Jump to content

Talk:Iceland: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
m Reverted edits by 208.108.138.1 (talk) to last version by J.delanoy
←Blanked the page
Line 1: Line 1:
{{British-English}}
{{WikiProjectBannerShell|1=
{{WikiProject Iceland|class=B|importance=top|nested=yes}}
{{WPCountries|class=B|nested=yes}}
{{Volcano|class=start|nested=yes}}
}}
{{ArticleHistory
|action1=GAN
|action1date=2006-08-08, 14:13:56
|action1result=Failed
|action1oldid=68354678

|action2=GAN
|action2date=2007-07-20, 03:58:10
|action2result=Failed
|action2oldid=145828131

|currentstatus=FGAN}}
{{V0.5|class=B|category=Geography|small=yes}}
{{WP1.0|WPCD=yes|small=yes}}
{| class="infobox" width="238"
|- align="center"
| [[Image:Vista-file-manager.png|50px|Archive]]
'''[[Wikipedia:How to archive a talk page|Archives]]'''
----
|- align="center"
| [[/Archive 1|Jan '05 → Aug '06]]
|}
<br />
__TOC__


== ð is not that exclusive ==
ð is used in both Icelandic, Faeroese, Northern Sámi, Inari Sámi and Skolt Sámi, so saying "Icelandic is the only language to use rune characters" is indeed incorrect. Please remove this. [[User:Rkarlsba|Rkarlsba]] 10:55, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
:This has since been fixed. -- [[User:Beland|Beland]] ([[User talk:Beland|talk]]) 03:04, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

== Stupid explanation... ==
...for low bio diversity! "''Its geological age -- only a few tens of millions of years -- has provided relatively little time for plants and animals to immigrate from elsewhere or evolve locally.''" The islands geological age is totally irrelevant for this issue as Iceland and the surrounding seas has been totally iced over several times in the last 100 000 years, wiping out every trace of life in the process. I'm changing this to ''The short time since the last ice over, only about 10 000 years, has provided very little time for plants and animals to immigrate from elsewhere or evolve locally.'' [[User:130.243.153.103|130.243.153.103]] 18:38, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

...Reverted? Mind telling why? I'll re-revert till someone come up with a good reason why not. [[User:212.247.216.39|212.247.216.39]] 22:38, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

About change to ice age..... I wrote ''ice over '' as, technically speaking, we're still in an ice time and has been so for a couple of 100 k years. But for the sake of simplicity maybe it is better with ice age.
[[User:212.247.216.39|212.247.216.39]] 12:15, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

== Population Census and estimates? ==

Why does the article Info box claim that censuses are still made in Iceland even though they and the estimates are long made obsolete as a result of the kennitölu system and the Þjóðskrá? If its a technical problem with the box it should be fixed nonetheless as its claiming absolote incorrectness. --[[User:130.208.189.147|130.208.189.147]] 00:35, 4 January 2007 (UTC)



== Pictures ==
Is it just me or are all the pictures in this article about its geography? Let's get more pictures of cities, people, etc.


==C'mon==

//This page is about the country Republic of Iceland. For the chain of supermarkets in the United Kingdom and Ireland, see Iceland (supermarket).//

Is this some kind of joke? [[User:172.141.116.152|172.141.116.152]] 20:45, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

:Nope, it's legitimate. '''[[User:Daniel.Bryant|<font face="tahoma" color="#086F9A">Killfest2</font>]]—[[User:Daniel.Bryant/Esperanza|<font face="tahoma" color="green">Daniel.Bryant</font>]]''' 07:41, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

::There is a chain of supermarkets called "Iceland" in the UK. I'm as ashamed about it as any Icelander may be...its also quite a cheap (and therefore ''****'') shop, but Wikipedia isn't a place for personal views... <small>—The preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment was added by [[User:SKC|SKC]] ([[User talk:SKC|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/SKC|contribs]]){{#if:{{{2|}}}|&#32;{{{2}}}|}}.</small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->

:::Well, it's not our fault if Icelandic cuisine consists of frozen potato croquettes and cheap Black Forest gateaus, is it? ;-)
:::Anyway, this is a non-issue now; the dab line at the start of the article links to [[Iceland (disambiguation)]]. [[User:Fourohfour|Fourohfour]] 15:53, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

== Not a Good Article ==

I failed Iceland as a GA due to the fact that there are no references in the "culture" section, in addition to few references throughout the article. ''(Working on it)'' Also, there is a lengthy Miscellany section which in my opinion violates section 3B of the [[Wikipedia:What is a good article?| good article criteria]]. ''(To be cleaned up)'' [[User:Some P. Erson|Some P. Erson]] 14:19, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

:''Italics'' by me. '''[[User:Daniel.Bryant|<font face="tahoma" color="#086F9A">Daniel</font>]].[[User:Daniel.Bryant/Esperanza|<font face="tahoma" color="green">Bryant</font>]]''' 09:15, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

== Delete Miscellany section? ==

Let's move it here. The dishelved facts ruin the page. Agree?

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lotsofissues lots of issues] | [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Lotsofissues&amp;action=edit&amp;section=new leave me a message] 04:31, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

:I find some of the facts interesting, and propose to let them be until they are included other places in the article. [[User:Mr. Carpenter|Mr. Carpenter]] 07:07, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

::[[User:Biekko]] was kind enough to do it for us - thanks! '''[[User:Daniel.Bryant|<font face="tahoma" color="#086F9A">Daniel</font>]].[[User:Daniel.Bryant/Esperanza|<font face="tahoma" color="green">Bryant</font>]]''' 11:49, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

== Religion ==

The statement: "Most Icelanders are either very liberal in their religious beliefs or uninterested in religious matters altogether, and predominantly do not attend church regularly or even at all." does not seem to be backed up by the reference cited. There is no "demographics" section at the supplied link.

Matt T. [[User:198.203.192.166|198.203.192.166]] 19:06, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

== Climate ==

I'm curious about the climate of Iceland. Is it strange there's no mention of this? [[User:Renfield|Renfield]] 16:41, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

: I am curious myself about the climate. I've heard it is relatively moderate considering its proximaty to the Arctic. Why is their nary a mention of the climate ? [[User:Jcam|Jcam]] 00:20, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

:: Because neither of you has bothered to research it elseware and add it to the article. --[[User:Sindri|Sindri]] 12:38, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

::: Good point- and I probably will get around to that, as well as most of the US state articles and many other nations. But just an observation... why is it that so many articles on nations/states/areas don't bother to mention this ? [[User:Jcam|Jcam]] 15:07, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

::::Because interest in climate implies that you go outdoors, and wikipedia editors never leave their keyboards? - [[User:DavidWBrooks|DavidWBrooks]] 18:49, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
::::Climate section added. Various statistics from the Icelandic Meteorology Office are the source of this. --[[User:Biekko|Bjarki]] 00:32, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
:::::Nice addition; not too long, not too vague. - [[User:DavidWBrooks|DavidWBrooks]] 11:58, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
i was very surprised to not find even the slightest mention of the long summer days in iceland...ive heard that sun rises around 2 in the morning and sets late as well....and also no mention of the six month days and six month nights which i think exist in iceland...points like these ,if true ,should definately be included in the section as thy catch the attention of people...in fact i myself wanted to know more about this different than usual day and night timings and thats why i actually checked out the page.........sadly didnt find it ........the page definately needs some work! <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/122.163.47.206|122.163.47.206]] ([[User talk:122.163.47.206|talk]]) 21:46, 8 February 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

In order to have six month days and nights, you'll either have to be situated on(or very close to) the North- or the Southpole.
Because the sun is a disc(from our point of view)rather than a (small defined)point, the day on the poles will last slightly longer than six months, and the night will be slightly shorter.
On the very poles, the day is probably as much as a couple of weeks longer.(speculating...)

The start of the day -- anywhere in the world-- is defined as the moment the upper rim(not the centre) of the sun rises above the horizon, while the end is when the upper rim disappears, hence making the day longer than the night all over the globe at the equinoxes in March and September, when the day and night are supposed to be of exact equal lengths.

I was looking for information about whether Iceland HAS got a midnight sun at mid-summer, but I couldn't find any information on this page.
When looking at the map, I notice that the entire mainland is situated SOUTH of the arctic circle; a clear indication that it HASN'T got a midnight sun.
But, as I stated earlier, the sun IS a 'disc'(no not really, but kind of...) as seen from the Earth, which makes it possible to see the upper rim of the sun at midnight(mid-summer), even when you're located quite a few kilometres SOUTH of the arctic circle.
The norhternmost point of the Icelandic mainland is indeed VERY close to touching the arctic circle, so my guess is the it IS possible to see the midnight sun.

I also realize that Iceland, belonging to the same time-zone as Great Britain, even though its geographic location should make it one hour behind, COULD have visible sunlight at MIDNIGHT, but NOT when the sun is at its lowest in(or very close to)the NORTH.
The question from me then is: Is there a single day(24 hour stretch) of the year on the Icelandic mainland where one(in theory, at least) can see the sun the entire time?
--[[Special:Contributions/84.208.224.234|84.208.224.234]] ([[User talk:84.208.224.234|talk]]) 09:09, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

==History==
Could someone add a history section (I was looking for Iceland's role in WWII). This seems to be the only section missing in this article about a country.--[[User:72.75.113.204|72.75.113.204]] 01:39, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

It depends how long you want the history to go back for. As far as I could tell, I didn't think Iceland had any involvement in any proper war. Correct me if I am wrong there. Or you could mention the cod war... [[User:85.12.80.128|85.12.80.128]] 11:35, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

I have lived i Iceland for some two years now and I have heard the stories about some allay ships hiding from german in Iceladic fjords. Iceladers told me the story but I couldn´t find anything concrete about the subject. If Bjarky can find something out... [[User:Marijica|marijica]] 12:22, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

:I wrote up a history section. It's not long, but I think it gives a decent overview of Icelandic history from the original Norse settlement to the present day. Of course, if people want all the gory details, they can just read [[History of Iceland]] -- [[User:Palthrow|Palthrow]] 18:41, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

The sentence, "Christianity was peacefully adopted in 1000," is in total contradiction to the link provided (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianization_of_Iceland). The king of Norway, Olaf Tryggvason, used coercion and torture to force the conversion of the Icelanders. This line should be struck[[Special:Contributions/12.171.191.132|12.171.191.132]] ([[User talk:12.171.191.132|talk]]) 18:06, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

It is incorrectly stated that Sveinn Björnsson who was elected regent in World War II was the prime minister. I deleted it since he was actually ambassador to Denmark at the time.[[User:Ormur|Ormur]] ([[User talk:Ormur|talk]]) 14:18, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

== Europe of North America ==

In the article [[Age of Consent]] there is a map that shows Iceland with the same color as North America. Is there an issue with what continent Iceland belongs? --[[User:Gbleem|Gbleem]] 12:02, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

:The map dividing countries by continents has it the same color as Europe. The top map colors countries by the legal age of consent, not geography. Geographically it could belong to either (the tectonic plate border goes right through it); historically it's European. - [[User:DavidWBrooks|DavidWBrooks]] 12:12, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

::It's worse than that. I was confusing Iceland and Greenland. I have [[shingles]] and I think it is affecting my brain. --[[User:Gbleem|Gbleem]] 12:23, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

== pronunciation of Lyveldid Island ==

I've noticed that the pronunciation of Lýveldið Ísland doesn't match the orthography, because d is always a [t] sound, never a [d] sound, because it doesn't exist in Icelandic, so can somebody explain what's happening here?

[[User:Reece Llwyd|RJL]] 17:47, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
:Corrected. I also removed the markers under the ð's which are not really needed. [[User:Edinborgarstefan|Stefán]] 19:52, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

== Volcanic island nation? ==

Hmmm.. In my mind, "Volcanic island nation" evaluates to (volcanic (island nation)), not ((volcanic island) nation), and thus, I believe that the attempt to compress that information into one sentence, though brave, has to be abandoned. This is a very minor issue, of course, and maybe that's why I didn't modify it. [[User:Jørgen|Jørgen]] 21:45, 27 November 2006 (UTC)



== Proposed WikiProject ==

It strikes me that the only way articles relating to Iceland are ever going to get any real attention and improvement is if it has its own project, as none of the continent or multi-country projects will necessarily think of including Iceland to any great degree. On that basis, there is a new proposed project on the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals#Iceland|Proposed WikiProjects]] page dealing with Iceland. Any parties interested in joining should add their names to the list, so that we can see if there actually is enough interest in such a project to make it viable. Thank you for your attention. [[User:Badbilltucker|Badbilltucker]] 20:20, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
:I can't find Iceland on the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals#Iceland|Proposed WikiProjects]] page. Has it been created or is it located at [[Portal:Iceland]] instead? [[User talk:Think outside the box|Think outside the box]] 13:12, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
::Found it at [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Iceland]]. Guess I didn't look properly the first time... [[User talk:Think outside the box|Think outside the box]] 13:14, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

== Television ==

The [[Television]] page claims that television broadcast is suspended in Iceland on Thursdays and in July. If this is true, this is curious and probably unique and should certainly be mentioned here somewhere, in regards to culture I presume. --[[User:Zachbe|Zachbe]] 15:14, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
:That's how it ''was'' before 1984 like it says in the television article. --[[User:Biekko|Bjarki]] 19:48, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

== External links needs trimming ==

This article seems to have collected a very large number of external links. It might be an idea if somebody went through them checking how many of them are actually needed. At the moment, the list is just too long.

For the time being, I've moved the latest addition here. They concern immigration to Iceland.

* [http://www.ahus.is/english/practical%5Finformation/residence%5Fand%5Fwork%5Fpermits Alþjóðahús (International Centre) Residence and Work Permit Practical Information]
* [http://www.utl.is/english Icelandic Directorate of Immigration]
* [http://www.vinnumalastofnun.is/english Icelandic Directorate of Labour]
* [http://www.mfa.is Icelandic Ministry of Foreign Affairs]


--[[User:Valentinian|Valentinian]] <sup>[[User_talk:Valentinian|(talk)]] / [[Special:Contributions/Valentinian|(contribs)]]</sup> 00:32, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

== Any Icelandic user? ==

I just wanted to know if there is any Icelandi user who might want to chat with me. I am interested in the language and have some questions. If there is anyone, please leave me a message. --[[User:Dexter prog|Dexter prog]] 14:57, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

:I am Icelandic, feel free to leave a message on my talkpage anytime. [[User:Irrer|Irrer]] 09:49, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

i am icelandic so i can answer almost all questions a involving Iceland and the language as long as they are not plan stubbed - [[User:andri12|andri12]]

: No offense, but I'm puzzled by those last two words: are they supposed to be "plain stupid"? (My Icelandic doesn't go beyond "tak", so I'm not criticizing anybody who's bilingual) - [[User:DavidWBrooks|DavidWBrooks]] 22:05, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

::Just thought I'd jump in here; I've been trying to learn some Icelandic reciently but its really hard. I changed the ''my preferences'' language box to IS so some of the regular wiki links converted to the language. I now know: talk, edit, recient changes and log out. [[User talk:Think outside the box|Think outside the box]] 13:05, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

== Animal and vegetal life, please. ==

Hello! Could someone add this, please, also the foreing species, grasses and invertebrates. Perhaps for someone in Iceland is not intersting, but is very few know in Europe. In European Guides few times appear Iceland. [[User:Anselmocisneros|Anselmocisneros]] 14:15, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
:Yes, I vote for this too. [[User talk:Think outside the box|Think outside the box]] 13:00, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
::I've added this under the imaginitively named section, ''Animal and Plant life'' [[User talk:Think outside the box|Think outside the box]] 13:01, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

== Shorter Version? ==

It would be good if we could get a version a little more condensed - It takes too long to print. <small>—The preceding [[Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages|unsigned]] comment was added by [[Special:Contributions/68.196.206.204|68.196.206.204]] ([[User talk:68.196.206.204|talk]]) 22:28, 6 February 2007 (UTC).</small><!-- HagermanBot Auto-Unsigned -->
:At what cost to the value of content? [[User talk:Think outside the box|Think outside the box]] 12:57, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

== Location maps available for infoboxes of European countries ==

<div style="background-color:#e8f0ff;">On the WikiProject Countries talk page, the section [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Countries#Location Maps for European countries|Location Maps for European countries]] had shown new maps created by David Liuzzo, that are available for the countries of the ''European continent'', and for countries of the ''European Union'' exist in two versions. From [[November 16]], [[2006]] till [[January 31]], [[2007]], a poll had tried to find a consensus for usage of 'old' or of which and where 'new' version maps. Please note that since [[January 1]], [[2007]] all new maps became updated by David Liuzzo (including a world locator, enlarged cut-out for small countries) and as of [[February 4]], [[2007]] the restricted licence that had jeopardized their availability on Wikimedia Commons, became more free. At its closing, 25 people had spoken in favor of either of the two presented usages of new versions but neither version had reached a consensus (12 and 13), and 18 had preferred old maps.<br/>As this outcome cannot justify reverting of new maps that had become used for some countries, seconds before [[February 5]], [[2007]] a survey started that '''will be closed soon at [[February 20]], [[2007]] 23:59:59'''. It should establish two things:
*whether the new style maps may be applied as soon as some might become available for countries outside the European continent (or such to depend on future discussions),
*which new version ([[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Countries#Creator's comment on the whole long lasting discussion/New maps with and without EU-marking available|with of without indicating the entire European Union by a separate shade]]) should be applied for which countries.
Please read the [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Countries#Location Maps for European countries|discussion]] (also in other sections [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Countries#New maps for Middle East|α]], [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Countries#Location maps (again)|β]], [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Countries#Middle East Maps|γ]], [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Countries#A final solution for the entire maps issue?|δ]], [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Countries#Stop forcing map change|ε]], [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Countries#Gallery of different map formats|ζ]], [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Countries#Greece|η]], [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Countries#Comments from a dazzled Greek|θ]]) and in particular the arguments offered by the forementioned poll, while realizing some comments to have been made prior to updating the maps, and all prior to modifying the licences, before carefully reading the '''[[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Countries#Final survey|presentation of the currently open survey]]. You are invited''' to only then finally make up your mind and vote for only one option.<br/>There mustnot be 'oppose' votes; if none of the options would be appreciated, you could vote for the option you might with some effort find least difficult to live with - rather like elections only allowing to vote ''for'' one of several candidates. Obviously, you are most welcome to leave a brief argumentation with your vote. Kind regards. — [[User:SomeHuman|SomeHuman]] <span style="font-size:.87em;">[[19 Feb]][[2007]] 00:25&nbsp;(UTC)</span></div>

== Translation of the motto ==

What does the motto "Með lögum skal land byggja" mean in English? It would be nice to add this to the infobox. <small>—The preceding [[Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages|unsigned]] comment was added by [[Special:Contributions/85.127.219.216|85.127.219.216]] ([[User talk:85.127.219.216|talk]]) 15:58, 1 April 2007 (UTC).</small><!-- HagermanBot Auto-Unsigned -->
:"Með lögum skal land byggja" means in direct translation "With laws the land shall be built". It is as far as I know the motto of the Icelandic Police, not the government or nation and has been added to the infobox as vandalism. I'll remove it right after I submit this comment. --[[User:Sindri|Sindri]] 16:02, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

I can't help but notice that the motto now reads "In Cod We Trust." --Stormy 23:09, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

:No longer! (how embarrassing, if mildly humorous) - [[User:DavidWBrooks|DavidWBrooks]] 23:45, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

::"Með lögum skal land byggja" is also the adopted motto of the [[Shetland|Shetlands]]. <small>—The preceding [[Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages|unsigned]] comment was added by [[Special:Contributions/90.241.157.246|90.241.157.246]] ([[User talk:90.241.157.246|talk]]) 23:27, 26 April 2007 (UTC).</small><!-- HagermanBot Auto-Unsigned -->

:::And the Danish version "Med lov skal land bygges" was the first words of the Code of Jutland written by King Valdemar the Victorious in 1241. In the Icelandic case, the words are probably from ''Frostatingslova'' which is one of the oldest laws in Norway. Some rules are believed to be from the 900's, but the law itself is probably from Magnus the Good (1035-1047). [[User:Valentinian|Valentinian]] <sup>[[User_talk:Valentinian|T]] / [[Special:Contributions/Valentinian|C]]</sup> 23:43, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Why do we think that "Með lögum skal land byggja" is the motto of the Icelandic state. I don't think that it is true. [[User:Edinborgarstefan|Stefán]] 19:31, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

== Icelandic only ''de facto'' ?==

The sidebar says Icelandic is the de facto official language, implying that that is not legally true, but the article on Icelandic states it is coded into law. Which is it?
:Icelandic is not explicitly declared an official language in the constitution, I don't think anyone considers it necessary since Icelandic is quite obviously the official language of Iceland by custom. Icelandic is however mentioned through Icelandic law, several statutes seem to assume the language's official status and others have the explicit goal of "enhancing and supporting the Icelandic language". I think it is correct to say that Icelandic is ''de facto'' the official language but it is not wrong either to say it is simply the official language, a de facto official language is still an official language and no less so than a ''de jure'' official language. --[[User:Biekko|Bjarki]] 17:59, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
::I don't see any reason why we should accept the unofficial demand that an official language must be specified in a constitution. In Denmark, it is required by law that all members of a jury must be able to speak Danish fluently, and the Danish language is also explicitly mentioned in the law about schools. Legislation also specifies that one can only expect to receive official communication with the state in Danish. This makes it "official" enough for me. Given the common history of our two countries, it would be my ''guess'' that Iceland had similar traditions. [[User:Valentinian|Valentinian]] <sup>[[User_talk:Valentinian|T]] / [[Special:Contributions/Valentinian|C]]</sup> 00:49, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
:::Valentinian, I couldn't agree more wit you. It is absurd to say if is not in the constitution, it is not official. If we accept this way of thinking most European countries woouldn't have an official language, which is not true. This demand, to write the official language in the constitution, comes from the [[English-only movement]] in the US, which wants to ban education and services for immigrants in any other language than English. --[[User:Michkalas|Michkalas]] 13:55, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
::::That sounds like a likely explanation. In any case, the U.S.-centric insistence on viewing this issue through U.S. glasses and U.S. legal tradition ignoring all other legal traditions is POV and not suitable for Wikipedia. (Continental) European legal traditions have as much right to be accepted as the English based "common law". [[User:Valentinian|Valentinian]] <sup>[[User_talk:Valentinian|T]] / [[Special:Contributions/Valentinian|C]]</sup> 15:17, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

== The European Library ==

I have added a link to the 'treasures of the national library of iceland' displayed via [[The European Library]]. hope this is okay. If not, please send me a message. [[User:Fleurstigter|Fleurstigter]] 14:42, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

== An article on the Kingdom of Iceland? ==

Perhaps a separate article on the [[Kingdom of Iceland]] could be made, like the articles on, for example, the [[Kingdom of Portugal]], the [[Kingdom of Finland (1918)|Kingdom of Finland]] and the [[Kingdom of Yugoslavia]]? What do the regular contributors here think? -- [[User:Nidator|Nidator]] 16:21, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
:hummm... that would make sense... IF ICELAND WAS A KINGDOM! --[[User:S.Örvarr.S|S.Örvarr.S]] 21:06, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
::You disagree that Iceland was a kingdom? [[User:Haukurth|Haukur]] 21:16, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
:::If you're talking about the time when Iceland (by force) was part of the Danish kingdom then that hardly makes Iceland a kingdom of its own. --[[User:S.Örvarr.S|Stefán Örvarr Sigmundsson]] 22:22, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
::::Iceland was a separate sovereign kingdom between 1918 and 1944. [[User:Haukurth|Haukur]] 22:29, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
:::::Yes -- the fact that the person who was king of Iceland 1918-1944 was also the king of Denmark makes no difference technically, no matter what the political realities were. --[[User:Palthrow|Palthrow]] 00:16, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
::::::And the political reality was that Iceland was as sovereign as it wanted to be between 1918 and 1944, foreign affairs and defences where left to Denmark as a part of a deal between two sovereign nations. Not because this was somehow forced. --[[User:Bjarki S|Bjarki]] 02:03, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
:::::::Yes, I was referring to Iceland between 1918 and 1944. -- [[User:Nidator|Nidator]] 11:19, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
::::::::Ever heard of the Kingdom of Australia? Or Kingdom of Canada? They exist! The Queen of Canada and Queen of Australia happens to also be the Queen of the United Kingdom, but Australia and Canada are seperate and sovereign states! This was Iceland's situation between 1918 and 1944 as explained by Bjarki.

== Military ==

I have brought this up once before here on the talk without any feedback at all. Being bold, I've now removed the section 'Military of Iceland'. I do feel that this is totally unneeded in a general article about Iceland, the biggest reason for that being that Iceland does not maintain a military and never has. Accordingly, this section actually had nothing to do with a military. Instead it was about the police force and the coast guard, every nation on the planet operates such bodies (except Somalia maybe). It also made clear that there is a SWAT-like team in Iceland, which every nation has that can afford such things. It also mentioned the civilian peacekeeping service which has nothing to do with defence. In any case, I believe nothing of this is a defining characteristic of Iceland that should be dealt with in a general article about the country. --[[User:Bjarki S|Bjarki]] 22:53, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
:I agree. --[[User:S.Örvarr.S|Stefán Örvarr Sigmundsson]] 00:09, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
:Likewise, good call -- [[User:Palthrow|Palthrow]] 03:02, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
: I disagree. And what you have written there is mostly incorrect. --[[User:Kjallakr|Kjallakr]] 23:16, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
:: And to explain: 1. Iceland operates an Air defence radar network and Command Center as part of the IADS. Before 2006 the Icelandic part could have been considered civilan, but since the American withdrawal the Icelandic personnel have taken over the Air defence Intercept command center and such personnel are according to international law military personnel. Thus since 2006 the IADS is an Icelandic military unit or operation. 2. The Icelandic Crisis Response Unit peacekeeping operations in Kosovo and Afghanistan were military operations. 3. Icelandic Coast Guard operations in Iraq were military operations and the Icelandic Coast Guard operates as Icelands Navy in Dimplomatic protocols as well. As for the "never has maintaned military force" part, you have clearly not read the part about [[Military of Iceland#History|Icelandic Military history]] here on wikipedia. --[[User:Kjallakr|Kjallakr]]
:::He's right, guys. Much as I hate to admit it. [[User:Haukurth|Haukur]] 23:49, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
::::I agree, and, as Iceland is known for not having a military, a section of this development is fitting. -- [[User:Nidator|Nidator]] 17:49, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
:::Okay, okay. I did not know about this status of IADS, could you possibly elaborate on the sources of international law thar define it as an military organization? Also what distinguishes civilian operations military ones regarding the ICRU? It is true that the coast guard can be defined as a military in certain capacities and its vessels might be considered "warships" in accordance with art. 29 of [[UNCLOS]]. One should keep in mind that strict legal definitions of what constitutes "military" may not fit with the definitions used in common speech and that an encyclopedia focused not on international lawyers but ordinary humans should probably give more weight to the latter definition. I am still of the opinion that a dedicated section to the "military" of Iceland is not justified. That does not mean this stuff shouldn't be mentioned at all but that a proper place for it would be in the politics section, possibly as a subsection there. See the following country articles for examples: [[Belgium]], [[Finland]], [[Luxembourg]], [[Mexico]] and [[Estonia]]. --[[User:Bjarki S|Bjarki]] 22:00, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
::::The matter with the IADS rests with the question weather the personell who are charged with guiding interceptors to their targets in combat are military personell or unpriviliged combatants. Assuming that Iceland is abiding with the Geneva convention, which in the first place is the thing that originally divides between civilans and military, these personell must be military. As these personell are considered combatants because they are actively controlling or in charge of a military operation on a tactical scale (guiding interceptors to targets and such) and there have been no precedents considering such personell as civilians anywhere in the world. As for the ICRU military operations, you could simply take a good look at the picture of Colonel Lárus Atlason and his ID badge. [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:IcelandPeacekorps.jpg]] On the top right corner you will see the following letters: "military". --[[User:Kjallakr|Kjallakr]] 23:11, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
:::::Yes, anyone can see that the ICRU is (or at the very least ''was'') a military unit - but as far as I know the people in charge steadfastly deny it. See here, for example: [http://www.althingi.is/dba-bin/unds.pl?txti=/wwwtext/html/lagasofn/133b/2007073.html&leito=friðargæsla\0friðargæslan\0friðargæslna\0friðargæslnanna\0friðargæslu\0friðargæslum\0friðargæsluna\0friðargæslunnar\0friðargæslunni\0friðargæslunum\0friðargæslur\0friðargæslurnar#word1] [http://fridur.is/2007/05/09/hverju-svara-stjornmalaflokkarnir-iv-hluti-hermennskutilbur%c3%b0ir-og-fri%c3%b0arg%c3%a6sla/] Apparently those are people in military uniforms, with military ranks, organized as a military unit, carrying weapons, working with the militaries of other nations, carrying out NATO missions as armed peacekeepers in a war zone - and it's all totally civilian. [[User:Haukurth|Haukur]] 23:45, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
::::::I see no denials in these links and if some politicians claim that the ICRU is a totally civilian operations they are basically lying. Peacekeeping is by definition a military operation, and currently there are 9 Icelandic peacekeepers in Afghanistan for example operating at KIA. There are also a few more Icelanders on the behalf of ICRU in Afghanistan, but they are as far as I know, all civilians unlike the peacekeepers who are armed and wear Norwegian "Ørkenkamo" with Icelandic insignia. --[[User:Kjallakr|Kjallakr]] 17:05, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
:::::::The law says: "Utanríkisráðuneytinu er heimilt að taka þátt í alþjóðlegri friðargæslu og senda borgaralega sérfræðinga til starfa við friðargæsluverkefni í því skyni." 'Borgaralega' is 'civilian', right? During the discussion in parliament one member said: "Þær breytingar ganga út á að taka af allan vafa að um er að ræða borgaralega skilgreinda starfsemi". [[User:Haukurth|Haukur]] 17:34, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
::::::::"Borgaralega" does indeed mean "civilian" of that there is no doubt. "Friðargæsla" on the otherhand means "peacekeeping" and that is by definition a military operation that may or may not be augmented with civilian operations. This member of parliament on other hand is clearly mistaken in his opinion. 2.gr 2.mgr states: "Íslenskir friðargæsluliðar skulu bera einkennisklæðnað þar sem við á, með hliðsjón af skipulagi og eðli þess verkefnis sem sinnt er. Jafnframt skal utanríkisráðuneytið ákveða þeim tignargráðu innan skipulags viðkomandi alþjóðastofnunar þegar þörf krefur." In effect this gr. has permitted by law an expiditionary military force operated by the Ministry for foreign affairs. Also 3.gr has permitted the minister to make regulations regarding the duties of the armed portion of the ICRU, which are potentially far more thorough than the law itself and might perhaps involve domestic operations depending on how openly this permission is understood. And even still, according to the widely achnowledged legal practice, how the law works in effect is more relevant than how the text may potentially be understood. Since in reality there are a number of people working for the ICRU as an expiditionary military force. --[[User:Kjallakr|Kjallakr]] 13:15, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

(de-indent) I totally agree with your reasoning. The problem is that I can't find any place where the Icelandic authorities have admitted this. When the politicians are asked, like they were in the link I gave above, they reply like this:

*"Við álítum að herleysi og vopnlaus lögregla séu mikilvæg sérstaða Íslands" - ''We believe that the lack of a military and an unarmed police force are important special characteristics of Iceland''

*"Íslensku friðargæslunnar sem tekur einungis að sér borgaraleg verkefni" - ''The ICRU which only accepts civilian assignments''

*"friðargæsla á Íslandi sýni skýrt í störfum sínum að þar fari ekki herlið heldur borgaralegir starfsmenn" - ''Icelandic peacekeepers should demonstrate in their work that they are not a military force but civilian workers''.

The only party to deviate from this line are the Left-Greens who offer a somewhat confused critique. [[User:Haukurth|Haukur]] 13:36, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

:Yes this is a very fascinating rethoric offered by Icelandic governments and politicians. However as Foreign Minister Davíð Oddson explained in 2004 [http://www.althingi.is/raeda/131/rad20041103T153646.html], the Icelandic peacekeepers are considered military by NATO and all others, while the Icelandic government believes they are still civilian enough because of their belief that the training of the ICRU troops isn't very thourough, and then also because of the expiditionary nature (medieval style leiðangr) of these military operations, the ICRU personell revert back to civilian when they return to Iceland. There are of course some other indirect admittals as well, such as those made by Halldór Ásgrímsson about the Icelandic operations to prepare Pristina Airport for civilian control, during which time the said Airport was under Icelandic command (and thus non-civilian command). That said, the Left-Greens are obviously correct in their claims of the ICRU being a military unit. --[[User:Kjallakr|Kjallakr]] 15:21, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

:::::Is there actually anyone in the IADS "charged with guiding interceptors to their targets in combat"? As I remember there was a short-lived media flurry surrounding the operation of IADS in 2006 when the Americans left, see: [http://mbl.is/mm/frettir/innlent/frett.html?nid=1222839] IADS's own website is horribly outdated but [http://mbl.is/mm/frettir/innlent/frett.html?nid=1225925 this] news piece states that the Radar agency would assume the role of monitoring unknown aircraft and "notifying the proper authorities", does that mean that the person looking at the screen at any given time forms an Icelandic military? I wonder if he or she knows about it... --[[User:Bjarki S|Bjarki]] 01:30, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
::::::Yes there are people in the IADS responsible for "guiding interceptors to their targets in combat" and you can be sure that they know of their status and what their job entails. The Icelandic defence contractor Kögun made the software currently used by the US forces for this job (and the IADS) and thus many Icelanders are skilled in this department of warfare. --[[User:Kjallakr|Kjallakr]] 17:05, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
The ISAF article says: "The [[International Security Assistance Force]] (10) (ISAF) is an international military force in Afghanistan led by NATO and consisting of about 35,500 personnel from 37 nations as of May 31, 2007." I mean, clearly, we need to update this to say: The ISAF is an international military force&mdash;'''except for the Icelandic part which is totally civilian and not a military unit at all'''&mdash;in Afghanistan led by NATO etc." [[User:Haukurth|Haukur]] 23:49, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

To turn this around a bit, can anyone find any instance of Icelandic authorities referring to the ICRU as a military unit or its personnel as military personnel? [[User:Haukurth|Haukur]] 17:36, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

I have been going through the official website of the [[Norwegian Defence Force|Norwegian Defence Forces]] for an article I remembered about the ICRU medal and I also found a picture which illustrates the difficulties of this debate excellently ([http://www.mil.no/multimedia/archive/00043/fritid_kopi_43358a.jpg][http://www.mil.no/luft/start/article.jhtml?articleID=78424]). Who are Norwegian soldiers and who are Icelandic civilians? -- [[User:Nidator|Nidator]] 17:48, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

==Good Article candidate again==

I've nominated Iceland as a good article candidate again. -- [[User:Palthrow|Palthrow]] 22:02, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

==GA==

:'''[[Wikipedia:Good article candidates|GA]] review''' (see [[Wikipedia:What is a good article?|here]] for criteria)
#It is '''reasonably well written'''.
#:a ''(prose)'': {{GAList/check|aye}} b ''([[Wikipedia:Manual of Style|MoS]])'': {{GAList/check|aye}}
#It is '''factually accurate''' and '''[[Wikipedia:Verifiability|verifiable]]'''.
#:a ''(references)'': {{GAList/check|nay}} b ''(citations to reliable sources)'': {{GAList/check|aye}} c ''([[Wikipedia:No original research|OR]])'': {{GAList/check|aye}}
#It is '''broad in its coverage'''.
#:a ''(major aspects)'': {{GAList/check|aye}} b ''(focused)'': {{GAList/check|aye}}
#It follows the '''[[WP:NPOV|neutral point of view]] policy'''.
#:a ''(fair representation)'': {{GAList/check|aye}} b ''(all significant views)'': {{GAList/check|aye}}
#It is '''stable'''.
#:{{GAList/check|aye}}
#It '''contains [[Wikipedia:Images|images]]''', where possible, to illustrate the topic.
#:a ''(tagged and captioned)'': {{GAList/check|aye}} b ''(lack of images does not in itself exclude GA)'': {{GAList/check|aye}} c ''(non-free images have [[Wikipedia:Image description page#fair use rationale|fair use rationales]])'': {{GAList/check|aye}}
#'''Overall''':
#:a ''Pass/Fail'': {{GAList/check|nay}}


Back things like this up:

:<small>Some are examining the possibility of introducing other crops from [[South America]], where the potato is native. Given that summers in Iceland are not hot enough to produce some other types of food, those [[plants]] that are from the same ecological range as the potato (those from a similar [[climate]] to Iceland), may very probably be adaptable to Iceland. Those of interest include the [[quinoa]], a [[pseudocereal]]; [[beach strawberry]], a [[fruit]]; [[calafate]], a [[fruit]]; and the [[Monkey-puzzle]] [[araucaria]], a [[tree]] that produces edible [[nuts]]. Those crops would help the country to reduce imports of food like [[cereals]], [[fruits]], and [[nuts]].</small>

[[User:SFGiants|<font color="orange">¿SFGi</font><font color="black">Д</font><font color="orange">nts!</font>]] <sup>[[User_talk:SFGiants|¿Complain!]] [[Special:Contributions/SFGiants|¿Analyze!]] [[Wikipedia:Editor review/SFGiants 2|¿Review!]] </sup> 03:58, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
:I removed this passage, it's speculative. --[[User:Bjarki S|Bjarki]] 11:50, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

==Flying==
When flying is iceland counted as europe?
:Iceland is a part of the [[Schengen agreement|Schengen zone]], thus forming a part of a common European border towards the outside world. If that was what you where asking about? --[[User:Bjarki S|Bjarki]] 11:50, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

== Link ==

How about including a link to the article [[New Iceland]] somewhere in this article, (if it's not already there)? --[[User:S.Örvarr.S|Stefán Örvarr Sigmundsson]] 15:38, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

== Firing blanks ==
The links to the two climactic [sic] means charts in the references section don't work. What's the procedure? Just delete them? (I assume that they were actually ''climatic'' means charts, but perhaps that's just because I'm a typically anti-climactic Englishman.) [[User:Vinny Burgoo|Vinny Burgoo]] 23:25, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
:No, just complain and somebody will fix them (and perhaps take three attemps to do so). [[User:Edinborgarstefan|Stefán]] 23:49, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
::Three attempts or not, that was very quick. Thanks. [[User:Vinny Burgoo|Vinny Burgoo]] 00:10, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

== Stupid Question, probably ==

What does the name Iceland actually mean? Does it mean 'land of ice' or 'island' or what? [[User:Svyatoslav|Svyatoslav]] 23:49, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
:Well the word ''Iceland'' is a calque of the Icelandic word ''Ísland'' which- yes, does mean "ice" (''ís'') + "land" (''land''). So the Icelandic name for Iceland was merely translated verbatim into English. --[[User:BiT|BiT]] 01:02, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
::Thanks. I appreciate the answer. [[User:Svyatoslav|Svyatoslav]] 00:49, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

== Language section ==

I think the section "Language" isn't 100% accurate, the last part I mean. I added that English and Danish are ''mandatory part of the '''compulsory''' school curriculum'' since one need not study neither in non-compulsory education. This sentence: '''''Danish''' is mostly spoken in a way largely comprehensible to '''Swedes''' and '''Norwegians''' – it is often referred to as "Scandinavian" in Iceland.'' doesn't make any sense to me so I'll just ignore it. As far as I know pupils can only study '''Norwegian''' or '''Swedish''' if they already have some understanding of either, possible having lived in either language's country, or if they attend a school which teaches either language, but I don't think many, if any, schools teach '''Norwegian''' nor '''Swedish''' to pupils genarally speaking (see my sources[http://www.noregur.is/icelandic/norwayoniceland/language.htm]). Also, more pupils study '''French''' than '''German''', and more pupils study '''Danish''' than '''Norwegian''' and '''Swedish''' together so I think it would be more logical to change the sentence: ''Other commonly spoken languages are '''Swedish''', '''Norwegian''' and '''German'''.'' to ''Other commonly spoken languages are '''French''', '''German''' and '''Norwegian'''.'' I am referring to compulsory education. In gymnasia '''Japanese''' and '''Spanish''' are quite popular to study. --[[User:S.Örvarr.S|Stefán Örvarr Sigmundsson]] 02:22, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
:I think the sentence "'''''Danish''' is mostly spoken in a way largely comprehensible to '''Swedes''' and '''Norwegians''' – it is often referred to as "Scandinavian" in Iceland.''" is quite easy to understand, it's not of the formal education either as you refer to in your source, but you can mention how many study each language if you want to I think. /[[User:Danog-76|Danog-76]] 16:59, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
::I did some changes to this section. As far as I know Swedish is not commonly spoken here in Iceland but I'll leave it there. --[[User:S.Örvarr.S|Stefán Örvarr Sigmundsson]] 03:08, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
Recently '''French''' was removed by the IP 216.191.4.43 and not comment left. So I ask, vandalism? --[[User:S.Örvarr.S|Stefán Örvarr Sigmundsson]] 07:30, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

::Yes, I understand very well what that sentence is referring to. Danish spoken by Icelandic and Faroese people is much easier to understand for me as a Norwegian than when spoken by a Dane. It sounds quite a bit like "spoken [[bokmål]]", which is logical when you think about it as its roots lie in Danish spoken by Norwegians. -- [[User:Nidator|Nidator]] <sup>[[User_talk:Nidator|T]] / [[Special:Contributions/Nidator|C]]</sup> 03:11, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

==Coastline Length==
I've removed the given coastline length, as all coastline's are [[fractal]] and thus infinite. [[User:Larklight|Larklight]] ([[User talk:Larklight|talk]]) 21:33, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

== Another Stupid Question, properly ==

Iceland is not much bigger than Ireland. It is about an area the size of Wales bigger. Why then does it always look so enormous on Maps compared to Ireland?! It looks almost as big as Great Britian but less than half the size of that. Explanation anyone?

:It depends on the [[map projection]]. You may be interested in looking at some of the equal-area projections. [[User:Haukurth|Haukur]] ([[User talk:Haukurth|talk]]) 10:52, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

==Economy==
[[User:Palthrow|Palthrow]], you undit my edits without offering any justification.

I maintain that Iceland's current policies are generally [[neo-liberal]], or at least those mentioned. to quote the neo-liberalism article, the list of neo-liberal policies are:
* maintaining a budget surplus,
* governments accepting market-determined exchange rates,
* Free trade,
* Privatisation,
* Undistorted market prices, meaning that governments would refrain from policies that would alter market prices.
* Limited intervention, with the exception of intervention designed to promote exports, some kinds of education or infrastructural development

To quote the article, it's current government aims to reduce 'the budget and current account deficits', which is the first of the neoliberal buttletpoints. They are raising [[interest rates]] to try to keep [[inflation]] in check, and [[privatisation|privitising]] lots of industry. The [[Economy of Iceland]] calls their trading policy relatively liberal, and their intervention, mainly in agriculture, fits with the 6th point.

As such, I will revert your undo, and would request you do not undo my edit again without discussing it here first. Thankyou [[User:Larklight|Larklight]] ([[User talk:Larklight|talk]]) 12:19, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
:Please provide [[WP:SOURCE|verifiable]] [[WP:RS|third-party sources]] that substantiate your claims. --[[User:Closedmouth|Closedmouth]] ([[User talk:Closedmouth|talk]]) 12:33, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
:As Closedmouth pointed out, you need to source this. I think only the opponents of the current government would go so far as to call their policies "neoliberal". While the current government's policy is to liberalise certain aspects of the economy, I wouldn't go so far as to describe their policies as neo-liberal -- certainly not all the points you raise are applicable, either in whole or even partially.-- [[User:Palthrow|Palthrow]] ([[User talk:Palthrow|talk]]) 12:45, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

::Not all of the bullet points are aplicable, but from that paragraph, most of the policies fit with one of the bullet points.

::The article on [[Milton Friedman]] holds that the current Pruime minister and leader of the indpendance party follows largely the policies he espouced. I suppose you could use the same source that is used there, http://courses.wcupa.edu/rbove/eco343/040Compecon/Scand/Iceland/040129prosper.htm .

:: The article on neoliberalism holds that it's success was built on Milton Friedman's works, and the interlectual victories of the chicago school, thus equating Milton Friedman with neoliberalism. The article on Milton Friedman himself, and the link I provided, equates the current PM with Milton Friedman, and thus, by extention, neoliberalism.
::I wouldn't count myself an opponent of them, but I would call them neo-liberal, and I expect neo-liberals would do the same. [[User:Larklight|Larklight]] ([[User talk:Larklight|talk]]) 17:58, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
:::It's debatable whether Geir Haarde is really going to follow through with the same aggressive liberalisation policies as his predecessor Davíð Oddsson-- he certainly hasn't, so far. In any case, using the branding "neo-liberal" in the article adds very little information. I'd much rather the policies of the government be explained thoroughly, leaving it up to the reader what "isms" they want to attribute to the bundle of policies in question. Your eagerness place this adjective in the article makes it sound like you have a political agenda... -- [[User:Palthrow|Palthrow]] ([[User talk:Palthrow|talk]]) 10:05, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

:::: Well, the other article says he does have a similar agenda, so if you disagree, I suggest you take it up on that page.
::::We can't explain their policies thoroughly- policies are released in massive releases, each one longer than this article. To thoroughly explain would mean to at least that extent, plus comments, effects, etc. Clearly we cannot do so, and need to simplify, for ease of reading. Giving it a label, as the other article shows to be applicable, is the ultimate expression of this. One label is much easier to understand and compare than a mash of policies, and this is the way the rest of wikipedia acts. That's why it's dotted with hyperlinks, rather than explaining every concept in full every time. A short summary, followed by a link, is how wikipedia operates.
::::Equally, I could call your eagerness to defend the status quo a result of an agenda. But what you call my eagerness is simply the result of my belief that this is an approreot place for it combined with your opposition. If soemone had reverted my deletion of the data about coastline length I would have argued for that. This does not make me an agenda-pusher: it makes me someone who is willing to debate what they believe in. To paraphrase Mill, to hold a belief is to hate all those who oppose it. I don't hate you, but I do consider the defence of truth a worthy subject for terifialy. If fighting for what one considers truth is agenda-pushing, then guilty as charged. But if we were to use that definition, every wikipedian would be guilty. [[User:Larklight|Larklight]] ([[User talk:Larklight|talk]]) 21:03, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
:::::There are still no references to a source outside Wikipedia for the neo-liberal thing. Also if such a source is found we can never ever describe the economy of a nation in such terms as if it were an absolute truth, only that it is the view of some specific notable group of people. --[[User:Bjarki S|Bjarki]] ([[User talk:Bjarki S|talk]]) 21:34, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
:::::Also guys, we can have both a detailed description of the economic policies and how they have been carried out AND a reference to how this conforms to an specific -ism according to some (like Friedman). It's funny though how it would be hard to get the power-people in the Independence Party to admit that Neo-Liberalism has been a major influence on the party in the last two decades while all of their opponent would happily describe them as such, neo-liberalism (frjálshyggja/nýfrjálshyggja) is a scare word in Icelandic politics that nobody wants to be associated with. --[[User:Bjarki S|Bjarki]] ([[User talk:Bjarki S|talk]]) 21:46, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
::::::This reminds me of the debate over at [[flat tax]]. In Icelandic political discourse a flat tax is a rather far-out idea sometimes discussed by right-wing commentators and ideologues. Over on Wikipedia, Iceland already ''has'' a flat tax. So there! [[User:Haukurth|Haukur]] ([[User talk:Haukurth|talk]]) 21:55, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
:::::Before you attach the adjective "neo-liberal" to the policies of the Icelandic government in this article, I would like to see good sources to this effect, qualified, as Bjarki suggested, by statements to the effect that this is the view of a specific group of people. Political categorisation is a notoriously difficult and delicate business -- political categories are vague and remain the subject of seemingly endless pedantic academic dispute. They also raise underlying methodological problems, no resolution of which commands no broad concensus, such as whether parties should be categorised according to overtly proclaimed policies, the realisation of intended results, unintended end results, etc. The frankly awful state of articles on political categories on Wikipedia is a testament to this. I'd much rather we leave out labelling. -- [[User:Palthrow|Palthrow]] ([[User talk:Palthrow|talk]]) 10:38, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
:::::: Why do we need to put such an emphasis on getting more 3rd party sources? The fact that their policies are generally neo-lierbal can be derived from the other pages. If you deny that they are accurate, you should change them. If not, and since you haven't said anything to this effect, I'll presume this is the case, we can use those articles as our assumptions. Which leads to the fact that they are generally neo-liberal. The need for a 3rd party source here is exactly the same as on those articles: if they need one, presumably they have one (if not, you should be there). If they don't need one, neither does this. The other source I mentioned earlyer shows the strong effect Friedman had: if you're reverting my becuase I didn't intergrate the reference, that's becuase I don't know how, and would appreciate your help.
:::::: Of course it's the view of a certain group of people: it's the view of those who, like [[User:Bjarki S|Bjarki]], can recognise that the independance party is heavily influenced by neo-liberalism, as is shown elsewhere on wikipedia, and who can understand the progression from 'Friedman is a neo-liberal' and 'Friedman influenced Iceland' to 'neo-liberalism inflencing Iceland'. If political catagorisation is subject to endless dispute, this is an issue for those pages. Here, however, it is clear that neo-liberalism is a major factor. And how else are you going to catagorise parties but by how they act? Iceland has acted in a neo-liberal way, hense, acts neo-liberally. [[User:Larklight|Larklight]] ([[User talk:Larklight|talk]]) 19:25, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
:::::::You still have to be careful of [[WP:SYN]] issues. Source X gives you fact A and source Y gives you fact B but you may still need source Z to connect the dots between A and B. [[User:Haukurth|Haukur]] ([[User talk:Haukurth|talk]]) 19:29, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
::::::::I don't think that applies here- nothing aditionally has been added, like in that example. Rather, I've simply joined up the two sources, and come to a conclusion that isn't contrary to anyone's experience or instincts.[[User:Larklight|Larklight]] ([[User talk:Larklight|talk]]) 19:34, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
:::::::::You've joined up two sources and reached a conclusion, perhaps a reasonable one. This seems exactly like that [[WP:SYN]] example to me. [[User:Haukurth|Haukur]] ([[User talk:Haukurth|talk]]) 21:54, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
:::::::::: I have joined up two sources, but I think that my conclusion is entirely contained in the sources- the conclusion is part of the inferances (making it an [[analytic proposition]], possibly a tautology). Additionally, [[WP:SYN]] describes putting together A and B to make C- what I have done is to find that A=B and that B=C, and derive A=C. Law of identity holds, and nothing, not even any new connections, are on my behalf. I simply noticed the [[tautology]] involved. [[User:Larklight|Larklight]] ([[User talk:Larklight|talk]]) 22:15, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

In the economy section it is stated that Iceland has progressive taxation but that's not quite true. The income tax is proportional with only a single tax bracket.[[User:Ormur|Ormur]] ([[User talk:Ormur|talk]]) 14:33, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

== Social structure ==

:''Iceland is not a very class-separated society, and most of the population belong to a large middle class. Not many Icelanders are very rich, and there are also not many who are significantly poor. Like in other Western societies, a traditional nuclear family consists of a husband, a wife, and their children, usually in the range of one to three. However, this is very different between families, and like in other Western societies, divorce is rather common.''

I removed this section because these facts are rather subjective and unreferenced. It would be better to show rather than tell. For example, income quintiles and household census statistics would tell a more accurate and objective story. -- [[User:Beland|Beland]] ([[User talk:Beland|talk]]) 03:02, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

== Location of the Fischer-Spassky Chess Match? ==
Where was the match held?

I think if the Reagan-Gorby summit's location is noted, the chess match likely also ranks up there historically as well. [[Special:Contributions/143.232.210.150|143.232.210.150]] ([[User talk:143.232.210.150|talk]]) 22:47, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
:[[Laugardalshöll]]. --[[User:Bjarki S|Bjarki]] ([[User talk:Bjarki S|talk]]) 10:48, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

==Good article nomination?==
This article’s come a long way recently, I think it could be ready for GA soon with a few tweaks. What do you guys think? [[User:Max Naylor|Max Naylor]] ([[User talk:Max Naylor|talk]]) 16:14, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
:We need to get rid of the weasel words. --[[User:S.Örvarr.S|Stefán Örvarr Sigmundsson]] ([[User talk:S.Örvarr.S|talk]]) 07:45, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

==What did the foxes eat?==
The article says that the Arctic Fox was the only land mammal in Iceland when humans arrived. If this is true, what did they eat? Birds and fish exclusively? [[Special:Contributions/70.243.223.32|70.243.223.32]] ([[User talk:70.243.223.32|talk]]) 01:02, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
:Presumably. -- [[User:Palthrow|Palthrow]] ([[User talk:Palthrow|talk]]) 13:21, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Revision as of 16:50, 25 February 2008

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Iceland&oldid=193955770"