Talk:Møn

Denmark Mid‑importance

	Denmark portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Denmark, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Denmark on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DenmarkWikipedia:WikiProject DenmarkTemplate:WikiProject DenmarkDenmark articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Islands

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Islands, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of islands on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IslandsWikipedia:WikiProject IslandsTemplate:WikiProject IslandsIslands articles

Protected areas Low‑importance

	This article is part of WikiProject Protected areas, a WikiProject related to national parks and other protected natural or ecological areas worldwide.Protected areasWikipedia:WikiProject Protected areasTemplate:WikiProject Protected areasProtected areas articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Mistake?

Isn't there a mistake in this article here? "... Klekkende Høj from the Neolithic age c.2500 years old."

Shouldn't this either be"... Klekkende Høj from the Neolithic age c.4500 years old." or "... Klekkende Høj from the neolithic age around 2500 BC."

2500 years old would put Klekkende Høj within the Danish Iron age, not the Neolithic age!

The website at web address: - http://web.telia.com/~u25003469/ancientframe.htm is good for information on Neolithic and Bronze Age mounds, stone circles in Denmark. This site actually claims that Klekkende Høj is over 5000 years old or before 3000 BC.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.41.239.229 (talk • contribs) 15 June 2006

Sømarkedyssen

I think the ancient monument at Sømarke is a dolmen rather than a barrow. 188.183.79.210 (talk) 19:40, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It is a barrow that has been excavated, leaving the dolmen exposed. --Klausok (talk) 06:23, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Møn/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

I find the history section hard to understand - some mistranslations, perhaps? eg "In 1447 King Cristopher of Bayern granted the town rights to trade outside Møn, within the remainder of Denmark. In 1450 Christian I of Denmark forbade farmers to trade goods outside of Denmark, with the direct result that they sailed directly to Germany to sell their goods, bypassing the town of Stege, which was starved of goods and revenue."??Isn't Germany outside Denmark? Why does forbidding trade outside Denmark mean they trade outside Denmark? Some confusion also about the population of the island. At the beginning it is 46,000 but at the end it has "fallen" from 14,000. Which is right?!Gramail 21:00, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Last edited at 21:00, 26 September 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 00:44, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Møn. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:06, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]