Talk:Per Imerslund

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
WikiProject Biography (Rated Stub-class)
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.
Stub-Class article Stub  This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale.


I've removed the bit about Imerslund's supposed homosexuality. The only reference I find to it is in the Emberland book, which is in Norwegian, and I have no idea as to its reliability. The removed info is:

A loathing of his homosexuality and self-perceived feminine traits, led him to frequently risk his life.<ref>{{cite book |last= Emberland |first= Terje |authorlink= |coauthors= Roughvedt, Bernt |title= Det ariske idol: Forfatteren, eventyreren og nazisten Per Imerslund |year= 2004 |publisher= Aschehoug |location= Oslo |language= Norwegian |isbn= 9788203229640 |oclc= 58648278 |pages= pp. 109, 456 }}</ref>

If anyone can find a source (preferably in English, though that's not strictly necessary) that corroborates Imerslund's sexuality, please re-add. Thanks! -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 07:26, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

What is the basis for your questioning the reliability of this source? Aschehoug is a major and reputable Norwegian publisher. Emberland is the foremost expert on Imerslund, having written about him also in his previous book about Norwegian neo-pagans and Nazis, Religion og rase (Oslo: Humanist, 2003). Det ariske idol appears on bibliographies of LGBT literature, e.g. [1], and Emberland has even been invited to lecture for a gay studies course at University of Oslo.[2] The book has featured on Norwegian LGBT websites,[3] and even Norwegian neo-Nazis have begrudgingly accepted that their "poster boy" was gay.[4] To the best of my knowledge, no reviewer has ever questioned the authors' findings about Imerslund's sexual orientation. I've read the book; I am familiar with the historical context surrounding Imerslund (it is part of my professional research just now), and I feel the book to comply with WP:RS. Most references to Imerslund will be based on Emberland's writings, so it will be hard to find independent corroboration. —Zalktis (talk) 08:53, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
That may be hitting the nail on the head - we're relying on a single source for that fact. I was unable to find a single other source to back up the claim, as I said. And I may be totally wrong here, since I'm dealing in a language I don't understand and a subject I'm almost totally unfamiliar with. But I would feel *much* more comfortable if we could find a second source. Even a scholarly review that says "he's right". At the moment, and I'm totally going by feel here, at the moment it feels like a WP:FRINGE.
Like I said, I could be wrong. But surely such a controversial claim about "the most prominent figure" has been questioned? Surely someone has corroborated Emberland's research? -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 16:34, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
Perhaps this quote from a review in Tidsskrift for Den norske legeforening (Journal of the Norwegian Medical Association) no. 24/2005,[5] might help: "Farens og hans egen homoseksualitet er sikkert riktig nok, men den interesserte leser får med seg poenget på et tidlig tidspunkt i boken." (His father's and his own homosexuality are certainly true enough, but the interested reader understands this point already from early on in the book.) I'll see if I can find a reference to another review in a history journal. As for corroborating research, no-one had ever written a full-length biography of Imerslund before Det ariske idol. —Zalktis (talk) 18:11, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
Anything new? -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 17:26, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
In his 2007 article, "Homohistorie: Men hva skal jeg skrive om?" (Gay history: But what should I write about?), published in the University of Oslo historical journal Fortid, Hans W. Kristiansen includes Emberland's & Rougthvedt's Imerslund book among the literature that describes gay life in Norway during the occupation in WWII (p. 11, fn. 8).[6] Try as I might, I can find no-one since Det ariske idol appeared who seriously doubts the version that Imerslund was gay, and that his inability to reconcile this with his own desire to live up to the warped national socialist masculine ideal led him to do many rash and self-destructive things... But maybe the issue really isn't about WP:RS. If you don't like the idea of a gay Nazi, (or a self-loathing gay Nazi, for that matter) then trying to determine whether Emberland is WP:FRINGE or not isn't the most effective way of going about things. Instead, you could put the article up for deletion as non-notable, and I'm sure you'll be able to get it removed from English Wikipedia in toto. I mean — the NNSAP and Ragnarok circle were the fringe of the radical fringe in Norway (cf. the much more important Nasjonal Samling party of Vidkun Quisling). Imerslund wrote a book, and got it published? So what?! Maybe this trivia should be banished back to Norwegian Wikipedia, where it belongs(?). —Zalktis (talk) 23:24, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
I suppose that's one way to "solve the problem", but that's not really my goal. I've spend a lot of wikitime verifying LGBT people, mostly for List of gay, lesbian or bisexual people and all the sublists. As such, it's not at all about what I like or don't, it's about making a better encyclopedia. If that's the only reference, then so be it. But it would be nice... Thanks for your help, and if you come across any further research that backs up the claim, let me know. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 04:39, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Per Imerslund. 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.

As of 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 the "External links modified" sections if they want, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 15 July 2018).

  • 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) 22:35, 4 December 2017 (UTC)