From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search


I'm not sure of criteria for inclusion of a language, however, given the modern world, it would be a bit silly to include languages without official recognition, or only spoken by recent immigrant communities. For this reason I removed Yiddish and Romani (without knowing whether these were 'established'). What should the criteria be? Size of group? Legal status? Extent to which language is 'indigenous'. Pincrete (talk) 08:18, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

Yiddish and Romani are official minority languages of Sweden. German is an official minority language in Denmark. I see no reason why these should not be included, even if the number of speakers are not quite as large as for e.g. Meänkieli.
Andejons (talk) 06:19, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
Is there some consistent, verifiable criteria we could adopt? I looked at a few 'place pages', GB lists only English, Scots, Welsh, Scottish Gaelic, Cornish. Cornish has reputedly 100 fluent speakers, which is obviously tiny compared to number of Jewish/Urdu/Hindi/Turkish/Greek/Somali/Polish etc. speakers in GB. The criteria used there appears to be EU recognition as a regional language. Is there some verifiable local official recognition? Pincrete (talk) 07:25, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
@Pincrete: This is a source for Finnish, Meänkieli, Sami, Romani, and Yiddish being recognised minority languages (though only in certain geographical areas for most, and mostly as a symbolical gesture for Romani and Yiddish...) in Sweden (see also Minority languages of Sweden), as for German being a recognised minority language in Southern Jutland (and there only), see European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages, which lists which minority languages are officially recognised where in Europe. - Tom | Thomas.W talk 10:48, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
And this (the official website of the Nordic Council) can be used as source for German being a recognised minority language in Sønderjylland. - Tom | Thomas.W talk 10:55, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
I think that makes sense, to list ALL with official recognition, regardless of numbers, since anyone coming to the article is unlikely to need to be informed that English, and recent migrant languages are spoken almost everywhere, but might be interested in historical use. Pincrete (talk) 11:40, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Scandinavia. 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) 17:37, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Incorrect sentence about the Sami people in the Toponymy section[edit]

Can someone, who can edit this page, edit the following sentence? "A small minority of Sami people live in the extreme north of Scandinavia." I would suggest something like this instead: "A minority of Sami people lives in northern parts and some southern parts of Scandinavia". Even today, there are Samis as far south as Hedmark in Norway (Elgå), so the current sentence is wrong. I would also remove the word "small", not because it's wrong, but because it's an inexact word to use in an encyclopedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 14:47, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 29 August 2018[edit] (talk) 06:18, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

According to the tourist rankings and reviews Norway, Denmark and Sweden are ranked as the most visited places from past 3 years , and therefore declared as the best places on Earth .

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. I doubt that ranking and my doubt is confirmed by looking at World Tourism rankings. Sam Sailor 07:50, 29 August 2018 (UTC)