Talk:Svaðilfari

Norse history and culture Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Norse history and culture, a WikiProject related to all activities of the North Germanic peoples, both in Scandinavia and abroad, prior to the formation of the Kalmar Union in 1397. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.Norse history and cultureWikipedia:WikiProject Norse history and cultureTemplate:WikiProject Norse history and cultureNorse history and culture articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Equine C‑class Low‑importance

	Horses portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Equine, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of articles relating to horses, asses, zebras, hybrids, equine health, equine sports, etc. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at the barn.EquineWikipedia:WikiProject EquineTemplate:WikiProject Equineequine articles
C	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Hrimthurs

Why is the term Hrimthurs used here, instead of the vastly more recognizable and noteable Jotun? 80.65.103.177 (talk) 16:37, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Plagiarist

I looked up the reference that was put down by the person who presumably made most of this article, which returns the Faulkes translation of the Poetic Edda, and it looks like this person copied the entire story in that book, word for word, and then clumsily replaced some of the phrasing. The grammar is atrocious and the writing is not in the style of an informative article. I think the entire article should be nuked and restarted, and maybe we should ban whoever made those initial edits to this page. 76.117.205.149 (talk) 18:09, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Constant reverting of edits that add in made up details among other issues

What do folks think about getting some degree of protection on this page? We are constantly working to stop changes that worsen the article being put in by a very persistent person. It is really wasting our time and has been happening for years.

To be specific, the story is written by the editor as a story and presented in an uneencyclopedic style. Furthermore, as has been noted by others, there is a lot of "original research". This includes the invented detail that after the builder was "yelling and screaming smashing stones and trees". In the text we only see that they were in a rage. The grammar is also questionable in places.

The current version is much closer to the text and delivers it in a more suitably concise style while covering the main points and I believe is more suitable to be the version which stays. I will try and add to the page and flesh it out a bit too as I have only really be involved in correcting made up details so far. This will also include improving this section with better referencing.Ingwina (talk) 06:14, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely, the current version is much better than the persistent edit warring-version. Some improvement to the current text would be welcome if you have time for it but this person's wholesale replacement is not an improvement by any means. I'd support some protection for a while in the hopes that this person loses interest. AntiDionysius (talk) 10:28, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that the current version of the article is better than the version the /64 was edit warring to. Waxworker (talk) 02:09, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]