Wikipedia:Peer review/Sverre of Norway/archive1

Sverre I of Norway

I very much want this article to become a FA at some point, but this is one of the more deserted areas of wikispace so I'm listing it here with the hopes that someone else will take a look at it. Language probably need a general brush up by a native speaker. I'm aware of the glaring lack of images and maps, but so far I've not been able to find any usefull free ones. Fornadan (t) 18:23, 8 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Overall, a good article. However, there are a few things that I feel ought to be done:

- I realise that Norwegian isn't as straight forward as English when it comes to pluralising, but the form used (birkebeins) is just sounding horrible. A more acceptable form would be birkebeiners (correct plural in Norwegian is birkebeinere (several birchleggers) and birkebeinerne (all the birchleggers)).

Agree

- One or several maps showing the movement of the Birkebeiners and the places mentioned in the article would be helpfull. As a Norwegian I know where most of these places are, but I would be surpriced if the avrage reader knew.

Problem is that my graphical skills are close to zero and I have not so far found any. I have left a note at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Maps/Requested_and_orphan_maps though. I can provide some rough drafts if someone would agree to make them presentable.

- You refer to the ship "Mariasuda" as the "largest ship of them all", allthought most sources indicate she was only '33 room long' (ie; had 33 pairs of oars - 40 to 45 mieters long and 8 to 9 meters wide). At the same time, all sources indicate that "Ormen Lange" (buildt for Olav Trygvason) was between 50 and 60 meters long and 9 to 10 meters wide. In all fairness, the section on the Mariasuda should be rephrased to show it was the largest longship afloat at the time, and possible the second largest ever built.

OK, will do that alhough I have my doubts wether Ormen really was longer (but that is not for us to decide. Fornadan (t) 09:33, 10 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Again, a good article. WegianWarrior 08:22, 10 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose the article's name is in accordance with Wiki practice, but in those days, kings did not have numbers. It should, to be correct, be called Sverre Sigurdson of Norway, I think, and then noted in the text that he has been called Sverre I by later historians. John Anderson 14:12, 15 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This was discussed at Talk:List_of_Norwegian_monarchs some time ago. In short, the conclusion (see Wikipedia:WikiProject Norway#Naming policy) was to let the articles titles be consistent with the rest of wikipedia, but use the more traditional & familiar forms within the article text. Fornadan (t) 20:47, 15 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sverre Sigurdsson has never been known to historians as Sverre I, since there has not been any later kings of Norway with the name. So, Sverre of Norway would be a more appropriate title. --Tokle 19:45, 22 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Seems comprehensive, but can use more references and pictures. Lead can also use some expantion, those paras are tiny. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 17:48, 21 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I've listed those references I've used. Pictures are very difficult to find. Was thinking of using the coins which I've linked under Externals, but they seems to be copyrighted Fornadan (t) 17:58, 21 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]