Talk:2010 in Norway

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

No longer conflict?[edit]

Should I take this edit to mean that there is no longer any reason to place a caveat at the date given for the Oslo Eurovision finals? __meco (talk) 09:21, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deleting of sections[edit]

I have just reverted your deletion of the "Arts and literature" sections in several of the Years in Norway articles.[1][2][3] Why did you remove this information?

Also, I have requested here on your talk page that you start writing edit summaries. I certainly commend you for you diligent work on the Years in Norway articles lately, but on several instances I have encountered edits which to me do not make much sense, and when you skip writing edit summaries altogether it is impossible for me or anyone else to understand what is your reasoning beind these edits. I'd appreciate your response as you chose not to respond to my previous inquiry. __meco (talk) 06:53, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is a lot of work to be done to improve the quality of these important articles. I have done and am planning to do thouasands of edits on these articles - this is the main reason I do not write short summaries of each edit I make. The reason I removed the prize winners is becuase there are too many prize winners each year (in endless categories) and I do not want to end up having big lists of all prize winners - only the most notable international prize winners should be included in these articles (you check the other similar articles for comparison) - such as the winner of the Nobel prize or the Eurovision song contest, etc. I would appriciate if you let me finish the work before we start discussing what should be included and/or start have reverting wars which would only prevent me from adding the neccesary improvments to these articles on the short run. TheCuriousGnome (talk) 14:51, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Although I understand that you want some elbowroom for your planned changes, expansions, I find that your request that you not be called on controversial edits until you are finished with this effort is unacceptable. Having now read your rationale for wanting to have the prize winners removed, I vehemently disagree and will press to block these removals. Certainly the number of national prizes aren't that overwhelming. Also, your rationale for wanting a waiver from the normal expectation of providing edit summaries is similarly unconvincing from my perspective
You are making wide-ranging, unilaterally motivated alterations to the standard for how these articles are to look, and you are expecting to ward off any discussions until you can present the community with a fait accompli which will be hard to challenge for the sheer volume of discrete changes having to be done. This is quite unacceptable.
I will afford you a day to consider my position and grievances. If you are prepared to dialog on these issues that will be appreciated, if you insist on going through with your project uninfluenced by this response, I will start reviewing your edits systematically and challenge any and all edits with which I disagree by initially reverting them per WP:BRD. Also, if we shall discuss this further, I propose a more intuitively related venue with respect to these articles, such as Talk:2010 in Norway. __meco (talk) 18:28, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
So far, the most tidious work related to these articles is mostly researching and adding the missing events in all these hundreds of articles - this is a proccess which might take me another week at most (I was hoping you would be mainly glad that I am taking the time to expand and improve the most important sections of these articles). Another tidious proccess is the correction of all the "Incumbents" sections which either contained only the monarch or were not detailed enough. My major changes besides that are in the general apperance of the article - the "Births" and "Deaths" sections - I've changed the titles to "Notable births" and "Notable deaths", removed portrait images in the births sections and added more portrait images to the deaths sections - this move was mainly done becuase it needs to be clear that these sections should contain the most notable births and deaths in Norwegian society and becuase these sections should not be the main focus of the article or used as advertisment for less notable living Norwegians. I feel that the biggest differences of opinions between us at this point are about the notability of "Popular culture" events and their inclusion criteria. I agree that we should provide more noatble prominent local events to these articles (In many cases, the notability of each of those events debatable and might need to be discussed) - for example even though Kurt Nilsen recieved a lot of media attention in 2003 for winning "Pop Idol", people win in this show every year, why should we only mention that he won that competition and not mention all the other people whom have won in that show? Another example - several of these articles listed the winners of local annual awards such as the Riksmål Society Literature Prize - why were they only mentioned in selected articles and not in all the articles? are those really the most prestigious notable awards in Norway?, Please suggest all the most notable local annual prize events and competitions (in Sports, Film, Music, Literature, etc.) which you believe are notable enough to be included in these articles. Another example - several of these articles listed the establishing date of different Norwegian bands - my main issue with this is that if we start adding the establishing date of different Norwegian bands without having an inclusion criteria we would end up with a big list of obscure bands. I hope you would agree with me that these articles should only present the most notable events in Norway and not all events which happend in Norway on a giving year. I am hoping we would be able to get past our minor differences and work together on these articles - if you are willing I would be also glad to have a friendly chat with you about the further development of these articles and possible co-operation between us through IM/Skype. What do you say? TheCuriousGnome (talk) 20:33, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You write that you hope that I would be "mainly glad" about the work you are putting into these articles. I am, and that is why I started by writing "I certainly commend you for you diligent work on the Years in Norway articles lately". Now, there's not really more to say about that, so when I am bringing forth my grievances my positive attitude might become a bit obscured, but that is unfortunately the nature of raising a problem. Unfortunately, I do not have access to Skype of anything of that kind. Now, I suggested we continue this discussion at Talk:2010 in Norway. Would you object if we simply moved this section to that page so that other interested parties more likely will find it now and later? __meco (talk) 08:35, 26 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please answer the following questions:

  • Several of these articles list the winners of local annual awards such as the Riksmål Society Literature Prize - why were they only ones mentioned and why were they included only in selected articles and not in all the articles? are those really the most prestigious notable awards in Norway? Please suggest all the most notable local annual prize events and competitions (in Sports, Film, Music, Literature, etc.) which you believe are notable enough to be included in these articles. Since the notability of local popular culture events are debatable, my solution for this is usually to keep those sections minimal as possible and add links in the "See Also" section to expanded articles which focus on the most prominent local popular culture events.
  • Do you believe we should add to each year the winners of local reality shows such as "Pop Idol"?
  • Several of these articles listed the establishing date of different Norwegian bands - my main issue with this is that if we start adding the establishing date of different Norwegian bands without having an inclusion criteria we would end up with a big list of obscure Norwegian bands. What is you position on this matter? TheCuriousGnome (talk) 16:12, 26 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • I assert that the threshold of notability has been established by entry to Wikipedia itself. All competitions and awards with their own articles or which would qualify for an article are notable to mention in the years in Norway articles. I do not see any threat of this ever becoming too much or too trivial as long as we apply Wikipedia's general notability standards. Any other threshold level would have to be based on the personal opinion of Wikipedia editors and would very likely, as presently is the case, lead to content disputes. Instead of trying to limit the size of these articles I'd like to see them as comprehensive as possible, and if for some reason, at some point in time, they would appear to grow to unwieldy sizes (which I cannot actually imagine the way the project currently is evolving), then we would solve that by spawning subordinate articles with limited topics (e.g. Category:2010 in Norwegian television, Category:2010 in Norwegian literature, Category:2010 in Norwegian politics, etc.)
  • With respect to winners of the myriad television series such as X Factor, Robinson, Skal Vi Danse? and the like, firstly this "problem" only relates to a limited number of years, basically the most recent decade. It would be very simple to create the layout for a combined presentation for all such shows in an indented, bulleted list in the entertainment section. With shows such as Paradise Hotel, Farmen and Jakten På Kjærligheten where the winners usually aren't of public interest (except some that become celebrities, such as Petter Pilgaard), we need not mention those.
  • As for Norwegian bands, of course we should include the establishment of every band which has met Wikipedia's notability criteria. If the bands are widely known, probably a regular point would be appropriate. For more eclectic acts, we could opt for a solution similar to the one I sketched out above for game show winners. After all, if we include all Norwegian bands that are notable, how many would that amount to per year? Not too many, I think. __meco (talk) 18:57, 26 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
In my opinion, it would be a big mistake to expand the popular culture sections of these articles unproportionately with the addition of many events of lesser significance such as ALL winners of local reality shows, establishment dates of ALL Norwegian bands (including minor bands), etc. In my opinion, these articles should be written in an encyclopedic style and should only present the most prominent events in Norway each year.
Nevertheless, as I have stated before, I would not object to having “Popular culture” sections in these articles as long as they would only contain the most prominent popular culture events sorted into sub sections such as Music, TV, Literature, Film, with notes that clearly indicate that these are “The most prominent events Norwegian Television:”, “The most prominent events in the Norwegian cinema:”, and so on... In my opinion, we could even mention several selected prize winners as well, as long as we agree on which awards are the most prominent ones and then add those to all years and not just to a selected few.
In any case, at this point I think both of our opinions on this matter are quite clear and therefore, I suggest that we'll let other Wikipedians express their opinion about this matter. TheCuriousGnome (talk) 18:42, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Notable deaths[edit]

I suggest this section, throughout the Norway by Years hierarchy should be renamed to simply "Deaths". All comparable structures use simply this term, and it is quite redundant to mention "notable" in any case. Naturally we do not mention deaths that aren't notable. __meco (talk) 14:12, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on 2010 in Norway. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 17:47, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on 2010 in Norway. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 02:09, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on 2010 in Norway. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 01:36, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:2010_in_Norway&oldid=1196578934"