Talk:Gardarike runestones

U 1003

Magnus Källström article http://fornvannen.se/pdf/2000talet/2008_233.pdf "En tidigare okänd österledsfarare från Rasbo: Till tolkningen av inskriften på Frötunastenen U 1003" (2009) notes recently identified drawing of U 1003 (before it was damaged) indicates it is a memorial to a man who died in Novgorod; needs someone who can accurately translate / summarize it and update this article. Deanlaw (talk) 00:06, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

G 134

The paragraph isn't balanced. It gives undue weight and detailed presentation of what is a minority point of view, namely Pritsak's. It states that the first mention of Wallachians is Choniates - this is interpretation, not fact. According to the mainstream interpretation G 134 itself is the first mention of Vlachs. Furthermore, the paragraph states that Blökkumannaland refers to Polovtsians although mainstream sources have linked it to the Balkan Vlachs since the 17th century translation of the Heimskringla onward. Plinul cel tanar (talk) 08:02, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Merger proposal

I propose that Ög 43 be merged into Varangian runestones. The content in the Ög 43 article seems too short to warrant a separate article to Varangian runestones. Also, note the articles current orphan status. The Varangian runestones article is of a reasonable size in which the merging will not cause any problems as far as article size or undue weight is concerned. LordVetinari (talk) 02:03, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

I would disagree with the proposal since the text of Ög 43 does not provide any basis for linking it to any eastern voyages such as to Rus, which is essentially the basis for all Varangian runestones. The Ög 43 text does not even indicate that it is associated with any activity outside of Sweden. Deanlaw (talk) 04:39, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Also, Ög 43 is no longer classified as an orphan as it has 3 valid links to it, so less of a reason to merge it (besides to it not being a Varangian runestone). Deanlaw (talk) 22:05, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Deanlaws first point should put an end to this matter. The proposal is absurd.

Accusativen hos Olsson (talk) 00:22, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

I have removed the merge tags on these articles. William Avery (talk) 10:21, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Gardarike runestones. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110225031159/http://www.sofi.se/servlet/GetDoc?meta_id=1472 to http://www.sofi.se/servlet/GetDoc?meta_id=1472

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 23:08, 7 January 2017 (UTC)