Talk:Haakon VI

Untitled

Henry Sinclair, ocean explorer,

Given that there is a lot of controversy & doubt over whether or not:

a) Henry Sinclair is the medieval explorer “Prince Zichmni” b) That the letters written by the Zeno brothers of Venice, about “Prince Zichmni’s voyages are authentic. and c) that the voyages actually occurred at all.

Isn’t it better that Henry Sinclair, ocean explorer, be changed to Henry Sinclair, Baron of Roslin. As I have found from the Clan Website that he held that title before becoming Earl of Orkney.

Anyone disagree?

The explorer controversy is covered in his own Wiki entry and also needs tidying up

Jalipa

Clan Grant

Is this Haakon, clan-father of the Grants?Norgy (talk) 13:20, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

When did he die?

When did he die? This article say he died in September 11, 1380 while his son's article it says his son started his reign in July 29 after his father's death. He was never desposed and died on the throne, so when did he died in July 29 or September 11?--Queen Elizabeth II's Little Spy (talk) 07:18, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

No numeral as Swedish king

Sometimes I hit something so an edit goes through as saved rather than being a preview. Don't know how it happens. This is what my edit summary just now should be been:

• 20:36, 20 February 2011 SergeWoodzing (talk | contribs) (15,675 bytes) (Undid revision 414984317 by Againme (talk) - no numeral has ever been used for him as Swedish king - there may have been more pre-10th century, in any case he was the second known for sure).

SergeWoodzing (talk) 20:40, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

Can a translation be copyvio?

The expansion of this article by an anonymous editor in March 2010 looks like a very close translation of the SNL article used as reference (leading to some awkward language). Should we be worried? Fornadan (t) 10:27, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Protection

{{editprotected}}

If you're trying to request protection of this article, WP:RFPP is the place to go, although I doubt it will be protected as I don't see any disruption or vandalism occurring--Jac16888 ^Talk 13:34, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Ownership issue

This has to be the clearest example of WP:OWN I have ever seen. A self-professed IP "professor" is telling us how things are going to be and dictating orders to us as if we were h dependant pupils. I respectfully suggest that the IP "professor" calm down, adopt a much less headstrong attitude and read up on the no-nos of article ownership before this behavior lands h at WP:RFCC.

Please also note more carefully the following text in the expansion template added by the IP "professor" h-self: "You are welcome to assist in its construction by editing it as well." That means me and everybody else, treated respectfully. SergeWoodzing (talk) 16:39, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

PS If my use of the words "huge overkill" in this edit comment got the IP "professor" in a belligerent mood, I apologize. The almost overwhelming amount of Roman numerals really astounded me. SergeWoodzing (talk) 16:44, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

I've now cleaned this up again and will keep looking at it. A lot of good work is intended and has been added in the expansion, so I'm glad to help fix things. SergeWoodzing (talk) 17:59, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Outstanding cleanup tag

Thanks for your work on this one. Unfortunately, since this article has an outstanding cleanup tag on it, it's not eligible for GA at this time. Someone should either remove the empty section or complete it before the nomination is quickfailed. -- Khazar2 (talk) 11:59, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Done: removed the section and the cleanup tag on it. -- Jokkemans

Thanks! Good luck with the nomination. -- Khazar2 (talk) 18:08, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Haakon VI of Norway/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Hchc2009 (talk · contribs) 19:37, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

I'll read through and review properly tomorrow. Hchc2009 (talk) 19:37, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

All done, and I learnt a lot about a subject I didn't know much about - putting on hold to allow for the remaining issues below to be dealt with. Hchc2009 (talk) 12:39, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Well-written:

(a) the prose is clear and concise, respects copyright laws, and the spelling and grammar are correct;

• "Haakon was born in 1340 (possibly in mid-August), most likely in Sweden, though the exact date and location of his birth remain unknown" - second half of the sentence is redundant.
• " Another noteworthy ancestor of Haakon, through his paternal grandfather Eric Magnusson, Duke of Södermanland, is Magnus III of Sweden." - "was" rather than "is". Would be good to explain or show why he was noteworthy (i.e. how this affected Haakon's life in some way).
• "Though the meeting at Båhus Castle forged historic ties to the old elective monarchy in Norway" - unclear what "historic" means in this context
• "Though the meeting at Båhus Castle forged historic ties to the old elective monarchy in Norway, the acclamation documents created by the Council of the Realm stipulated that Haakon was to rule over only parts of Norway, and it was also carefully documented that the Norwegian Law of Succession would apply if he were to die leaving no legitimate son, thereby ensuring that the hereditary monarchy would be upheld" - a monster sentence that could do with being cut in two.
• "Haakon would then rule as the sole king in the kingdom" - "Haakan then ruled as..."?
• "where a growing conflict eventually had erupted into open warfare." - I'm not sure that "conflict" is the best word here; "where growing tensions had eventually..."?
• " It all took a dramatic turn when Eric suddenly died of the plague in 1359" - Didn't feel encyclopaedic in tone to me. "This changed suddenly when Eric died of the plague in 1359."?
• "It was presumed that Valdemar would assist Magnus in the aforementioned rebellion, started by his eldest son Eric, by invading the province of Scania, which had been pawned by Christopher II of Denmark before his death in 1332 to Magnus and had been under Swedish rule since. " - Another very long sentence.
• "but in June 1359 Eric unexpectedly died of the plague" - repetition from previous paragraph
• "The Norwegian army entered Uppland through Västerås and clashed against the Swedish-German army in the disastrous Battle of Gata where Haakon and Magnus suffered a devastating defeat and Magnus was captured and taken prisoner by the Germans; which he would remain for six years." - another long sentence.
• "The military campaign ended in the Siege of Stockholm in 1371, where it looked like Haakon could decisively defeat the Germans and acquire revenge for his defeat at the Battle of Gata; but Albert and his German supporters managed to withstand the siege and Haakon was forced to sign a peace treaty. " ditto.
• "In 1361, Valdemar had invaded and conquered the Swedish province of Scania..." - this para would be easier to read, in my opinion, if it were broken in two. It was also hard to work out what Haakon was doing during this period in it.
• Worth linking marks and nobles (the money)
• "Military policies" section - my Norwegian isn't great, but this looks very close to the original cited text. Could you double check it for close paraphrasing? (NB: If you're content, I'll be happy, as I can't read it very well). Hchc2009 (talk) 12:39, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

(b) it complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.

• The lead feels very short given the length and detail of the article - could it be expanded a bit? Hchc2009 (talk) 12:38, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Factually accurate and verifiable:

(a) it provides references to all sources of information in the section(s) dedicated to the attribution of these sources according to the guide to layout;

• The web pages cited lack authorship and publication details.
• I don't know what some of the citations mean: " Ingebjørg Håkonsdatter (Store norske leksikon)", for example, or Ulf Sundberg Medeltidens Svenska Krig 2002
• Some probable web pages seem to lack links - e.g. Our Family History and Ancestry. "Ingeborg Valdemarsdatter, Prinsesse of Denmark". Retrieved 2011-05-05.
• Nordberg (2001) seems alone as a short citation, with no accompanying detail
• Some references lack page numbers, e.g. Dollinger, Philippe (1999). The German Hansa. Routledge. ISBN 0-415-19072-X.

(b) it provides in-line citations from reliable sources for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines;

• Minor point (not a requirement for GA), but at some points, there a lot of citations backing up a long para of text - e.g. "Valdemar was unable to enforce the fragile peace with the Hanseatic cities, and in 1367 the League founded the Confederation of Cologne against Denmark and Norway to counter the growing ambitions of the two allied kings. The Confederation renewed their alliance with German-held Sweden and assembled a large fleet of warships and subsequently assaulted the Norwegian coast and continued to raid it all the way to Agder. Also, the Confederation launched a successful campaign against Valdemar in Denmark, which turned out to be disastrous for Valdemar's plans to reassemble the Danish kingdom. The Confederation raided and pillaged the Danish coast, invaded the province of Danish-held Scania, and even captured and looted the city of Copenhagen through a successful siege. This, in combination with the rebellious nobles in Jutland, forced Valdemar to flee his kingdom during Easter in 1368. Realizing the futility in a prolonged and costly war, as well as Haakon's wavering support for the disastrous conflict, Valdemar appointed his friend and advisor, Rigsdrost Henning Podebusk, to negotiate peace with the Confederation in his absence.[1][2][3][9][18][33][34][35]" - In practice, this makes tracing a specific fact to a specific source very hard, and in these cases I'd usually advise attributing the citations to sentences, or giving more detail in the citation. Hchc2009 (talk) 12:06, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

(c) it contains no original research.

• None found so far. Hchc2009 (talk) 12:06, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Broad in its coverage:

(a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic;

• Yes. Hchc2009 (talk) 11:30, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

(b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).

• Yes. Hchc2009 (talk) 11:30, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without bias, giving due weight to each.

• Appears neutral so far. Hchc2009 (talk) 10:28, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.

Illustrated, if possible, by images:

(a) images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content;

• File:Kungaval.jpg. The tag is for a 2D work, but in this case much of the photograph is of the 3D seals and ties.
• File:Diplomatarium Norvegicum I 409.jpg. This needs a US PD tag. Hchc2009 (talk) 10:28, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

(b) images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.

• "A page of Margaret's letter to Haakon, cca 1370" - "cca"? I've come across circa, and c., but not cca. Hchc2009 (talk) 10:28, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
  • I can respond to two of your points. File:Diplomatarium Norvegicum I 409.jpg already has a US PD tag; I added it two days ago. See also circa - "cca" is one of the abbreviations. My main concern is about chronology of events, but you have a very good point regarding long sentences. Surtsicna (talk) 23:46, 1 January 2014 (UTC)