This article is written in
British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other
varieties of English. According to the
relevant style guide, this should not be changed without
broad consensus.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Iceland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Iceland on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IcelandWikipedia:WikiProject IcelandTemplate:WikiProject IcelandIceland articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
the Middle Ages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages articles
I realize the whole article is almost unreferenced (well no inline refs anyway), but in particular the section of text about "the exposure of infants", is unacceptable because as it is it sounds to much like
blood libel. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
119.224.40.127 (
talk)
00:31, 18 May 2009 (UTC)reply
Exposure of infants was common throughout large parts of Europe in pre-Christian times. I don't see the connection with blood libel, 'false and sensationalized allegations that a person or group engages in human sacrifice, often accompanied by the claim the blood of victims is used in various rituals and/or acts of cannibalism.' Your point seems spurious. --
Palthrow (
talk)
12:47, 19 May 2009 (UTC)reply
I have heard of this before, and perhaps you are right. However until some references for this particular statement are provided it seems best left out, because its a fairly controversial thing to say.
119.224.40.127 (
talk) —Preceding
undated comment added
12:45, 30 May 2009 (UTC).reply
Trigger happy
Akigka reverted all my recent changes saying I added a spam link? But the link is the same one from the main
Iceland article. And if he though the link was spam, then just remove the link. For consistency sake, the text I added is the same as the main
Iceland article. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
84.19.169.231 (
talk)
16:37, 26 February 2010 (UTC)reply
Hope we can have a discussion about this. The way i see it you are c/p-ing the same text across a number of pages who touch on the subject of the settlement of Iceland even where that text is obviously irrelevant, and using a timeline of medieval Greenland history as reference. I may have been rash in supposing that you were pushing that reference for strange purposes - it just seemed so obviously irrelevant and useless as reference (of the thousands that could be used: including online publications of Landnáma in various languages). It is, however, not good practice IMHO to simply copy-paste the same text to many articles (overwriting what was there before). Why do you think this particular person in Landnáma is so important that it needs be mentioned on every page that touches on the subject? --
Akigka (
talk)
01:36, 5 March 2010 (UTC)reply
Papar?
Needs to be a nod to the possibility of the
papar pre-dating settlement.
Snori (
talk)
Requested move 12 September 2019
The following is a closed discussion of a
requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a
move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a
requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this
talk page or in a
move review. No further edits should be made to this section.