Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Sverre of Norway/archive1

Sverre of Norway[edit]

Self-nom. Peer review can be found here. I know it's lacking in illustrations, but those are very hard to come by Fornadan (t) 22:18, 15 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

There's another "Trek across Voss" here: [1] but it seems to be scanned from a black-and-white printing and may not be interesting enough to add to the article. - Haukur Þorgeirsson 21:39, 17 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure, basically another interpretation of the same scene. A picture of one of his coins [2] would have been ideal, but those are of course copyrighted. There is a monument of him within walking distance, but I don't have a camera. Fornadan (t) 22:24, 17 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright on uncreative pictures expires within 25/50 years in Scandinavia and in the U.S. (the laws of which Wikipedia is subject to) it doesn't apply at all for pictures of two-dimensional public domain artwork. A picture of one side of a coin at least arguably falls under that case (read up on the Bridgeman ruling), we should check for precedents.

There are more picture opportunities if people are desparate for pictures. Location pictures are sometimes appropriate - there's one of Kirkjubøur at Commons. A picture of a manuscript of Sverris saga would also be a possible, though perhaps somewhat dull, decoration. But I wouldn't worry too much about lack of pictures - the maps help a lot. - Haukur Þorgeirsson 22:30, 18 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Support, a very thorough treatment; a few suggestions, however:

The inline links might look better if they were moved to footnotes.
The relationship among Eystein Meyla, Sverre, and Haakon as Birkebein leaders should be via {{succession box}}, but I'm uncertain what the proper title would be.

Fixed the sucession box thing. Could you point me to a how-to for the footnotes? Fornadan (t) 11:39, 17 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

There are several different formats described at Wikipedia:Footnotes. I personally prefer the first (using {{ref}} and {{note}}), but you can use any of them. Kirill Lokshin 13:31, 17 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Notes are now in place Fornadan (t) 17:19, 17 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Overall, a very good article. Kirill Lokshin 23:10, 15 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent article a sucession box would be very useful. Support. Falphin 01:49, 17 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Comment there are a lot of red links. Could you fix some of them? Renata3 12:43, 18 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I've not had much time for editing lately. Will try to write some basic stubsFornadan (t) 20:19, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent. Good luck with that. I think a short text on Sverris saga would be especially helpful for the readers, giving them a better idea of the historical sources for the events related in the article. I've watched you put a lot of effort into this article, Fornadan, and I hope to see more of your work in the future. - Haukur Þorgeirsson 20:37, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Will support article as is since I think it's very good. However I think it's a bit heavy on red links. Could you at least make the two red links on the lead stubs? -- Rune Welsh | ταλκ | Esperanza 21:49, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]