Talk:Freedom to roam

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I think this article should be moved to a new name, preferably something that works for all the three countries. It seems that the finnish jokamiehen oikeudet is usually translated to everyman's rights, would this be an acceptable name? -- Jniemenmaa 11:49, 12 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Yes, I think no one can question your logic Gunnar Larsson 20:11, 12 Aug 2004 (UTC)

There is no question about the need to change the name of the article to something in English, but it may be important to try to find the most fitting or suitable term. Personally, I would go for something more descriptive as for instance

• Public Access to Uncultivated Land and Water,
• General Rights to Public Access of the Wilderness, or
• Public Access to the Wilderness (in the Nordic countries).

In that latter case, the Danish/Icelandic exceptions must of course be prominently mentioned. Of course with plenty of redirects from jokamiehen oikeudet, allemansret, allemandsret, everyman's rights, etc, etc...

/Magnus Hansen, Malmö

I think we should use a translation that is officially used. Then we have, from what I can find: everyman's rights and the Right of Public Access.The latter has more hits on google (2800 vs 300) and might therefore be better, but both is preferable to the current state. Gunnar Larsson 19:15, 15 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I agree that the name ought to be changed. IMHO, the "Right of Public Access" sounds better than a literal translation. -- Mic 15:39, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Right of Public Access to what?

Could be useful for Offentlighetsprincipen also.

I would support Right of Public Access to the Wilderness.

/Tuomas 15:04, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Contents 1 Denmark/Iceland 2 open access 3 Citation needed 4 Regarding Sweden 5 Regarding Finland 6 Problems 7 Article name needs to be revisited 8 Requested move 8.1 Survey 8.2 Discussion 9 Naming

[edit] Denmark/Iceland

Do these countries not have the right of public access? Right now, the article implies that they do not, but it isn't stated explicitly.

I have a vague memory of hearing on Danish radio last Summer (2004) that they had been trying right of public access locally somewhere in Denmark, that it went fine and were now going to extend the experiment to other places. Does someone know? --Erik J 14:23, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

However it is not a tradition there, yet 193.65.112.51 15:26, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] open access

Since this is linked from an "Open Access" disambiguation page, shouldn't something like "Commons" be there instead? This seems like an issue related to open access more than anything.

[edit] Citation needed

Do we really need a citation specifically for Scotland having greater access rights than England and Wales? Finding a citation for such an explicit comparison is going to be tricky, and we've now got citations for each of the relevant acts which I think is enough. --VinceBowdren 09:08, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Regarding Sweden

The information in this article is not correct with respect to Allemansrätten in Sweden. In Sweden, it does cover the right to make a fire, if this can be done safely, and there are no restrictions on commercial activities such as picking berries for commercial purposes, as long as they do not cause any harm. Spakoj 18:54, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Regarding Finland

Furthermore, everyman's right does not include commercial exploitation of the land. For example, getting immigrant workers to pick berries is legal only with the landowner's permit. This sentence is not correct about the jokamiehenoikeus in Finland. You can also pick berries and mushroom in commercial way. Since it is not true in Finland or in Sweden, i suggest removal of the sentence. 193.65.112.51 15:22, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Problems

This article begins with stating that this "convention" is particular to the Nordic countries (in adition to some other places). I see Madagaskar has been stapled on the end of the intro. But then the history section seem to be mostly describing UK conditions and perspectives. This article started out as an attemt to describe the Nordic allemannsrett, but has been twisted by several passers-by (including me). Ideally it should have a general introduction section on the Nordic tradition followed by descriptions of the spesifics in each country and then a description of similar conventions in other parts of the world. Inge 15:31, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Nice to see several people wanted to improve this article. Doing it at the same time was a bit inconvenient though :). I have made some general changes and added a section on Norway. I feel if each country is to get an equally long bit they will repeat each other. I went in such detail on Norway because if we are to describe this topic in detail it is best to let the reader know where the spesific information is relevant. Other country sections should show their differences, but not re list rules that are the same as in Norway. Inge 20:24, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Article name needs to be revisited

Yes Inge is correct; the topic has worldwide significance. For that reason i propose a title change of the article. The name Freedom to roam seems like a better article title. First of all its the only term commonly used in the United Kingdom. Secondly it is far more used in the literature (roughly 1000 time more google hits than present name). Thirdly it is not so much of a mouthful. And fourthly, isnt the topic broader than wilderness? Joan-of-arc 02:52, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

I think Right to Roam is a more commonly used term in the UK isn't it? --VinceBowdren 08:12, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Yes, right to roam is common in the UK but i think joan of arc's idea is a good one. Freedom to roam gives very high google hits and is probably the most NPOV term and also doesnt single out one country's name for the phenomenon. I support the name change to Freedom to roam. Anlace 14:26, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

OK, but since the name Freedom to roam is already a redirect we have to do this the formal way with a vote and then get an administrator to move the article for us. Otherwise I gather the article history and probably some other things will get messed up.Inge 14:42, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Requested move

[edit] Naming

I am sorry to bring up the naming question again, but this article should be named "Law of Commons". The name allemansrätten is an alteration of allmänningsrätten, i.e. the "Law of Commons. Such laws exist and existed in England and other countries.--Berig 19:21, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

I don't think "Law of Commons" would be a very good name. In English law, a common is something quite different; it is a distinct piece of property which has specific rights attached to it (limited to specific people), rather than a set of rights which apply to all property of a certain type, applicable to all people. --VinceBowdren 10:52, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

concur with vincebowdren. Anlace 15:17, 6 December 2006 (UTC)