Talk:An Introduction to Old Norse

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate, you can edit the article. You can discuss the Project at its talk page.
???
This article is part of WikiProject Norway, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to Norway. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
Flag
Portal
An Introduction to Old Norse falls within the scope of WikiProject Denmark, a project to create and improve Denmark-related Wikipedia articles. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, all interested editors are welcome!

Satellite Image of Denmark

??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

[edit] Is this an advertisement?

Really, the book exists, but this is dubious "wikipedianism", and the stub is POV as well. Cheers Io 22:14, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

I wouldn't have thought this counts as POV: "This book is commonly accepted as a standard text for any student studying Old Norse". It has, in my experience, enjoyed the status of a standard textbook, and has thus, for some time, played an important role in the teaching of Old Norse in the English-speaking world; this isn't the writer of the article offering their own opinion about the book's worth. Whether that qualifies it for inclusion, I don't know. I've read that at least some of the illustrations are the work of JRR Tolkien; if we could find confirmation, might that add notability? And would it make the article less advert-like to mention other textbooks and Old Norse teaching aids which cover similar ground? Perhaps it would help if we could find some reviews worth quoting which would testify to the book's status and give some idea of how people view its merits relative to other textbooks and learning aids which now exist. Or does that run the risk of making the article itself too much like a review? Dependent Variable 02:58, 13 August 2007 (UTC)