Talk:Lóðurr
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Norse history and culture, a WikiProject related to all activities of the Norse people, both in Scandinavia and abroad, prior to the formation of the Kalmar Union in 1397. 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 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] Requested move
Lóðurr → Lodur – Use English. Jonathunder 10:35, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
- Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one sentence explanation, then sign your vote with ~~~~
- Oppose. There is no standard English form so we should use the native form as per Use English. - Haukur Þorgeirsson 06:47, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
- Oppose, strongly, and agree with what Haukurth says below and above...
- Oppose, and for Heavens sake, follow Haukurth's suggestion below: discuss the naming convention, instead of proposing a move to some arbitrary "get rid of the funny dots" version. --Salleman 12:38, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
- Oppose ... --Cessator 13:31, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
- oppose, this is taking on BC(E) proportions, with anti-diacritics-squads moving articles to score points without any involvement, or knowledge of the matter. This is unwikilike behaviour. As per Haukur, we need a solid policy for Old Norse names. dab (ᛏ) 14:42, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
- Strong Oppose. Firstly, this is a decision to made by the page's regular editors, not some outsiders looking to tidy up loose ends. At the very least we should wait their is a policy before we start ignoring the voices of those who are knowledgable. Secondly, the page is more professional as it is, we need only ensure that all synonymous terms redirect here, or to a disambig linking here. Sam Spade 20:53, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
- Oppose as per Haukurth. Uppland 12:35, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
- Support. Mark 06:52, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
- Support using the modern English alphabet. Quintusdecimus 21:11, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
It was requested that this article be renamed but there was no consensus for it be moved. Dragons flight 00:03, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Discussion
Please let's discuss the naming standard for names from Norse mythology rather than each individual case. It's far too resource consuming this way. - Haukur Þorgeirsson 06:47, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
- I strongly agree. Sam Spade 20:53, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Anglicised names
This gives the wrong impression that all the names listed are anglicised, and needs changing. Something saying "The name Lóðurr can be represented as Lóður, Lódurr, Lódur, Lóthurr, Lóthur, Lódhurr, Lódhur, Loðurr or Loður. Its anglicised representations are Lodurr, Lodur, Lothurr, Lothur, Lodhurr and Lodhur." This would remove the impression in the current sentence, that some of the names that use the non-English characters "ó" and "ð" are anglicised, which they are not. Mark 12:23, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
- Yes they are. The form 'Lódur', for example, is used as an anglicized form in John Lindow's Handbook on Norse Mythology. But in any case "represented or anglicized" surely covers all bases. - Haukur Þorgeirsson 14:35, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
- No they are not!! That is John's version, but they still aren't fully anglicised. Mark 04:14, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
- I should have mentioned that I recently discussed precisely this issue with Philip at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (Norse mythology). - Haukur Þorgeirsson 18:28, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
