This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
A fact from Norse rituals appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 6 February 2009, and was viewed approximately 902 times (
disclaimer) (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|
This is a good article in terms of sourcing and coverage, though I wonder why you have created a new article, almost replacing the Norse paganism article. These two articles now overlap, and "Norse paganism" is really the most appropriate one. Would you mind merging the two articles into "Norse paganism", or do you have any arguments for this particular subject needing a separate page? – Holt T• C 19:47, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
I don't understand why this wasn't fixed. It seems everybody above agreed that the article cannot remain as it stands. -- dab (𒁳) 17:45, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
It is more complete than the other one, and it focuses upon rituals, not upon beliefs. The links are appropriate. I think it should stay. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.67.176.27 ( talk) 12:09, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
Source 73 Ellmer p 191 is not enough information to verify information from. 192.180.222.78 ( talk) 00:16, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
A fact from Norse rituals appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 6 February 2009, and was viewed approximately 902 times (
disclaimer) (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|
This is a good article in terms of sourcing and coverage, though I wonder why you have created a new article, almost replacing the Norse paganism article. These two articles now overlap, and "Norse paganism" is really the most appropriate one. Would you mind merging the two articles into "Norse paganism", or do you have any arguments for this particular subject needing a separate page? – Holt T• C 19:47, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
I don't understand why this wasn't fixed. It seems everybody above agreed that the article cannot remain as it stands. -- dab (𒁳) 17:45, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
It is more complete than the other one, and it focuses upon rituals, not upon beliefs. The links are appropriate. I think it should stay. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.67.176.27 ( talk) 12:09, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
Source 73 Ellmer p 191 is not enough information to verify information from. 192.180.222.78 ( talk) 00:16, 30 June 2022 (UTC)