Talk:History of the Danish navy

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Move?[edit]

I propose renaming this article Royal Dano-Norwegian Navy to better reflect the conventional English rendition of dansk-norsk. //Big Adamsky 14:30, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. But for some reason I do want it to be Danish-Norwegian. I'll move it anyway.Inge 15:59, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The move is done. But if someone disagrees just say so.Inge 18:25, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Excellent! I didn't quite understand whether you agreed or disagreed though, and if so why or why not...? :-0 //Big Adamsky 18:55, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think the way it is now is the right way, but somehow I "like" danish-norwegian better. I can't explain why. Maybe it's the double no-sound which make dano-norwegian a bit odd in my ears.Inge 11:35, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I also think "Dano-Norwegian" is a deeply awkward sounding word. john k (talk) 16:48, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well, there's always "Danish". — LlywelynII 16:37, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This "Royal" business makes no sense at all. This is about a historical navy that never used the term "Dano-Norwegian". The name is purely descriptive and seems to have no association to actual usage in literature. As such, I've moved it to simply Dano-Norwegian navy, similar to how we write Byzantine navy.
Peter Isotalo 00:08, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is no longer history?[edit]

Rather than reverting your decision to remove the category:hisotry of norway designation, I'll sak here first. What is your logic? Tusen takk - Williamborg 02:44, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Of course it is history. And i my view important history. But since it is also in Category:Royal Danish-Norwegian Navy which is in Category:Denmark-Norway which is in Category:History of Norway I don't see why it should be listed in both categories. Inge 13:42, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

my last revert.[edit]

How many percent of different regions/nationalities must be documented some where, or just believed by a trusted historian. Since there is no source provided, i revert Berig's edit. --Dynamiske (talk) 16:46, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Obviously you're working in a foreign language, but do try to be more clear as to what you're talking about. — LlywelynII 16:42, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sources for article expansion[edit]

Two massive sources – not just for this article but also for all the affiliate ship articles – are the Orlogsmuseet's ship-by-ship history pages and this compendium of Danish ships from prehistory to the 1690s. Of course, both of them are in (in Danish), but what would you expect? — LlywelynII 16:42, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Name[edit]

The latest (undiscussed) move from Dano-Norwegian navy was a slighty improvement in my view, but I think we should have a discussion on what to actually call the article. There seems to be somewhat of an undue focus on the loss of Norway. I don't see that it actually became a new organization, just like the Swedish Navy didn't suddenly change because by losing Finland (or gaining Norway).

So why use complicated and speculative backronyms? Why not settle for something intuitive like history of the Danish navy?

Peter Isotalo 19:40, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on History of the Danish navy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:39, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

More lists of Danish ships[edit]

Hallo everybody!

Rather than a long list of ships names in this article, why not just give links to those ships which have Wiki-articles (i.e. blue links). There are two superb external sources which I use a lot, and which are on my User page but which I repeat here. Both originate from the website of the Royal Danish Naval Museum

  • The Danish Navy and then >DATABASE>SIMPEL>Danske Navne>and choose your ship, or simply this link. This site also gives search ability by year, builder, type of ship by going >DATABASE>ADVANCEREDE and completing the drop-down menus. (Works only when language is set to Danish)

For record cards of individual ships (where they exist) or just the names listed alphabetically


Of course, each complete ship's wiki-article is probably listed in the Category:Ships of the Royal Dano-Norwegian Navy
Would this make this Danish Navy article easier to follow?? Comments??
Viking1808 (talk) 11:18, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

After some thought, I have transferred the above as two notes at the beginning of the Ships section in the article. Viking1808 (talk) 20:37, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:History_of_the_Danish_navy&oldid=1211605045"