Talk:Jomsvikings

Jomsvikings was a good article, but it was removed from the list as it no longer met the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated.
Review: November 16, 2006.

Military history: Medieval B‑class

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history

B

This article has been rated as B-class on the project's quality scale.

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Medieval warfare task force (c. 500 – c. 1500)

Norse history and culture B‑class Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Norse history and culture, a WikiProject related to all activities of the North Germanic peoples, 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.Norse history and cultureWikipedia:WikiProject Norse history and cultureTemplate:WikiProject Norse history and cultureNorse history and culture
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Does Saxo Grammaticus really mentions Jomsvikings? IMHo, but I read comments about it quite long ago, he only mentions JULIN, city of SLAVIC pirates, and does not mentions Jomsvikings. AFAIK sagas are ONLY source which mentions Jomsvikings. Szopen 11:35, 18 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't spread desinformation. In Gesta Danorum, book 10, there is no mention of Slavic members and it was led by Styrbjörn the Strong.--Berig 22:19, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Berig, as I said, this is IMHO and I asked. Anyway Saxo is not contemporary chronicler. Those, who lived in the times of mythical Jomsvikings have not mentioned the existence of Jomsborg, but rather about Julin, Jumne etc. BTW, I didn't write Slavs were members of Jomsborg - I wrote that Jomsvikings have never existed, but some Vikings could fight alongside the Slavic pirates Szopen 08:39, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, as far as historicity is concerned, we'd better leave the decision to the readers. When saga matters are concerned opinions differ widely from scholar to scholar on what is "historic" or not. As long as archaeologists have not identified any such settlement it is better to be careful. I don't see why a location on the Wendish shore could not have been a basis of Viking operations when both Kiev and Dublin were.--Berig 08:47, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

GA Re-Review and In-line citations

Members of the Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles are in the process of doing a re-review of current Good Article listings to ensure compliance with the standards of the Good Article Criteria. (Discussion of the changes and re-review can be found here). A significant change to the GA criteria is the mandatory use of some sort of in-line citation (In accordance to WP:CITE) to be used in order for an article to pass the verification and reference criteria. Currently this article does not include in-line citations. It is recommended that the article's editors take a look at the inclusion of in-line citations as well as how the article stacks up against the rest of the Good Article criteria. GA reviewers will give you at least a week's time from the date of this notice to work on the in-line citations before doing a full re-review and deciding if the article still merits being considered a Good Article or would need to be de-listed. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact us on the Good Article project talk page or you may contact me personally. On behalf of the Good Articles Project, I want to thank you for all the time and effort that you have put into working on this article and improving the overall quality of the Wikipedia project. Agne 20:56, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reasons for GA Delisting

This article's GA status has been revoked because it fails criterion 2. b. of 'What is a Good Article?', which states;

(b) the citation of its sources using inline citations is required (this criterion is disputed by editors on Physics and Mathematics pages who have proposed a subject-specific guideline on citation, as well as some other editors — see talk page).

LuciferMorgan 01:05, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Jomsvikings Heathen Crusaders?

I was wondering where the stance that the Jomsvikings were "staunchly pagan, they have been compared to the Crusaders of Christendom" comes from. I have read the Jomsvikings Saga and it did not seem to focus on this at all. Perhaps I have a strange translation, or the translation I have is from an unusual original manuscript. I also know that the Jomsvikings are mentioned in other sources that I have not yet read. I was wondering in which of the original sources they are discussed as fighting for heathendom. I do not seem to find this as prevalent belief on other web sites. --Jomfinding 19:31, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Myth of Jomsvikings

Very good artcile:

http://www.dur.ac.uk/medieval.www/sagaconf/slupecki.pdf Szopen 16:57, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jomvikings?

Why is this article currently at Jomvikings if the name is Jomsvikings? --Anticipation of a New Lover's Arrival, The 05:59, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, it should be moved. Haukur (talk) 07:16, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re-enactment Links

Should historical articles link to modern re-enactment groups ? It seems to be they shouldn't and I speak as an active re-enactor. This article has two such links and I wonder if they should be removed ? Guthroth (talk) 21:01, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]