User talk:Berig/Archive 5 (September 30, 2007 - March 27, 2008)

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, to be archived

"In-universe"

Well, I'd hope he'd do more than just tag them, but it is a first step. There are a lot of articles - not just Scandinavian ones - where we need to distinguish epics and sagas, which may contain a germ of truth, and more historical sources. Peter can do that as well as anyone else, and I'll try to do my bit too! Angus McLellan (Talk) 15:44, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, we should be aiming to use the best sources we can find, which a 1911 Britannica-equivalent encyclopedia is obviously not. If the choice is between a degree of skepticism and producing things like Ragnar Lodbrok, my current bête noire, we clearly need to take a harder line. My ability to read Danish and Norwegian, never mind Swedish, is very limited indeed. More to the point, the possibility of finding Scandinavian academic works here, or in Scotland, is pretty much zero. So, the degree to which I could help will always be limited. I hope to get a copy of Sawyer's Kings and Vikings soon, and to finally read the first volume of the Cambridge History of Scandinavia, but that's hardly scratching the surface. Only Scandinavian editors can really get things moving. Angus McLellan (Talk) 16:37, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, Nordisk familjebok is hardly up to date, but in my experience there is usually good scholarship behind it, as in the case of Ragnar Lodbrok, where it gives the same picture as you find in modern works. The most recent work I have read where Ragnvald Ulfsson is mentioned is Mats G. Larsson Götarnas riken (2002), where Ragnvald is talked of as the jarl of Västergötland as he is in Snorri Sturluson's works, which clearly shows that Snorri's information on Ragnvald is not considered to be entirely fiction, even by recent publications.--Berig 17:22, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If Larsson's book deals with Ragnvald, it would make sense to base the article on what he says. His work constitutes an undoubtedly reliable source. Angus McLellan (Talk) 18:03, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The WP referencing stipulations are a kind of latin imperialism over the northern traditions of history rooted in orally transmitted materials and will produce an encyclopedia fit for beaurocrats. One can always reference opinion if it is in print though, even if it is not the result of the 'best' scholarship, provided there is balance. We cannot aspire to perfect answers, that is not what history produces. Best wishes, Steven (Dr Steven Plunkett 06:55, 14 October 2007 (UTC))[reply]

DYK

On 1 October, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Staveless runes, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

D_arkF_alls ^talk 06:12, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An article which you started, or significantly expanded, Runa ABC, was selected for DYK!

On October 9, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Runa ABC, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Thanks for your contributions! Nishkid64 (talk) 02:05, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Freyja

Just wanted to thank you for digging up that reference. I always felt bad that I wasn't able to really add anything to the article aside from preventing vandalism, I'm glad there's something there now backing up the existing content. so sayeth Lucky Number 49 ^{Yell at me!} 23:29, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome :).--Berig 06:26, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Saint Olaf's Church in Novgorod

On 15 October, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Saint Olaf's Church in Novgorod, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 12:15, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Galdr

On 18 October, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Galdr, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--howcheng {chat} 17:57, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rune stones

Berig, thank you for the excellent job you are doing on the rune stone articles here. Wikipedia will soon have the largest collection of English language information about rune stones in the world thanks in no small part to your contributions. :bloodofox: 05:05, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

æ

Hi Berig - thanks for making the important ae -> æ change to the Grendel's mother article. It is correct of course, I just wasn't certain how to do the formatting. -Classicfilms 18:58, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, that's nice of you to say. And I hope you'll make more contributions to the Grendel's mother page. -Classicfilms 19:16, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Patronymics

This may be a silly question but do you know any article on Wikipedia on a (modern) Swedish person who has a (non-fossilized) patronymic and no other surname? I seem to have found one: Ida Ingemarsdotter.

And another question. For 19th century Swedes or earlier, should the patronymics be used for sorting and subsequent references? I mean examples like Anna Månsdotter and Karin Hansdotter. Or should that only be done for post-medieval people? Haukur 20:56, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nine Worlds Template

Hello Berig. I've created the template I spoke of before. It can be viewed here: Template:Nine Worlds. Of course, you're welcome to make whatever changes you like. I think a color change may be due but I will edit it later. :bloodofox: 06:31, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An article which you started, or significantly expanded, Þingalið, was selected for DYK!

On November 7, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Þingalið, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Thanks for your contributions! ++Lar: t/c 02:44, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On November 7, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Ulf of Borresta, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Blnguyen (bananabucket) 05:54, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

u. 343

If Ulf of Borresta's second memorial runestone disappeared, how is it known what was written on it? Thank you, Shir-El too 06:25, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Many runestones were recorded, depicted and analysed by scholars during the 17th and the 18th centuries, after which many of them disappeared. U 343 is one of them.--Berig 13:28, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thorgrim/Viglund

Hi, Berig. How are you? Well, I hope. I wondered if you could advise about something. An opera by Frederick Hymen Cowen called Thorgrim is said to be based on an Icelandic tale of Viglund the Fair. Could you possibly disambiguate us and identify what this Icelandic source is? Does it have an article we can make a bluelink to? Cheers and good wishes, Dr Steven Plunkett 17:41, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I knew you would be the right person to ask!!! Of course... keep up the good work. Thanks, Dr Steven Plunkett 17:09, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well as you have probably realised I'm not really that far away. But also for now I am doing some thinking just for myself... and I can watch with admiration as your articles unfold. Onwendeth wyrda gesceaft. Dr Steven Plunkett (talk) 01:32, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

Check out your userpage. Great work! -Classicfilms 19:21, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Germanic Parent Language

I would like to get your opinion on an article I started entitled Germanic Parent Language. It has been suggested to merge it with Proto-Germanic, and we are discussing approaches to dealing with future additions to the general subject of the Proto-Germanic language. Please check out the article and the discussion page (there's also a good deal of discussion on my talkpage if you want to see more of the background) and voice your opinion on the matter. Thanks. Aryaman (☼) 17:02, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Beowulf Template

Thanks! (Midnightblueowl (talk) 15:24, 18 November 2007 (UTC))[reply]

List of people & objects in Beowulf

Nice article. All the objects you have mentioned are named objects - why not point that out? Since there are so many objects, but these interesting named ones, maybe it's worth spelling it out? I can't remember if there is a named harp in Beowulf but I have a feeling not... Great work, best, Dr Steven Plunkett (talk) 23:05, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

re:Award

What a surprise! Thank you so much Berig, I really appreciate the award. -Classicfilms (talk) 20:44, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Official thanks, slightly delayed due to post-RfA crash (who knew?)

Tapadh Leibh (Thank You)...

...for helping me navigate the waters of my surprisingly peaceful RFA, which closed successfully with 85 supports, 1 oppose, and 0 neutral.

I would particularly like to thank Acalamari and Alison, my nominators, and everyone who watched the page and ran the tally.

If you hate RfA thankspam, please forgive me. I promise I won't block you in retaliation for deleting it ;-)

If there is anything I can do to be of service in the future, please feel free to contact me.

And forgive me if I need a Wikibreak now and then (like now. I'm exhausted!). You wouldn’t want to see me climbing the Reichstag, now would you?

Off to flail around with my new mop! (what?!)

Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫
This RfA thanks inspired by Neranei's, which was inspired by VanTucky's which was in turn inspired by LaraLove's which was inspired by The Random Editor's, which was inspired by Phaedriel's original thanks.

Víkingr frá Esthland

Hi Berig, how about renaming Estonian pirates using Old Norse like they were mentioned originally? The current consensus Estonian viking expeditions would be fine I guess but it still refers to Estonians, at the time when Esthland and the "vikings" from there mentioned in the sagas meant the lands across the Baltic sea and denoted proto Estonians and Curonians. For example it would be quite a stretch to call the curonians that were also active traders-raiders -Estonians. therefor if we'd go with Víkingr frá Esthland it could be explained in the aricle that Esthland refers to East-Land and Víkingr to the "Viking style traders-raiders" mentioned in the Icelandic sagas. How about that? Please respond at Talk:Estonian_pirates. thanks!--Termer (talk) 08:32, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

All Things Yule & You

Hello! It's that time of the year again. As you might know, right now there are an amount of subjects relating to Yule that I feel your valuable contributions would greatly assist with. Since these pages will soon see some heavy traffic (and subsequently information derived from them will too), you are most welcome to join me on editing and sourcing these subjects:

Santa-related:

Santa_Claus#Influence_of_Germanic_paganism_and_folklore

Talk:Santa_Claus#Germanic_folklore_section_going_bye-bye_soon

There's probably an amount more too. I've passed this on to some other users who I think would be of help in this area also. Again, any help would be appreciated! :bloodofox: (talk) 09:10, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Freyja talk page

Hey Berig, there's a conversation going on at here that you may be interested in regarding my take on this "god of.." and "goddess of.." (in my opinion) tomfoolery. Please have a look as it could come up again and I'd like to know what you think. It's going on here: Talk:Freyja :bloodofox: (talk) 10:12, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Scandinavian Source for Askold

12 December 2006 you removed a reference to the scandinavian source for Askold origin. You wrote: this must be based on a misunderstanding (the source says "aslaug" not "haskuld"). Could you give a reference to the text of that saga please? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ddtrock (talk • contribs) 03:04, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The referenced source did not mention anything about Askold being the son of Hvitserk, so I assume that the reference was based on a misreading of Aslaug.--Berig (talk) 16:27, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What is the name of the saga? Ddtrock (talk)

AFAIK, there is no saga that mentions any Askold, so I verified in the referenced source which was Nordisk familjebok. It has both an article on Askold and an article on Ragnar Lodbrok's son Hvitsärk who waged war in Eastern Europe, and who was said to be the father of Askold in the text I removed. In its entry Ragnar Lodbrok, Nordisk Familjebok does however, claim that Hvitserk was based on Askold.--Berig (talk) 16:49, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So it's Nordisk familjebok which has "aslaug" not "haskuld"? It should have some references to original sagas, I guess. Anyway this Nordisk familjebok is just amazing! In Russia I cannot find any names of my ancestors from just 4 generation back. Two world wars and that revolution erased almost all records. Ddtrock (talk) 22:15, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it is Nordisk familjebok. In the article Askold, it mentions the standard Old Norse (OWN) form Hoskuldr, but it does not connect him to any figure in Old Norse sources. The only connection it makes between Askold and such a figure is in the article Ragnar Lodbrok where it claims that Hvitsärk was based on Askold. You can read more about Hvitsärk/Hvitserk in sources like Gesta Danorum, Tale of Ragnar's sons and in Ragnar Lodbrok's saga.--Berig (talk) 16:18, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! So (Hvitsärk was based on Askold) Askold is a place? Ddtrock (talk) 03:07, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I mean that according to Nordisk familjebok, Askold was the original person on which Hvitsärk was constructed as a legendary figure.--Berig (talk) 15:21, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Aha! So some original Askold did exist! What does Nordisk familjebok tell about him? Ddtrock (talk) 21:46, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It only says that he was a Norse chieftain in Russia during the second half of the 9th century[1]. For what it is worth, it may be interesting that the Old Norse name Höskuldr would have been (H)askuldR in the dialect of Uppland. The u-umlaut rendered as ö in Höskuldr is generally not considered when treating the Swedish-Danish dialect, and so it is represented as an a. The dialect of Roslagen is characterized by lack of the h-phoneme (see Öpir) and this lack of the h-phonem is believed to have been more widespread in Uppland during the Viking Age. As far as I am concerned, the name Askold is an authentic Old Norse name of the period.--Berig (talk) 14:30, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Greeting

Merry Christmas, Berig! Another year of happy editing. Best wishes, Dr Steven Plunkett (talk) 05:14, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wealtheow

Dear Berig, The little bits I added to this article were only as they seemed to me might be interesting. If you think maybe they would be better out (e.g. the bit about Helmingas etc) I shall be quite happy if you prefer to delete them. I didn't know that that wife was called Ögn.... not a very pretty name! Best wishes from Eebahgum (talk) 17:58, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I think the theory you added is notable enough for inclusion. The fact that Wealtheow doesn't appear to have a clear cognate in Old Norse sources helps people understand why not everyone agrees with Wealtheow being Anglo-Saxon.--Berig (talk) 18:12, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

T..Th.....Thingammy

Hi. I've reviewed Þingalið for GA. There are a couple of probably minor points and one that may either be major, or be me imagining things. I've put it on hold for now. I've also asked for comments from a variety of talk pages. Your comments would of course be very useful. Cheers. 4u1e (talk) 18:13, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Gerichtslinde

Hello Berig, you may be interested in and able to contribute to the discussion happening at Talk:Gerichtslinde. :bloodofox: (talk) 07:51, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think I have anything to add really. The connection is not farfetched, though, if it's true that the linden tree was connected with the virgin Mary in Germany. She inherited several of Freyja and Frigg's functions also in Scandinavia.--Berig (talk) 13:10, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This does seem to be the case and I am surprised this isn't mentioned more commonly onsidering it seems to be a genuine holdover and, on texts regarding the Nibelungenlied, it doesn't seem to be commonly speculated on (or mentioned at all!) despite the metaphorical significance of the leaf in connection with Siegfried's fate. Well, in English, anyway. I was just curious if you had any information I hadn't found already. :bloodofox: (talk) 04:11, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Schagerstrom, sea people and what not

You made some intersting remarks at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Suiones, and I presently find Schagerstroms theory very relevant, trying to find out more what sources he used as support. I cant even find in what litterature his theory was mentioned 1931, would you know?

regards,

Dan Koehl (talk) 22:37, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Try Namn och byggd. Tidskrift för nordisk ortnamnsforskning. 1931, p. 131ff.--Berig (talk) 17:01, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Could vindicate Jordanes?

Hello, Berig. You may find this interesting. I did. http://www.svd.se/nyheter/vetenskap/artikel_790557.svd A gene spreading from - West Geatland - to the rest of the world. Wow, that must be written by some silly gothicist? /Leos Friend (talk) 18:52, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It looks much too early to be connected specifically with the Goths.--Berig (talk) 16:55, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Only if you believe in prefabricated dating tables. Bones in a grave chamber doesn't have to be of the same timeperiod as the grave. I think this story is too similar to the old tales of the Goths to be a coincidence. It's like finding fingerprints on a weapon. Besides, even if the dating were correct, we still have that gene here among us today, which in that case would show a direct connection to those old stone-age "geats". But as I don't believe the stoneage inhabitants were relatives to us, nor did Snorre, either the dating must be wrong, or the gene is something everyone living here catches. The last alternative is interesting because Rudbeck has similar thoughts in his Natural History. Leos Friend (talk) 18:31, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

well done

On 12 February, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Heimir, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Victuallers (talk) 20:34, 12 February 2008 (UTC) [reply]

Thanks! :)--Berig (talk) 20:51, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Quickfire

Did I include the correct Old Norse word? Do you know where in the Gragas it's discussed? By the way, I put that cd we talked about in the mail for you today. Sorry for the delay. Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 16:55, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Simris Runestones DYK

On 18 February, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Simris Runestones, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 17:29, 18 February 2008 (UTC) [reply]

Thanks!--Berig (talk) 17:47, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mjolnir photograph

Hey Berig, I've noticed you've been posting some photographs from the Swedish Museum of National Antiquities. I still haven't had a chance to get there since it's pretty far out of my way but I intend to do so as there's quite a lot of major finds to photograph there, as you know. Did you happen to get a shot of the bird-headed Mjolnir there? It would be great to have a decent shot of this on Wikipedia since it's such an impressive object. :bloodofox: (talk) 00:06, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was in a hurry so I didn't have the time to look more closely at the displays. There are many objects that I probably missed and some that I forgot to take pictures of.--Berig (talk) 05:56, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Urnes style

On 24 February, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Urnes style, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 09:52, 24 February 2008 (UTC) [reply]

Thanks!--Berig (talk) 11:41, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Potential category

How do you feel about a potential category for museums containing runestones and image stones? I don't know if this is too specific but I'd find it useful. It could also be expanded to "Churches containing runic inscriptions or runestones" or something like that too. What do you think? :bloodofox: (talk) 21:22, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know. I guess most historic museums in Scandinavia contain some runestones. As for the church category, it seems like a difficult category to make. First of all, all Swedish runestones are categorized according to the parish where you find them. Secondly, if you visit a medieval church in the vicinity of Stockholm, you are likely to find a runestone either in its wall, in its porch, at its entrance, in the cemetery or at a small distance from it, or runestones in all these places.--Berig (talk) 07:41, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's less so the situation in Denmark, as they tend to be considerably more sporadic in placement, though in places like Bornholm you can find them almost everywhere. Otherwise, they're either in the major museums, obscure ones or in random churches or other odd locations spread all over. Still, I think it would be useful for categorization purposes since their articles - if they have one - would all mention that they have runic inscriptions, ideally. :bloodofox: (talk) 19:17, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll think of it. I have noticed that tourists usually pick up the camera when they see a stone, so it may be of general interest that WP tells where you can see many stones.--Berig (talk) 19:43, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, or anyone else who wants to hunt them down for whatever reason. At least in Denmark, the locations of these things can be pretty difficult to find, especially in the more distant and rural areas. :bloodofox: (talk) 19:55, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

He he, that is why runestone hunting gives me great satisfaction :). When I look at the pictures in the articles I've written and remember all the trouble I've had finding the stones, I feel so satisfied. They are almost like trophies ;). I could write a book about my search for this one.--Berig (talk) 19:57, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That is a pretty gnarled old stone that looks like it's out in the middle of nowhere, considering most of them are in church yards or museums! I can understand that feeling, I am sitting on an archive of photographs of images of locations and objects myself from my traveling around trying to find particular things and I've enjoyed it very much. There's a particularly beautiful stone I've been wanting to get a photograph of for some time, which you can see here: [2] I am not exactly sure where it's at, though I'd assume the original location is somewhere called Sundby in Sweden. Know anything about it? :bloodofox: (talk) 20:08, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That is one beautiful stone. I have a word file with all the runic inscriptions from Rundata, and I'll see if I can identify it by transliterating a part of the inscription.--Berig (talk) 20:11, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

UPDATE: It's the runestone Sö 116, and you can find it in the vicinity of Eskilstuna.--Berig (talk) 20:19, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That was really fast! If I could figure out how to properly use Rundata, I suspect it would be of a lot of use for me, haha. It's a gorgeous rune stone, I agree, probably the singularly most aesthetically pleasing stone I've seen! I will soon be in Northern Jutland, so let me know if you there's anything you're looking for photos for in the mean time as I've either probably already found it and taken photographs of it or would enjoy going hunting for it. :bloodofox: (talk) 20:24, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you feel like it, I'd be very grateful if you could take a picture of the Kolind Runestone.--Berig (talk) 20:29, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PS. I'll take a picture of the Sundby stone for you next time I go and see my parents. I will take that route anyway since there are some other runestones in the area to shoot.--Berig (talk) 20:45, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, depending on how difficult it is to get out there, it sounds like fun to me. Here is what it apparently looks like: [3] If there is anything else in that general area I can help you with in furthering your excellent work here (most stones in Aarhus are in Moesgaard Museum) let me know! Thanks, by the way. I've been very fond of that stone for years now based on that simple image and some proper photos of it would be outstanding. :bloodofox: (talk) 20:48, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ATM, I don't know when I'll go and see them next time, but you probably won't have to wait more than a few months.--Berig (talk) 20:58, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PS, that is an impressive collection of items!--Berig (talk) 20:59, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I highly recommend the museum, it's really wonderful. It has an expansive and very scenic open air portion with many things of interest, much of which is wonderfully wooded. There's an odd "modern rune stone" on the grounds too that someone apparently carved over night.. or so the legend goes. I think an article on "modern rune stones" would be pretty interesting, actually, though I am unsure how much supporting references could really be dug up. There is one, for example, in the middle of Freetown Christiania that is surprisingly well done! :bloodofox: (talk) 21:28, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've been considering a "modern runestone" article as people get inspired and there are nowadays real professionals who pride themselves in reviving the art, but that'll have to wait until I think I've finished writing articles on notable old ones.--Berig (talk) 21:43, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll help out as much as I can. I think there's a large void of information regarding these stones in the English language and it's wonderful to see it becoming available through this medium. :bloodofox: (talk) 22:27, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! :). Any help is appreciated, and we especially need pictures of runestones from Denmark and Norway.--Berig (talk) 07:17, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]