GusGusBrus

Your submission at Articles for creation: Battle of Grimstad Bay has been accepted

Battle of Grimstad Bay, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

TheBritinator (talk) 13:34, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

A belated welcome!

The welcome may be belated, but the cookies are still warm!

Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, GusGusBrus! I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may still benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:

• Introductory tutorial
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• The Teahouse

Need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Try the Task Center.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Again, welcome! > Tesseractic: talk? ✎ 22:17, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Follow the guidelines

Hello. I see that you have added information to articles, which have not been considered a consensus on our recent discussions. If you want anything changed on Wikipedia [that is disputed] then you should not change it until its agreed upon. At last in our recent discussion you said you were going to find a third-party to resolve the issue. This has yet to happen and therefore you **SHOULD NOT** change the article. If you want the articles to be changed, you should first resolve the issue, and since we cannot on our own resolve it, you should find a third-party who's willing to intervene. Tinkaer1991 (talk) 09:53, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

The articles i changed isnt unsources and doesnt have anything to do with the other on-site discussion we had. Please don’t reverse my edits and call them unsourced but rather take it to my talk page. I’m gonna reverse your edits since you wrongly mix this up with the other discussion we had. Although feel free to find a third party.

Best of luck! GusGusBrus (talk) 10:28, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

This is all about the same thing; If a victory of Denmark-Norway can be called a Dano-Norwegian victory, without any mention of Norwegian participation.

Claiming any victory is Dano-Norwegian (which you have changed multiple articles to) without Norwegian/Dano-Norwegian is mentioned in the article and supporting sources, is what you have done, and also what we were discussing. To say this isn't the same issue if plainly wrong, and even if we consider it as such, then I would still fully disagree, and you would still need a third-party intervention to make such changes. Tinkaer1991 (talk) 11:43, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

Furthermore it would also be a breech of the guidelines to reserve my edit, in that you have the burden of proof and you made the change. Thereby for Wikipedia rules your claim should not be added until we have come to a conclusion on the talk page. Tinkaer1991 (talk) 11:45, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

Hey, thanks for a quick answer.

Your claim that Norwegians need to be spesifically mentioned is not needed, as your sources on multiple of them such as https://danmarkshistorien.dk/vis/materiale/trankebar already mention the fleet consisting of both Danes and Norwegians along with Danish and Norwegian ships. It also describes the colony as "Dano-Norwegian" which would itself make it right to put the result as "Dano-Norwegian" since the result section in the infobox should show which combatant claimed victory, and possibly extra information if needed. Your claim that there wasnt any Norwegians involved is therefore a negative claim, since its different from the default that there would be both Danish and Norwegian intervention as they had a combined fleet. It is also a known fact that "Denmark" or "Danish" is often used to refer to both nations during this period as shown in https://web.archive.org/web/20060212020313/http://www.sa.dk/ra/brugearkivet/rasaml/foer1848/danskekanc/B0274.htm. Therefore you would need a source stating that for some reason the navy was split up and that there for some reason where only Danes (?) Which would differ from the default.

Hope to hear from you soon, GusGusBrus (talk) 12:41, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

No of the sources describing the engagements you have changed says they were “dano-norwegian” yet rather as Danish. And just because the colony was owned by Denmark-Norway doesnt mean we now should Call everything it possesed and did “dano-Norwegian” should we now also Call the Danish East India Company for the “Dano-Norwegian East India Company”? By No means. Because that Company is described in sourced as danish, just like the engagements. Again for the 10th time, we have already gone over this, and if you want it changed contact a third party. Tinkaer1991 (talk) 12:48, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

Have you read what i just wrote? Denmark or "Danish" was often the way Denmark-Norway and its people was refered to as. Same way the wars against Sweden was mostly called "Dano-Swedish war". Either way the name of the trade company is irrelevant and i wont discuss that further. You have yet to really reply to what i sent in the message above your most recent message. GusGusBrus (talk) 12:56, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

This is My last reply to you without a third-party. Per Wikipedia articles you should write What your sources say, if the sources say Danish, even if they imply Norwegians, it should be described as Danish in the article and supporting infobox. That os how it is. Tinkaer1991 (talk) 13:00, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

And sources say that they had a combined fleet? Either way this would be irrelevant as Denmark-Norway is the combatant either way. GusGusBrus (talk) 13:02, 24 April 2024 (UTC)