Talk:Norway/Archive 10
 | This is an archive of past discussions about Norway. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 5 | ← | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 |
Bokmål and nynorsk as languages
In the current (22 August 2024) edition of the page, the following is stated under the "Languages" section: "It has two official written forms, Bokmål and Nynorsk. Both are used in public administration, schools, churches, and media. Bokmål is the written language used by a majority of about 85%."
According to the Act on Languages of 2021 § 3 (https://lovdata.no/dokument/NL/lov/2021-05-21-42), bokmål and nynorsk are defined as languages, not as written languages. This was purposefully done by the Norwegian government, as explained in Prop. 108 L (2020-2021) on page 156, to highlight the fact that the two Norwegian languages are not only written languages.
Seeing as bokmål and nynorsk are not legally restricted to written languages in Norway, I suggest that the languages are not referred to as written in this article. 132.150.8.6 (talk) 10:27, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
- The same law quotes as follow:
- "§ 4.Norsk språk
- Norsk er det nasjonale hovudspråket i Noreg.
- Bokmål og nynorsk er likeverdige språk som skal kunne brukast i alle delar av samfunnet. I offentlege organ er bokmål og nynorsk jamstilte skriftspråk."
- Translated:
- "§ 4.Norwegian language Norwegian is the official national language of Norway.
- Bokmål and Nynorsk are equal languages that should be able to be used in all parts of society. In public bodies, Bokmål and Nynorsk are equally written languages."
- As many have stated before, nobody in Norway speaks purely Bokmål or Nynorsk, as these are constructed to be written norms. Most of the spoken language is either a form of a sociolect or dialect. Volum-ion (talk) 18:48, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 10 September 2024
 | This edit request to Norway has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Request to add
Media
under the section Norway#Culture.
42.60.108.206 (talk) 11:40, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
Not done: I would think that the main article for the culture of Norway would be Culture of Norway, I don't think adding this one to this location makes sense. TylerBurden (talk) 19:11, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
Economy
There is a an unsourced, most probably false information written in the opening of this section that contradicts the rest of the sourced information in the article, it mentions a mix of free market (free of regulation) and state intervention system, but there is no area of Norway's economy working withouh state intervention as the article explains. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2800:810:446:98:FD3F:FD2E:3557:3270 (talk) 12:11, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Yes it is. Jerk. Norwegian economy is way more open than american economy (that really doesn't excist in the bankrupt USA) 188.113.95.213 (talk) 07:19, 31 October 2024 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 21 February 2025
| This edit request to Norway has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
In the Culture section, in the subsection Music, there is a paragraph listing "notable female solo artists". I'm proposing that the artist Aurora simply be included in this list with a hyper link to her wikipedia page.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aurora_(singer)
Thank you. Patrick.palmerthomas (talk) 17:04, 21 February 2025 (UTC)
“Industrialisation of nature”
The term is used in the context of Gro Harlem Brundtland's term. What does it refer to? Is it oil production or sustainable development, or both? This term is unusual to me and, in my opinion, lacks clarity. Can someone shed light on this? Ogourment (talk) 18:58, 16 November 2024 (UTC)
- It probably refers to the development/exploitation of petroleum, hydropower, fish, forests, and minerals. What I'm not sure about is, the fact it is mentioned in the list of "traditional Labour concerns". Again, appreciate if someone can shed light on this, so maybe we can clarify or add references. Ogourment (talk) 19:18, 16 November 2024 (UTC)
- Hi, I doubt there is a source for this curious choice of words; I guess someone wanted to avoid the term 'exploitation'. Even before oil, energy was a driver of NO economic development, since we had a lot of hydropower for production of nitrogen fertilizer and electrical power to drive industry and raise the standard of living in rural areas. The Labour Movement were always 'modernists', keen on developing industry around the vast reserves of various natural resources. All Labour governments were happy to dam a lot of lakes and channel rivers into turbines, hence the nickname 'kraftsosialist', i.e. 'energy socialist' once environmental issues became a concern (or the concerns became an issue?); to my knowledge, NO is still a preferred location for refining bauxite from e.g. Brasil into aluminium, as the companies get to buy power at subsidized prices. I know this is all a little anecdotal, but I hope it gives other editors some idea of what was meant. T 2A02:FE1:E180:3900:34FD:4D4C:92B2:EEEA (talk) 04:47, 24 February 2025 (UTC)