Talk:Sweden

user:Anders Törlind wrote in an edit summary: Not a colony, so no independence.

Would Sweden's leaving the Kalmar Union not be an appropriate thing to put in that box? --Brion VIBBER

user:Henrik Clausen While the Danish kings were trying to extend their rule to unite the three Scandinavian countries, they never succeeded, and the various governmental institutions (Rigsråd etc.) remained separate during the Kalmar union. Thus Sweden was still a separate nation that happened to have the same monarch as Denmark and Norway. Eventually several of the Danish monarchs messed up so much they were rejected and an independent Swedish king came to power.

Anders, thanks for helping to edit this page. A few notes on your edits:

the English name for the Swedish currency (and the Norwegian and Danish) is krone, not krona

Sweden may never have been a colony, but the history tells that Sweden separated from Denmark in 1523 under Vasa. Wouldn't that be the independence date?

regards, Jeronimo

Aha! Well, I was certainly now aware that it was krone...Thought I'd read otherwise somewhere, but I will take your word for it :-)

Hmmm, atlapedia lists it as Krona. Have a look: http://www.atlapedia.com/online/countries/sweden.htm --Ato

Regarding independence, this is an interesting point. Also, I don't know the bitish/american standpoint on this, but in the Swedish educational system, it is counted as liberation from foregin occupation more than independence...Splitting hairs maby...

cheers, Ato

RE Swedish currency: I would check the website of the Swedish National bank and see if it has an English translation, then use the name for the currency that is mentioned there - they print it and managed it so they should know what it's called... WojPob

Well, checking out the English version of http://www.riksbanken.se/ yields "Swedish krona", so I guess that's what it'll be then :-) --Ato

You appear to be right - a google search gives the same outcome. I should throw my dictionary out of the window... Well, I liked the Swedish name better anyway :-) Jeronimo

You could also see the old Encyclopedia Britannica: http://1911encyclopedia.org/S/SW/SWEDEN.htm --Ruhrjung

Something to satisfy you statistics freaks out there, from the Swedish central bureau of statistics: http://www.scb.se/allmanmanadsstatistik/tabellereng.asp --Ato

The english version of the website of the Swedish Central Bureau of Statistics is;http://www.scb.se/default____2154.asp. --User:84.217.8.122

Yeah, but that url doesn't look very impervious. :-)

http://www.scb.se/ is better. There one can most definitely expect a link to the English language section.

/Tuomas 23:21, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)

This page is still lacking a decent government and culture section. Shall I move it to main or wait for a good editor to arrive? Jeronimo

It looks good to me. I don't think there is anything wrong with one or two empty headings but anything more than that really starts to look unprofessional and unfinished. --mav

I'd say go for transferring it as well. Culture is something that should ideally be added by a Swede anyway. -Scipius

Second that, transfer away! --Ato

"In the 13th century, the three countries of Norway, Denmark and Sweden were united under a single king, who founded Sweden." It is unclear what this refers to, and it is difficult to reconcile it with the List of Swedish monarchs for that century.
S.

This is something I never heard of, I doubt that it ever happened. Does anyone know? -XeoX

Contents

1 Official language (1)

2 Languages (Was: Official language (2))

3 National motto

4 Holidays

5 The Swedish Economy

6 Independence of Sweden

7 Pronunciation

8 French map

9 Suggestion to cut down text

10 edit conflict...

10.1 Pre-history

11 A minor detail about Boule

Official language (1)

On official language. Even though Swedish may not hold status as official language it is far more than just most common. Laws are given, and official documents are published, only in Swedish. It is the language of the dominant culture and few countries may have been so exclusively comitted to a single language culture, as Sweden (after 1809). The terminology de facto standard language may be replaced by a better one, albeit accurate. -Mic

On Swedish (language) I'm about to write: Swedish is the national (but not official) language of Sweden, mother tongue for the Sweden-born inhabitants (7,881,000) and aquired by nearly all immigrants (1,028,000) (figures according to official statistics for end of 2001).

The prior statement there (Swedish being spoken by nearly all inhabitants of Sweden) wasn't really to my liking. At the same time, I propose the term "national language", but please change it back if it looks awkward.

On official language (continued) I was taught (in my Swedish class) that Swedish was declared the sole language of the government in the late 17th century. I'm puzzled by not being able to find any references to this. (I mean: I don't find it in the Real World, on the library.) -- Ruhrjung 11:02 May 15, 2003 (UTC)

I think the term national language works. It is potentially confusing but to some extent it is an improvement over previous terminology in making it less officious. There is currently a government bill proposing to give Swedish status of official language. The bill is meant to be analogous with introduction of the minority languages, but the general sentiment is that the it will fail to become law due to lack of support in parliament. -- Mic 11:51 16 May 2003 (UTC)

Hmm I have wondered hwt shall we do about the coat of arms, as the "lesser arms" were shown but now have been replace by the "greater arms", the are both coat of arms but what one should be shown? or should they btoh be some how fited in? -fonzy

As you know there are two official "Riksvapen", or coats of arms of the realm. The larger one represents the Monarchy and Sweden as a state. The lesser arms is a part of the larger and primarily used to represent the authority of the elected government within Sweden. There is Coats of Arms article in the works as well as more on official heraldry in Sweden. -- Mic 12:07 May 4, 2003 (UTC)

I remove the following paragraph from the page:

Sweden is one of the world's most secularised societies, and the church has so many members only because, until recently, Swedes automatically became members of the State Church at birth.

Seems rather POV to me, and maybe hard data of attendance to mass, daily prayer, communion, or feeling of closeness to God would be better? -- Ruhrjung 11:31 16 May 2003 (UTC)

Swedes do become members of the church at birth, though - it takes some considerable legal effort to revoke one's membership, too - David Stewart 12:03 16 May 2003 (UTC)

Apparently that was before 1995. If one of a childs parents was a member then the child would automatically become a member too. And leaving the church just requires filling out a form.. at least according to [1] (http://www.svenskakyrkan.se/). Here are some statistics on how many people have joined/left the church in the last years [2] (http://www.svenskakyrkan.se/statistik/inuttrade.htm). -- Jniemenmaa 13:59 May 16, 2003 (UTC)

The Church of Sweden was the official registrar of Swedish citizenship and domicile until 1990, when these tasks were transferred to the tax authorities. The separation of church and state was effectuated on January 1, 2000. It has been possible to transfer membership to another church since 1850s and leaving the church altogether since 1950s. Leaving the church requires a filling out a form, which has to be completed and returned by November 1 if the member wishes to leave the following year. Many chose to leave the church over membership fees, amounting to roughly 1% of the income, and still beeing collected by the tax authorities. -- Mic 16:36 16 May 2003 (UTC)

Being a Scanian, I might agree that Scania is one of the worlds most secularized countries :-))), but you don't have to go further than to Småland (i.e. to Sweden) to find lots of churches of different denominations in also the smallest villages. Well, seriously, I think the removed sentence was rather unneccessary. In an American Criminal Court drama, the Defence would have shouted "Objection, speculations" or something similar. -- Johan Magnus 01:21 19 May 2003 (UTC)

Users have been latinizing all manner of place names in Swedish location names on the English pages. This has to stop. I swear, this is an over the top offensive slight to the pages and to Scandinavians. When a page is written in English, that does not mean pseudo-latin. I, for one, am severely disgusted. Somebody with some enforceable authority change and protect those pages, please. Latino-maniac arrogance has no place in non-latin location names.
68.0.150.158 (http://www.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Special:Contributions&target=68.0.150.158)

Well, if you couldn't find a more important fight to pick, start editing and be bold in updating pages. With regards to pre-20th century concepts, you ought to consider that also for English speakers Latin was the lingua franca.--Ruhrjung 17:07, 30 Sep 2003 (UTC)

See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Swedish provinces -- Mic 15:16, 1 Oct 2003 (UTC)

I asked this on Image talk:Sw-map.png, but (not surprisingly) it appears that no one reads that: Why does the map of Sweden show a bridge? —Bkell 08:16, 21 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Probably since someone thinks the Øresund bridge is very important - and maybe it is.
--Ruhrjung 10:05, 21 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Languages (Was: Official language (2))

I think we should write the six official language that are stated in the laws. Swedish is not the national language either, only a country language. Compare CIA fact book over Sweden, which lists some of them, although not all of them. Why does it hurt to list them all? It's a good info! // Rogper 04:43, 28 May 2004 (UTC)

As it is stated in the article and as is discussed elsewhere on this talk page Sweden does not have an official language. Further information is also available at Swedish language. The minority languages, which recently received official standing as such, does not constitute official languages of Sweden. They are, as the term might preclude, minority languages, not official languages. -- Mic 08:05, May 28, 2004 (UTC)

The six languages have been domestic before the formation of Sweden 1550 (or similar date..) and the Sami group have an own "constitution" since end of 1980s. Instead of Official languages one would rather use "Domestic Languages" or simply Languages. I think one of the meaning of the fact box is to show what languages that have been spoken in the region during the kingdom's lifetime since mid-16ths. Swedish have taken word from these languages, e.g. tjej, pojk, härk, jo, Kiruna, etc. are non-Swedish and not to mention the usage of ä instead of æ.

I think it is good information to write these six languages in the fact box, and this is my wish. :-) // Rogper 19:38, 28 May 2004 (UTC)

The content of the factbox follows the template at Wikipedia:WikiProject Countries. The reason why there is a template is to make it easier for the reader, and not to have separate definitions and layouts for each country. -- Mic 06:24, May 29, 2004 (UTC)

There is the point where I wanted to come. Other countries with no official languages, not many official languages, list their domestic ones. Therefore I think the article about Sweden should do so too. // Rogper 20:23, 29 May 2004 (UTC)

(cf. Australia, Eritrea, Luxembourg, Tuvalu) // Rogper 20:27, 29 May 2004 (UTC)

Firstly, it is somewhat unclear what you are getting at. It would seem that you are implying that existance of erroneous information elsewhere ought to be an argument to enter incorrect information here. Such an argument is needless to say moot. Secondly, for me it is hard to see the point of pursuing an issue like this. It would seem more productive for someone concerned with the language questions for Sweden in general, or the position of the minority languages, to set about creating articles on these subjects instead of inappropriately fitting information where it would not belong. -- Mic 09:05, 30 May 2004 (UTC)

Well, wheter right or wrong one can in that case really wonder wheter there should be any language in the fact box at all. We simply write

"Languages (no official lanugage): Swedish.
note: small Sami, Finnish, Tornevalleyfinn and Romany-speaking minorities." (cf. [3] (http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/sw.html))

I think that Wikipedia:WikiProject Countries should note this since the already existing ones treats "officially language" as the major language spoken. Don't you like to hear that there are other languages also (I'm native, too) or is it simply because you are unaware? 25% of Swedish territory don't speak Swedish daily and they haven't since stone age (when there was no inhabitans)! :-) Regards, Rogper 23:59, 30 May 2004 (UTC)

Official language is a good criterion and it serves its purpose well. What can be considered in the case we're discussing is whether, or how, to improve on the present information given. I would see no problem in supplying more information in an additional footnote. The information given there ought to be brief and to the point. I can see a breakdown in three instances which may considered in such a case (1) the Finnish and Sami speaking communities, (2) the recognized minority languages and (3) minority languages in general.

The reasoning on which of the cases to choose is may not be as simple however. It should be understood that the use of languages will always transcend the bounds of official or majority languages, and any country may at any given time contain sizeable minority groups each with their own languages. Merely looking at the demographics of Sweden, and just to make an example, one could inquire whether or not Balkan and Middle Eastern languages are receiving enough attention. An appropriate footnote link in this case might be to the demographics article.

Minority languages in general enjoy protection in Swedish law, but five languages have been listed and enjoy a comparatively higher degree of protection, earning them the position of recognized minority languages. It would be more essential to explain the concept rather than listing its components and the footnote should link to a new article describing the position of the recognized minority languages in Sweden.

Finnish and Sami belongs to the group of recognized minority languages, but they also have a certain status in a number of municipalities in Norrbotten, where they may be used in dealing with authorities, schools and healthcare. This is a somewhat stronger position than the other minority and recognized minority languages and here it may be proper to refer to them as the Finnish and the Sami speaking communities.

So, what ought to be singled out? The Finnish and Sami languages that enjoy a special position? The middle group of recognized minority languages? Or, finally the entire group of minority languages? Despite the clear-cut definition and sanction existing in the second case, I would say that either the first or the third cases seemingly provides more relevant information.

On a more personal note; am I to understand by your comment and your recent focus on Sami topics that you yourself belong to this lineage? If this is the case, I think it is very positive to have someone with direct knowledge of the Sami culture contributing articles, and when I'm able I'll be glad to assist in this field. Have you given any thought of starting a WikiProject Sami? -- Mic 12:39, 31 May 2004 (UTC)

I guess groups descenting with foreign languages are larger than the groups with minority languages (although I don't know if they use it daily.) I think these six languages are brief enough and suited in the fact box. Information in the fact box makes the reader more intrested -- I didn't know what mäkiäli was although I've mäkiäli friends (I never learn how to spell it ... it has a completely different name in Swedish !) :-)

The crown statement (=konungatiteln) was from the beginning (with Gustav Vasa) an abbrevation over the peoples and not the territory. This have laterwards only included Göter, Svear and Vender, but from the beginning also Samis, Finns, Estonians and Livonians was included. The latter ones fall of because territories was lost and perhaps some miss-honor to be associated with Sami, Finns, Estonians, Livonians. But the old sources views Sweden as rather a "Nordic union" (cf. European union) than "United kingdom" in the beginning.

I originally had ideas to start with project about Native Americans (cv. Etymological_list_of_U.S._states) but turned later to Sami. But I have thoughs of WikiProjects (I'm not native Sami.) Regards, Rogper 20:47, 31 May 2004 (UTC)

National motto

För Sverige i tiden - but that is the motto of our current king. Does that make it a national motto? Habj 19:25, 22 Jun 2004 (UTC)

It certainly does not. The cowardly way out would be to change 'national' into 'royal'. The straightforward way out would be to remove it altogether. Sweden has no national motto. -- Jao 09:30, 23 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Good observation. I won't subscribe to the idea of whether one action or the other may have a particular moral value, but there certainly is a distinction. The motto adopted by Carl XVI Gustaf is his personal motto in the role as Swedish monarch, and even though Sweden is a monarchy this does not make it a national motto. In fact in can be argued whether it is a royal motto (in the same way as in the United Kingdom, ie a motto for the monarchy), or merely the personal motto of a reigning monarch. I can see two possible solutions where it is either displayed like in the United Kingdom article, or making it into a footnote. -- Mic 14:14, 23 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Indeed the motto given is not a motto of Sweden. I am not aware of a motto of Sweden. I would have changed it myself, but couldn't understand the format. The article on Norway gives the corresponding information correctly. Please change this someone.

I did so, although the result is rather lengthy footnotes, that maybe can be improved by someone else. Johan Magnus 20:04, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Holidays

Under Holidays, it is said that: "The Swedish holiday calendar consists mainly of Christian holidays. Many of these are however a continuation of pre-christian customs, such as Midsummer and Walpurgis Night." This gives the impression that Midsummer and Walpurgis Night are, in fact, today considered a Christian holiday. To the best of my knowledge, it is not. Does anyone have an explanation of the reasons behind the chosen wording? Alarm 13:51, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Well, both are or were, according to my understanding. ...although I don't have energy right now to go and check it up, I am told that "Midommardagen" and "Valborgsmäss" (-mäss meaning the sacral mass) were taken up by the Nordic churches as holidays. In Danish, this is more obvious, where Midsummer is celebrated to S:t Hans.
--Ruhrjung 15:30, 2004 Sep 6 (UTC)

The Swedish Economy

Hi! I'm doing a project on Sweden,and i need to know about the economy. I was searching for some info, and i noticed that there isn't anything about the economy. Could someone find the Gross Domestic Product of Sweden in 2000? I seem to have trouble! Thanks. user:Proud Canadian

Independence of Sweden

I believe that the independence of Sweden usually is counted since Sweden left the Kalmar Union (or when Gustav Vasa formally became King). The CIA fact book share the veiw[4] (http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/sw.html) and I think that I remember seeing it elsewhere. I'm not sure if the council has to be abolished for a country to lose it's independence. I personally have no real prefernce if the Kalmar union should count as indpendence or not. I just want to make sure that we have the correct facts (if there is anything right or wrong in this case) - Jeltz talk 11:03, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia strives to be correct instead of repeating common misunderstandings. Also the US government and its agencies do sometimes misunderstand things. So is the case here. A state can't get independent unless it's been dependent. It's IMHO rather safe to rely on the opinion of the locals in a case like this.
--Ruhrjung 15:33, Jan 14, 2005 (UTC)

Hmmm, I am one of the locals. :) I agree with you about that we should not repeat common missunderstandings and that the world factbook isn't the most reliable source. In this case I have no idea of what is correct. Jeltz talk 17:27, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)

You see the discussion higher up on this page?
--Ruhrjung 23:10, Jan 17, 2005 (UTC)

And yet, interestingly, we still rip the entire economy section straight from the CIA Factbook: http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/sw.html#Econ ... someone should change this, as its blatant plagarism, right? --Freshraisin 03:18, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Yes - however, that's been one of the cornerstones of Wikipedia, to fill up with public domain material until someone cares to write something better. Go ahead!

--Johan Magnus 06:37, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)

To add my view on the independance "thing" (I to am a local :). I don't count the leaving of the Kalmar Union as an independance day. Strikly speaking, Sweden was in the union by free will and had existed as an independant state since at least the middle of the 13th century. The wars at the beginning of the 16th century was about leaving the union yes but it wasn't a war like the US indenpendance war. Just because a state is in a union doesn't mean it ceases to exist as an indenpendant state.

Pronunciation

IPA for Sverige would be nice.

X-SAMPA svErjE I think

French map

I know the phobia of "other" language, but the French map is clearly superior in that it shows lakes and rivers.

--Fred-Chess 08:37, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I agree with you on this. The French map is a better map and so much superior that it should replace the English map untill a better one is found. I think that the World Factbook maps are of quite low quality. Jeltz talk 12:33, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I have made some improvements of the map and uploaded it. --Fred-Chess 01:01, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Suggestion to cut down text

I would like your opinion on this. To give people a better overview, I would like to cut down on the text so that every section is 4-5 paragraphs long. The rest of the section would be merged with the "main" article.

Are there objections to this? If so, please give your own opinions.

--Fred-Chess 22:29, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Ok I've made som changes.

Concerning the massive history of the intro, I wrote it to go along with the anthem "du lever på minnet av fornstora dar".

--Fred-Chess 12:14, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

edit conflict...

i was just about to edit the pre-history, but I will wait a while and paste it here for the time being.

Pre-history

Sweden was inhabited by hunters and gatherers during the Stone Age (6000 BC – 4000 BC), following the recession of the last ice age – the Weichsel glaciation. The region developed rather slowly compared to southern Europe; while the Romans wrote poetry, Scandinavia had just entered the Iron Age.

Sweden was first mentioned in the 1st century, by Roman historian Tacitus, who wrote that the Suiones lived out in the sea and were powerful in both arms and ships. After that, the sources are scarce.

Sweden as a name originated in a so-called "back-formation" from the plural form Swedes (Old English Sweoðeod, Swedish Svear), the land of the Suiones. This referred to the inhabitants of eastern Sweden only, in Östergötland, primarily around lake Mälaren; towns of Stockholm, Sigtuna and Birka. The western parts were on the other hand inhabitet by Götar in Västergötland.

During the Scandinavian Viking culture of the 9th and 10th century, the Svears primarily went east, to Balticum, Russia and the Black Sea, and by lakes of Russia down to southern Europe. The Kievan Rus', from which Russia takes its name, traces its heritage to the Sveas.

With the Christianization in the 12th century, the country was consolidated, with its center at the water-ways of the northern Baltic and the Gulf of Finland. Like the rest of Europe it was in the 14th century struck by the Black Death (the Plague), with all the effect. But Sweden's expansion into the northern wilderness of Laplandia, the Scandinavian peninsula, and present-day Finland continued; the country today known as Finland was a part of Sweden from 1362 until 1809.

--Fred-Chess 10:18, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

A minor detail about Boule

I see that the link to the game called boule is showing a totally different article and it's not about the game boule, could anyone who knows the rules of boule make a disambiguation page about boule (or is this game known under another name in English?)

I added a note at the page of boule, and corrected the link here to point to the correct name boules. --Fred-Chess 19:14, Jun 22, 2005 (UTC)

Looking at the boules page I wonder if it shouldn't be changed to Pétanque instead. This rings a bell for me. It seems like the English term for the specific game known as "Boule" in Sweden, whereas "Boules" seems to be a collective term for several games played with metal balls. / Alarm

As the game is known as Boule is Sweden, "boules" seems like an appropriate term. I also can not state with certainty that the game played in Sweden is the specific variant petaneque and not the other mentioned variants bocce or bowls, it may also be a unique variant, or the rules may differ as with brännboll and krocket. -- You can of course add petanuque in paranthesis afterwards if you think this is highly vital. --Fred-Chess 21:13, Jun 22, 2005 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://academickids.com:443/encyclopedia/index.php/Talk:Sweden"