Talk:Victual Brothers

Latest comment: 5 months ago by Jähmefyysikko in topic Large revert

Vitalians

edit

In 16th century, vitalians was possible generalized term for mariners since it abbrevated recruited mariners from Gulf of Bothnia.

The reference to Vitalienbruder sacking Bergen in 1429 makes it sound as if there is some continuity between these and the Vitalienbruder of the 1390s. There is no evidence that any organisation, even any individuals, of the original Vitalienbruder survived later than 1401. The name was applied to pirates who behaved similarly in the 1420s but they were not the same.~WMEP1981 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.149.112.50 (talk) 14:39, 16 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

Trivial

edit

Trivial, but there was no such thing as a liter in 1400. The Commissioners of the Treasury's Ale Gallon is just over 4.6 Liters.

>

'He got his name allegedly because he could swallow an ale gallon {just over four & half liters} of beer without taking the beaker from his mouth.'

He could drink a gallon of beer...


NantucketNoon (talk) 06:37, 11 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

Victual Brothers / Likedeelers

edit

This is NOT worded too well. It suggests that Klaus Störtebeker had solely leadership with the Likedeelers, but never with their predecessors, the Victual Brothers. Hah, no, this is wrong, he had leadership in BOTH, albeit not exclusive leadership: in fact him and Gödeke Michels were respecting themselves to the fullest---you could even say they were good friends---and so Störtebeker (known as being very adamant normally) never tried to compete with him nor outdo him in any way. So, the gist of my "inquiry" is, that Störtebeker be mentioned also in the Victual Brothers section, not only in the Likedeelers section. -andy 77.7.108.164 (talk) 22:03, 27 July 2012 (UTC)Reply

That sounds all well and good, but until you do the edit and cite your sources, it's just a comment on a talk page. No worries - I found the source to support your statement in Meier, and will make the change. LTC (Ret.) David J. Cormier (talk) 17:39, 11 May 2015 (UTC)Reply

edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Victual Brothers. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:55, 21 July 2016 (UTC)Reply

edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Victual Brothers. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:25, 1 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Victual Brothers. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:00, 26 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

Someone trying to kill the article

edit

It looks like someone is trying to kill the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:8807:5602:4C00:B1B3:2E31:E94:5DF8 (talk) 16:41, 2 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Large revert

edit

I reverted from this version to a one in 2022]. With so many tags, the article was simply unreadable, and it also lacked clear structure. The citations in the <ref> tags were excessive and contained commentary.

At the same time, it seems that there was some good expansion in the reverted part. I will try to slowly work on it to salvage what I can. Let me know if you disagree, as it was a very large revert. Jähmefyysikko (talk) 16:27, 21 June 2024 (UTC)Reply