I want biased POV articles like Viking to become NPOV; so that you can read about true, documented Vikings, on the page about vikings, and not read myths, fantasies, or a lot of stuff that refer to norse people in general. Now the article Norseman is even redirected to viking article, which is not correct: Viking is an oldenglish word that means pirat, and the latin word piratae is directly translated to viking in numerous documents, during medevial time. I argue that the article Viking, should supply information about vikings and not about a late misinterpreted ideas about who Vikings were, or any fantasies people may have. I object to that article viking expands the original meaning, including more or less every Norseman during viking time; (people of north Germanic descent, people of the Norse culture, scandinavians, scandinavian kings, tradesmen, settlers, founder of cities, explorers of America), since viking has only one meaning: it means pirat. A pirat can be from just anywhere. And a Norseman, or scandinavian person during medevial time who didnt perform piracy should not be refered to as a viking.

The term ”Viking” appears in Anglo-Saxon or Norse sources in the so-called Viking Age. Here it simply denotes pirates, no more, no less. It had no geographic or ethnic connotations that linked it to Scandinavia or Scandinavians. By contrast, in these sources we find it used anywhere about anyone who to an Anglo-Saxon or a Scandiniavian appeared as a pirate. Therefore we find it used about Israelites crossing the Red Sea; Muslims in Galleys* encountering Norwegian crusaders in the Mediterranean; Caucasian pirates encountering the famous Swedish Ingvar-Expedition, and Estonian and Baltic pirates attacking Scandinavians in the Baltic Sea. Thus the term was never used to denote Scandinavians as such. Therefore, if we wish to maintain Viking-Age studies on a scholarly level, we must stop acting as an appendix to the tourist industry by using the term Viking as if it was synonymous with Scandinavian and Scandinavians.

Source: doctor in History, Copenhagen University, https://www.academia.edu/8906219/_Vikings_and_the_Viking_Age

Swedish History Museum writes on their Web: Ordet viking finns på några få runstenar från perioden och verkar oftast betyda ungefär ”sjörövare”. Det var alltså inte namnet på ett folk eller en grupp.

In English: "The word viking is known from a couple of rune stones from the period, and ssems to mean sea rover (pirate). It was not name for a people or a group."

Source: Swedish History Museum, https://historiska.se/upptack-historien/artikel/vilka-var-vikingarna/

The website for the archeology museum at Birka, has the following explanation for the word viking: "I både det anglosaxiska och de skandinaviska språken betydde viking sjörövare. Det hade ingenting med just nordbor att göra. Att ordet idag används allmänt om människor som levde på vikingatiden är totalt felaktigt. Vikingatida människor eller människorna på vikingatiden är mera korrekt att använda."

In English: " In both Anglo Saxic and the Scandinavian languages viking meantsea rover (pirate). It did not have any specific affiliation with Norsemen. The common use today for about people living during viking time, is totally wrong."

Source: Birka archeology museum, https://www.birkavikingastaden.se/ordet-viking/

A deeper insight in research on the word viking, can be obtained from an article by Christine Fell, professor in history at University of Nottingham, her online article can be found at https://www.thebritishacademy.ac.uk/documents/2349/72p295.pdf

1. Vikings, as any pirate, could origin from anywhere: The first documented use of the word viking is made by Orosius, written in latin, and translated into old english. There is to read about Alexander the Great´s father, Philip II of Macedonia: Philippus vero post longam obsidionem, ut pecuniam quam obsidendo exhauserat, praedando repararet, piraticam adgressus est. translated into: ac he scipa gegaderade, and i vicingas wurdon. In this time the word pirat was not used in the english language, the latin piraticam was directly translated to vicingus. Source: https://archive.org/stream/kingalfredsangl00boswgoog/kingalfredsangl00boswgoog_djvu.txt

2. in Njals saga about Norwegian Gunnar from Lidarände, there is to read about vikings from Scotland, who attacks Gunnars fleet. While Gunnar and his crew is never called vikings. Source: https://sagadb.org/brennu-njals_saga.se

3. Then we can read about Arab muslim pirates from Northafrica, who was mentioned as vikings in the saga about Sigurd Jorsalfare (while Sigurd and his crew are never mentioned as vikings) : "Så gjorde han seg ferdig til å reise derifra og seilte langs med Spania. Da kong Sigurd seilte langs Spania, hendte det at noen vikinger som var ute etter hærfang, kom imot ham med en galeiflåte. Men kong Sigurd la til strid med dem, og dette var det første slaget mot hedninger, og han tok åtte galeier fra dem. Source: https://www.olhov.net/m_sons.html

4. King Haakon Haraldsson of Norway (c. 920–961), also Haakon the Good (Old Norse: Hákon góði, Norwegian: Håkon den gode) and Haakon Adalsteinfostre was a famous viking hunter and killer of vikings, some of those vikings were Vends from Vindland, a historical name for Slavs who inhabited present-day northeast Germany: Then Hakon steered southwards with his fleet to seek the vikings, and so on to Sealand. He rowed with two cutters into the Eyrarsund, where he found eleven viking ships, and instantly attacked them. It ended in his gaining the victory, and clearing the viking ships of all their men. "". "Then Hakon proceeded along the coast of Skane, pillaging everywhere, levying taxes and ransome from the country, and killing all vikings, both Danish and Vindish."

Source: https://www.gutenberg.org/files/598/598-h/598-h.htm

5.Vikings, as any pirate, can not be labelled as tradesmen, (or any civil profession) because tradesmen doesnt perform piracy: Snorri Sturlusson writes in Egil Skallagrimsson about Björn Farman: Björn var farmaður mikill, var stundum í víking, en stundum í kaupferðum; Björn var hinn gervilegasti maður. (english: Björn was a great traveller; sometimes as viking, sometimes as tradesman.) Source: https://sagadb.org/egils_saga.is

6. Vikings, as any pirate, can never be used as a label for someone who is not viking, like a scandinavian who defend his land against viking raids, or a king who chases away vikings from his land: Harald I of Norway At last, Harald was forced to make an expedition to the West, to clear the islands and the Scottish mainland of some Vikings who tried to hide there.. (the original text says in english translation:

King Harald heard that the vikings, who were in the West sea in winter, plundered far and wide in the middle part of Norway; and therefore every summer he made an expedition to search the isles and out-skerries (1) on the coast. Wheresoever the vikings heard of him they all took to flight, and most of them out into the open ocean. At last the king grew weary of this work, and therefore one summer he sailed with his fleet right out into the West sea. First he came to Hjaltland (Shetland), and he slew all the vikings who could not save themselves by flight. Then King Harald sailed southwards, to the Orkney Islands, and cleared them all of vikings. Thereafter he proceeded to the Sudreys (Hebrides), plundered there, and slew many vikings who formerly had had men-at-arms under them.

https://www.wisdomlib.org/scandinavia/book/heimskringla/d/doc5036.html

Regarding "vikings"in America, not one single viking is mentioned in Vinland in Saga of the Greenlanders

Source: https://vidforul.wordpress.com/the-saga-of-the-greenlanders/

Regarding "vikings"in America, not one single viking is mentioned in Vinland in Saga of Erik the Red Source: https://sagadb.org/eiriks_saga_rauda.en

Please also understand that a Norse organised army, looting and plundering, is no different from other armies from other regions, an army looting and plundering is not a viking activity. And no vikings invaded England, or established cities there or on Ireland, it was just Norse people. "Viking kings"never existed, and vikings never ruled any kingdom. Not one single "viking ship" exhibited in museums, has any proven connection with viking acitivity, they are NOT viking ships, just Norse longships. Other things which people speak about, but which never existed is: Viking women, viking villages, viking fortresses, viking runes, viking horses, viking swords, viking shields, viking society, viking culture. Nothing of this ever existed, according to historical written sources. Rus people and Varyangians were not vikings, and not one single written source mention that they were vikings. Vikings never served as body guards of the roman emperors in Bysanz, it was Norse warriors. In 99% of cases when uneducated people speaks about vikings , they were NOT vikings. And in most cases when the written sources really speaks about vikings, they didnt come from Scandinavia. Fiction is not history, history is a scientific discipline, based on written prime sources. What some old guys wrote in encyclopedias long time ago, without reading the written sources, is NOT history. Opinions are not facts, and not history. Only what is written in historical sources is history.

I have an agenda: As a scandinavian, I object to that all my Scandinavian ancestors, although belonging to "Norseman" and "Northmen" during the Viking Age, are on the english wikipedia described as vikings, when most probably 99% of Northmen were not, and reliable sources claim that at least most Swedes were defending their country against vikings..

I strongly believe that he word, and the article Viking should reflect the historical persons who were really vikings, and not my forefathers. Its time that also in the english language, the word Viking gets a modern definition, and not belong in the same box as Nigger, Nazi, and other terms that people has used uncorrectly for groups of people. I am a scandinavian, and so were my Northmen ancestors in Scandinavia between 800 and 1066. Most probably, only a very few percent of those Norse people were actually vikings, and its very wrong to refer to them as such, just becasue its fun, or "we did like that a long time" (less than 50 years) etc.