Ingibjörg Hakonsdóttir of Orkney: Notability is entirely based on family.  Lots of mentions, nothing with SIGCOV.  No objection to a consensus redirect to Óláfr Guðrøðarson .
 I am also nominating the following related geneology bio page: Ragnhildis Olafsdottir ( edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views ) // Timothy :: talk 02:46, 18 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Its notable enough to be its own article it just needs more sources which i will have to scavenge for cant we just move it to the draft space so it can be worked on and finalized?  AvailableViking ( talk ) 03:16, 18 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Óláfr Guðrøðarson (died 1153) .  LibStar ( talk ) 04:26, 18 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History , Royalty and nobility ,  and Scotland .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 17:46, 18 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] It seems that the subject was also known as "Ingibjörg Hákonardóttir" (not to be confused with Ingeborg of Norway ), as documented here .  Phil Bridger ( talk ) 11:35, 19 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : Both articles are well sourced and present details about the lives of two women who played an important historical role in the 12th century. -- Ipigott ( talk ) 06:57, 20 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Even the articles both state, "Not much is known about her life other than her descent from noble blood and marrying Óláfr Guðrøðarson". // Timothy :: talk 15:33, 20 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Yea I did that as a general thing because I was lacking information. I was waiting for people with more knowledge on the subject to fill it in also because I personally didn’t know what to put because I didn’t know the intimate details of their life. I still think the articles should be kept because articles generally tend to be improved over time. AvailableViking ( talk ) 20:06, 20 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment I find it confusing that two separate proposals for deletion seem to be on the same proposal. I think they should be separate as each biography would benefit from separate consideration Lajmmoore ( talk ) 07:10, 20 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per Ipigott. Not much being known about a person is not a criteria for deletion. Insufficiency of sourcing is. These articles do not suffer from an insufficiency of sources. -- Tagishsimon ( talk ) 15:37, 20 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions .  TJMSmith ( talk ) 18:28, 20 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment .  What SIGCOV is available on this person?  If everything is in the context of her genealogy then a redirect would be more appropriate than a standalone.  JoelleJay ( talk ) 20:04, 20 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] @ JoelleJay just to note the AfD is proposed for two people Ingibjorg AND Ragnhildis Olafsdottir , so I think there's two separate discussions to be had.  Lajmmoore ( talk ) 07:28, 22 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I'm not convinced on Ragnhildis.  The Moore source has a passing mention in one clause of one sentence on her; Ellis just says she was the daughter of Olaf of Man and wife of Somerled with no other details on her; Williams says basically the same thing while also mentioning a claim that she was daughter of Ingibjorg.  I can't access McDonald, but if it's also just repeating genealogy without any coverage of her then my ! vote would be to redirect both articles.  JoelleJay ( talk ) 17:06, 22 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] JoelleJay , Lajmmoore , McDonald is available through the Cambridge University Press section of Wikipedia:The Wikipedia Library .  TSventon ( talk ) 17:45, 22 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep for Ragnhildis Olafsdottir - I think there's sufficient evidence from sources Moore, Ellis, Williams and Macdonald to show that she is significant in the wider historiography.  This article may also be helpful to support this, but I do not have access.  (Note: I've not looked in detail at Ingibjörg's article yet.)  Lajmmoore ( talk ) 07:57, 22 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Nothing much in that linked article, I'm afraid.  It's basically this sort of thing: "Somerled himself married Ragnhild, a daughter of King Olaf of Man, and through this marriage was the founder of a vigorous family of Hebridean sea-kings." -- asilvering ( talk ) 19:51, 22 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect for Ingibjörg Hakonsdóttir of Orkney (although I'm not anti- keep ) - the issue for me is that although the article is well-sourced, the majority of those are primary sources, and secondary sources are required to demonstrate notability.  This mentions Ingibjörg in more detail, but in the absence of wider research (a problem with Viking Studies in general) it's difficult to make a more substantive case.  I empathise @ AvailableViking : as I remember clearly how it feels when you're making your first contributions and things don't work out.  Thanks so much for your hard work on these Lajmmoore ( talk ) 08:30, 22 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect (or merge) somewhere.   There is nothing in this article but genealogical information, with which I see no issue over the truth of the content, but she was not separately notable.   My preferred target is her husband Óláfr Guðrøðarson (died 1153) , but any of the other suggested targets would do.  Peterkingiron ( talk ) 14:20, 23 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] There is two articles on this talk page AvailableViking ( talk ) 15:59, 23 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect Ingibjörg to Óláfr Guðrøðarson (died 1153) ; the material may be well sourced, but what's in there is nothing but genealogy, easily incorporated into other articles.  We do not address systemic bias in any way by keeping a bare-bones stub; the subject's significance is better presented as part of an article that would gain more views.  Keep Ragnhild; while only marginally better, there is a genuinely independent claim to notability there (which could honestly be explained somewhat better), and content that does not easily fit into any of the more clearly notable articles linked.  Vanamonde ( Talk ) 20:02, 29 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks,  — Amakuru ( talk ) 11:47, 31 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment .   Per WP:PRESERVE and WP:NOTPAPER ; just because the passage of time has erased much of their RS, doesn't mean we should not preserve them.  Aszx5000 ( talk ) 18:59, 2 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, - 🔥 𝑰𝒍𝒍𝒖𝒔𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝑭𝒍𝒂𝒎𝒆 (𝒕𝒂𝒍𝒌) 🔥 01:17, 8 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Soft keep Ingibjörg Hakonsdóttir of Orkney, Keep Ragnhildis Olafsdottir: If I read both the pages correctly, they were both Queen consorts (which may be notable) and there is sourcing to verify that.  I think these articles need improvements, but are good enough that they don't need deletion.  I also think Ragnhildis's sourcing and article probably meet WP:GNG .  TulsaPoliticsFan ( talk ) 04:21, 8 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep (both).  Per WP:PRESERVE and WP:NOTPAPER (and my comments earlier), they were important people in their times.  Ragnhildis probably meets GNG on its own; and also Ingibjörg would have been notable in her time.  Aszx5000 ( talk ) 21:39, 16 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Specific discussion and analysis of the references available for this subject, and why they do or do not constitute significant coverage by reliable and independent sources, would be much more helpful than a back and forth of "Yes it's notable" and "No it's not".  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Seraphimblade Talk to me 21:07, 17 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - in addition to the longstanding community consensus that subjects who would have had an article in their time should have one now, both articles have sufficient sources from in depth works and papers that establish notability from a historic standpoint.  @ Death Editor 2 , it's not just a "single dead blog." - Knightoftheswords281 ( Talk · Contribs ) 21:22, 17 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I made a mistake, I have nothing to do with this with discussion.  Death Editor 2 ( talk ) 21:23, 17 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Whoops, my bad.  - Knightoftheswords281 ( Talk · Contribs ) 21:52, 17 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] "subjects who would have had an article in their time should have one now" Maybe so, but sadly they don't get one until we can find reliable sources to build them one.  -- A. B. ( talk • contribs • global count ) 23:41, 23 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : There's enough verifiable sources for that article, it just needs expansion.  Rager7 ( talk ) 22:53, 17 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment .  Can someone ! voting to keep please link the best three pieces of SIGCOV for each?  Notability is not inherent or inherited, so it is irrelevant what subnational "noble status" someone had.  There is also no consensus anywhere that allows editors to decide an ancient subject "would have had an article in their time" (how does that make any sense!) or even that coverage would have existed.  The requirement for an article is the current existence of SIGCOV in IRS, which does not include mentions in genealogies or other coverage exclusively in the context of relatives.  I have not seen a single in-depth source here; everything has been trivial mentions or, at best, a few sentences describing a lineage that leads back to the subject(s)--nothing that actually discusses the subject's life .  JoelleJay ( talk ) 01:03, 18 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep , @ Tagishsimon and @ Knightoftheswords281 make good arguments which I second.  MY CHEMICAL ROMANCE IS REAL EMO!  ( talk or whatever ) 03:25, 22 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Strong keep Ragnhildis Olafsdottir , Keep Ingibjörg Hakonsdóttir of Orkney First, these are those articles that take a lot of research to start - well done, AvailableViking .  Someone could write 1000 words of Pokemon stuff in the time it takes to carefully research and write one paragraph of medieval Kingdom of the Isles history.  Personally, I prefer the history.  This is material that comes from books, not articles; it's worth considering what "passing mention" means in that context.  So many of our articles are referenced using dedicated one or two page modern news articles.  A one page news article that mentions a person in passing does not establish notability.  Just one page of text in a 500 page history might technically be a passing reference (given its percentage of the book's content) but it's plenty to establish notability and build an article.  So @ AvailableViking can you tell us about how much those sources at the bottom of the two articles say about each subject?  Ingibjörg's article lists 9 sources , Ragnhildis's lists 6 sources .  Since Ragnhildis Olafsdottir as the wife of Somerled was the "cause of the collapse of the entire kingdom of the Isles" as one historian said, I'd say she was a big deal.  The Kingdom of the Isles lasted several centuries and consisted of every island off the coast of Scotland from Man to the Shetlands.  See the section about the Somerled era in our Kingdom of the Isles article.  Precedent: about a third our articles on Scandinavian Scottish nobles are as terse as our Ingibjörg article and most do not list 6 or 9 sources at the bottom of the article.  Here are some examples; I encourage taking a quick look: Sumarlidi Sigurdsson , Paul Haakonsson , David Haraldsson , Magnus II, Earl of Orkney , Jón Magnússon, Earl of Orkney , Magnús Jónsson, Earl of Orkney , Máel Muire ingen Amlaíb , Ásbjǫrn skerjablesi , Neit All are important even if we don't know much interesting detail about their lives.  The same is true of Ingibjörg and Ragnhildis.  -- A. B. ( talk • contribs • global count ) 00:50, 24 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Looking around some more, I see our article about Óláfr Guðrøðarson (died 1153) has interesting material about Ingibjörg that could be added to our Ingibjorg article.  See Óláfr Guðrøðarson (died 1153)#Alliances .  Óláfr had two wives; Affraic was his second.  These marriages were closely associated with regional power politics and scheming.  Ragnhildis gets a mention, too.  This material is well-referenced and foot-noted.  A. B. ( talk • contribs • global count ) 01:36, 24 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Yes i have noticed there was information from Olaf the reds article about this someone just need to transfer the sources, references and information to help add on to Ingibjörg's article.  AvailableViking ( talk ) 02:56, 24 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Going back to Óláfr Guðrøðarson (died 1153)#Alliances at the bottom of that section about the marriage not being official and it coming before Olafs other marriage, that could be added as a section to Ingibjörg's article which would definitely add some more content to the article.  AvailableViking ( talk ) 03:30, 24 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I appreciate your enthusiasm about this.  Most of the sources only marginally refrence the character or have very little information about them you really have to scrap the bucket to get information about them dispite how influential and important they were for their time AvailableViking ( talk ) 02:53, 24 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] While the information about Ragnhildis and Ingibjörg is sparse, they were undeniably important figures in their time, with a significant impact on society they ruled.   Hence WP:PRESERVE and WP:NOTPAPER .  Aszx5000 ( talk ) 08:32, 24 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: keep