Talk:Thorvald Asvaldsson

message: *Strong Support as usage. Other instances of thorn should be kept, rejected, or imposed by the same test; for example, it may be reasonable in modern Icelandic politicians. I congratulate Erudy on gathering evidence. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 22:54, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, and additionally, the case of Novak Đoković is certainly different, as the name is written in Cyrillic letters in Serbian, therefore "Novak Đoković" isn't the "real" original spelling but one possible transcription into the Latin alphabet, which makes this name and its handling an unsuitable example for the current discussion. Gestumblindi (talk) 14:27, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That's not the case. Whereas most languages use only one alphabet, Serbian is a rare exception in using two alphabets side by side, both of them equally valid "Novak Đoković" isn't a Latin transcription of a Cyrillic original spelling, and it most certainly isn't one just "one possible transcription. It's the proper way to spell the name, and the way it is spelled by the daily newspapers in Serbian that are printed in the Latin alphabet. JdeJ (talk) 15:49, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: i. e. Novak Đoković can also be just as correctly written as Новак Ђоковић, but not Novak Djokovic. Admiral Norton (talk) 17:18, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, I stand corrected. If "Novak Djokovic" is the overwhelmingly used spelling in English, however, it can and should be used here in the English Wikipedia, I think. However, if there's no clearly dominating English spelling of a contemporary person's name, I would opt for the original spelling, as long as it's originally in a Latin alphabet (which would, according to your information, be the case with Serbian). The current discussion is about a historic name where things are different. Gestumblindi (talk) 18:41, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey

message: Husond has now reverted three times to:
:Þorvaldr Ásvaldsson (Icelandic: Þorvaldr Ásvaldsson) was the father of the discoverer of Greenland,
The exact repetition of the Icelandic form is bad writing, if nothing else, and the overwhelmingly common English form should be mentioned in the lead. Both of these are more important that the rule Husond has made up that titles must be reflected, exactly, in the first line; what our conventions actually say is that all common forms must be. For some counterexamples, see Cicero, Tacitus and Charles, Duke of Orléans. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 18:31, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, Thorvald Asvaldsson could be used in the parentheses, but your edits definitely don't show this point of view, I'm afraid. Admiral Norton (talk) 11:28, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Department of Redundancy Department

message: The page currently states that he died before 980 but not explanation or source for that date  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.108.32.100 (talk) 04:32, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Death date 

message: The page currently states that he was exiled in 960 during the reign of Harald Fairhair, but Harald's reign came to an end 30 years prior.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.136.221.210 (talk) 21:05, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Exile date