Talk:Fairhair dynasty

message: This article was frankly very poor - no reliable or verifiable sources at all, and a seemingly over-literal use of Norwegian names. I've stripped it down to the basics and added a king-list taken from List of Norwegian monarchs. If people want to expand the article, feel free, but please make sure that you cite your sources and don't add your own original research. -- ChrisO 21:59, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Most medieval genealogies of noblemen and royals were actually all made up centuries later to gain political power by claiming noble birth. To point out that they contain false links is like criticizing a crime novel for just being fiction. Of course its made up!.. 
If people of the 12th century actually believed that i.e. Sverre was the son of King Sigurn Munn, it had political consequences, regardless the fact that it was a forgery. Perceived (and sometimes false) genealogies may be equally as historically important as true genealogies. 
"But its more likely that only three generations of rulers in lineage of Harald Fairhair himself are known, and all the rest afterwards just used the prestige and name of the country's first unifier."
Sounds plausible, but that is not the point the medievalist are making. It was (probably) in the 12th century that it was politically advantageous to claim inheritance as far back as AD 890, instead of e.g. Saint Olav (died 1030). "The rest" didn't claim being members of a Fairhair dynasty, it was instead claimed later that they had been members of the Fairhair dynasty by their postdecessors. (Same logic as it was in 1648, that 1618 became the start of the 30 years war)
--H@r@ld 05:52, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Genelogy

message: On 1 May 2007 an anonymous Norwegian contributor edited this article in a way that the non-traditionalist viewpoint was erased away. Editors may want to dissect that one's claims and comment upon such. The outcome on 1 May was:      Suedois 15:35, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Norwegian nationalist/ traditionalist view to Fairhair dynasty 

message: The different branches of the so-call Fairhair dynasty should be seperated to their own articles, maybe stubs. There is already a House of Hardrada article (which still needs to be broken down into Hardrada and Gille branch), and I created House of Sverre. Can someone else create the other branches?--Queen Elizabeth II's Little Spy (talk) 18:05, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure I agree, because there is this big scholarly issue of whether the Fairhair dynasty is real, which is best discussed here. I'd rather see some of the repetition removed. Yngvadottir (talk) 19:14, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Seperation 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Fairhair dynasty. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070228054707/http://www.genealogi.no/Genealogen/Artikler/kongar_i_aettetavlene.htm to http://www.genealogi.no/Genealogen/Artikler/kongar_i_aettetavlene.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:31, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified