Talk:Sigurd Ring

message: The lead should only contain information that is not contradicted by the article itself. Some sources say that Sigurd Ring's father was born in Russia, while the Danish Gesta Danorum says that his father was the king of Sweden. This makes it peculiar to call him a "Danish king of Denmark" in the intro. Moreover it is equally unreasonable to call him the "paternal nephew" of Harald Hildetand (which he was in some sources) when Gesta Danorum says that Sigurd was Harald's maternal nephew.--Holger the Dane 12:25, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You mean that Sigurd was the "grand-son of Randver", I presume. Randver was born in Russia and he was the son of the king of Russia (in Sögubrot and the Lay of Hyndla). If you contemplate this you may understand how your "Danish king of the Danes" really sounds.--Holger the Dane 15:10, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

text: You wrote: "I don't know were you get your Rusia and grandson from". It appears that there no use discussing it with you since I told you where in my last post. If you want me to take you seriously you should ask a more established user to support you, e.g. User:Valentinian, User:Carewolf or User:Michael riber jorgensen.--Holger the Dane 15:29, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

text: You showed in your next to last post that you do not listen to facts. There was still the childish "Danish king of the Danes" as usual. You are just as dedicated to sprinkling "Danish" all over Wikipedia as the multi-blocked Arigato1 was.--Holger the Dane 15:53, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Arigato1's and Huscarl's edits

message: I had removed :Category:House of Munsö. Lars O. Lagerquist wrote in Sveriges regenter (1996) that Björn Ironside (who Lagerquist does not accept as historical) was according to the sagas the först one of a new dynasty, and that according to 18th-century antiquarians Björn was buried in the Munsö mound. Sigurd is supposed to have been earlier than Björn Ironside. He was not a member of Björn's new dynasty. That is why I remove the category. Please do not put it back in unless you have a source at least as good as Lagerquist. /Pieter Kuiper 18:04, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[House of Munsö]] 

message: From where do we get the spelling Hring? I doubt it's more frequent in standard English literature than Ring. Will move if not sourced. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 08:56, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I've moved the page. PhilKnight (talk) 22:20, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you! --SergeWoodzing (talk) 22:22, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Why not just Ring?

message: According to Saxo, Ring (simply Ring not Sigurd) of the Battle of Bravellir, nephew of Harald Wartooth, and Sigurd Ring, father of Ragnar Lodbrok are different persons. And there is more than 10 generations between them.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.87.154.162 (talk) 00:33, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gesta Danorum 

message: We should use less, not more, Old Norse lettering. This is English Wikipedia which is supposed to be able to be read aloud, not just ocularly, so whenever possible, normal readers of English should be spared the encumberment of such wording that requires expertise. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 10:31, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Old Norse lettering

message: In response to this revert, I will soon again be removing ficticious "succession" that makes these titles and positions look like factual history. Unless someone can give a very good reason to keep that silliness, and source reliably in the article that it has any legitimacy of any kind. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 16:17, 27 February 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, this "succession" box isn't realy helpfull in any way. To try to identify Sigurd Ring with the Ringo of  Gesta Danorum seem rather strange, and as for the Siwardus Ring (also Gesta Danorum) there we can see a similarity in the name, but the similarity is either random or a mistake of some sort or as some writers of more recent time suggest, Siwardus Ring of Gesta Danorum is named after Sigurd Ring and therefore could/should be considered as Sigurd Ring II. I fully agree, that we remove this "succession box" for Sigurd Ring. Oleryhlolsson (talk) 19:14, 27 February 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Olery, if you argue that there are errors in the succession, it can easily be fixed. If you are unfamiliar with coding these boxes, you can ask me and I can fix it.--Berig (talk) 23:04, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

text: This looks like removal based on WP:IDONTLIKEIT. There is nothing in the succession boxes that claim they were historical, and I don't see why we have to make the navigation of these articles harder than it already is. If you find that two saga sources contradict each other it is more constructive to divide the succession boxes into "succession in saga X"  and "succession in saga Y".--Berig (talk) 22:30, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Adding "succession"

message: I wonder why there is so much focus on Sigurd being a legendary Swedish king in the lead, when about 90% of the article is about him being king of Denmark or how he got to be a Danish king? People seems almost agitated when this is being questioned. Kisualk (talk) 23:09, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  This Swedish / Danish thing 

message: Why bring in Uppland? Uppland is only attested from after the writing of the sagas, in 1296, when it is described as (j) þrim uplandæ folklandum meaning "in the three upland folklands" referring to Tiundaland, Attundaland and Fjädrundaland. And if someone is claiming that Sviþjóð meant "Uppland", he is free to point me to an Icelandic or Old Norse dictionary as reference. Our specialists on Old Norse at Uppsala University invariably translate the name as "Sweden" in the Scandinavian Runic-text Data Base.--Berig (talk) 22:18, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Uppland