This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The article may be improved by following the WikiProject Biography 11 easy steps to producing at least a B article. -- KenWalker | Talk 07:21, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
I am glad to see this extremely interesting woman has got her own article. However, I find the article leaves a lot to be desired. First and foremost, it seems very clearly to hold a negative point of view of poor Ingrid, which I find quite incomprehensible. I posted the cleanup-tag, and will hopefully find time to make some more changes to the article myself, later on, if someone else doesn't do it before me.-- Barend 13:33, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
Contrary to idea of Barend, the name Ingrid Ragvaldsdotter is not a typo. It is that form of the name that is in the book from which I took material to the article. If I understand the difference correctly, "Ragvaldsdotter" is used in material that has more Swedish background, and "Ragnvaldsdottir" in material with more Icelandic background. If the other of these is used, no one should come and allege it as typo, even if the alleger's own preference is not that. Marrtel 20:08, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
It's spelled Ragnvald in the admittedly old Nordisk familjebok [5]. User:Marrtel should name his sources if he wants the current naming retained. Fornadan (t) 18:39, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
for example, Lars O Lagerqvist, "Sverige och dess regenter under 1000 år" calls her Ingrid Ragvaldsdotter (register on p 398). Her father is mentioned as Ragvald (p 44). Marrtel 06:17, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
I remember having read that Henrik was cruel to Ingrid, she finally left him, and after a while, he was killed in battle. It is not important for the "leaving" part if she had to wait for her separated spouse's death before being able to hunt next husband to the altar (probably priests would not have allowed a wedding before either annulment of previous marriage or Henrik's death; a king with a less than secure throne would probably not risk gaining ire of ecclesiastics, but as soon as a princess' former husband was dead, she again had good prospects). By the way, that book might have been written by some feminist historian... Marrtel 14:52, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
The result of the debate was PAGE MOVED per discussion below. - GTBacchus( talk) 21:51, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
Ingrid Ragvaldsdotter → Ingrid Ragnvaldsdotter — Name used in sources, and in English translations. No source given for the alternate spelling Barend 17:09, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
Perhaps some of the contributors to this discussion should check the actual sources before they start complaining! Ingrid Ragnvaldsdotter was born in Sweden, but married a dane (Henrik Skadelår) whom she left - upon his death she went to Norway and married the Norwegian king. All three languages cite her name differently. The Icelandic language has a different spelling. That's what this is about, my dear.
According to Lagerqvist, Ingrid's later reputation is bad. I removed this sentence. The moral judgment of one modern day historian, without any further explanation, is irrelevant. There are different opinions on Ingrid, and a balanced discussion of different views might be appropriate, but not a one-sided condemnation. -- Barend 11:12, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
What is the purpose of moving the article to an article title which does not resemble anything that is used in any written sources or academic literature, and moreover, doing so without any discussion?-- Barend ( talk) 14:27, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Move. Jafeluv ( talk) 10:59, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
Ingrid of Sweden, Queen of Norway → Ingrid Ragnvaldsdotter — This is the article title which the article had until recently, when it was moved unilaterally, without discussion, and for no readily apparent reason. If I were to hazard a guess though, I assume the move was due to the view that queen-consorts should have an article title reflecting the name of their country of origin. In this case, this creates a totally constructed name, which never appears in any sources or secondary litterature. Also, Wikipedia: Naming conventions (royalty and nobility) says: "there was a proposal that Wikipedia always use the maiden name, or house of origin, for such people; but that rule produces unrecognisable titles too often to be generally applied." Therefore, the article should never have been moved in the first place, and should now be moved back to Ingrid Ragnvaldsdotter. -- Barend ( talk) 09:30, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
This article has references to user-generated articles in Store norske leksikon (utdypning). One cannot rely on such articles reflecting current standards of scholarship. / Pieter Kuiper ( talk) 22:18, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The article may be improved by following the WikiProject Biography 11 easy steps to producing at least a B article. -- KenWalker | Talk 07:21, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
I am glad to see this extremely interesting woman has got her own article. However, I find the article leaves a lot to be desired. First and foremost, it seems very clearly to hold a negative point of view of poor Ingrid, which I find quite incomprehensible. I posted the cleanup-tag, and will hopefully find time to make some more changes to the article myself, later on, if someone else doesn't do it before me.-- Barend 13:33, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
Contrary to idea of Barend, the name Ingrid Ragvaldsdotter is not a typo. It is that form of the name that is in the book from which I took material to the article. If I understand the difference correctly, "Ragvaldsdotter" is used in material that has more Swedish background, and "Ragnvaldsdottir" in material with more Icelandic background. If the other of these is used, no one should come and allege it as typo, even if the alleger's own preference is not that. Marrtel 20:08, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
It's spelled Ragnvald in the admittedly old Nordisk familjebok [5]. User:Marrtel should name his sources if he wants the current naming retained. Fornadan (t) 18:39, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
for example, Lars O Lagerqvist, "Sverige och dess regenter under 1000 år" calls her Ingrid Ragvaldsdotter (register on p 398). Her father is mentioned as Ragvald (p 44). Marrtel 06:17, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
I remember having read that Henrik was cruel to Ingrid, she finally left him, and after a while, he was killed in battle. It is not important for the "leaving" part if she had to wait for her separated spouse's death before being able to hunt next husband to the altar (probably priests would not have allowed a wedding before either annulment of previous marriage or Henrik's death; a king with a less than secure throne would probably not risk gaining ire of ecclesiastics, but as soon as a princess' former husband was dead, she again had good prospects). By the way, that book might have been written by some feminist historian... Marrtel 14:52, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
The result of the debate was PAGE MOVED per discussion below. - GTBacchus( talk) 21:51, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
Ingrid Ragvaldsdotter → Ingrid Ragnvaldsdotter — Name used in sources, and in English translations. No source given for the alternate spelling Barend 17:09, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
Perhaps some of the contributors to this discussion should check the actual sources before they start complaining! Ingrid Ragnvaldsdotter was born in Sweden, but married a dane (Henrik Skadelår) whom she left - upon his death she went to Norway and married the Norwegian king. All three languages cite her name differently. The Icelandic language has a different spelling. That's what this is about, my dear.
According to Lagerqvist, Ingrid's later reputation is bad. I removed this sentence. The moral judgment of one modern day historian, without any further explanation, is irrelevant. There are different opinions on Ingrid, and a balanced discussion of different views might be appropriate, but not a one-sided condemnation. -- Barend 11:12, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
What is the purpose of moving the article to an article title which does not resemble anything that is used in any written sources or academic literature, and moreover, doing so without any discussion?-- Barend ( talk) 14:27, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Move. Jafeluv ( talk) 10:59, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
Ingrid of Sweden, Queen of Norway → Ingrid Ragnvaldsdotter — This is the article title which the article had until recently, when it was moved unilaterally, without discussion, and for no readily apparent reason. If I were to hazard a guess though, I assume the move was due to the view that queen-consorts should have an article title reflecting the name of their country of origin. In this case, this creates a totally constructed name, which never appears in any sources or secondary litterature. Also, Wikipedia: Naming conventions (royalty and nobility) says: "there was a proposal that Wikipedia always use the maiden name, or house of origin, for such people; but that rule produces unrecognisable titles too often to be generally applied." Therefore, the article should never have been moved in the first place, and should now be moved back to Ingrid Ragnvaldsdotter. -- Barend ( talk) 09:30, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
This article has references to user-generated articles in Store norske leksikon (utdypning). One cannot rely on such articles reflecting current standards of scholarship. / Pieter Kuiper ( talk) 22:18, 17 August 2011 (UTC)