Talk:Thorgils Sprakelegg

Denmark Low‑importance

	Denmark portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Denmark, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Denmark on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DenmarkWikipedia:WikiProject DenmarkTemplate:WikiProject DenmarkDenmark articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Military history: European / Nordic / Medieval

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion not met

Associated task forces:
/
	European military history task force
	Nordic military history task force
	Medieval warfare task force (c. 500 – c. 1500)

Biography: Royalty and Nobility

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by WikiProject Royalty and Nobility.
	An appropriate infobox may need to be added to this article. Please refer to the list of biography infoboxes for further information.
	An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

Norse history and culture Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Norse history and culture, a WikiProject related to all activities of the North Germanic peoples, both in Scandinavia and abroad, prior to the formation of the Kalmar Union in 1397. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.Norse history and cultureWikipedia:WikiProject Norse history and cultureTemplate:WikiProject Norse history and cultureNorse history and culture articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Middle Ages Low‑importance

	Middle Ages portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

I have a reference suggesting his mother was not Tyra, but another daughter of Harald Bluetooth. Charles Matthews 20:08, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

He was not danish but swedish — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.73.217.230 (talk) 07:50, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Symeon of Durham ?

The article at its present mention a chronicle from the 11th-century (John of Worcester), and several chronicles from the 13th-, 14th- and 15th-century, but what about the 12th-century?

P.F. Suhm writes in his Historie af Danmark, III. Tome, from 1787, that Symeon of Durham (Simeon Dunelmensis) also mention Ursus as the father of Sprakelegg. It follows like this in Suhm's notes: "Den Engelske Skribent Simeon Dunelmensis, der skrev ved Aar 1120, følgeligen en god Tid førend Saxo, beretter col. 183. at Spragelegs Fader hed Ursus, det er Bjørn, men synes ei at tænkes uden paa et Menneske." (p. 166). Is Symeon of Durham something we should follow up on and include in the article? Oleryhlolsson (talk) 05:35, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The available published edition of Symeon's work mentions neither Ursus nor Sprakalegg. The most likely explanation is that Suhm was referring to the John of Worcester quote and mistakenly attributed it to Symeon. Also, we have probably already strained the dictates of WP:NOR already in the degree to which we have farmed primary sources so perhaps circumspection is required in the degree to which we list every single source - for that matter, the more that the article is filled out, the more I am questioning whether this man even qualifies for a Wikipedia page, given that all but the oblique mention of his character by Saxo is entirely genealogical, presenting him as a name in a pedigree and nothing more. Agricolae (talk) 19:05, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not much material on the man himself, but he have been widely debated by scollars for several hundred of years and that's what makes him interesting. Even though we don't know much about the person himself, some schollars tend to se him as a person of importance in his own time for instance the Danish historian J.G.F. Ræder wrote in his book about Sweyn Estridsson from 1871: "...Bedstefaderen, Thorgils Spragelæg omtales kun lidt, skjøndt paa en saadan Maade, at han maa have været en betydelig Mand;". Oleryhlolsson (talk) 19:26, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No, he hasn't been widely debated - the debate has been about his half-ursine(?) father, with Thorgils simply being how we get there from Ulf and Gytha. Ræder's 'no source says so but he must have been important' isn't really the type of 'substantial coverage' that underlies WP:NOTABILITY. Yes, he must have been somewhat imporatant for his son to marry the king's daughter, but Wikipedia notability isn't based on presumptions of importance, it is first and foremost based on the degree of detailed coverage the person has received, and this person has received next to none. While I have no motivation to nominate this page for deletion, we should certainly avoid doing the all-too-common Wikipedia thing of trying to turn an entirely obscure person into a 50,000 word biography by writing a paragraph about every single passing mention, jumped conclusion, unsupported hypothesis and undocumented elaboration that has ever appeared in print, and if anything we (and particularly myself) have already gone farther down the road of WP:OR than we perhaps should have, so I hesitate to scour the primary literature for more mentions. Agricolae (talk) 19:42, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No, I agree, that there as such is no more need for more mentionings in primary sourches if we should have overlooked some, but there are still some aspects concerning this person, that hasn't been dealth with in the article so far, like his appearance in litterature and possibly also some references about how the view on the interpretation of this person has changed over time. I might add a little more on these aspects in the coming days. Oleryhlolsson (talk) 20:20, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]