Talk:List of Vikings and Vikings: Valhalla characters

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fictional characters, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of fictional characters 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.Fictional charactersWikipedia:WikiProject Fictional charactersTemplate:WikiProject Fictional charactersfictional character

Television Low‑importance

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Main characters

There is no citation to verify the classifications of some characters as 'main' and others as 'recurring' on this page. The list of main characters does not appear to align with prominence or noteworthiness in the series (for example the character Harbard has had much less prominence and fewer storylines than either Aella or Judith), and the Wikipedia list doesn't match with IMDb (which includes Judith in its summary cast list), other sites like famousfix (declaring Judith a 'main' character) or the History Channel's own website which has Judith as one of nineteen principal characters listed as the 'cast'. At the least the information on this page needs properly verifying with a source and citation IanB2 (talk) 23:51, 3 January 2017 (UTC) IanB2 (talk) 23:51, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The episodes are the primary source. If they are credited in the opening sequence, then they are main. If they are credited at the end of the episode, they are recurring or guest (this depends on the number of episodes they appear in). This is per WP:TVCAST: "The cast listing should be organized according to the series original broadcast credits" and "Please keep in mind that though "main" cast members are determined by the series producers (not by popularity, screen time, or episode count) and generally have a set order in the credits"; this can be further seen at Template:Infobox television. Us determining who is "notable" would be based on our own observations, and therefore it is original research. Alex|The|Whovian^? 00:06, 4 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the helpful reply, and I do see the section of the MOS you have flagged. When I read this it appeared mostly to be about the order in which names are listed, and there isn't any explicit reference in that paragraph to the 'opening sequence/closing credits' distinction you cite above. Also, the preceding paragraph contains the phrase Remember to follow the notability guidelines when creating a cast list: not every fictional character ever created deserves to be listed, which doesn't really sit happily with your reply, since if we always follow the credits then pointing editors to the notability guidelines to decide a cast list doesn't really make sense? And of course the decision as to whether to include any page, or any material within a page, is in your sense 'original research' and so to make WP work that phrase cannot be defined excessively tightly. It might be useful to review these parts of the MOS since I don't find it particularly consistent or clear? I would add that there may be some geographical/cultural problems with your definition, since where I am television series often don't have any opening credits at all. IanB2 (talk) 07:16, 4 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I notice that the MOS says cast members are determined by the series producers, yet the people listed as 'cast' on the websites of The History Channel (owned by Shaw Media), MGM Television, and Take 5 Productions, are all different, and none of them line up with our WP page. Octagon Films just list four stars. IanB2 (talk) 07:51, 4 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ragnar

Some eager little beaver jumped the gun and listed Ragnar as dead in multiple articles, just because he appeared to die onscreen during season 4. However, multiple sources confirm that Travis Fimmel will return as Ragnar in season 5. - ^theWOLFchild 11:17, 19 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please prove the existence of these sources and their reliability and validity. Until then, the note remains. Alex|The|Whovian^? 11:20, 19 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If by the sources you mention, you mean these ones, one only needs to read them to know that the information provided is outdated and proved incorrect. The newseveryday source: "His confirmation debunks the reports that Ragnar Lothbrok will die in the current season." The hngn source: "This also debunked rumors about the death of Ragnar." The parentherald source, older than the other two sources: "Happily Ragnar Lothbrok will not be among the major characters dying in "Vikings Season 4" Part 2." These are all obviously incorrect. Alex|The|Whovian^? 11:27, 19 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"Obviously incorrect" according to who? You? Is that the ref we're using to support Ragnar's death? "Because Alex said so"...? You're also claiming these are "old and out of date", yet they're all from just last month, after the snake-pit episode was filmed. If you don't like the sources, go challenge them at RSN. What you're doing here is basically OR and perilously close to OWN. I suggest you revert to the supported version and move on. - ^theWOLFchild 13:19, 19 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The supported version? As in, the version that has stayed for this long and is being disputed by one editor? It currently is standing on that revision. Anything else that is attempted to be forced with no supporting content, based on their own beliefs, that's OWN. The references you have provided gave false information to cover the spoilers of the episodes that had not yet aired (note that filming does not affect this, it was in regards to the airing of the episodes), as indicated by the pulled quotes, and are therefore outdated due to the events of recent episodes. They are no longer reliable sources. Alex|The|Whovian^? 13:30, 19 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Alex, despite your having a point on the substantive issue, I would suggest a refresh of WP:OWN wouldn't go amiss? I don't think you have authority to be posting comments like "until then, the note remains" given WP is a collective project. IanB2 (talk) 07:48, 20 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Every editor that has edited this article between the time the note was added, and the time this discussion was started, has had no issue with the note; only one editor is disputing it. The status quo remains until proof otherwise can be given. Nothing in my comment violates OWN. It is indeed a collective project - that is why this discussion exists, why guidelines exist on how an article should remain during a discussion. But we digress, as any personal comments should be posted on a user's talk page. Back to the topic at hand. Alex|The|Whovian^? 08:02, 20 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on List of Vikings characters. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:47, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 31 August 2017

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved DrStrauss talk 17:35, 7 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

List of Vikings characters → List of Vikings (TV series) characters – The main article is called Vikings (TV series) and not Vikings, so this title is not consistent wot the primary topic article. It is misleading, since this article is not about characters from Vikings mythology, religion, folklore, history; it is rather about a particular TV show. These are not fictional Vikings characters in general, rather they are about a very specific TV show. The naming of this article lacks consideration of history and culture, since the Vikings are not just a TV show, they were a people. -- 70.51.46.15 (talk) 04:59, 31 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.

Support I am the nominator -- 70.51.46.15 (talk) 05:00, 31 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Striking attempt to stack votes, as explained below; editor was not a neutral party when they started this discussion, and therefore their position within this was already clear. -- Alex^TW 07:58, 1 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oppoose 1) Supporting your own RM is a clear attempt to stack WP:VOTES. 2) As I posted on your talk page, before you deleted it and decided not to discuss there: The move of this article as a result of your request has been reverted, as it was undiscussed; the title is acceptable per MOS:TV#Naming conventions and WP:NCTV#List articles. I recommend that you read these links and see the provided examples that match this case. Your bold changes to the templates have also been reverted. -- Alex^TW 12:56, 31 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- No, it is not, since I clearly stated that I am the nominator. Nominators may be neutral in their own requests, in this case I support my own request. And I was clearly stating who I was, without hiding the fact.
- Replacing this page with a list based on CAtegory:Fictional Vikings would serve to fix the lack of context left in this.
- The template itself is not an article, and further, Vikings is the primary topic of "Vikings" so a template for "Vikings" is obviously what it should be used for. Unless Wikipedia has become IMDB, I don't see why you have a problem with the template at all.
- -- 70.51.46.15 (talk) 05:34, 1 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Seems that the consensus is pretty clear anyways. And yes, it is; if you were a neutral editor who had not participated in the issue previously, you may !vote on it, but this discussion is directly a result of your intervention, and hence you are directly involved in it and your views are clear. An attempt at stacking. And this article and that category is unrelated. The reasons already given explain why the articles and templates are the way that they are. -- Alex^TW 07:46, 1 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose as per WP:NCTV – NCTV is quite clear that you don't use disambiguation with LoC and LoE articles unless there are other "list" articles with similar titles. This is not the case here – there is only one Vikings series with LoC/LoE articles. The redirect at List of Vikings (TV series) characters is sufficient, and the article should remain at the "base" title as per WP:NCTV. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 15:17, 31 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per the points made above. Not necessary to disambiguate here, and the other article redirects here anyway. - adamstom97 (talk) 22:13, 31 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. There is really not much more to be said. --AussieLegend (✉) 13:01, 1 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:35, 1 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Any additional comments:

This list has little to do with Category:Fictional Vikings, so the list name is highly misleading. -- 70.51.46.15 (talk) 05:07, 31 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Proper Spelling for Kjettil / Kjetil / Kjetill Flatnose character

Per source WWE Hall of Famer Adam Copeland on the Edge of tv stardom they have the spelling as Kjettil, but according to User:TheVampire it's spelled Kjetil. Per source Official History Channel YouTube Vikings Preview – Kjetill Flatnose Questions Queen Lagertha's Decision it's spelled Kjetill. Just wanna find some clarification on the correct spelling. Tho History Channels link I feel is most accurate. JMichael22 (talk) 11:08, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The spelling of the historical character is Ketill (noting that this is transliterated from old Norse). It seems that the producers of the series have messed around with the name, for some reason. The contemporary spelling of the same first name is Kjetil. IMDb has decided that its Kjettil. Until we get a truly authoritative source, the best we have is the YouTube video issued by History.com, which suggests Kjetill. Which, apart from the addition of the 'j', does at least align with the historical character. MapReader (talk) 16:12, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Kjetil is the name of the article on the Norse Wikipedia, but I agree with Kjetill (even though the double l is not pronounced by Floki in the episode). Additionally, I would add the English pronunciation in brackets as it was done with Þórunn (Thorunn) in seasons 2-3.--TheVampire (talk) 17:52, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I feel Kjetill is best since the show its self is using that spelling. JMichael22 (talk) 21:03, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Where are you getting that from? The call-up cast list on the episodes currently being screened by Amazon Prime uses the spelling Kjettil MapReader (talk) 23:04, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of Vikings characters. 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://www.webcitation.org/6FhcvQ1Iu?url=http://www.irishfilmboard.ie/irish_film_industry/news/VIKINGS_Tops_The_Ratings_With_83_Million_Viewers/2149 to http://www.irishfilmboard.ie/irish_film_industry/news/VIKINGS_Tops_The_Ratings_With_83_Million_Viewers/2149

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:51, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Olaf II link error

the King Olaf in Vikings is NOT Olaf the Stout / Olaf II from Norway! As he appears in Vikings Valhalla!!!! Was born in 995 !!! the links in description and the character timelin need to be corrected! The Olaf in Vikings seems to be this one: https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Olaf_Tryggvason wise man, partly Christian, but also pagan.Like the one on the season 5 and 6 in Vikings. 2A02:8109:8CC0:6480:1D9C:BD71:B078:6BA8 (talk) 04:39, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

me again. the Olaf in Vikings can be this one:

https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Olof_Sk%C3%B6tkonung

or the one noted in the descritpion here by your own text:

https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Amlaib_Conung 2A02:8109:8C94:3D00:A56F:CA7D:3F89:4A82 (talk) 17:01, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Split tables into Vikings and Vikings: Valhalla

As there is only one character crossing over between the two series, would the tables not be more manageable and accessible if there were discrete tables for each series? --wooden superman 08:01, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]