Talk:Sexræd and Sæward of Essex

Military history: Biography / British / European / Medieval Start‑class

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

Start

This article has been rated as Start-class on the project's quality scale.

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 not met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion not met

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

Biography: Military

	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
	This article is supported by the military biography work group.
	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.

Anglo-Saxon Kingdoms Mid‑importance

	Anglo-Saxon England portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anglo-Saxon Kingdoms, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Anglo-Saxon Kingdoms 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.Anglo-Saxon KingdomsWikipedia:WikiProject Anglo-Saxon KingdomsTemplate:WikiProject Anglo-Saxon KingdomsAnglo-Saxon Kingdoms
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Proposed merge of Sæward of Essex into Sexred

As discovered in the latest AfD, the reliable sources say very little about the subject, containing only passing mentions. The subject does not thus pass WP:GNG/WP:NBASIC. As per WP:BIOSPECIAL (Part of WP:NBIO), articles that fail WP:GNG/WP:NBASIC but pass one of the "additional criteria" (here, WP:NPOL) must be merge[d] ... into a broader article providing context. If merged, a separate discussion can be held whether to (or what to) rename the target article to. Ljleppan (talk) 05:24, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Merger complete. Klbrain (talk) 11:28, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Klbrain: Is it too late for me to oppose this proposal? BeanieFan11 (talk) 14:33, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@BeanieFan11: Not too late as far as I'm concerned; what's your counterargument to the case Ljleppan makes? Klbrain (talk) 16:50, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Klbrain: If, for no other reason, because I sincerely believe that we should have individual articles on those who were quite literally the actual kings of entire nations; several at the deletion discussion also thought the same and opposed merging (they just didn't seem to find out about this discussion). But also, because Saeward passes both WP:ANYBIO and WP:NPOL, which we have historically treated as indicators and presumers of notability, even when sources can't be found due to the age and topic of the subject; additionally, the full quote that Ljleppan partially quoted is If neither a satisfying explanation nor appropriate sources can be found for a standalone article, but the person meets one or more of the additional criteria: Merge the article into a broader article providing context – the part stating "a satisfying explanation" seems to imply to me that the articles passing those criteria can be kept despite a lack of sources if there's a satisfying explanation for keeping the article – being the king of an entire nation is certainly one in my opinion. Also, I'm sure there's plenty of other offline book sources, journals and other things mentioning Saeward to write something longer – we just haven't found them yet (a "satisfying explanation" as well, in my view, for a topic like the subject we've got here – there appears to be lots of results on Google Books for "Saeward"/"Sæward", many of which are offline – there's also a few like this that have details of him not in the article when prior to it being merged). One more point, if there is consensus to merge, why should the final title be Sexred and not Saeward or something else? BeanieFan11 (talk) 20:33, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The source you site includes both Sæward and Sexred together, which is an excellent argument in favour of a merge. The reliable sources we have discuss them together, and hence what is said about one often applies to the other. The formal merge reasons are hence overlap, context and short text. I absolutely agree with a move of the joint page to a joint name; either Sæward and Sexred or Sexred and Sæward would be fine, as per WP:AND; perhaps the latter, given the current structure of the article. Klbrain (talk) 16:18, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]