Talk:Ingeborg, Duchess of Öland

Regent
The fact that Ingeborg Eriksdottir was co-regent during the minority of King Magnus in 1319 has been removed from this article, even though it is confirmed from the references. Juridically, Ingeborg has the same status as Ingeborg of Norway: they both had seats in the Swedish regency government, and noting more than that is confirmed. Other than the seats in the council, no formal political position is actually confirmed about either of them. Ingeborg of Norway is not confirmed to have been a regent, but she is still referred to as one. Thereby, Ingeborg Eriksdottir must be given the same status: they are both confirmed to have had a seat in the regency, and none of them is confirmed to have been a regent. They must therefore be treated the same way. It is as justified to call both of them regents, and it is justified to call none of them regents. It is not justified to give them different treatment.

On Swedish Wikipedia, the same conflict has occured. Only two people took part in that discussion, and I withdraw from it only because I had no wish to engage in a conflict: it was not solwed, and I had hoped that the same problems would not affect this article. In Swedish wikipedia, I referenced the fact that the two Ingeborg are both mentioned as representing the regency alongside Matts Kettilmundsen. This is really all the proof we have that either women can be seen as "regents" rather than just having a seat in the council. The only difference is the fact that one woman was active, and one was passive.

This was denied and removed by the same editor who has now done the same here. I gave up that dispute in Swedish wikipedia, as I do not wish to engange in disputes. But the fact is, that this does damage Wikipedia as a source for correct information. I am sorry that the quality of this article has been damaged in the same way. I already tried to reference this fact in Swedish Wikipedia, but it was not respected. And as these edits has now been made by the same editor here, I have no hope that any work of mine on this article would be respected here either. I do not wish to engage in the very same disupute here. If anyone else wish to have this article corrected to represent the truth more carefully, however, I will give my vote and my full support to them. --Aciram (talk) 10:26, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
 * See next issue below. Ingeborg Håkansdotter of Norway appears in many contemporary sources as acting for the government during the minority of her son, who was king, in other words as regent. Her cousin and sister-in-law never does, not even once. SergeWoodzing (talk) 10:46, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

The period of her tenure
I also see that the same editor, who removed the position of regent, has also added that her seat in the council was brief. I wrote this article from the beginning, and I have read all the references. The truth is, that we have no information as to how long tenure she had in the council. I do not wish to cause any conflicts, but I cant help saying, that I am truly very sorry that this article has been edited to a much lover lewel of truth, and can no longer be trusted to represent the truth. Due to the recent edits, this article is no longer trustworthy. --Aciram (talk) 10:26, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
 * There is no clear evidence that Ingeborg was a regent, only that she once - please note: once! - is mentioned as likely to have been on that regency council at its very outset. There is no list of the council members, no mention anywhere that she definitely was on it, nothing but the mention of the "two Ingeborgs" as given in the article. The fact that we have no information on how long a person had a certain position means that we should assert that she had it for a long time, when she only is mentioned once as probably in such a position? The information before exaggerated her position. The article is now accurate as far as I can see, also being quite familiar with reliable academic sources on this subject. Thank you for all the good work you do, Aciram! SergeWoodzing (talk) 10:41, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

The 1312 double wedding


I suggest that the text is now at least improved somewhat. Obviously, I welcome further improvements.

Vague and mysterious references can hardly be called "facts". There were multiple problems with the wording. The force of "thus" was unclear—"the third son" [who was actually the second son—see below] was not introduced in the text. "Her cousin" was utterly confusing—one would expect "her" to refer to the subject of the article. "Duke of Finland in Oslo" was also bewildering.

Accusativen hos Olsson (talk) 00:35, 16 March 2012 (UTC)


 * 


 * By the way, Eric was the second son, and Valdemar the third.
 * Accusativen hos Olsson (talk) 03:42, 16 March 2012 (UTC)