Talk:Eric and Eric

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

Sweden Low‑importance

	Sweden portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sweden, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Sweden-related articles 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.SwedenWikipedia:WikiProject SwedenTemplate:WikiProject SwedenSweden articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Norse history and culture

	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
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Speculation OK

Latest comment: 8 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

If we read before we edit, we find that it's already clear that their "assigned" names are the product of speculation. Futhermore we can never state as fact what does or does not appear in literature, whether "contemporary" - what does that mean here, then (i.e. runestones in the days of Eric & Eric) or today? We can say what we know, and what we do not know, but not what exists. Reversing this as the wording is not up to par. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 14:03, 13 October 2016 (UTC)Reply

I have reworded tha last part about the names. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 14:07, 13 October 2016 (UTC)Reply

That seems OK. And we actually know of them from a source who was contemporary with them - Adam of Bremen. I don't think any other interpretation of the word is reasonable.

Andejons (talk) 14:30, 13 October 2016 (UTC)Reply

You and I agree on that, but some people mean today or in our times, and I've never been able to come up with a good argument against that opinion, so I just have to respect it. It's one of the most confusing words we have in English, I think, so I just try to avoid it. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 14:50, 13 October 2016 (UTC)Reply

Add topic