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 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 is within the scope of WikiProject European history, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the history of Europe 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.European historyWikipedia:WikiProject European historyTemplate:WikiProject European historyEuropean history articles
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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England 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.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related articles
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 articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject English Royalty. For more information, visit the project page.English RoyaltyWikipedia:WikiProject English RoyaltyTemplate:WikiProject English RoyaltyEnglish royalty articles
I've starting this talk page to try and get consensus for this edit. As far as I can see the two reasons people don't want this edit is because the previous is a wider description and long-standing. My argument is that just having Anglo-Saxon is far more accurate as an explanatory term for the House of Godwin. Firstly, the house itself was only based in England and had no possessions elsewhere in Europe (including Scandinavia) so the House of Godwin should only be considered Anglo-Saxon under the feudal relationship that it had exclusively in England. Secondly, (and I'm guessing this is the main area of contention) just because the house had intermarried with Danish nobles doesn't undermine the fact it is essentially an Anglo-Saxon family. When discussing feudal nobility (or European aristocracies in general) the ethnicity of the people they intermarry with shouldn't be something that influences our description of the family. For example we wouldn't call the French House of Bourbon a Franco-Italian-Polish-German family due to their marriages to other European ethnicities. It's for these reasons that it would be far more accurate to call them an Anglo-Saxon family. If people have an issue with this edit then please tell me why. If in two or three day I don't get a response saying why this edit shouldn't be implemented then I'll assume people are fine with it and make the edit.
Thank you for starting the discussion, Marvic 256.
I agree that the family was, at root, Anglo-Saxon; it's very clear, however, that the line from Tostig became Scandinavian/Danish, and as that is given space in the article i don't see the point of removing it from the lead. Though, if it stays, i don't think the piped wlink to Danelaw is especially accurate, as it wasn't in that area that they were active. Your comparison to the House of Bourbon isn't altogether helpful, as there is no way that we would call the current Spanish monarchs French, or even members of a French house; in fact, i've just had a look, and we say it's a European dynasty of French origin. Do you see what i mean? happy days, LindsayHello19:08, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure how Tostig proves that the family became more accurately described as Anglo-Danish/Scandinavian rather than Anglo-Saxon, If you could expand on your reasoning further then I can respond to the reason directly. I certainly agree that the wlink to Danelaw is inaccurate, as it is referring to a class of people who are specific to the intermingling between Danish and Anglo-Saxon inhabitants of the Danelaw territory, which by this time is long gone and irrelevant to the House of Godwin and the reasons for calling them Anglo-Danish. As for my comparison to the House of Bourbon, it was simply to illustrate that we don't mix the numerous ethnicities that comprise noble families to produce a single descriptive term (which is what is trying to be done with this article). In fact the description for the House of Bourbon denotes its French origin/identity explicitly with the European part referring to the family's expansion beyond France (to places such as Spain for example); the description on this article however tries to imply a transformative process from Anglo-Saxon to Anglo-Danish, which is inaccurate.
.svg)
