Talk:Hugleik

Norse history and culture Mid‑importance

	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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Biography: Royalty and Nobility

	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 articles
	This article is supported by WikiProject Royalty and Nobility.

Daily pageviews of this article

A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org

Renaming[edit]

Would it not be a good idea to rename this article, to 'Hugleik (Yngling dynasty)', Hugleik son of Alf, or something like that? It would make things less confusing for interwiki links. /Pieter Kuiper 11:42, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I propose 'Hugleik (Edda)'. Also those who believe that Hygelac of history developed into Hugleik of legend should be fine with this article name. /Pieter Kuiper 15:37, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

He is not mentioned in any Edda, AFAIK, so I disagree with your suggestion. Moreover, there's no need to call either the character Hygelac or the character Hugleik by any other name but the form by which they appear in the sources, so they are easy to keep apart if needed. It is a simple case of Wikipedia convention and of verifiability. The fact that their name forms are cognates and any possible connection between the two can be mentioned anyway.--Berig 12:50, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]