Talk:Baldr

Did the Germanic peoples consider the death of Baldur to be an event in their past, or in their future? The text doesn't make this clear. -- 84.57.73.92 20:53, 26 Nov 2004 (UTC)

What exactly is Baldr the god of? Michael May II (talk) 20:42, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

:This [god] of [x] construction you're looking for is an extremely simplistic take on complex systems that developed over many years. This is particularly notable for Norse myth, where easy answers are particularly difficult to find. I suggest that you read the article. :bloodofox: (talk) 20:44, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

Does the Prose Edda mention Váli when the article states it does? I cannot find him in any translation there, and the reference itself does not include him. Váli killing Hod is attested in the Poetic Edda, but I don't think it is in the Prose Edda itself.Eladabudi (talk) 20:08, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

The article claims that Baldr was known to some mainland Saxons as "Baldag", but the source for this claim leads to nothing but a quote. This claim should be removed unless someone can properly source it. Hurlebatte (talk) 15:31, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Bældæg is listed as a son of Woden by some manuscripts. Baldr is said to be a son of Othin by some manuscripts. Their names are a bit similar. Is this really all we're basing the claim on that they're the same figure? This seems like incredibly weak evidence which no good scholar would ever leap to a conclusion from. Hurlebatte (talk) 15:33, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

:This compound as a form of the deity name has been a common observation in scholarship since at least Grimm (who linked it with the expansive 'day' complex of theonyms and Germanic personal names, and proposed the Old High German cognate *Paltac). But it also occurred long before: It is acknowledged as an Old English form of Old Norse Baldr in the Prose Edda ("Beldeg, er vér kǫllum Baldr"). Another attested Old English form is Herebald (Beowulf), quite recently revisited for example by Lindow (2020). This article could use an expansion. :bloodofox: (talk) 18:14, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

::That's much better evidence, I'll work it into the article some time. Hurlebatte (talk) 17:50, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

In response to the edit summary:

:{{tq|There are multiple stories, an infobox is meant for straightforward facts, obviously complicated when it comes to mythological content}}

No it's not. From the Manual of Style:

:{{tq|The purpose of an infobox is to summarize, but not supplant, the key facts that appear in an article.}}

The phrase "to summarize" in the first sentence links to the following:

:{{tq|Articles over a certain size may not cover their topic in a way that is easy to find or read... Summary style keeps the reader from being overwhelmed by too much information up front, by summarizing main points and going into more details on particular points (subtopics) in separate articles.}}

The purpose of an infobox is to summarize. Summarizing is not necessary for straightforward facts; summarizing is for when the facts are complicated.

It follows that an infobox is meant for complicated facts.

Norse mythology is complicated. So is climate change and World War II and the presidency of the United States, and all those articles have infoboxes.

I'm not going to try and add an infobox to this article, I know what the outcome would be. I did try to start a discussion at WikiProject Mythology about the "infobox deity" template that wasn't picked up, and that I then didn't have the time and energy to pursue.

What I am going to do is counter misinformation when it comes up. This is misinformation.

—VeryRarelyStable 22:51, 2 June 2025 (UTC)