This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Mythology: Norse mythology Low‑importance This article is supported by WikiProject Mythology. This project provides a central approach to Mythology-related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the WikiProject page for more details.MythologyWikipedia:WikiProject MythologyTemplate:WikiProject MythologyMythology articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Norse mythology work group.

This should probably be moved to Odin, Vili and Ve or similar, because any discussion of Vili and Ve will actually be a discussion of that triad. dab (𒁳) 14:52, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is it me, or did I miss the references in this article? Is the alliteration in proto-norse an accepted fact, or is it original research? Likewise, the references to the Exeter book strike strongly of original research — the entire Exeter book is alliterative, so it's no surprise to find a sentence with Woden which alliterates with other Ws. Emendations to suit a theory are generally highly discouraged in Old English studies.Martin Turner (talk) 23:30, 2 February 2008 (UTC) Also note that the bibliography (which is not connected to the text) is only of out-of-date studies, from the period when emendations to suit theories were rife.Martin Turner (talk) 23:32, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your criticism is valid and I tend to find that Wikipedia has a very severe problem with such original research in these areas. References, people - solid, referable, reputable references! If you can correct it, you are most welcome to. :bloodofox: (talk) 12:19, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

While I am not completely certain about the alliteration in Proto-Norse, it did alliterate in Proto-Germanic. I've added a citation to Simek that roughly states such, but the the line likely needs to be rewritten. My current revision adds links to Wiktionary as well. Yugure (talk) 03:27, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This is just my personal interpretation, but the three also seem to make up a triumvirate of time in a way as well. When I say that I am not referring to the roles of past present and future, thats the Norn’s, I'm referring to the impetus force driving time forward, the three elements that define destiny, fate or unchangeable events(Odin, due to his foreknowledge of Ragnarok), will or things affected by personal choice for a set determination(Vili, his defining characteristic was will) and chance or those things beyond our control that are not determined one way or another(Ve, whose defining characteristics regarded a divine power or sovereignty that is hard to pit into words, which to me sounds a bit like luck)2600:1008:B06C:1C28:256C:46C:F400:BB43 (talk) 14:57, 24 June 2020 (UTC)Mer Watts 9:57 am CST 6/24/2020[reply]

I see that the Germanic tradition of alliterating personal names has been questioned here. Here is a source on the Anglo-Saxon tradition of alliterating personal names in a family:

• Gelling, M., Signposts to the Past (2nd edition), Phillimore, 1988, pp. 163–4.

I believe this source has some information about that too:

• Peterson, Lena (2002). "Developments of Personal Names from Ancient Nordic to Old Nordic". In Bandle, Oskar; Elmevik, Lennart; et al. (eds.). The Nordic Languages: An International Handbook of the History of the North Germanic Languages. 1. Walter de Gruyter. pp. 745–753. ISBN 3-11-014876-5. p. 750.

The tradition of alliterating family names in Northern Europe is fairly well-known. It seems a bit obvious that three names that would have alliterated in Proto-Norse would follow this tradition too.--Berig (talk) 17:33, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Berig, thank you for the sources. I didn't question the existence of alliteration in Old Norse, but rather the fact that Simek talks about the alliteration of Óðinn–Vili–Véi in Proto-Norse in his book. I cound't find this passage in the book (I only have the German edition, of which I possess a searchable pdf as well). I have restored that part of the article with a ^{[failed verification]} tag. Alcaios (talk) 18:07, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You did not do anything wrong. Information that is not referenced can be removed, but it is better now that you have added a failed verification tag.--Berig (talk) 18:11, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Having a closer look, I see that the "Proto-Norse" forms are incorrect. For instance, there is no nominative ending in Wódin. It would have been *Wódinaz or *WódinaR. Proto-Norse was an archaic form of Germanic with small differences from reconstructed Proto-Germanic.--Berig (talk) 11:35, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]