Jon Snow status
- Eh, I'm holding off on updating it until as soon as they give any clear statement within the Season 6 premiere episode. Just want to see they way they phrase it.--The Dragon Demands (talk) 00:42, February 9, 2016 (UTC)
House Starks Status
Isn't Sansa technically the Queen in the North until her brother is rescued as she has called some of the Stark bannermen to her side and calling herself Stark is kind of claiming the title or is it Queen in the North (de facto)? I'm lost —Preceding unsigned comment added by Breexox11 (talk • contribs)
- It's a reasonable assumption, but that's what it is: an assumption. We don't entirely know if House Stark would still claim royalty, and we don't know just yet if Sansa, who seems to be the acting head of House Stark, desires for the North to be free and independent still. Is it likely? Perhaps, but like I said, it's an assumption, and I think for now it's just too speculative. I have a feeling that, even if she feels this way, the Northern war for independence won't continue because they - all of the Seven Kingdoms - are going to start needing to look after each other due to the impending onslaught of the white walkers and their army of the dead/wights. Reddyredcp (talk) 07:02, June 9, 2016 (UTC)
- Jon does become King of the North. That's what's actually happening because Robb did name Jon as heir. Jon, first of his name (talk) 02:58, June 13, 2016 (UTC)
- Should be fixed now. Through some trial and error, I found that some tags weren't closed properly. Reddyredcp (talk) 23:57, June 20, 2016 (UTC)
I wouldn't call the result of the "Battle of the bastards" a restauration! It should be changed because neither the "Kingdom in the North" was reinstalled and certainly the Lannisters in King's Landing would never accept them to rule the north again as wardens! By the way, House Glover has displayed that they won't accept the authority of the Starks anymore, and I think there are several other houses as well, not only the ones who declared for the Boltons like the Karstarks and the Umbers! --Exodianecross (talk) 23:25, June 23, 2016 (UTC)
- With the Boltons now gone and Winterfell back in Stark control, the Glovers and the other houses ony have one possible liege lord, despite Robbet's bitter words. --Gonzalo84 (talk) 00:09, June 24, 2016 (UTC)
Jon is the King in the North and Sansa, Lady of Winterfell, is the last known trueborn of House Stark. The title of King in the North always included being Lord of Winterfell and head of House Stark, but Jon is a Snow with Stark blood. That legally makes him the overlord of House Stark, and Sansa the lord. Maybe it's better to wait for season 7 to approach this, I just wanted to put it out there since it may be the future conflict between Sansa and Jon --Kai200995 (talk) 23:13, June 27, 2016 (UTC)
Sansa does have a right to be pissed thought Jon being King, is robbing Sansa of their birth right, Jon confirmed it with all their family gone Sansa is Lady of Winterfell Bree 00:05, June 28, 2016 (UTC)
Stark Family Tree?
Now that Jon has been revealed to be the son of Lyanna, shouldn't the family tree be updated to reflect that information? I personally cannot edit it because it is locked (for good reason, if that page was vandalised it could screw up a lot of other pages) and I'm not an Admin, but someone should really edit it. Also, if there is a way to put "possible father" it would be much appreciated if that was done.Ainzeelee (talk) 15:47, June 28, 2016 (UTC)Ainzeelee
Lord of the House
I saw too many people trying to change the Lordship status of the House from Jon to Sansa, so lets discuss this:
In my opinion Jon is the Lord of the House Stark, obviously, because of the folowing... Lyanna Mormont claimed: "We know no king but the King in the North, whose name is STARK. ",claim that was followed by all the lords of the North,despite his bastardy, this claim legitimazes Jon Snow not only as a King in the North but as a STARK too, once King in the North and Stark, this makes him have the titles of Lord of Winterfell, King of the Trident and Lord of the House Stark, titles earned by inherence, Sansa keeps the title of Lady of Winterfell since the lordship of the Town is shared with Jon by agreement, making them both Lord(Honorific) and Lady(Righfully) of Winterfell. Lrdzz (talk) 00:51, June 29, 2016 (UTC)lrdzz
- Jon legally, rightfully, or by inheritance do NOT have any claim on Winterfell or House Stark even AFTER he was proclaimed King in the North. Jon is not legally or rightfully a Stark. You yourself said "in my opinion." In the show Sansa is still the Lady of Winterfell, according to HBO's GOT Viewer's Guide, because she is a Stark. Jon is a Bastard, which strips him of all entitlements to the Stark name and titles even after he became King in the North. He's more of an unofficial lord of House Stark, Sansa is the official Lady/Lord. He's not King of the Trident, because the lords of the Riverlands nor Jon himself claimed to be so. "King in the North" is not interchangeable with Stark, especially if the claimant's name isn't Stark. He's House Stark's King but he's not their lord, he doesn't have the Stark name, that's why Lyanna Mormont specifically acknowledged his bastard status. If Gendry was King of the seven kingdoms he cant legally or rightfully claim "I'm lord of the Stormlands too" if Shireen Baratheon is present and is trueborn; He'll be her King, but not the lord of her house. Jon can be King of the North without being the Lord of Winterfell, House Stark, or the Stark name, and he is.--Kai200995 (talk) 02:02, June 29, 2016 (UTC)
- The last king of the North(Robb) had the title of king of the Trident when he died, so the sucessor keeps the same titles, even if the title is being constested with another kingdom or doesnt exist anymore, the title remains until the next king decides to drop it.(In theory any sucessor of the throne of the North could use this argument too usurp Trident Throne)
- Being bastard is irrelevant after being legitimizated, and yes he was legitimizated has a Stark,otherwise he could never be claimed King of The North by the other lords of the North, since they all have oath only to the Starks,they could never claim no one else without breaking that oath, so for them to claim Jon Snow and not break their oath with the house Stark, Jon must be officialy recognized as a Stark..
- and once he is Stark plus King in The North,that makes him to have the strongest claim to the Lordship of the house,even upon the former heirs.
- By the way, thats your opinion too, since GRRM didnt clarified this matter.Lrdzz (talk) 03:02, June 29, 2016 (UTC)Lrdzz
- I'm not basing my point on my opinion. A bastard can't claim a House, unless the trueborn heirs are all dead. Jon is named "The White Wolf" because that is the sigil of a bastard of House Stark. Officially, Sansa is the head of House Stark, because she carries the name. Rightfully, Bran is the head of House Stark and Lord of Winterfell. Robb was King of the Trident, because he was a Tully, and House Tully with the Riverlords proclaimed him King. Jon can't inherit that title. He can't inherit the name Stark, unless he chooses to legitimize himself. Jon was not legitimized, which is what you're basing your argument on. However, I will admit he's an unofficial lord of House Stark because he's effectively making decisions of the house with Sansa. He's a "de facto" lord of the House, if anything.--Kai200995 (talk) 11:29, June 29, 2016 (UTC)
- Jon was not legitimised so he can't be the head of House Stark. The Lords were declaring him King in the North despite his bastard status. King in the North and Lord of Winterfell/House Stark do not need to go hand in hand, and not only do the Lords still refer to him as Jon Snow, all official guides (e.g. the HBO viewer guides) state his name as Jon Snow, not Jon Stark. Technically, Jon can legitimise himself as a Stark, but he has not done so (and I honestly don't think he would, but my personal opinion is irrelevant), so unless he does, he is not the "official" head of House Stark, Sansa is. (Tyjet92 (talk) 16:39, June 29, 2016 (UTC))
Disagree? Let's Vote!
There's an ongoing discussion of the head/lord of House Stark. Here's the thread link: http://gameofthrones.wikia.com/wiki/Thread:47132#16. Add some input, there's a poll too for those who love voting. Admins, there's an edit war, your involvement in the thread is recommended. --Kai200995 (talk) 15:39, June 30, 2016 (UTC)
The Free Folk specifically refused vassalage, and House Arryn is a separate great house with its own lands. Note that Tormund stood by passively when Jon was declared King in the North. --CrappyScrap 23:01, July 1, 2016 (UTC)
Can Houses Umber and Karstark be updated on the House Stark page? As of season 7 they've re-declared their allegiance to House Stark. --Jman321 10:23, July 17, 2017
Official status post-Season 6 finale
I've finally managed to work through the other pages that needed updating, and to sift through the thousands of post-finale edits. The back and forth arguments about this only slowed down the time it took to turn our full attention to this and were not helping. I started working on the season finale article, then the Jon Snow article, then the family trees, and this took a few days. The House Stark status isn't impossible, I simply didn't get to turn my attention to it yet; now, as if this was what I focused on first Sunday night:
- Jon Snow says he expects Sansa to be declared "Lady of Winterfell", but doesn't really explain how he intends to handle the Kingdom of the North now - they're obviously not going back to the south.
- Jon Snow then gets hailed as King in the North ahead of Sansa as Queen.
- Not only the Riverlands, but the Vale hail Jon as King. Strictly speaking "the Kingdom of the North" in ancient times was just "the North", not even the Riverlands, so it makes about as much sense - or at least, Robb set the precedent that their new "Kingdom of the North" in fact includes quite a bit more than that.
- Robb never really explained how he was going to divide up rule of the Riverlands. The Riverlords just hailed him as "King of the Trident" like a dual title.
- Unknown to all, Bran Stark is still alive, who has a better claim than Jon or Sansa, and he's heading south.
- Unknown to all, Jon Snow is actually Lyanna's son, making him rank behind even Sansa; he also ranks behind Bran even if Jon is legitimized and treated as older than Bran.
- Screw the line of succession, it's a legal fiction. Where was Robert Baratheon in the line of succession when he took the Iron Throne?
- The HBO Viewer's Guide still labels Sansa "Lady of Winterfell", albeit the website might not have been updated.
- The current succession of House Tyrell and House Frey, and to an extent House Martell, is also very uncertain in the TV series.
- If you think about it, succession to all major regions in the Seven Kingdoms is in dispute now: The Stormlands/Crownlands are gone with Tommen (seized directly by the Lannisters?), the Starks in the North are in an odd position, the Greyjoys are in a civil war, the Freys are in chaos, etc. and the Lannisters to an extent (though Tyrion is now returning saying he's the real heir as he outranks Cersei because she's female. In truth, the only ones not in dispute are the Vale (Sweetrobin Arryn is a minor but no one disputes his claim) and House Tully (defeated, but the captive Edmure is indisputably their lord).
The only solution is to make a provisional, placeholder statement, and note that the situation is simply unclear until Season 7.
The provisional answer will simply be this:
- Bran Stark is listed as the rightful heir, but with a note that everyone thinks he's probably dead.
- Due to the HBO Viewer's Guide still listing Sansa as Lady of Winterfell, and combined with the fact that even the Vale has declared for Jon at this point, Jon's position as "King in the North" will be treated as separate from his position as "Lord of Winterfell", not ex officio. Sansa rules "Winterfell", Sweetrobin Arryn rules "The Eyrie and the Vale", Edmure Tully nominally rules the Riverlands if they reclaim them.
- Sansa is listed as Jon's heir to the Kingdom of the North.
- We outright make a subsection explaining this and just link to it.
- Correction: Jon is not the King of the Vale. The Vale declares support for Jon against his enemies. Major difference. --CrappyScrap 22:38, July 4, 2016 (UTC)
House Arryn as a Stark vassal
I won't start another discussion about why the article is locked, as it never seems to lead anywhere, but can someone please remove House Arryn from the list of Stark vassals? Thanks... --CrappyScrap 00:40, July 9, 2016 (UTC)
- Also, House Mazin is still a vassal to House Stark. Not sure why it's marked as a former vassal. The Mazins even fought for the Starks at the Battle of the Bastards. Reddyredcp (talk) 01:14, July 9, 2016 (UTC)
Please unlock it
If one user edit warring is enough to get an article locked, there is something seriously wrong about the locking policy on this wiki. Penalize the users that are edit warring, not the whole community. This lock is completely unneccessary and should end at once. --CrappyScrap 02:30, July 9, 2016 (UTC)
- ...and why the hell has the blocking administrator blocked her own talk page so only administrators can post there? Is this even allowed? --CrappyScrap 02:35, July 9, 2016 (UTC)
- Xanderen and Ser Shield McShield are also admins besides me, Dragon, and QueenBuffy. She has locked her page because she's taking a break for personal and we hope you respect that. Just a week ago we had a harasser who wasn't an anon or a new user but an established user who got a bit obsessive and then a sockpuppet. If the article was locked its not because a single edit war but a constant discussion over who is the head of the house despite not even the show settling the issue.--Gonzalo84 (talk) 23:42, July 9, 2016 (UTC)
- Ah, I see. Well it sucks that you guys had to go through all that. You must understand that I (and basically every other user here) do not mean to disrespect or purposefully harass the admins here. We are simple contributors who - when they see an error on a page - get frustrated when we can't fix that error as the page is locked. Lord Sharky (talk) 23:54, July 9, 2016 (UTC)
- Gonzalo84, thanks for the explanation and for unlocking the article. I don't at all mind inactive administrators locking their own talk pages, but as long as they're active, they should be able to get in touch with. That being said, harassment is something nobody should have to deal with, and I completely understand why she would want to shield herself from stalkers. --CrappyScrap 01:14, July 10, 2016 (UTC)
House Seaworth as a Vassel
Davos Seaworth did swear Jon Snow in his coronation as King in the North. He's still a head of a House despite appearances. AnonymousAnomaly 23:17, July 9, 2016 (UTC)
- NO. House Seaworth isn't treated as a "faction" in this context, with men and such.--The Dragon Demands (talk) 01:12, July 10, 2016 (UTC)
- Vassal Houses don't JUST imply "factions", its also fealty and alliances as well. Should the same apply for House Lannister serving as a Vassal to House Targaryen because Tyrion (who, like Davos, is one man) sweared fealty to Daenerys? .AnonymousAnomaly 02:47, July 10, 2016 (UTC)
- Tyrion is not the head of House Lannister. He swears fealty to Daenerys, but Mad Queen Cersei does not. And since she is the head of House Lannister, the Lannisters are not pledged to House Targaryen (that would also be impossible, since House Lannister is now the ruling Royal House of the Seven Kingdoms). Davos is the lord of House Seaworth and since he swears fealty to Jon Snow (and in turn, House Stark), House Seaworth is a vassal of the Starks, although their stronghold, Cape Wrath, is located in the Stormlands. Lord Sharky (talk) 10:18, July 10, 2016 (UTC)
- Yet the question remains: WHY was House Seaworth removed from the webpage's list of Vassal Houses? (found in the infobox) AnonymousAnomaly 07:02, July 11, 2016 (UTC)
- 'Cuz it's one dude. --CrappyScrap 08:15, July 11, 2016 (UTC)
- Well then it should be considered more formal to be acknowledged as a vassal for the sake of context. Even adding (Under Davos) at the end would still make sense than just outright ignoring it. 18.104.22.168 13:07, July 11, 2016 (UTC)
No it wouldn't. The entire "vassals" section refers to Houses - factions and territory. Davos would be a member of his household at best or an ally, but not a "vassal" - those never refer to individuals.--The Dragon Demands (talk) 13:48, July 11, 2016 (UTC)
It's been about four months since the last time this request was put in. I can understand the Jon Snow article being put on indefinite lockdown for now, but does the same need to be done for this article? And if so, can an admin add that at the top? Otherwise, could we get this article unlocked please? Thanks. Reddyredcp (talk) 23:19, November 6, 2016 (UTC)
Can you just unlock it for a second so I can fix a RedLink?
The links are fixed. House Stark is locked because there have been too many fights over if Jon Snow is the head of House Stark or just King in the North ruling from Winterfell. We need some clarification that should happen in Season 7.
In the first episode of Season 7, during a meeting amongst the Northern Lords, Alys Karstark and Ned Umber, both swear their and their houses loyalty to House Stark. So I think this should be fixed. Also, it would appear that Jon Snow is now the Lord of Winterfell. All of the Northern Lords and even Maester Wolkan are treating Jon like he is the Lord of Winterfell. This is obviously up for debate but Houses Karstark and Umber are both loyal vassal houses now so they should be added to the list of vassal houses.
- For what it's worth, now that this is all cleared up, I really think that the House Stark article should be unlocked. Reddyredcp (talk) 06:35, July 31, 2017 (UTC)
The remaining Stark children are "not" princes and princesses
I think there's enough empirical evidence now to suggest that, rather than House Stark becoming a monarch house in and of itself - Jon as an individual has been named King in the North. Sansa has been addressed as "Lady Sansa" by the guards in Winterfell, not "Princess" or "Princess Sansa". Likewise, Sansa expected Bran would become Lord of Winterfell. This isn't her backstabbing Jon or anything - rather the title of "Lord or Lady of Winterfell" still exists in the current hierarchy of the North. So Sansa is currently "Lady of Winterfell", not a princess, same with Arya and Bran. --Mandon (talk) 17:15, July 31, 2017 (UTC)
- I have to disagree, you can still be a King and have the title as lord at the same time. For instance, the title of the King on the Iron Throne is also listed as Lord of the Seven Kingdoms . In Season 2, Catelyn Stark points out that Robb is "Lord of Winterfell" and "King in the North".Iwould imagine it is the same case for Sansa, since she is ruling as Lady of Winterfell in Jon's place. PeytoncZoran (talk) 18:41, August 10, 2017 (UTC)
Is that what he was suggesting? Sansa is the permanent Lady of Winterfell because Winterfell belongs to House Stark, of which Jon is a bastard of. Robb was able to hold both titles, yes, but Sansa holds one title and Jon the other, which isn't conflicting. Now, in Jon's absence, Sansa is the regent of the North. Reddyredcp (talk) 21:13, August 10, 2017 (UTC)
Question: is Bran still "a Prince"? He was in Season 2.
I do hope the next 3 episodes say something. It would waste time to argue about this now, after the finale we'll weigh what evidence we have.
House Stark Update Please
- Bran Stark abdicated his claim on House Stark's lordship of Winterfell - he is no longer a considered lord to House Stark.
- Sansa now officially and rightfully hold the title Lord of Winterfell and is Regent of The North & Jon acknowledges her as a Stark as a precedent for making her Regent. Jon also rules under the Stark banner.
- So I think it is safe to list Jon AND Sansa as lord of House Stark and Arya as the heir to House Stark - Arya is Sansa heir and she will remain the heir if Jon dies and Sansa inherit his title.Kai200995 (talk) 02:41, August 2, 2017 (UTC)
The military strength stuff is entirely unsourced. Various numbers - "45,000", "16,000", "20,000 men from the Vale" - all of this is entirely made up. It should be amended.Vympel (talk) 06:30, August 12, 2017 (UTC)
- Yeah I agree, there has not been any specification on how many knights of the Vale there really are, but most of these sources are taken from the books. However, we know for a fact that there around 10,000 northmen to fight. Until there is a specific military count for the knights of the Vale, I'd say to leave that at an unknown number of Knights. PeytoncZoran (talk) 00:04, August 15, 2017 (UTC)