User talk:Goldenrowley
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
/archive (001) June, 2006 - November 30, 2006
Contents |
[edit] Great work
 |
The Original Barnstar | |
| Very, very good job on stub sorting, this award is a token of your hard and very much needed work. Cheers!__Seadog ♪ 13:53, 2 December 2006 (UTC) |
-
- Thanks! Even though I don't use userboxes :P I would love to part of the project. I have a great love for mythology of all kinds...as it is very interesting. If you need my help or want me to do something please let me know. Cheers!__Seadog ♪ 23:20, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Thanks :)
Hey, thanks for the Barnstar for Mythology! I haven't been working on it much lately (end of semester craziness) but hope to get back to it soon. It's a long-standing interest of mine and I've learned SO MUCH from working on the hotlist topics. --Bookgrrl 17:24, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Triple deities
What was it that you wanted sourced? The article is really just a pointer to articles on more specific topics that (I hope) source their details. I don't think the article is providing any "facts" that need to be sourced (I guess it could source that triple deities even exist in myth at all, but that seems kind of pointless given that each of the articles it refers to will/should already provide such sourcing. It's just a list, really. Maybe it should even be renamed to List of triple deities]]. Maybe you can tell me what you're after, and I'll see what I can dig up. — SMcCandlish [talk] [contrib] ツ 13:46, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
- Hi, in answer to your question, I think this article has a lot of potential to be popular (and highly used) under the categoory of religion and mythological archetypes and could be expanded. Where did the trinity/triune definitions come from? That could be the source for the introduction. What souce said this is a "mythological archetype" (if any)? This is to enhance and validate the article. Thank you! Goldenrowley 02:13, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Ojibwe and Algonkin
I noticed you removed the merge tags on Michabo and Algonquin mythology. These articles are part of a larger discussion we're having at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America/Anishinaabe. I'm of an opinion that the word Algonquian is really only useful in linguistics, but it is often confused with Algonquin, which is a specific tribe that lives in Quebec and is part of the larger group of Anishinaabe peoples along with the Ojibwe(Chippewa). I wouldn't support an article on Algonquian mythology as the differences between Cree and Powhatan, Blackfoot and Abenaki are too vast. However, Chippewa mythology and Algonquin mythology could conceivably come under the umbrella of Anishinaabe mythology. I invite you to comment at this talk page. Leo1410 04:37, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
- Thank you for letting me know. I have just paused on making the Algonquin mythology stub and responded to your team on their talk page. One mythology article per ethnic group works very well in California, while I am not that familiar with Canadian First Nations. Goldenrowley 05:09, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] WikiProject mythology
Don't know how/why I didn't get my name onto Wikipedia:WikiProject_Mythology when you invited me on my talk page a few months back, but now I'm there. Belated thanks, and looking forward to continuing to spread mythinformation ;) --Bookgrrl 00:03, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Beowulf
Dear Goldenrowley, I disagree with you labelling Beowulf mythological. The other characters surrounding him are held to be semi-legendary or semi-historical. If you call him "legendary" I would not oppose it.--Berig 09:40, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
- About category selection: I don't understand why he can't be both a legendary king and mythological king at the same time? I think he is also a mythological king of the dark ages as he went beyond legend of an ordinary man to become the allegory of 'kingship' who faught with monsters and dragons. I just read a chapter on Beowulf in the book "Storytelling & Mythmaking: Images from Film & Literature" by Frank McConnell: McConnell who gives Beowulf as the example of the epic King and mythological king because of the allegorical performed to the people making the world safe from chaos. I put this on the talk page for people to discuss. Goldenrowley 19:25, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
- Sure, if you insist on categorizing him as mythological, you can do that. I am not impossible. My reasons for objecting to it is the fact that Scandinavian kings from the 6th century and onwards enter the realm of semi-historicity. Hygelac is widely accepted as based on a historic figure, and the contemporary Swedish king Ohthere is often called the "first historic king of Sweden". You can find older scholarship where Beowulf is held to have been a historic figure as well. Moreover, AFAIK, legend is distinguished from myth due to the fact that legend takes place in real world settings, and was at the time it was composed held to be almost historical if not outright historical, like Beowulf.--Berig 19:34, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- Ok I am not impossible either so I like to give it time for thought before doing more. Historical people and events can become mythological, see King Arthur. On kings, there are going to be grey areas between legend and myth. Goldenrowley 19:50, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
-
