Talk:Miriam
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Ancient Egypt, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Egyptological subjects. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit the article attached to this page (see Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ for more information). | ||
| Start | This article has been rated as start-Class on the Project's quality scale. | ||
What's the best thing to do with the asteroid link at the bottom? Avocado 01:06, Apr 8, 2005 (UTC)
- You could create a disambiguation page. See for example London, on how it's done. Welcome, btw, it looks like you're new. Keep up the good work. : ) --MPerel( talk | contrib) 01:18, Apr 8, 2005 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Reed Sea?
Reed Sea (found in the newer versions of the Bible); Red Sea was a translation error from the Hebrew language recently corrected.
Does anyone have a reference for this? I've never heard of the Reed Sea.
- Try the Sea of Reeds. If it's not already mentioned in the Red Sea article, it should be. -- Avocado 05:36, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Move
I moved this back to Miriam, as the move to Miriam (Bible) seemed unnecessary. We don't write Muhammad (Islam) or Jesus (Christianity). SlimVirgin (talk) 04:16, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Merge Snow-white Miriam Article in
Propose merging the Snow-white Miriam article into this one, with a redirect. The Snow-White Miriam article covers one incident in Miriam's life, not a different subject. --Shirahadasha 06:28, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
- Merging the article in would cause it to basically dominate this one. Maybe it needs a paragraph summary and a link to the full article. The discussion there of various interpretations of the incident doesn't deserve to be cut from Wikipedia, but also doesn't seem to me to be really appropriate for this article about the character herself (it's mostly about Jewish law, with some parts that are more about Zipporah than Miriam). --Avocado 11:56, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Discussion on deletion/merger of Snow-white Miriam
A proposal to delete or merge Snow-white Miriam into this article is currently going on on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Snow-white Miriam. Please express your opinion there. --Shirahadasha 03:30, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
- The result of that AfD was to merge Snow-white Miriam into Miriam. Anyone can feel free to perform the merge at any time and make Snow-white Miriam a redirect. —Mets501 (talk) 02:33, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Maria Prophetissa
Is it worth adding anything about the fact that Miriam is regarded as being Maria Prophetissa, the mysterious figure to whom the secrets of Alchemy were given? Esotericists see her as being as important as Moses in the transmission of mystical secrets. See the link Mary the Jewess. ThePeg 15:10, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
- These are completely different people who happen to have the same first name, so there's no reason to have a mention about one in an article about the other. It may, however, be appropriate to have a disambiguation page. --Shirahadasha 02:50, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Snow White Miriam section
- Dreadful tabloid name. Suggest renaming to Miriam's leprosy
- Why is this section (about people who have been dead for thousands of years) written in present tense?
- Is the paragraph about questioning Moses' authority Original Research? Is there a textual basis for this? --Dweller 16:38, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
Regarding the name, it comes from Richard Friedman's book so it is sourced. I don't particularly like the name either, but it was found earlier to have some notability. Regarding the paragraph on Moses' authority, your point is well taken. The story is in the present tense because the source, Richard Elliott Friedman, uses this tense. (See e.g. "In this story, Aaron and Miriam speak against Moses regarding his wife, and God personally reprimands them" on p. 76 of Who Wrote the Bible). I speculate that Professor Friedman may use the present tense in an aorist or "indefinite" sense to reflect his view that this is "story" which is better described in the manner of a piece of literature (where present tense is common for narratives) and not in the manner of historical accounts which take place at particular times, but be that as it may the approach reflects the source. Sections on more traditional views use the past tense to reflect the traditional view that the events involved are historical and take place within actual time. I also clarified the challenge was to "exclusive" authority and cited the relevant verse. Feel free to propose something more appropriate, but the result should reflect Richard Friedman's view as this is currently the only source for the "Snow White Miriam" concept. --Shirahadasha 19:16, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
- If the section dealt more generally with the story of Miriam's leprosy (the Bible being a bigger seller than Richard Friedman, whoever he is) it could then include a small note about this theory, which would be a better reflection of the relative importance of the subject matter. There's also no need to ape daft prose technique in our encyclopedia, except when we directly quote. --Dweller 09:39, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Paragraph 2
Which baby, which river and which pharoh? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.77.154.214 (talk) 21:27, 23 January 2007 (UTC).
