User talk:Bloodofox/Archive II

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents

Editor's Barnstar

The Editor's Barnstar
I award User:Bloodofox the Editor's Barnstar for his valiant efforts to keep irrelevant, unsourced and subtrivial material out of our articles. Haukur 14:13, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Polytheism Portal, or something?

I was noticing we have a Wicca portal on WP, but not a Neopagan one. As many Reconstructionist traditions are not all that comfortable with being identified as Neopagan (even if it is a technically accurate descriptor), I'm wondering if there would be any interest in putting together a Polytheism portal? Perhaps it could cover both ancient, traditional and reconstructionist polytheistic traditions? Or is that too broad? Anyone interested on working on such a thing? My WP time is limited right now - I'm very busy with offline work - but I would be interested in participating in putting something like that together, if there's enough interest. Thoughts? - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 21:35, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Hello Kathryn. A broad polytheism portal is probably a good idea. It's actually fairly surprising that there isn't one already. As you know, I am primarily interested in Germanic paganism and editing articles of this nature, as well as surrounding subjects. I am afraid I would of be of limited help for such a project due to time constraints and lack of interests in some of the surrounding subjects but I will help out when I can. :bloodofox: 21:49, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Your restructuring

Bloodofox, I usually approve of your edits, but this is an edit I completely disagree with[1]. You seem to have singled out the information that there were numerous Norns and virtually hid it on the bottom of the page and attribute it solely to the reliable source Nordisk familjebok. The information that there were numerous Norns is completely mainstream and appears in both the Poetic Edda and the Prose Edda. If there is any piece of information that deserves to be treated like that it is the probably classic influence of the trinity of norns.--Berig 05:53, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

PS, do not get hung up on the distinction bad/good. The pagans could see the difference between good and bad events, and benevolence vs. malevolence, but they did not attribute them to separate powers like Christians do.--Berig 06:10, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Berig, I realize in retrospect that I made something of a mess of the article when trying to defuse it of terms such as "good" and "evil." I also didn't intend to hide anything so to say but instead to single out information specifically referencing the Nordisk familjebok so that it would appear more distinctly in the table of contents rather than hidden in the references. It's only at the bottom because it's considerably newer than the rest of the stuff. I appreciate you taking the time to through and improve on my edits and catching my mistakes here.
I also meant to ask you if you know how to make templates? If so, would you be interested in making a Nine Worlds template with maybe subchapters showing different realms and halls? I would do it myself but I am having a hard time understanding how to make templates for some reason. It would be a good visual means of navigating Yggdrasil. :bloodofox: 13:23, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
I make templates the easy way. What I do is to create a link in a sandbox page, like Template:Nine Worlds. Then I copy and paste an older template like Template:Odin or Template:NorseMythology into it and test my way to a version that I am pleased with. In other templates and in articles, such as color you can find the colour codes you need for the last touch. When you are done, you only need to add {{Nine Worlds}} to the articles where you want the template. If you want to you can make a try, and then ask me again if you want me to make one for you.--Berig 15:41, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
I appreciate the help, I will toy with this when I get some more free time and hopefully make something of it! :bloodofox: 07:03, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Hypotheses

Hello Mr. Editor. Wikipedia is against WP:OR and POV, so please do not add or spread hypotheses. Please keep the hypothesis of Gullveig and Freyja at its main article (Gullveig) where it can be discussed, and do not add it as one of Freyja's names, until it is confirmed or proven with facts and mythical sources. Thank you. 203.210.241.128 11:43, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Hello anonymous editor. The source is given and it's a widely discussed hypothesis. It's worth noting on the article for Freyja, regardless if you agree with it or not. Thanks. :bloodofox: 13:53, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

You messed up the article

Look at it ;( And I only did ONE revert

And your edits are ugly

Main article: Gullveig#Potential_connections_to_Freyja

A hypothesis supported by Gabriel Turville-Petre[1] is that Gullveig, a name given to a female seeress mentioned in the Völuspá is yet another name for Freyja due to a number of parallels between the two.

^ what's with the # _ _ _ thingies??

And this hypothesis is the POV of a guy who died a century ago, and now it is still a hypothesis?

I am stupid. Please tell me how that gullveig who was joy of evil women and killed by gods 3 times became a principle goddess, and how she lived happily with them after being killed 3 times? And Freyja was also mentioned in that poem as Odr's wife, wasn't she? How did the executed Gullveig become Odr's wife who the gods love? err, if they don't love her, they should have given her to the giants, right?

I re-added that >100-year-old hypothesis, so it's ok now, eh? All happy, no grudge, eh? I don't see why you should be so worked up over it. Are you Gullveig's descendant? You edits had funny things like # _ _ _ , and what's "female seeress"? Is there a male seeress?

Hmm... can I be your friend? I like anime and cute girls. I hope this is not considered vandalism :p

First of all, if this is your first account, welcome to Wikipedia. Secondly, the link, which you refer to as "ugly," is simple Wikipedia code that takes users to a specific page. Third, we report on the notable "POV's" of others here as long as it's referenced. The theory about Gullveig and Freyja is not uncommon at all.
It's not our place to speculate anything. We simply cite references here. If you want to try to place cohesiveness into the Eddas, Sagas and the various historical forms of the Germanic deities, you're in for a hard time. It would be wise of you to familiarize yourself with the figure of Wōdanaz, for example.
Lastly, you will have a hard time being taken seriously by other editors after referring to them as "boy" in your edit summaries. :bloodofox: 08:35, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

druids and neo-druids

I'm also thinking some recategorisation is in order. See [[Category:Druidry]] and [[Category:Druids]]. I'm going to start [[Category:Neo-druids]], but will only have a few moments to start re-categorising the articles tonight. - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 00:35, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

"More successful"

Hi Bloodofox, I see that you continue your great work on paganism. I noticed that you have removed a piece of text asking how things like that can find their way into articles[2]. The reason why it was there is because "White Christ and his retinue" were successful in the sense that their religion was taking over in Northern Europe. It was a way of presenting why Christianity seemed interesting to people who were used to believing in Odin and Thor, and it was in no way intended to devalorize the old faith.--Berig 17:13, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Hello Berig! I tend to be particularly critical of the articles involving Christianization because they can very easily have a pro-Christianization slant due to either editors with this particular viewpoint or presentation of the source material in a less than neutral way. If you added this, I apologize, as I respect your edits. However, I think some rewording is in order for such a statement to give a clearer picture. :bloodofox: 23:50, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
and I respect your edits, but it is I who should apologize for inadvertently writing in a way that made you take offense. I won't reinsert the info because it was not that important.--Berig 14:44, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the courtesy, as always Berig! :} :bloodofox: 06:51, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Rune stones

Thanks for giving me feedback on the rune stone articles. I am glad that you appreciate my work.--Berig 05:36, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Der Blutharsch

I'm going to have to ask you to find sources for describing Der Blutharsch as "psychedelic rock". I question describing them as not neo-folk simply for departing from military themes. And I can't even fathom how some one could lump them in with psychedelic rock. (I'm listening to Time is Thee Enemy! now, and it sounds like Der Blutharsch sounds... - BalthCat 02:02, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

It's a self-descriptor that is pretty applicable to the direction Julius has been taking the project for some time, see:[3]. I would call very little, if anything, Der Blutharsch has done as "neofolk" - most of it very firmly sits in the martial industrial category. :bloodofox: 04:44, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
Explain "self-descriptor"? He uses this term himself? In interviews? Please link to them, as that would be at least some source. Thanks - BalthCat 21:26, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
To summarize, Julius describes himself as thus on his myspace in the "genres" bracket- which I've linked you to above - (and elsewhere that I can't seem to recall at the moment) and there you have it. :bloodofox: 00:34, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
Sorry, I completely missed that link! I'm admittedly pretty ignorant of Myspace, so I hadn't come across that. That's certainly enough to at least placate me, though I'm not sure the word sits well with me personally... I imagine perhaps I have a personal bias that makes me think hippies when I see "psychedelic". Not that I mind hippies, I just don't see hippies and DB hand in hand. Thanks for your patience. - BalthCat 04:53, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Grottasöngr

Hi Bloodofox! I believe that you made a mistake in the article Grottasöngr. AFAIK, the poem is only found in the Prose Edda, but like some other poems that were not originally part of the Poetic Edda, it is included in some modern editions.--Berig 11:33, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Hey Berig! My copy of the Prose Edda just has, well, prose about it but my copy of the Poetic Edda has the song. Neither of them say anything about where it should be, so I just assumed that, like other songs and poems referenced by Snorri in the Prose Edda, it was simply a part of the Poetic Edda. It was lacking a song write up anyway so we can probably still get some use out of it if it turns out you're right. :bloodofox: 12:02, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
I was partly wrong. When Norse mythology is concerned, Nordisk familjebok is a great source. It says here that Grottasöngr is not part of the Codex Regius, but that it appears in later manuscripts. Therefore Grottasöngr appears as an appendix to editions of the Poetic Edda. It is not part of the Poetic Edda, but no change is needed to the structure you made in the article.--Berig 15:36, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for keeping an eye out, Berig. We should definitely make note about what you've mentioned here in the article. :bloodofox: 23:36, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
I have since updated the article to reflect the information you brought to light. :bloodofox: 02:48, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

This might interest you.--Berig 07:26, 30 October 2007 (UTC)