Talk:Horse worship

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Equine, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of articles relating to horses, asses, zebras, hybrids, equine health, equine sports, etc. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at the barn.
Start	This page has been rated as Start-Class on the quality assessment scale
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance assessment scale

[edit] References?

I get precisely one hit for the word hippolatry on Google, and that is as a proposed word:

There is evidence of horse worship in numerous ancient cultures, particularly in early Indo-European cultures. There does not, however, seem to be a word for it. The proposed "hippolatry" is.. (http://www.panikon.com/phurba/articles/propose.html)

This proposed word is found in between "Emetomancy - "Divination by Means of Vomit."" and "Hoplolagnia - "Sex Play Involving Guns.""

Given this, it would be wise to cite some additional sources and references. If they don't come, it is possible the article will be listed for deletion.

I have no quarrel with an article on the significance of the horse to the Celts, or with an article on horse worship generally, if we don't already have one on Wikipedia. It's the word itself that I am querying.

Telsa 16:55, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

Suggesting the article might be listed for deletion is absurd. At most, it should be renamed to "Horse Worship" or "Hippo-latry" if there is no evidence for "Hippolatry" in the OED. There is no need for an AfD on this subject.--Nicodemus75 17:22, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

Moved to "horse worship" and removed references to "hippolatry" in the article. The lack of any evidence for this word being in actual accepted use means that Wikipedia would effectively introducing a new word into common usage, which is not what we do. Give this one some time. I've removed the lead section though, since I felt that stating "Horse worship is the worship of horses" is insulting the intelligence of our readers somewhat. Chriscf 12:07, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, Chris. The other thing that still concerns me is the referencing and verifiability. I see that Nicodemus imported a collection of references as I was writing my original comment (when it was still a hippolatry page). These are the references, down to the last page, from the Epona article. They were not there when I originally looked: that's why I commented on their lack. But are they really the same references for this article? Right down to pages 190-205 of one book? I ask in part because the etymology given on this page for the name Epona is not the same as that given on the Epona page. How can the same references give different etymologies? (I do see that they are related, but this page's one seems far less detailed and precise.) Some footnoting might help, perhaps. I hope the original author of the article returns and sees this discussion: s/he can help us out then! --Telsa 12:19, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Reference relevance

I am still wondering why the reference list is cut and pasted from that on Epona right down to page numbers. Is User:Nicodemus75 still around on Wikipedia to explain? I think it is less misleading to remove them, so that we have a clearly unsourced article for now. Telsa 15:35, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

User:Nicodemus75 says Do not bother leaving any messages here. I do not read this page - THIS MEANS YOU. so, I guess not. The page is clearly a neopagan cut and paste job.

The references list is clearly bogus. I am the major contributor to the Epona page and added most of the references there. The etymology on this page is not completely correct and is unreferenced. There are numerous errors throughout. I was previously unaware of this page, and will improve it now I know about it. --Nantonos 04:59, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Chronology

Its not clear how the mediaeval Rhiannon and macha are evidence of horse worship "before Epona"! Where does the "bronze age" start date come from? --Nantonos 05:02, 5 December 2005 (UTC)