SMcCandlish (talk | contribs) m →Same issues as before: merging dup. topics |
SMcCandlish (talk | contribs) attrib; heading fixes; replies |
||
Line 105: | Line 105: | ||
As of now first introductory line of the article is as follows: |
As of now first introductory line of the article is as follows: |
||
⚫ | |||
:It's not necessary to record edits on the talk page. That's what the [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Poles_in_mythology&action=history page history] is for. <span style="white-space:nowrap;font-family:'Trebuchet MS'"> — [[User:SMcCandlish|'''SMcCandlish''' ☺]] [[User talk:SMcCandlish|☏]] [[Special:Contributions/SMcCandlish|¢]] ≽<sup>ʌ</sup>ⱷ҅<sub>ᴥ</sub>ⱷ<sup>ʌ</sup>≼ </span> 12:21, 23 October 2015 (UTC) |
|||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
As far as my personal study goes all poles being discussed across world faiths, cultures and religions in past and in present are not necessarilly central poles. The poles are used in front of or inside of houses and temples too. So over a period of time we need to look for improvement in this aspect. |
As far as my personal study goes all poles being discussed across world faiths, cultures and religions in past and in present are not necessarilly central poles. The poles are used in front of or inside of houses and temples too. So over a period of time we need to look for improvement in this aspect. |
||
[[User:Mahitgar|Mahitgar]] ([[User talk:Mahitgar|talk]]) 04:12, 3 October 2015 (UTC) |
[[User:Mahitgar|Mahitgar]] ([[User talk:Mahitgar|talk]]) 04:12, 3 October 2015 (UTC) |
||
⚫ | |||
:Maybe. The potential problem here is that "a long piece of wood that might be associated in some way with ceremony or ritual" is not really a topic; it's [[WP:NOR|original research]] to equate every dissimilar use of a lengthy piece of rigid plant material, across every culture in the world. The holding of ritual/ceremonial functions {{em|around}} a central pole, however, is similar enough cross-culturally that it can be generalized about, without making up anything, jumping to any questionable conclusions, or mistaking something outside but nearby a ritual/ceremony as being intrinsically part of it. "Correlation is not causation", as it were. <span style="white-space:nowrap;font-family:'Trebuchet MS'"> — [[User:SMcCandlish|'''SMcCandlish''' ☺]] [[User talk:SMcCandlish|☏]] [[Special:Contributions/SMcCandlish|¢]] ≽<sup>ʌ</sup>ⱷ҅<sub>ᴥ</sub>ⱷ<sup>ʌ</sup>≼ </span> 12:21, 23 October 2015 (UTC) |
|||
⚫ | |||
Pole celebrations , festivities and devotions are obsrved from north to south and from east to west almost on all continents either in past or present so it would be better that first sentence highlites this global aspect. |
Pole celebrations , festivities and devotions are obsrved from north to south and from east to west almost on all continents either in past or present so it would be better that first sentence highlites this global aspect. |
||
Line 118: | Line 121: | ||
[[User:Mahitgar|Mahitgar]] ([[User talk:Mahitgar|talk]]) 04:26, 3 October 2015 (UTC) |
[[User:Mahitgar|Mahitgar]] ([[User talk:Mahitgar|talk]]) 04:26, 3 October 2015 (UTC) |
||
:Agreed, but it's also not necessary to cram a list of every case into the lead either. An example or two from major cultures on each continent is sufficient, if the lead even uses such an "examples" approach at all (it's not really necessary that it do so). It's probably more useful to outline the different types of ritual/ceremonial uses. However, given the [[WP:NOR|original research]] problems already apparent in the article, such an [[WP:AIES|analysis/interpretation/evaluation/synthesis]] should not be done by a Wikipedian, but taken from a [[WP:RS|reliable secondary source]] by a subject-matter expert who has already published such an analysis, under external editorial oversight. <span style="white-space:nowrap;font-family:'Trebuchet MS'"> — [[User:SMcCandlish|'''SMcCandlish''' ☺]] [[User talk:SMcCandlish|☏]] [[Special:Contributions/SMcCandlish|¢]] ≽<sup>ʌ</sup>ⱷ҅<sub>ᴥ</sub>ⱷ<sup>ʌ</sup>≼ </span> 12:21, 23 October 2015 (UTC) |
|||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
Anthropologically what it is also likely that stick/stake/pole related reverance and celebrations would have been started even before inroduction of formal concept of religion to human beings, by this narrow definition human ancestors are being put with a burden of being religious what might not have necesssarilly existed then. |
Anthropologically what it is also likely that stick/stake/pole related reverance and celebrations would have been started even before inroduction of formal concept of religion to human beings, by this narrow definition human ancestors are being put with a burden of being religious what might not have necesssarilly existed then. |
||
Line 126: | Line 131: | ||
[[User:Mahitgar|Mahitgar]] ([[User talk:Mahitgar|talk]]) 04:40, 3 October 2015 (UTC) |
[[User:Mahitgar|Mahitgar]] ([[User talk:Mahitgar|talk]]) 04:40, 3 October 2015 (UTC) |
||
:It's more that former religious practices have often become secularized in various places into move vernacular, secular folk practices. They originated in religion. Archaeology has demonstrated pretty conclusively that religion in the broad sense dates back at least to the last Ice Age. "Religion" in English doesn't mean only "centralized, organized, authoritarian, dogmatic religion with a priestly class". It includes even the most rudimentary [[animism]] and [[totemism]]. The self-identification of "[[spiritual but not religious]]" is a thoroughly modern concept. That said, because some of the religious practices have in fact become secularized, the lead should be clear about this. Just not for the "it only became religious later" rationale that you're advancing, for which there won't be any reliable sources. <span style="white-space:nowrap;font-family:'Trebuchet MS'"> — [[User:SMcCandlish|'''SMcCandlish''' ☺]] [[User talk:SMcCandlish|☏]] [[Special:Contributions/SMcCandlish|¢]] ≽<sup>ʌ</sup>ⱷ҅<sub>ᴥ</sub>ⱷ<sup>ʌ</sup>≼ </span> 12:21, 23 October 2015 (UTC) |
|||
== Is it ok to add [[Nantosuelta]] image holding a pole ? == |
== Is it ok to add [[Nantosuelta]] image holding a pole ? == |
Revision as of 12:21, 23 October 2015
This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Work under progress
There is enough encyclopedic info to have a separate article on this subject. Contribution from other wikipedians is welcome.
Mahitgar (talk) 10:24, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
"Worship"
When creating articles and redirects, make sure that the English definitions and connotations of the word really make the word "worship" the best choice. I have moved "Pole worship" to "Poles in mythology" for instance, as people don't worship poles themselves; the consecrated pole is a symbol for various concepts or spirits in the religion. - CorbieV☊☼ 17:52, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
Article information some one deleted due to PoV
Some one deleted follwing information (to which I wanted to add references one after other, I had already written on talk page that work is in progress) from the article due to personal interpretation and PoV. Pole/Stick/stake worship word have been used by authors and references are given.
All pole worships are not necessarily central poles nor necessarilly coming with mythological background either. Some tribal cultures are worshipning poles without any known religious background. Usually I get defeated in these wikipedian debates so I will not be debating the issue atleast immidiatly but this is not encouraging enough either.
(Because some one thinks that content is offensive) I dont know what is offensive in this or retained content and when content is with references and encyclopedic then why does subjective criteria of being offensive does matter ? God knows)
- Deleted portion: Since ancient times poles (many times of bamboo) are revered as sacred totem pole at the same time poles are worshiped as devine spirits, ancestor spirits or as deity in some other instances. Instances of ancient pole worship are cited in case of Mære Church in Norway, Asherah pole in Israel ...Jangseung poles in korea, Bamboo festival of Chedi as mentioned in Adiparva of Indian Epic Mahabharata are cited.
Mahitgar (talk) 18:47, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
- Dear friend, I am not only old and aquient enough of wiki culture but also have been one of the advocate of the same policies you are referring to. I have already researched this topic atleast for two years and written with references at par with WP:RS and WP:V and encyclopedic values (emphasis added) in my own language. :I do admitt that my english is not at par with standard american or british english since I am not a native speaker, unfortunately that invites initial backclash from few editors unknowingly, actually once I complete substantial phase of writing then I do on my own invite fellow wikipedians for the review of the article. Wikipedia is a continuously developing encyclopedia and can and is supposed to bear with the process and needs to allow enough breathing space for improvement process to take place, correct if I am wrong.
- While writing preferably initial paraphrasing I do write in my own words along with its inherant linguistic limitations to save my self from copyright issues. and I further improve upon it and as said above I keep inviting people to support me on linguistic aspects.
- As far as references are concerned those are already researched and available with me either in the language of my mother tounge wikipedia or are saved in my browser, and some references are available in some other en wikipedia articles too and I am updating them one by one on my own. Like you I am also involved in multiple wiki activities and articles and time taken for some relevant translations that is why it is taking time from my side.
- Now you will ask me why I have not first built the article in user sand box, the reson is my research indicates that the topic has been researched and written by various sociology and anthropological scholors in various native languages too. Besides some other language wikipedias may already have related articles or info included in some other article. So all the way my intention was to begin a stub article and find establish interwiki links and build this article collaboratively along with other language wikipedians.
- While I understand your concern, and you would not know to whom you are following is a experienced fellow or a new one but frankly you do not need to wory about encyclopedic and reference side about my writings. The real support I do need is in content research and development for which library resources or different language resources are needed. I need support in english grammar part too.
- Thanks any way for your efforts, had you been aware of all my good intentions both of us could have focussed on some different aspect, may be, but in such a large wiki community we wont know each other This article made come across each other, god willing.
- Best wishes and Rgds
- Mahitgar (talk) 06:19, 26 September 2015 (UTC)
Explanation towards difference between 'Worshipped poles' and 'Totem poles'
- Usually objective of 'Worshipped poles' are likely to include an aspect of reverence/veneration/adoration/devotion; towards a faith, religion or cultuaral celebration amongst family or community. Where as 'Worshipped poles' Totem pole objects's are not or lost any objective of reverence/veneration/adoration/devotion aspect towards faith, religion or cultuaral celebration of family or community.
- English wikipedia article notes Totem poles are monumental sculptures; where as are not necessarily monumental sculptures, In few instances worshipped poles may have significance like toem poles simmillarly in few instances totem poles are or may have been worshipped in past still Totem poles and worshipped poles leave a marked difference among themselves.
- Why this is written here and not included in article itself:
- This attempt to explanation is important in writing intro line and maintaining apropriate information in apropriate article and avoiding any likely mix-up of the concepts
- Atleast as of now this differentiation has not been seen in any reference book in exact words and for this particular article is being followed up to be precise to follow wikipedia reference policy.
Mahitgar (talk) 08:06, 26 September 2015 (UTC)
- You need to source this stuff. You've once again put in a lot of unsourced content that has many grammatical errors, and some of it is incorrect. You don't seem to understand what a totem pole is, for one, and much of the Maypole section is wrong. I'll give you some time to source this, then it's going to need cleanup. - CorbieV☊☼ 15:21, 26 September 2015 (UTC)
Hi, once again,
- First of all I am not including this section in the article, take it I am trying to understand it and you are one of the experts on the subject and you are most welcome to make me understand what is right with apropriate of references , I am open minded from my side. I am just here to take note of encyclopedic aspects of certain tradition without any PoV or conflict of intrest for that matter.
- Second just for your info what I have mentioned about totem pole in this section is, one from Totem pole article itself two I googled term 'Define "Totem pole"'
- Since I am not including this section in the article atleast i near future. This section is just a noting for kinda reference. Ofcource your difference of openion with reference is most welcome. May be I will learn some new things which I did not know.
- About may pole I will begin a new section, Letus not mix up the issues we shall go one by one, I have no reservations any where
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Mahitgar (talk • contribs) 19:44, 26 September 2015 (UTC)
May Pole
What I have added is from Maypole article itself, I thought your goodselves have added link to Maypole so you might have done some clean-up already there so I copy pasted same content here. I suppose it would not be the case that what is right in another article becomes wrong in this article. In any case part of Maypole section has relevant references already if you want to veryfy them at this juncture you are most welcome :) As said earlier I will be working on unreferenced areas too even without your follow up :)
It is also ok thit If you have some special intrest in this article you are welcome to research and develope the article. I will take break for a while from this article and come back after some months and keep you informed of my come back to this article to request your critical support. Please let me know.
Thanks and Regards
Mahitgar (talk) 19:44, 26 September 2015 (UTC)
procession of the Prangstangen
Muhr-Zederhaus: A local custom is the annual procession with Prangstangen, up to 8 m (26 ft) high wooden poles which are decorated with flowers and carried by local bachelors on the Feast of Saints Peter and Paul, June 29 into the church.
KathiKawadi tradition Translation from Marathi language to English language
Following paragraphs will be translated from marathi language to english language
विरगावची काठीकवाडी
डॉ. सुधीर राजाराम देवरे यांच्या अहिराणी लोकपरंपरा या ग्रंथातील काठीकवाडी लेखानुसार, नाशिक जिल्ह्याच्या सटाणा तालुक्यातील विरगाव येथे गुढीपाडव्या पासून अक्षय तृतीयेपर्यंत येणाऱ्या प्रत्येक सोमवारी (सहसा चार किंवा पाच सोमवार येतात) रात्री संपूर्ण गावात काठीकवाडी मिरवणूकीने मिरवली जाते.
काठीकवाडी मिरवणूकीसाठी एक भगत असतो, डफ नावाच्या वाद्यावर शंकराची लोकगीते म्हटली जातात. काठीकवाडीच्या पूजेसाठी घरोघरच्या अंगणात पाट मांडून ठेवले जातात. दारासमोर कठीकवाडी आली की गल्लीतल्या पाटावर ती उभी केली जाते. स्त्रिया शंकराच्या पिंडेची व मुर्तीची पाण्याने अथवा दुधाने अंघोळ घालून पूजा व आरती करतात. भगताजवळ दक्षिणा देतात. त्यानंतर काठीकवाडी उचलून पुढच्या घरासमोरच्या पाटावर घेऊन जातात. आळीपाळीने काठी एकमेकांकडे देत मिरवणूक संपूर्ण गावात फिरते. [Deore Sudhir 1]
काठीकवाडीच्या काठीची रचना
काठीकवाडी म्हणजे एक खूप उंच आणि जोड काठी असते,काठीकवाडीची रचना पुढीलप्रमाणे केलेली असते. सर्वात खाली चंदनाची एक जाड काठी असते. तिच्या वरच्या टोकाला एक जाड बांबू जोडलेला असतो. आणि त्या जाड बांबूला पुन्हा एक कमी जाडीचा पण उंच असा बांबू जोडलेला असतो. अशा पध्दतीने ह्या काठीकवाडीची रचना असते. माणसाच्या छाती इतक्या उंचीवर या काठीला एक आडवी फळी जोडलेली असते. या आडव्या फळीवर पितळाची शंकराची मुर्ती आणि पिंड जोडलेली असते. गुढीपाडव्याच्या दिवशी गावकरी ही काठी नदीतून स्वच्छ धुऊन आणतात. तिची यथासांग पूजा करून संपूर्ण काठीला लाल नवे कापड गुंडाळतात. काठीच्या वरच्या टोकाला मोरपिसे आणि भगवे कापड फडकवून ठेवतात. अशी ही संपूर्ण सजवलेली काठीकवाडी एका घराच्या ओट्यावर उभी करून हवेने पडू नये म्हणून दोरीने घट्ट बांधून ठेवतात.[Deore Sudhir 1]
- ^ a b Deore, Dr. Sudhir Rajaram (30 May 2013). अहिराणी लोकपरंपरा -Language Marathi (English Transliteration Ahirani Lok Parampara). Mumbai in India: Granthali publication. p. Article Name काठीकवाडी (English Translation: Kathi Kawadi). ISBN 9789382161967. Retrieved 17 September 2015.
{{cite book}}
: More than one of|pages=
and|page=
specified (help)
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Mahitgar (talk • contribs) 19:43, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
- They will be? When? — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼ 12:02, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
Same issues as before
Mahitgar, May I gently but firmly suggest, once again, that you stick to editing articles in your native language. Your translations are lacking accuracy in English. It is not fair for you to expect others to fix these problems over and over again. I have held off on administrative action, but if you keep dumping in these inaccurate and unsourced or poorly-sourced translations, your ability to edit the 'pedia may have to be limited or taken away. Do you understand? - CorbieV☊☼ 20:58, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
- This stance is neither unexpected nor surprising. I have already replied on this talk page itself in detail (emphasis added), and there is hardly any point in repeating the same point again.
- I can not challange your administrative prowess, when some-one does not want to discuss and join in improving article point by point on the talk page and if it is specially an admin an ordinary wikipedian can hardly do any thing.
- I am not sure if flexing muscles of administrative prowess for subjective views and purposes is best use of administrative prowess. If I have been the admin and if my attitude would not have been of inclusive accomodating, and if I have flexesed administrative power unnecessarilly sincerely I would have resigned from my adminship, ofcource I can not expect the same thing from others. I wish best luck to those who want to put administrative powers and rules to misuse.
- Nothing more to say
- Rgds thanks any way
- Mahitgar (talk) 03:11, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
First introductory sentence of the article
As of now first introductory line of the article is as follows:
Central poles are used to symbolize a variety of concepts in several different world religions, for example in the Anshun & Miao culture in Yunnan China. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mahitgar (talk • contribs) 04:12, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
- It's not necessary to record edits on the talk page. That's what the page history is for. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼ 12:21, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
Only Central poles?
As far as my personal study goes all poles being discussed across world faiths, cultures and religions in past and in present are not necessarilly central poles. The poles are used in front of or inside of houses and temples too. So over a period of time we need to look for improvement in this aspect.
Mahitgar (talk) 04:12, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
- Maybe. The potential problem here is that "a long piece of wood that might be associated in some way with ceremony or ritual" is not really a topic; it's original research to equate every dissimilar use of a lengthy piece of rigid plant material, across every culture in the world. The holding of ritual/ceremonial functions around a central pole, however, is similar enough cross-culturally that it can be generalized about, without making up anything, jumping to any questionable conclusions, or mistaking something outside but nearby a ritual/ceremony as being intrinsically part of it. "Correlation is not causation", as it were. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼ 12:21, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
Need to represent global presence
Pole celebrations , festivities and devotions are obsrved from north to south and from east to west almost on all continents either in past or present so it would be better that first sentence highlites this global aspect.
Secondly I am doubtfull that only mention of for example in the Anshun & Miao culture in Yunnan China. in intro line is sufficient to understand what the article and the concept is all about to a novice who is not already exposed to pole related celebration culture and worship
Mahitgar (talk) 04:26, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
- Agreed, but it's also not necessary to cram a list of every case into the lead either. An example or two from major cultures on each continent is sufficient, if the lead even uses such an "examples" approach at all (it's not really necessary that it do so). It's probably more useful to outline the different types of ritual/ceremonial uses. However, given the original research problems already apparent in the article, such an analysis/interpretation/evaluation/synthesis should not be done by a Wikipedian, but taken from a reliable secondary source by a subject-matter expert who has already published such an analysis, under external editorial oversight. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼ 12:21, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
Whether wording "different world religions" is not too narrow
Anthropologically what it is also likely that stick/stake/pole related reverance and celebrations would have been started even before inroduction of formal concept of religion to human beings, by this narrow definition human ancestors are being put with a burden of being religious what might not have necesssarilly existed then.
In present times also all individuals / families and and communities may not necessarilly be religious they might be participating just because a matter of culture or matter of indiviual faith in an object. So I note my difference of openion and I prefer to belive that term faiths and cultures will be broad to be inclusive of facts and apropriate
Rgds
Mahitgar (talk) 04:40, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
- It's more that former religious practices have often become secularized in various places into move vernacular, secular folk practices. They originated in religion. Archaeology has demonstrated pretty conclusively that religion in the broad sense dates back at least to the last Ice Age. "Religion" in English doesn't mean only "centralized, organized, authoritarian, dogmatic religion with a priestly class". It includes even the most rudimentary animism and totemism. The self-identification of "spiritual but not religious" is a thoroughly modern concept. That said, because some of the religious practices have in fact become secularized, the lead should be clear about this. Just not for the "it only became religious later" rationale that you're advancing, for which there won't be any reliable sources. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼ 12:21, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
Is it ok to add Nantosuelta image holding a pole ?
[[:File:Nantosuelta HistMusPfalz 3482a.jpg|thumb|A depiction of Nantosuelta from Speyer, showing her distinctive sceptre and birds. The head of Sol]]
List of references to be confirmed before use
Change of article name
Poles in mythology → foo – Actually when I started name of the article Poles in mythology was some thing different, due to some misunderstanding some one changed name of the article to Poles in mythology. Actually I wanted to cover cultural aspects and festive celebrations as an umbrella article and wanted to have historical mythological, worships wherever concerned as a small part.
Poles in mythology is altogether a different subject when I am doing research and writing cultural aspects of festive celebrations are also coming up simultaneously and I am coming to a conclusion that for covering cultural aspects of festive celebrations of 'pole' we need to have a separate umbrella article altogether so we will not have more confusions and misunderstandings.
Please let me know your openion and if you are positive to my suggessions what should be the new articles name ?
Looking forward to further discussion and consensus
Thanks and Rgds — Mahitgar (talk) 09:38, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
Comments
- Chnage of name to 'Poles in traditional culture', 'Poles in folklore' or something along this line. suggested by User:Eleassar (discussion ref)
- Comment - I'm not all that attached to what we call this, as long as it's not the original title, "Pole worship". I moved it here from "Pole worship" as that was inaccurate, especially given the content Mahitgar was adding. Not every culture that has a pole or stake somewhere in some of their ceremonies or customs "worships" the pole. Actually, I'd say few do. I've tried discussing this with Mahitgar, as I have to assume some of this is due language differences. I would really appreciate more eyes on this article to help deal with these terminology and content issues. - CorbieV☊☼ 16:00, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
- Move to Ritual pole, for several reasons: 1) This has nothing to do with mythology (written or oral cycles of myths); 2) their use in festivals remains an essentially ritual practice even if secularized, and where it retains religious significance it's clearly ritual behavior (namely a phallic fertility rite); 3) "Poles in ..." means "Polish people in ..."; 4) it has nothing to do with "worship" of poles (I challenge anyone to find any evidence anywhere of the ritual poles being actually worshipped as a form of odd idolatry, except where they are carved phalluses, not poles, really, in a phallic cult, as in rural Japan); 5) "in traditional culture" is too vague (all sorts of things, like building traditional forms of tribal housing, crafting traditional fishing rods, etc., pole-navigating waterways on traditional rafts, etc., involve poles, but are not connected in any way to the subject of this article); 6) folk practices are not folklore (folklore is oral or written folk wisdom and tales); 7) WP:PLURAL: We do not use plural forms in article titles except rarely and with good reason (this situation does not qualify). — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼ 11:58, 23 October 2015 (UTC)