Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Zoroastrianism/Archive 4

Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4

Sagdid ceremony

Hi. I've just added some information on the sagdid ceremony to the article Dogs in religion. I hope that what I wrote was accurate and respectful. Steve Dufour (talk) 09:53, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Coordinators' working group

Hi! I'd like to draw your attention to the new WikiProject coordinators' working group, an effort to bring both official and unofficial WikiProject coordinators together so that the projects can more easily develop consensus and collaborate. This group has been created after discussion regarding possible changes to the A-Class review system, and that may be one of the first things discussed by interested coordinators.

All designated project coordinators are invited to join this working group. If your project hasn't formally designated any editors as coordinators, but you are someone who regularly deals with coordination tasks in the project, please feel free to join as well. — Delievered by §hepBot (Disable) on behalf of the WikiProject coordinators' working group at 07:02, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Requesting input on a new Zoroastrianism article

Hello! Can someone from this WikiProject please take a look at the new article Asham vaho? Zoroastrianism is not a subject where I have expertise, and I wanted to get input from the experts on the validity and viability of this new article. Thank you. Pastor Theo (talk) 02:47, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Discussion regarding Christianity project organization

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:WikiProject Christianity/General Forum#Project organization. Some of the subjects being discussed relate to Judaism and this project, and any members of this project are more than welcome to make any comments they think appropriate there. Be prepared for some rather lengthy comments, though. There is a lot of material to cover there. John Carter (talk) 17:52, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Article alerts

This is a notice to let you know about Article alerts, a fully-automated subscription-based news delivery system designed to notify WikiProjects and Taskforces when articles are entering Articles for deletion, Requests for comment, Peer review and other workflows (full list). The reports are updated on a daily basis, and provide brief summaries of what happened, with relevant links to discussion or results when possible. A certain degree of customization is available; WikiProjects and Taskforces can choose which workflows to include, have individual reports generated for each workflow, have deletion discussion transcluded on the reports, and so on. An example of a customized report can be found here.

If you are already subscribed to Article Alerts, it is now easier to report bugs and request new features. We are also in the process of implementing a "news system", which would let projects know about ongoing discussions on a wikipedia-wide level, and other things of interest. The developers also note that some subscribing WikiProjects and Taskforces use the display=none parameter, but forget to give a link to their alert page. Your alert page should be located at "Wikipedia:PROJECT-OR-TASKFORCE-HOMEPAGE/Article alerts". Questions and feedback should be left at Wikipedia talk:Article alerts.

Message sent by User:Addbot to all active wiki projects per request, Comments on the message and bot are welcome here.

Thanks. — Headbomb {ταλκκοντριβς – WP Physics} 09:54, 15 March, 2009 (UTC)

Category:Enoch

I would like to create category called Category:Enoch in order to re-organize the material in the Enoch series. Enoch is a very mysterious character that would still need to be de-mythologized for the sake of ancient and modern studies in religion. Is there anywhere I can propose or discuss the creation of this category ? ADM (talk) 20:33, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

There are a number of folks named Enoch; any particular one? --—— Gadget850 (Ed) talk - 20:45, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
(e/c) I imagine that you could just start adding the category to relevant articles (WP:BEBOLD maybe?), but of course there is no guarantee that the category would remain if other editors disagreed. Are there other, similar categories already in existence for Biblical figures? I tried looking for some, but my already sparse religious knowledge seems to have deserted me! You could try looking through the sub-categories under Wikipedia:Categorical_index#Religion_and_belief_systems for a precedent.
For discussion, perhaps the best place to begin might be the talk page of Wikiproject Religion, or alternatively the talk page of one of the articles mentioned at Enoch (I wasn't sure which Enoch you meant), although a discussion there may not get as many contributors. --Kateshortforbob 20:52, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
The son of Jared is by far the most famous one, known simply as Enoch, there is merely a problem in the disambiguation which I would like to fix. ADM (talk) 20:53, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

User:Mr.Z-man has a new service available to various requesting WikiProjects which gives the project a monthly update of the number of hits on the 1,000 most frequently accessed articles for that project. An example of such a listing can be found at Wikipedia:WikiProject Christianity/Popular pages. Would the members of this project be interested in getting such a list for their use? John Carter (talk) 18:55, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

I don't see why not. Warrior4321talk 00:31, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Months

An editor has apparently redirected the names of each of the months on the Calendar to the spirit they are named after. This makes just as much sense as combining the articles on January and Janus. (Especially since the articles I examined do not even mention the connection with the calendar.) I suppose I could straighten it out myself, but it would be easier for someone who knows the subject better than myself. If any admin help is needed in deleting to accomplish the changes please let me know. DGG (talk) 23:09, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

The other months do not have their own article, that is why I redirected red links to the divinities that they derive their name from. Mr.TrustWorthy----Got Something to Tell Me? 23:21, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
The direction of the names of the days/months to the divinity under whose protection they are does in fact make sense. The comparison to Janus/January does not work as Janus/January are different names. In contrast, the Zoroastrian calendar day/month names are the same as those of the names of the divinities under whose protection they are.
There is not much that anyone could say at an "X (month)" and/or "X (day)" article anyway; as mere month/day names, they have no distinguishing characteristics other than their ordinal day/month number. The features that make each "special" are all related to the divinity under whose protection they are. -- Fullstop (talk) 19:49, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
how is this different from the Roman months, for which there is a great deal to say? The relationship is some sense to the divinity is present for the roman gods also. I disagree that a month and a divine being can ever be the same thing. Even if the names are written identically, surely there are two different meanings--someone is speaking of one or the other , and the context would make it clear? I'll draw an analogy to the astrological signs also: one may refer to someone as a Pisces, but this means born in the period under the domination of the astronomical Pisces--the constellation, in either its real or spiritual significance, is different from the person, and from the period controlled by it also. Obviously, I'm not a specialist in this, but I will see how other encyclopedias deal with it. DGG ( talk ) 06:07, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Project scope

I note that there is nothing on the project page indicating clearly what the intended scope of this project is. It would probably be a good idea if there were something along the lines of the "Scope" section of many other WikiProjects included, to make it clearer to the members and others what articles do and do not fall within the scope of the project. John Carter (talk) 14:32, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Is that better? Warrior4321 14:35, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
Maybe a little. Generally, it does make sense to have the introduction section be just that, with a small section regarding "Scope" (which often indicates at least the parent category of the project) following directly thereafter. Wikipedia:WikiProject Holidays has an example of the kind of "Scope" section I mean, although it could be expanded a bit for clarity's sake. John Carter (talk) 14:40, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Pageview stats

After a recent request, I added WikiProject Zoroastrianism to the list of projects to compile monthly pageview stats for. The data is the same used by http://stats.grok.se/en/ but the program is different, and includes the aggregate views from all redirects to each page. The stats are at Wikipedia:WikiProject Zoroastrianism/Popular pages.

The page will be updated monthly with new data. The edits aren't marked as bot edits, so they will show up in watchlists. You can view more results, request a new project be added to the list, or request a configuration change for this project using the toolserver tool. If you have any comments or suggestions, please let me know. Thanks! Mr.Z-man 02:05, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Call for editors to help manage religion related content

Please see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Religion#Coordination of activity. Thank you. John Carter (talk) 19:11, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Persian Empire

Please note that there is an editwar occuring at Persian Empire, with content shifting from being a 60k article, a redirect, or a disambiguation page. Previous to the 2 month long edit war, the article was a 60k article. As this article is rated as MID IMPORTANCE to your wikiproject, I thought I'd let you know.

76.66.197.30 (talk) 00:20, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Diwe vs Daeva

Could someone with a little experience/expertise on Zoroastrian/Persian mythology take a look at Diwe and Daeva? Diwe is a stub that was created off of the Mythology Project page's request list. Daeva is much more developed, and reading it, I'm leaning towards believing that they are two transliterations of the name of the same creature. Please provide input at the Diwe AfD discussion. Thanks! --SquidSK (1MC•log) 19:58, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

They are the translation of the same name and the articles should be merged.--WIMYV? (talk) 05:26, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Done. Since Diwe was a one-sentence stub, I just made it a redirect to Daeva. --SquidSK (1MC•log) 11:48, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Open discussion

Project participans might be interested in the following discussion. As a Third Opinion commenter on the subject I shall not make additional comments regarding the present discussion in the interest of remaining neutral. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 02:15, 13 December 2009 (UTC)