User talk:Bloodofox/2007

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Email addy?

Would you mind dropping me an email via the form mailer or entering a contact address into your account so I can talk to you off wiki sometime? - WeniWidiWiki 06:48, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Why are you telling ME to discuss when you are not doing so yourself?

Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you. Jefferson Anderson 20:56, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

It is pretty neat that this is a template. :} :bloodofox: 21:03, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, better than doing it by hand. I'd probably be too terse or interpreted as being uncivil or something. This way I get to blame the template author if someone takes it the wrong way :-) Jefferson Anderson 21:56, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Yule

Could you please explain why you regard

questionable under "See Also" while

is not. And please also motivate why your use of the term questionable in practice means you delete them without question. In my opinion all these links are relevant to Yule. --Profero 20:26, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Unless you want a massive list of non-directly related European winter festivals included as well, these should probably be removed. Yalda in particular has nothing to with Yule and the connection between the Slavic Koleda is vastly distant at best. :bloodofox: 20:44, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
Could be you're right about the massive list, I don't know. Perhaps you can show us. But Yaldā also known as Shab-e Cheleh is celebrated on the eve of the first day of the winter (December 21) in the Iranian calendar, which falls on the Winter Solstice. It celebrates the birth of Sun god Mithra, and this type of midwinter celebration is also what the Yule article is talking about. In my opinion links like these can lead to further knowledge, widened horizons and tolerance in showing similarities of cultures. Therefore they are important, even if not always 100% relevant. --Profero 21:22, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

MedCab case: Celtic Reconstructionist Paganism

I am presently contacting all parties to confirm voluntary participating in the MedCab Case. If you wish to participate in this voluntary, informal mediation please return to the mediation page, edit the discussion section, state that you wish to proceed with my mediation and sign your name. Alan.ca 21:57, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Goth subculture

I salute your assault on the mass of dodgy and pointless linkspam on this article. Be prepared for the links to be constantly re-added by anon editors who refuse to discuss it on the Talk page, no matter how many times you ask them to - that's what I've been getting in response to my milder attempt at cleaning it up. --Stormie 21:36, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. It seems a few of the sharper edits I made on the article were restored, including the criticism section with the ridiculous Maddox information. The article is a circus, though it seems most subcultural articles have this problem. :bloodofox: 02:33, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, sadly it's very very difficult to try to persuade people that their own personal experiences as a member of a subculture are not necessarily the best source for an encyclopedia article about that subculture. --Stormie 06:27, 19 February 2007 (UTC)


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:Norse mythology 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)

Template:nine worlds

Hi Bloodofox, I am glad that you have made the template. I have been thinking of it myself, and I have a few suggested changes. What do you think of these alternative versions? I personally prefer the closeup of the runes a:miþkarþi since it refers to Midgard beyond any doubt.--Berig 14:51, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

OTOH, I quite like it as it is now. I have made it slimmer so it allows more text on its left and it makes the picture fit better.--Berig 16:51, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
Well, change it as you see fit, though I personally would prefer that we went over the green rather than the fuschia if I had a choice between the two. Also, perhaps the depiction of the World Tree is more appropriate as an indicator of the whole? I am thinking we should maybe do a World Tree one that encompasses the various creatures and shows how they worlds are layered, if possible. It seems some templates are able to portray a tree-like form. :bloodofox: 22:47, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
I have given it some consideration and I am quite happy with the template as it is now. Well done!--Berig 13:42, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

English Wikipedia


1. Þrvðheimi
2. Ydalir heita
3. Valascialf heitir
4. Sacqvabeccr heitir enn fiorþi
5. Glaðsheimr heitir enn fimti (Midgard)
6. Þrymheimr heitir enn setti
7. Breiðablik ero in siavndo
8. Himinbiorg ero en atto
9. Folcvangr er inn nivndi


Ninum 00:29, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
Hello Ninum. I am not sure what you are trying to tell me here. Please keep it in English as this is the English Wikipedia. :bloodofox: 12:20, 7 November 2007 (UTC)


The nine worlds is defined in Voluspa
2. Jotuns I remember
early born,
those in old
foster me have.
Nine cities,
nine dwellings,
a sacred large tree
before ground below.


The names of the nine first dwellings is defined in Grimnesmal
1. Trudhome is the first dwelling
2. Ydales the second dwelling
3. Selectionledge the third
4. Hollowriver the fourth
5. Gladshome the fifth - centre (Midgard)
6. Stronghome the sixth
7. Wideview is the seventh
8. Heavenfort is the eighth
9. Folkvang is the ninth


These are The Nine First Dwellings of the Norse Edda. Ninum 16:47, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
I am afraid you are mistaken, Ninum. These are the locations of halls associated with various deities and events, not the Nine Worlds held together by the World Tree. :bloodofox: 17:31, 7 November 2007 (UTC)


The word Worlds is never used in Edda in plural form, so the reference to the nine places is homes as in heimar, the word World is used to define the place you and me dwell on, so I refrased the line accordingly: These are The Nine First Dwellings of the Norse Edda. When they travell to Muspellsheimen from Norway, they use a boat, not a spaceship. Ninum 22:16, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
I am not sure what this has to do with the Nine Worlds as mentioned in the Prose Edda, specifically in Gylfaginning.. Here is the etymology for the English term "world":
World
O.E. woruld, worold "human existence, the affairs of life," also "the human race, mankind," a word peculiar to Gmc. languages (cf. O.S. werold, O.Fris. warld, Du. wereld, O.N. verold, O.H.G. weralt, Ger. Welt), with a literal sense of "age of man," from P.Gmc. *wer "man" (O.E. wer, still in werewolf; see virile) + *ald "age" (see old). Originally "life on earth, this world (as opposed to the afterlife)," sense extended to "the known world" (e.g. "Greatest Show on Earth"), then to "the physical world in the broadest sense, the universe" (c.1200). In O.E. gospels, the commonest word for "the physical world," was Middangeard (O.N. Midgard), lit. "the middle enclosure" (cf. yard), which is rooted in Gmc. cosmology. Gk. kosmos in its ecclesiastical sense of "world of people" sometimes was rendered in Goth. as manaseþs, lit. "seed of man." The usual O.N. word was heimr, lit. "abode" (see home). Words for "world" in some other I.E. languages derive from the root for "bottom, foundation" (cf. Ir. domun, O.C.S. duno, related to Eng. deep); the Lith. word is pasaulis, from pa- "under" + saule "sun." Original sense in world without end, translating L. sæcula sæculorum, and in worldly. L. sæculum can mean both "age" and "world," as can Gk. aion. Worldwide is from 1632. World power in the geopolitical sense first recorded 1900. World-class is attested from 1950, originally of Olympic athletes. :bloodofox: 04:25, 8 November 2007 (UTC)


First of all, the nine dwellings in question is taken from Edda, an the book you refer to is written by a christian man called Snorre. The book starts with the story of Adam and Eve, and then continue with the story Noha and the flood. He then claim that in the centre of the earth was build a world called Troja, and from this place comes the man we call Tor. He also claim that Trudheim is in Trakia, and that Tor travelled around all heimsbolkar, fighting dragens and all kinds of things. The story of Thor in northen Europa is a very old one, written in stones called rockcarvings. In these carvings you will find motives from many of the tales written in Edda, and it was believed that these carvings was around 2000 years old. By comparing these carvings with ancian Greek pottery dating back as far as 5000 years, we can now prove that these carvings are wery old. It also means that the greek people are connected to the people from Scandinavia at this time. If we follow this logic we end up debating real geographi in the understanding of Snorres view of these places, and in Gylfaginning as you mention, Gylve travell to Åsgard to a castle called Valhall. And the location of this place is: Then they build a castle in the centre of the world called Åsgard; this is what people call Troja.


Gladshome the fifth is named,
there the golden bright
wide Valhall stands;


Ninum 14:14, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
I'm the one who added the information regarding the images of the Thor stones to Wikipedia. I'm well aware of these four stones. I'm also aware that they were all created between the 8th and the 11th century, which is not "5,000" year ago by about 4,000 years.
Snorri's Prose Edda was written with his Christian influence in mind, either to save his own skin or because of his personal doctrine. We don't know. One of the earliest things you must learn when reading the Prose Edda, History of the Danish People, Heimskringla and the various other surviving accounts that attempt to Romanize the gods is their source and why that is done. I'm not interested in theorizing about a Greece-Denmark connection.
As for the Nine Worlds, they're there as they're stated and backed up by other sources outside of Snorri, including rune stones and surviving English text. :bloodofox: 22:09, 8 November 2007 (UTC)


I’m not talking about rune-stones, but motives in rockcarvings, but this is beside the point. Edda is not written by Snorre, but he used these poems as a source to compile Snorre-Edda where you find Gylfaginning, as you then use as a source for this theory about the Nine Worlds. Here we find text like The cosmological allusions in the Poetic Edda, and I assume you then are refering to the poems as mention above? Then it say that this are often vague, so when they say that Valhall is in Gladsheim, you mean that this is vague? Then it claims that there are a more clear descriptions in the Prose Edda, which brings us back to Gylfaginning which then is influenced by mediaeval Christian cosmology. There is a link to Prose Edda, whith the line Our ancestors divided the universe into nine worlds, which bring us back to the spaceship. Since you are not interested in theorizing about a Greece-Denmark connection, you must then exclude the work of Snorri, since he base his theory on Troy, which is taken from Greek mythology. The mention of these worlds in Edda, as you say, is just locations of halls, so this is then also excluded as a source, but as you say, this is backed up by other sources outside of Snorri, including rune stones and surviving English text. Ninum 16:36, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
a:miþkarþi for Old Norse à Miðgarði meaning "in Midgard" - "in Middle Earth" on runestone Sö 56.
Please name the specific carvings. Maybe you're talking about the Nordic Bronze Age? If so, that is theory that it is not our place to speculate about here but we can add that others have with a proper reference.
In English Snorri's Edda is commonly known as the Prose Edda, as I stated above. As I also stated above, Snorri bases many aspects of his Prose Edda from the Poetic Edda, as well as sources unknown to us. He was obviously very well versed in these skaldic poems as they were in his time.
Notably, Muspelheim (Muspilli) is referenced in surviving Old High German poetry. Midgard is referenced in numerous places, for example this runestone.
The nine dwellings mentioned in the Völuspá seem to be locations within the "worlds", of which there are also nine. As with practically everything in Germanic paganism, everything comes down to the numbers 3 or 9. As for the term 'world' again, I must state that the term does not directly refer to outer space in English. :bloodofox: 20:30, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Wicca edit

Hi there, I saw your recent edit which was reverted by Huntster. Personally I'd agree that Wicca is essentially a newly-invented religion but I can understand why Huntster reverted your contribution: it is a viewpoint that not all Wiccans would accept and would need to be worded a little more neutrally AND sourced. If you can find a source I'd support making sure that this point of view is held by at least some people. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk to me) 11:23, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Hello Kim! My edit was placed after reviewing the initial paragraph on the Wicca article after editing a very Wiccan-influenced author's page. I wanted to clarify that Wicca is not, for example, a continuation of Celtic practices as so many Wiccan works have attempted to claim. The usage of knot work, Cernunnos-like images, talk of 'druids' and Cernunnos-like imagery would lead many to believe this and it was clearly not by mistake given the origins of the religion. The introduction seems to point at this but states it "cannot be independantly proven" that it's continuation. I think it should clearly state that it's not a continuation of any native religion to the British isles that we know of via mountains the large amount of information we do have about the indigenous Celts and the conquering Anglo-Saxons. I am not sure where to go to find an article that's a decent reference for this, but I did find these three: [4], [5] & [6]. They've also appropriated things such as the maypole and certain holidays from Germanic paganism via Anglo-Saxon polytheism. I think figures from Celtic Reconstructionist Pagans groups would be of help here. :bloodofox: 22:33, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

WP:Trivia

From WP:Trivia#What_this_guideline_is_not; "This guideline does not suggest removing trivia sections, or moving them to the talk page. - If information is otherwise suitable, it is better that it be poorly presented than not presented at all."

Emphasis mine. If you have other reasons than WP:Trivia to remove content then use those, otherwise leave it in. Taemyr 15:52, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

See also WP:Cruft, Wikipedia:"In popular culture" articles, Wikipedia:Listcruft all point out numerous reasons why these are simply farms for tons of random, generally minor pop culture references. See also Wikipedia:WikiProject Trivia and Popular Culture. It's in the history of the article - if someone wants to merge it into a relevant article, they can go ahead, but all of the ...In Popular Culture articles have been deleted (most of which I made) for things relating to Germanic paganism have since been deleted and not by me. :bloodofox: 16:15, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
Sure, there might be several reasons to remove this content, most of which springing from one of WP:IINFO,WP:DIR or WP:NOT#OR. If consensus is developed then WP:ROC will likely be easier to apply. I stand by my statement that WP:Trivia is not a guideline to lean on for removing content. Taemyr 07:39, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
No problem, I will try to be more specific. Thank you for calling me on it. :bloodofox: 08:44, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Anastasia

OK, maybe I was too fast in putting Anastazija to the list of Neofolk groups, but the description of this music style given in the article seemed to me that it exactly corresponds to what Anastazija are doing: use of traditional music and instrumentation; relation to post-punk, darkwave, gothic rock, industrial music and such styles: the frontman Goran Trajkoski is/was involved in such groups: Mizar, Padot na Vizantija, as well as other members of the Makedonska streljba collective which was related to Laibach's Neue Slowenische Kunst (for example Gorazd Čapovski's group Kismet in Australia included dark, industrial and ethnic music elements). While Anastazija's Before the Rain soundtrack included 100% traditional sound, their next albums like Nocturnal included elements of electronic music as well. Kiril Džajkovski was also making similar music in the past. I see Dark cabaret also mentioned in the Neo-folk article, Goran Trajkoski is working on such project right now, its called Circo Europia. Taking into consideration all of the previously mentioned facts I thought that Anastazija qualify for this Neo-folk label, of course I may be wrong, what is your opinion? --Dzole 17:04, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Well, as far as I can tell, there just isn't a direct relation outside of general similarities. If you can find otherwise though, you may as well go ahead and add it. I think there should be some sort of direct genre connect though, as in collaborating with other artists in the genre or receiving attention from a noted zine or so forth that directly refers to them as 'neofolk' somewhere. It's a gray area but it's all about association. :bloodofox: 07:55, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

your two cents

I am a little bit disappointed in you seeing this. We have had constructive interactions in the past, even if, as you may remember, you had a bit of a rough start on Wikipedia. Now we seem to be running into a dispute, and instead of trying to come to a compromise understanding at Talk:Tyr (journal), you sort of smear me behind my back. This isn't a problem, but based on your userpage I would have expected a little bit more of you. dab (𒁳) 11:15, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Dbachmann, I found the page where I voiced my concerns through your talk page, which is not exactly "behind your back." Besides, it would appears that I am but one of many. For that matter, I can only imagine how many otherwise constructive users you've frightened off with that nasty attitude and penchant for insults. Instead of claiming that you've been smeared, perhaps you ought to consider the reason for these numerous comments. The fact that you're an administrator doesn't help matters either. It's less likely a conspiracy considering I know none of those people and more likely your actions - nobody likes to be reverted by an administrator without explanation. :bloodofox: 02:04, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
Hi Dab, I'm responding here to keep this discussion in one place. You know, I also considered posting on AN/I, but hesitated because AN/I isn't really the place for this type of thing. Something I don't think you realize is that your persistence and determination is being perceived as bullying by a number of people. While some of your more prickly tactics may be effective, and welcomed, when you've been battling kooks and racists, when you turn the same sort of attitude towards reasonable, experienced editors, this can be a problem.
Recently you've been adding some OR to articles, and it has at times felt like you're pushing an agenda. It hasn't always been clear to me what that agenda is, but I have felt pushed around at times. I am glad to see that more recently you've been more open to collaboration, and not just reverting. I am glad to see you discussing things more. But I would like to remind you that not all editors feel able to be bold and stand up to you, and I worry that when other editors do not stand up to you in a strong, determined way, you tend to take that as permission to keep pushing.
This may be far more a matter of personal style than good vs bad intentions. But really, it's not just :bloodofox: who has felt stressed out by your actions lately. I have, too. And I am sincerely requesting that you think about this. Thank you. - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 03:35, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
Kathryn, you are a good editor, and I have never intended to 'bully' you. I have pointed out issues with your CR article, and I have been willing to discuss them with you in good faith. I have gone out of my way to reassure you that my attitude was not hostile, and that I was willing to compromise. If you feel stressed out by that, I am afraid I cannot help you. Likewise, with bloodofox, I recognize him as a good editor and would be most willing to discuss the issue calmly on Talk:Tyr (journal). Why either of you should feel compelled to turn against me in completely unrelated cases of actual trolling I don't know. My posting above is a show of good faith and an offer to discuss things calmly and with wikiquette. In return, I am accused of my "nasty attitude and penchant for insults". I frankly fail to see where I could have insulted either of you. If you will show me a diff where I lose my countenance, I will be quick to apologize. But I do take bloodofox's hostile reply as a rejection of my offer for friendly debate, and I will be content to restrict my interaction with him to the bare minimum required by policy. I am not here to make friends. I am here to build the encyclopedia. If that results in friendly interaction that's a nice aside, but if it doesn't, we can also do this in a purely official tone. dab (𒁳) 08:00, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
Hi dab, As I said on my talk page, I think we're having some miscommunication here. I don't think you treat me the same as the trolls, and I am grateful for your support and cooperation. I was concerned that you were not taking the concerns of some other editors seriously (I was thinking mostly of bloodofox, pigman and myself, as I don't know the others who have mentioned it), and I wanted to encourage you to think about their perspective. I am sorry if I did this in a way that was hurtful to you. I reiterate, I think this is an issue of differing personal styles.
I have not seen you lose your countenance or yell at anyone. Your style has been calm. The things that have stressed me have been some of the sweeping changes and reorganization you've been making to a number of Neopagan-related articles, where at times your edits have created a large number of inconsistencies or unsourced theories that I've wound up cleaning up. No, I didn't *have* to clean them up, but I care about the articles and want them to be internally consistent as well as consistent across the project, and well-sourced. I really do appreciate your good intentions in your work on these articles, and you've also been doing good work in a number of the edits. I appreciate your dedication to the project.
I am sorry if discussing this is unpleasant for you. But I do not think bringing up these issues is "turning against you," and I apologize if I gave you that impression. I am also unclear on what you are referring to as "completely unrelated cases of actual trolling". Is this about other conflicts with actual trolls? If so, I am unaware of what those incidents are, and sorry to be somehow grouped with them.
Like I said, I think things have been improving, and I look forward to productive collaboration in the future. - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 01:38, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
thank you for the clarification, Kathryn. I am most open to carve out intelligent and informed compromise by open confrontation of diverse viewpoints, focus on content issues and good faith debate. This applies to you, and it certainly also applies to Bloodofox. I did not open this section to complain about BoO having opinions I do not share. I commented because I found his behaviour (viz. trying to vent spleen against me in a wholly unrelated trolling case) vindictive, unconstructive, and not very honourable. I did appeal to his sense of fairness precisely because I consider him a good editor. I would not waste time and energy along such lines with users I judge to be either unwilling or incapable of constructive interaction (see below). dab (𒁳) 10:49, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Dbachmann

I noticed that you've had some problems with this user, care to comment at this RFC? JJJamal (talk) 01:39, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

I've never even met this user. Try saying "policy" at Talk:Afrocentrism, and you'll have a whole hornet's nest after you. "Nationalists of all countries, unite!". The funny thing is that I get hardcore ethnocentrists of all descriptions, Hindu, Black American, Armenian, Nordic and what have you, out to paint me a "problem user". Give the most diverse or even antagonist factions a common adversary and they will stand united.What may be the common goal here? A shared dedicated interest to subvert Wikipedia core policy and glorify The Nation, of course. This will be interesting. dab (𒁳) 10:49, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
Dab, are you implying that I am attempting to glorify something? :bloodofox: (talk) 11:20, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
I am implying that, for some reason or other, you suddenly find yourself united in opposition against me with accounts that are clearly "attempting to glorify something". It isn't always a good idea to blindly take the enemies of your enemies as your friends: you tend to end up cuddling with people you normally "wouldn't cross the street to pee on if they were on fire" (disclaimer: this is an authentic sample of British humour I picked up somewhere. Please don't give me a headache because I used the word "pee" on your talkpage, ok?). dab (𒁳) 11:14, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
I wouldn't say "united" there. Actually, I find some of their arguments pretty questionable, which is why my signature is clearly absent outside of my own summary and Pigman's comments. I was directed there due to the issues I have with your conduct which I think need to be brought to light. However, I think charges of "racism" or "White Man's Burden" are ridiculous and, obviously, some of these people are just pushing an agenda and luckily for them realize that you're an easy target/scapegoat. It doesn't benefit you or anyone else that you give them ammunition through smarmy commentary, you are basically helping them. Just slap them around with policy when they step out of line and leave it at that, any further commentary expressing any sort of opinion to them and it's only benefiting them in the long run. :bloodofox: (talk) 04:03, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Official thanks, slightly delayed due to post-RfA crash (who knew?)

While I don't think anyone had any doubt that you would, I am glad to see you made it, Kathryn! Enjoy your break! :bloodofox: (talk) 08:22, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

ArbCom

I have filed a case here, I just listed myself an Dbachmann as the involved parties, because I was unsure how to do it, if you would also like to be listed as an involved party and make a statement, please feel free to add your name and statement. futurebird 20:57, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Dbachmann

An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Dbachmann/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Dbachmann/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, David Mestel(Talk) 19:23, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!

Hi Bloodofox - Thanks so much for the cleanup on the Grendel's mother page. Since your background in this aspect of the article is quite strong, I hope you'll give the article more tweaks and edits when you have a chance. Regards, -Classicfilms (talk) 08:30, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

No problem! I am glad that to help on this very interesting subject. Keep up the good work! :) :bloodofox: (talk) 09:46, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
Fabulous changes to the introduction (which I also tweaked a bit). That will help readers to distinguish between the original work and the multiple translations which currently exist - your edits are always so helpful, keep it up! Regards, -Classicfilms (talk) 13:41, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
Excellent, I think things are looking much better in the introduction now. Thanks largely to your efforts, this is easily the finest article on the subject on the internet. :bloodofox: 04:05, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Germanic Neopaganism

Can I ask you again to stop blanking content on this article that has been stable for months, and condescend to tag them with {{fact}} for five minutes instead so that we can address your concerns? Your behaviour at present is extremely unconstructive, and borders on positive disruption. dab (𒁳) 11:10, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

This is inflammatory content that has been removed from other pages for the same reason that essentially breaks down to systematic insertion of your opinion. There was no citation given there and there is no citation here. This "stable" information was removed very recently by another editor who brought it to the talk page with the exact same concerns of my own. Your response? Wholesale revert. I've removed the controversial information until it has a source and is properly formatted, as per policy. :bloodofox: (talk) 11:20, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Location of your ArbCom statement

Hi. I saw your edit summary asking why your statement was moved to the talkpage in the Dbachmann case. First, generally, statements by non-parties to the case are moved to the talkpage, particularly when they are relatively lengthy, as yours is. Although you may have been involved in some of the prior controversies relating to this dispute, to the best of my knowledge you have not actually been named as a party to the case. Second and equally important, generally the casepage is kept for statements that were before the arbitrators at the time the case was accepted, and if I recall correctly, yours was posted later. In any event, please bear in mind that the location of your statement is not very important, as the arbitrators should read all the material on the casepages wherever it is located. To be even more sure, you can link to your statement from your evidence or one of your workshop proposals if you submit any of either. Hope this helps. Newyorkbrad (talk) 03:31, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

I understand. Thank you for your help! :bloodofox: 04:01, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Yule articles

Hi Bloodofox, I'm afraid I've only got one book from which there's something to add to the subject. I'll soon be writing a related article and I'll add something to the articles you mentioned if I find something useful.--Berig (talk) 20:09, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

I appreciate it, Berig! :bloodofox: (talk) 11:16, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Hello

Please discuss in the talk page of the article Freyja. BTW, the link on the top of your page is misspelled (bloodofx), you should correct it 123.19.47.22 (talk) 09:00, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Ah, you're right! I fixed it, thanks for letting me know. I have since placed my response there and would be happy to speak to you about this. :bloodofox: (talk) 09:07, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Allerseelen

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Allerseelen, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of Allerseelen. TheRingess (talk) 02:10, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:Robertntaylor.jpeg

Replaceable fair use
Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:Robertntaylor.jpeg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

  1. Go to the media description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
  2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, fair use media which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if not used in an article), per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. – Quadell (talk) (random) 14:02, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Yule Log

If you want to question a source, then that's fine -- cite multiple sources that challenge the source. Or fold in your Thor stuff -- you seem to have a strong interest in putting Thor-centric stuff in Wikipedia, so I'd suggest you show some restraint, and provide sources. While we're at it, citing a source from 1897 is stretching things a bit, isn't it? Many of those old ultranationalist sources were across-the-board preposterous in their claims, and much of it was made up.

Conversations with a guy who knows a lot about stuff (even if he's claimed to be an admininistrator for scare value) doesn't really do the job on wikipedia. So let's start over. Add the material rather than obliterating it because it cites a Celtic origin for the yule log rather than your preferred interpretation, a Germanic one. Larry Dunn (talk) 00:17, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Response is at: Talk:Yule_log#Recent_Llewellyn_Worldwide.2FPublications-derived_additions. :bloodofox: (talk) 00:38, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

  1. ^ Turville, Petre. E.O.G. Myth and Religion of the North: The Religion of Ancient Scandinavia. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1964.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Bloodofox/2007&oldid=1028802284"