Talk:Day of the Dead
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| header 1 | header 2 | header 3 |
|---|---|---|
| row 1, cell 1 | row 1, cell 2 | row 1, cell 3 |
| row 2, cell 1 | row 2, cell 2 | row 2, cell 3 |
Block quote
Media:Example.oggInsertformulahere
Contents |
[edit] Headline text
 Caption1 |
Caption2 |
|
Caption1 |
Caption2 |
|
Caption1 |
Caption2 |
|
Caption1 |
Caption2 |
|
Caption1 |
Caption2 |
|
Caption1 |
Caption2 |
|
Caption1 |
Caption2 |
Caption2 |
|
Caption1 |
Caption2 |
|
Caption1 |
Caption2 |
|
Caption1 |
Caption2 |
|
Caption1 |
Caption2 |
|
Caption1 |
Caption2 |
|
Caption1 |
Caption2 |
|
Caption1 |
Caption2 |
|
Caption1 |
Caption2 |
|
Caption1 |
Caption2 |
</gallery>This seemed to be someones paper on day of the dead. It isn't terrible and there is somewhat more information than there was in the original but the author completely removed the original content. I did some minor (and possibly bad) integration Thadk 08:53, 2004 Dec 7 (UTC)
I've wikified what's there a bit, but it still needs some heavy editing. I deleted a few duplicate facts left over from the integration, and shuffled a few paragraphs round to read better. The next thing that needs doing is the references, some of them are no longer being pointed to, so they will need removing and renumbering, but that should be done last after the edit. It could probably do with a sub heading or two as well, and i'm not sure all the dates are entirely accurate, ill have a google and see what I can come up with.--Beeglebug 11:39, 30 Dec 2004 (UTC)
OK, i've done a bit more work on it, but it might need someone elses touch to get it flowing right. I've deleted all the duplicated facts, and added a load of stuff about the history of the festival. I've sectioned it off too. The whole thing is still a bit of a mess of short sentences though. --Beeglebug 18:00, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
The link to Calacas is a bit misleading--it leads to a region in the Phillipines, not a page on skulls. jkupetz 21:00 August 6 2005 (EST)
[edit] Happy Ghost Liberation and Spook Appreciation Day!
Have you kissed a ghost recently? Have you hugged the soul of your deceased great-great-great-grandma lately? Go on ahead and wish them a happy Ghost Appreciation Day! 204.52.215.107 05:10, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
There are a few mistakes regarding the celebration in this wiki. People dont wear masks in a dia de muertos, an the sugar calaveras are suposed to bear the name of the person who is to receive them as a gift. a living person. Theres no information on the altares de muertos, or shrines.
[edit] Marigolds
Someone was editing at the same time I was and it looks like we were trying to add the same information, so I put my edit back in after he was done, since it had more information, and removed the "red" link on "cempazúchil". If there was a link, it should redirect to Marigold anyways, since they are the same flower in different tongues. Maybe a Wiktionary entry for the term is justified?--Rockero 22:26, 2 November 2005 (UTC) Mariagolds
[edit] NPOV
I think that referring to the subject matter as "morbid" is biased. Obviously, it's not considered morbid in Mexico or they probably wouldn't celebrate it. Such a holiday is considered morbid within an Anglo Saxon context, not a Hispanic context. Andrew Parodi 13:13, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
Well, the current version only says that it "may be considered morbid from the Anglo Saxon perspective", not that it is morbid. There's nothing wrong with editing the line if you feel that doing so would improve NPOV, though I think it helps explain to those unfamiliar with the holiday that it doesn't have the same morbid character as Halloween, for example.My mistake. Sxeptomaniac 23:20, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Not an Aztec celebration only
I just want to let you know it is NOT only an Aztec celebration. It is a Mesoamerican Celebration indeed. It is a party in which we celebrate how our departed souls dive into the inframundo, the underworld. I supposed it is related to the end of harvest, just as the Celt's (nowadays) Halloween.
[edit] Altars and Shrines
I question the use of the word 'wealthier' in "Some wealthier families do build altars or small shrines in their homes." Some families regardless of income build altars or shrines in their homes. Yes, some altars are more elaborate then others, but that seems irrelevant. Does anyone else agree? Lichking20 06:45, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Move to Día de los Muertos?
Shouldn't this page be at "Día de los Muertos" with "Day of the Dead" redirecting there? I think most English speakers who know of the event understand the Spanish name. Marnanel 14:55, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
- Why? This is the English side of Wikipedia. Latin America calls New York "Nuevo York" and that is not the name of the city/state (and there are countless other examples). Are speakers of English to be expected to take on a greater burden of political correctness than any other language? Mensch 07:19, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
-
- I don't see what political correctness had to do with it. New York has a sizeable English-speaking population, so it's reasonable to call it "New York" in English; Día de los Muertos is primarily a Spanish-speaking event. Marnanel 15:20, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
- I like "Day of the Dead." It's not difficult to understand, and a simple translation.翔太「Shouta:talk」 17:22, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- I'm not strongly opposed to the move, but I don't see any particularly compelling reasons for it, either. This is the English Wikipedia, so we should probably stick to translated names when they are commonly used. It also strikes me that, while those who refer to it as "Día de los Muertos" will almost certainly also know it as "Day of the Dead", there are those who know it as "Day of the Dead" but are unfamiliar with "Día de los Muertos" (I was talking to one yesterday). Sxeptomaniac 21:02, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
- The question, though, is is the English translation of Dia de los Muertos more commonly used? A case could certainly be made for, say, Oktoberfest. I doubt anyone would argue that we should house the article at Octoberfest because it's the English Wikipedia and that's the Anglicianized spelling, because there's no doubt that Oktoberfest more commonly used. But can the same strong case be made for Day of the Dead versus Dia de los Muertos? This may ultimately be an unanswerable question, because most newspaper articles mention both the Mexican and English version, by way of explanation.
- Hmm. Well, a cursory Googling shows 3.9 million hits for "Day of the Dead" [1] versus 1.9 million for "Dia de los Muertos" [2]. Given this, probably, absent more compelling evidence, it should be left as it is. — e. ripley\talk 21:15, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- How many of those hits were for Day of the Dead (film) or its upcoming remake, though? —Angr 08:02, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- I was thinking about that, too, so I tried adding "holiday Mexico" and got 291 thousand for "Day of the Dead"[3] and 151 thousand for "Dia de los Muertos"[4]. Sxeptomaniac 20:22, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- I am all for using the local term instead of the translation... when it makes sense to do so. In this case, I lean towards keeping it under "Day of the Dead." There is, for example, the fact that in Mexico itself "Día de los Muertos" is not the only or even the most common term among people who actually celebrate the holiday (as opposed to schoolkids who learn about it in class, given that for many years the holiday was celebrated more in the countryside than in the cities).
- First off, we are talking about two days, not one (All Saints/Todos Santos plus All Souls/Fieles Difuntos), so one often hears "Días de los Muertos" (in the plural). Second, "Muertos" sounds a little brusque, so many people use the name of the second day, "Fieles Difuntos" or "Dia de los Difuntos," instead. (This is popular speech, not the stuff that children are taught in schools nowadays, so of course these terms barely register on Google searches.) The most common term is simply "el 2 de noviembre." Given all this, I don't see a problem with using the English term. -Potosino 01:46, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
I totally agree it should be referred to as Dia de los Muertos, Day of the Dead make people think of those dumb horror movies which have nothing to do with Dia de los Muertos.Ohquepretty 18:04, 4 November 2006 (UTC)ohquepretty
[edit] Anglo Saxon?
I understand the author's intent of the phrase, "Though the subject matter may be considered morbid from the Anglo Saxon perspective, Mexicans celebrate the Day of the Dead joyfully...," but I think that Anglo Saxon is a much too particular term. Anglo Saxon implies a distinct ethnic group (an ancient one, at that) and is far too specific. Could it possibly be changed to "Modern European" and/or "Modern American" (or another phrase besides "American" that is indicative of the United States' culural perspective)? El Diablo Volador 1 November 2006
- I've changed it to Anglo, since that article is more about the group intended (white non-Hispanic Americans). —Angr 08:02, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- "Anglo" is a bit too informal for an article. How about we just avoid specifying and go with something more like "Though the subject matter may be considered morbid from the perspective of some other cultures..."? After all, it isn't really important which other cultures might find it morbid. Sxeptomaniac 17:13, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Vandalism
FYI, I requested another semi-protection for this article because the vandalism seems to be even stronger than what it was before the first semi-protection was instituted a few days ago. Looks like it's going to be put into place soon, but I'm not sure exactly how long it will take. -- Tim D 17:50, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- It should not be semi-protected as long as it's linked to from the Main Page. And really the vandalism isn't so bad we can't keep on top of it. Semi-protection really needs to be reserved for when the vandalism is coming so thick and fast you're getting edit conflicts with the vandals when trying to revert it. —Angr 18:44, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- Well it was protected for less last time, but if you and others are willing to keep a close eye on the article over the next couple days, that's fine by me. My big concern was vandalism slipping under the radar or staying up for more than a couple minutes when the article is probably at its peak traffic for the year. -- Tim D 19:11, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Vandalism
This article had a chapter about the day in popular calture which has disappeared somehow. Deror 15:29, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
- Indeed. This massive piece of vandalism from last May never got fully reverted. —Angr 15:40, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
