User talk:Æo/Archive 1a

Nickname: Eckhardt Etheling, years 2016–2018

Welcome!

Hello, Eckhardt Etheling, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit The Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! --Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 22:36, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ways to improve Peterburgian Vedism

Hi, I'm Usernamekiran. Eckhardt Etheling, thanks for creating Peterburgian Vedism!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. Thank you for creating the article. But would you please add some references to the article? Thanks.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.

—usernamekiran(talk) 20:02, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I will improve the article in the next days or weeks. Thanks,--Eckhardt Etheling (talk) 20:29, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free use of File:The Slavic god Koleda.jpg

Hi Eckhardt Etheling. The licensing of each image you see on Wikipedia is determined by it copyright status and not every image file you see on Wikipedia is licensed the same. Some files are licensed as public domain or licensed under a free licensed suitable for Wikipedia and these are often collectively referred to as "free images". Other files are licensed as non-free content because of their copyright status and these file are commonly referred to as "non-free images". Non-free image use is highly restricted and each use of such an an image must satisfy Wikipedia's non-free image use policy. One of these restrctions is WP:NFCC#9, which says that non-free content can only be used in the article namespace. Non-free content should not be used on usepages or their subpages as explained in WP:UP#Non-free files which is why I have removed the non-free File:The Slavic god Koleda.jpg from User:Eckhardt Etheling/sandbox. Perhaps you did not notice the edit sums I left the previous times I removed the file; therefore, I'm posting this here to provide more explanation. Please do not re-add this file again because doing so is clearly in violation of relevant Wikipedia policy. If you continue to do so, an administrator will be asked to get involved. If you have any questions about this, you can ask for help at WP:MCQ or WT:NFCC. -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:19, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I am sorry but I didn't notice your edits and the fact the image is NFC.--Eckhardt Etheling (talk) 12:23, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That's OK. Single edit sums can be easily to miss on heavily edited pages. Just for reference though, I don't believe the way you seem to want to use the file would be allowed even if we were referring to an article and not your sandbox. WP:NFCC#9 would not be an issue, but that type of usage typically has problems satisfying WP:NFCC#3 and WP:NFCC#8. In general, non-free images are not allowed to be used to illustrate single entries in a embedded list or a list article for the reasons given in WP:NFLISTS. In such case, a link to the file's page using the colon trick is usually considered more appropriate. The link can be piped if you like. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:36, 7 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There's no problem, I already decided not to include the file in the table even once it will be added to Wikipedia proper.--Eckhardt Etheling (talk) 17:35, 7 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Arkaim

Hi - thanks for your work there but I removed the stuff sourced to Anatole Klyosov - you'll see it's been discussed on the talk page before. This is simply fringe material. Unless of course several reliable sources have discussed in in some detail, then it might meet WP:UNDUE. Doug Weller talk 13:14, 1 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That's ok, I did not read the discussion and just recovered it from the older version since I thought the Journal of Genetic Genealogy was a serious publication.--Eckhardt Etheling (talk) 13:30, 1 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Zadrugism

Hi, I apppreciate that "Zadruga" is found useful (although it's not a direct translation of the Polish article, I don't like translating, I prefer recreating). I have noted your request, once I have time, I'll do it. noychoH (talk) 06:37, 26 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Eckhardt Etheling. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Deities of Slavic religion

Hi, you added there the "Hands of God" as symbol of Svarog with alternate name "Hands of Heaven". Can you find and put there also citation for this symbol and its alternate name? --Wojsław Brożyna (talk) 09:13, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Wojsław Brożyna, I am sorry but the "/Heaven" there was probably an error of copying and pasting material. "Hands of God", ręce boga in Polish, is the WP:COMMONNAME by which that symbol is known.--Eckhardt Etheling (talk) 03:09, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, I think that all material pertaining to modern Rodnovery can stay in that page, given that it is appropriately pointed out that it is an innovation of the modern community. In fact, I disapprove the removal of all the representations, as the article was not conceived as being exclusively related to "historical Slavic religion" (which is exclusively about the ancient religion and what archeology says about it) but also shared with "Slavic Native Faith". I'll write something in the talkpage when I'll have time.--Eckhardt Etheling (talk) 03:19, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The statute of the Native Polish Church at p. 28 treats the symbol. In other material coming from NPC it is described as a symbol of the supreme God in all its manifestations, not only Svarog but also Perun and Svarozhich. Actually, in that description the NPC says that Svarog is better represented by the squared-hooks swastika between the "arms" of the rece boga. So, a squared-hooks swastika could be put in the "Svarog" image box in the table, while the rece boga could be put on top of the page in place of the SNF template to represent the supreme God sum of all gods, or under the main Rod illustration, since Rod already represents this concept of the supreme.--Eckhardt Etheling (talk) 03:56, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No, it's good to link that symbol with Svarog; concept of Rod as supreme God is specifically east and in west Rodnovery we can't see Rod by this way. In Slavic Polytheist theology Svarog is described as "pre-god" and supreme god; but sumpreme in sense that he's father of other deities, not in that the other deities are hypostasis of him - they're not. Native Polish Church is also specific organisation, which aren't described as Rodnover by majority of Polish rodnovers. And, I think that blog which you linked are not good source. :) --Wojsław Brożyna (talk) 09:47, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The blog is certainly not RS, but the original source is the NPC, which could be treated as a good source, though primary, in the absence of better sources. I've not been able to find better sources in Polish, since it's not my native tongue and it's difficult for me to understand. It is not our burden to decide whether the NPC is Rodnover or not; in fact it is treated as such by sources. In that description it is clearly stated that Svarog is associated to the square-hooks swastika, while the hands of God symbol represents the broader pre-god God (whether begetter of other gods or hypostatising in other gods — both the theological positions are, actually, acceptable within Rodnovery). Maybe the NPC's statute contains a better description.--Eckhardt Etheling (talk) 16:49, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding monism, by the way, it is not so "unorthodox" within Indo-European culture, considering that it is already present in the Vedas, which are among the oldest IE scriptures that we dispose of. There's much ignorance in the English-speaking world about the so-called "polytheism" (a term which in the modern meaning is actually an 18th-centiry creation).--Eckhardt Etheling (talk) 17:20, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Photos about Rodnovery in Poland and Russia

Hi, of course, I already wrote to few guys and they initially agreed to share few photos :) I have a quick question - can you send me simple instruction how to archive persmission from 3rd people? --Wojsław Brożyna (talk) 10:58, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Great! You have to upload the photos and then forward the email exchage that you had with the photos' author to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org, with a link to the uploaded photos and to their original location (if they were online, otherwise you might attach them to the email). The author has to clearly express his consent to upload the photos (e.g. "Yes, I agree to upload the photos xyz (+links or attachments) to Wikimedia Commons under the CC-BY-SA 4.0 license". In most cases this is sufficient. However, in some cases they want the permission directly from the author, so you could have to ask the author to send the email himself (in this format).--Eckhardt Etheling (talk) 11:24, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Chernava

Hello, Dear

Eckhardt Etheling!

I'm here to give you reliable sources about Chernava for the article "Deities of Slavic religion". Before this, I want to note that there are not a lot of mentions about Chernava. I, for example, found them only in the legends about Sadko. Sources of informations that I found:

Fedorovich, Alexander (1873). Онежские былины, записанные Александром Федоровичем Гильфердингом летом 1871 года (in Russian). The Imperial Academy of Sciences. p. 400. ISBN 978-5-4460-3959-3. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)

I also found this book in English language. Probably, one of its authors is Russian:

Bailey, James; Ivanova, Tatyana (2006). Anthology Russian Folk Epics. Routledge. pp. 225, 249, 250, 252, 308. ISBN 9780765630803. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)

I hope you'll restore all the relevant information about the Chernava. Best Wishes,

ForestFox200

ForestFox200 (talk) 20:10, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I'll do my best to restore the information.--Eckhardt Etheling (talk) 22:35, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Marek Hapon

FROM MAREK HAPON Dear Mr. Ethling: Thank you for requesting more of my artwok. Yeasterday I added my illustration of the god, Nyja. However, it was removed.

Thank you, I will restore it since it represents Niy while the former is the folklore character Viy.--Eckhardt Etheling (talk) 12:47, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Re: The symbols of Slavic deities

Ok, you're right according to the source, but most of these symbols ale not widely used in Rodnover movement and I saw them first time when you added them. So, if they're local (probably used only in Russia), should you not added such an information about? --Wojsław Brożyna (talk) 23:18, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you are right: They are from Russia and possibly Belarus.--Eckhardt Etheling (talk) 23:24, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 20

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Hungarian Native Faith, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Pluralism (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:36, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 27

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Hungarian Native Faith, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ordos (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:35, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for June 11

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Deities of Slavic religion, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Saint Paraskevi (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:26, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Sumerian Neopaganism

Hello Eckhardt Etheling,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Sumerian Neopaganism for deletion, because it seems to be an article that was created in violation of a block or ban. Content created by banned users will be deleted immediately.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions.

Jamez42 (talk) 21:14, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Mesopotamian neopaganism

Hello Eckhardt Etheling,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Mesopotamian neopaganism for deletion, because it seems to be an article that was created in violation of a block or ban. Content created by banned users will be deleted immediately.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions.

Jamez42 (talk) 21:15, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Sumerian-Mesopotamian Neopaganism

Hello Eckhardt Etheling,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Sumerian-Mesopotamian Neopaganism for deletion, because it seems to be an article that was created in violation of a block or ban. Content created by banned users will be deleted immediately.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions.

Jamez42 (talk) 21:15, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Mesopotamian Neopaganism

Hello Eckhardt Etheling,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Mesopotamian Neopaganism for deletion, because it seems to be an article that was created in violation of a block or ban. Content created by banned users will be deleted immediately.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions.

Jamez42 (talk) 21:46, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock request

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Æo (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Eckhardt Etheling is a legitimate alternative account. See here for the unblock request.--Eckhardt Etheling (talk) 21:00, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

If that account is unblocked, you can request this one to be unblocked. Until then - only one unblock request is needed. SQL ^{Query me!} 22:03, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

To Katolophyromai

@Katolophyromai: Thank you for having pinged me in the recent discussion, but I am unable to intervene due to the block. The fact that I am blocked does not mean that my edits were problematic in the first place. Indeed, my block is due to a topic ban evasion and I have had a recent email exchange with the Arbitration Committee which has determined that my use of my accounts was legitimate before the topic ban, although I will have to wait for an unblock.

No, I am not an adherent of SNF or of any other religion and my edits are not biased in favour of it. It is just one among my many academic interests. I am a researcher in the academia and I know how to handle sources. I largely rewrote the article "Slavic paganism" on the base of the best sources immediately available, and even expanded it based on the requests of other users, including :bloodofox: (here you can find the past discussion). It is not biased in favour of SNF, which is cited just in the last chapter as a "reinvention" of Slavic paganism. The article is based on a thorough, in-depth reading of the sources I used. I think that :bloodofox:'s post refers to the plethora of articles about Slavic mythology, deities and folklore characters. In the past, I myself criticised the bad state of those articles. See, for instance, the discussions here.

Please refer my position. It is really, really frustrating to be the subject of allegations, such as that I am a SNF adherent, without having the possibility to respond directly. Iryna Harpy knows me both under this name and as Wddan, and she may witness that I am a trustful user who knows how to use the sources.--Eckhardt Etheling (talk) 23:18, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Katolophyromai: There is also the horribly unsourced article "Supernatural beings in Slavic religion" which I unsuccessfully voted to delete at one point. It should be merged with "Slavic folklore", since the characters discussed in that article are more about folklore than religion.--Eckhardt Etheling (talk) 23:25, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

My comment about you and Slavic Native Faith was not intended as an "allegation"; I have nothing against followers of Slavic Native Faith. It was merely a guess based on your edit history and the fact that you frequently wrote about Slavic paganism and Slavic Native Faith. I apologize for making incorrect assumptions about you; I did not mean to offend you in any way. I have to be honest, I was not expecting you to respond to my comment, since you have been indefinitely blocked for over a month now and I figured you would have probably moved on. Also, as I understand it, a blocked user's ability to edit his or her user talk page is supposed to be limited to unblock requests only. I have to say that, from what I could tell, your work on the article Slavic paganism seemed to be excellent, but I am not an expert on Slavic paganism and since Bloodofox and Alarichall both seemed to be commenting on bias in the article, I assumed there were distortions I was not picking up on due to my lack of knowledge in that area. Perhaps the confusion was merely a result of good old Groupthink. --Katolophyromai (talk) 04:33, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Katolophyromai: Thank you for the response and the apologies. I noticed the ping for coincidence, as it happened that I was logged-in just yesterday evening (with the account AE on Meta). Since I felt called into question, I wanted to clarify my position. As a scholar, I have had close contacts with my objects of study, including SNF communities and various other religions (especially Asian, my specialisation). However, with my work on WP I try not to represent any specific viewpoint, and I used different accounts to edit different topic subsets also to avoid contaminations between viewpoints.

For my work on "Slavic paganism", I indeed reported faithfully what the sources that I used say. Those sources themselves, many of whom are renowned scholars of the last years of the Soviet era and the 1990s, present a rather consistent picture of Slavic paganism/religion, so this consistency is not the fruit of a Slavic nationalist agenda (I am not even a Slav; I am a Western European). Also note that Slavic paganism/religion is not entirely the same as Slavic mythology. The article "Slavic mythology" was originally a mass of unsorced material collected throughout the years; by reworking it into the current "Slavic paganism" I expanded the scope to the broader category "paganism/religion" and gave it a historical cut.

Besides, WP:BP does not specify that the user's talk page must be used exclusively for unblock requests. However, maybe it is better to avoid pinging me. If anyone wants to contact me for personal reasons in the future, he may do it through Special:EmailUser.--Eckhardt Etheling (talk) 09:49, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]