Talk:Capricorn (astrology)/Archive 1

Appearance
I've put the bit about physical appearance and complexion back in; despite the claims of the editor who deleted it, many astrologers describe a person's sun sign as resulting in certain physical characteristics, not to mention that it keeps this article consistent with all the other astrological sign articles. I don't have any references handy on this, but i'll dig them up soon.... Lucky number 49 21:27, 28 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I agree, there are many articles about this subject. http://www.astrologyweekly.com/sun-signs/ has a section on this subject. Meojive (talk) 00:13, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

"Pluto in Capricorn"
I noticed, major political events occurred every time Pluto entered Capricorn? Would it be worth noting of how Obama was elected this year, the same year Pluto entered Capricorn? Probably just a crazy ideal, but hey, who knows? - JWhitt (talk) 08:03, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Nevermind, better off ignoring my question, I checked the history of the page and I see its been reverted every time its been added. - JWhitt (talk) 08:05, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * There are always major political events :-) just as the first black US president was nominated when Pluto was retrograding back into Sagittarius. Nathanael Bar-Aur L. (talk) 04:34, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I think this entire topic is foolish. There's nothing political about the birth of Christianity or the rise and fall of the Vikings. The fact that a minority was elected as a public official seems insignificant compared to the other examples. Where was Pluto during the U.S. Revolution or World War I and II? Isn't that just as significant or coincidental? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.212.63.80 (talk) 10:37, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

I think ,that world wars and capricorn are irrelevant about the meaning of this topic. Capricorn is considered to be controlling force in the universe, so that's why this is the main subject... the world war energy would be much issued about Planet Mars and Aries constelation...

i would like that this topic is alive again about capricorn —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.116.153.167 (talk) 15:08, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Is that why?
For some reason I am attracted to a full moon and whenever I look at it I go into some sort of trans and I can't get out of it until something interrupts my thoughts. I am a Capricorn born on January 15th, 1998. Does anything have to due with this attraction of mine? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.70.39.243 (talk) 02:35, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Disputed
which parts are disputed? Meojive (talk) 00:36, 7 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Why is there a reference of Pluto associated with Capricorn? KyuuA4 (talk) 16:22, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Also, Capricorn is actually a masculine sign... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.203.254.29 (talk) 08:49, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

-- on the main astrology page, it lists Capricorn as a masculine sign; therefore we have two contradictory messages being disseminated by Wikipedia —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.166.131.243 (talk) 21:16, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Earth and water signs have always been considered "feminine" by astrological literature. That notion has a particular meaning in astrology and supposedly reflects an introspective quality. --Nathanael Bar-Aur L. (talk) 05:53, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

How can you talk about "feminine" signs, "water" signs, disputed or undisputed since all of this stuff is total BULLSHIT anyway? You all know that, don't you? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.5.163.195 (talk) 12:32, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Notable persons
In case you're wondering what's happened to the Notable persons section, it has been deleted in favor of the page Category:Subjects of the Sign of Capricorn. If you want to add a notable person go there. --Carmelita 21:10, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Shouldn't there be a link to the category then? Or else just leave the "notable persons" on this page? Someone looking for notable people would not look for or be able to find a category like that easily. Irish Pearl 19:52, 25 January 2007 (UTC)


 * (I'm gonna cross-post this): there is absolutely no need to have a "notable persons" section. What about cuspers (people born between two signs), what would they be? If they went under both that'd take up more space. You can't list EVERY single person ever born under one sign. If you want to know what a famous person's zodiac sign or birthday is, just look up their separate article on Wikipedia. If they are famous, they should be on Wikipedia. So yeah, I'm taking out the notable persons section and I'm warning people not to readd it. 75.27.185.204 03:03, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

i could not disagree with you more and whats with the threat at the end. since when do you make the rules b/c in this forum it is 3 to 1. you dont even have a name your just using your ip address. Peppermintschnapps (talk) 18:59, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Capricorn (astrology)
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Capricorn (astrology)'s orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "encyzodiac": From Aquarius (astrology): The Diagram Group, The Little Giant Encyclopedia of The Zodiac,Leo p 171, Sterling Publishing Company, New York, 1997  From Virgo (astrology): The Diagram Group, The Little Giant Encyclopedia of The Zodiac, p 171, Sterling Publishing Company, New York, 1997  From Taurus (astrology): The Diagram Group, The Little Giant Encyclopedia of The Zodiac, p 171, Sterling Publishing Company, New York, 1997. 

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 00:42, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Compatibilities
Why are all of the same element compatible? That's not right. Slowish guitar (talk) 16:12, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

It's one of the fundamental beliefs of astrology, that signs of the same element will generally do very well together (as compared to signs that are not of the same element). The only exception to this is of course is the compatibility between the exact same sign of the exact same element. Possibly spend five minutes researching astrology before you post and you'll learn these sorts of things. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.229.205.4 (talk) 15:14, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

compatibility
Is it really necessary to have a romanitic compatibility chart in this article? This reflects an extremely superficial understanding of astrology, imho.

Why not have a similar chart for say....anthropologists? I.e., anthropologists are compatible with Physicists but not so much with mathematicians and engineers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 111.163.232.121 (talk) 17:00, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress which affects this page. Please participate at Talk:Capricorn and not in this talk page section. Thank you. --202.28.181.200 (talk) 08:53, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Capricorn which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 18:18, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Redirection of Western Zodiac signs
On 22 October 2012 the contents of the articles for the individual signs of the western zodiac (Pisces (astrology) etc.) were removed and replaced with redirects to Astrological sign. These edits were made by User:Dominus Vobisdu with the edit summary: ''Unsourced and unsourceable cruft. No justification for stand-alone article.'' This did not seem to follow a community discussion.

Following concerns raised at the Reference Desk I will, after posting this, restore the articles to the form they were in immediately before their redirection. At least some of the articles seem to have been significantly reduced in size also prior to this redirection, however I have not reverted these changes.

Because I am sure editors may wish to discuss this (perhaps to reinstate the redirects, or make other changes to these articles), however a discussion spread among the talk pages twelve articles in question would be too dissipated, I suggest Talk:Astrological_sign as a centralised discussion location. An editor with more experience than I in Wikipedia policies may wish to move this discussion to a better location. LukeSurlt c 15:22, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Picture not appropriate
The picture is not appropriate because it shows a goat, and Capricorn is not really a goat, but a sea-goat. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.148.193.153 (talk) 16:24, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

Corrections to dates, date and citation format in sign articles
I have created a module which encapulates values for the dates the Sun enters and exits the various signs; the data is taken from the U.S. Naval Observatory's Multiyear Interactive Computer Almanac and covers 2015 through most of 2050. The Template:Zodiac date produces some erroneous results, so I hope to implement the change this week.

It is only practical to implement one date and citation style for the module and infobox, so it would be helpful if we can agree on what format to use for the various sign articles. Please discuss at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Astrology. Jc3s5h (talk) 21:04, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 November 2019
Some information regarding the Capricorn is partially true. I am talking about cultural significance. Makara Sankranti is not celebrated only in India but also in Nepal. It is not exclusively an Indian festival. So I suggest you edit it as a Hindu festival as it is celebrated by Hindus worldwide. Be it, Nepalese people or Indian people. Thanks for your time! 27.34.68.220 (talk) 07:31, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. NiciVampireHeart 07:49, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

Reference to Vedic Astrology
The information regarding Vedic astrology is incorrect. The Vedic system diverges from tropical astrology because it follows the procession of the equinoxes, not because it doesn't account for them, whereas tropical (Western) astrology's astrological signs are longer aligned with the constellations that give the signs their name and symbol. Nuitexseptumvela (talk) 22:34, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 August 2020
Raman Thapa (talk) 19:50, 3 August 2020 (UTC) In cultural significance, instead of stating only "India" state "In India and Nepal" cause both the countries celebrate Makar Sankranti.
 * ✅. ◢  Ganbaruby!   (Say hi!) 12:32, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Sign's symbol
apparently Capricorn has an "american" & "european" variant, at least according to programs like astrolog that allow you to choose which one to display (in the "obscure settings" on the right side). Nagelfar 07:53, 12 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Yes, and the symbol currently gracing the article is not a good rendition of either of the variants. It looks like an attempt at compromise between the two. 216.75.183.126 (talk) 23:16, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

You can't be perfect for everyone on earth. If it bothers you so much, do something! I think compromise is good on a world wide access. If you choose the american one, europeans get insulted. If you choose the european one, americans get insulted. if you compromise, you get a couple people scratching their heads. I personally have never seen the sign before, So I can care less. -Andromoidus —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.181.125.250 (talk) 21:17, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

A "Symbology" category, as model by the Sagittarius (astrology) article, should be made to give both their face time and background. Meojive (talk) 00:16, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

One looks like a 76 and the other looks like a V8 or WS. Quite different, even if from "differing angles" 50.246.247.217 (talk) 11:16, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

It's not an *.svg, but an opaque *.png, but this one from the “occult / mysticism oriented” periodical "The Equinox" from 1911 seems superior (at least with regard to common usage depicting / portraying it's shape and likeness)



Nagelfar (talk) 15:44, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

Capricorns
this information wasn't helpful but I learned something new. Maybe someone could take the time to add more info. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 136.41.128.9 (talk) 18:42, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 27 January 2020 and 22 May 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Jesbewiki.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 16:44, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Neutrality
This article clearly does not have a neutral point of view, being written entirely from the point of view of those who believe in astrology, and using language which portrays those beliefs as facts. <span style="border: 1px; border-style:solid; padding:0px 2px 2px 2px; color:black; background-color:lightblue; font-weight:bold">Lurker your words/my deeds 16:01, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

It's fairly clear that it is only explaining the astrologers' position. I don't think anyone would believe this to be anything other than descriptive.
 * Nevertheless there should be a disclaimer. - Plasticbadge 07:11, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Disclaimers are unencyclopedic, in part, because they are not NPOV. That these are the views of the profession should be written into the article itself organically, that is part of what good writing is about, not having to put up separate disclaimers et al. 67.5.147.77 06:05, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
 * This all seems quite unscientific to me. Where are the references to the relevant studies? User — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.254.167.140 (talk) 21:19, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
 * All of the following is junk, that has no place in any credible reference text. It contains multiple broad, 'factual' assertions with no grounding in any form of evidence whatsoever. If this is what 'astrologers assert,' then this should be stated at the opening of each sentence, and referenced appropriately (where do astrologers state this?) Otherwise, wiki's entry risks being no more substantiated / reasonable than a tabloid horoscope or psychic hotline: "most Capricorns are very confusing and complicated souls. They are very good at hiding their true feelings, but are super emotional on the inside. Many Capricorns are shy and cautious people who take a long time to show their fun side or deepest feelings to others. Some label them as serious and unapproachable individuals with a tough exterior, but beneath the tough exterior lies a warm heart wanting to love and being loved, ready to help and become one of the most loyal and caring friends. They have good memories, an insatiable yet methodical desire for knowledge and a witty sense of humor which may erupt at unexpected moments." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.32.240.38  (talk • contribs) 14:29, 5 May 2015  UTC (UTC)

The article is specifically about the Astrological Capricorn and as such is is more or less correct. There are however dubious citations. Neidzwiedz (talk) 12:25, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

Cultural Background
This article needs to go more in depth about how 'Capricorns' are interpreted by different cultures because it is different for many areas```` — Preceding unsigned comment added by Garciba0 (talk • contribs) 18:18, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Makar rashi
Voice 27.34.59.194 (talk) 10:01, 3 July 2022 (UTC)

Enki
The claim about a link between Capricorn and a much, much older Sumerian God Enki is very strange, and supported by a single citation to an amateur horoscope blog post that does not cite anything. "There appears to be a connection" is at worst misleading and at best original research. 2600:1700:67D0:2EE0:6C2F:854A:C294:56FA (talk) 22:24, 2 February 2023 (UTC)