Talk:List of Celtic deities

Copyvio
I've discovered that the verbal commentary on the various gods is reproduced verbatim from http://www.paralumun.com/celticgod.htm. I'm therefore cutting it as copyright violation; it was going to be a nightmare to have to verify and wikify the material anyway. I'll also move this article from Celtic gods to 'list of', since that's basically what we'll be left with. QuartierLatin1968 17:11, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

No great loss, since that is just one of many terse, unreferenced and error prone deity lists floating around the Web. They tend to get copied over and over, accreting both new material and new errors. They are usualy copyvios themselves.

I prefer instead to work from the detailed to the general - start with individual deity pages, make each one list the actual evidence (epigraphc, archaeological, literary) for each one, and include them in a category such as Category:Ancient Gaulish and British goddesses or [:Category:Ancient Gaulish and British gods]]. --Nantonos 19:07, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Well, now that there are a significant number of citations, I wonder if this page can move back to Celtic gods? Anyone have an opinion? 66.189.247.72 (talk) 02:24, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

"Gods"? - "Goddesses"? - "Deities"?
It could be said that the only well-attested to instances of ANY known non-christian "deities" worshipped by the Irish/ Welsh/ Scottish/ British, etc. are those named in inscriptions on Romano-Celtic altars. I have left reminders on this elsewhere on Wikipedia discussion pages and so it seems especially appropriate here. I would like to see some serious discussion on the merit of the near universal custom of elevating to god/goddesshood virtually any of the primary characters in the stories of the so-called "Celtic" corpus. Related articles could start responding to this issue by briefly (-somehow?) defining their usage of the terms "gods" and "celtic". Earrach (talk) 16:07, 15 May 2010 (UTC)


 * I agree. A case can be made for the Tuatha De Danann as former Irish gods but some of the characters in the Welsh section are clearly not deities. Some are even thought to be historical figures like Taliesin and Myrddin Wyllt. It's misleading to call all these characters deities. I changed the heading and included a note about this point. Rajah1 (talk) 20:41, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Perhaps most of the Gallic "deities" are local epithets or hypostasises of deities of the original pantheon? For example, Gallo-Roman Mars has many epithets and these epithets are probably not independent deities. We could organize these regional epithets by Interpretatio Romana for clarification and organization. Deo Mercurio, the website, does an excellent job of explaining this and cites reputable sources. See his page for Mars ("To Lenus Mars") for an example. The downside to this is not every Gallic inscription has an interpretatio romana deity to go with it. So maybe there could be a separate list for unique Gallic inscriptions of deities. Emmie3296 (talk) 01:41, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Debranua
"Debranua, a goddess of speed and fat"... Really? As far as I can tell, this comes from a roleplaying game. Unless anyone can find an authentic reference for it, I suggest this is removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DomWalsh (talk • contribs) 15:28, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

I found this about Debranua, but I wasn't the creator of this page so I don't know where he or she got his or her citations from. http://www.lowchensaustralia.com/names/celticdeities.htm 66.189.247.72 (talk) 02:30, 23 March 2018 (UTC)


 * I'm afraid this one does look nonsensical. I'd agree with removing it. Q·L·1968 ☿ 16:47, 5 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Hmm, I found a mention of Debranua as a goddess https://books.google.com/books?id=kgxaCAAAQBAJ&pg=PA123&lpg=PA123&dq=%22debranua%22+goddess&source=bl&ots=YIIOl2WjtO&sig=wX2h7728WCs5n7b-xul7iZHwQgk&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwib7r2VoKXaAhUDuVMKHVxzDRs4ChDoAQg0MAI#v=onepage&q=%22debranua%22%20goddess&f=false This book was published by Weiser Books
 * I have changed Debranua to "goddess of air" because the book mentions the element air and its the only semi-reliable source I could find, speed and fat together sounds a bit ridiculous. Kspecific2011 (talk) 08:42, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

Domnu
There needs to be an English Wikipedia article on Domnu. There already is an article on her in a different language. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.189.247.72 (talk) 02:13, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

Citations added
Hey, I have painstakingly added citations to the article. Can someone remove the template saying the article needs additional citations for verification? Most of the deities now have citations, although there are still some missing. If you can help, that would be great. Kspecific2011 (talk) 01:07, 29 March 2018 (UTC) > it does need additional citations, the one for the Pictish deities links to a (neo-pagan) site explicitly about Gaelic deities. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C4:FD1D:F700:5811:A9AF:9FA1:481C (talk) 00:53, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

Deities added to Celtic pantheon not included
Is it just me or are deities later added to the Celtic pantheon from other cultures not included? For example Eostre was added to the Celtic pantheon, but she's not included in the list. Cybele was an Anatolian goddess added to the Galatian pantheon, but she's not included either. Gog and Magog are originally from the bible and they're not included in the list. Should the article stay this way? What are your thoughts? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kspecific2011 (talk • contribs) 02:54, 29 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Personally my feeling is that none of the deities you mentioned should be included here, because what is it that makes them Celtic? Galatians worshipping Cybele is interesting and important, but it's usually taken as evidence of their Hellenizing (or even Phrygianizing?!) tendency once they were established in their new digs. What would be the argument for including Gog and Magog? Are they mentioned in the Mabinogion or Geoffrey of Monmouth (my memory's failing me at the moment!)? Q·L·1968 ☿ 21:31, 3 April 2018 (UTC)


 * We should keep Angdistis (Galatian name for Cybele) off the list. But I didn't put Gog and Magog, Erce, or Eostre in the list. The hundreds of deities on the list are mostly Gallic (at least 300-400 entries!). I can verify most of the other gods were originally Celtic. Every reputable source (all the book sources) also puts on the Mars variant gods on a Celtic list so I left the hybrid Roman-Celtic gods in there, but I think they number less than 100 (the list has over 1,000 deities). As for the argument for Gog and Magog, this article mentions they became deities during Roman times and it was mentioned in a book written in the 12th century "The full story can be found in Geoffrey of Monmouth's twelfth century Historia Regum Brittaniae, a largely fanciful history that connects Celtic royalty to the heroic world of the Greek myth by way of the old Welsh legend of King Arthur." https://lordmayorsshow.london/history/gog-and-magog.html Kspecific2011 (talk) 23:14, 4 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Got it! For my part, I'd think it would be incredibly useful if primary source attestations were listed (e.g. so-and-so is mentioned as a god in Cormac's Glossary, so-and-so is invoked in an inscription on an altar from Spain, etc., etc.). But there are WP rules about not presenting original research and relying too heavily on primary documents. Maybe an encyclopedia of Celtic mythology by a reputable publisher might serve the purpose best? Q·L·1968 ☿ 16:45, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
 * PS: Among online resources, L'Arbre celtique (with which I'm not affiliated!) is excellent. It includes an inventory of deities named on ancient altars. This could be a good starting point for cross-checking the validity of the other online source(s), at least down to 500 CE or so. Q·L·1968 ☿ 16:54, 5 April 2018 (UTC)


 * There are some gods and goddesses with which I can't find any source on them since I didn't start this page. I can't find anything on Bandoga (Celtiberian goddess) and Epane (Celtiberian goddess). And these are just a few. It would be nice if we had some more help. I think it wouldn't be a bad idea to have 2 citations for each deity. Also, I can't read French, but I'll try to use that website. But, according to that website, Trivia is a Gallic goddess? Wikipedia says Trivia is a Roman goddess.

Also, the German Wikipedia lists Cú Chulainn and Cormac mac Airt as gods. These are not gods! They are mortal heroes. If a god has a child with a mortal, their offspring are mortal. I have kept mortal demigods/heroes off the list. Kspecific2011 (talk) 19:59, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

Let's keep count
We have now reached 1170 entries! We have 572 male entries and 598 female entries (643 female deities including triads). We have a total of 1215 deities on the list! Kspecific2011 (talk) 22:40, 4 April 2018 (UTC)


 * We need quality here, not quantity. Looking over this, too many of these are "sourced" to pop culture or dubious occult presses, rather than reliable sources. These lists of redlinks need cleanup, not expansion. - CorbieV  ☊ ☼ 19:38, 28 July 2018 (UTC)

Cleanup
Deities that can easily be sourced to the manuscripts have been sourced to things like amateur websites with zero sourcing; occult books that also have no reliable sourcing for the existence of these deities, merely a passing mention; a PDF that has a list of mediocre sources at the end but zero inline sourcing for the individual deities; newage meditation books with no connection to Celtic cultures; and even works of fiction. And this article/list has been a dumping ground for WP:CITESPAM. Long-overdue cleanup underway. If I accidentally cut something that good sourcing is available for, please add good sourcing when you put it in. - CorbieV  ☊ ☼ 19:43, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I think this is a fantastic idea <b style="color:#44018F;">Co</b><b style="color: #003878;">rb</b><b style="color: #145073;">ie</b><b style="color: #006E0D">V</b>, and I am interested in helping in this area as well. Happy to do a pass after you do some work or collaborate with a more systematic approach if you have a plan in mind. --- FULBERT (talk) 13:08, 24 March 2019 (UTC)


 * I would be delighted if others would ignore the ref "rescue" of the bot, again delete those bad sources and continue on with the tedious removal of the cites to those non-RS sources and the content solely sourced by them. I only stopped when I did because I got tired of the bot-level wikignoming and needed a break. I'm only leaving unsourced entries if they have WP articles, or I'm pretty certain they can easily be sourced with RS cites. The sources I've left are not necessarily OK; I just may not have had the chance to look through them yet.
 * Once the bad cites are gutted, and the list pared down to actually-attested deities, we source to solid sources. The articles on these deities should have good sourcing already formatted, that we can check and import. If those articles don't have solid sourcing, those articles should also be cleaned up or, if they are also fabrications based on bad sources, deleted or merged, as necessary. Thanks! - <b style="color:#44018F;">Co</b><b style="color: #003878;">rb</b><b style="color: #145073;">ie</b><b style="color: #006E0D">V</b>  ☊ ☼ 18:50, 24 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Also, as the cleanup can be time-consuming, we might want to use the edit in progress templates when we do a major pass on the whole thing, or only do sections at a time. Whichever works best to avoid edit conflicts. We could also post here right before and after major edits to let others know. I'm not really feeling like diving back in just yet. So if anyone else wants to take a pass right now, go for it. I'll try to remember to post here and add the  template before I do another run. -  <b style="color:#44018F;">Co</b><b style="color: #003878;">rb</b><b style="color: #145073;">ie</b><b style="color: #006E0D">V</b>  ☊ ☼ 19:23, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

Question: As so many of these sources are crap, might we save ourselves a bunch of work by finding an earlier version to revert to? As in, MUCH earlier? I've added some text, but... I'm just not sure at this point. Thoughts? - <b style="color:#44018F;">Co</b><b style="color: #003878;">rb</b><b style="color: #145073;">ie</b><b style="color: #006E0D">V</b>  ☊ ☼ 21:31, 25 March 2019 (UTC)


 * OK, this will be rather bot-like. Going back in for moar cleanup. - <b style="color:#44018F;">Co</b><b style="color: #003878;">rb</b><b style="color: #145073;">ie</b><b style="color: #006E0D">V</b>  ☊ ☼ 19:27, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Done for now. There are still sources I haven't had a chance to check, but it's getting there. Feel free to dive in without edit conflicts now. - <b style="color:#44018F;">Co</b><b style="color: #003878;">rb</b><b style="color: #145073;">ie</b><b style="color: #006E0D">V</b>  ☊ ☼ 21:10, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I do not think we can overall revert to an earlier page, as there is simply too much information that is link here. If anything, it will require a page-by-page review. May make for a nice 2019 overall project CorbieVreccan. --- FULBERT (talk) 18:29, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
 * I came to the same conclusion, which is why I went back in and did it manually. There are still more sources and entries to be evaluated, but I think it's in much better shape now. Please have at it. The edit you just reverted (thank you) was someone attempting to put one of those unsourced, non RS websites (and content from it) back in. They didn't even put in the cite itself, just the abbreviated ref. - <b style="color:#44018F;">Co</b><b style="color: #003878;">rb</b><b style="color: #145073;">ie</b><b style="color: #006E0D">V</b>  ☊ ☼ 18:34, 10 April 2019 (UTC)