Talk:Tarot

Ridiculous Hyperbole
Do we really need that quote in the introduction paragraph about Tarot being the subject of the "most successful propaganda campaign ever"? It makes those historians sound like crackpots with a bone to pick. If that's true then their work shouldn't be used. But I see that book is cited a lot in this page, and may be a good history of Tarot. If it's not then we should just remove that quote because it sounds ridiculous.

REPENT !!!!!
DISCLAIM TAROT AND ACCEPT JESUS CHRIST AS YOUR TRUE LORD AND SAVIOR. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.65.91.78 (talk) 11:27, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
 * The traditional imagery of the tarot is derived from medieval Christianity and the cards were originally used for a trick taking game similar to Rook Smiloid (talk) 03:49, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
 * no 88.230.6.158 (talk) 14:07, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
 * @69.65.91.78. As Smiloid says, the traditional pictures are typical of mediaeval Christianity. Christians may draw on the Bible to reject the occult use of any cards and the use of cartomantic packs with occult designs that have distorted or replaced the traditional pictures. But there is no logical argument in rejecting packs designed for playing games that have no occultic images (the older Italian ones arguably do). They are just playing cards. And historical objections by church and state to card games was primarily due to the problems caused by gambling.


 * @Smiloid. We don't know the original rules, but there is no close resemblance of tarot games to Rook. Rook has four suits, all with the same number of cards and any of which may be named as trumps; Tarot packs have five suits; one is permanently trumps and longer than the others. There are 57 cards in a full Rook pack; 78 in a Tarot pack. The rules of play are also different: Whist rules for Rook with no requirement as in Tarot to play a trump if unable to follow suit. And of course the culture around the games is totally different. Bermicourt (talk) 09:15, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:The Fool (Tarot card) § Requested move 11 August 2022
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:The Fool (Tarot card) § Requested move 11 August 2022. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 13:00, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Research Process and Methodology - FA22 - Sect 201 - Thu
— Assignment last updated by WZ2372 (talk) 08:13, 29 October 2022 (UTC)

re "See Also'

 * Astragalomancy
 * Zener cards

Why was it reverted?

Both are related to paranormal. Dice orginally a game (like tarot cards were) became a tool for divanation.

ED 2607:FEA8:4A2:4100:3948:5327:3C8A:C4D4 (talk) 02:22, 9 January 2023 (UTC)


 * this is about your edit. DMacks (talk) 03:55, 9 January 2023 (UTC)


 * Thanks DMacks. I reverted the links because this article is primarily about the cards, not divination. The logical place for the the Astragalomancy link is at the Tarot card reading article which is the main article about the use of Tarot cards for divination and which already has similar links. However, we need to be selective because Category:Divination contains nearly 200 articles and the "See also" section is not meant to cover everything. Zener cards are not about divination, they were part of a paranormal experiment, so should be linked from paranormal articles.
 * BTW it is not true to say dice and tarot cards were "orginally a game, but now a tool for divination". Dice are way more commonly used for playing and even tarot cards are widely used in games today, except in Britain and America where we are almost entirely ignorant of their original purpose and current usage. Yet there are even international tournaments in games like Königrufen which use Tarot cards and many areas of Europe play Tarot card games. Bermicourt (talk) 08:24, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you DMack. What is wiki's policy on "see other"? Would you know?
 * Ed 2607:FEA8:4A2:4100:BC20:F80A:3FA9:DAD9 (talk) 00:18, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

@Bermicourt::You said "primary" but not totally.
 * So divination (or Cartomancy) is not mentioned in the article?
 * "Zener cards" are cards are they not?
 * Zener cards are not just used for paranormal experiments but by some also as a tool to develope ESP clairvoyancy.
 * Ed 2607:FEA8:4A2:4100:BC20:F80A:3FA9:DAD9 (talk) 00:34, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Wiki policy on the "See also" section is at MOS:SEEALSO. The section is not essential and, if used, should not be overly long. This article's focus is on Tarot cards; their use in games and divination is covered in detail elsewhere. So there is a section on cartomantic use, but it's only an overview because the main article is at Tarot card reading. The latter is logically where divinatory links should be added, not here. Otherwise we could add links to every tarot card game in the world as well.
 * Zener cards are cards, but so are business cards, postcards, Christmas cards and birthday cards. They have nothing to do with Tarot cards and are not used for divinatory purposes according to the article. Even if they were, I would argue that the subject is not even notable enough to link from Tarot card reading; otherwise editors would have carte blanche to add every article listed at Category:Divination which then violates MOS:SEEALSO. See also sections should not be endless lists or a substitute for categories. Bermicourt (talk) 10:23, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I would say business cards, post cards, Christmas cards, birthday cards are not like playing cards. They are not randomly shuffled like Tarot and Zener cards are and are in a deck. They are not used in a single like business, post cards, birthday and Christmas cards are. Also not gifted.
 * Both Tarot cards and Zener cards are used by "occultests".

Also would "Tarot card reading" be suited for "See also"?
 * Ed 2607:FEA8:4A2:4100:C115:C822:D04B:FC78 (talk) 10:13, 17 January 2023 (UTC)


 * This isn't a topic-area with which I'm familiar (it's just on my watchlist due to it being a tempting target for vandalism and POV editing). So I can't speak to what is specifically relevant. But I can say that the SEEALSO guideline says one should not list entries that are already in the article itself. Therefore tarot card reading should not be listed because it is linked in the first parargraph. DMacks (talk) 12:51, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

Pack vs. Deck
"Deck of Cards" sounds more correct than a "Pack of Cards". 24.51.192.49 (talk) 12:24, 26 February 2023 (UTC)


 * They're the same thing, but broadly speaking "deck" is American and "pack" is British/European and possibly used in other English-speaking countries outside of North America. Plus "pack" is the usual term used by scholarly sources on Tarot cards. HTH. Bermicourt (talk) 20:35, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

"Distribution" section heading
Would it be better to clarify that this section is about geographic distribution in history? (Proposed suggestion: rename section to "Geographical distribution") I thought it was somewhat misleading and was expecting to see a distribution of the cards in the major and minor arcana. 2600:1700:4579:B80:A7:F866:2B5:497E (talk) 05:17, 7 March 2023 (UTC)