Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bozaloshtsh


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result of the debate was NO CONSENSUS. Harro5 22:44, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Bozaloshtsh
del Nonverifable. The anon is creating Wiendish mythology here, totally unreferenced, taking an advantage this being an unknown area. mikka (t) 16:41, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
 * delete original research per referrer. If this is taken from neopaganist manuals, please clearly say so in the text. --Ghirlandajo 13:10, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Dear Mikkalai. Several homepages refer to the Bozaloshtsh. What is your problem? Dr. Anthony E. Smith is behind this interpreation of the Bozaloshtsh. Remember it is Wendish - not Russian mythology in this case. See: http://www.pantheon.org/articles/b/bozaloshtsh.html

But on the other hand. I may have been fooled by this Wicca, I'm must admit. see: http://www.heathenfolk.net/forums/view_topic.php?id=599&forum_id=&jump_to=2750 "Now this guy, Dr. Anthony E. Smith, is a prime example of parroting Wiccan doctrine."

LK


 * Comment. This has been listed on WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/Hotlist of Mythology & Folklore/B3 since that page was created, using www.pantheon.org as a source. Either we believe that is a valid source or we don't. But creating red links based on it, then posting the articles filling in the red links on AfD is hypocritical and newcomer-biting, among other things. 24.17.48.241 09:22, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Bozaloshtsh's also got an article at http://da.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bozaloshtsh (where it should be less of an 'unknown area'). 24.17.48.241 09:32, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Please check out: Bonnerjea, B. A Dictionary of Superstitions and Mythology. London 1927

user:konzack 20:23 December 13 2005

Relisting this to generate more discussion. howcheng   [ t &#149; c &#149; w &#149;  e  ] 19:21, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep has credible sources. Kappa 01:46, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Relisting due to insufficient votes. - Mailer Diablo 09:54, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Weak keep This whole area seems full of circular references. I can't find a copy of Bonnerjea for example. Has anyone independent seen/read any of these works?  There may be a story here, but I sense it is not balanced.Obina 12:31, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment - this article has been on AfD for 13 days now, which seems to be stretching the process beyond what it's meant to be. Clearly there is no consensus to delete, so the article (as ridiculous as it may be) should be unburdened of the AfD notice. The 'not verified' notice should be enough to warm people that this is a potentially questionable article. - squibix 20:48, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Emphatic Delete. There's no consensus to delete because it's such an incredibly obscure topic. As one of the few people who actually know anything of pre-Christian Slavic mythology, I have to say this is complete bollocks. The people had no writing. We're not even sure of the functions and relationships between their chief deities. I have never heard of Biren Bonnerjea or his 1921 book before, but in the past few decades made up Slavic mythology has been used to support a huge number of hoaxes in wiccan literature. I'd need to see more modern sources, with detailed explanation on where they found this deity, to change my mind. A single obscure 1921 book isn't nearly good enough. Flyboy Will 23:23, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep with the unverified tag -- Astrokey44 |talk 01:00, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
 * That's the worst possible solution. This entire encyclopedia will go down the drain. Any insane tidbit of idiocy can be kept here, as long as a couple of geocities pages copy it off of each other. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, a secondary repositary of information, which means reputable sources must exists before an article is created. Flyboy Will 02:58, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Seems to me like complete bollocks. Stifle 13:50, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete as per Flyboy Will unless proof of given reference text, or other independent source provided. -Tim Rhymeless (Er...let's shimmy) 13:00, 28 December 2005 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.