Talk:Easter

External link

I posted one link recently here at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Easter but now it is removed by Wikipedia what would be the reason. link was to this website http://www.fundootimes.com/festivals/easter.html with title Happy Easter, kindly suggest me how to link this site to this article.

This question is crossposted at Wikipedia:Help_desk#External_link_problem. Adrian J. Hunter^{(talk•contribs)} 08:34, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

History

The article should also have a history section, showing the original (pagan, Norse, etc.) influences regarding Easter. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thangalin (talk • contribs) 02:49, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

See also: http://homecooking.about.com/od/foodhistory/a/easteregghistry.htm

Thangalin (talk) 02:50, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

We've been over this numerous times before. This article is about the Christian festival. Look on the Easter_(disambiguation) page. Ruckabumpkus (talk) 22:08, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Missing history

There is a great deal of missing history. Easter was originally the worship of a number of goddesses associated with fertility, rebirth, and death long before the Christanic cult came along. Fertility festivals and death and rebirth rites which ritually took place long before Christianity were usurped by the upstart cult as a means of political and economic control of subjugated, oppressed, and occupied people under the thumb of the Occupational Armies of Rome, so much so that Christianity is considered a "resentment cult" complete with Mithratic rebirth after a Roman execution despite previous Jewish versions which had The Bull mythos hung from a living tree in the Jewish tradition rather than crucified in the Roman tradition. Are Christanics removing actual history from this Wiki entry trying to pretend otherwise, perhaps? Damotclese (talk) 20:24, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

There is probably need for some history, given that there is none. Of course, it would all be speculation as to how things co-occur, but there are probably various theories. I have not researched them, so can not respond now. But I do not recall anyone deleting them. But also see the message of Ruckabumpkus just above who said this has been discussed before.

And given the lovely tone of your paragraph above, welcome, love and kisses to you too. And a reading of WP:CALM and WP:NPOV may also be suggested. Best wishes and love as always - in the spirit of Easter. History2007 (talk) 20:35, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Please take a look at the talk archives -- the article has often considered alternative theories about the origins of Easter, ranging from Alexander Hyslop's 19th-century Ishtar polemics, to neo-Pagan restoration hypotheses, to fundamentalist Christian etymologies asserting "Easter" derives from "Jesus", to repeated cut-and-pastings of the poorly-sourced garble at religioustolererance.org. The word "Easter" has a history, the holiday Easter has a history, various religious and secular traditions associated with Easter have histories, and each of those (often independent) histories have been explained as much as valid sources will support. Ben (talk) 15:00, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

So to avoid the same questions again, how about changing the section "In the early church" title to something like "origins in early Christianity" "or History of the feast" or something like that to cut back on "why is there no history" questions like the 2 above. And a comment needs to be left there, advising people to read the archives. History2007 (talk) 15:16, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Would it be useful to provide an index to archived discussions here? Something like:

• Easter is 100% Pagan because "Easter" derives from "Ishtar"
• Easter is 100% Christian because "Easter" derives from "Iesus"
• Easter is 100% Christian because "Easter" derives from "Auferstehen"
• Easter is 100% Pagan because "Easter" derives from "Eostre"

with links to the corresponding archive page sections? Ben (talk) 16:05, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Useful, yes, but permanent, is doubtful, for this page will also get archived. So some method needs to be found to say it very briefly somewhere not on a talk page. I am not sure how. History2007 (talk) 16:28, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure that you can pass directives to Miszabot and tell it not to archive a section. I'll take a look at it sometime this week. Ben (talk) 17:17, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Maybe there could be a separate article about "History-of-Easter controversies"? Ruckabumpkus (talk) 20:09, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Please tell me that someone here is not proposing that the etymology of the word Easter—as handled by historical linguists and academic Indo-Europeanists—is to be put on equal footing with Christian claims of Ishtar and Jesus and is being taken seriously. :bloodofox: (talk) 00:30, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

So which one gets the lower footing? History2007 (talk) 00:39, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

I'm not proposing anything of the sort. We've all been involved in these arguments with newbies to the subject whose enthusiasm outstrips their research. Wouldn't it be nice to have a sort of directory of arguments which have already been shot down as being unacceptable for Wikipedia, so that we can point folks who want to cut-and-paste the shoddily-sourced religioustolerance.org article or the even worse easterau article thither? Ben (talk) 01:22, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

I agree with Ben. Put links to them at the top of the talk page so we do not have to repeat them again in 9 months. History2007 (talk) 01:27, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

While I would also love to snuff out the nonsensical Ishtar-business, I think that all we need to do is tell them that Wikipedia is not a bulletin board, point them to the etymology section, and tell them to take it as they will. :bloodofox: (talk) 03:43, 13 September 2011 (UTC)