|Yoruba religion has been listed as a level-4 vital article in Philosophy. If you can improve it, please do. This article has been rated as C-Class.|
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
|This article has an assessment summary page.|
I believe, consistent with articles on Western religions and Wikipedia's WP:NPOV policy, that this article should be titled Yoruba religion rather than Yoruba mythology. --Shirahadasha 08:34, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
- Have renamed the article for these reasons. Best, --Shirahadasha 03:16, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
Otelemuyen 08:00, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
The Yorùbá religion comprises the original religious beliefs and practices of the Yoruba people before their encounter with other religions. Its homeland is in Southwestern Nigeria and adjoining parts of Benin. During the migration of personnel, it was exported to America where it has influenced or given birth a thriving way of life such as Lucumí in Cuba and Umbanda and Candomblé in Brazil. Yoruba religious beliefs are part of itan...the total complex of songs, histories, stories and other cultural concepts which make up the Yorùbá society. Otelemuyen 07:38, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
Orisha are entities that possesses the capability of reflecting some of the manifestations of Olódùmarè. Often described as intermediaries between man and the supernatural. The term is often translated as "divinity" or "deity".
There are Orisha that are more like "anamistic entities" and have control over specific elements in nature and are better known as the Divinities, and there are also the Orisha that are more like ancient heroes and or sages and are best addressed as Dema Deities. Even though in the basics of things, the term Orisha is often used to describe either of these entities it is mainly reserved for the former. °
- Latest Edit - Divinities: The issue raised by the initial post on this topic as to if there exists a degree or hierachy in amongst the Orisa's; the difference beteween the Irunmole, the principle Orisa's Divinities [(e.g Obatala, Orunmila, Esu e.t.c)many of which are indeed Irumole too] and the Orisa's Dema Deity that are more or less ancient heroes that (due to the deeds that have been accomplished from) are immortalised has been addressed. Otelemuyen 17:36, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
- grammar -
This was the third paragraph of the Beliefs section
- Some feel it also binding to make a petition or prayer to one's Orí Òrún as it is said to yield quick and decisive pockets of joy. Ẹlégbara (Eṣu, the divine messenger) who, without distortion or partiality for good or for bad, negotiates communication to Òrún and navigates them to Ayé; deliverer of àṣẹ. It is thought that Ifá is called upon whilst in times of major decision making; whatever the 'offering'; the line of advice is commonly used to draw conclusions that would not have been first thought. Call Orunmila,Ifa; or try vice-versa; it is said that all communication with Òrún is energized by invoking àṣẹ.
I tried to remove weasel words and clean up the grammar a bit. My first cut at its meaning follows:
- Prayer to one's Orí Òrún is can yield quick and decisive pockets of joy. Ẹlégbara (Eṣu, the divine messenger) initiates contact with Òrún, and transmits to Ayé; deliverer of àṣẹ. Ẹlégbara transmits messages without distortion. Regardless of the form of prayer or offering, Ifá is called upon whilst in times of major decision making. Call Orunmila,Ifa; or vice-versa. All communication with Òrún is energized by invoking àṣẹ.
- Latest Edit - Otelemuyen 07:57, 20 January 2011 (UTC) Beliefs: The first line in 1, and other aspects in 1.2
°Otelemuyen 07:52, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
Only one God Yoruba
Otelemuyen 08:02, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
- Ok, since you've asked what is wrong with the article. Statements like "Yorùbá engage in a robust philosophy" and "The Yorùbá(s), refered to as being highly cultured and exquisite statesmen are spread across the globe in an unprecedented fashion" are totally biased and not encyclopaedic language (as well as being completely uncited opinion). Now do you understand why you can't have statements like that in the article? --Hibernian (talk) 04:18, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
- As you are probably already aware that the issues you are raising about specific content on the article being a mere opinion or not being cited is (as i respond) unfounded. Maybe you would like to take the pain of actually checking the article in question for verification. Otelemuyen (talk) 16:05, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
I have to agree with Hibernian.
The tone of much of this article is more like an promotional essay than an encyclopaedia entry. In addition "robust philosophy" and "highly cultured and exquisite statesmen", sounds awkward and jingoistic, like a bad google translation of some old Maoist propaganda.
Perhaps clarifying the fact that the statements are quoted opinion where given, and replacing some of the more effusive quotes with ones of a more relevant and scholarly tone, will help to improve the article. Philip72 (talk) 12:48, 22 May 2012
|Response to third opinion request:|
|Hello, thanks to the good faith editors of this article for contributing to Wikipedia and for suggesting a 3rd party opinion. This article is perhaps a little trickier than most since it involves a religion, which is a belief and may involve articles of faith. What some see as facts, others will see as opinion. There can be a genuine good faith disagreement as to how best treat this subject in keeping with Wikipedia guidelines. My specific opinion...
Overall, this is an article on a religion and this type of subject matter is largely defined by the religion itself, which arbuably makes it on its face questionable and untrustworthy. But, the only way to present a contrary view is with cited information from trusted sources. Absence any sources that substantially disagree with the points in the article now written, I see no reason to change much in this article - except of course to make clear what is obviously opinion by attributing the opinions to those who hold them. Write on my talk page if you are interested in further thoughts or disagree. Good luck. Leidseplein (talk)}}
Accent marks (diacritics)
Why is this page full of diacritics that are not part of standard English language? All or most of the terms have articles of their own or are widely cited elsewhere and this practice is not followed. Could we have some consistency? Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 08:39, 8 November 2014 (UTC)
- Whereas these accent marks are correct in the Yoruba language, they are not necessary - in fact make no sense in English, as no English speaker will be guided by them as a pronunciation tool. These words are now already part of the English language, dictionarised in many dictionaries, therefore English spelling should apply. I could understand if there were 100% foreign words, unknown to English speakers. Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 12:25, 8 November 2014 (UTC)
Accent marks (diacritics) — The work of a sock
I first saw these accent marks true of Yuroba spelling in the corresponding Portuguese article and so decided to track down how this practice was introduced into the WP. Looks like the introduction took place since the appearance of User:Latin Wolf, who made the first of these changes on June 10 2013here. Incidentally, the introduction of these accent marks in the Portuguese WP predate these here by more than a year. Strangely enough, Latin Wolf disappeared forever at 03:53, 15 August 2013, to be replaced 16 minutes later by User:Afro-Eurasian at 04:09, 15 August 2013. The latter user has since been blocked as one of numerous socks investigated here. Both edit the same pages. Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 15:52, 8 November 2014 (UTC)
- Cf.The Concept of God: The People of Yoruba for the acceptability of the translation