Jump to content

Talk:Unicorn: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
rv to version of 05:29, 27 April 2021, by Deor—unrelated to article improvement
Line 200: Line 200:


:[[File:Red question icon with gradient background.svg|20px|link=|alt=]] '''Not done:''' it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a [[Wikipedia:Reliable sources|reliable source]] if appropriate.<!-- Template:EP --> [[User:ಮಲ್ನಾಡಾಚ್ ಕೊಂಕ್ಣೊ|ಮಲ್ನಾಡಾಚ್ ಕೊಂಕ್ಣೊ]] ([[User talk:ಮಲ್ನಾಡಾಚ್ ಕೊಂಕ್ಣೊ|talk]]) 03:05, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
:[[File:Red question icon with gradient background.svg|20px|link=|alt=]] '''Not done:''' it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a [[Wikipedia:Reliable sources|reliable source]] if appropriate.<!-- Template:EP --> [[User:ಮಲ್ನಾಡಾಚ್ ಕೊಂಕ್ಣೊ|ಮಲ್ನಾಡಾಚ್ ಕೊಂಕ್ಣೊ]] ([[User talk:ಮಲ್ನಾಡಾಚ್ ಕೊಂಕ್ಣೊ|talk]]) 03:05, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

== What mythology does the Unicorn actually belong? ==

I've seen it listed as Greek (though the article does say it has never existed in Greek Myth), Roman, and Persian.

Then there is the issue of Monoceros, should be the Monoceros be considered a imported version of the Unicorn described by the Greeks? Similar to the case of the Greek Sphinx.[[Special:Contributions/74.124.162.10|74.124.162.10]] ([[User talk:74.124.162.10|talk]]) 04:47, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

Revision as of 04:47, 6 July 2021

Template:Vital article

" which some translations have erroneously rendered with the word unicorn "

An earlier version said that the Bible contains a word "re'em" "which some translations have erroneously rendered with the word unicorn".

This sentence takes the definitive position that this translation was wrong, when in fact, this is debatable and in fact not supported by very strong evidence.

The oldest Greek and Latin translations translate this word as unicorn, which is pretty strong evidence that it meant this, since these translations were done when Biblical Hebrew was still a living language or shortly thereafter. The basis for the arguments that the word "re'em" did not mean "unicorn" was because another ancient Middle Eastern language is known to have a word "rimu" which meant wild ox. However, merely because another nearby language had a word that shared two consonants does not mean they were variations of the same word. For example, English word "parrot" is very similar to the Spanish word "perro", but these words refer to completely different animals and are etymologically unrelated. In sum, there is not enough evidence to definitively say that the translation of "re'em" as "unicorn" was wrong. The article should instead merely state that some versions translate the word as unicorn. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Atomicporcupine88 (talk • contribs) 03:56, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Rothschild family uses lion & unicorn supporters on their family arms as granted by the Emperor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.164.87.162 (talk) 10:08, 22 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Unicorn. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:36, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 4 April 2018

Unicorns are born with their horns already developed 86.177.127.31 (talk) 17:56, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done. No source presented. Not a serious edit request. Deor (talk) 18:23, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 7 May 2018

krishna chandra kheti is the most intelligent person 2405:205:1580:9366:171:55DE:3BA3:F326 (talk) 15:42, 7 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. L293D (☎ • ✎) 15:59, 7 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 11 June 2018

plz let me edit i have more info about unicorns Omgaunicorn (talk) 07:42, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: Please state the change you want made, citing a reliable source if appropriate. Adrian J. Hunter(talk•contribs) 08:26, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Indus Valley Civilization Entry

The theory about the unicorn seal representing an auroch in profile, and thus hiding the second horn behind the first, has one problem: the Unicorn Seal is one of five, and one of the others is a Bull. This shows the bull, despite being drawn in profile, as having two horns offset from one another. The cultural artistic style of the "Harappans" was not necessarily limited in the manner suggested, although it of course remains a possible explanation. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indus_Valley_Civilisation#/media/File:IndusValleySeals.JPG — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.167.220.254 (talk) 17:59, 28 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. The examples provided unequivocally show two horns, clearly an ox/aurochs type of animal. So why are these even used here? It makes the whole Indus Valley section seem as apocryphal as the unicorn itself. BenEsq (talk) 21:40, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Possible origins" section

The entire "possible origins" section appears to be a mix of WP:SYNTH, WP:OR, and reliance on WP:FRINGE sources. The section appears to be leftover from when proponents of the pseudoscience of cryptozoology ran rampant on the site, slapping together 'possible origins' for complex figures and going more or less unquestioned. If someone can find a reliable source on this topic, such as an academic, then please produce a section built around that source. In the mean time, I'm removing this section. :bloodofox: (talk) 16:16, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that the section was either unsourced or poorly-sourced. The listed species simply bear a passing resemblance to the unicorn or have had their horns presented as unicorn horns, with no evidence that they are the origin of the myth. –dlthewave ☎ 17:35, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's not totally unreasonable to suggest that there was an animal as big as a horse with one horn. The mythological origins seem to be french/norman. The transformation from a 'big as a horse with one horn' into a creature with magical curative properties and only appears to virgins is a fairly modern invention. My guess is that it started around 16th-19th century with the massive explosion in the germanic world in the interest surrounding curio. English mythologists claim that the unicorn is a uniquely british myth and use, for example, heraldic armour on a war horse in paintings or a man holding a spear with the spear tip passing behind the head of the horse as proof of English origins for the unicorn. Early Scottish heraldry included a man riding a horse, holding a spear and this appears to have been reduced to the unicorn after the conquest of Scotland. Unicorns are usually used to mark fantasy as being of a distinctly British origin, for example Anne McCaffrey's novels however there is no evidence that the mythology has a British origin.

Unicorns dont appear in the matter of britain which is somewhat the equivalent of the british version of the Iliad, a collection of various stories, theatrical performances and king making myths that worked. Modern authors have worked the Unicorn into the Arthurian legends so that people mistake unicorns for belonging to the matter of Britain. 175.36.91.0 (talk) 09:16, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Main Article Picture Change

The picture up at the top shows what appears to be a Mesopotamian winged auroch, or bull. While I understand that the article discusses the connections between aurochs and unicorns, perhaps a more unambiguous depiction of a unicorn would suit the page better. Additionally, the animal in the picture has wings, and "Winged Unicorn" has its' own separate page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Diatryma (talk • contribs) 20:57, 4 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, there must be a better image representing a "Unicorn" (without wings) for this page. - FlightTime (open channel) 21:03, 4 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Even this is better than whats there. - FlightTime (open channel) 21:06, 4 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Siberian rhinoceros

This article suggests that the 4-ton Siberian rhino (Elasmotherium sibericum), which survived until at least 39,000 years ago, may have been the earliest inspiration for the legendary unicorn: 'Siberian unicorn' walked Earth with humans. Cheers, Rowan Forest (talk) 01:19, 30 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

True and there is some overlap in the Elasmotherium article. 175.36.91.0 (talk) 08:44, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This is no longer a part of this article due to a single vandal.

edit request on 12 December 2018

Hi, i would like to edit this page because i love wikipedia and i have found a reliable source to cange/edit some things please change unicorns are not real to unicorns are real here is my source https://www.thesprucepets.com/are-unicorns-real-1885833 make sure you check it out and let me know -mystery for now!! 2600:100E:B101:F835:406C:58C:C784:7C3F (talk) 00:20, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: the last line of that page says that "So while myth and song may be filled with the lore and legend of the unicorn, actual science leaves us little to work with.", meaning that there is little evidence in "actual science" that unicorns are real DannyS712 (talk) 00:59, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Missing are modern-day examples

Long ago, I read some articles about modern-day animals found with a single horn. If true, then this would lend credence to the past existence of similar one-horned animals. These examples I read about where considered rare, or anomalies, animals expected to have two horns but had one instead. Can someone with knowledge of these please add them to the article? For they are certainly examples of note and are beyond notable to the common reader, and even to the scientific community. Misty MH (talk) 11:08, 24 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

One other thing: The rhinoceros is an animal that can be single-horned or dual-horned, and quite impressive. Misty MH (talk) 11:16, 24 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
And one example is "Rhinoceros unicornis". Misty MH (talk) 11:22, 24 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Etymology

It's a bit strange that neither the article nor any section on this Talk page (or its archive) go into the etymology of the word. That it means "one-horn", from Latin ūnus (one, single) and cornu (horn), translating Greek monokerōs.[1] At simple:Unicorn this is mentioned in the very first paragraph. --77.173.90.33 (talk) 23:56, 28 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 15 April 2019

The last sentence of In Antiquity should be deleted. 2607:FEA8:4CDF:DB52:D136:688B:E0CA:78A5 (talk) 22:23, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. Why ? - FlightTime (open channel) 22:30, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Unicorns are real

one peace of corn — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.30.85.100 (talk) 20:56, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Royal arms of Queen Elizabeth II as used in Scotland

Shouldn't this be something like "Royal arms of Queen Elizabeth II used as Queen Elizabeth I in/of Scotland? There are 2 kingdoms, England & Wales and Scotland, and QEII of England is also QEI of Scotland. This is because in the Elizabethan age Queen Bess was only Queen of England, but never of Scotland. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.105.160.150 (talk) 10:12, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This was ruled on by the government prior to Elizabeth's coronation, who agreed on a "higher number" convention. So England will never have a James III, IV, V, VI or VII because Scotland already used those numbers. 134.58.253.56 (talk) 10:32, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ainkhurn listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Ainkhurn. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Steel1943 (talk) 07:57, 3 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Unicorns were real, but now extinct

There is an article on them here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elasmotherium — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.179.159.63 (talk) 05:39, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There used to be some content about Elasmotherium in the article, but it was removed in this edit as poorly sourced. Deor (talk) 12:51, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Wow. Quite ridiculous to remove it. There is a lot of media attention about this, and, yet again, Wikipedia are made to look quite poor. 58.179.159.63 (talk) 14:40, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
That media is mostly unreliable and influenced by cryptozoology. There's no evidence that Elasmotherium influenced the legend of the unicorn, if anything living rhinoceroses from India and/or Africa did.--Ermenrich (talk) 15:51, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I checked through the history, and this fact was included in this article for over 4 years, until one person, acting alone, deleted the whole thing for no particular reason. That's vandalism surely. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.179.159.63 (talk) 23:46, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The reason it was removed is explained in the edit summary.—Ermenrich (talk)

False reason given.

Semi-protected edit request on 1 March 2020

It should mention that the one-horned rhinoceros is commonly believed to be the basis of the unicorn myth. This article used to mention it but a single vandal deleted years of research in a single edit. 58.179.159.63 (talk) 18:45, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The reason was explained in the edit summary. Please point to some reliable sources that we can use to support this. – Thjarkur (talk) 20:45, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 24 April 2020

this article has incorrectly stated the facts about unicorns they have also not mentioned its relation to the Pegasus Alia.franz (talk) 20:14, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

yall are idiots unicorns are not real — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alia.franz (talk • contribs) 20:15, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. JTP (talk • contribs) 21:45, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 6 July 2020

Change to entrapment- Addition

Hildegarde von Bingen and Thomas of Cantripe, among others, imply in their tel lings of a unicorn's capture that the animal is skilled in detecting a true virgin at sight. In some stories if the huntress is not truly a virgin she will be killed by the unicorn.

Citation:Shepard, O. The Lore of the Unicorn. Random House UK Ltd. London.1996. p 50. ISBN 0 09 185 135 1 121.215.195.158 (talk) 11:39, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. The reference could not be verified against the claim made ~ Amkgp 💬 11:41, 7 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 19 July 2020

It is scientifically proven that unicorns exsist! There is footage of this animal... They have been spotted near homes in Linden MI and Canada-therefore unicorns are real. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:6C48:647F:EC81:CC44:6893:CEAD:8374 (talk) 21:47, 19 July 2020 (UTC) unicorns can be fond but they are not wut you exspekt they livd in the years of the wole mamith mabey you can find one like in moves and books let find out.but it is hard to do. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:A000:1130:61CC:50D6:3F55:A84B:D1B1 (talk) 21:02, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Grammar or Quotation?

The following paragraph has several grammatical errors that I was going to rectify but then wondered if author intended them as direct quotes. If so then shouldn't "(sic)" be employed? It also occurred to me that perhaps author is ESL.

[I tried to investigate source but couldn't access it. Apologies for any errors I have made. I'm no scholar and try to limit my edits to typos and basic grammar fixes. I hesitate to change anything substantial especially when I am not an expert in given field. This is 1st time I've added to a discussion.]

Shanhaijing (117) also mentioned Bo-horse (Chinese: 駮馬; pinyin: bómǎ), a chimera horse with ox tail, single horn, white body, and its sound like person calling. The creature is lived at Honest-head Mountain. Guo Pu in his jiangfu said that Bo-horse able to walk on water. Another similar creature also mentioned in Shanhaijing (80) to live in Mount Winding-Centre as Bo (Chinese: 駮; pinyin: bó), but with black tail, tiger's teeth and claws, and also devour leopards and tigers.[42] SharikaRed (talk) 13:48, 30 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That text was added in December 2015. It is likely that ESL is the problem—it does not look like a quote to me. Ideally one would check the source but that would be difficult so I guess cleaning the grammar would be best. Johnuniq (talk) 01:34, 31 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"Draft:DJTruthsayer" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Draft:DJTruthsayer. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 March 21#Draft:DJTruthsayer until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 21:12, 21 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 11 April 2021

Narwhal, may be, of the negotiation of practical factuality, the origination scenario, of, the creature upon which brazen phoenecians, rode, whilst not, gathering from up the sea bed, nutritious foodies, spongeness, and, pearls, and, the other permutatives as can be supposed, of, activities of times long past.

The noteworthy problem, of, whether Unicorn's ceased to exist on account of their being precluded from Noah, (of biblical notoriety), as, at, the operant, tensation, pertains, the Word of God, that the voyage he amounted to, as operant, to evade, the judgement, and, fulfill, the prophecy, and, assuage also, the faithful, (with the exception of his son, Ham, whose trials, will be explored further in,), that the earth shall not, nay ever be destroyed, except, and, save for,

That Ham, the unlike problem, of, the arrival, of Noah's foundedness, at the drink and, naked, as of the days, of, Adam's youth, and, brought, to an inflammation of cursory, of, the kind, so as to cast Ham, to, the outlands, with the avowed protection of God, that he do no wrong before his sight,

Until such time, as the calamities known reckoned by Fatima, be fulfilled, and, Ham rule all the earth, at, his opprobrium, considering, the unlike son, at the ramparts, as can be considered to have occurred variously, at the cycles, of, the generations, to be,

In power and awe, before the testimony, as beyond reproach, and, the effect elaboration of, the sound of the praise and glory of God who had protected him all, through and throughout the ages,

That, the elaboration, some these nodules, and, noodles, have been long known, the inner most vagary, of, the diffidence considering, the father, and, the nimrod, at times, and, terms, where the huntness was meek, and, the townsfolke cowardly, at, to, and, pertains,

That the son, be at besmirch the fathers, and, operant, to expedite, the 'sons of perdition', to unlike manners, ways, and, methodologies, considering, the fathers,

Do, we consider, anew, the Narwhal, at, it's majestic simplicity, considering, the defacto, juxt, the rumoured, and, what, can be extolled, the either intersect, on, the high day, of, Holy unction, at, the Jubilee of Easter, the week beyond, as, considering,

The Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, who repaired we us from these reckonings, and, sealed the bible anew, that, the 'curse' of the law, be, from we us out rebuked, except for the end time, where, the truth be known, of, the prophecy, e'en before, the Heathen, of, the yield of Hams protagony, as, that, and, how, to, reprove, the faith, restored, and, affirm protege exacted. Preposter (talk) 01:19, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ಮಲ್ನಾಡಾಚ್ ಕೊಂಕ್ಣೊ (talk) 03:05, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What mythology does the Unicorn actually belong?

I've seen it listed as Greek (though the article does say it has never existed in Greek Myth), Roman, and Persian.

Then there is the issue of Monoceros, should be the Monoceros be considered a imported version of the Unicorn described by the Greeks? Similar to the case of the Greek Sphinx.74.124.162.10 (talk) 04:47, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Unicorn&oldid=1032219834"