Jump to content

Talk:Dragon: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 39: Line 39:


Do we really need this section. It seems to be a rant about a certain book rather than any true scientific research. It does seem to strech completley off topic similar to having an entire section devoted to a dragon such as Smaug. It really adds little to the article and even if we wanted to keep it in could be made not into an entire section but a couple sentences claiming that in some books Dragons are statistical creature that live outside of reality. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/173.23.69.184|173.23.69.184]] ([[User talk:173.23.69.184|talk]]) 18:26, 18 July 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
Do we really need this section. It seems to be a rant about a certain book rather than any true scientific research. It does seem to strech completley off topic similar to having an entire section devoted to a dragon such as Smaug. It really adds little to the article and even if we wanted to keep it in could be made not into an entire section but a couple sentences claiming that in some books Dragons are statistical creature that live outside of reality. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/173.23.69.184|173.23.69.184]] ([[User talk:173.23.69.184|talk]]) 18:26, 18 July 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

: Maybe merge it or reduce it?[[Special:Contributions/173.8.11.157|173.8.11.157]] ([[User talk:173.8.11.157|talk]]) 20:36, 3 August 2010 (UTC)


== unicode pictographs ==
== unicode pictographs ==

Revision as of 20:36, 3 August 2010

WikiProject iconCryptozoology C‑class High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Cryptozoology, an attempt to improve coverage of the pseudoscience and subculture of cryptozoology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
CThis article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconMythology C‑class High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is supported by WikiProject Mythology. This project provides a central approach to Mythology-related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the WikiProject page for more details.
CThis article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconVisual arts C‑class
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Visual arts, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of visual arts on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
CThis article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

As with all Talk pages, please add new discussions to the end and use a header with "==" "==". This will cause it to automatically appear in the table of contents.

Origin and etymology

Should "Origin and etymology" and "Overview" articles be merged?Babassu (talk) 20:27, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Two Legs

Following discovery of how pterosaurs walked on the ground, some dragons have been portrayed without front legs and using the wings as front legs pterosaur-fashion when on the ground, as in the movie Reign of Fire."

'Saint fart and the Dragon' painted about 1470, by Paolo Uccello features a two-legged dragon long before pterosaurs were known about. Link to British National Gallery.

Suggest this should simply therefore read:

Some dragons have been portrayed without front legs, some using the wings as front legs pterosaur-fashion when on the ground, as in the movie Reign of Fire —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.12.237.236 (talk) 19:45, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

'Saint fart and the Dragon' = 'Saint George and the Dragon': St George pierces a two-legged dragon in the head with his lance while an anorexic Maid stands helpless.--Felix folio secundus 23:26, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Where the Myth of Dragons Came from According to the History Channel

According to the History Channel, it happened like this.

Since our Australopithecine ancestors were about half our size, it was that much easier for crocodiles or anacondas to eat them. Back then, there were also hawk-like birds large enough to carry away an animal half what is now the size of a human.

As cultural memories of these predators passed from Australopithecines to humans, they melted together over the millions of years. This resulted in a mythical animal with the head of a crocodile, the neck of a snake, and the wings and claws of a large predatory bird. (If the History Channel holds any water at all, this makes dragons by far the oldest mythical monsters.) Since they were combined in the mind to be perfect predators, dragons are large enough to swallow humans whole, and in a fair number of stories that include them as characters, they do so.

As humans spread from Africa to inhabit most of the world, it came to pass that basically every culture has some type of dragon in its mythology.

I say we should include this tale in a section on "Origins of the myth." The Mysterious El Willstro (talk) 03:55, 25 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a reliable source, to say the least. Sounds like mere television twit speculation, of the unsupported kind whose peer or better will be found among any batch of college freshmen in late-night dorm gabfests. --Orange Mike | Talk 18:58, 25 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Dragons of Probability

Do we really need this section. It seems to be a rant about a certain book rather than any true scientific research. It does seem to strech completley off topic similar to having an entire section devoted to a dragon such as Smaug. It really adds little to the article and even if we wanted to keep it in could be made not into an entire section but a couple sentences claiming that in some books Dragons are statistical creature that live outside of reality. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.23.69.184 (talk) 18:26, 18 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe merge it or reduce it?173.8.11.157 (talk) 20:36, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

unicode pictographs

When 6.0 goes final, we might want to mention 🐉 and 🐲. ⇔ ChristTrekker 18:45, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]