Talk:Scorpio (astrology)

Recent Contributions

but my scepticism would mean I may cut more than required. The content could be retained under some sort of disclaimer, but I feel that a more neutral editor need consider this. I will keep an eye on these pages, and will help with spelling/grammer once a course of action is decided. LessHeard vanU 21:00, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
 Good Idea --70.67.6.8 22:20, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

LOL, Of course it might help if you started with your own "spelling/grammer" the correct word is GRAMMAR.

It's easy to talk about someone when you're anon, eh? Anyway, if you don't have anything productive to say... そせい! 10:34, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm afraid I don't know enough about astrology to make any useful changes to this page, but I altered a couple of the more egregious grammatical errors.--FelisNocturnus (talk) 01:22, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Notable persons

I haven't heard barely any of these "famous" people before. WHO ARE THEY! They are like 200 years old. Im taking them off and putting down real people.

Just because you've never heard of them is no reason to remove them. They were still famous -- don't screw around with articles just because you're ignorant. --Feidian 20:15, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Is that list, and those in the other zodiac articles, really necessary? I understand those people who born under those signs, but it doesn't fit well, it's not really encyclopedic, and Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Perhaps those persons' articles could be given categories instead of a list? DanPMK 15:10, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

They should all be removed. Useless. There would be many hundreds of people in each of these articles if all the birthdays of the famous people in the world were enumerated. 72.254.12.177 23:30, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

WP:CIVIL, Feidian. JuJube 02:38, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

I think the list has some value. It obviously can't be a fully representative sample - that is an impossible task. However, as an indication of the people that astrologers claim to have similar personalities I think it has a place, provided that a disclaimer is made. That is why I restored it with the intro that The list is indicative only and makes no claim to be a representative sample of all Scorpios. Neelmack 10:16, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

I read on a website that Edgar Allan Poe was a scorpion, is that true? I can't match up his date so far with a chinese zodiac and convert to astrology, because the ones I find only go as far as early 1900's. If he is a scorpion, he would probably be a good person to add under the list, much more lastly famous than Julia Roberts, no offense to her. (I felt this didn't need a new topic made for it, so I put it here.) 70.16.152.167 (talk) 02:53, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Notable persons (expanded list)

I wonder if it would be reasonable to create a second page for a more expanded list of Notable Persons? -FJ | hello 09-25-2006

In case you're wondering what's happened to the Notable persons section, it has been deleted in favor of the page Category:Subjects of the Sign of Scorpio. If you want to add a notable person go there. --Carmelita 21:08, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

I got some famous people: Anne Hathaway, Winona Ryder, Mick Thomson (Slipknot), Cedric Bixler-Zavala (The Mars Volta), Gretchen Mol, Chris Jericho, Nick Lachey (lame), Vanessa Manillo (lame), Dermot Mulroney (sizzlin'), Eric Dane, Grace Kelly, Charles Manson, Neil Young, Megan Mullally, Pablo Picasso, Lisa Bonet, Martha Plimpton, Maria Shriver, Ethan Hawke, Thandie Newton,

and so many more... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.229.180.76 (talk) 17:17, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Pluto?

Now that Pluto is a "dwarf planet," will Scorpio go back to being ruled by Mars, or will it continue to be ruled by Pluto? --Feidian 07:24, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Shouldn't astrologers be able to tell us? Personally, I think we should be ruled by Xena - but not UB411Y33_4.11 (who needs a reggae tinged UK band as its own planet?)LessHeard vanU 19:34, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree - rulership by Xena is ok with this scorpio.

I'm not so sure that things will change just because Pluto is now reclassified. After all, the Sun and Moon are classified as "planets" in astrological terms, and obviously those terms are completely wrong, scientifically. It's the astral bodies' influences that matter, not what people are calling them nowadays. I could be wrong, but that's just my two cents. Astroangie 03:33, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

This all depends if you use astrology, where it wouldn't change, or astronomy, where they actually use all 13 constellations the planets pass through. DanPMK 00:21, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

That is a huge debate, and I've read so many different (and equally convincing) arguments.

Were the astrological calculations based on the assumption that it was one large body, and hence inaccurate and should be corrected? Or were they amazingly accurate (like the Dogon with Sirius B) and we should not adjust astrology at all? Does anyone have a reliable resource for the origin of the original Mars->Pluto changeover in Scorpio rulership? (oh, she's called Eris now - Goddess of Discord? superb!)AndrewGenus 10:20, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Pluto, definitely. Pluto is a dark and cold planet, kind of like Scorpios. Yes, some astrologers beleive that Scorpio and Aries are a lot alike, but the astrologers who say that probably aren't Scorpios. So take it from a REAL Scorpio, the only thing that Aries and Scorpio have in common is their competitive drive, which makes them natural enemies. Sharing a planet with an enemy isin't a smart thing to do. I know this really doesn't have anything to do with science, but people today are more familiar with Pluto the DOG. And dogs, like Scorpios, are way more loveable than big-headed, quick-tempered, close-minded Aries. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.41.186.213 (talk) 03:35, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Since it's all in people's heads (where other people have their brains?), this is actually very valid reasoning. But, I don't think this is the only bit of astrology that "really doesn't have anything to do with science"?! lol. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.73.65.85 (talk) 23:48, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

You know, the Sun and the Moon aren't "planets" but yet they rule Leo and Cancer? So why is everyone freaking about Pluto? It's still the best "planet", whatever that is nowadays. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nm1119 (talk • contribs) 03:41, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

~I believe it is Scorpios who live in their ambitions and desires are ruled by the planet of Pluto. The eagles and Phoenixes who seek a path of spiritual transformation through suffering and strife fall under the rule of more bellicose planet of Mars. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.116.143.82 (talk) 04:52, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

question

why do some places, like the external sites, have scorpio (October 24 to November 22) and wikipedia (oct23 - nov22)? What's the deal?

-Well, they consider it a cusp date, along with 12 other dates, because sometimes people may add in an additional day because it's never exactly sure. However, most sources generally consider starting with the earlier dates (Oct.23rd- Nov.21) as opposed to (Oct.24- Nov.22) for example.

What's a "cusp date"? I still don't understand, but I'll take your word for it. Maybe this bit of information should be listed in the page or in the astrology page? 04:57, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

A cusp date is when you're born in between a Zodiac.

• Oct. 18 to Oct. 28 is the Libra/Scorpio cusp
• Nov. 17 to Nov. 27 is the Scorpio/Sagittarius cusp

DanPMK 14:58, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

In response to the unqualified statement above about using Oct.23rd to Nov.21st, that actually only applies to a limited range of North American astrologers, and even the more reliable (reknowned) American ones still use an end date of Nov.22nd (check the links from the existing External Links on the wikipedia page, or Linda Goodman's books, or Astro Dienst [[1]] for an example. AndrewGenus 10:26, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Physical Description?

Other sign's pages have a physical description of people under this sign, but this page doesn't! Could someone add it? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.68.233.150 (talk) 01:19, 14 December 2006 (UTC).

Physical description; seems tainted by vanity of editors

For the physical description a book is cited as the source. Unfortunately changes have been made which I think are not in the original work (the addition of 'curvy', the addition of a strange remark about blue eyes). These additions to me seem to be out of vanity; I have a sneaking suspicion people adapted the article to (better) describe themselves, but of course, I cannot prove this. Is there anyone who can tell with a bit more certainty what the characteristics of a Scorpio are, according to astrology, or who, even better, actually has the cited book at their disposal?

195.240.229.19 (talk) 03:02, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

As a scorpio, i'd say that my eyes are my strongest eyes, since they're a very deep brown and even sometimes have a bit of green. The medium build sounds right for me, and even the broad shoulders. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.13.157.253 (talk) 23:05, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, not ALL physical traits will match up for ALL scorpios. I am a Scoprio and I have dark burnett, wavy/curly hair, blue-gray round eyes, thick eyebrows, my voice is a little on the high side but sometimes is comes out low, like a boys, even though i'm a girl, and I hate to admit it, but I'm on the short side. So some things, like my hair, eyebrows, voice and height is true, but my eyes are a different color. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nm1119 (talk • contribs) 03:45, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

I myself, as a Scorpio, posess deep penetrating eyes. My Face: I have brown wavy hair, brown eyes. My eyebrows are thick and dark (because I'm part Syrian) and have a pronounced arch. My face is a round, oval shape. My forehead is slightly flat, although not exaggerrated. My nose is slightly a Roman, with a lifted point (I give credit to my part Anglo-Saxon heritage.) My neck is strong, but it's not thick, neither too skinny. My Body: I have a medium build, medium-tall height (5' 6"--and yes, I'm a girl.) I am slightly muscular, well proportioned, hourglass-shaped and I have a sturdy frame. I do have to admit, my shoulders are slightly broad, but not signifficantly. My voice is not too high, not too deep--but I guess, shrill. Also, my biological organs work well--this corresponds to the Scorpio's role in medical astrology. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.229.180.76 (talk) 20:56, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Compatibility with other signs

"Yeah, not only is the physical description lacking, but so is the signs it's supposedly compatible with. Someone please address this."

Response: Scorpio is a water sign. It is a forgone conclusion that a Scorpio will always gravitate towards another water sign. Cancer and Pisces are most compatible with Scorpio, as they are prominent water signs. Capricorn and Virgo are Earth signs and follow the water signs concerning compatibility with Scorpio. A Scorpio is also an excellent match with another Scorpio. Two Scorpios can have a very deep and complex understanding between them that only they can understand. As far as fire and air signs go, they are all a very poor match with Scorpio, encompassing squared compatibility at best (air signs), and incompatibility at worst (fire signs). There is great tension between a water sign and a fire sign, and an air sign compliments a fire sign the way an Earth sign compliments a water sign.

NO, NOT TURE! Why does everyone think that Water signs are most compatable with other Water Signs?!? Just because they have a lot in common doesn't mean that they are the best match. Astrology and compatabliliteis are like puzzle pieces. You have to find the match that fits, the one that has the sides that you don't have. You can't create a whole puzzle with just 2 equal pieces. Water signs may get bored with how emotional and senistive each other can be. They need someone to bring them down to EARTH, not make them get caught up in more sensitivity and endless emotions. I'm driving myself crazy just by thinking about it! And same with earth signs. Earth needs water to grow. Water + plant = pretty flower. It's simple kindergarten junk! Not a match you up with a person wo has the same things in common with you high school valentine's dance survey! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nm1119 (talk • contribs) 03:52, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

My best friend of nine years is a fellow Scorpio. We have a bond, never have gotten into a really bad fight. Our minds work the same way. We always agree on something. We have the same sense of humor, and we are both very intelligent. I've been great friends with a Pisces in the past. I am very influenced by Virgo. My mother, sister, ex-best friend, and crush are all Virgo. I work well with Virgos and am very familiar with them. In general, I'm just comfortable around them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.229.180.76 (talk) 21:06, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

FISH! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.3.106.170 (talk) 18:23, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Missing Reference

Why don't other people let other viewers say what they beleive in the Scorpio section. It could give other people hope and want to move on. Not like other people(whom ever wrote the previous quote)WHO ARE JUST BORED WITH THEMSELVES AND DISSAPPOINTED and wanting everyone else to come down with them. You obviously DON'T know everything in this world. Im not saying I know everything, because it is clear to me that I don't.

Scorpio

I came on to this topic too see the names of the stars which comprise Scorpio. Is this a valid heading? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.36.64.219 (talk) 22:57, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Compatability

(this counts for every sign article!)

First, I think the difference should be noted in these articles that signs are 'romantically compatible' with trine signs of their own element, while only 'complimentary' to those of 60 and 180 degree aspects.

Second, more emphasis should be placed on the potency of ninety degree square aspects. The pair of respective polar signs have the power to transform the individual of a given sign, depending on which diverging path he or she chooses to follow. Water/Fire and Air/Earth pairings represent mutual self-realization on the level of individual potential, while Air/Water and Fire/Earth pairings represent a potent cosmic alliance between two individuals who share the same unique power to reshape the universe.

=====

There has been a major update on the compatability between the scorpion and other signs. I have done my best to be clear and concise though my grammer sometimes may be a little run of the mill. It was a bit of an undertaking though I believe the infromation provided is useful and may be translated into all of the other Zodiac relationships. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Christineadsherry (talk • contribs) 07:14, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Real Solar Zodiac Dates Terrible English

Someone please correct the following passage:

The dates that are given isn't correct. That's why if you met somebody who was supposedly born under the Scorpio constellion, but didn't exactly a Scorpio, but acted an Libra, well that's because their probably really a Libra. The dates given that were incorrect are the Conventional Sun Sign Dates, but the Real Sun Sign Dates. The real Solar Dates of an Scorpio is October 23 to November 29. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.4.204.36 (talk) 13:27, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

House Astrology

I think detailed discussion of the 8th house is off-topic for this article. What do you guys think? Maybe it should be moved? --Nathanael Bar-Aur L. (talk) 21:18, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

This is somewhat tangential to your question, but that discussion appears in many if not most of the house-specific astrology articles here. If you were going to do some cleanup, looking at the structure of other house articles would probably help in cleaning this one up. I do think at least a reference to the 8th hous should be retained. Aisa0 (talk) 21:46, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Characteristics and related sections, removal

Relevant discussion of inclusion or removal of Characteristics, Compatibility, Sexuality, Exaltation and related sections is taking place on Talk:Aries_(astrology)#Trimming. Since this an issue which relates to all the astrological sign articles, please direct relevant comments there.

Notable people who share this sign section

Relevant discussion of inclusion or removal of notable people who share this sign is taking place on Talk:Gemini_(astrology)#Notable people who share this sign section. Since this an issue which relates to all the astrological sign articles, please direct relevant comments there.

November 22

So, let me get this right: Since I was born on November 22, I'm both a Scorpio and a Sagitarius?Wikimichael22 (talk) 15:26, 5 June 2008 (UTC)Wikimichael22

No, it means that you need to get your birth time, and have your chart calculated to see exactly in which sign the sun was at the moment you were born. --Nathanael Bar-Aur L. (talk) 20:31, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Or you could save a trip and just read the characteristics and see which one you are more like. You probably aren't a scorpio, they are logical enough to figure that out. No offense. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nm1119 (talk • contribs) 03:56, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

that was hilarious!!!!!!!!! (coming from a scorpio) -jenn —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.65.7.103 (talk) 04:19, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Article temporarily semi-protected

Due to ongoing vandalism from various IPs, which has risen to a noticable level here over the last few days, the article is semi-protected for the next week.

Please feel free to comment here or on my talk page. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 00:22, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Reliability of Astrology-online.com

Astrology-online.com has already been discussed on the reliable sources noticeboard and there has been agreement that the material cannot be considered reliable, as it does not associate it's claims with any known, notable astrologer. Furthermore, there are strong indications that some of the content is lifted off of elore.com, and thus probably violates copyright. To top that, the content it does originate often contradicts itself. If someone wishes to reopen the discussion, please do so on the reliable sources noticeboard. --Nathanael Bar-Aur L. (talk) 02:22, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Furthermore, there are strong indications that some of the content is lifted off of elore.com - have you provided evidence of this? the content it does originate often contradicts itself - well, thats astrology for you, its a pile of nonsense, what do you expect. Slightly more seriously, (a) do you have any evidence? and (b) is being internally non-contradictory actually a requirement for astrology? William M. Connolley (talk) 08:33, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply. The discussions on WP:RSN are [2], [3] and [4]. A side-by-side comparison of the two articles makes it pretty obvious to anybody examining them. Although it is usually strongly reworded, the order of similar claims they are making for each sign is strikingly similar. Check out the start of each block on elore.

elore.com	Astrology-online.com
Scorpions are known for their intense and powerful natures.	Scorpios are the most intense, profound, powerful characters [...]
Their demeanor is dignified and reserved, affable and courteous [...]	In conventional social gatherings they are pleasant to be with, thoughtful in conversation, dignified, and reserved, yet affable and courteous.
Scorpio will rarely be found in the center of activity	In their everyday behavior they give the appearance of being withdrawn from the center of activity.
When they harness their abundant energy constructively, their self-confidence tempered with shrewdness, and their ambition coupled with generosity toward others [..]	They can harness their abundant energy constructively, tempering their self-confidence with shrewdness and their ambition with magnanimity toward others provided they like them.
Scorpio imagination and intuition are excellent. They possess refined critical perception and strong analytical ability.	They are fortunate in that their strong reasoning powers are tempered with imagination and intuition, and these gifts, together with critical perception and analytical capacity, [...]
Their inner intensity can result in the ice-cold restraint and detachment of the surgeon, the concentration of the research scientist and the heroism of the soldier.	Their inner intensity can result in the ice-cold self-control and detachment of the surgeon, the concentration of the research scientist, and the heroism of the soldier.

Note that according to the discussion on RSN, elore is not considered a reliable source itself and thus should be removed from the article. SotosfromGreece has continuously reverted my removal of that source. --Nathanael Bar-Aur L. (talk) 16:39, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

He has the right to. Nathanael, you are not an administrator. kashimjamed (talk) 00:20, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

My response to Mr Nathanael ,corcerning his astrological beliefs along with his biased and bossy behavior in wikipedia

The problem with Mr Nathanael is that loves to act like a self proclaimed Administrator here in wikipedia and deleting even reliable sources from other members that contradict his own personal beliefs (or his friends) from his picked sources and i am not talking only about deleting Astrology-online but other sources too that i citated and Mr Nathanael try to delete them with some unjustified cheap excuse....

Here is one example below of Mr Nathanael bossy behavior here in wikipedia from the Scorpio History page when i contributed a reliable source from Kelli Fox (A professional Astrologer as i clearly pointed him with a url of her homepage)

SCORPIO (ASTROLOGY) HISTORY PAGE: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Scorpio_(astrology)&action=history (cur) (prev) 11:19, 12 January 2009 SotosfromGreece (Talk | contribs) (17,330 bytes) (Added some traits\citations from "The astrologer.com" - Official site of the professional astrologer Kelli Fox).) (undo) (cur) (prev) 06:32, 13 January 2009 Nathanael Bar-Aur L. (Talk | contribs) (16,736 bytes) (nobody knows who Kelli Fox is, why would her opinions be relevant? why not quote Robert Hand or somebody?) (undo) (cur) (prev) 10:43, 13 January 2009 SotosfromGreece (Talk | contribs) (17,055 bytes) (Kelli Fox is a Professional Astrologer with CA NCGR, PMAFA, ISAR C.A.P., FAA all the information about her is in her homepage ( http://theastrologer.com/ ). My source is legitimate) (undo)

FROM WHEN WIKIPEDIA DOES NOT ALLOW SOURCES FROM "NOT-ENOUGH" FAMOUS PROFESSIONALS as Mr Nathaniel stated to me in the Scorpio history page??
From when Mr Nathaniel became our boss and a judge here in wikipedia ??
--SotosfromGreece (talk) 18:42, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Why are the astrological sign pages so short?

Has it been done on purpose? I'm pretty sure they used to be longer and described associated traits and stuff. Simple English wiki has longer pages on the zodiac signs (http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aries) Or have they just been moved or scattered around Wiki? Is there a reason? Not qualifying as 'knowledge'? Or too hazy?(Haha Cancer's talk page is way calmer than this one, hehehhe) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.177.169.56 (talk) 19:55, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Count me as very sad to see the characteristics sections gone. I have no belief in astrology, but I'm a writer and was looking at these pages out of interest. A while back I looked at the Scorpio page while thinking of one of my fictional characters and was astonished to find that the section described her so exactly, it could have been written with her in mind. It would be cool to have that section available to refer to again. 91.105.13.247 (talk) 19:45, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Compatibilities

Why are all of the same element "generally compatible"? That doesn't make any sense. Slowish guitar (talk) 16:05, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Does this need to be updated in light of the new Zodiac sign dates, or is nobody in the Zodiac community taking those seriously? http://newsfeed.time.com/2011/01/13/horoscope-hang-up-earth-rotation-changes-zodiac-signs/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by M. Frederick (talk • contribs) 02:33, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

MUST BE UPDATED

This needs to be updated to match the newest adjustments to the chart. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.170.180.54 (talk) 03:57, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

What "new" adjustment? Someone963852 (talk) 14:16, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Scorpio Dates are wrong!

Not sure why but a recent edit modified the dates of Scorpio. According to all other websites I check Scorpio is November/October 87.9.204.56 (talk) 23:55, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

NPOV

I'm about to go on a Wikibreak, but the article is clearly written from an 'in-universe' perspective, ie most of it is written as though this is factual. That's clearly not NPOV. Please don't remove the tag again unless we get consensus that the article meets our NPOV policy. Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 14:18, 18 November 2011 (UTC)