Talk:Agrionius

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Agrionius article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Classical Greece and Rome Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome, a group of contributors interested in Wikipedia's articles on classics. If you would like to join the WikiProject or learn how to contribute, please see our project page. If you need assistance from a classicist, please see our talk page.Classical Greece and RomeWikipedia:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeTemplate:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeClassical Greece and Rome articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Greece

	Greece portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Greece, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Greece 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.GreeceWikipedia:WikiProject GreeceTemplate:WikiProject GreeceGreek articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Merge[edit]

Proposed merge: As an epithet for Dionysus this would seem more appropriate as a section of the Dionysus article, with a redirect from here. naerii - talk 17:08, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I created the article, so perhaps I am a little biased, but I do favor separate articles for cultic epithets in general. I dislike the current state of messiness one finds in the "Epithets" sections of most greek deity articles. I think what would be preferable would be a link to something like Main article: List of epithets of Dionysus. I'm currently populating things like Category:Epithets of Greek deities and individual categories for each of the gods, but I haven't felt any of these have reached sufficient critical mass to do anything with them besides retain them as distinct articles in these (probably temporary, but workable) holding categories. It is a work in progress.

Also, Greek deities had LOTS of epithets, not just the eight or ten generally referred to in the articles we have now. And in terms of clutter alone, there are five sources here, and I usually (try to) source my stuff pretty well, so multiply that times ten or fifteen epithets (at least) in an article, and I think 1) it just looks ugly, and 2) regional variants of worship really do deserve a separate space, and ought not be all crammed into the main article with one another. That's my take. Ford MF (talk) 17:16, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also, supplemental to that is the fact that cultic epithets were not necessarily (or even usually) applied to one god alone. It is the case here, true, but I think centralizing the information for epithets into their own article, to prevent redundant information about, e.g., Agraeus, in our articles for Artemis and Apollo, is a much sounder and more encyclopedic approach. Ford MF (talk) 17:20, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, that's sound reasoning. Never mind :) naerii - talk 17:22, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]