Classical Greece and Rome Template‑class

This template 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 Template This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Religion Template‑class

This template is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. 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.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion articles Template This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Would it be possible to create an alternative version of this, to appear at the bottom of articles. I don't find that the template in this form, very text-heavy and somewhat dull, improves the visual attractiveness of articles. For example, on Greek temple, it has definitely replaced a more appealing design, and also forced a re-introduction of the long contents table with no text beside.

An example would be this:

athinaios | Talk 04:06, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I find this template bizarre. Just to take the first heading, "Doctrines"--the notion that Greek religion had doctrines would be surprising to many people who study it; Greek religion(s) was not about belief, but action. To see orthopraxy, reciprocity, and virtue placed in the same category also seems strange--these concepts seem to belong to different classes of things. Hubris, while an important subject, is not a doctrine--it's an action or a mental disposition.

I don't have a good suggestion for fixing the template. I don't think there are articles corresponding to the topics I would include in the template--e.g. prayer, oracles, festivals (each article would need to be specific to Greece and so would probably follow the "X in ancient Greece" format). But as the template stands it's misleading about the nature of Greek religion and the relative importance of topics within it. --Akhilleus (talk) 03:24, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think you are correct. Maybe "Doctrines" could be "Aspects". I agree about orthopraxy, reciprocity, and virtue needing its own category. I'm not sure what would be the best for that either. Maybe "Concepts"? --151.201.149.209 (talk) 00:36, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I associate the caduceus with medicine, not ancient Greek mythology. A better logo could be used. chad. (talk) 00:39, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree sir and the issue is now resolved! Reigndog (talk) 00:29, 14 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The symbol was changed without any knowledge of symbolism, or any consensus, by Reigndog, among a series of other questionable changes in terminology and definition. The caduceus is only secondly a logo of modern medicine: in ancient Hellenic culture it was a religious symbol, representing the godly force of generation of things.--Karl's Wagon (talk) 15:55, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

My God, KW. Is this how you try to win the day here, just insult polite people until they give up? A new symbol was asked for. Six years ago. No one seemingly bothered. I did a search. You do an image search for Hellenismos / Hellenism, then tell us all what symbol pops up the most. It is the same image that is used for the portal, one that preexists my editing.Reigndog (talk) 20:31, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Actually the ancient religion didnt have an "official symbol", such as the Christian cross for example. As I know the caduceus was close related to the ancient religion, especially God Hermes. Today its most related with medicine, but in antiquity it was a symbol of Hermes. Thats why I choosed it.

On the other side, the bay laurel was the award for the Olympic games' winners. Today it is used as an official symbol by the modern believers ("neopaganists" if you like).

Saw the laurel visiting a page about greek gods. Love it, except for the pixelated look on a macbook. Replaced the wreath with its vectorized version so it looks good on any screen specially retina/high density. You can see it here: Greek_Roman_Laurel_wreath_vector.svg (talk) 13:44, 4 August 2015 (UTC-05)

So I think both are ok for a symbol. It is only a matter of choice. Greco22 (talk) 22:18, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This template states that Dionysus is a "Lesser god" and that he is not an Olympian. This is not true for it was he who Hestia gave up her throne on Mount Olympus for. If you agree and see fit, please correct this mistake.

Arguably, both Dionysus and Hades should be listed as Olympians along with the other twelve. While the Olympians are traditionally twelve in number, there are many variations in the myths and no one "right" version. As the above commenter noted, there are tellings in which Hestia gave up her seat in favour of Dionysus. Likewise, some tellings name Hades as an Olympian. All fourteen are listed in Twelve Olympians, and Template:Greek religion lists thirteen. Personally I'm in favour of listing the full fourteen, but I think at least Dionysus deserves his place. Whatever the case, we ought to have some uniformity. --Shoemoney2night (talk) 05:40, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Possible related to the above, there are now 15 gods listed under the Twelve Olympians section. I think Heracles is the erroneous addition (he's in the table twice), and I suggest both removing him from the Olympians section, and dropping the "Twelve" so it's just "Olympians".--82.35.251.109 (talk) 09:27, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hades should be included in the gods of this template, I think that much is clear: he is a major god. He is obviously not a lesser, nor a primordial deity, which leaves us with the category Olympians. I know he isn't technically one of the Twelve Olympians, but he is extremely closely related to them (he's a brother of the eldest Olympians). Besides, there's no clear definition of the Twelve anyway, seeing as currently thirteen Olympians are included in the template. So why not add Hades? Would it really be better to exclude him, or add an "Other" section just for Hades? I don't think so. Lennart97 (talk) 08:02, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Olympians were named so because of their residence on Mount Olympus. Hades is not usually considered an Olympian since he resides in the underworld, not on mount Olympus. So I think it would confuse things to add Hades to that category. You might consider creating a new category (" Chthonic dieties"?) which could include Hades, Persephone (and others?), But please see Chthonic#Ambiguities in assignment. Or you could consider changing the name of the category from "Olympians" to "Principle deities". This issue illustrates one of the problems with lists like this, they end up forcing square pegs into round holes. Paul August ☎ 18:24, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]