Contents

Talk:Esbat

This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Neopaganism Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Neopaganism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Neopaganism 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.NeopaganismWikipedia:WikiProject NeopaganismTemplate:WikiProject NeopaganismNeopaganism articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Religion Low‑importance This article 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 Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Removed

[edit]

Those definitions of a "blue moon" are of a recent date as the original definition that gave rise to the phrase "once in a blue moon" has been generally forgotten. The original definition related to the moon actually being blue. This occurs when Venus is very close to the Earth and geocentricly on the opposite side of the Moon from the Sun and the sky is very clear. The dark part of the Moon is then illuminated by Venus and appears to be a pale blue color.

I've removed this text from the article, as it strikes me as being very unlikely -- the full Venus doesn't give off much light -- certainly less than the Earth. Can anyone comment on this?

Well, blue moon doesn't mention anything about Venus, but it does state that a blue colored moon does rarely happen. I made blue moon a wikilink, that should take care of it. If someone wants to chat about Venus making it blue, they can do so over there. :) -- Zawersh 00:17, 19 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Added brief paragraph NakedCelt 06:42, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Added citation -- NakedCelt 17:07, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There are a few problems with all that info that's been recently added. First off, there's no context. Is this old pagan tradition, and if so, from which group or culture? Or is it a recent neopagan invention? Is this an authoritative set of names and description of qualities, or just one of several variations? Secondly, we need better references for this info than what is essentially an anonymous website that anyone could put up. Preferably a reliable published source, but a website of a very reputable witchcraft organisation might be permissible. Thirdly, this shouldn't be written as a "how you can observe an esbat" guide, but more as a description of what people who observe esbats think and do.

I'm not sure it's appropriate having all this info here, but seeing as you put the work in I'll see what you can make out of it. Fuzzypeg☻ 05:11, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see the problem you're referring to - I'm going to go ahead and pull that section out until I can find some better references. Isarian 18:29, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Margaret Murray is just about the worst author you could use if you're looking for authoritative sources for citations. Scholars of religion and the anthropological community in general do not hold "The Witch Cult in Western Europe" in high regard. Quoting Murray actually makes this article seem less authoritative. 76.69.11.244 (talk) 00:51, 19 March 2013 (UTC)Christine[reply]