Talk:Derzelas

This article was nominated for deletion on 14 March 2013 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep.

	Bulgaria Start‑class Low‑importance
Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Gebeleizis was as far as my mythology serves me right the sky god and storm and lightning were only the manifestations of his anger ... also he was often compared to Zeus of the Greek mythology or Jupiter as he is known in the roman pantheon that led to some debates over the origins of the God Zeus ... last but not least Gebeleizis' cult was at some point "absorbed" by the Zamolxian one and Zamolxis eventually became the Supreme God in the Dacian mytholgy ... other minor gods being overlooked as time and roman occupation passed by.

P.S.: The stuff here is only as accurate as my memory from a few books I read on Dacian myths and history I can guarantee it's correct only as far as a personal opinion and knowledge :D

1. Gebeleidis=Zhaibaleidis meaning producing lightning (Lith. zhaibas means lightning and leidis means throwing-producing) 2. Derzelas=Darzhelas meaning god of vegetables and plants (Lith. darzelis means kitchen-garden), and the corn he is holding in Lithuanian is called a corn of abundancy

nothing mysterious, in ancient times Getai-Trakai-Dakai were regional tribes of Lithuania

Zamolxis=Savamokslis=Saumokslis is not a god, but the nomination of the person meaning self-educated (Lith. savamokslis means self-educated), later it become god of the land-ground and was called Zhemeliukshis (Lith. zheme means land, soil or ground)

As a person with Romanian family connections, I appreciate the place archaic Thrace plays between modern Baltic language families and their resonances with ancient Persian provenance, and regret if expanding the entry has diluted any perceived cultural heritage vested in Nordic paganism. While I have appended copious footnote references to readily-available source resources for all claims supplemented to the original version of this page (examined under either a Carpathian or Greco-Roman lens), and where possible linked directly to an appropriate Wikipedia entry for many of the wide-ranging syncretic cultural-historical associations drawn between East and Western religious practices associated with Derzalas. The Turkic influence on cultural practices spread along the Silk road led me to include some Tartar Russian media from the twentieth century under "See also" with notable semiographic phenomena linking forms of a prominent natural feature and form of a monument. Seconding Prof. Caroline Bynum, I would want to avoid the tyranny of morphology, see www.hs.ias.edu/sites/hs.ias.edu/files/Bynum_Articles/Bynum_AvoidingTyrannyMorphology.pdf while drawing attention to persistence of memory in human behaviour from one era to the next.

Pls specify any egregious errors, I will be happy to amend MrsKrishan (talk) 07:40, 5 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The problem with your edits is a fundamental issue of troubling Wikipedia behavior, and, more importantly, the entire reason that appears to underlie your edits.

Your edits misuse citations. The cited statement

Derzelas (Darzalas) was a Dacian or Thracian chthonic god of abundance and the underworld, health and human spirit's vitality.^[1]

was changed to

Derzelas (Darzalas) was a Dacian or Thracian chthonic god of abundance and the underworld, health and human spirit's vitality, probably related with gods such as Hades, Zalmoxis, Gebeleizis.^[2][3]

Probably related with gods such as Hades, Zalmoxis, Gebeleizis? CITE PLEASE. Also your other cites are meaningless, self-referential to Wikipedia sites, or not cites at all.

You make the utterly unsupported and frankly

WP:FRINGE

claims

The modern Polish surname Zelazo (from żelazo meaning "iron" cognate with Lithuanian geležìs) is derived from the eponymous Dacian martial deity Gebeleizis, echoing Sarmatia's Eastern European links with Iran: gebel is a Maltese and Arabic word for hill or mountain, related to جَبَلَايَة (gabalāya) “grotto, cave” related to English javelin, a warrior's spear); and the Homeric Αἰγίς (aegis), a sacral hieratic hunting bag of classical Grecian myth, derived from the verb aissu "violent windstorm". Ζεὺς Αἰγίοχος ("Zeus who holds the aegis") may have originally meant "Sky/Heaven, who holds the thunderstorm". Mount Smolikas (Σμόλικας), the second highest mountain in Greece after Mount Olympus may predate Aromanian ethnographic roots in Zalmoxis (Smolcu in local Romanisch dialect of the descendents of Paeonian tribes who settled the northern Aegean peninsula) related to Turkic^[4] sol "left" (meaning the side of the body facing north when a devotee faces the rising sun at dawn) from Ugaritic 𐎌𐎎𐎀𐎍 (šmal) Akkadian 𒆏 (šumēlu, “left side”) cognate with Aramaic סְמָלָא / ܣܡܠܐ (semālā, “left side”), Arabic شَمَالٌ (šamāl, “north”) and Hebrew שְׂמֹאל(s'mól) "left", as perhaps passed down in Romanian Solomonari folk legends, and the Naiad nymph named Salmacis.

I barely even follow this. It's nonsense. You claim it's Turkic is related to Semitic. You claim "javelin" is from "Arabic and Maltese". This is like off-the-cuff word association games by someone who doesn't have any idea what they are talking about. It's uncited. It's practically

are here

to build an encyclopedia: you have a long-term agenda inconsistent with building an encyclopedia and are free-associating on this page to prove it. This is not the purpose of Wikipedia.

Your near-instant response to my edits, your careful listing of the issue here, on your own page, and on my talk page reeks of note-keeping for the purpose of gaming the system. I look at your editing history and I see you are engaging in long-term

fringe edits on other pages. This is extremely troubling. Ogress 23:07, 5 June 2016 (UTC)[reply

]

Citations given, as cited in comment above? MrsKrishan (talk) 15:48, 6 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Correction: respectfully, perhaps you misread the time codes on the unCITEd edit you mistakenly attribute to me

"was changed to " Derzelas (Darzalas) was a Dacian or Thracian chthonic god of abundance and the underworld, health and human spirit's vitality, probably related with gods such as Hades, Zalmoxis, Gebeleizis.^[1][2] Probably related with gods such as Hades, Zalmoxis, Gebeleizis"  ? CITE PLEASE."

antedates my contribution by three years

see Talk-page history dated March 2013 [1]

and the un-id'd commentary (re: added nomenclature you question the veracity of) posted above, by four years!

see Talk-page history dated May 2012 [2]

Pls redirect any CITE critique to User:Theopolisme or 82.7.83.208, User:SineBot, User:Bine_Mai, User:Sadads and User:Ginkamikaze participants defending a proposed article-deletion or User:Gligan who opened discussion here 7 years ago and User:Bogdangiusca who appended

{{Myth-stub}}

to express desire for expansion on the earliest content (referencing Burebista and Decenu sacerdot, neither of whom historically established characters have prevailed in edits made in the interim) more than a decade ago. Is it any wonder that certain articles never grow to the healthy length required for encyclopedic utility when zealous moderators wield the hatchet on them whilst yet in embryonic form? Someone may have an agenda, but its not me! MrsKrishan (talk) 15:48, 6 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Citations autogenerated, as cited in comment quoted above MrsKrishan (talk) 15:52, 6 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You have replied to my concerns on my talk page, please do not do that. I can see them here.

If you did not add that first content, my apologies, it was part of my initial wave of stripping the page of malformed information.

As for your counterclaim that your assertions are equivalent to

The deity Elagabalus was initially venerated at Emesa. This form of the god's name is a Latinized version of the Syrian Ilāh hag-Gabal, which derives from Ilāh (a Semitic word for "god") and gabal (an Aramaic word for "mountain"), resulting in "the God of the Mountain," the Emesene manifestation of the deity.^[3]

I reply simply: how is it possible you can have edited on Wikipedia for so long and do not understand that we do not do original research, we do not do synthesis, we use reliable sourcing for our edits. Those two sentences are cited from Lenormant's article "Sol Elagabalus" in the the Revue de l'Histoire des Religions. Indeed, that article was written in 1881, and yet stands the test of time in terms of these assertions. We literally have a Roman relief inscribed in the Aramaic alphabet ʾlhʾ gblʾ^[4]

I do not get to claim Elagabalus has a semitic origin. No. Lenormant and a wealth of other scholars make the claim, it is assessed that they are

WP:RS, and statements are written by editors who then append the citations with these claims. It doesn't matter that I can easily recognise Elagabalus as an obvious latinised form of Semitic words. Ogress 18:51, 6 June 2016 (UTC)[reply

]