Talk:Grateful dead (folklore)

Folklore Low‑importance

	This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Folklore, a WikiProject dedicated to improving Wikipedia's coverage of the topics of folklore and folklore studies. If you would like to participate, you may edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project's page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to discussion.FolkloreWikipedia:WikiProject FolkloreTemplate:WikiProject FolkloreFolklore articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Death High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Death, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Death 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.DeathWikipedia:WikiProject DeathTemplate:WikiProject DeathDeath articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Cicero and Simonides

I am not in a position to check the reference given, but the story told about Simonides by Cicero in his De Oratore (book II, lxxxvi) is not an instance of this trope, although it bears some resemblance that might lead to it being confused for such a tale, in that it does concern both the proper burial of the dead, and a supernatural reward. The order and causal relations of the events are quite different, though. The relevant passage is here (pp. 220-221).

Simonides is not rewarded by the spirits of the dead in gratitude for their proper burial, as this trope requires. He is rewarded by being saved from dying, and, by implication, this reward comes from the demigods Castor and Pollux, and is for having extravagantly praised them in a poem he recited during a banquet. Castor and Pollux (or someone else unknown) has him called outside just after his recitation, and, just after he leaves, the banqueting hall collapses, killing all the remaining occupants and mangling them so much as to be unrecognizable. However, Simonides is able to identify the bodies, and thus ensure their proper burial, because he can remember where each person was sitting during his recitation. His reward does not come from the grateful spirits of the dead. Indeed, no such spirits are mentioned by Cicero, and at the time of Simonides' "reward" the people whose proper burial he ensures are not yet dead.

It is possible, I suppose, but not very likely, that the passage in Laura Hibbard's book that is given as a citation refers to a different passage where Cicero tells a different story about Simonides, but that seems highly unlikely. Perhaps Ms Hibbard gives a misleading or very tendentious account of this passage, or, much more likely, the Wikipedian who put this mention of the Simonides story into the encyclopedia misinterpreted Ms Hibberd.

I have edited the relevant claim out. Before considering reverting it, Ms. Hibberd,s book (cited as Laura A. Hibbard, Medieval Romance in England p74 New York Burt Franklin,1963) should be checked, and what she says there should be checked against whatever passage in Cicero's works she is talking about. I would be very surprised, however, if it is a different passage from the one I have described. Treharne (talk) 16:50, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 5 March 2018

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: no consensus to move the page, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 17:32, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Grateful dead (folklore) → Grateful dead – No need for a disambiguation, per WP:DIFFCAPS. A hatnote can fulfill that task instead. _{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 14:54, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support, but hatnote required to help lazy (or high) typers find the band. -- Netoholic @ 21:19, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Strong oppose, the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for "Grateful dead" is the band (the page views favor the band by a ratio of about 100:1), and, so, Grateful dead should remain a WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT to Grateful Dead accordingly. In more pragmatic terms, anyone searching with "grateful dead" is almost certainly looking for the band, not the near-stub folklore article, and so the band article is where they should be taken. --В²C ☎ 21:37, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm not sure how you can consider the band the primary topic in long term significance when it's literally named after the element of folklore, which has been around for far longer. Popularity doesn't overrule long-term significance when determining a primary topic._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 01:33, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  - The band is not the primary topic in long term significance, but that's a minor consideration given the original and much more important primary topic criteria, likelihood of being sought, by which the band is the primary topic by a margin of 100 to 1 in usage. Creating this kind of confusion about determining primary topic is exactly why I was opposed to adding the long-term significance criteria to primary topic in the first place. --В²C ☎
- Oppose along the lines presented by В²C — Preceding unsigned comment added by Barkeep49 (talk • contribs)
Support. Popularity can certainly override long-term significance, depending on individual circumstances. That's why proposals have to be discussed on a case by case basis. In this case, it can also be argued that the band's significant cultural and musical influence in the last half of the twentieth century has greater long term significance than a relatively minor folkloric tradition that itself might be as well known as it is partly or even mostly because of the very popular band's name. The significance and popularity of both topics may be to some degree mutually dependent, but in any case derivation of a name does not automatically indicate which topic is more significant; "long term" may include the future as well as the past, and 'significance' is more important than 'longevity'. In this particular case, it doesn't really matter too much, though, because "grateful dead" is not a popular method of getting to the band's article, with fewer than 40 hits per day, about the same number as view "grateful dead (folklore)", which itself is fewer than 2% of those who view the band. So while we may assume the majority landing on grateful dead probably do want the band, correct use of capitals might militate toward using the title for the folkloric tradition, with a hatnote for those who don't bother to type caps (I don't know if I'd call them "lazy" so much as "shift-less"). Station1 (talk) 03:31, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - the band is capital D. However (folklore) is useful on drop down menu. I would say a primary redirect to (folklore) and leaving the article as is would be most user-friendly solution here. In ictu oculi (talk) 08:51, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per B2C. The likelihood of people using all lower case to search for proper title case names, which would redirect to the proposed title, is very high. In this case the band has such significant strength as the primary topic that the likelihood of the majority of users using a lower case search is high.--Yaksar (let's chat) 01:31, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- We could make EVERYTHING useful in the dropdown if we wanted - by adding parentheticals to every article. But that's a bit silly. People primarily find their way to articles here via robust search engines that work on keywords and context. We don't need to put so much stress on the value of the dropdown. There will be a hatnote here pointing to the band, and heck, maybe if some rare people land here wrong because they misclick the dropdown (they'd still have to miss the capital D), they'll learn where something new. -- Netoholic @ 09:38, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  - User:Netoholic, I think you may have meant this in response to a comment other than mine?--Yaksar (let's chat) 13:27, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Prime redirect should continue to be to the band. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:50, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Oliveros de Castilla

O romance de cavalaria "La Historia de los Nobles Caballeros Oliveros de Castilla y Artus D'Algarbe", publicada em Burgos no ano de 1499 (autor anônimo) é perfeitamente um caso de "morto agradecido". Oliveros (filho do rei de Castela), quando se dirigia à Inglaterra, sobreviveu a um naufrágio, e ainda salvou do mar a um inglês chamado John Talabot. Quando chegam à praia, o inglês morre, e Oliveros fica sabendo que ele não poderia receber sepultamento cristão por estar "excomungado por dívidas". Oliveros paga as dívidas, levanta a excomunhão e John é enterrado. Depois, Oliveros começa a receber a visita de um cavaleiro misterioso, que o ajuda a vencer o torneio pela mão da filha do rei de Inglaterra ao dar-lhe muitas armas, armaduras e cavalos, com a condição de dividir com ele tudo o que recebesse em decorrência dessa ajuda. No penúltimo capítulo do romance, o cavaleiro misterioso vem cobrar a dívida, pedindo para dividir a esposa de Oliveros ao meio; ele ainda objeta que metade do cadáver de u'a mulher não significaria nada para o próprio cavaleiro misterioso, mas termina consentindo no "pagamento" da dívida que tinha com ele. Então, o cavaleiro não parte a mulher, e diz que era o fantasma de John Talabot, e desaparece. Oliveros e sua esposa vivem até uma idade muito avançada, e seu filho varão (Henrique) se torna um cavaleiro, que morre com honra lutando contra os mouros em Chipre, e sua filha (Clarissa) se casa com Artus, rei do Algarve. 2804:14D:5C74:C9D8:80FA:2E90:DC48:2FCF (talk) 11:55, 7 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]