Talk:Haitian Vodou and sexual orientation
 | This article was nominated for deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:
|
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||
This article is ridiculous
[edit]I think this article is a hoax too. Anyone who knows Voodoo, knows this can't be the case. Either the person who wrote this is lying or they are a divorcee who is newly lesbian and trying to justify it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.65.206.106 (talk) 04:05, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
This article is as said above a hoax. Anyone who knows Voodoo knows that this article is just pure make belief. The article is just based on the author's opinions and thus every statement about Vodou and homosexuality is left without Citations. No one else has come up to add citations to the article because there's no research substantiating the claims made here. It should be deleted.
- Agaou Wedo, you are free to nominate the article for deletion again and use the argument you stated above as rationale. You are also free to usd the citation needed tag any place in the article that you feel needs that tag. BostonMensa (talk) 22:28, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
This entry is full of inaccuracies and untruths as anyone who knows anything about Haiti, Haitian culture or Vodou can testify. I suggest that this article may be a hoax. It is certainly very misleading. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.120.160.30 (talk) 12:50, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
- I agree entirely. The article almost entirely lacks citations, and the citations that are there do not support the article, or at best provide spurious support. Anyone who knows anything about Haiti and Vodou knows what general attitudes are towards homosexuality. Let's keep the articles real, people! Eastcote (talk) 04:22, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
- Interesting but vague assertions. A tag of unbalanced should be accompanied by a discussion of actionable items that other editors can look into and, hopefully, fix or address. Simply stating that every knows this isn't true or that the list of sources don't support this isn't helpful. Do you have a source that shows what we have here is untrue? If so it would help to review that source. -- Banjeboi 07:26, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
- That's not how it works. It's not up to me to provide citations to support my view. I didn't write the article. It's up to the writers of this article to support their assertions with solid references. If I assert that leopards are pink, it's not up to you to provide documentation to the contrary. It's up to me to provide proof that they are in fact pink. This article provides scant in-line citations, and those that are provided are questionable in their support of the article's main assertions. The reference in Metraux's work, Voodoo in Haiti, for instance, has nothing to do with homosexuality, but refers to possession by the Loa. Metraux is silent on homosexuality (I have the book open to the index in front of me). The link to Mama Zogbe's article points to a blank page. The "Reverend" Ms. Severina Singh is likely not an authority on Vodou of any kind, much less Haitian. She's a hodge-podge of Feng Shui, Reiki, "Native American" Medicine, Rastaferianism, Sikhism, and Tibetan Lamas, to name a few. Is the word "charlatan" apt? The list of "Further Reading" also provides a lot of pop metaphysics (Goddess-worship, Isaac Bonewits, etc.) and articles unclear in their support (does AIDS, Fear and Society, for instance, say anything concerning Vodou and homosexuality? If so, cite the reference). This article is weak at best, and untruthful at worst. This article needs work to provide support for its assertions, or it is simply spurious. Eastcote (talk) 02:23, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
- You may have missed my point. In regards to a tag like {{pov}} or {{unbalanced}} placed on an article the talkpage should also have a section to address the issue, hopefully in a friendly manner, so that whatever is thought to be POV or unbalanced can be addressed in some way. What I meant with vague statements weren't helpful was that they weren't actionable. Now you have actually stated some items that can be looked into by those interested in helping improve the article. Thank you! -- Banjeboi 10:56, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
- That's not how it works. It's not up to me to provide citations to support my view. I didn't write the article. It's up to the writers of this article to support their assertions with solid references. If I assert that leopards are pink, it's not up to you to provide documentation to the contrary. It's up to me to provide proof that they are in fact pink. This article provides scant in-line citations, and those that are provided are questionable in their support of the article's main assertions. The reference in Metraux's work, Voodoo in Haiti, for instance, has nothing to do with homosexuality, but refers to possession by the Loa. Metraux is silent on homosexuality (I have the book open to the index in front of me). The link to Mama Zogbe's article points to a blank page. The "Reverend" Ms. Severina Singh is likely not an authority on Vodou of any kind, much less Haitian. She's a hodge-podge of Feng Shui, Reiki, "Native American" Medicine, Rastaferianism, Sikhism, and Tibetan Lamas, to name a few. Is the word "charlatan" apt? The list of "Further Reading" also provides a lot of pop metaphysics (Goddess-worship, Isaac Bonewits, etc.) and articles unclear in their support (does AIDS, Fear and Society, for instance, say anything concerning Vodou and homosexuality? If so, cite the reference). This article is weak at best, and untruthful at worst. This article needs work to provide support for its assertions, or it is simply spurious. Eastcote (talk) 02:23, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
- Interesting but vague assertions. A tag of unbalanced should be accompanied by a discussion of actionable items that other editors can look into and, hopefully, fix or address. Simply stating that every knows this isn't true or that the list of sources don't support this isn't helpful. Do you have a source that shows what we have here is untrue? If so it would help to review that source. -- Banjeboi 07:26, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
Move discussion in progress
[edit]There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:LGBT in Islam which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 12:59, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
External links modified
[edit]Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Haitian Vodou and sexual orientation. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070922171136/http://www.neworleansvoodoocrossroads.com/voodoofaq.html to http://www.neworleansvoodoocrossroads.com/voodoofaq.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:35, 28 October 2017 (UTC)