User talk:Avatartar20

Re: Nibiru
The article is in need of a major clean-up, so the wiki appreciates if you're willing to help with that. Also, no worries: feel free to rewrite it from scratch you need to. -- BlueFrackle (talk) 01:20, December 14, 2018 (UTC)
 * In your mind, whats at least one thing that is wrong with the article? ... so that i dont make the same mistake. Nibiru is a difficult article because it is not just science fiction to a certain audiance... and is surrounded in controversy. What is one thing you would like to see better on the article? If you dont know, its okay... i can still work through it. Its gunna take some time because its not easy with its current editors and interested audiences. (You can also sample my direction of this article on my User Profile page). - Jsosa (talk) 07:29, December 14, 2018 (UTC)


 * Nibiru now re-written. Please let me know if it meets the scope / standard of this Wikia. Thanks Jsosa (talk) 11:01, December 14, 2018 (UTC)

About Nibiru
I'm sorry, I should have told you to read the wiki rules on the Main Page before editing. The fact is that we cannot have sentences copied straight from Wikipedia or any other external source. You need to write everything with your own words.

Other than that, the page looks good, but there are also way too many Wikipedia links, including some which are completely unnecessary (e.g. "List of Star Trek planets (M–Q)": in cases like this, if you feel the need to have a link, link to planet Nibiru's page on Memory Alpha instead). Overall, since we are not an extension of Wikipedia, the external links should be used sparingly, only when they feel most necessary. If a user wishes to read about Babylonian cosmology, they can do so without us directing them to Wikipedia. The excess of external links pollutes the page and feels gratuitous.

So, to improve the page, I would recommend getting rid of most Wikipedia links and rewriting the sentences that have been copypasted. Do so and the page should become excellent. -- BlueFrackle (talk) 13:57, December 14, 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you for clarifying. I did skim through your policy notes, but my own MOS got in the way. Im glad we are having the dialogue so i can modify. Every wikia’s MOS is different. I will make adjustments and find other Wikias to link to. I only had done one link to w:c:babylon.


 * Also, you can see my preparation for the article here, before i had originally posted it in one shot: edit history for Nibiru.


 * okay i did a cleanup. Let me know if thats good. Although some parts were copy and paste from wikipedia, i had tailored them for this wikia even earlier...but i made further edits so it wouldnt look so copy and pasted. Further, for attribution, the sources are referenced to the wikipedia pages that are appropriate. But you let me know if it works or not for this Wikia. Thanks - Jsosa (talk) 15:17, December 14, 2018 (UTC)

About Nephilim
The word "Nephilim" has been used for several different creatures in science fiction. That alone justifies the existence of the article as within the scope of the wiki in my opinion. Usually, articles like this are built with a brief introduction talking about the mythological creature, and then a section listing down aliens and alien-related concepts which have been named after it and/or inspired by it. See for instance, Angel, Vampire, Centaur and so on. That said, I don't think the Nephilim page should be deleted, but if you wish to rebuild it, feel free to do so. -- BlueFrackle (talk) 13:57, December 14, 2018 (UTC)
 * Understood. Which means dreaded research....because that page is top heavy with the mythology. Jsosa (talk) 14:19, December 14, 2018 (UTC)


 * You can follow my progress here> User:Jsosa/Nephilim


 * Please see if Nephilim is to spec. Thanks for your time on this. Jsosa (talk) 19:30, December 14, 2018 (UTC)

Nibiru and Nephilim pages
Great job, man, both pages look much better! I only did a minor correction on the Nephilim page: all mythological content is considered (for practical reasons) to belong to the real universe, so I changed the infobox accordingly. Other than that, it's all good. Thanks for helping out with this -- BlueFrackle (talk) 20:24, December 14, 2018 (UTC)
 * Im glad you like. There are many perspectives. And if you see in the Nibiru history before my edits, someone made the comment that the article content was “shit”. There is a lot of controversy and a lot of info... so i tried to keep it concise with a broader perspective. Sometimes the articles are written with too much focus from a Christianized perspective, which makes content unbalanced... especially when referring to “fallen angels” a very Christianized concept...that has its place, but not to take over the article. (And im not saying these things as a knock toward Christian thinking...im just looking for balance... as every ideology: religious, atheistic, evolutionist thinkers all bend toward fanatical thinking and bias. Its a paradox man, because we are human...thus im biased too. That said, i thank you for your eyes and helping me shave this stuff down to something more digestible. Hopefully, we will see less “this is shit” comments. -Jsosa (talk) 20:44, December 14, 2018 (UTC)

Found This
Hey, I glaced through the activity log and thought you might be interested in adding to the unused Category:Biblical_Creatures. You seem to be working with articles that might fit in that category. Renncast (talk) 00:03, December 15, 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi, yeah I removed Nephilim from that cat because there was only one page. Im surprised to see that there are quite a few Bible related articles on this Wikia. Right now im weary to use a category with “Bible” in it, because it would suggest that all the characters in the Bible - only come from the Bible (Assuming there is only one Bible! Which there is not (ie, Hebrew Bible, Christian Bible, Hindu Bible, Quran Bible, Crystal Bible). “angels”, “demons”, even “nephilim” are not exclusive to the uhm, Bible. Please take a look at my current project to see what i mean > User:Jsosa/angel. However, maybe im over thinking all this... so id like BlueFrackle to also weigh in on this. Hey, thanks for bringing this to light! - Jsosa (talk) 00:17, December 15, 2018 (UTC)


 * Personally, I don't think a biblical category is necessary. First, these species are already covered under "Mythological Creatures" and "Actual Universe". Second, it would open a precedent for having other categories for each of the most well-known religious texts, and there would be a lot of overlap between them. -- BlueFrackle (talk) 02:18, December 16, 2018 (UTC)
 * I 100% agree. Jsosa (talk) 02:27, December 16, 2018 (UTC)

Angels
By the way, Jsosa, your research on Angels is looking good too. It's probably worth pointing out that Angels are fundamentally distinct from Jinn, as, according to Islamic tradition, the Jinn were created out of fire (and humans out of clay), whereas the Angels were created out of light. Out of the three races, it is said that Humans and Jinn have free will and can choose to act upon God's will or not, whereas the Angels are pretty much bound to serve God (this, of course, contrasts wildly with the concept of "Fallen Angels" and the traditionally-accepted origin of Satan). As for the Tuath Dé, they were originally Irish deities, but ended up being relegated to the status of "Fair Folk", thus giving rise to the Aos Sí (People of the Sidhe), which dwell in their own supernatural realm beyond the mounds. I'm not familiar with the Watchers, so, I'm afraid I can't help much with that one. Overall, it's nice to see that you're covering a lot of folklore from many different cultures on this page. -- BlueFrackle (talk) 02:41, December 16, 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your feedback! Okay, and now let the dialogue wheels begin!


 * 1. Jinn - as in my convo with Renncast, “demons”, “angels”, “nephilim”, even “Jinn” are not exclusive to the Abrahamic faiths (i.e in this order: Judaism, Christianity, Islam). According to Walter de Gruyter, Jinn is not exclusively Islamic (Tobias Nünlist Dämonenglaube im Islam Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co KG, 2015 ISBN 978-3-110-33168-4 p. 2 [German] ). The history of the Kurds predates Islam at least to the 3rd century BCE (thats almost a 900 year time span) (Baron Patrick Balfour Kinross, Within the Taurus: a journey in Asiatic Turkey, 1970, 191 pages, see p. 89).


 * “angelic servants” is the description used to describe the Jinn in Kurdish culture (Kahn, M. (1980). Children of the Jinn: in Search of the Kurds and their Country. Michigan: Seaview Books, pp. xi.)
 * 2. As in many legends, the myth of Tuath Dé has been changed and modified and molded 50 different ways to Sunday. The interest here, is, what was the most ancient concept for them? There name “tribe of god” is very close to other mythological expressions which i have not included in my project notes... but interestingly there is a connection to the phrase “children of Anu” (Koch, John T. Celtic Culture: A Historical Encyclopedia. ABC-CLIO, 2006. pp.1693-1695) which happens to be (by coincidence?) an exact well accepted meaning by mainstream historians for the Akkadian expression: Anunnaki (Black, Jeremy; Green, Anthony (1992), Gods, Demons and Symbols of Ancient Mesopotamia: An Illustrated Dictionary, London, England: The British Museum Press, ISBN 0-7141-1705-6, p. 34). (If you are interested to know where im going with this further... you can check out (w:c:ufoaliendatabase:eloheem).


 * 3. ”Watchers” is a term well known by “Fallen angel” enthusiasts (Academia.edu, On the Origin of Watchers: A Comparative Study of the Antediluvian Wisdom in Mesopotamian and Jewish Traditions).


 * Please review my dialogue, and let me know if its okay to include the planned sub-sections into the Angel article. Thank you so much for your feedback/ dialogue. This makes it kinda fun.
 * - Jsosa (talk) 03:19, December 16, 2018 (UTC)


 * Sure, the sub-sections are definitely OK. In fact, as I said, I think it's a really good idea to showcase multi-cultural ideas about angels and angel-like beings across different cultures. Just as well, it's nice to know that the Kurds described the Jinn as "angelic servants", but I still think it's relevant that you also point out how Jinn and Angels have later been portrayed as distinct from each other in Islamism. The possible connection between the Tuatha Dé and the Anunnaki is also interesting, I wasn't aware of that, thanks for the info! :) -- BlueFrackle (talk) 04:18, December 16, 2018 (UTC)
 * Noted... yes Jinn distinction. It may be a further discussion on a re-written Demon article. The Anunnaki connection with Tauth De is based on the works of Christian O'Brien (Christian O'Brien, The Genius of the Few, Daintus, UK, 1985.) Since you show some interest, i might write something on it. I hadnt planned to... because i was afraid it would push fringe... but then again...everything alien and extraterrestrial is fringe. I will now insert the sub articles as i have them right now. And tommorow i will develop a jinn / demon topic for existing article. Please note though... that Islam, like Judaism, and others borrow from pre existing ideas. So in my bias, im looking for the most ancient clause, and i lack interest in pursuing neutrality for all nations religions that have their own ideas. That way you know what my bias is: Whats most Ancient (not, what does everyone believe about it - then it turns into Wikipedia.) Thanks for your awesome feedback. Jsosa (talk) 05:13, December 16, 2018 (UTC)

Angels part 2
I just wanted to toss a quick thought regarding an earlier statement you made... “whereas the Angels are pretty much bound to serve God (this, of course, contrasts wildly with the concept of "Fallen Angels" “.
 * I was curious about this line of reasoning. At its core an angel is a “messenger”. Then over time, the concept of an angel gets bogged down in all sorts of characterizations... they get animal heads, they get wings.. no wait - they get four wings, no wait - the number of wings determine their hierarchy, they can materialize as humans, no wait - those are only fallen angels who can materialize, no wait - they werent fallen, the scriptures meant they were “sons of God” a princely class of magestrates that took the “daughters of men”. No wait - it was Satan, no wait - it was Azazel, no wait - it was the “Day Star”, no wait - you mean Jesus? Hes the Day Star. Wait, are you saying Satan is Jesus? Oh my god... it just keeps going... so many rules, so much convoluted material (and the Jesus / Satan thing is a real debate... im not making any of this stuff up). So i kinda ask... what says that angels are under complete servitude to God, and do not have free will themselves? Its just a playful question... I am really curious about that particular source. I personally dont have a belief either way, because its all speculative to me.Jsosa (talk) 06:40, December 16, 2018 (UTC)
 * To be perfectly honest, I don't have a source in hand for this information, but I've seen it more than once. It seems to be a piece of "common knowledge" regarding Angels that they cannot sin or disobey their creator (unlike Humans and Jinn). Doing a quick research, I just found several positions on this issue. For instance, here's a detailed analyzes and here's a rebuttal. Hope that helps a little. -- BlueFrackle (talk) 15:44, December 16, 2018 (UTC)
 * Cool. Jsosa (talk) 16:01, December 16, 2018 (UTC)

Jinn
okay so i inserted... Although viewed as free-willed spirits in Islamic culture, the Kurds believed Jinn to be angelic servants who...

Also, in my quick look of Islamic view of Jinn, there seems to be three different types of Jinn... which i fear might convolute and make top heavy potential topics that dont need to necessarily be written up. One of the problems with human thinking is that everything gets demonized... from gods, to angels, to demons themselves, to people, to reptilians. In fact, the demon article might be the hardest to rebalance. What makes these subjects so complicate is that the Jewish Rabbis have Midrash, Christians have theologians, and Islam have Hadith... and none of them agree on anything. Thus, we have convoluted belief systems as to weather angels are good or bad... Jinns good or bad... or even if demons are good or bad... maybe they are just beings who are demonized for no good reason. :/ - - Jsosa (talk) 05:40, December 16, 2018 (UTC)


 * Yeah, it's complicated. Different cultures have different perceptions of such beings. Demons, for instance: the word comes from Greece ("daimon"), but they were originally just spirit-like entities, not necessarily evil. They could choose to help people or not. The Jinn, likewise, in most folkloric traditions, are much like human beings: they can choose to act selfishly or selflessly, to help or hinder, etc. Same thing about the Aos Sí, same thing about many Yōkai and Nymphs, same thing about the Baba Yaga, etc. And sure, beliefs change through time, and sometimes, deities become spirits, or spirits become deities; "evil" entities become "good" and "good" entities become "evil"; and so on.


 * If you're looking for advice about this, remember that this is Alien Species Wiki. We're not meant to be the most detailed source of information about these beings: there are other places that have this as their mission. Our mission is to document the entirety of alien life in the universe, as portrayed in lore, in stories, in fiction. From that point of view, the "Actual Universe" articles actually serve to complement the fiction-related ones: to provide a perspective of what could truly be out there, and what people across history have believed to be out there, living beyond the material world, beyond the celestial plane, beyond the skies if you will.


 * If it helps, I can point you towards two articles that I have written: Tzitzimitl and Wandjina. In both cases, there's a ton of info that could have been included about them (entire books have been written, of course), so I opted for what I perceived to be the most informative and interesting summary that would be befitting for an encyclopedia of alien life. -- BlueFrackle (talk) 16:16, December 16, 2018 (UTC)

I agree. Looking at the demon article, it is top heavy With one path of the Christianized perspective entirely (Because not all christians believe in “fallen angels” or “Lucifer”). Here is my problem... It would be just as bad to include the Jewish or Islamic perspective (ie, turning into Wikipedia). I propose a re-write to the intro, pointing to Sumeria and maybe a quick summary of the origins of the demon concept (the way you explained above). Jsosa (talk) 16:22, December 16, 2018 (UTC)