![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Does Kachina need to be capitalized? (Few English nouns do.) Vicki Rosenzweig
No, kachina and katsina do not need to be capitalized. Only the proper names of each being (e.g., Mongwa, Sohu, or Qoqole) need to be. FYI katsina is becoming the accepted spelling, as it is closer to the Hopi pronunciation.
...would be useful. There is an inherent problem in sourcing and reliability about Hopi and other Puebloan societies, who have oral histories, protect religious information as secrets, regard scholarship as irrelevant, intrusive, or even culturally exploitive, etc. There's also a lot of nonsense out there, even from published sources. Lacking any real information people opine. Maybe that means we have to keep these articles very brief and limit it to simple, objective info. That cautious approach would probably please both the article subjects and the Wikipedia people. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikidemo ( talk • contribs) 02:09, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
Hopi Kachinas by
Jesse Walter Fewkes, 1903
in which most of the kachinas are briefly referenced, i never payed much attention to it, as i purchased the book along with several others as a lot, however i find myself glad i have it and i am simply typing out what he has to say, i also notice that if i look around the internet many people are using Fewkes text, or atleast part of his text with some personal touches, but are not crediting him with it, perhaps this will help us to lay this referencing problem to rest. with any luck i can have about 80% of the kachinas listed on this page up and online within a week or two if work does not keep me from it.--
Tophatdan (
talk)
11:32, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
These are all small matters but if it's just right from the start it won't need any follow-up. It would be good to standardize an introductory sentence or two so that the article makes sense to an intelligent lay reader who does note yet know anything about the subject...and also perhaps develop a template just for Hopi katchinas.
Although I'm sure it's difficult to translate Native American metaphysics into English, from the point of view of a newbie like me this article doesn't do a very good job of defining what a kachina is. The first sentence, which should define it, says only "Kachinas exist in western Pueblo cosmology and religious practice." The second paragraph doesn't help much: kachinas can be "...anything which exists in the natural world or cosmos." I understand not wanting to offend another culture's religion by offering a simplistic facile explanation, but surely the term can be narrowed down more than this. -- Chetvorno TALK 03:39, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
The sentence "Although not worshipped, each is viewed as a powerful being who, if given veneration and respect, can use their particular power for human good (...)" is not clear. The article on worship defines the word as an act of religious devotion usually directed at a diety, so I fail to see why katchinas are "not worshipped". I would guess this is a pragmatic explanation used by practitioners to make their beliefs more palatable in a monotheistic environment. But should it be repeated in an encyclopedic article? 11:39, 16 May 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.103.96.231 ( talk)
I would like to see a source for the etymology that katsina comes from qatsina meaning "life bringer." The Hopi Dictionary (1998) does not connect the two words, and the definition and the dictionary's examples for qatsina don't support the interpretation being put on it in this article.
qatsina 1. make a life (of)... e.g., when he made a life of corruption.... 2. make a big event, a commotion...
I suspect we're looking at a case of folk etymology, projecting a plausible idea back on the word.
-- SteveMcCluskey ( talk) 20:21, 2 June 2009 (UTC) -- Edited 13:45, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
Anonymous user 23.31.81.101 added extensive material at 21:06 on 12 March 2019 without citing any sources. My initial reaction was to revert the entire edit, but I chose instead to flag it as needed citations.
User:Modernist has repeatedly reverted the flag.
Either the flag stays, or the edit by 23.31.81.101 goes. -- Kent G. Budge ( talk) 14:25, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Does Kachina need to be capitalized? (Few English nouns do.) Vicki Rosenzweig
No, kachina and katsina do not need to be capitalized. Only the proper names of each being (e.g., Mongwa, Sohu, or Qoqole) need to be. FYI katsina is becoming the accepted spelling, as it is closer to the Hopi pronunciation.
...would be useful. There is an inherent problem in sourcing and reliability about Hopi and other Puebloan societies, who have oral histories, protect religious information as secrets, regard scholarship as irrelevant, intrusive, or even culturally exploitive, etc. There's also a lot of nonsense out there, even from published sources. Lacking any real information people opine. Maybe that means we have to keep these articles very brief and limit it to simple, objective info. That cautious approach would probably please both the article subjects and the Wikipedia people. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikidemo ( talk • contribs) 02:09, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
Hopi Kachinas by
Jesse Walter Fewkes, 1903
in which most of the kachinas are briefly referenced, i never payed much attention to it, as i purchased the book along with several others as a lot, however i find myself glad i have it and i am simply typing out what he has to say, i also notice that if i look around the internet many people are using Fewkes text, or atleast part of his text with some personal touches, but are not crediting him with it, perhaps this will help us to lay this referencing problem to rest. with any luck i can have about 80% of the kachinas listed on this page up and online within a week or two if work does not keep me from it.--
Tophatdan (
talk)
11:32, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
These are all small matters but if it's just right from the start it won't need any follow-up. It would be good to standardize an introductory sentence or two so that the article makes sense to an intelligent lay reader who does note yet know anything about the subject...and also perhaps develop a template just for Hopi katchinas.
Although I'm sure it's difficult to translate Native American metaphysics into English, from the point of view of a newbie like me this article doesn't do a very good job of defining what a kachina is. The first sentence, which should define it, says only "Kachinas exist in western Pueblo cosmology and religious practice." The second paragraph doesn't help much: kachinas can be "...anything which exists in the natural world or cosmos." I understand not wanting to offend another culture's religion by offering a simplistic facile explanation, but surely the term can be narrowed down more than this. -- Chetvorno TALK 03:39, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
The sentence "Although not worshipped, each is viewed as a powerful being who, if given veneration and respect, can use their particular power for human good (...)" is not clear. The article on worship defines the word as an act of religious devotion usually directed at a diety, so I fail to see why katchinas are "not worshipped". I would guess this is a pragmatic explanation used by practitioners to make their beliefs more palatable in a monotheistic environment. But should it be repeated in an encyclopedic article? 11:39, 16 May 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.103.96.231 ( talk)
I would like to see a source for the etymology that katsina comes from qatsina meaning "life bringer." The Hopi Dictionary (1998) does not connect the two words, and the definition and the dictionary's examples for qatsina don't support the interpretation being put on it in this article.
qatsina 1. make a life (of)... e.g., when he made a life of corruption.... 2. make a big event, a commotion...
I suspect we're looking at a case of folk etymology, projecting a plausible idea back on the word.
-- SteveMcCluskey ( talk) 20:21, 2 June 2009 (UTC) -- Edited 13:45, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
Anonymous user 23.31.81.101 added extensive material at 21:06 on 12 March 2019 without citing any sources. My initial reaction was to revert the entire edit, but I chose instead to flag it as needed citations.
User:Modernist has repeatedly reverted the flag.
Either the flag stays, or the edit by 23.31.81.101 goes. -- Kent G. Budge ( talk) 14:25, 14 March 2019 (UTC)