Dorset Ooser is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | |||||||||||||
This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on January 17, 2017. | |||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
Current status: Featured article |
This article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The Head of Atho was removed based on a wrong theory published in an article on the Coven of Atho in 2007. The Head of Atho has nothing to do with the Dorset Ooser. It was crafted based on symbolism found in the Coven of Atho. It was not a mask like the Dorset Ooser but used as an alter piece and a tool used to teach the oral lore within the Coven of Atho. Covenofathos ( talk) 03:14, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
With respects, CoA, your claim that the information is "wrong", which you base upon "lore not yet published" doesn't hold water here I'm afraid. There is a referenced link to the fact that Melissa Seims SUGGESTED that when Raymond Howard made the head (which has been proven through the claims of his son Peter), he based it's iconography upon the Ooser. It is a perfectly plausable possibility. Granted, the head contained aspects from Howard's Athonian tradition, such as the symbolism of the entwined snakes and flying bird which were engraved upon it, but it's general shape could have been inspired by the Ooser. Thank you for your contribution, but Wikipedia relies on published fact, like the fact that Melissa Seims stated that the Head of Atho's design may have been based upon the Ooser. Your claims at unpublished lore just aren't provable; indeed, if you published an article about them in The Cauldron or Pentacle or whatever then yes, we could use them on here, but with just your word for it, I'm afraid we can't.( Midnightblueowl ( talk) 18:19, 17 February 2009 (UTC))
This comment has been moved from the article page:
The comment was made by Simon Le Messurier ( talk) 00:54, 18 October 2013 (UTC), and was moved here by PaleCloudedWhite ( talk) 10:12, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: J Milburn ( talk · contribs) 08:41, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
Happy to take this on. I know I review a lot of your articles, so if you'd rather hear from other voices, do let me know- I'd be happy to step away from this review or stay away from some in the future- and, of course, I wouldn't take offence!
Josh Milburn (
talk) 08:41, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
Really interesting topic. The claim that the Ooser's owner was "willing to dispose of this mask to a lover of objects of antiquarian interest" is like something straight out of an M. R. James novella. Josh Milburn ( talk) 10:05, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
I've added a few extra pieces of information procured from Frederick Thomas Elworthy's Horns of Honour. Midnightblueowl ( talk) 10:27, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
I'm really happy with how the article's looking- I'm happy to promote. Great work! Josh Milburn ( talk) 18:58, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
The lead sentence of the article states that the Ooser "a wooden head that featured in the nineteenth-century folk culture of Melbury Osmond", but I am wondering if this is misleading. Lower down in the text the article states that the Ooser mask found at Melbury Osmond was "possibly the only example now in existence, or at any rate from one of the very few which may still survive in the County", which suggests the Ooser as a concept existed more widely than at Melbury, and that only one particular effigy is connected to the village. I have a small book on Dorset folklore in my possession; I cannot with confidence state that it could be regarded as a reliable source (it might be self-published), though the author (Maureen Hymas) has this to say on the Ooser: "a creature who roamed villages at the end of each year demanding refreshment. He was believed to have represented a high priest who rules over a pagan fertility ritual. Reputed to be the stud bull of Dorset witchcraft, the Ooser's mask was worn by the head of a coven. By the beginning of the 19th century his original purpose was forgotten and in places like Shillingstone he became known as the "Christmas Bull". The last known one was at Melbury Osmond who roamed around at the beginning of the 20th century." From reading the article it is apparent that this summary would be disputed by modern scholars, however it is the last two sentences that I find interesting, as they suggest the Ooser is not something specific to Melbury Osmond. PaleCloudedWhite ( talk) 10:04, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
Ooser and Wurse may possibly come from woodwose, the hairy wildman of English lore. Woodwoses had connection to devils and Mummers plays. Just an educated guess, no source I have.
"Ooser" is mentioned fleetingly in Thomas Hardy's "The Return of the Native" (written 1878) by a child as an potential source of fear or distress (“What have made you so down? Have you seen a ooser?”) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.251.54.95 ( talk) 11:07, 26 March 2022 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Dorset Ooser. 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:
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: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 10:21, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
Dorset Ooser is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | |||||||||||||
This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on January 17, 2017. | |||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
Current status: Featured article |
This article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The Head of Atho was removed based on a wrong theory published in an article on the Coven of Atho in 2007. The Head of Atho has nothing to do with the Dorset Ooser. It was crafted based on symbolism found in the Coven of Atho. It was not a mask like the Dorset Ooser but used as an alter piece and a tool used to teach the oral lore within the Coven of Atho. Covenofathos ( talk) 03:14, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
With respects, CoA, your claim that the information is "wrong", which you base upon "lore not yet published" doesn't hold water here I'm afraid. There is a referenced link to the fact that Melissa Seims SUGGESTED that when Raymond Howard made the head (which has been proven through the claims of his son Peter), he based it's iconography upon the Ooser. It is a perfectly plausable possibility. Granted, the head contained aspects from Howard's Athonian tradition, such as the symbolism of the entwined snakes and flying bird which were engraved upon it, but it's general shape could have been inspired by the Ooser. Thank you for your contribution, but Wikipedia relies on published fact, like the fact that Melissa Seims stated that the Head of Atho's design may have been based upon the Ooser. Your claims at unpublished lore just aren't provable; indeed, if you published an article about them in The Cauldron or Pentacle or whatever then yes, we could use them on here, but with just your word for it, I'm afraid we can't.( Midnightblueowl ( talk) 18:19, 17 February 2009 (UTC))
This comment has been moved from the article page:
The comment was made by Simon Le Messurier ( talk) 00:54, 18 October 2013 (UTC), and was moved here by PaleCloudedWhite ( talk) 10:12, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: J Milburn ( talk · contribs) 08:41, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
Happy to take this on. I know I review a lot of your articles, so if you'd rather hear from other voices, do let me know- I'd be happy to step away from this review or stay away from some in the future- and, of course, I wouldn't take offence!
Josh Milburn (
talk) 08:41, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
Really interesting topic. The claim that the Ooser's owner was "willing to dispose of this mask to a lover of objects of antiquarian interest" is like something straight out of an M. R. James novella. Josh Milburn ( talk) 10:05, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
I've added a few extra pieces of information procured from Frederick Thomas Elworthy's Horns of Honour. Midnightblueowl ( talk) 10:27, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
I'm really happy with how the article's looking- I'm happy to promote. Great work! Josh Milburn ( talk) 18:58, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
The lead sentence of the article states that the Ooser "a wooden head that featured in the nineteenth-century folk culture of Melbury Osmond", but I am wondering if this is misleading. Lower down in the text the article states that the Ooser mask found at Melbury Osmond was "possibly the only example now in existence, or at any rate from one of the very few which may still survive in the County", which suggests the Ooser as a concept existed more widely than at Melbury, and that only one particular effigy is connected to the village. I have a small book on Dorset folklore in my possession; I cannot with confidence state that it could be regarded as a reliable source (it might be self-published), though the author (Maureen Hymas) has this to say on the Ooser: "a creature who roamed villages at the end of each year demanding refreshment. He was believed to have represented a high priest who rules over a pagan fertility ritual. Reputed to be the stud bull of Dorset witchcraft, the Ooser's mask was worn by the head of a coven. By the beginning of the 19th century his original purpose was forgotten and in places like Shillingstone he became known as the "Christmas Bull". The last known one was at Melbury Osmond who roamed around at the beginning of the 20th century." From reading the article it is apparent that this summary would be disputed by modern scholars, however it is the last two sentences that I find interesting, as they suggest the Ooser is not something specific to Melbury Osmond. PaleCloudedWhite ( talk) 10:04, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
Ooser and Wurse may possibly come from woodwose, the hairy wildman of English lore. Woodwoses had connection to devils and Mummers plays. Just an educated guess, no source I have.
"Ooser" is mentioned fleetingly in Thomas Hardy's "The Return of the Native" (written 1878) by a child as an potential source of fear or distress (“What have made you so down? Have you seen a ooser?”) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.251.54.95 ( talk) 11:07, 26 March 2022 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Dorset Ooser. 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:
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: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 10:21, 3 December 2017 (UTC)