Mabuse
What do you think should be here? How accurate do you think it is?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divinatory,_esoteric_and_occult_tarot
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divinatory,_esoteric_and_occult_tarot
What are your thoughts on Wikipedia article
amethyst57
think it's accurate, and think it would very informative to a novice, and the many links would lead to further exploration of the cards and etc...
don't think i would change anything about it...
don't think i would change anything about it...
IheartTarot
My 2c
"The Face cards also correspond to the Elements. The Page is Earth, the Knight is Air, the Queen is Water, and the King is Fire."
I learnt that the Knight is ruled by Fire and the King is ruled by Air (Source: The Building Blocks of Tarot by Jacques Theron, see also Tarot Teachings).
"Celtic Cross: This is probably the most common spread."
It may be the most well-known spread but I would argue that it is probably no longer the most commonly used spread.
There are many variations of the Celtic Cross in terms of what each of the 10 positions means, and it can be used with or without an extra 11th significator card, so I would not include only one version (I would leave out the detailed description).
"Mirror Spread: The Probable result card is drawn with circumstances as they currently are—but if changes recommended by the reading are effected, then this final card can change."
Hmmm, I haven't seen an actual card change by itself.
"The Face cards also correspond to the Elements. The Page is Earth, the Knight is Air, the Queen is Water, and the King is Fire."
I learnt that the Knight is ruled by Fire and the King is ruled by Air (Source: The Building Blocks of Tarot by Jacques Theron, see also Tarot Teachings).
"Celtic Cross: This is probably the most common spread."
It may be the most well-known spread but I would argue that it is probably no longer the most commonly used spread.
There are many variations of the Celtic Cross in terms of what each of the 10 positions means, and it can be used with or without an extra 11th significator card, so I would not include only one version (I would leave out the detailed description).
"Mirror Spread: The Probable result card is drawn with circumstances as they currently are—but if changes recommended by the reading are effected, then this final card can change."
Hmmm, I haven't seen an actual card change by itself.
Teheuti
I was looking at this article just the other day and thinking how inaccurate it is. I could almost go through line by line and find problems. For instance, while Etteilla is certainly a major influence on card meanings, to single him out as the "primary" influence on today's meanings is overly reductionistic, creating a distorted image right from the beginning.
Essentially, the article, while generally correct, tends to be very superficial and wrong or distorting in its particulars. I believe the same person wrote the majority of the general topic on Tarot. In both wiki articles I found that many assertions were without sources, or that the source links led nowhere or to a source that was only repeating, without any authority or detail and not always accurately, information from elsewhere. In the main article a lot of space was spent on some spurious theory of the source of the word tarot, with no sources and found nowhere else in any tarot literature - probably the author's pet theory - presented as if it were generally acknowledged among tarot scholars.
Earlier material that was far more accurate and even-handed has been removed.
Unfortunately I'm in the midst of several projects and deadlines so I can't spend the month or more it would take to learn how to do wiki editing and to track down all the correct references. Someone really needs to take this on.
The table on spreads is totally unnecessary. The Celtic Cross is probably the best known spread in the English language, although the French have their own spread traditions, but the other spreads mentioned are either highly individualistic (not common at all) or distorted - for instance, three-card spreads can be used for all kinds of readings - not just past, present, future.
The article should not be a "how to," but express historical facts and general principles.
It does not represent the tarot-reading world that I am familiar with at all well, and I have a wide experience in that world (at least the English-speaking part of it).
Mary K. Greer
Essentially, the article, while generally correct, tends to be very superficial and wrong or distorting in its particulars. I believe the same person wrote the majority of the general topic on Tarot. In both wiki articles I found that many assertions were without sources, or that the source links led nowhere or to a source that was only repeating, without any authority or detail and not always accurately, information from elsewhere. In the main article a lot of space was spent on some spurious theory of the source of the word tarot, with no sources and found nowhere else in any tarot literature - probably the author's pet theory - presented as if it were generally acknowledged among tarot scholars.
Earlier material that was far more accurate and even-handed has been removed.
Unfortunately I'm in the midst of several projects and deadlines so I can't spend the month or more it would take to learn how to do wiki editing and to track down all the correct references. Someone really needs to take this on.
The table on spreads is totally unnecessary. The Celtic Cross is probably the best known spread in the English language, although the French have their own spread traditions, but the other spreads mentioned are either highly individualistic (not common at all) or distorted - for instance, three-card spreads can be used for all kinds of readings - not just past, present, future.
The article should not be a "how to," but express historical facts and general principles.
It does not represent the tarot-reading world that I am familiar with at all well, and I have a wide experience in that world (at least the English-speaking part of it).
Mary K. Greer
IheartTarot
Is there any point changing it if anyone can change it again? As you say the previous version was better so why was it removed?
Laura Borealis
Doesn't Wikipedia keep a record of changes? It could be reverted to the earlier, more accurate version, if so.
ETA: Here's the revision history: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Divinatory,_esoteric_and_occult_tarot&action=history
Click on the dates to view the previous versions.
ETA: Here's the revision history: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Divinatory,_esoteric_and_occult_tarot&action=history
Click on the dates to view the previous versions.
Teheuti
Like I said, it will take a while to learn how to operate within the wiki environment appropriately (and not mess it up further) and I can't do that right now.
