Talk:Morning Star
Deletion debate
[edit]
The following information has failed Wiktionary's deletion process.
It should not be re-entered without careful consideration.
Do we keep newspaper titles? ---> Tooironic 01:24, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
- Delete. If any paper by that name were mentioned in major works of English literature (Dickens or Twain, e.g.) with some regularity, then I might say "weak keep". However, this doesn't appear even to meet that generous criterion. --EncycloPetey 04:36, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
- Delete - however I think if Wikiquote stays this should too. It comes back to DCDuring's point "which of our criteria does this meet - or is it just voting?" Mglovesfun (talk) 10:10, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
- Delete. It might be worth mentioning in a usage note s.v. star that this is a relatively common newspaper name. Also s.v. times, news, post, herald, mirror, etc.—msh210℠ 16:11, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Mglovesfun (talk) 18:54, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
The following information passed a request for deletion (permalink).
This discussion is no longer live and is left here as an archive. Please do not modify this conversation, but feel free to discuss its conclusions.
There is nothing so special about the capitalised forms of morning star and evening star that means we need an entry for them. I'm sure it is attestable, but then so are lots of words in their capitalised form. Doesn't mean they are entry-worthy. This, that and the other (talk) 06:52, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
- I think they could stay as alternative letter-case forms. Keep. ·~ dictátor·mundꟾ 10:53, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
- I have added an additional sense to Morning Star, though it's not a particularly interesting one. Theknightwho (talk) 12:29, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
- When referring to the planet Venus as seen in the sky, this is IMO a proper noun, regardless of its capitalization, just like sun when referring to the star we see rise every morning*, for which we also have Sun. --Lambiam 13:20, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
- *Excepting cloudy mornings or mornings one appears unable to convince oneself in time to get out of bed.
- Yeah, when used as a proper noun / name of the planet or religious figure, it's probably the norm(?) to capitalize it, or at least an acceptable alt form, so I'm inclined to think keep the entry, although this isn't a defense of all the senses (we should drop the just-added newspaper sense; we don't have New York Times, London Times, Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone, etc, we've tended to delete multiword and modern book/newspaper/etc titles, like Talk:Liber AL vel Legis), and we should try to sync and reduce duplication between the entries as much as possible. But it seems comparable to Sun, Death, War, Devil. - -sche (discuss) 18:31, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
- I certainly wouldn't have added it as an entry in its own right. I think the reason it felt more natural here is because it's often ambiguous what "Morning Star" could be referring to. Coincidentally, I think Sun is a good example to compare it to, as it definitely makes sense to keep the newspaper sense there. Theknightwho (talk) 08:12, 17 March 2022 (UTC)
- I don't think that sense of Sun should be listed either. Names of newspapers aren't dictionary material. Binarystep (talk) 09:07, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
- In a general sense sure, but when there's a real chance of genuine confusion then I think it does serve a purpose. Theknightwho (talk) 22:57, 20 March 2022 (UTC)
- What do you mean by that? I'm honestly not seeing what potential confusion would exist here. I'd also like to point out that there are quite a few newspapers called Sun or The Sun, making it kind of odd to single out the British one specifically. At the very least, the definition should probably be changed to something broader along the lines of "A common name for a newspaper". Binarystep (talk) 07:09, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
- That's a fair point. There does seem to be a pattern when it comes to newspaper names, even though I can't quite put my finger on it, so I'd support having entries like that. Theknightwho (talk) 11:07, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
- What do you mean by that? I'm honestly not seeing what potential confusion would exist here. I'd also like to point out that there are quite a few newspapers called Sun or The Sun, making it kind of odd to single out the British one specifically. At the very least, the definition should probably be changed to something broader along the lines of "A common name for a newspaper". Binarystep (talk) 07:09, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
- In a general sense sure, but when there's a real chance of genuine confusion then I think it does serve a purpose. Theknightwho (talk) 22:57, 20 March 2022 (UTC)
- I don't think that sense of Sun should be listed either. Names of newspapers aren't dictionary material. Binarystep (talk) 09:07, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
- I certainly wouldn't have added it as an entry in its own right. I think the reason it felt more natural here is because it's often ambiguous what "Morning Star" could be referring to. Coincidentally, I think Sun is a good example to compare it to, as it definitely makes sense to keep the newspaper sense there. Theknightwho (talk) 08:12, 17 March 2022 (UTC)
- Yeah, when used as a proper noun / name of the planet or religious figure, it's probably the norm(?) to capitalize it, or at least an acceptable alt form, so I'm inclined to think keep the entry, although this isn't a defense of all the senses (we should drop the just-added newspaper sense; we don't have New York Times, London Times, Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone, etc, we've tended to delete multiword and modern book/newspaper/etc titles, like Talk:Liber AL vel Legis), and we should try to sync and reduce duplication between the entries as much as possible. But it seems comparable to Sun, Death, War, Devil. - -sche (discuss) 18:31, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
- Keep both. DonnanZ (talk) 09:59, 17 March 2022 (UTC)
- Also keep both. It’s unhelpful that the same quote from Revelation referring to Jesus as the ‘Morning Star’ appears at both Morning Star and morning star when in the actual quote it’s Morning Star - this sense should be listed solely at the capitalised version of the term, it should only appear in the lower-case entry if we can find quotes to support it.
- I say keep the Sun and Morning Star newspaper entries just for the sake of avoiding ambiguity or confusion - even if newspaper titles aren’t normally listed here.
- Also it’s debatable as to whether the Isaiah quote actually does refer to Lucifer/Satan/the devil and even if those three terms are themselves synonymous, though it wouldn’t do to get too encyclopaedic. Overlordnat1 (talk) 11:18, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
- Yeah, the lack of certainty as to the meaning of the Bible quotes, which is the source of the polysemy remarked on in the Tea Room, means we can't use the Isaiah quote as a citation for the sense "Satan" (since it's quite disputed whether that is what it actually means), I'm going to move it to the etymology; we need other quotes. I also think we need better quotes than Revelation itself to attest Morning Star as meaning Jesus; if a villain John Doe intones "I am your worst nightmare; I am the Devil" at someone, or "I can make or break you, I am God", that does not, itself, seem like it makes "John Doe" a definition of Devil or God... - -sche (discuss) 18:04, 20 March 2022 (UTC)
- I see what you mean and agree with your analysis, along with the slight changes in wording to Lucifer and morning star you’ve made and the corresponding amendments to those entries’ etymology sections. Overlordnat1 (talk) 20:27, 20 March 2022 (UTC)
- Yeah, the lack of certainty as to the meaning of the Bible quotes, which is the source of the polysemy remarked on in the Tea Room, means we can't use the Isaiah quote as a citation for the sense "Satan" (since it's quite disputed whether that is what it actually means), I'm going to move it to the etymology; we need other quotes. I also think we need better quotes than Revelation itself to attest Morning Star as meaning Jesus; if a villain John Doe intones "I am your worst nightmare; I am the Devil" at someone, or "I can make or break you, I am God", that does not, itself, seem like it makes "John Doe" a definition of Devil or God... - -sche (discuss) 18:04, 20 March 2022 (UTC)
- Also it’s debatable as to whether the Isaiah quote actually does refer to Lucifer/Satan/the devil and even if those three terms are themselves synonymous, though it wouldn’t do to get too encyclopaedic. Overlordnat1 (talk) 11:18, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
- Keep and a Wikipedia link should be sufficient for all the newspapers with those names. Facts707 (talk) 08:05, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
- RFD-kept. ·~ dictátor·mundꟾ 23:05, 14 April 2022 (UTC)
The following information has failed Wiktionary's verification process (permalink).
Failure to be verified means that insufficient eligible citations of this usage have been found, and the entry therefore does not meet Wiktionary inclusion criteria at the present time. We have archived here the disputed information, the verification discussion, and any documentation gathered so far, pending further evidence.
Do not re-add this information to the article without also submitting proof that it meets Wiktionary's criteria for inclusion.
RFV seeking citations of these being used to mean Lucifer, Satan, or Jesus, like "then Roman soldiers crucified [the] Morning Star" or "then [the] Morning Star tempted them to sin". Be aware citations I've found so far seem to be about other people named "Morning Star" (a la Native Americans being named Sitting Bull), not Jesus or Satan. The Isaiah quote is not usable because it doesn't clearly mean this (many scholars think it means something else). I also don't think it's clear the Relevation quote, "I, Jesus, have sent my angel to give you a this testimony for the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, and the bright Morning Star", is a use of this sense per se: we don't have Root defined as "Jesus", nor Offspring of David, and it seems like how if John Doe says "I am your worst nightmare, I am the Devil", it doesn't make "# John Doe" a sense of "worst nightmare" or "Devil". - -sche (discuss) 22:44, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
- I dont think this is possible. This is my thinking:
- I live in area with moderate light pollution, such that when I look out the window in the morning (at least this time of year), Venus is the only star I can see, and because it's visible early enough, the sky is still fully dark, and Venus is the only reason I know that the sun is coming up soon. Also it happens that Venus is always in the same part of the sky where the sun will appear.
- I learned recently that Romans named the planets after their gods, but they did not (as I'd expected) believe that the planets actually were their gods. So, even if the Romans were using a name like Lucifer as a common appellation, it might still have been distinct from Venus, since Venus was both a god and a planet named for a god, whereas Lucifer can only mean one of those things.
- Therefore I assume the name Lucifer was meant as a nickname, or appellation if that's a better word, for someone who brings light. Therefore it may be that no usex of the sense we want is possible, as it would be like asking for a usex of an appellation like blondie to mean one specific person with blonde hair. Even if the context is abundantly clear, the meaning we want still doesnt belong to the word we want. —Soap— 12:04, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
- Latin Lucifer was used for the planet Venus appearing as morning star. It does not follow from this observation that English morning star is not used for “Lucifer” in the common Christian sense. (I do not see the connection of a particular Christian interpretation of the latter term to “historical Judaism”, whatever that means.) --Lambiam 14:58, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
- Closest I can get is that a few works take advantage of the (long) use of Morningstar as a surname to make if Lucifer's surname: Citations:Morningstar. Though various other appellations are quite widely used for Luci or Jesus, e.g. it's no trouble to find books saying "then the Son of God is put on one footing with men, so that the Son of God lives by the Father just as we live by the Son of God", the closest I've gotten here is one book that says "It means, Enemy of the Morning Star's Light, which is Christ the Light of the world!" The use of [The] Morning Star as the name of various publications, only one reflected in our entry, makes searching difficult. This book seems to define "Morning Star" as not Jesus, and instead uses "Bright and Morning Star" for Jesus:
- (Can we date this quote?), Arrival Of Morning Star, Father Thomas Devlin, page 115:
- Morning Star is Eucharistic man. Morning Star prepares the way for the arrival of the Bight and Morning Star - Christ Jesus. As the morning star announces the arrival of a new day, so too, Eucharistic man, Morning Star, announces the arrival of the great day of the Lord.
RFV-failed Kiwima (talk) 23:29, 9 May 2022 (UTC)