Jump to content

Talk:Satan

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleSatan has been listed as one of the Philosophy and religion good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Did You Know Article milestones
DateProcessResult
June 15, 2006Good article reassessmentDelisted
November 14, 2006Good article nomineeNot listed
February 6, 2018Good article nomineeListed
Did You Know A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on February 23, 2018.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that Satan frequently appeared as a comic relief figure in late medieval mystery plays, in which he "frolicked, fell, and farted in the background"?
Current status: Good article

Visual Clutter: the Devil is in the Detail

[edit]

Nice article, shame about the overload of links. As well as looking unsightly, does not all the visual clutter tend to disrupt reading? Also, might not keeping the underlining - but changing the blue links to black - help to offset the visual distraction?

Nicknames

[edit]

@VenusFeuerFalle:, ait so i made the disambiguation Old Roger, listing Satan since Old Roger is an old nickname for him. However, user:Bkonrad removed it per WP:MOSDAB because it was missing from the root article. Thus i implemented a short list of nicknames in the root article, here, which you then removed for some reason. Now all i want is a useful disambiguation page, so i feel yal with oppinions on the matter can discuss how to solve this. Blockhaj (talk) 13:28, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The disambiguation page can exist even if the name is not mentioned on the main article. THe reasons for removal were provided in the edit summary. VenusFeuerFalle (talk) 14:30, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 19 June 2025

[edit]

For the sentence indicated before reference 82, the quoted text "Archon of the Cosmos" is used, which is not the word that is used in the King James Version (KJV) passage of John 12:31 - 32. "Archon" is a term used in Gnostic texts, which are not part of the canonical Gospels. The quoted text should be changed to "prince of this world," in accordance with the cited Gospel passage. The argument for "Archon of the Cosmos" can be made in a correctly cited sentence connecting it to the Gnostic gospels, not the canonical Gospels. Chani pablo (talk) 15:22, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Day Creature (talk) 05:44, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
""Archon" is a term used in Gnostic texts" Archon is just a Greek term for a male ruler. More specific ranks of archons included the archon eponymos (chief magistrate), the polemarch (the head of the armed forces), and the archon basileus (the magistrate tasked with organizing civic religious arrangements). Dimadick (talk) 06:56, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for pointing this out. However, the quoted text in the original passage was misleading as it didn't contain the actual quoted text from the KJV version linked, nor other recognized translations of the canonical Gospels. The original author may have intended to cite the "Secret Gospel of John," a Gnostic text. My edit request was more pragmatic than philosophical. Chani pablo (talk) 17:57, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]