Talk:Onmyōdō

While this article is pretty in-depth about the history of Onmyodo, it might be nice if it goes into more detail about the actual practices.

there is a separate article on onmyoji... should they be merged?

merged them

Note: The above two messages were added by User:Niz at 12:14, 21 June 2005 and 14:32, 23 June 2005 respectively, but were not signed. —Typhlosion 21:13, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

I made some grammatical changes to the Development section of the article, but I am afraid I may have changed its meaning. Someone who knows more should take a look at it and make sure it is still accurate. Caelarch 16:20, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

I just cleaned it up a little. Today, I learned something! --Bluejay Young 01:05, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Wether or Onmyodo is considered a pseudoscience is of no consequence. This article should be purely about Onmyodo, not what modern science thinks of it. -- User:Brian at 6:41,10 August 2006

I disagree. The article is purely about Onmyodo currently. Firstly, stating that Onmyodo is pseudoscientific is a valuable way of putting the practice in a modern perspective, because it does demonstrably incorporate pseudoscience. Furthermore, the article is mostly made up of historical data translated from the equivalent Japanese article which, though in need of more specific sources, appears to be verifiable. Unless someone can define a specific conflicting viewpoint, I see no need for a POV dispute. Shiva Indis 07:20, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Cultural References

I just added a tidbit of a footware company being named Onmyōdō and I can't quite decide if it's more culture or more advert. If it's believed that it falls into the latter, feel free to remove. --Thisisbossi 02:40, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

This section seems a little long. RJFJR 18:32, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Five elements

Currently the article links to Five_elements_(Japanese_philosophy) for the five elements, but in the references to onmyodo I've encountered in modern media the Chinese version came up instead, so I'm a bit surprised to see the article makes no further mention of what concept of the elements was used in onmyodo. 213.10.112.111 (talk) 18:35, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Pff study Onmyōdō

Pff study Onmyōdō from 2006 yepp Onmyōdō available only for descendants of the clans onmyoji. This is not only technics. This is a curse for which to pay dearly. A "study" is just another deception. This is not a doctrine is something to which people have dared to when there was no other way to stop the demons. And in the Xia only hides the name of God. Triune and asexual God. But this name is not Jesus . But maybe other His Name before Christmas. :) maybe .... Maybe so no need to do. But since they could be seen properly :-/ 95.28.178.172 (talk) 15:31, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

References for Cultural references

Dear Nikkimaria: if you consider that my reference (unlike 17 of the existing 18 cultural references, mind you), has a particular need for reliable sources, by all means feel free to add tag, but please refrain from carelessly undoing other people's contributions.

I know you might mean well and believe that it will encourage people to redo their work, but it actually just bullies people away. In my case, after you reverted my contribution twice, I won't make any further efforts to add to Onmyōdō's cultural references.

Amenadiel (talk) 22:26, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

Hello Amenadiel, it wasn't "careless" - we recently had a long discussion that concluded that cultural references should include reliable secondary sources. This means that material without such sources can be removed and should not be restored without good sourcing - this is why I removed not only "your" entry but also a number of others without sourcing. You are welcome to restore the entry if you can provide a reliable secondary source for it. Nikkimaria (talk) 22:55, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

I can still see 17 references with no reliable secondary source whatsoever. Moreover, I'm calling you out not because you broke any explicit rules, but instead because you didn't care about the contribution itself nor the integrity of the article. You just applied a standard preset. It might be valid in the eyes of a self-appointed moderator board, but it does scare casual contributors away. Most of them, I'm sure, just leave silently.

Amenadiel (talk) 00:34, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

Amenadiel, if you believe there are other entries that warrant removal, by all means, have at it; we have no moderator board, anyone can edit. After all, it is important to the integrity of not only this article but Wikipedia that we maintain our standards of verifiability with reliable sourcing. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:02, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

Nikkimaria: I get it, you're right. My vision might be skewed because I can see that RfC: Are "in popular culture"... didn't settle the issue of dealing with past entries, and it's almost impossible to enforce the quality of existing content, so you focus on incoming editions. Considering this, I can't argue that my contributions were unfairly scrutinized, because every recent contribution is.

Consensus for navbox

Can we add {{Witchcraft}} to this article? I've been reverted twice by an IP editor, first without explanation and then incorrectly claiming that the template does not link here. Since it does, it seems uncontroversial to add it here. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 18:19, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

Mistaken Link?

Hello, the Tsuchimikado Family mentioned in the first paragraph of the article are not the same as the link provided, which goes to an article about Emperor Tsuchimikado: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emperor_Tsuchimikado. There is no English article about the Tsuchimikado Family. Here is the related Japanese article: 土御門家: https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%9C%9F%E5%BE%A1%E9%96%80%E5%AE%B6 May I suggest to remove the link or provide the link to the Japanese article? -Thank You — Preceding unsigned comment added by 153.215.227.159 (talk) 11:56, 25 April 2019 (UTC)