Talk:Qetesh

message: A search for "Qetesh" at JSTOR brings up zero mentions in that literature. --Wetman 18:38, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Section

message: qetesh was the goddess of love and beautifulness.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.19.51.77 (talk) 01:11, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Qetesh 

message: This article needs some serious work.  I've made a start but frankly run into too many problems I can't really address.  As a first step, I've removed numerous alternative spellings of 'Qetesh'; it wasn't clear whether these were simply alternative, or the names of cities, or who used which versions, and so on.
The paragraph beginning "Her Semitic essence was adopted..." baffled me completely.  Essences, aspects, senses and higher levels...  Without any definitions or background for these terms the entire paragraph was a mystery.  And I have no clue what 'BA' and 'KA' mean in this context.  It may be obvious, but I'm not an expert and I think it's important that articles don't shut non-experts out.  I've left the paragraph in simply because I don't know what it's referring to, so I don't know how crucial it is to a description of Qetesh; but it certainly needs to be reworked.
I've removed the comment about Asherah being the consort of YHVH.  I'm not a monotheist so maybe I don't understand and I'm being a little overcautious, but it strikes me it may be a potentially controversial association and I think if we're going to raise it then we need to be prepared to support the idea and explore it in some detail.  I see that Asherah's own article does so, and I don't think we need to go over it again here.  I don't think it adds anything here and it's possibly more likely to provoke than inform.
I've added various fact and specify markers.  There are several statements that I don't feel confident to remove, but that, if I'm honest, I can't really make head or tail of.  The lion representing Canaan, and the horse representing Israel, for example: I'm quite happy to accept  both associations, but I need them cited.  As it stands I'm expected to take them as read.  And Qetesh is "posed with the symbols of physical and mental intensity; sex, drugs and the  brinksmanship of diplomacy" - but the sentence is unclear.  Are sex and drugs the symbols referred to?  Are they in addition?  And what is the symbol of the 'brinksmanship of diplomacy'?  Are we implying that all diplomacy is brinksmanship?  Which of Her elements are also associated with the Mycene and Minoan deities?
I don't want to go over the top.  Like I said, I'm not an expert and I'm reluctant to go on a delete spree without having some knowledge to replace the removals with.  The whole article has a disjointed structure and a tone that makes me wonder how much of it might be original research - though I don't know enough to mark any of it as such.  I'm hoping someone at some point might be able to make some more informed edits than I can.  And, of course, if anyone finds that I've removed or edited anything out of pure misguided ignorance then I encourage you to revert my changes; but I'd ask please that you make sure the article is properly cited at least.  - Laterensis (talk) 01:22, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article Cleanup 

message: I would not trust anything they say as fact since they are not truly out in the field of archaeology.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.11.51.217 (talk) 10:08, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: The section itself is ok as it has nothing to do with neo-paganism, I removed the link however. Doug Weller (talk) 16:21, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Remove the Neo-pagan section