Talk:Santa Claus/Archive 3

message: There appears a great many christian organizations who believe that Santa is in fact a manipulation of the religious event surrounding Christ; a corruption of it.  Santa or Satan The reference to Saint Nicholas, has been replaced with a word that appears a manipulation ? Saint or Santo, is not Santa, or is this mere co-incidence ? There are however many who believe this was an intended corruption.... Yahoo Search of Sites 1 
There may be some truth to this that should be considered for inclusion... Bottom line there is good and bad in all things; nothing is perfect and so let us appreciate the truth of this... ! Even if the representation was designed to be perfect it can, it may, it is corruptible... --Caesar J. B. Squitti  :  Son of Maryann Rosso and Arthur Natale Squitti 17:53, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: In a related yet equally nonsensical story, dressmakers have been up in arms for years with the revelation about how Santa is actually a misspelling of Satin, and that it is actually this magical fabric that  - wackily enough - splits itself into a great many swatches and delivers toys to children all over the world in one 24 hour period. Usually, the dressmakers are laughed out of the room; they have considered forming a church to argue how Santa Claus is ruining Christmas by not paying homage to the real Spirit of Christmas - the making of unwanted clothing for children. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 03:27, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Santa or Satan 

message: In many regions of Austria and former Austro-Hungarian Italy (Friuli, city of Trieste) children are given sweets and gift Saint Nicholas's Day (San Niccolò in Italian), in accordance with the Catholic calendar, December the 6th."
:This is true to most of Hungary as well, and many regions in other countries in central-eastern europe too. Couldn't add this, as the page is protected.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sbhsbh (talk • contribs) 10:37, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Addition 

message: Hi. I'd say that the introduction should not make an extremely clear point that Santa isn't real. This can be considered POV, and it is the point of view that Santa is not real and should never, ever be regarded as such. If you use strong wording like this, it can be POV (or weasel words?). So, please try to back off on the use of wording, eg. one adjective suggesting he might not be real, "legendary", is enough. An arrangement of adjectives like "Santa Claus is a nonexsistant fictional legendary mythological allegorical character that does not exsist and it not real" should not be used. This is not about censorship, this is about NPOV. Strong wording like that will defy NPOV. One simple adjective is enough to get the point accross. Besides, some people may argue that "Santa Claus is not real" is a significant, non-obvious, and, some people may consider, doubtful statement. Thus, it needs a  tag, to provide a citation as the article has not given any proof that Santa is not real, and not something that everyone knows. So, please try to not overrun the number of adjectives. After all, where's our proof that Santa isn't real? How do we know that even myths don't have some truth behind them? Please only use mild wording, as overdescriptive wording is POV and unnesecary. Thank you. ~AH1(TCU) 00:20, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, and by the way, what's with "Category:Wikipedians Who Like The Big Guy In The Red Suit"? That defineately does not belong there. This is a talkpage, not a userpage. Besides, that category doesn't even exist. Can someone remove that? I can't seem to find the part on the talkpage where the editable portion of the category is. Can someone find and remove it? Thanks. ~AH1(TCU) 00:25, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, if someone is able to get rid of it, please tell me how they found the darn thing. I went a-looking, without success. As far as the descriptives int he Lead goes, I've arranged them in alphabetical order. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 13:47, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It was the userbox.  (Metros beat me to it.)  Good trick for finding miscategorization like that is editing each section and previewing until you find the one with a category. —Cryptic 16:16, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I went with the "look at a random set of diffs until I can find where/when the category was introduced" approach.  Either of these methods can reach the end goal.  Metros (talk) 16:17, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

text: Wow, that was a devilishly clever thing. Thanks for catching it. I am glad I posted the issue to AN/I! - Arcayne (cast a spell) 01:34, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

text: Hi. Well, the New York Sun isn't the only newspaper. The local newspaper I get (not to expose too many details or you'll find out where I live) also states Santa is real. It talks about an interview with Santa, how he says, "let the children believe". It talks about Santa saying how many people dressed as Santa and don't look like him fill in for him, and how he and a hockey player would impersonate each other. Well, is the article from the Sun too similar to that story, "Yes, Virginis, there is a Santa Claus"? I can't source the newspaper article I had because it would reveal where I live, and also because it has long since been thrown into the recycle bin. Are those newspapers not reliable? Why isn't anyone else discussing this? Thanks. ~AH1(TCU) 23:03, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No, they are not reliable because they constitute a tiny minority view and violate NPOV, per WP:UNDUE ("Articles that compare views should not give minority views as much or as detailed a description as more popular views, and may not include tiny-minority views at all. For example, the article on the Earth doesn't mention modern support for the Flat Earth concept, a view of a distinct minority.")  --David Shankbone 23:10, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I suppose you have some kind of reference that Santa-believers are a minority? I mean, I believe in Santa and I'm 38 years old! Applejuicefool (talk) 20:31, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "fictional, mythological, nonexsistant", etc 

message: I just noticed while searching for pre-existing Santa images (no sense in reinventing the wheel if someone else had already uploaded the image - which hadn't been done) an article entitled Santa_Claus_in_Northern_American_culture. It seems a fairly close approximation fo this article. I am not sure if it needs to merged, as it seems like a content fork. Thoughts?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Arcayne (talk • contribs) 11:46, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The information in these articles used to be in this article.  It was decided that Santa Claus was so different in North America that it deserved its own article.  You should be able to find this discussion somewhere in this talk section or in the archives. — Val42 (talk) 16:49, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Alternate Santa page?

message: I Honestly Feel that a new page of Santa Claus should be started for Chidren so that they do not lose Christmas Spirit by finding Out the Truth abaout Santa Claus.
--Christian Cardozo (talk) 01:28, 26 November 2007
: Wikipedia doesn't deal in deliberate misinformation. Such a page would belong at http://uncyclopedia.org/ Carewolf 15:33, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Who's saying it would be misinformation? Santa is real! Applejuicefool (talk) 20:34, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Santa is REAL! I don't care what anybody or the kids at school say! Loolylolly1997 (talk) 23:46, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Santa Page for Children would be Better 

message: I am missing an article on the german tradition with "Sankt Nikolaus" which sounds a bit more like the origin of the term "Santa Claus". At least it sounds more like it, doesn´t it?! I think it should be called germanic origin instead of just "dutch" OR "german"?!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.86.166.203 (talk) 07:47, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: German pronunciation of Sankt Nikolaus is in no way similar to Santa Claus (American pronunciation). On the other hand, the Dutch word Sinterklaas is. Add to that the Dutch influence on American culture/folklore and numerous sources tracing Santa back to Sinterklaas. Kweniston (talk) 00:43, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The German pronunciation of Sankt Nikolaus does by far not sound like Santa Claus. The Dutch Sinterklaas does almost sound exactly as Santa Clause. One thing I do not find clearly explained in this article is that why Santa Claus is associated with Christmas Day and not with Saint Nicolas Day. (Or: what went wrong!?) Bokkie (talk) 23:14, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Germanic origin 

message: For some reason I don't think the guy they based Santa Claus of is the Patron saint of prostitutes, pharmacists,lawyers,pawnbokers and prisoners. Well maybe some of them but I think I don't need to list the ones that really need a citition before being put in the article.--71.164.185.120 (talk) 05:11, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I pulled the noting of prostitutes as well as the uncited reference of a similar figure elsewhere (pls feel free to reverse with citation connecting the two), and added 'cn' to the rest. Patron saints are wacky things - there are some for boils and the clap, so it seems likely that lawyers would get their own saint as well (Lord knows they need them). Please do not remove the tags without reliable citation.- Arcayne (cast a spell) 14:40, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: He was the patron saint of prostitutes along with many other professions.  But I don't see any reason to single them out.  It's strange enough that he's the patron saint of lawyers.  See http://www.stnicholascenter.org/Brix?pageID=45.  Fitzaubrey 07:04, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Excellent source! Thanks, Fitzaubrey. I think we'll do an Gilligan's Isle and simply note that a lot fo different groups claim him as a patron saint, and provide the source. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 07:18, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is this vandalism(I think) 

message: Should we mention that some "civil rights" groups are trying to change the image of Santa because he supposedly encourages obesity in children, or that they are trying to change "Ho Ho Ho" to "Ha Ha Ha" so it's not degrading to women.
Personally I believe the ACLU is a load of crap, but it might be notable. Crazycarolina (talk) 02:20, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't quite get where the ACLU came into this. From what I understand, they don't really care much about obesity... While some organisations have campaigned against the image of a fat Santa Claus I don't think the ACLU is one of them. As for the ho ho ho thing, the only thing I came across is one agency in Australia (i.e. not the USA) apparently instructed the people they hired to say ha ha ha. However it appears the primary reason is because they feel ho ho ho can be frightening to children, with the degrotary to women thing secondary thing probably mentioned off the cuff if at all (the fact that ho is AFAIK fairly uncommon in Australia makes me wonder if this was made up by someone looking for a story) which was blown out of proportion . N.B. Regardless whether or not either of these are silly doesn't change the fact the ACLU doesn't appear to be involved and that the ho ho ho thing apparently has little to do with it being potentially degrading to women Nil Einne 06:23, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I wonder if there are any women who were actually offended by Ho Ho Ho, and that they started that Ha Ha Ha nonsense. As for encouraging obesity in children, I believe that is also nonsense. MalwareSmarts  —Preceding comment was added at 18:04, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Political Correctness