Talk:List of mythological places

message: Should places religious people believe to exist be considered "mythical"?
:What if I said I believed Hades existed, or Asgard, or Coruscant?  Would you humour me?  No, or at least I hope not.  Why should the mythology of established religion be held to a lower standard of evidence than that of extinct religion or self-declared fiction? 2.121.221.45 (talk) 13:21, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think so--plus they're not physical places believed to exist on the earth like the other examples...--Romulus (talk) 02:09, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

text: Religious non-physical places (Heaven, Hell, etc.) seem mythological rather then not. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk  12:12, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Religious places

message: That's my suggestion. A "large portion of the populace" does believe Paradisic and Perditional states of being to exist, so perhaps "thought not to exist by some, or in some cases even by most" would work better. Are there any thoughts on this rewording? The Mysterious El Willstro (talk) 08:10, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Include them if and only if the heading is reworded...

message: At the very least it should be divided between "Ethereal", non-physical (as in you can only get there by dying or something) and "physical" locations. Just my two cents worth. Although if there were enough, I'd also divide it by "Supposed Location" like El Dorado under South America.Ncboy2010 (talk) 19:54, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  The list should be broken up. 

message: How about Svartalfheim or Vanaheim in the Norse section?— Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.49.80.6 (talk) 02:02, 23 March 2013‎ (UTC)
:You seem to have already added this. What is your question? -- Fyrefly  (talk) 08:08, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Svartalfheim

message: Hi, 
I'm removing the above entries from the list because it would be more accurate to refer to them not as "mythological" places but as "religious" places, which would be an entirely different list. I see the inclusion of these places as a singular attack on Christianity; if modern-day religions can be equated with extinct mythologies, then why not include Brahmapura from Hinduism, Yomi (Shinto), Barzakh (Islam), etc.? Until this list is renamed "List of religious and mythological places" and it is balanced out by including places from every religion, please don't single out one religion as "myth" by re-adding the entries I deleted. Thanks.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.198.201.254 (talk) 13:28, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Although I agree that 'Kolob' is restricted to one religion, the others aren't. See for instance Heaven and Hell. I'm pretty sure that the Garden of Eden is first mentioned in a Jewish text. Dougweller (talk) 15:44, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: The list does include places from countless religions. That's the whole point of the list. If it's incomplete, then add to it.  The only editor giving "singular" treatment to one religion (or a handful of related ones) is the one who cherry-picked the places he believes are real and removed only them. His argument is nonsensical.  My describing something as "mythical" we aren't saying it does not exist. We are only saying that it is described in myths, and has not been proven to exist. -Jason A. Quest (talk) 22:51, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I can appreciate the comments from the IP user above, as well as other IP users who have tried keeping these places out of this article, as I see these users reside in epicenters of Christianity such as Omaha, Nebraska and Colorado Springs, Colorado. Based on their ability to articulate their obvious knowledge of religions, they could be well-respected religious leaders of their Christian community or otherwise heavily invested in the Christian religion. But if my guesses are anywhere close, that further explains their inability to see that their position leads them to a bias that the neutral Wikipedia does respect. These places are mythological and must remain in this article for the reasons already given, and no biased user will be successful in keeping them out. I have added the mythological places mentioned above; if there are others that needed to be added please do add them or just mention them here. Prhartcom (talk) 22:25, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Garden of Eden," "Heaven," "Hell," "Kolob" 

message: I don’t think Aristophanes’ Cloud Cuckoo Land belongs here, rather in List of fictional countries. However, I don’t feel that it’s clear-cut enough to remove without discussion … As a satirical comedy, The Birds would fall into the category of fiction, but OTOH its antiquity, its original performance in the context of a religious festival, and the appearance of characters from ‘genuine‘ Greek mythology, might persuade some that it’s more mythological than fictional. Comments?—Odysseus1479 23:29, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that Cloud Cuckoo Land, and Meropis, are both fictional instead of mythological. I don't think anybody believed in them. For now I'm moving Cloud Cuckoo Land to the Greek section instead of deleting it. 2601:441:4900:A6E0:D4E5:9E6D:F589:2FB8 (talk) 17:29, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Cloud Cuckoo Land]] 

message: I would like to move/remove Middle Earth on account of it doesn't originate from some shared ancient mythology like the other entries, but rather from the mind of a man intentionally crafting a universe. The other entries may share aspects with Middle Earth, such as originating from one individual or being fictional, but it was never meant to be taken literally as it is packaged in a series of fictional novels. Heck, the location is still trademarked, despite being a literal translation of Midgard.
The other problem with it being on the list is that it opens up the floodgates to all sorts of fantasy worlds. Why not Azeroth? Why not Norrath? Or Aselia, Sylvarant, or Tethe'alla? I have the utmost respect for the work, but it just doesn't fit on a list of (mostly ancient) religious and mythological places. -- sarysa (talk) 17:49, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed: it doesn't belong on the list. Removed. -Jason A. Quest (talk) 17:39, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Pretty sure some part of Tolkeen's mythology made it a precursor of our actual present human earth, which would merit inclusion. I might be misremembering something though. — LlywelynII 20:38, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Middle Earth isn't a mythological place, it's part of a fictional universe 

message: Reposted from JasonAQuest's talk page regarding a recent entry after he objected to the inclusion of a mountain in the West Bank:
:Kunlun is mythological despite also being the namesake of some actual rocks. Same thing here, even though there isn't enough content to fork 'em. There's no actual rock that Jesus stood on with Satan while taking in all the kingdoms of the world and their glory. The fact that there are important stories concerning said rock makes it a noteworthy inclusion on that list. Even for believers, its association with XYZ particular rocks or traditions is a feature of medieval mythology without scriptural support.
I know the Christian faithful can get touchy about atheists treating their beliefs as pure mythology, especially after atheism went militant 20 years ago, but Christian mythology details plenty of different medieval nonsense and patent lies that fall under that heading. The medieval treatment of knowing which mountain the Gospel account occurred on fits. — LlywelynII 20:42, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: First, it's one story (repeated), not "stories", and the story doesn't even bother to name it, it just vaguely describes the setting. It's like the site of the Burning Bush or the inn that Mary and Joseph didn't stay in: one of countless stories in the Bible whose setting isn't specifically identified. Or it's an objectively real place with a legend from the Bible attached to it. We also have a whole list of places mentioned in the Bible where the events described may or may not have actually happened, but we don't include real places in this list. Either way, it doesn't fit. -Jason A. Quest (talk) 14:48, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Mount of the Temptation

message: Hi, I have moved some entries from the "other" section to the specific cultural sections where they appear to belong. I interpreted Mandaeaism, Mormonism, and Paradise Lost as Abrahamic; I apologize if I got one of those incorrect (other Mandaean entries were already in the Abrahamic section). Also I'm making a new section for Chinese since there are 12 Chinese entries.
I’m wondering if “Celtic” or “Slavic” are OK to make into categories, also? “Dharmic” and “Abrahamic” are both broad categories with multiple religions each. I might make a separate edit creating Celtic and/or Slavic sectios since they each have 3+ entries. 2601:441:4900:A6E0:D4E5:9E6D:F589:2FB8 (talk) 17:48, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, I made a section for "Celtic" entries. I didn't make one for Slavic entries since there are fewer (that I'm sure aren't also Christian) than the Egyptian section has. I counted and no other cultural category in Others has more than 3 entries. So I'm not sure I should make any more separate categories. 2601:441:4900:A6E0:D4E5:9E6D:F589:2FB8 (talk) 18:00, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Chinese section, I moved some entries