Talk:Castor and Pollux

message: I came here to this article by the article on Hengist & Horsa ... ... Therefore I suggest a link towards them. Alrik Fassbauer (talk) 20:23, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Further reading : Link to Hengist & Horsa ?

message: It is commented that it has never been a consensus on whom of the twins is of divine origin; and that this dispute is read as the archdispute. Both this story and the story of Helen (of Troy) mirrors eachother as myths regarding the origins or reasons of war i.e. superiority vs inferiority.   —Preceding unsigned comment added by Xact (talk • contribs) 11:24, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dispute of Disputes 

message: method discussed in Wikipedia:Footnotes and Wikipedia:Citation templates (e.g. the Citation template for cite web in the latter? I'm referring to the commented section towards the end.) Schissel | Sound the Note! 17:22, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Isn't cite.php the same  

message: The article refers to the comparison with the horsemen brothers Ashwini Kumaras of the Vedas. While the similarities are considerable, there is a problem with the parallel. There is a nakshatra (constellation) named after the Ashwini Kumaras, called Ashvini, which is actually the stars Mesarthim and Sheratan of Aries. There is no astronomical manifestation of the parallel (Castor and Pollux are in Gemini, quite far away).
I propose that this fact be mentioned in the article lest someone makes the mistake of thinking Castor and Pollux stars are the Ashvini nakshatra (I did).
--Ankurtg (talk) 20:51, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Parallel with Ashwini Kumaras 

message: Did they rape the Leucippides or just carry them off to be betrothed?  And if they did, why was that venerated as divine?  Is that a reflection of the base values of a patriarchal society or what?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.29.79.250 (talk) 08:50, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Rapists?

message: I'm rewriting the lede somewhat. It's a bit convoluted to read, doesn't adequately reflect the major points of the article (and still doesn't), and repeats information. It was also stated that the Dioscuri are the half-brothers of Timandra, Phoebe, Hercules, and Philonoe. This is nowhere discussed in the article, and so I deleted it. If it needs to be here, it's evidently a minor point that shouldn't be in the lede. Zeus had countless children, and so any of his offspring have numerous "half-siblings." This symbolic kinship is rarely important in mythology. Cynwolfe (talk) 15:50, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  lede 

message: The US Navy's Submarine Warfare Insignia has two dolphins on it that are named Castor and Pollux. Not sure if that is worth mentioning...  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.199.246.66 (talk) 19:42, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Submarine Insignia 

message: The rapper Dessa has been quoted as saying that Pollux had metal hands and was a fighter. I can find no corroboration of this idea. However, I would ask whether Roy Thomas was aware of this fact, if true, when creating Iron Fist (comics)?(mercurywoodrose)75.61.135.151 (talk) 03:23, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Dessa

message: With all due respect to the Bloomsbury Dictionary of Myth, can we really consider it a reliable source for the meaning Polydeukes?  Does anyone have a good source (i.e. a scholarly work by a classicist or historical linguist) for the introduction of wine into a name that LSJ rightly glosses as "very sweet"?  davidiad.: 18:43, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Much sweet wine 

message: The 'In Culture' section says the 'the Holy Bible' mentions the twins; I would have expected to see 'the Bible' without the word 'Holy', whose inclusion seems to me to violate Wikipedia's rules on Neutral Point Of View (NPOV). But as an unbeliever myself, I don't want to risk gratuitously offending believers by imposing such a correction on them. Perhaps some editors who are themselves believers could have a think about the matter, and decide themselves whether or not a correction is required.Tlhslobus (talk) 22:50, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  'Holy' Bible versus neutral point of view? 

message: The section 'The Leucippides, Lynceus and death' tells us that Paris 'kidnapped' Helen. For all I know, this may well accurately reflect the views of its referenced source. But it seems misleading at best, and arguably incorrect, given that the Helen of Troy article says that various Greek sources contradict each other on this question, with Herodotus saying Helen was abducted, but Sappho claiming she left voluntarily because she had fallen in love with Paris, and the Cypria, which, as a kind of 'prequel' to Homer's Iliad, is arguably as near as we can get to a 'quasi-authoritative' account, making no mention of an abduction, but simply stating that Aphrodite brought them together, thus seemingly agreeing with Sappho, given that Aphrodite is the goddess of love. Tlhslobus (talk) 00:10, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Did Paris 'kidnap' Helen? 

message: This is cited for the entire Leucippides section, but it seems to be a children's book. See the Greek Wikipedia entry on the author: http://el.wikipedia.org/wiki/%CE%A0%CF%8C%CF%84%CE%B7%CF%82_%CE%A3%CF%84%CF%81%CE%B1%CF%84%CE%AF%CE%BA%CE%B7%CF%82. The section needs a rewrite, especially as Theocritus 22 gives a version of the story where Castor kills Lynceus, instead of the other way around. --Quadalpha (talk) 01:38, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stratikis, Potis (1987), Greek Mythology B, pp. 20–23. 

message: Twin sisters are mentioned. What are their names? ♆ CUSH ♆ 10:01, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sisters 

message: If no one objects to it within the next twelve hours or so, I will be deleting the "In popular culture" section for this article. My reasons for doing this are as follows:
# There is not a single citation anywhere in the entire section.
# Almost all of the information in the section is completely trivial and irrelevant to the main subject of the article.
# The section continues to grow, which is not good because it is already bloated enough as it is.--Katolophyromai (talk) 19:02, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: The section may not be sourced, but is its contents inaccurate? And of course the section is completely trivial. It is about pop culture. ♆ CUSH ♆ 20:16, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  As far as I am aware, the contents of the section are not inaccurate, but I am not exactly an expert on popular culture, so I cannot be sure. If you think the section should be kept, I will not delete it, but I do think it should certainly be at least trimmed down to only include information that is truly notable. Furthermore, all information in the section must be cited, so any statements that we keep must have at least one citation to support them. --Katolophyromai (talk) 20:30, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Removal of "In popular culture" section