Talk:Diadem

message: I thiink a better translation for diadein is to bind around or tie off. --Fulminouscherub 22:01, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, I changed it as that's what Liddell and Scott defines it as.  Note to people: diadein would be the infinitive of diadeo, Liddell and Scott uses the the "o" form for listing, despite giving the English definition in infinitive tense, so I did the same.  I don't know if there is Wikipedia policy on this sort of thing --216.211.73.243 00:39, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

message: * :Diadem → Diadem (disambiguation) — to allow Diadem (personal wear) to take the plain name, with of course an "other uses" hatnote to the disam page.  As shown by "what links here", this is by far the dominant usage of the plain name, from which all other senses are derived. None of these are really common, and nearly all have a disambiguating term in their names already. Please comment at Talk:Diadem.  Johnbod (talk) 17:35, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 

message: Anyone care to explain why diadems are essentially made out to be all types of crowns, tiaras, circlets, etc. without any unique meaning, or designation of what it is, despite it is treated as unique from crowns, and tiaras on the List Of Headgear page? And, this page goes from saying it's an Eastern crown to talking about cases of diadems in non-Eastern cultures? Clearly, multiple people contributed to the page, and created inconsistencies that go to a level of "diadem" ceasing to have any meaning... It's so bad someone put that any indication of being royal in general can be called a "diadem," "technically." WTF? Someone needs to fix this page, it's all screwed up. If it truly is so all-encompassing, then why is there any mention at all of specific cultures, or crowns in the article? This is absurd. The parts of the page that must be older from more credible editors clearly indicate a "diadem" is something specific that is unique from other types of metal headwear things, but then people messed up the page to expand the meaning, and to be racist fools who won't leave it as an Eastern thing of any kind. (Literally, the groups that must have been added in directly hype up the favorite ethnicities of some white supremacists (Celts in general, Brits, Irish, Anglo-Saxons in general), all black supremacists (Egyptians (weird, because they did not wear any diadems that I know of at all)), and some Middle Eastern supremacists (Persians). And, at least one of the examples used by white supremacists is not a diadem (from what "diadem" seems to mean), but a normal European crown, so WTF? Clearly, racism is behind these mentions. (Doesn't that make it vandalism, and mean this page has been vandalized? What a weird page for it, too. Of all the things to find so important is a type of 'crown' headwear no one wears anymore, and that isn't even normally featured in fiction, or on historical figures normal for an English-speaker to see an image of.)) --174.19.244.195 (talk) 00:45, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Diadem was originally used to describe the cloth headband worn as a crown by monarchs in Greece, Asia Minor and the Middle East.  I don't know where it first developed and the order in which its use spread.  It has since been expanded to include any kind of crown which is band-like, which would include various regal headdresses from Pharaonic Egypt, for example.  In some contexts, I believe the term can even just be applied to any head-piece reserved for royalty, but context applies -- that is, if referring to something in Classical Greece using the term "diadem", it probably means the cloth headband; but if referring to something worn by Queen Elizabeth II, then perhaps it's just being used as a somewhat poetic way to refer to a crown.   I agree that the article is not entirely clear on how the word generally gets used.  Furthermore, I am skeptical of the claim that the original use of the term was for a headband that was necessarily silk.  While there was probably some silk around at the time that the term was originally coined, silk would have been a relatively new introduction to the region.  Also, its not clear from anything else I've read that a diadem had to be silk.  I'm not claiming it's wrong, but I'd prefer to see a reference (or to see someone say "oh, this is pretty widely accepted among scholars who study that period", even if a specific written reference may not be easy to find).  Chuck (talk) 00:27, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
replies: text:  Indeed it is not a good article.  A strip of cloth wrapped around the head to indicate rank or royalty is very ancient and can be found in many cultures including Egypt, Persia, Babylon and so forth.   There are various names for the same thing, including diadem, fillet and other terms. Egyptians decorated everything with colorful pictures and therefore you have copious evidence of the various forms of strips of cloth knotted at the back of the head symbolizing royalty in a great many styles and fashions, including some of the crowns of Tutankhamun.  These were especially popular from the Middle Kingdom forward. Unfortunately, a lot of these other forms of crowns are often overshadowed by the red crown, white crown and other crowns, creating a misleading representation of what styles were actually used in different periods.   Hence a lot of the books on Ancient Egypt focus on those forms and downplay the others making it hard to get good references.Big-dynamo (talk) 12:31, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nonsensical 

message: Who is Juliana? and what Barons are we talking about in this sentence: "For example, the crown worn by Juliana was a diadem, as was that of a baron later (in some countries surmounted by three globes)." TheCormac (talk) 03:55, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Mystery references