Talk:Scythe

message: That's the connection I'm finding on the internet.  I'll let you good wikipedia people censor or research the matter~  Don't let me down.  "Invented" by the Scythians in BCE times, rather than "appearing" in 12th and 13th century Europe. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.43.65.33 (talk • contribs) .
:Sounds sketchy to me. I've marked the section as unverified. —Nahum Reduta 06:39, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Scythe was originally "invented" for cannabis cultivation? 

message: There's a paragraph about sharpening scythes by peening.
However, one of the most important — and hard — parts of working a scythe (as I've seen it being done)
is the need to regularly stop mowing in order to sharpen the blade using a stick of hard wood
made for the purpose (and analogous to the leather strop used for straight razors).
Should this be in the article — or is it perhaps peculiar to the Nordic countries?
JöG 18:42, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Sharpening techniques

message: I hate to rain on a couple of people's parades, so to speak, but the popular culture section of this article is massive. In fact, it appears longer (in rows) than the actual article itself, which contains pictures that artificially inflate its length. Perhaps some of the less commonly known 'pop culture' references could be removed? In fact, it looks like almost every video game that includes a scythe is listed here, and I think that is unecessary. Perhaps removing all but the most recognizable four or five video games with scythe references?
*World of Warcraft
*Castlevania
*Pokemon
*Devil May Cry
*Final Fantasy (cite individual games under one topic: The scythe was used in Final Fantasy I, II, III, etc.)
This would remove 9 topics from the list, 10 if the general 'The scythe is also a commonly used weapon in a number of video games.', and 11 if the redundant 'In Final Fantasy XI the Scythe is among the strongest weapons of the game, mainly equippable by Dark Knights only, and is the best weapon a Dark Knight can use. They feature high delay with high damage.' is removed. Xiliquiern 12:24, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Are there any objections to this? No-one has spoken up.Xiliquiern 19:08, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Perhaps they could be migrated to- "List: Scythes in Popular Culture". It's not like there aren't any more ridiculous lists out there, and it would prevent further flooding of the article in the future by an overzealous editor.24.53.130.233 05:48, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Popular Culture

message: I would like to propose a major ammendment to the entry on scythes, based on the extensive work done by Peter Vido and his family.
To include up-to-date info on the state of the tool and its use today.
Their site is listed in links but still the bulk of the text is, I think, really only relavent for historical reference.
There is a community of users who would be able to collaborate on a re-write, newly associated online, through an ibiblio list:
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/scythe
I would like to know other users opinions on this subject.
:Any balanced and factual expansion to Wikipedia is more than welcome, in my humble opinion. If there is a group of specially knoweldgable individuals, all the better. --Xiliquiern 02:54, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Scythe listing ammendment/re-write 

message: The article mentions parts of the scythe and blade without defining them. For example heel is mentioned in "Structure and Use", but the article never explains where the heel is. A picture like presented on Scythe Supply - The Beauty of Scythes seems like a good way to do this.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.96.130.95 (talk) 12:08, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Scythe Parts Identification 

message: Why is the featured picture an upside down scythe and why is there a 6 line long description for it??  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.80.154.236 (talk) 20:11, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I put the caption on, to try and explain the confusing picture.  No idea why it's upside down – nor why edge-upwards.  I'll try to take a better one of my own & substitute it.--Richard New Forest 20:27, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Upside down picture

message: The article gives an old Englsih derivation for the scythe, impling use in the 11th cnetury or earlier, but then says it was introduced in the 12th or 13th century.  It also refers to the Romans having scythes.  These statements are mutally contrdictory.  Can some one resolve the problem?  My only contribution to it is that there were mills for the intial sharpening of scythes by the 14th century.  Peterkingiron (talk) 00:59, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If 'everyone knows' that, would you not think it might be mentioned at Scythians#Names and terminology ? --Qwfp (talk) 21:32, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contradictions 

message: The article (Under the mythology section) claims:  "The scythe also plays an important traditional role, often appearing as weapons in the hands of mythical beings such as Cronus, and the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse, specifically, Death. This stems mainly from the Christian Biblical belief of death as a "harvester of souls"."
Do we know that the reason why we associate death with scythes is because of a quote from The Bible?  Is it possible that scythes were used as symbols of death before this reference was made in The Bible?  If one does a search of the King James version of The Bible, the expression "harvester of souls" doesn't appear, and neither does "scythe".  In fact, a Google search of the term with the words "'Harvester of Souls' bible quote" brings us back to this article's page, and a number of articles in it's vicinity, not to a bible proper.
If some expert does believe that we associate death with scythes because of The Bible, then a citation would do wonders here.  Otherwise, I assume the sentence is opinion, and should be removed.
Jmgariepy (talk) 07:19, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Good point. I've marked that sentence with a  tag for now. If no-one's provided a suitable citation within a reasonable time (at least a couple of weeks?) than it could be removed. Qwfp (talk) 08:49, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Christian Symbolism

message: "A long, curved blade about 60 to 90 centimetres long is mounted at the lower end, perpendicular to the snaith."
I'm no expert, but I have used one of these most amazing tools. The blade on mine was definately not perpendicular to the handle. It was at roughly 45 degrees. If it was perpendicular, it would have been unusable as I would have had to smash it into my feet to cut anything properly instead of swishing it in front of me as I walked. Not only that, but being such a long tool, I would have had to hold my support hand at the end way up in the air to cut like this. A most tiring posture. I notice also that most of the photographs bear this out, albeit, subtly.
It seems blatantly obvious the whole reason this device was invented was to allow a human to stand fairly upright instead of bending over with a sickle or kama in a much more painful position. The ~45 degree blade is clearly a fundamental part of its improvement over other tools.
Again, not being an expert on anthropology (and having used only 1 - which most closely resembles the "Traditional Wooden Scythe" photo), I'm not confident to amend this, but I suspect this part needs improving. Research/check and correct please.
An an aside, I don't know why it's mentioned so many times that these things are hard to use. I picked it up in about 10 minutes, and from there, probably could have gone all day with a week or so of lower back muscle strengthening practice. Again, compared to a sickle, they must have been a god-send.
Also, if you can't make up your mind whether the handle is called a "haft" or "snaith", don't be a pretentious dickhead, just call it a handle. This is wikipedia, not "Annuals of Medieval Anthropology"!
07:55, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Structure 

message: QR code in place — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elrebe56 (talk • contribs) 8:28, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: QR code installed

message: Just browsing this article, I was surprised to find no reference to the Scandinavian/Western mythical figure known as "Death" or the "Grim Reaper", who dresses in long dark robes and wields a scythe. This seems like something that should probably be touched on, perhaps in a section entitled "Popular Culture", because of how often it is referenced in modern-day literature and other cultural elements. Anyone feel up to the task of adding this? 2ReinreB2 (talk) 05:13, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mention of "Grim Reaper" myth 

message: This involves which of images is best for the lede -- the image at left showing how a scythe is used ("use image") at right, or the image at right showing the parts of a scythe ("parts image").
In this edit, I moved the "use" image from Scythe#Use section to the lede, leaving the "parts" image as the second lede image, with the summary .  
This was reverted with the summary 
So, per WP:BRD, it's time to discuss.
I'll reiterate my summary.  The primary purpose of the lede image is to immediately assure the reader they have the article they are expecting, or make it immediately obvious it's not what they're interested in.  The parts image doesn't tell the reader anything basic about the subject; it could be some part of a big crane or a tiny mechanical device.  The use image shows its scale and how its held and used.   Also, being in the style of a medieval woodcut, it strongly indicates it's old-fashioned, which gives good immediate context that helps the reader.  The parts image actually tends to do the opposite, as it has the form of a modern technical diagram.
Note both edits include both images in the article; no one is implying that they aren't both helpful to the article in their own way.
Comments?  --A D Monroe III(talk)  21:07, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  BRD on lede image 

message: I've stricken or substituted several usages of traditional applied to scythe work. A tradition is a custom like having turkey at Thanksgiving or rooting for a preferred sports team; we can regard it (however beloved it may be by its practitioners) as a strictly social practice, not one codified in rules or laws or having any practical utility beyond that of group communion. Traditional is often misused in place of conventional and historical. Scientists use the SI metric system by convention (so that they are all working with the same practically useful system), not by tradition. Latin used to be, and English is now, not the traditional but the conventional common language of scientific communication. Scythe snaths were historically, not traditionally, shaped in ergonomic curves, not because it gave the mower a warm fuzzy feeling to do what his mates were doing but because it made mowing easier. And because it still does, now they are most commonly shaped that way, without need of appeal to either tradition, history, or convention.
I too own and use scythes (not that this has anything to do with the subject of word usage), and I do none of my scythe work, whether mowing or peening, by tradition. I do it in ways shown by historical practice to be the most effective ways known to use the tool.
As for substituting "man" for "gentleman"; unless there is some evidence (which there isn't) that the man in question was indeed a gentleman and that his elevated social position had some bearing on the example (which it didn't), "man" is the most straightforward term for an adult male.Chenopodiaceous (talk) 05:02, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Usage of ''traditional''