Talk:Zagreus

Agreus

Are the names Agreus and Zagreus related? Aminabzz (talk) 14:08, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

Etymology

Zagreus from zoe Life Zoo Animal + agreyo hunt catch, trapp, capture = Hunter Lifecatcher = Jaguar. The Same in Jupiter it s Zeus Patir = God Father of Life. 2A01:C22:B191:8200:2061:8D5A:31AC:D0A0 (talk) 10:16, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Academic Writing II 2pm

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 2 March 2024 and 13 May 2024. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Studentofthegame99 (article contribs). Peer reviewers: TheMostEver.

— Assignment last updated by TheMostEver (talk) 11:02, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

Parentage

There have been various attempts today and yesterday at this article and our Demeter, Dionysus and Zeus articles to assert that Zagreus is, in Greek mythology, the child of Zeus and Demeter, and that Dionysus is the child of Zeus and Demeter. No clear citations of reliable secondary sources have been provided, nor even of primary sources. Text has been added claiming that Nonnus or Apollodorus somewhere are sources for this claim, e.g. "The best-known source mentioning the story of Zagreus as the son of Zeus and Demeter, who later is reborn as Dionysus, is the "Library" of Pseudo-Apollodorus ...". It's not said where in Apollodorus that claim is made and the latest edit summary when re-adding that text at Demeter contradicted it, saying "There is no specific citation in the poems attributed to Nonnus of Panopolis or in the "Library" of Pseudo-Apollodorus that explicitly states that Zagreus is the son of Demeter."[1]

Per Wikipedia:Verifiability, a core policy, All material in Wikipedia mainspace, including everything in articles, lists, and captions, must be verifiable. All quotations, and any material whose verifiability has been challenged or is likely to be challenged, must include an inline citation to a reliable source that directly supports the material. Per WP:SYNTH, we must not combine material from multiple sources to reach or imply a conclusion not explicitly stated by any source. Vague statements, well-phrased but making peculiar claims alongside superfluous digressions to add the appearance of veracity (much in the manner of LLM-generated text) are not citations. NebY (talk) 18:11, 5 May 2024 (UTC)

As far as I'm aware no ancient source says that Zagreus was the the son of Zeus and Demeter. And I don't believe that Apollodorus mentions Zagreus, nor does Nonnus mention Demeter in connection with Zagreus. However, Zagreus was sometimes identified with the so-called "Orphic Dionysus" and, as pointed out in the section "Allegorical accounts" Diodorus Siculus:

knew of a tradition whereby this Orphic Dionysus was the son of Zeus and Demeter, rather than Zeus and Persephone.

But such a tenuous connection hardly justifies the bald-face assertion that Zagreus is the child of Zeus and Demeter. Paul August ☎ 02:36, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

References

And such an at-best idiosyncratic parentage should certainly not be listed in any infobox. Paul August ☎ 02:41, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

Source for "In popular culture" section

I don't really know anything about video games, nor the game mentioned in the "In popular culture" section, but some of sources cited there don't really seem the greatest to me, mostly being online articles (and a youtube link?). A book from De Gruyter, however, seems to have a chapter on this video game, [2] which apparently mentions "Zagreus" 85 times, so perhaps the current sourcing in the "In popular culture" section could be replaced, partially or fully, by sourcing to that chapter. – Michael Aurel (talk) 01:07, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

As the existing section was the product of an RfC, it seemed prudent to bring the matter up here before altering it significantly; seeing, however, as this suggestion didn't receive any opposition, I've gone ahead and replaced the sourcing in the section. – Michael Aurel (talk) 04:34, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

I restored a few of the sources that are industry outlets (Wired, etc) listed at WP:VG/RS as reliable sources. Online articles are fine as sources (& tend to be more accessible to readers) but I agree the book is a stronger source than a few of them (such as Forbes). Sariel Xilo (talk) 05:34, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

I agree that those you've restored do seem to be reliable sources in the context of video games, but more relevant here I think is whether they are in line with MOS:POPCULT. In particular, sources in popular culture sections should cover the subject's cultural impact in some depth, which, looking more closely at these articles, I don't think they do. I think the example given by MOS:POPCULT about bone broth and Baby Yoda outlines a useful distinction here; while the chapter by Cameron is from a book about Greek culture and mythology, and their reception in the modern era, these articles are about the video game, and only reference the Greek mythological Zagreus. – Michael Aurel (talk) 08:30, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

I disagree that these sources are passing mentions (which is what the bone broth example highlights); pulling what an editor said in the previous RfC these sources "show that the game makes serious reference to the Zagreus mythology". MOS:POPCULT also states: "Consensus at the article level can determine whether particular references which meet this criteria should be included". These sources were all vetted during that RfC; instead of removing them, I would suggest doing a more formal RfC to see if consensus has changed. Sariel Xilo (talk) 16:22, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

Before resorting to an RfC, we ought to wait for opinions from page watchers, notify relevant Wikiprojects, or ask for a third opinion, as recommended by WP:RFCBEFORE. As to my own position, while MOS:POPCULT does say that Consensus at the article level can determine whether particular references which meet this criteria should be included, this is referring to whether cultural references should be included, as indicated by the preceding sentence, not whether specific sources (ie., "references") should or should not be used. What MOS:POPCULT does say about the standard to which a source cited in a popular culture section should be held is the following:

A source should cover the subject's cultural impact in some depth; it should not be a source that merely mentions the subject's appearance in a movie, song, video game, television show, or other cultural item.

My stance is that these articles don't cover "the subject's cultural impact in some depth". It's important to note that just because a source may use the word "Zagreus" a number of times, this does not mean that it covers the subject's cultural impact "in some depth", as the subject of our article is not the word "Zagreus", but rather the Greek god Zagreus. Reading the three articles, this is all they seem to say about our article's subject, and his cultural impact:

Farokhmanesh: When the team took their holiday break, Kasavin kept researching. He eventually stumbled across myths about Zagreus, Hades’ son. Something clicked. [...] ["]Hades is one of these super iconic like household name level, Greek gods. And yet there’s so few stories about him and he has a son?”

Wired article: Hades focuses on Zagreus, who plays such a minor role in myth that, as the titular god of the underworld’s son, he makes a great canvas to fill in for the player character.

Wiltshire: “I ran into this detail that there’s this little-known god called Zagreus who, according to some, is a prototype of Dionysus, but there’s also a shred of evidence that he might be the son of Hades. Like, woah! What’s that about? Then I researched Hades more, and it turns out there are very few stories told about him.” [end of para] Zagreus was a perfect subject: the lack of stories about him and his father gave Kasavin space to imagine new ones, [...]

Looking at this, I do not believe that these sources cover the Greek god Zagreus's "cultural impact in some depth". In addition, the bone broth and Baby Yoda paragraph of MOS:POPCULT mentioned above asks that sources should provide [...] in-depth coverage of the subject of the article, which these articles do not. Furthermore, this same paragraph seems to me to heavily imply (especially the part on the Bon Appetit magazine) that popular culture sources should also be reliable in the context of the article in which they are cited, and these sources are not reliable in the context of Greek mythology. Contrast all of this with the book chapter by Cameron, which discusses how the mythology of the Greek god Zagreus is rationalised by the video game, and explores the aspects of his mythology which the game adopts; it is also a reliable source in the context of Greek mythology.

Apologies for the length of my response, but I felt it was helpful to provide quotes, so that others can more easily see what it is we are discussing. As we seem to disagree, I recommend we leave a note at WT:CGR, which is the relevant WikiProject here, asking for the input of others. An RfC is not yet appropriate. – Michael Aurel (talk) 01:22, 19 November 2024 (UTC)