Talk:Day of the Dead

This is All Souls' Day

It seems ood that this article is not related to the All Souls' Day article in the Category bar below. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.52.117.89 (talk) 10:54, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Only some

Instead of "is a holiday celebrated in Mexico and by Latin Americans living in the United States and Canada", it should be "is a holiday celebrated in Mexico and by some Latin Americans living in the United States and Canada" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.150.163.164 (talk) 17:11, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Neopagan Samhain

Would it be possible to add a section about the Neopagan festival of Samhain?

It should be stated that there is no hard evidence for a pre-christian Celtic equivalent of the day of the dead, although some speculate that it may be the case. Another scenario is possible, which is the introduction of aspects of the Day of the Dead into modern halloween and that the practices have been gradually imported from America to the UK. The Irish name for November is Samhain and the customs associated with the Neopagan festival cannot be traced back to pre-christian times. The Day of the Dead is most likely to be the influence, for the contemporary Neopagan festival. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.92.40.49 (talk) 08:34, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

This article states that, "The festival that became the modern Day of the Dead fell in the ninth month of the Aztec calendar, about the beginning of August, and was celebrated for an entire month." So originally the Central American festival of the dead occurred in the month of August, not on November 1st and 2nd. Why the change? November 1st is the Christian holiday of All Saints Day, which was brought to the Americas with the rest of Catholicism. Where did the festival of All Saints Day originate? According the the Wikipedia article, it originally occurred on May 13, the historical date of the Roman festival of Lemuria (also a festival of the dead), but was moved to November 1st by Pope Gregory III in the 730s. This new date corresponded to the Gaelic harvest festival of Samhain (October 31- Nov 1st). Samhain coincided with the Feile na Marbh, or "Festival of the Dead". The ancient Gaelic festival of Samhain was the inspiration for the Neo-Pagan Festival of the same name, which occurs on the same date.Lily20 (talk) 06:07, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Move to Día de los Muertos?

Shouldn't this page be at "Día de los Muertos" with "Day of the Dead" redirecting there? I think most English speakers who know of the event understand the Spanish name. Marnanel 14:55, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Why? This is the English side of Wikipedia. Latin America calls New York "Nuevo York" and that is not the name of the city/state (and there are countless other examples). Are speakers of English to be expected to take on a greater burden of political correctness than any other language? Mensch 07:19, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

I don't see what political correctness had to do with it. New York has a sizeable English-speaking population, so it's reasonable to call it "New York" in English; Día de los Muertos is primarily a Spanish-speaking event. Marnanel 15:20, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Personally I would agree with a move -- even I know it primarily as Dia de los Muertos and I'm a gringo. But, we should probably wait to hear from a few more people. — e. ripley\^talk 16:20, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

7

I like "Day of the ." It's not difficult to understand, and a simple translation.翔太 ^{「Shouta:talk」} 17:22, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm not strongly opposed to the move, but I don't see any particularly compelling reasons for it, either. This is the English Wikipedia, so we should probably stick to translated names when they are commonly used. It also strikes me that, while those who refer to it as "Día de los Muertos" will almost certainly also know it as "Day of the....."there are those who know it as "Day of the Dead" but are unfamiliar with "Día de los Muertos" (I was talking to one yesterday). Sxeptomaniac 21:02, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

The question, though, is is the English translation of Dia de los Muertos more commonly used? A case could certainly be made for, say, Oktoberfest. I doubt anyone would argue that we should house the article at Octoberfest because it's the English Wikipedia and that's the Anglicianized spelling, because there's no doubt that Oktoberfest more commonly used. But can the same strong case be made for Day of the Dead versus Dia de los Muertos? This may ultimately be an unanswerable question, because most newspaper articles mention both the Mexican and English version, by way of explanation.

Hmm. Well, a cursory Googling blah shows 3.9 million hits for "Day of the Dead" [1] versus 1.9 million for "Dia de los Muertos" [2]. Given this, probably, absent more compelling evidence, it should be left as it is. — e. ripley\^talk 21:15, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

How many of those hits were for Day of the Dead (film) or its upcoming remake, though? —Angr 08:02, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

I was thinking about that, too, so I tried adding "holiday Mexico" and got 291 thousand for "Day of the Dead"[3] and 151 thousand for "Dia de los Muertos"[4]. Sxeptomaniac 20:22, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

I am all for using the local term instead of the translation... when it makes sense to do so. In this case, I lean towards keeping it under "Day of the Dead." There is, for example, the fact that in Mexico itself "Día de los Muertos" is not the only or even the most common term among people who actually celebrate the holiday (as opposed to schoolkids who learn about it in class, given that for many years the holiday was celebrated more in the countryside than in the cities).

First off, we are talking about two days, not one (All Saints/Todos Santos plus All Souls/Fieles Difuntos), so one often hears "Días de los Muertos" (in the plural). Second, "Muertos" sounds a little brusque, so many people use the name of the second day, "Fieles Difuntos" or "Dia de los Difuntos," instead. (This is popular speech, not the stuff that children are taught in schools nowadays, so of course these terms barely register on Google searches.) The most common term is simply "el 2 de noviembre." Given all this, I don't see a problem with using the English term. -Potosino 01:46, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Growing up in Texas, I always heard día de los muertos. To me, Day of the Dead is a zombie movie only. But if Google can be trusted, Day of the Dead is in fact used in English. —Angr 06:02, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Does not originate only from Mexico

The article states that the holiday originates from Mexico, but this holiday has been celebrated by indigenous cultures throughout mesoamerica and south america: the Quichua in Ecuador, the Mayans in both modern Mexico and central america, as well as the aztecs in central mexico, with of course different variations in each place. [User:66.108.225.149|66.108.225.149]] 03:15, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

If you have information (with references/sources) that would be an interesting addition to this article.LAVisitor1 00:44, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

The connections to the Aztecs and other Indian groups are tenuous at best. It was celebrated in Spain at the time of the Spanish colonization of Mexico in almost exactly the same form it is celebrated today. Its popularity as a cultural marvel arose due to the influence of the German Jewish art critic Paul Westheim, who had an enormous influence over people like Octavio Paz and Diego Rivera, and who brought the importance of this holiday to their attention. In his book "La Calavera", he traces the roots of the holiday to both their Indian and their European antecedants. In terms of the fascination with skulls and skeletons, there is plenty of material from Prehispanic Mexico that might be examined, but it did not have much to do with the Day of the Dead itself. Most of the attempts to force this paradigm are based on wishful thinking.

It is interesting that this paradigm (that this is an Indian tradition), although it is widely accepted as fact in the US (thanks to the proliferation of US-based dilettante writers) is not at all accepted in Mexico. Most Mexicans see it as a Catholic Holiday, because that is what it is, and that is what it always has been. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.65.156.86 (talk) 05:30, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

This article as written today is seriously misleading All Saints Day and All Souls Days are major festivities of the Catholic Church. The Latin name is "Commemoratio omnium Fidelium Defunctorum" (Day of the Dead, in Latin)--- this is conmemorated worldwide everywhere there are Catholics. The fact that Catholic Mexicans happen to call it in Spanish "dia de los muertos" does not make it any more "Mexican" than "French", who call it... you guessed... "day of the dead" in French. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.13.6.71 (talk) 05:43, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

This article got it all wrong. November 2 is the day of the dead in every Catholic country (in France as well in Italy and Spain!). It's evidently something that the Mexican derived from the Spanish colonizers. The text should be absolutely changed. It was probably written by someone who doesn't know much about Catholicism. Btw All Saints Day is November 1, NOT November 2!--93.40.92.189 (talk) 19:56, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

You're all aware that Day of the Dead is a autumn equinox celebration, right? Every culture has them, not just Catholic European nations. Many of the Mexican customs are derived from the indigenous form of the holiday, as are Ecuadorian traditions. No doubt they overlap the Spanish form, just as solstice and equinox festivals in the Western World like Christmas, Easter, Halloween, and Midsummer overlap ancient, pagan, European festivals. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.98.148.217 (talk) 02:59, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

• I would like to note that the article is not, on its merits, wrong. What it seeks to create is a distinction (and an appropriate one) between celebrations on 1/2 Nov. in Mexico/the rest of North America and those elsewhere. The "Day of the Dead" should be distinguished between el dia de los santos and el dia de los fieles difuntos / dia de los difuntos. This distinction rests on the syncretism between ancient Native American religions of the area and the Roman Catholicism of the early Spanish missions. News casts in Mexico itself make this quite clear with the references to Mictlan and so on. This is not the traditional celebration of the departed in other Roman Catholic influenced countries--eleuthero (talk) 14:32, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Puzzling Text

I am a bit confused about some text:

Some Mexicans feel that death is a special occasion, but with elements like water, earth, fire and air of celebration because the soul is passing into another life.

I know that water, earth, fire and air are the traditional elements, but I think the word "elements" in the first part of this sentence is used in a different sense. So, I am removing the whole confused mid-section, to restore some coherence. If I am missing something here, please feel free to correct me, but it appears the sentence was mangled by someone who didn't comprehend the original intent of the sentence. 76.100.205.82 20:52, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

I agree. That sentence looks like a case of "too many cooks ruin the broth." I can't parse it either. --Jaysweet 20:57, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Good catch.I suspect it was a subtle vandalism insertion that everyone just missed at first. This page does seem to be one of those targeted by vandals, especially with the holiday approaching. Sχeptomaniac^{χαιρετε} 21:28, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Wtf

Why in god's name is this page protected? I wanted to add a reference to the Venture Bros episode Dia de Los Dangerous! and Rusty's hilariously culturally ignorant line about "that crazy dead-people Christmas you people celebrate" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.72.21.221 (talk) 20:25, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Too much vandalism. If you don't feel like registering, I think the article will survive without that pop culture reference for a couple of weeks. Sχeptomaniac^{χαιρετε} 15:47, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

I think someone should have tried taking the vandalism off the page before they decided to protect it. Luosiji 16:38, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

If you look at the article history, that's exactly what I did. The most recent piece of vandalism was by a logged-in user, which semi-protection doesn't stop. Sχeptomaniac^{χαιρετε} 17:02, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

There's good reason to control this page. Here's an example of text that needs to be removed from the site ASAP under Mexico - (Copy of text of vandalism removed, as includes what is probably a real person's name) so vandalism seems a problem. This is the first time I have come across it. Since the page is protected, can a moderator help? Then remove my message which by keeping it on the internet only continues the vandal's goal. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.164.171.159 (talk) 16:39, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

That particular piece of vandalism was only up for literally one minute. Since it's already taken care of, I'm removing the copy of the vandalism from the comment here, since it includes what I assume is a real person's name. Sχeptomaniac^{χαιρετε} 17:02, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

As far as the semi-protection, there is an unusually large amount vandalism on this page for some reason. I haven't quite figured out why, but it is one of the more vandalized pages on my watchlist. Go figure. --Jaysweet 17:12, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Organization

I'm curious to wonder whether the part 1.2 Beliefs should be a separate heading like 1 Beliefs, 2 Observation in Mexico etc. because it doesn't completlly fall under the Observation in Mexico category.Janus8463 04:54, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

IP request to remove vandalism

Could someone remove the vandalism in the second section? Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.188.255.26 (talk) 17:38, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Could you please be more specific? I don't see any vandalism at the moment, but I haven't gone over the article with a fine-toothed comb either... --Jaysweet 17:48, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

categories

Am I the only one who finds it odd that this is under both religious and secular holidays? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.138.5.199 (talk) 16:07, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Questionable paragraph from opening.

I cut the following paragraph from the introduction, and bring it here for discussion:

The traditional mood for this holiday is bright with emphasis on celebrating and honouring the lives of the dead. This is because they think of The Day of the Dead as the continuation of life. They believe that death is not the end, but the beginning of a new stage in life. These people are usually Christians of Native American descent whose ancestors introduced indigenous ideas of life after death.

First and foremost, there are no references for the assertions made in this paragraph. Secondly, the tone is not encyclopaedic, with statements like "they think" and "they believe" this or that, without specifying who "they" are. Overall, the tone is simplistic, turning a complex mythology into the equivalent of a junior high essay. I do not believe the article is any the worse without it. ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 18:54, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

"Similar celebrations"

I think that the discussions of "similar" festivals of the dead, such as those in Japan and China, should be split off into a separate article. The current article should discuss only the "Day of the Dead" with origins in Christianity, specifically Catholicism. Short paragraphs on supposedly similar celebrations, the origins of which are in completely different belief systems, and which are celebrated at other times of the year, is a disservice. There are as many differences as there are similarities. Any thoughts? ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 16:14, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Actually, they already are the subject of separate articles ... I think that it's appropriate and interesting to have a one or two sentence description of similar celebrations here, with links to the main articles (as now). IMHO, a brief "compare and contrast" section here helps put the Mexican observances in perspective. EspanaViva 19:14, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Well then, some sort of brief explanatory paragraph is needed at the head of the "similar celebrations" subsection. As it is now, we have only a list of countries and no explanatory text. ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 19:19, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Sure - no problem! EspanaViva 18:48, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you! ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 05:12, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Incorrect statement

"Scholars trace the origins of the modern holiday to indigenous observances dating back thousands of years, and to an Aztec festival dedicated to a goddess called Mictecacihuatl (known in English as Catrina and also known as "The Lady of the Dead")."

The goddess Mictecacihuat, described below, is not known in English as Catrina, who is also described below. "La Catrina" of the Day of the Dead is the female dandy skeleton. The goddess is the goddess. They are both female but one is not the other. Mictecacihuatl is definitely not known in English as Catrina. "Catrin" means a dressed-up rich person who wears overly dressed-up attire, and the middle and lower classes of Mexico of long ago would refer to such a person as "Un Catrin." "La Catrina" is the female version of such a person. Not a name in English like "Catrina." If you see a female skeleton who is not dressed up in "fancy" clothing, she is definitely not a "Catrina." If you saw one dressed in a huipil and rebozo, that is not a Catrina in the slightest. A female dressed in modest traditional dress also would not represent the ancient goddess, but a deceased person from humble origins. Any skeleton you see in Day of the Dead celebrations is a person who has died. "Death" itself, "La Muerte," "La Huesuda," "La Flaca," "La Calaca," can be depicted as a skeleton, but she would never be dressed in fancy clothing.

If anything in modern times would have taken the "place" of the goddess, it would be the image of the Virgin Mary, who replaced the female goddesses in most o the prehispanic religions during the colonial period. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jluntz (talk • contribs) 23:11, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Catrina is a female skeleton created by Jose Guadalupe Posada, it is a satirical image poking fun at the elite of the era. It has also been reproduced in one of Diego Rivera's murals.

Mictecacihuatl is mistress to Mictlantecuhtli Aztec God of the dead. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.160.171.253 (talk • contribs) (05:03, 17 January 2008)

Please place your comments at the bottom the page where they belong, and use proper talk page formatting in future. Thank you.

If there is information in the article that is incorrect, and you have references that indicate this, please change the article. ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 17:07, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, according to the article Catrina, José Guadalupe Posada's creation, the calavera de la catrina (the "calavera of the female dandy") has come to be associated with the Day of the Dead and Mictecacihuatl, in popular Mexican culture. They both are female figures with skeleton faces, and while they do come from very different sources, I can see how the modern name could become associated with the ancient (roughly similar) figure. If you have any sources indicating that these Day of the Dead figures are not sometimes referred to as "Catrina," that would be helpful to know.

I will adjust the text slightly to better reflect the history of Mictecacihuatl and Catrina. EspanaViva 21:16, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

I do not see any fact in this article or the cited sources that specifically connects the holiday itself, El Dia De Los Muertos, to any ancient "indigenous observances." Rather, the connection seems to be, through All Saints' Day, to the Samhain. The offered explanation jumps ahead thousands of years from a supposed Aztec festival in August (attested only by that terrible website) to a festival that just happens to be on the same day as All Saints' Day, which bears a striking resemblance to same, but to which, we are to believe, it bears no historical connection. This is absurd. What is needed is an explanation of when the festival originated and how it got to its present form. Certainly customs related to Dia De Los Muertos celebration seem Mexican in origin. But we need to explain the process of how these were incorporated into the Catholic All Saints' Day. The whole process of absorption is not explained at all. Are we supposed to believe that the Aztecs at some point just switched the festival from August to November, which happened to coincide with All Saints' Day? There must be somebody here who knows something about this. Ocanter (talk) 01:22, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Lebanese celebration

I am moving this statement here because it is unsourced, and entering the name given in search engines does not provide any sources. If you have any sources for this information, please re-post with the source citation.

"In Lebanon, people visit cemeteries where they pray for their dead relatives. The holiday in Lebanon also occurs on November 2 and is known as Yom el Maouta. The holiday is celebrated by Catholics as well as Greek and Armenian Orthodox." EspanaViva 08:12, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Use of image from Disneyland

This image (Image:1664289779 83b06140e3.jpg) appears to be a Disneyland display about this holiday. I'm not sure that it really should appear in this article about a folk holiday. Comments? EspanaViva 13:57, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm neutral regarding using the image. If it's made clear that it's a commercial representation of the holiday, rather than a traditional one, I think it's acceptable to use it. Still, the image itself is rather dark, so it's not really that useful, anyway. Sχeptomaniac^{χαιρετε} 16:37, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Grim-fandango-cast.jpg

The image Image:Grim-fandango-cast.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --07:11, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Including an Extra External Link Resource

Could someone add this link, http://www.visitsanantonio.com/visitors/play/history-heritage/dia-de-los-muertos/index.aspx, to the "External links" section for this page? It has some relevant information regarding the Day of the Dead. {{editsemiprotected}}

 Not done: This is only relevant to San Antonio. If you could find something more globally relevant, that would be great.--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 03:59, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Jennifer Ann Crecente altar image

I am moving these comments from my talk page here so that other editors can be involved in this discussion. I feel that the image in question is, as I said in a recent edit summary, "while relevant to her article, here it does not elucidate the topic, which is the point." I would like other editors to weigh in on this issue. ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 23:11, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

• You state: "The image is not appropriate, as I made clear in my edit summary."

Your edit summary does not appear to speak to appropriateness but rather that you don't believe that it provides clarification. ("Removed Jennifer Ann Crecente altar; while relevant to her article, here it does not elucidate the topic, which is the point.") If you do feel the image is not appropriate, please explain why, I feel that I can show otherwise and that this may be a misunderstanding.

• "It is for you to prove that it is appropriate, since you insist on adding it."

As mentioned here and in the edit summary, the image in question is a genuine altar for "The Day of the Dead" whereas the other image is not a genuine altar but rather a satirical piece that, while humorous, is not illustrative of the topic at hand. I feel that a genuine altar more appropriately illustrates this article.

• "It seems to me that the purpose of the image is to serve as a memorial for a murdered teen, and not to illustrate the topic of the article, which is already well-illustrated."

By its definition, a "Day of the Dead" altar would be a memorial to somebody that is dead. While the image is of a memorial for a murdered teen, that is subordinate to its purpose in the article which is to illustrate a genuine altar.

Additionally, I'd like to know your thoughts on the following (asked above):

• Is there an established standard regarding how many images are appropriate per article / topic / sub-topic?
• If so, how does one determine which images are more appropriate?
• Please leave a message after the beep, and if you don't i'll poop in ya mouth. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.115.76.183 (talk) 20:39, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks again, Drew30319 (talk) 17:50, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

removed link

Removed external link. The link is broken and the site is not in English nor in Spanish (looks like Chinese)Días de los Muertos photo and information site. -— Preceding unsigned comment added by DanKilo (talk • contribs) (23:30, 26 August 2009)

New mention for Pop-Culture

{{editsemiprotected}} In the Game, World of Warcraft, there is a holiday celebrated in game for two days. November 1st and 2nd.

Reference: http://www.wowwiki.com/Day_of_the_Dead

Firstly, a Wiki is not a reliable source. Secondly, once you have a reliable source, you must tell where you would like this added. Also consider whether or not is it appropriate to add this; random useless tidbits of information which would only be of interest to a small, devoted group of people should not be included in Wikipedia. Intelligentsium 22:53, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Day of the dead is very special to almost all Mexicans. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.196.49.4 (talk) 14:23, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Mentos?

The page says offerings to the dead include "mementos, mentos". I think "mentos" is a mistake and should be deleted. 403forbidden (talk) 16:24, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

This is a Mexican tradtion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.26.137.103 (talk) 02:54, 2 November 2009 (UTC)