Talk:Leo (astrology)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 This article is part of the Astrology WikiProject, an attempt to improve and organize the astrological content on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
??? This article has not yet been assigned a rating on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet been assigned a rating on the importance scale.

Contents

[edit] Introduction tone

I think the introduction's tone needs work. The last half of the first paragraph sounds too conversational: "They think they're Leos, but they're not". I'm pretty sure a more professional way to note that cuspers exist is possible (though I question the necessity, as it's a pretty well-known phenomenon; I knew about it, and I don't really know anything about the Zodiac). 68.102.179.108 (talk) 10:03, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Neutrality

This article describes beliefs held by Jovonne's Book of What If's as if they were facts. Lurker your words/my deeds 16:08, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

So are the beliefs in Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, Taoism and Scientology, yet they do not fall under POV, for some reason. I believe this is called Faith. --Marvin Monroe 12:44, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

I dont think it is about faith... faith is something personal and definitly no encyclopedic. But i think it is about representing each point of view in the same way adherents to that pov beleive it. :) Warkos 11:34, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Beliefs

It should read before the article that it is a matter of beliefs, but continue to talk as facts

[edit] Notable persons

In case you're wondering what's happened to the Notable persons section, it has been deleted in favor of the page Category:Subjects of the Sign of Leo. If you want to add a notable person go there. --Carmelita 21:05, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Flowers, Birthstones, Fall...

These things either don't show up or they have brackets where the identified item should go (i.e. "Fall: {{{Fall}}}" instead of "Fall: None"

I don't know how to fix it or else I would. 74.129.182.66 00:19, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Leo as king

There are some sites that refer to Leo as the "king of the zodiac," [1] but I'm not familiar with which are reliable sources for that type of claim. I removed it from the lead because it needs further research, as well as being shown to be significant enough be be included there. Might be good info to include in the body of the text. Also saw a site that says "Leo likes to think he's king of the zodiac" [2]...soo...;) Dreadlocke ☥ 00:34, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ref link astro

I tracked it back to this edit [3], seems to have been broken since inception. I can only guess that it was really supposed to be "astrocom" instead of "astro", so I did this. Um, sorry for Jetsons reference there...;) Dreadlocke ☥ 03:25, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Leo and Taurus - the best couple

I am Leo and used to lova a girl that was a Taurus, she was so peaceful and calm. I love calm confident people, and most Taureans are such. So why do you say that we're incompatible? 213.240.234.212 12:14, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Because Astrology isn't a science and isn't always accurate. 206.126.170.20 (talk) 23:05, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Characteristics and related sections, removal

Notice Relevant discussion of inclusion or removal of Characteristics, Compatibility, Sexuality, Exaltation and related sections is taking place on Talk:Aries_(astrology)#Trimming. Since this an issue which relates to all the astrological sign articles, please direct relevant comments there.

I removed a large section from Leo (astrology) because the sources for the claims made were either not reliable or were not given. I contend that the claim that one's star sign influences one's character is an exceptional claim and as such requires exceptional sources (see WP:SOURCES for the exact policy). These: [4], [5], [6], [7] are not even remotely reliable sources. An example of an appropriate source would be, say, a paper published in Nature. CIreland 21:05, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Notable people who share this sign section

Notice Relevant discussion of inclusion or removal of notable people who share this sign is taking place on Talk:Gemini_(astrology)#Notable people who share this sign section. Since this an issue which relates to all the astrological sign articles, please direct relevant comments there.

[edit] subtle vandalism?

someone wrote under "careers", "professional druggie".

hmmmm. Mail10 (talk) 17:21, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

The lists are constantly being revised, some of it well intended and some of it blatent vandalism, but virtually always without a source to back up the claims. Pairadox (talk) 01:58, 26 January 2008 (UTC)