Talk:Wyvern
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
Wyvern is within the scope of the Heraldry and vexillology WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of heraldry and vexillology. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. |
| Start | This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale. (FAQ). |
 |
This article is supported by WikiProject Mythology .
This project provides a central approach to Mythology-related subjects on Wikipedia. |
|
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.) |
|
 |
This page is within the scope of WikiProject Cryptozoology, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles on cryptozoology and cryptids 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 received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. | |
Contents |
[edit] Mythology
As far as I'm aware, the wyvern is only found in heraldry. I'm not aware of any myths or legends involving them and understand that they're a stylised dragon.
Given that dragons/worm/serpent confusion, I wouldn't have thought that number of legs was any means of differentiating save for in heraldry. Mon Vier 16:31, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
I'm aware of at least one wyvern legend from the UK: the story of Maud and the Wyvern in the town of Mordiford.
[edit] Factual Accuracy
Where have African tribes become agricultural because of fear of dragons? Where are the sources for this?
[edit] Confusing Passage
Paragraph 3 of the current version contains the following sentence:
In some fantasy works, wyverns are said to be the one of the 4-legged dragons.
The bold text doesn't make sense. It looks like a 'visible edit' where parts of two versions of a sentence are still visible. The 'one' could be removed and replaced with something like 'relatives' or 'cousins'.
The author's intentions aren't clear enough to be certain that's what they meant, however.
Any other useful guesses as to the missing word/s?
I don't think there are missing words so much as a bit of a muddle.
The sentence is, I think, referring back to the earlier statement "The wyvern is similar to a European dragon, but it differs in that it has only two legs, cannot breathe fire, and has a barbed or snake-like tail." That is, a wyvern is traditionally a type of two-legged dragon, but some fantasy works treat it as a type of four-legged dragon. If this interpretation is correct, then the reference to "one" would mean "type", "kind" or "species". An analogous statement might be "The concord is one of the delta-winged aircraft." Not as clear as it might be, but I think understandable.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
You know, being able to edit comments would be a nice feature. Those responsible for the this site really should think about adding it. Also, separating comments so they don't run straight off one another would also be useful.
For the record, the last sentence of the initial comment was "Any other useful guesses as to the missing word/s?" The first sentence of my response is "I don't think there are missing words so much as a bit of a muddle." If the preview had indicated that the new comment was going to run straight off the bottom of the old one and look like it was part of it, I would have put in a dividing line. Similarly, if I could edit my comment, I would have gone back and put in a dividing line. As it is, all I can do is append this statment and repeat the comment with a dividing line.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
I don't think there are missing words so much as a bit of a muddle.
The sentence is, I think, referring back to the earlier statement "The wyvern is similar to a European dragon, but it differs in that it has only two legs, cannot breathe fire, and has a barbed or snake-like tail." That is, a wyvern is traditionally a type of two-legged dragon, but some fantasy works treat it as a type of four-legged dragon. If this interpretation is correct, then the reference to "one" would mean "type", "kind" or "species". An analogous statement might be "The concord is one of the delta-winged aircraft." Not as clear as it might be, but I think understandable.
[edit] Wyvern and Wyvern (Online Game)
The dablink to Wyvern the online game should stay, as Wyvern is used to refer to that game, and someone might come hearing of this game and become confused upon not seeing a relevant article or a link to one.
[edit] Garble
If you disagree with something so dearly that you need to put a 'citation needed' for every third sentence, it's better to remove it temporarily and discuss it here rather than mudding the article with all the disputing templates. Joffeloff 15:01, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] FFXI Wyverns
There are flying Wyverns in FFXI. The job Dragoon Can summon a small Flying blue Wyvern to aid him.
[edit] "Draconians" in Heroes III?
- In Heroes of Might and Magic III, wyverns are described as a dragon like creature with a pair of wings, two legs, no arms/front legs and some of them have a poisonous stinger tail. Wyverns belongs in the order of Draconians along with Dragon, Drake and Wyrm.
The last sentence makes no sense. There is no "order of Draconians" in Heroes III. Also, there is no "Drake" and no "Wyrm". This sentence probably should be places someplace else (certainly not under Heroes III), but I don't know where, so I'm deleting it. SpectrumDT 10:58, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Too much popular culture
Really, is all that information necessary? It's much larger then the rest of the article itself. 83.252.141.112 15:39, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
Then perhaps we should make it into a seperate article? You know like a "Wyverns in Popular Culture" like what was done for the Yeti article. Unknown Dragon
I think that's a good idea. 83.255.67.167 15:43, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
It's been done. Gurko 20:34, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Wyverns are dragons
In mythology, wyverns are a type of dragon. It was D&D that decided they were just dragon-like. Mythological dragons in Europe did not all have four legs. This was a modern fantasy idea. It seems that this article might have picked up a bit too much popular culture in its overall categorisation/introduction. Here are some citations. In Edward Topsell's work, amount of legs was not what decided if things were dragons. Several two-legged (and no legged) dragons are on the dragon pages:
http://info.lib.uh.edu/sca/digital/beast/pages.html?id=158 http://info.lib.uh.edu/sca/digital/beast/pages.html?id=159
The Concise Oxford Dictionary (Sixth Edition) also states that wyverns are dragons, not just 'like a dragon'.
wy'vern n. (Her.) Winged two-legged dragon with barbed tail. [f. ME wyver, f. OF wivre, guivre, f. L vipera; for -n cf. BITTERN]
The Encyclopedia Mythica may say they aren't dragons, but it's a site that can be a bit suspect in its accuracy and they don't give a citation for it. It's really the original sources that should come first. Most of the other links on the wyvern page call them dragons. I'd like to edit it to be more accurate, but obviously if I don't persuade people of my point it'd just be reverted. Polenth 03:44, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Wyverns, Wessex, Worcester
No mention that the flag of Wessex(English region and former kingdom) was/is a Golden Wyvern on a Red Background?83.67.75.213 19:30, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
Is there any connection between the wyvern and the medieval Latin abbreviation "Wigorn" for Worcester or Worcestershire? --Sir Myles na Gopaleen (the da) 11:26, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Liber Floridus picture
With all due deference, this appears to be a regular dragon, not a wyvern. Wyverns are usually portrayed as having front legs and wings - this one clearly has back legs and shows a hint of a front leg as well. Jpaulm 00:33, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
- It was only added recently, so I don't think there's tons of support for it being there. It was just one editor thinking it'd look good. It's not a standard wyvern (which the opening picture should be) and it mucks up the page formatting having it there. I'm all for deleting it. The heraldic crest makes a much better opening picture. Polenth 05:02, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
I have deleted it! Jpaulm (talk) 16:27, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Pronunciation
This article seems to have flipped back and forth between IPA and pronEng a few times - which is the current standard, or isn't there one? Jpaulm (talk) 16:29, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Removed needy edit
I removed some stuff from an edit by an anonymous IP editor because it was pretty needy. See below. If anyone wants to clean it up and re-add it, go for it. Here's the diff: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wyvern&curid=242246&diff=209128230&oldid=207086563
It is also a dragon in the book Dragonology and its companions that eats elephants. It also states that sightings of Rocs(giant mythical birds that eat elephants) may be mistaken sightings of wyverns.
-FrankTobia (talk) 01:26, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
