Talk:Aurora (mythology)

Classical Greece and Rome Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome, a group of contributors interested in Wikipedia's articles on classics. If you would like to join the WikiProject or learn how to contribute, please see our project page. If you need assistance from a classicist, please see our talk page.Classical Greece and RomeWikipedia:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeTemplate:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeClassical Greece and Rome articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Mythology Low‑importance

	Mythology portal This article is supported by WikiProject Mythology. This project provides a central approach to Mythology-related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the WikiProject page for more details.MythologyWikipedia:WikiProject MythologyTemplate:WikiProject MythologyMythology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Women's History Low‑importance

	History portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Religion Low‑importance

	Religion portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Women in Religion Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of the Women in Religion WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Women in religion. 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.Women in ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject Women in ReligionTemplate:WikiProject Women in ReligionWomen in Religion articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Unsupported in text or image?

The following insertion has been moved here:

She was frequently seen with keys in her hand, because she opened and closed the gates of the sky for her brother and sister every dawn and dusk. She didn't have any luck with love. She had many lovers younger than her, for example Astraios. They had four children together (Boreas, Euros, Zephuros and Notus), who later became the four winds of north, south, east and west.

Is there a "frequent" image of Aurora with keys, then? Which Roman poet or mythographer tells of Aurora and Astraios?--Wetman (talk) 16:41, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a source (1916) for the Eos/Astraios myth: http://books.google.com/books?id=QqkTAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA247 Gavroche42 (talk) 16:33, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Was the "Mentioned in Literature and Music"section copied and pasted in? Could this section just list the names of the literature and music it is in, instead of inputting the lyric? VikingVeteran (talk) 02:47, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Which image would be better for the top of the article?

Option A: The one that has been there since an IP editor added it on July 5, 2021.
Option B: The previous picture.

When presenting arguments, consider the following:

Wikipedia is not censored – "Some articles may include images, text, or links which are relevant to the topic but that some people find objectionable. Discussion of potentially objectionable content should usually focus not on its potential offensiveness but on whether it is an appropriate image, text, or link. Beyond that, "being objectionable" is generally not sufficient grounds for the removal of content."
MOS:IMAGEQUALITY – "A biography should lead with a portrait photograph of the subject alone, not with other people."
MOS:LEADIMAGE – "Lead images should be of least shock value; an alternative image that accurately represents the topic without shock value should always be preferred. For example, using an image of deportees being subjected to selection as the lead image at this version of The Holocaust is far preferable to the appropriate images that appear later in the article that show the treatment of the prisoners or corpses from the camps."
WP:OM – "Material that would be considered vulgar or obscene by typical Wikipedia readers should be used if and only if its omission would cause the article to be less informative, relevant, or accurate, and no equally suitable alternative is available."
WP:GRATUITOUS – "[E]ditors of articles such as Car do not include images of vehicles with naked women posing near them, even though such images exist and "Wikipedia is not censored", due to concerns about relevance. Wikipedia is not censored, but Wikipedia also does not favor offensive images over non-offensive images."

– MrPersonHumanGuy (talk) 13:20, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The argument being made here seems to be that the change should be made on the basis of the current image being offensive. I don't agree with this; nudity is common in classical art and sculpture, as well as in post-classical representations of mythological figures, and prominent pages such as Dionysus, Aphrodite, Hermes, and Apollo feature examples of such nudity in their lead images. As to the actual choice between the images, I wouldn't say I really feel strongly either way; the former is a clearer representation I suppose, although I must admit it's not clear to me that the painting is actually of the Aurora from Roman mythology, as opposed to just a general personified notion of "Dawn" (I seem to remember a similar Bouguereau painting previously heading Nyx's page). Preferable to both paintings would be a classical depiction of Aurora. – Michael Aurel (talk) 14:34, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A look at the LIMC doesn't indicate a whole lot of choice with respect to classical depictions (there only seem to be around 4 or 5), though one of these is apparently the famous Prima Porta statue; [1] Aurora is shown on the breastplate, a good quality close-up of which might work well. – Michael Aurel (talk) 05:15, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Michael Aurel, in that I see nothing shocking, offensive or vulgar about the current image, and that a classical image would be preferable to either image. However of the two, the current image is simpler and more narrowly focused on Aurora, and to me at least more aesthetically pleasing. Paul August ☎ 23:08, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In hindsight, I should've provided a customizable third option. (Option C: A different picture of your choice, if neither A or B are satisfactory.) – MrPersonHumanGuy (talk) 13:01, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]