Talk:Eris (mythology)/Archive 1

Archive 1

Category:Roman goddesses

Is there any way to add Category:Roman goddesses to the Discordia entry, which is a redirect to Eris? Eris is a Greek goddess, of course, but Discordia should be listed in the Roman goddesses category. DenisMoskowitz 14:06, 2004 Jun 29 (UTC)

biased towards greek religion

the eris didnt change. the view has changed. the article seems biased towards ancient greek interpretation of eris. it is not good, as her cult is still alive and kicking

I could see the value of adding Greek Mythology and Discordian Mythology subsections, and including some descriptions of Eris from Discordian sources. DenisMoskowitz 18:11, 2004 Jul 22 (UTC)

good solution. --Kyknos 02:19, 23 Jul 2004 (UTC)

discordianism

I'll probably be writing some stuff up on Eris within Discordianism soon.

I agree. This should be done. Hail Eris. Hail hail.

discordianism has a page already. if anyone wanted to read about it they would go there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.204.48.143 (talk) 14:08, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

"Strife" vs. "Chaos"

In most of the references I've ever encountered of Eris in greek mythology or literature I've always seen the aspect translated as "Chaos" not as "Strife" (i.e. - Eris, the Greek Goddess of Chaos)

Is there any way to make a note that it is translated that way at times as well without it being deleted?

I'm not saying I want to remove any part of the original entry, just to amend it to include that she was often thought to personify chaos as well. --Ladysilvereyes 05:57, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

I've got to disagree. Everything thing I've seen indicates that she was though of as a bloody instigator of strife, conflict, war -- at best, healthy competition. I feel fairly confidant in saying that the disorder bit is a Discordian invention. JamesFox 12:33, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Avoiding edit wars

With today's announcement of the naming of Eris (the dwarf planet), there are two major public references to Eris. Given that Eris-related pages are getting jostled around, I'm suggesting that Eris be left as a disambiguation page. There are certainly strong arguments to be made for both mythology and astronomy fans with regards to claiming Eris, but a dab page seems to be the fairest approach to head off what would otherwise be an ongoing edit war. (This message appears on Eris, Eris (mythology), and 136199 Eris) --Ckatz^chat_spy 06:41, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

There is a way to solve this; by utilizing a disambiguation page that is disambiguated to be a disambiguation page. The naming of 136199 Eris is not even 24 hours old, and I had created Eris (disambiguation) which you had undoubtedly used for the disambiguation page that was Eris. A chunk of ice that was once named after a television character does not beget a thousand years old goddess. Ryūlóng 06:54, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Ryulong, you were involved in the situation over at Pluto, so you know what can happen with these things. I'm trying to prevent problems, not create them. Also, you might want to reconsider your last statement -- as you know, Eris was never named "Xena". Furthermore, someone could just as easily say that a real object in the solar system, one that led to the redefinition of the term planet and the reclassification of Pluto, trumps a fictional character. --Ckatz^chat_spy 07:18, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Got to agree with Eris being a dab page. Eris the planetoid thingy has had an awful lot of press. Morwen - Talk 09:18, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

oh, and can i just point out how brilliant it would be to have an edit war about the location of the goddess of discord! Morwen - Talk 09:40, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

I support Ryulong's opinion. Erida (mythology) should be moved to Erida, not because the goddess would be more important than a real object, but simply because the original sense of the word should have the more important position. --Eleassar ^{my talk} 12:00, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Image

Ah, I see. There's a commons:Image:Eris.jpg that was tried to be added, but the local Image:Eris.jpg overrides this. Anyone know how to sort this out? Morwen - Talk 09:36, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

I have solved this by uploading commons:Image:Eris (Discordia).jpg and marking the other one for deletion --Gunter.krebs 09:43, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Eris versus Erida

Greek speakers know well that Eris (Έρις) and Erida (Έριδα) are different forms of the same name. They are not different goddesses. “Eris” is the nominative form of the name. Its genitive form is “Eridos” and its accusative form is “Erida”. In Modern Greek, however, the nominative form is also “Erida”. I suppose that this fact caused this confusion. Such a variation of the nominative form of nouns between Modern and Ancient Greek is very common. “Eris” is still used in Modern Greek but it sounds a bit archaistic. Actually, in Modern Greek, “erida” is the actual word that we use for strife. Fanis 14:02, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks very much for this explanation. I just stumbled upon this when I was considering in Slovenian Wikipedia whether to move Eris the dwarf planet to Erida or not. All other names approved by the IAU have their Slovenian equivalents: for example Pluton for Pluto, Neptun for Neptune and so on. Now I think the case is clear: the name of this celestial body should be written as Erida and not as Eris in Slovenian, as the goddess of discord is usually called Erida in our language and this is not a mistake. --Eleassar ^{my talk} 14:27, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

• The above confused me for a while, because i was aware of 718 Erida, and assumed the question about properly calling something "Eris" or "Erida" (whether in English or Slovenian) was about 718 Erida, the much smaller minor planet (asteroid), rather than about Eris, the largest of the dwarf planet (which by definition is much larger than any minor planet, let alone 718 Erida). I see no basis for doubt about the names in English, but i think Slovenian-speakers would be making a bad choice if they call Eris (dwarf planet) "Erida", given the risk of confusion implied by the fact that 718 Erida has been using that name for about a century. Granted, none of my business, but i feel an obligation to improve the opportunities for avoiding it!
  --Jerzy•t 01:28, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
  

Discordian section needs to be clarified

The entire discordian section needs to be clarified a bit as it's all based on a fictional work. Principia Discordia is not a true holy book but rather a parody, as anyone who has actually seen the work can attest. (It was a forerunner of the Church of the Subgenius, another long-running parody). Not meaning to wreck a good joke, but this is an encyclopedia and it such things need to be made clear. I've tried to indicate a bit of this by adding the fact that Eris, as depicted in P.D., is a character in the Illuminatus! Trilogy. 23skidoo 23:45, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean - in what sense is "Principia Discordia" not a "true holy book"? There's not some official holiness scale you can put it on. Discordianism is an actual (though silly) religion with actual adherents. I think the unclear parody-ness of Discordianism is made clear in the Discordianism article, there's no need to belabor it here. DenisMoskowitz 00:12, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Silly Religion? Christianity is the belief that a cosmic Jewish Zombie who was his own father can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree. How's that for a silly religion? ;P --TiagoTiago (talk) 05:55, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

How does being used in a piece of fiction have any relevancy to whether that something is based on fiction or fact. I saw an episode of South Park with Jesus & Christians in it, is Christianity therefore a parody religion? Nope. So what possible bearing could it have on the status of Discordianism if Eris and Discordians appear in the Illuminatus trilogy, -none whatsoever. And, as it happens, I have read the PD and will most certainly not attest that it is 'just' a parody, therefore your claim, and the entire basis of your assertion, that anyone who has read will attest to that, is shown to be false.Number36 23:08, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

I'd just like to thank whoever thought it would be a good idea to reveal a surprise ending of the entire Illuminatus! trilogy. I was a small ways into the first book, and there is not a single spoiler tag to be found in this article. 128.227.61.156 (talk) 05:27, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

• Wikipedia is full spoilers, which is what the template says. Information trumps fun. Get over it. (Oh, yeah: Othello strangles Desdemona, and Malcolm out-duals Macbeth.)
  --Jerzy•t 01:34, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
  

I agree, Discordianism should be clarified. We should start by explaining what Discordianism actually is, and someone can post a picture of some discordian pervert fisting themselves up the anal crevice in a public park in the name of Discordianism. That should do very well to clarify what it is being spoken of. I would hate for any little children to get the wrong idea. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.204.48.143 (talk) 14:15, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Person directly above me: could you please refrain from the nonsensical hate-speech? I don't mean to be rude by calling your comment "nonsensical hate speech", but really, I do think that you may have the "wrong"(opinion) idea there, and, in order t avoid cluttering up this long-dormant conversation, I would greatly enjoy discussing this with you further, perhaps on my talk page(I suggest making an account before posting on my talk page, just to avoid inconvenience)?Zer0n888 (talk) 07:05, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

As a serious Orthodox Erisian, who has read the Principia Discordia, Illuminatus! Trilogy (and everything by Robert Anton Wilson), Zenarchy by Kerry Thornley, and a host of other Discordian scripture - as well as having published my own Discordian zine in the 1990's (Tsujigiri), and furthermore as someone who communicated with Kerry Thornley by mail for some time before his untimely demise, and speaking as someone with an accredited degree in Comparative Mysticism from the University of Alabama (New College) - I would like to point out that Discordianism (though a modern creation) is not merely a joke. Granted, many self-proclaimed Discordians assume it is (especially post Church of the SubGenius). It is more complicated. For one thing, the Principia Discordia, though full of humor, is also based heavily on Taoism and other Asian religions, not always in obvious ways. The entry on Saint Sri Syadasta, for instance, includes a word for word translation from the seven valued logic system of the Jain religion. Another important point, holy scripture can contain humor and still be valid. Take the Zhuangzi for instance, the second major text of Taoism - it is hilarious and full of parody, even self parody. Zen is likewise filled with bizarre absurdist humor and sharp satire, also directed at itself. As for worshipping a goddess of Chaos (yes, that's a Discordian invention, Eris was traditionally the goddess of Strife, though as mentioned elsewhere, Hesiod mentions a second Eris that was a positive equivalent, competition - or as I call her, "Strive.") that may sound like a ridiculous idea to most Westerners (unless they happen to be neo-Platonists). I recommend Prof. Norman Girardot's classic _Myth and Meaning in Early Taoism: the Theme of Chaos (Hun-Tun)_ for an academically accepted study of a former cult (well, still active, this book just covers the ancient myths) that valued Chaos in a positive way. As for Discordianism appearing in the fictional work The Illuminatus! trilogy, Discordianism and the PD predated it, so this is moot. Actually, many Discordian cabals that were active at the time were upset at the authors of said cult classic, and went further underground as a result. You can read about this, and how Discordianism is a genuine spiritual path, in the classic anthropological study of modern paganism, _Drawing Down The Moon_ by Margot Adler. Besides, The Church of All Worlds was invented as entirely fictional by Robert Heinlein in his novel _Stranger In a Strange Land_, yet people adopted it and developed it into a genuine religion (recognized by the government and all). So who cares what the original intentions of Greg Hill and Kerry Thornley were when they founded/rediscovered/invented Discordianism? More on that history can easily be found in the incredibly well researched _Historia Discordia_ by Adam Gorightly (his biography of Thornley, _Prankster and the Conspiracy_ is also highly recommended, unless you don't like your religion's co-founder to have feet of clay). Besides, as the U.S. Supreme Court has recently made clear in a few rulings, the legal grounds the State has when determining the validity of a particular religion is not whether or not a religious view is based on fact, but whether or not it is a "sincerely held belief." The academic view is much more complex, nuanced, and open to interpretation. In the field of Religious Studies, there is a relatively recent specialized field in "New Religions" that if one is more academically inclined, provides a very fruitful framework for understanding Discordianism as a genuine spiritual belief (which one can follow yet still be lighthearted and silly with, or mock serious to the point of self-parody). Unlike parody only mock-religions like the SubGenii or Flying Spaghetti Monster, Discordianism has been around since the 1950's, and shows no signs of fading away. In closing, to show how serious I am, I shall refrain from ending this with a fnord. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pseudosadhu (talk • contribs) 19:14, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

Category:War goddesses

Okay, sure, so she caused one little war. Is that grounds to include her in the category "War Goddesses"? I mean, I get the feeling she looks nothing like Ares in a skirt.

Ergh. Umm serious now. Right. She is the goddess of discord, chaos, strife. Those are her prime traits/duties. One war happened during her watch. If we attribute the Trojan War to her, shouldn't we also call the other three Goddesses involved War Goddesses, too? Loki's murdering Baldur led to Ragnarök, but we don't generally call him a War God, just a trickster. samwaltz 17:13, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree, I hardly think it's even fair, or reflective of the facts as reported, to say she caused the war, I mean, she rolled an apple into a party, sure it said 'to the most beautiful' or something on it -but really how could anybody be reasonably expected to foresee that escalating into a literal, & huge, war, it was everybody else being ridiculously vain and excessively over-reactive (to the point of being of suspect mental health) that caused the war. Number36 02:29, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, she is certainly a war-goddess, strife in the sense of "battle-strife", and is often named as the sister and handmaiden of Ares. She is frequently portrayed striding across the battlefield: war is the ultimate discord! --Theranos 21:15, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

War isn't discord in and of itself, it is a possible result of discord though. Plenty of aspects of war are also extremely orderly, in fact there's a high degree of order within militaries generally speaking. Also war is much more than strife, to be a war goddess would suggest more than merely being representative of that one aspect, but representing the whole kit and caboodle. It comes down to this, was she specifically known as a war goddess? If not speculations, and extrapolations aren't relevant here.Number36 06:45, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Discord and strife are not the opposite of order. Discord and strife mean disagreement and conflict. I can't think of a way that doesn't describe war.Υδρόμελι (talk) 03:19, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

Peruse through this page recording the appearances of Eris in classical literature, and decide for yourself. http://www.theoi.com/Daimon/Eris.html --Theranos 07:56, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Well I can see how one could get the impression that she is a war goddess, but to me it all seems to rather say as above, that she's more specifically the goddess of strife and discord, which is (amongst other places) found in war. But calling her a war goddess when she isn't specifically named as one, but rather called the goddess of Strife, seems to be extrapolation. Related, closely associated, even Venn diagram over-lapping at points, but not the same. If every deity who was depicted as enjoying battle, causing a war or being in a war was a war deity we'd be labeling pretty much all of them war deities.Number36 23:15, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

I don't disagree. Apollo is the god of battlefield archery, amongst other things, but he is rarely represented as a god of war. Athena on the other hand is, although she is just as importantly the goddess of industry (weaving, pottery, carpentry). Nevertheless, when the ancient poets speak of the gods of war, or of gods who attend the battlefield, they invariably speak of three: Ares, Athena and Eris-Enyo. Her other name Enyo, which Homer uses interchangeably with Eris, is Greek for "warlike" the female counterpart of Ares Enyalios. The Greeks also equated her with the war-goddess of Cappadocia in Asia Minor. --Theranos 08:25, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Enyo, who I would agree is a war goddess, may be closely associated with Eris but that doesn't mean she's the same Goddess. Despite the one example of Homer appearing to use them interchangeably there are plenty of other examples where they are mentioned as distinct entities. Consider the site that you link to above, Enyo and Eris have separate pages (as here), and though noting the interchangeability in Homer, it doesn't claim they are the same, and in plenty of the examples it gives they are clearly distinct. Though I must say I think their association warrants mention in this article, and the Enyo article.Number36 23:07, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Dwarf planet

Erm, does this need to be updated since Pluto got demoted? --Belg4mit 01:34, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Nope, Eris is bigger than Pluto, I assume that's what you mean.Number36 05:18, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

seperate pages for the greek and roman goddesses

Um, why do greek and roman goddesess, with different names and attributes, share the same wikipedia entry? Mathiastck 06:09, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Because no one has split the articles. If you feels strongly, go for it! DenisMoskowitz 14:40, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Its probably not possible in the case of this goddess. The Latin Discordia is merely a translation of the Greek Eris whose name the Roman poets used in their renderings of Greek stories. She has no distinctive "Roman" personality, iconography or cult per se. Its a bit like trying to draw a line between the Greek Muses and the Roman Muses. --Theranos 12:55, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Trivia/In Popular Culture

I know this is a bit of a hornet's nest, but how does an "in popular culture" section merit a "Trivia" notice? Guthrum 20:46, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

It's not the content itself which merits the {{trivia}} banner, but the organization of the section. In its current form, it appears as just a bulleted list of loosely related facts. One could improve it by reorganizing it completely into paragraph form, or by writing lead-in and closing paragraphs describing the significance of the list. I played with a few ideas about how to best do that, but I came up with nothing particularly good. Maybe you could give it a shot? — Bigwyrm _{watch me}^{wake me} 22:57, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

I can live the version today by Wikidemo. Sleeping Beauty is obviously a significant cultural descendant. I'm less sure about the SciFi but Wikidemo makes a reasonable case. Clearly stuff like "Eris was on Billy and Mandy is far too trivial. Cultural referents should either be obviously important, like Sleeping Beauty, or something you can make a strong case for with multiple sources. Thatcher131 19:58, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Cultural references are just like any other information and don't have any special standards for inclusion. Here as with other myths there is a special reason to cover them. Eris itself is a cultural phenomenon and referant. Tracing that through time, including our own time, is the very subject of the article. So, although I don't agree as a general matter, and requiring multiple (or any) sources runs counter to the guideline, in this case there do happen to be many, many references for these two. Sleeping Beauty is an old myth that arose with reference to Eris. And the Illuminati Trilogy is an old, bestselling, science fiction series arising from a popular made-up religion based on Eris. These aren't trivial at all, as many or most of the other mentions were. A well-written article about Eris in modern literature, song, or modern thought would be encyclopedic as well.Wikidemo 21:54, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

My little Pony character Discord: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_My_Little_Pony:_Friendship_Is_Magic_characters#Discord — Preceding unsigned comment added by Reboot81 (talk • contribs) 16:40, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

Pronunciation

Could someone fill in the (Ancient Greek) pronunciation? I've always thought of it as rhyming roughly with "fearless" or "nearest". Is that right? Tuf-Kat (talk) 05:57, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

• The way it is written in the Greek would warrant a pronunciation similar to "heiress". The epsilon in Greek is most often pronounced like the "e" in "fed", rather than the "ea" in "fear". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.117.107.182 (talk) 02:18, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

"Eris"

The usage and primary topic of Eris is under discussion, see talk:Eris (dwarf planet) -- 67.70.32.190 (talk) 03:57, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

Requested move 7 April 2018

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: no consensus to move the pages at this time, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 22:51, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

---

• Eris (mythology) → Eris
• Eris → Eris (disambiguation)

– The dwarf planet is the only real contender for primary topic, and it was only named as such in 2006, and remains lesser known. Per the criteria of historical precedence, this should be the primary topic. _{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 23:09, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

• Support. The dwarf planet gets 50.9 percent of relevant pageviews compared to 48.6 percent for the goddess, according this this analysis. I'm happy with the proposed solution though. After all, the dwarf planet is named after the goddess. Nine Zulu queens (talk) 01:13, 8 April 2018 (UTC)
• Oppose. I think the dwarf planet is the primary topic here, just like Pluto. Rreagan007 (talk) 03:18, 8 April 2018 (UTC)
  • I'd be equally happy with the dwarf planet as primary topic. Nine Zulu queens (talk) 08:31, 8 April 2018 (UTC)
• Support per nom. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 10:43, 8 April 2018 (UTC)
• Support, the Goddess continues her notability through use in writings and books and as the dwarf planet's namesake. The dwarf planet name, however, isn't in the same awareness-situation as Pluto, per long-term recognizability. Randy Kryn (talk) 12:12, 8 April 2018 (UTC)
• Strongly OPPOSE - PLEASE DON'T. The mythological figure only has a LITERAL 50-50 pageview ratio against the planet, which is NOWHERE close to enough to be the 100% obvious primary topic. It would be strongly preferred to have the disambiguation page at the main basename to direct users to the correct page. HALF of all the people looking for one of the two Eris pages would be looking for the planet's page, which is way too high of a number to give the primary to the mythological figure. (There's also often many people accidentally linking to the Eris page on other articles in the belief that it's the planet's page, which can easily be fixed now but becomes harder to spot when it no longer links to a disambiguation page). The planet also has very withstanding long-term relevance and importance and notability. Also, not everyone who knows about the planet knows about the mythological figure, and vice versa. It's best in situations like these to leave it how it is and keep the dab page at the main basename. It's been this way for a while, and it's worked perfectly well. Just keep it the way it is; it's fine. The fact that there's no consensus yet shows that it might not be the best idea to move it. Paintspot Infez (talk) 20:58, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
  • These concerns are addressed in WP:TWODABS. If the goddess is selected as primary, a hatnote will be added to the article with a link to the dwarf planet. There are actually more than two choices here, but the goddess and the planet are the only ones that are at all likely as desired destinations. Nine Zulu queens (talk) 21:17, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
    • A) Literally the 3rd result on the dropdown menu when I search for the name is the dwarf planet. B) A hatnote will direct anyone who just types in the name expecting the planet. It's virtually guaranteed that at some point an astronomical feature or body will be named after a mythological figure - we shouldn't let it eclipse (no pun intended) the mythological figures themselves._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 07:31, 10 April 2018 (UTC)
• Oppose There's no primary topic, and many links are intended for the other article. Peter James (talk) 16:52, 10 April 2018 (UTC)
• Oppose, no clear primary topic. If we play the historical significance game then I do believe a planet trumps a goddess. —Xezbeth (talk) 07:28, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Ahem, a planet is not given a name upon its creation. Sure, maybe the planet is older, but up until recently it was a nameless hunk of rock. The deity has a far greater historical precedent than the planet does in the timespan from when it was named until now._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 10:55, 12 April 2018 (UTC)
• Support - a namesake should always be primary. Being named after something else is proof of long-term significance. -- Netoholic @ 03:36, 12 April 2018 (UTC)
• Oppose dwarf planet is a better candidate and outperforms in page views. Ribbet32 (talk) 14:03, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Pseudologoi vs Pseudea & Logoi

This article cites multiple different translations as sources for the children of Eris as written in Hesiod's Theogony. The assumed correct translation of the Theogony says "Pseudologoi" is the correct translation and all articles that refer to the nonexistent Pseudea and Logoi should be amended. This includes articles other than this one, mostly the ones about the children of Eris (i.e. Horkos et al) 2A02:A210:A400:8400:5593:6509:35A1:5BFE (talk) 05:35, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

What "assumed correct translation" are you referring to? The Greek text is Νείκεά τε Ψεύδεά τε Λόγους τ’ Ἀμφιλλογίας τε, which Glenn Most translates as: "Strifes (Νείκεά) and Lies (Ψεύδεά ) and Tales (Λόγους) and Disputes (Ἀμφιλλογίας)," (see Most, G.W., Hesiod, Theogony, Works and Days, Testimonia, Edited and translated by Glenn W. Most. Loeb Classical Library No. 57. Cambridge, Massachusetts, Harvard University Press, 2018. ISBN 978-0-674-99720-2. Online version at Harvard University Press.) Paul August ☎ 13:51, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

I'm no distinguished expert in ancient greek, I've just noticed that different translators translate it differently. The Evelyn-White translation speaks of "Lying words" rather than "lies and stories". When I went to consult an expert he told me that "Ψεύδεά τε Λόγους" correctly translates to "Lying stories" in the full sentence because Ψεύδεά is used as an adjective to Λόγους as τε comes after the word it's applied to. The Pseudologoi seem to be more recognized as Ancient Greek mythological spirits overall rather than the Pseudea and Logoi, which have little to no recognition. I'd regret it if fake deities came to exist just because of translation mistakes. The Evelyn-White translation is even mentioned in External links, while Caldwell translation is mentioned in the References. These are conflicting translations when applied to this topic. 2A02:A210:A400:8400:9022:7DD8:5168:AEB7 (talk) 00:06, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

Well, it's not just Most's translation; or Caldwell's (used and cited in the article): "Neikea, Pseudea, Logoi, and Amphillogiai"; see also West, M. L. (1988), Hesiod: Theogony and Works and Days, Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-953831-7, p. 10: "Quarrels, Lies, Pretenses, and Arguments"; and Hesiod; Works and Days, in Hesiod and Theognis, translated by Dorothea Wender, Penguin Books Ltd. (1973 edition): p. 30: "Quarrels and Lies and Stories and Disputes". Besides' Evelyn-White's 1914 translation, can you site any others which support his "Lying words" interpretation? In any case the Greek text does not contain the word Pseudologoi. Paul August ☎ 00:55, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

I feel like a few experts should look at this together, I don't think we'll be getting anywhere. I'm not keen on buying like 5 books to find out which translator did what. I doubt either of us could be hundred percent certain of our case. 2A02:A210:A400:8400:6916:7E7E:46D5:FE94 (talk) 19:55, 5 September 2019 (UTC)