Talk:Yoruba religion

Let’s use the talk page to actually talk

“The anthropologist Robert Voeks described Yoruba religion as being animistic, noting that it was "firmly attached to place".

Can anyone kindly explain to us how the inclusion of the above improves the article.

I put it to anyone who cares to listen that it actually attempts to degrade, belittle, stifle the spirit of the article.

The above is nothing other than a false positive that is out of place and totally out of pocket.

What enhancements does the inclusion of the above give to the article? 2A04:4A43:430F:EA93:18BC:60C7:E65A:562 (talk) 21:56, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

This removal [1]? The content seems possibly WP:DUE (I know nothing about him). This article is supposed to be of summary of independent WP:RS on the subject, and if Voek is on one of those, he should be in there. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:38, 10 June 2022 (UTC)

@Gråbergs Gråa Sång I've restored it. I suspect this is by the now blocked editor who has been removing it,(although before their block). Doug Weller talk 11:44, 12 June 2022 (UTC)

Fair enough. Discussion has taken place. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:52, 12 June 2022 (UTC)

Four of the columns in the table 'List of Orisha' are superfluous

Only the first two columns seem meaningful, as the rest have the same content on all rows (all the listed Orisha are Yoruba, all are part of Yoruba religion, all come from Yorubaland etc.). One or two rows may have a qualification ('part' or something like this), but if it is necessary to have such a qualification, it would be better to place it in a footnote. 62.73.69.121 (talk) 13:31, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Names of the Orisa

A lot of the Orisa on the list are either half correct or straight up wrong. Akogun, whoever they are, is not an Orisa. Obalufon is another name for Obatala, unless you're referring to Ooni Obalufon. In that case he's also not an Orisa. If all Ooni automatically become Orisa, then all the dozens of them should be on the list. Please let's try to be accurate in adding Orisa to the list. Theguycalledrae (talk) 22:58, 21 December 2025 (UTC)

Why the edit war?

@Olubadan0 and co. Please come to an agreement on what you want to do here so this page won't get locked Theguycalledrae (talk) 19:05, 5 February 2026 (UTC)

Please don't associate other editors with this "and co" bit. See this conversation. Carlstak (talk) 03:35, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

Aight Theguycalledrae (talk) 03:57, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

Unclear Wording

This paragraph in the Diaspora section is unclear:

In the 1949 documentary Fiestas de Santiago Apóstol en Loíza Aldea, anthropologist Ricardo Alegría noted a similar tendency at Loíza, Puerto Rico, arguing that the affinity between the black population in the municipality and the Catholic saint Santiago Apóstol may derive from the way in which he is depicted as a warrior; a similar theme to some depictions of Shango and Adams. This theory supposed that this resemblance was used by the population as a covert form to honor their ancestral deity.

---

To me, this first seemed like it was saying that the black people in Puerto Rico considered the Catholic saint similar to the Yoruba Orisha named Shango, and that they possibly used images of the saint as a stand-in for Shango to evade persecution for practicing their ancestral religion under Catholic control. But the sentence closes with "and Adams." Adams is not an Orisha in the list provided in this article. Is this a mistake caused by badly editing a sentence that originally also mentioned the researcher named Adams? Or is this a reference to myths regarding the Judeo-Christian Adam who may sometimes be viewed as a warrior (meaning there are many Adams who are warriors)? I tried to access the reference but it is in Spanish so I cannot confirm either way. ~2026-12401-0 (talk) 13:00, 20 March 2026 (UTC)