Talk:Lamia (Basque mythology)

This article was nominated for deletion on 11 July 2012 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep.

	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
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Women's History

	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
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Merger proposal

No need for two articles. Nice to see another Basque editor by the way but could you please be a little more encyclopaedic and less flowery? :) Akerbeltz (talk) 10:00, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Redirected Laminak to here. Akerbeltz (talk) 11:18, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup

This article mainly describes beliefs about lamiak from the perspective of one who holds those beliefs. It would be more appropriate to describe the factual content of the beliefs (i.e. that these beliefs exist, and that some people hold or held them), rather than stating the substance of the beliefs as fact. For example: something like "Lamiak have duck feet" is not encyclopedic, and should be replaced with something like "Lamiak are described as having duck feet". It would be nice if someone could go through the article and rephrase everything in this way. Sources would be nice too! I might do this myself later but I'd have to do a little background research first since I am unfamiliar with the topic. 72.195.132.12 (talk) 22:54, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, but I don't have the time unfortunately. Do feel free to improve the article! Akerbeltz (talk) 00:09, 17 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I did my best. There are probably some typos and other errors, but I hope this will get the article on the right path.--131.93.98.83 (talk) 02:51, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]