Talk:Iron maiden

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Iron maiden article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1

Death Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Death, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Death 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.DeathWikipedia:WikiProject DeathTemplate:WikiProject DeathDeath articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Correction and Detention Facilities (defunct)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Correction and Detention Facilities, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.Correction and Detention FacilitiesWikipedia:WikiProject Correction and Detention FacilitiesTemplate:WikiProject Correction and Detention FacilitiesCorrection and Detention Facilities articles

Germany Low‑importance

	Germany portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany 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.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

A very poorly written article

This article is written very haphazardly, starting out by saying that the thing wasn't medieval only much later to say that in fact it was. This needs to be cleaned up. 174.91.7.232 (talk) 12:42, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Where does the article say that the iron maiden was in fact medieval? I agree, however, that it's not a very good article. Why don't you have a go at fixing it? garik (talk) 00:13, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Killbox Redirect

There should be a Killbox disambiguation page instead of a redirect. As the person above stated, there is a band named Killbox, and I ended up here looking for a wiki page about Killbox, or Pocket Killbox, the program. Someone needs to fix this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.103.55.252 (talk) 16:51, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have to agree. There is ZERO mention of "killbox" in the article, but a search of killbox DOES land one directly to this article. As I have zero clue how to fix that, I respectfully request one with more knowledge of the Wikipedia system kindly fix that gaff, or justify it in the main article.Wzrd1 (talk) 06:11, 1 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A DAB page would not be appropriate. There doesn't seem to be any other page that would be listed (neither the band nor software referred to by 208.103.55.25 have articles). But I do think the redirect should be deleted. It appears that one editor who has made exactly two edits over a two-day period in 2009 created an article "Killbox" ([1]), that was promptly redirected here, when it should have instead been deleted. I see no support for the contention that the "killbox" is a synonym for "iron maiden". The wikipedia community would be better served if a search for killbox came up empty, rather than sending them here.

The only incoming link to it is an error; it's actually referring to the software. (See [2], HijackThis.)

If there were an actual article about the band or software, I would suggest changing the redirect to point there. But as it stands, I would support its deletion, if anyone wants to take it to WP:RFD. Alternatively, perhaps it should point to Killbox 13, "the twelfth full-length studio album by thrash metal band Overkill in 2003". TJRC (talk) 20:40, 1 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It should be deleted immediately, and only restored when Killbox (band) or Killbox (software) are created. I googled "Killbox Iron Maiden", and a lot of the top hits are created because of the killbox-iron maiden-link created by this redirect. I will nominate it at WP:RFD.Dr bab (talk) 06:09, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks; I've put in my two cents on the discussion there in support of deletion. TJRC (talk) 17:59, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dates

Article states, "The Iron Maiden is often associated with the Middle Ages, but in fact was not invented until the 19th century.[1] No account of the iron maiden has been found earlier than 1793 ...".

If an account exists of the device's existence in 1793, then it must have been invented prior to that time. Either that or the account is false. DieSwartzPunkt (talk) 19:23, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent point, which I made mention of the sentence after claiming it would have only been used in the twentieth century, with no citation, only a totally unfounded or cited claim. OR the device was used for the first time in the twentieth century, as is claimed in the article. While, I'm dubious on BOTH points, I'm not an expert on the matter, hence my reading of the article tonight, which is rather challenging in temporal sense, to put it mildly. Indeed, to plot out the times of claimed existence, claims of use and claims of witnessing the device, one would absolutely require a time machine to accomplish it! Can someone with knowledge on this subject kindly untangle the history WITHOUT requiring time travel?Wzrd1 (talk) 06:15, 1 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Added Cites & Reorganized

I added a number of citations, did some reorganization of the article, but there are still some major problems I could not find a fix for. First, the timeline of the history of the Iron Maiden is very confusing. Second, the bit about "The original 17th century iron maidens may have been constructed as probable misinterpretation of a medieval Schandmantel" needs to be sourced. I did a web search on "Iron Maiden" and "Schandmantel" and found only stuff in German, or stuff obviously sourced from this Wikipedia article. If someone who speaks German happens upon this page, please consider finding a source! Carl Henderson (talk) 03:40, 17 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Earlier than 1793

The claim that there are no references to iron-maiden devices does not seem to be true. Valerius Maximus, writing in the first century AD, wrote: "The Carthaginians cut off Atilius Regulus’ eyelids, shut him in a machine in which sharp points stood out from all angles, and killed him from lack of sleep and extension of pain..." (Valerius Maximus, Factorum et dictorum memorabilium, 9.2.ext.1). See Crucifixion in Antiquity 24.91.75.78 (talk) 01:06, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Iron Maiden was never used in the Middle Ages

The Iron Maiden was never used in Medieval Europe or by any Catholic institution. It was invented after the Reformation in Protestant Germany. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 168.215.249.197 (talk) 15:52, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 17 June 2015

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: Move. Clear consensus that this is the primary topic of the lower-cased variant of the term. Cúchullain ^t/c 16:45, 26 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

– The device is in lower case, and the band Iron Maiden named themselves after it. If it was the band that needed disambiguating then maybe it could be argued that capital letters weren't enough for that, but this is in lower case, so surely (lack of) capitals can suffice here. Unreal7 (talk) 15:47, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Strong support I'm surprised this isn't the status quo. It seems to be the only usage that can be referred to with this capitalization. Whether or not we could call it a primary topic, WP:DIFFCAPS applies. --BDD (talk) 17:18, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support: makes utter sense. Best, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 02:47, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support I think the device is the primary topic overtop the band anyways. -- 70.51.203.69 (talk) 04:19, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Well spotted by nom. Egsan Bacon (talk) 16:16, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Question, what exactly has changed since the previous requested move? ~Mable (chat) 16:41, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- WP:DIFFCAPS didn't exist eight years ago, right? Red Slash 19:12, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Consensus, apparently. bd2412 T 17:03, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support per WP:DIFFCAPS. bd2412 T 17:03, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support per WP:DIFFCAPS Red Slash 19:11, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - per WP:ASTONISH, and the considerable number of opposes in the 2007 move request above. The band are far more well known than the torture device, and the lower case should be a redirect to the upper case. WP:DIFFCAPS very clearly does not apply in this case, because of the clause "This form of disambiguation may not be sufficient if one article is far more significant on an encyclopedic level or far more likely to be searched for than the other". — Amakuru (talk) 12:17, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support. I don't think the band is the primary topic anyway, but in any case Iron maiden doesn't redirect there anyway, it goes to the DAB page. Readers searching on "iron maiden" aren't going to go to the band's page in any event. As between this article and the other articles on the DAB page (I say even including the band, although I recognize that's debatable), this article is clearly the primary. TJRC (talk) 17:53, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I suppose that the iron maiden article will have something along the lines of "For the band, see Iron Maiden, for other uses, see iron maiden (disambiguation)" at the top of the article? I have to agree that the band is what a lot of people will be searching for instead, though I can't make up my mind on what the article titles should be. ~Mable (chat) 18:00, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's sufficient to have the hatnote {{about|the torture device}}, which, after the move, will render as:

Readers looking for the band will find it on the dab page. However, if that's deemed insufficient, you can always instead use {{about|the torture device|the band|Iron Maiden|other uses|Iron maiden (disambiguation)}}, which will render as:

TJRC (talk) 18:53, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

As I said, I'd rather have the latter, as the band will be looked for awfully often, and we'd want to make getting there as easy as possible for that reason. ~Mable (chat) 20:30, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

But don't forget the capital M for disambig page. Unreal7 (talk) 00:25, 26 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Should the disambiguation page have a capital M? I don't think it does? If I'm not mistaken, disambiguation pages always have lower-cased words (besides the first), at least if it is not specifically a name. "Maiden" is a word, and therefore shouldn't be capitalized unless it is disambiguated. Right? ~Mable (chat) 13:25, 26 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Surprisingly, WP:DABNAME doesn't mention that, though perhaps BD2412 can enlighten us on the usual practice. My hunch is that it doesn't matter a great deal, but uppercase would probably be better since the torture device is the only use that would really be uncapitalized. --BDD (talk) 15:18, 26 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

My impression is that we use the lowercase unless all meanings are capitalized. bd2412 T 15:38, 26 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Other torture devices in picture

These other devices/implements don't seem to be explained anywhere. Is it worth documenting them perhaps? Presumably on another page, or the main page for this. If so, does anyone or any web page have this information? 2A02:C7D:CA00:B200:F017:6C50:F1D3:D62D (talk) 17:44, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The most poorly written article I have ever read.

It seems as if this article has been confusing people for over 4 years! Someone please fix the history of this device, as it is incredibly confusing. Apparently there are 2 different origins for the Iron Maiden. From Siebenkees' Wiki page: "Siebenkees studied theology, philosophy, and philology at University of Altdorf. In 1791 he became associate professor of philosophy there, and a full professor of languages in 1795. He also taught archeology. It has been suggested that he was responsible for the invention of the iron maiden during this period." Yet this page states that: "The iron maiden is uniquely a Germanic invention, originated in the town of Nuremberg at some point in the high-middle ages (the period with which it is associated[1]); probably in the 14th century." I'm so confused... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.70.72.75 (talk) 0:25, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for your suggestion. When you believe an article needs improvement, please feel free to make those changes. Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit almost any article by simply following the edit this page link at the top.
The Wikipedia community encourages you to be bold in updating pages. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes—they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use the sandbox to try out your editing skills. New contributors are always welcome. You don't even need to log in (although there are many reasons you might want to). TJRC (talk) 22:41, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Fictional

Since the iron maiden is a fictional torture device, I put that in the intro. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.235.137.101 (talk) 16:44, 30 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any new info on the validity?

Iron maidens are popular in media but it's dubious how accurate they are historically. Is there any new research on the topic? The page feels like it can't decide which way to lean. 2A00:EE2:907:FF00:B036:506E:F515:986 (talk) 01:11, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Iron Maiden device

If a thing is imaged by someone it has certainly been created or attempted. The creation of something so intricate would be costly. In another direction. Think of this device as an iron chair except you must remain standing. Encased within a upright coffin of spikes. A rather slow torture as one must stand or lean against the spikes when your strength fails and days pass. Maddening. Having the ability to end the suffering whilst suffering the inability to perform it. 2601:5C2:4380:AC40:A0B6:E85D:9792:50C8 (talk) 07:19, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Footnote 1 says 19th century

The article states that there is no mention of the iron maiden prior to the 18th century, yet the reference (footnote 1) says 19th century. An earlier discussion thread mentions the year 1793, yet that doesn't seem to be in the article anymore. So, to make the statement match the footnote, I'm going to change that to "19th century" till someone can find a reference backing up the 18th-century claim. Mpaniello (talk) 13:49, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Bran Stoker’s account

Bran Stoker in ‘The Squaw’ 1893 gives an account of the Nuremberg Iron Maiden. Though framed as a fictional short story it gives the impression of having been based on an actual visit. The Iron Maiden is described as having a front hinged at the top and being held open by a block and tackle from the ceiling, and therefore closing under its own weight either slowly or when the rope is released (as it is on an American tourist). See https://www.bramstoker.org/pdf/stories/03guest/03squaw.pdf 80.189.11.222 (talk) 23:06, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]