Talk:One Love

This disambiguation page is within the scope of WikiProject Disambiguation, an attempt to structure and organize all disambiguation pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, you can edit the page attached to this talk page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.DisambiguationWikipedia:WikiProject DisambiguationTemplate:WikiProject DisambiguationDisambiguation articles

Concept[edit]

Was wondering if a line about the concept of one love and what most of the songs are discussing could be useful here.

I mean, why have a list of songs based around and titled after a similar concept not explained as such in the disambiguation?

124.168.30.145 (talk) 03:51, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

One love is refering to the unification of all people. It's the universal love and respect for not only people, but all things on earth, regardless of creed, color, or what you might have been taught to think about it. This phrase has been developed to let everyone know that at the end of the day we all live on this earth together, so why not live together in peace. One love. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.68.192.198 (talk) 20:45, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Vote up the thread-leading suggestion: +1 (Sept 05 2010, London UK) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.9.171.182 (talk) 17:41, 5 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That is Rastafarian concept described under https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Livity_(spiritual_concept) Rastavox (talk) 17:15, 1 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This topic should be revisited and perhaps updated due to the recent World Cup controversy. I believe the phrase has gained enough cultural traction and meaning seperate from Rastafarianism in order to emphasise this. At the moment, it is far too buried for the average reader. Ittybittykittycommittee (talk) 00:51, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support 2A00:23C4:41A:9601:A8D9:F740:81E5:CEF4 (talk) 18:02, 30 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This alternative definition was written in 2004 (even though Wikipedia has strict 'reliable source' guidelines. (To be outrageous and to challenge academia, I think reliable sources do not exist. All there is is trust.). It's not that the World Cup has made it relevant; it has already had its own definitions akin to the World Cup ones, completely different to narrow Rastafarian ones. 2A00:23C4:41A:9601:A8D9:F740:81E5:CEF4 (talk) 18:39, 30 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]