Talk:Choronzon

message: There was, as I saw it, a rare, welcome completeness to this page:  contemporary occulture views balancing the traditional Thelemic notions. My heart double-backflipped to see the Choronzon project was also discussed.  I, Psychaotic, am the (humbly apologetic) newbie... who, suffering my usual TMI/logorrhea syndrome - especially as regarding the subject of this page, added the most recent, utterly-overlong trivia storm last week. (7 October '05...or aroundabouts.) 
I did read through the ever-increasing load of FAQs, rules, examples, etceterata. Perhaps some of the other Wikiters understand my vexation, as a newbie faced with lots and lots to share with a project with a level of freedom rare on today's internet- a freedom counterbalanced (in most cases, understandably so) by a lot--I mean, a WHOLE LOT--of rules, guidelines and suggestions, in form of both written and unwritten behaviour standards. When I joined weeks ago, writing a Choronzon page was one of many intentions; soon, I found I'd been beaten to it. Overall, the contents pleased me; I added not to correct, but to update them. (And spell Peter Carroll's name right...never have I seen him referred to as "Pete".) Upon returning a few days later, I feared I'd surely managed to make enough grievous errors in Wikipedian standards to assure the whole thing would end up shunted to the Wiki-deathbucket.  At first, this seemed the case; but I then noticed some of my addendata remained, including the link to the Book of Earthquakes .  
Re: the suggestion that I should make another page to cover the various archetypal entities Choronzon has come to represent in non-Thelemic occulture:   a) Article  did not seem to be limited solely to Enochian interpretation, so I just added to it in kind, b) are you suggesting a "disambiguation page" or link be created? (Reading about those tied my brain in knots...They're so...ambiguous!)
I've no problem with the deletion of my newbie-style overload. (I was merely going by the general detail level of some other articles I'd read here.)                                                                                                                                                                             
Thanks/apologies
--Psychaotic 07:31, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Greenhorn Wikiter, Fave Beastie, Recent Logorrhea

message: Establishing an operational definition of 'reality' for the body of the article is, in my opinion, POV. rmbh 18:08, Nov 21, 2004 (UTC)
:The following is duplicated from my talk page: rmbh 00:33, Nov 22, 2004 (UTC)
The article says that the character, Choronzon, is real 'in a sense.' It's difficult to explain well without a lot of lengthy exposition, but it's also inadequate to say that this character is wholly unreal. It's not quite like Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny.
It has a similar sort of reality to concepts such as the 'personality,' the 'superego,' etc. It's a reflection of internal events and processes. But also, because of the techiques people use in doing these workings, it's experienced as a thing outside of, and apart from, the self. It appears through trained visualization as a separate physical entity with its own will and agenda.
The line dividing 'real' and 'unreal' gets rather tenuous in that kind of circumstance, and it's not fair to say either that 'Choronzon' is an unreal thing whose importance you can dismiss as if it were a character in a dream, or that it's an actual being. It's really somewhere between the two. 
Is that what you were asking?
Auto movil 21:26, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Isn't this POV?

message: This article desperately needs references. Also, there appears to be a lot of original research that will have to be removed if citations cannot be provided. -999 13:15, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  References 

message: The Peter Carroll mistake has just been fixed; I noticed that a while back and meant to fix it for some time.
As for the rest, a lot of this is not going to be found in published sources due to its nature.  I will be able to cite some of the material I wrote to Joel Biroco's publication KAOS, but I need to get the issue number for the one he did on Choronzon.  A lot of this comes from Choronzon.org and its vault of articles.  Original research goes on every day in occultism, and I hold it cannot be held to the same standards as science, being that occultism and magick have a subjectivist bent and so eveeryone who uses any kind of magick is going to be getting different results, ideas, and inspirations from it.  I humbly suggest that particular Wikipedic canon be somewhat loosened for such topics, or else you'd not be able to include anything new.  These days, people frequently write their thoughts for the world, especially about obscure topics like occulture, into website articles, without bothering to publish in magazines and books.  Has not anyone ever considered this? Psychaotic 17:55, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reference added 

message: How is this name pronounced? Can someone please add a note about it? SpectrumDT (talk) 21:19, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It has a few different spellings, and Enochian has no real universally accepted rules of pronunciation. But I don't think anyone pronounces the first letter as 'S'. Dan (talk) 01:28, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Pronunciation?

message: This edit enumerated the spellings the way they are now: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Choronzon&diff=prev&oldid=191473360
How do the Casaubon publication and Dee's notes line up?  I don't have either one on hand.  I meant to bring a clearer light to the topic, but I got distracted or something.  (In other words, citation please.)  Sorry about the misunderstanding. YhnMzw (talk) 18:33, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: This url was referenced earlier.  It's on one edge of original research, but now we have more pieces, at least.  http://web.archive.org/web/20061219074051/http://www.esoterica777.com/coronzom.htm  YhnMzw (talk) 07:18, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spellings 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Choronzon. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added  tag to http://www.themagickalreview.org/enochian/mss/img/cotton_xlvi_1/xlvi1_23_f88b-94a.jpg
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071009204128/http://choronzon.org/grinnoire/massofchoronzon.html to http://choronzon.org/grinnoire/massofchoronzon.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:24, 5 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified