Talk:Burning Man/Archive 3

message: I have started a collection of sources we can use in improving articles in :Category:Burning Man or for writing new articles, located at User:Todfox/Burning Man/Sources. Please feel free to edit that page to any articles or sources you think should be included. If you have comments on the quality of the links, you can use User talk:Todfox/Burning Man/Sources to discuss them. Thanks! Kit 21:47, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources Collection 

message: I went ahead and archived the Links dispute since it, thankfully, appears to be over. It is now located in Talk:Burning Man/Archive02. 
Hopefully continued work will improve the quality of this article! I hope to work on adding sources/contribute to general editting rewriting soon. Kit 21:30, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Archive 

message: an interesting parallel situation at the louvre: meta:It_is_forbidden_to_take_pictures_%21 ∴ here…♠ 02:17, 18 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Add new comments here

message: Added this to the links section. Perhaps this and other Burning Man videos should have their own articles created. --Matthew Cohen (Tccmod: user / talk / contribs) 00:22, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Burning Man: Beyond Black Rock 

message: "Fandango loves you drunk"(?) among other unencyclopedic atrocities. Looks more like an old BB then an encyclopedia :) Dlohcierekim 19:28, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. For now, the top priority would be cleaning up the theme camps section, it's slowly growing with vanity edits. I oscillated between just deleting it all and keeping a handful of representative ones. I do think theme camp websites are an interesting addition for people learning about the event, but I'm not sure how you would select 4-5 and justify deleting new additions. --Zambaccian 16:53, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Theme camps at Burning Man should have the same encyclopedic standards as shops along a famous street.  You wouldn't list every Starbucks and McDonalds that has ever existed along a famous thoroughfare, but you might mention a few that have significantly altered or established the character of that area.  Take 42nd Street for example.  --Vees 19:28, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds nice enough in theory, but someone with more knowledge than me should do make the cut. --Zambaccian 07:11, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  clean up 

message: I've asked User:NLOleson to comment here on why he/she feels the page needs a citations tag - if there is no further explanation by the time I get back from the playa I'll remove the tag.  Now back to packing Trapper 14:21, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  citations tag 

message: The listing of some theme camps and not all theme camps seems unfair and incomplete.  Unfortunately, there are hundreds of theme camps each year.  I would like to strike the listing of any theme camps in this article. Thoughts? —XSG 01:44, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Listing Theme Camps 

message: I am putting this section in here because during my recent cleanup and content adding, I just got tired of trying to figure out where I should put my comments and discussion pieces. If you want to comment on what I have done, please do so here. I will, however, try to add comments through out this document if possible. 
I removed this section from Safety and Policy since it did not really fit, but I would like to include it in at a later time since I think it is a good example of the clash of the culture of Washoe County and the participants of BRC. Where as the county is very conservative and the residents of BRC are not.
Burning Man has developed a reputation for drug use,One more Pagan Orgy, Sex Drugs and Glow Sticks which is not tolerated by law enforcement.
In 2001, local law enforcement objected to an art installation depicting a homosexual act at a former camp called "Jiffy Lube" now renamed "Stiffy Lube." The art was moved to a more private area of the camp, giving rise to charges of censorship and homophobia from a number of quarters.Jiffy Lube
I attempted to find this citation in the Criticism section but was unable too. It is refereed to on the Stop Burningman website, but since it is down, I have removed them from page.
According to ecologists Peter Brussard and Donald Sada, the cumulative effects of Burning Man on the complex playa ecosystem need to be more carefully investigated.
I would like this section to be expanded as there are plenty criticisms of Burning Man. I am not saying I am personally anti Burningman but to give the idea it is a island of perfection would be intellectually dishonest at the very least.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jtmurphy (talk • contribs) 19:32, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: FYI BM is in Pershing county not Washoe (the line is at about the 3 mile entrance to the playa) Trapper (talk) 05:24, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jan/Feb 2008 clean up and expansion 

message: The article comes off as an amateur brochure. This is a place for encyclopedic information. Most of it was clearly written by people who have been and are excited about it (which is fine, but you shouldn't be able to tell that from the contributions) One of the most obvious offenses against encyclopedic content is the "advice" sprinkled here and there. Please leave that kind of stuff out. I'm going through, and taking out the most obvious unencyclopedic information, but the whole article is written in a tone that is not appropriate for a encyclopedia article. I'm not even going to get into the citing problem. 
I would like to see this one day become a featured article (at its current state it should have never even been considered). This isn't going to happen if people excited about the event come here and write in a way that makes it obvious its coming from a participants point of view. This isn't a place to learn what to do and what not to do on the Playa. Its a place to learn facts about burning man. It is not a place to get advice, or to initiate the uninitiated. Brentt 23:29, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: One big thing I see that needs improvement is that the Notes section should be renamed References and actually formatted like references. There are lot of notes and external links where the information here is theoretically verifiable but that doesn't exempt the article from having an actual references section Plymouths 14:50, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Much of the brochure parts of this article should be removed. For example, discussing how much Ice and Coffee costs is pointless and not worthy of a good article. Jtmurphy (talk) 06:03, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article needs some serious work 

message: Here is an example of the kind of travel brochure-like advice that should not be in this article (the first sentence is OK).
::Black Rock City also has its own airport for small private planes, run by volunteers. Mountainous desert regions are extremely dangerous for inexperienced and experienced pilots alike, however, and it's not recommended to fly into this airport unless one is experienced with desert flying. The only advertised airfares are for shuttles offered by Advantage Flight Solutions from Reno and the Bay Area.
This is not a lonely planet guide. If there have been notable problems with the airport in the past, that may be germane to this article and please include it, but please don't write it in a travel brochure style which is warning prospective attendees of dangers. Instead cite the problems there have been in the past with the airport, or cite concerns that have been raised by published sources about the safety of the airport. Brentt 19:44, 14 September
Yes, we need to make sure that any time someone adds information, especially the airport, that it is not of a brochure type nature. It seems that every time someone adds something about the airport, they just have to add some travel guide information to this article. Jtmurphy (talk) 18:12, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: While an Official NOTAM does go out about the black rock airport, it is _NOT_ listed on the Klamath Falls Chart, at least not the one in my hand, or any other I've ever seen.  Also, I second the notion to add a notice to Pilots that the NOTAM is required, and all relevant information should be sourced there.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.191.208.186 (talk) 03:22, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Airport travel brochure--inappropriate style 

message: I've begun the process of finding a source for every comment made in the article.  If I can't find a source, I'm purging it from the page and placing it here for assistance.
I encourage others to do the same, since I'm sure I don't have the time to do it all by myself. —XSG 03:42, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It is well known that those are some of the few things on sale at BM. I'd be suprised if the BM website doesn't have info on that. But in this case I'm prepared not to object because the article needs so much work, and its been languishing in this poor state for so long, and it is so prone to being altered by enthusiastic burners in a laudatory or brochureish style. Maybe its good to make an exception for this article about lack of sourcing not being sufficient grounds for deletion for now. At least until the article improves and the cited information starts to outweigh the uncited information. There are so many published articles about BM that there is really no excuse for things not being sourced.  Brentt 07:04, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: My take is that by moving content to the Discussion page, it isn't being deleted as much as it is giving people an opportunity to find a source which makes it acceptable for inclusion in the article...  And since I wrote the above paragraph, you'd think I'd have a good source for that, but no... I pulled it all out of many years of Burning Man experience... —XSG 08:56, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Good idea. Brentt 09:06, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sourcing and Purging 

message: I'm moving this from the article until it can be cited:
::Recreational drug use is largely kept as a private activity and the number of roaming drug dealers has decreased dramatically since the mid-90's, although the amount of drugs actually consumed on the playa each year is still believed to be enormous. Officers refer to tickets issued for public drug use as the “Stupid Tax”. Undercover officers are known to roam the playa dressed up like attendees, even going so far as to be naked for the purpose of winning unsuspecting peoples' trust.
 
and please make a less weasel phrase ridden version e.g. "it is believed that"--believed by whom? The general public? Burners? You? Tell us who please. Brentt 08:41, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Policing and Regulations moving second paragraph out until cited 

message: This paragraph sounds like a bit of philosophizing by the contributor (italics):
::Burning Man participants often call themselves "burners". Although this usage may vary with region, a burner is an annual denizen of Black Rock City, and anyone who embraces Burning Man as an expression in sync with their own identity is a burner. In general, the term's use is only practical in contexts outside of the event itself. A burner is usually someone who has been to the event and aspires to return, even if only in spirit. The concept also implies the sentiments and values inspired by the event itself, including a high regard for creativity, especially radical self-expression, and willingness to participate in a gift-based economy. 
Its too philosophical not to be attributed to a published source. Please somebody either attribute it to someone or delete it. (if nobody finds a source I'm going to delete it.) Brentt 06:26, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Philosophizing without attributing 

message: Does anyone know a good published article about sexuality at burning man? I bring this up because the reference to BMs reputation for sexual promiscuity was in the Policing and Regulation section, where it doesn't really fit in because it has nothing to do with policing or regulation (aside from public sex). I moved it to the "Community" section, where it barely fits in really (along with the clothing optional bit, which also barely belongs in the community section), but I would think that a section on Sexuality would be good. But I would like some published material to reference before I create a whole section. Brentt 07:27, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You could try the archives at www.pissclear.org. Electric.tapir 19:36, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Published material on sexuality at BM 

message: This kind of information needs to be sourced before being put in:
::, or else to the method of execution that ancient German armies used against captured Roman commanders ( Roman commander Marcus Aurelius Scaurus, when captured at the Battle of Arausio by the Germanic Cimbria tribe, was put in a wicker cage and then burned alive)
Just doesn't sound like typical symbolic thinking of a bay area Bohemian. It might be true, but its far out enough to need a source before being in the article. 
The bit about it being related to Wicker Man should be sourced too, since Harvey has disavowed it. But I guess it can slide for now since it says it says he has disavowed it. But it should probably be made more clear that it has been disavowed by harvey in the same sentence its presented. Brentt 19:56, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I was questioning this bit too. When I get a few minutes, I'll shorten it up. That much detail isn't necessary in this article, even if it remains referenced. --Waterspyder 20:43, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Info about German soldier executions sounds speculative 

message: "community," "artwork," "absurdity," "decommodification," and "revelry."
seems wrong to me.  The change was made by someone without a login, so I can't discuss it with them directly.  As such, I'm reverting the change so that it appears as
community, artwork, absurdity, decommodification, and revelry.
—XSG 03:31, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Quotation Punctuation 

message: This article is partly very well-written, but it sure does need cleanup. I have removed the misleadingly titled section "Decommodification" (!) along with its low-value footnote links: some are mere spam (advertising), some fail to address the claims made, some are to pure how-to pages like bus timetables and ticket sales (WP:NOT a how-to guide). Also nearly the whole "Travel" section--sorry, but how to get there and how to get around in there, and so on and so forth, just aren't fit topics for an encyclopedia article. I left a mention of the art cars. Bishonen | talk 13:39, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. Brentt 08:25, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I put a bit of time into reworking the decommodification section.  The links aren't footnotes, they're references.  They're not there to advertise, they're their to demonstrate the level of decommodification that Burning Man holds itself to.  It's certainly open to criticism, but the fact of the matter is that it's not travel brochure information...  For these reasons, I've put the decommodification section back.  Please rework it, if you care to, but don't just delete it.  I can support the removal of the travel section. —XSG 06:29, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If the links are references they should be formatted as references. See WP:CITE#H Plymouths 14:57, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

text: I am launching a major effort to clean up and remove much of the how-to guide and brochure nature of this article. I will also source as much as I can and try to bring this page up to the higher standard that it desires. Jtmurphy (talk) 22:32, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  (Ahem) encyclopedic cleanup 

message: I don't see what this company have to do with Burning Man. Isn’t this company a capitalist venture...
:Burning Man is not a money-free workers paradise. GT gives shuttle rides to and from the event from various cities and to and from Gerlach during the event (yes, for a price). It could be argued that its not a significant thing to put in, but lots of things at BM are "capitalist ventures"--ice, coffee, and ticket sales for for example. (as an aside the no commodification thing isn't a political stance on BMorg's part, its simply a way to keep the event from being overun by vendors. The event isn't a promotion of some Utopian vision of a workers paradise--hehe more like a temporary bourgeoisie paradise if anything. ) Brentt 23:16, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: BM itself is a capitalist venture - it's run by a for profit LLC Trapper 07:58, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

text: The Green Tortoise company are actually contracted to provide said bus service by the Burning Man Project during the event; it is considered branch of the organization's  Community Services department, and is an official part of the infrastructure.
Andie Grace 22:36, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Green Tortoise 

message: Please keep see also section limited to directly related articles. Famous attendees (Harrod Blank) and festivals having some remote similarity to BM (e.g. Rainbow Gatherings) don't count, as there is no direct relation between the two events, other than having a few people that probably attend both. The see also section would get out of hand if we included every festival that was remotely like BM.Brentt 23:33, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You mean this article isn't supposed to be all things to all people?!  ;)  You've done a great job monitoring and maintaining, Brentt.  Thank you for your efforts.  —XSG 03:26, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  see also section: Rainbow Gathering etc. 

message: I moved the following from the article. The info needs to be sourced. It is too much of the kind of stuff that could just as well be apocryphal as real.
::The name "Burning Man" may have come to Harvey when he was watching a video of the 1986 ritual.  A member of the crowd watching the event supposedly shouted out "Wicker Man!", suggesting that the burning of the wooden effigy was somehow related to the ancient Celtic ritual of the Wicker Man, signifying rebirth.   Harvey was the son of a Freemason, and (for Harvey) the use of wood in building the man had symbolic significance and was a critical part of the ritual; also, according to him, he did not see the movie The Wicker Man until many years later, so it played no part in his inspiration.  Accordingly, rather than allow the name "Wicker Man" to become the name of the ritual, he started using the name "Burning Man."
Please reference a solid source before adding it back in. Brentt 00:19, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Harvey has said that the name "Burning Man" came to him when he was watching a video of one of the Baker Beach burns. A member of the crowd had shouted out "Wicker Man!", suggesting that the burning of the wooden effigy was somehow related to the ancient Celtic ritual of the Wicker Man, signifying rebirth.  Harvey was the son of a Freemason, and (for Harvey) the use of wood in building the man had symbolic significance and was a critical part of the ritual; also, he swears that he did not see the movie The Wicker Man until many years later, so it played no part in his inspiration.  Accordingly, rather than allow the name "Wicker Man" to become the name of the ritual, and after considering "Lumber Man" and "Fire Man," he started using the name "Burning Man." ()  
Can I add it back? JKPrivett 10:41, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Yea, but QUOTE it and attribute it. Apparently the problem wasn't a lack of source, it was outright plagiarism. Brentt 21:42, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Questionable history moved from article 

message: The 2000 to the Present section needs some elaboration and clarification. John Law is only debatably suing Harvey to get Burning Man into the public domain. Critics of Law have said he is actually in it for money. Both perspectives should be represented. Deramisan 14:24, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  John Law Suing Larry Harvey, et. all 

message: I support the recent removal of most external links and would request a few words here before they are re-added.  Articles should rarely have more than a handful of links, this one included.  A long list is difficult to maintain, dilutes any benefit to the reader, and is not what this project is about.  See Wikipedia:External links for more info on the community guidelines.  Thanks!  ∴ here…♠ 21:05, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: my view exactly Trapper 00:33, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links May 2007 

message: What is this BLM citation that gets referred to?  The wiki link leads nowhere. --Theloniouszen 21:24, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Bureau of Land Management. Fixed. adamrice 21:43, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  BLM 

message: For an event that has 40k something attendants at a price of 350 USD (former from this site, later from burning man site), meaning 14 million in sales, has no one seen the irony in a "hippy" event more being a yuppie/new age convention? I've got nothing against free expression, when its free.
And yes, I could state numerous other things that could be debated about how Burning Man continues to fail its 10 principles, but I don't feel like it. Zanduar 07:04, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Your multiplication is off.  Not all tickets are sold at the $350 level, some are significantly cheaper. It isn't a hippy event. Stating numerous things about it's failure to adhere to the 10 principles is probably fine, as long as they are cited and aren't original research. Eppythatcher 00:25, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Tell-tale sign someone hasn't been to burning man: they call it a "hippy festival". There are not that many "hippies" at burning man. A few here and there, but most people don't even come close to being "hippies". As a matter of fact, your likely to see as many punks at BM as hippies. And way more yuppies than either. Its never been a "hippy" event. Where did that come from? South Park? Or maybe peopel think only hippies burn stuff? Brentt 07:55, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

text: There is also no meaningful public disclosure of finances?  They're about as detailed as they get.  BTW, I just removed a sentence from this section that was false when I checked the sources listed. ( Non-usable info from the artist was used to come up with what is obviously a nonsense statistic.  Specifically, so-called <created gigawatts> were transmogrified <sic> into an energy metric by someone who doesn't know how to do the math/physics problem at hand.)--Elvey (talk) 04:23, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

text: Generally speaking, segregated criticism sections are discouraged (see WP:CSECTION) -- it is considered better writing to integrate criticism within appropriate sections. It is, for instance, possible to incorporate details of the LLC in the section titled "1997 to present" and/or in the article Black Rock City, LLC. You must use reliable sources -- in other words, find published, mainstream news sources or academic journals that make the assertions. Don't do your own estimating or draw your own conclusions as that would violate no original research. ∴ Therefore cogito·sum 02:14, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

text: What is your point? -- BaldPark (talk) 02:59, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: To Wikibeagle: I understand what you are driving at and would recommend researching third party sources either on-line or at the library and see what other reliable sources have to say on this matter. Possibly you are not the only one who has raised these concerns and if you can cite published sources (making sure to preserve a neutral point of view by balancing them with responses from the LLC or others) then it would be a candidate for inclusion. Otherwise, lacking that, this wouldn't be the appropriate forum for publishing your questions. Perhaps better to find a blog or a newsgroup. ∴ Therefore cogito·sum 03:12, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

text: Careful and detailed accounting is published out their website every year in the Afterburn report and linked prominently from the main page.  In 2008, total event related expenditures were $14,091,000.  See here http://afterburn.burningman.com/08/financial_chart.html  AndrewHires (talk) 02:23, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why no controversies? 

message: Is anyone else familiar with this postmodern artistic movement? I have searched the interweb high and low.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Checazoe (talk • contribs) 13:11, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Burn Burning Man Movement 

message: I was at Burning Man in 1996 and heard that there were 2 deaths that year. The deaths, at least, should be verifiable. [Attribution unknown]
I was also at Burning Man in 1996 and also heard there were two deaths that occurred after separate medivacs.  Technically, the deaths didn't occur at Burning Man. —XSG 03:22, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deaths 

message: The history looks a little thin and the timeline has a lot of history stuff in it - anybody got any ideas on how best to clean it up?  Trapper 18:34, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  History vs Timeline 

message: I propose that Burner (Burning Man) be merged here, as it is an unsourced article about a neologism associated with Burning Man. Beeblbrox (talk) 21:22, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Now done. Beeblbrox (talk) 03:40, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger proposal 

message: The mention of "Festeroo" in the music section, to the best of my knowledge, is only a mockumentary done by Primus bassist Les Claypool.  Electric Apricot is not an actual band that has released an album.  The song, however, is a real song from the mockumentary soundtrack.
This was bothering me.  I moved it from the music section to the films/TV section.
70.251.46.189 (talk) 05:02, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Burning Man in Popular Culture 

message: No Cash is allowed to be used inside.. except to buy tickets, ice, food, gas, schwag, bracelets, transportation.. etc.. other than that absolutely no cash. ? I don't get it. Is it notable to say that money is not allowed if everyone uses money to buy everything? --98.243.129.181 (talk) 06:00, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Hopefully, I can explain. Only ice and drinks like coffee, mocha, tea can be bought inside, and only in one location. This is all. Nothing else sells inside of the Black Rock City. BaldPark (talk) 00:31, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  I have to correct myself. Also, gray water can be dumped for a fee, and supposedly water tanks can be filled, and an arrangement can be made about refueling at the airport. BaldPark (talk) 00:36, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

text: Agree this is confusing.  Cannot both be "no cash is allowed" and "except for T, U, V, W, X, Y, and Z", and rewording of the text is needed.  Sounds to me like it is purchasing of unlicensed services which is prohibited.  --71.168.124.11 (talk) 20:24, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  decommodification 

message: the article states
"The event starts on the Monday before, and ends on the day of, the American Labor Day holiday." - this needs some more clarification; what are the exact dates? Also most non Americans will not know what day labour day falls on. Regards JV-CDX (talk) 02:02, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  dates of festival 

message: The fourth and fifth sentence of the article give the (sourced) tirades that "Trying to explain what Burning Man is to someone who has never been to the event is a bit like trying to explain what a particular color looks like to someone who is blind" and "Its[sic] like trying to explain sounds to a deaf person, taste to someone who can not taste. There is just a myriad of pointless analogies concerning the Burning Man Festival."
I think it's defensible to have these enthusiastic non-descriptions quoted somewhere in an encyclopedia article, but not in the introductory section, where a knowledge-hungry reader might first look for a clear and concise explanation. I'm sure it's also impossible to completely relay the feeling of being in Vancouver or in the middle of a hurricane to somebody who's never been there, but it's still possible to give a brief, rational description of what Vancouver and hurricanes are.
For comparison, see the facts-of-the-matter introduction to the Wikipedia article on Zen (a subject certainly more esoteric than Burning Man).  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.155.151.233 (talk) 20:56, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Quite right. I'd go so far as to call it nonsense. Burning Man is not esoteric, it is not indescribable (unless one's intoxication impedes memory formation). It is perfectly suitable to be described concisely and without any vagueness. Not only that, but the quotes in question are essentially public relations testimonials, taken directly from the Burning Man website. Wikipedia is no place for such amorphous "information". See qualia for a suitable place for such descriptions.Fuzzform (talk) 07:27, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Undescribability poetry in introduction 

message: "Organizers have noted, "Trying to explain what Burning Man is to someone who has never been to the event is a bit like trying to explain what a particular color looks like to someone who is blind." Similarly, Thomas Nagel has commented that "it's like trying to explain sounds to a deaf person, taste to someone who can not taste. There is just a myriad of pointless analogies concerning the Burning Man Festival.""
Pointless analogies indeed. This is a perfect example of hyperbole. Burning Man is not a type of qualia. It is not something that cannot be described. It is an event with concrete happenings, and as such, it is subject to a concise description, as is everything else on Wikipedia. This hyperbolic nonsense description only serves to purposely confuse what occurs at Burning Man events. I'm removing the above text for the time being.Fuzzform (talk) 07:18, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unnecessary hyperbole 

message: This page mentions that Neutral Milk Hotel referenced the Burning Man event in their song entitled Song Against Sex
The specific lyrics are:
"Deli markets with their flower stands
And pretty girls and the burning men
Hanging out on the hooks next to the window displays
And I took out my tongue twice removed from my face"
Can anyone verify that these lyrics are a direct reference to the Burning Man event?  I had always considered it to be a metaphor.  If no evidence is provided, I suggest it be removed.
--Skyfinity (talk) 02:38, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree. Done.--Elvey (talk) 20:07, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

text: Thanks!:)!--Skyfinity (talk) 00:39, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutral Milk Hotel 

message: I'm not so great on policies, but the sentence "The project has inspired many to look for positive ways to get involved in the global warming and climate change movements by seeking out solutions." can't possibly belong here unsourced.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.71.243.219 (talk) 22:30, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Weasel words, etc 

message: So someone blocked out a image with the following code:
: "I find this image inappropriate please edit to be safe viewing for Kids how use wikipedia"
: "Image:Burning Man 228 (241613953) crop.jpg|thumb|upright|150px|A nude woman dancing at the 2006 Burning Man. Nudity is common at this eight-day annual event"
: Image
It was added by Cteckerman on May 21st and it looks like it was removed on July 18th by new contributor Grdewar -- his only credited edit on English Wikipedia.
Obviously his comment about Wikipedia being safe for kids is incorrect, as the other page that picture is on is Nudity, which has several other photos.  In addition, Burning Man is hardly an article or event that I would call appropriate for children -- so the idea of censoring the article to match is unusual.
So, should the picture stay or go?  A quick peek at various Burning Man webpages on the net give the impression that Nudism/Naturism/Topfreedom/Bodypainting and other Clothing Optional philosophies and body art "stuff" are quite readily welcome and a big part of Burning Man, does that excuse a picture of a random naked woman on the page?  If not, does it need to be deleted instead of commented out?
If it does, should we also add one of the various copyright free Bodypainting pictures from Burning Man to the article? KiTA (talk) 06:16, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Of course we don't censor nudity or even sexually explicit images on the grounds provided by Grdewar if the reasons for putting the image there in the first place was according to Wikipedia guidelines and editor consensus. There's clear precedent for this, so I assume we can readily reinstate that image. See WP:NOTCENSORED. __meco (talk) 07:44, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

text: I have restored the image.  While we're on the subject, perhaps this image may also be added/may be a more appropriate picture to add, as it covers both Nudity and Body painting, which seems to be a big "thing" as far as this event goes?  KiTA (talk) 23:28, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image with Non-Sexual/Non-Pornogrpahic Nudity Commented Out 

message: Burning man seems to be enough of an event that it's probably not worth listing every single time it's been mentioned in the history or printed material, since that part seems to be largely a list, shouldn't we cut it down to only things which use Burning Man significantly as part of the work?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.247.152.4 (talk) 04:44, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  So many references 

message: Just to inform you :commons:Commons:Deletion requests/File:Burning Man 228 (241613953) crop.jpg --MGA73 (talk) 19:59, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image nominated for deletion 

message: An admirable amount of effort is expended, apparently, to mitigate the environmental impact of this event. What I feel is lacking is a little more discussion of the natural environment itself. You will never see a more barren, lifeless place in the US, I am certain, except perhaps Bonneville, yet there is life, and all the more precious for its scarcity. Around the edges of the dry lake, if you drive a vehicle across the landscape, the tire marks may remain for years. Litter does not decompose at the rate it would elsewhere. I went to Black Rock Desert every summer I think from 1962 to 1978. We camped in the shelter of the one "island" in the middle of the "lake"--perhaps a quarter-acre mound of dust, fifteen feet high, held in place by sagebrush and dry grass. Lizards, snakes, and mice lived on that island, and we saw carcasses of rabbits and porcupines out on the open playa. We always stayed off the vegetation entirely, and I hope the BLM has cordoned off the island as well, to protect it. Well, this is not the place for original research, but I hope someone out there can fill in this gap. I have some pictures showing the environment without all the people, so I'll try to post something when I can. Perhaps the Black Rock Desert article can cover some of this, but the Burning Man article should also, particularly with respect to environmental impact.
Taquito1 (talk) 02:05, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The "island" is the Coyote Spring mound, formed by the presence of a spring at one time. Here is where I found it, in a great reference on the environment: Friends of Black Rock/High Rock. And here is a great example of mitigating the impact on the environment: Coyote Springs Restoration Project. Really, some of this will need to be in the Black Rock Desert article.Taquito1 (talk) 02:43, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Environment and Environmental Impact 

message: Many countries celebrate something refered to as Labour Day at different times of the year (Sometimes varying between states, which I believe was the case historically in Australia and may still be the case). To counter ambiguity for non-American readers, I'd love to see the rule by which US Labour Day is determined either in the article text or as a link to an article to "Labour Day (USA)"
This raises another issue I am not qualified to comment on - the significance of the Labour Day closing of Burning Man. Is it purely practical (An example of extending a public holiday to include a weekend to maximise time off work at minimal dammage to holiday allowance) or is it an intentional socio-political statement?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.152.143.189 (talk) 09:22, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  American Labour Day 

message: There's a section in the 1997 summary in the table which says the Washoe Co. Sheriff takes over the gate and the role of "impounding all money."  This was added way back in 2007 but I'm not sure that's accurate or quite what it means.  Thoughts?  --TeaDrinker (talk) 04:03, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe it could be phrased better.  And it sure as heck could use a reference.  But I believe it's probably true.  And it refers to the the Sheriff confiscating the money from ticket sales. -- Bob drobbs (talk) 21:44, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Impounding all money 

message: i'm a newbie to burning man: I somehow realized, that the arms of the burning man are UP when burning, and down the rest of the time. is there any more info about that?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.171.132.58 (talk) 23:33, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  arms up/down 

message: When were the 10 principles first promulgated? I haven't been able to find this information anywhere (I've asked friends, but they weren't sure about the exact year; 2002ish, maybe).192.104.39.2 (talk) 17:11, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  History of the 10 principles 

message: The subsection entitled "Concerns regarding the "Leave No Trace" policy" does not seem to accurately summarize what is written there, as the "concerns" mentioned are not specifically raised with the concept of "Leave No Trace". What might be a better title for this subsection? Kansan (talk) 17:41, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Concerns regarding the "Leave No Trace" policy" 

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Deletion requests June 2011 
;What should I do?
	A discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs.
This notification is provided by a Bot, currently under trial --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 07:18, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  File:Burning man 2.jpg Nominated for Deletion 

message: I added a couple of "citation needed" tags.  But that's just the start of the problem.  There are entire sections (e.g. Bikes) which don't contain an entire reference.  Where did this material come from?  It needs to be sourced from somewhere.
-- Bob drobbs (talk) 17:22, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Much of the article lacks needed citations 

message: The attendance figures for the BM 2012 was tagged as dubious though it is sourced. If there is doubt about the figure, please say why. A 'dubious' tag is likely to stay on the page for years without intervention. The Huffington Post, The SF Chronicle, supports the figure. Thanks Span (talk) 21:40, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  2012 attendance? 

message: Is this considered a music festival?  Are there any djs, bands, dancespaces or sound systems setup?  Music is mentioned once in the article.  I was under the impression this was part of the psytrance scene in the states but the article doesn't mention it. - Shiftchange (talk) 08:06, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Not really a music festival. There are plenty of DJs and sound systems, and some live bands. All of that is organized by the participants; there's no master schedule of music, and nobody booking acts to play. While some people DO go specifically for the music, for the majority, music isn't the focus of the event. There's been hardly any psytrance in recent years (although I've met some people at Burning Man who are part of the psytrance scene).  Plantdrew (talk) 16:16, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Music 

message: Sergei Brin and Larry Page attended Burning Man in the late 90s just as Google was getting underway and it was influential in the process. (From The Google Story by David A. Vise and Mark Malseed)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.90.188.21 (talk) 13:15, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm pretty sure most of American "celebs and notables" attended BM at least at some point :) I would be impossible to track all of them down. probably makes sense to mention it on Brin's page, not here.Cosainsé (talk) 03:29, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Celebs and other Notables Attending Burning Man 

message: I can confirm that Burning Man has absolutely no legal right to prohibit your personal photographs, or even professional photographs (as the judge explained to my lawyer and I), from being used in absolutely any way you desire. Be they of drug use or nudity either. I've received a "cease and desist" notice emailed to me (i'm Australian) from their company towards my Facebook photography profile and later photography website profile. Responding to these was as easy as "please go screw yourselves" (much to my lawyers later chagrin). Upon receiving a seemingly legal notification through the post, again demanding a cease and desist or legal action would be taken, I talked to my lawyer who initiated "harassment stoppage" officially towards their organisation. Despite this, we receive a few further notices, all which my lawyer replied with his own replies to stop sending me these notifications. WE then initiated legal proceedings towards them, seeking a court ordered stop to their harassment. Hilariously they still thought they had any ground to stand on and kept at it.
After 8 months, they were pretty much straight away found by the judge to have no legal basis for their complaints and had no legal right to tell me what to do with my private property and (now) copyrighted material as the land was still public, even though rented for a festival, and my buying a ticket was in NO WAY A LEGAL CONTRACT OR AGREEMENT TO TERMS OF SERVICE. This is according to both US and Australian law.
Those in my photographs were willingly photographed, nude and all, and had knowingly consented. She stated that being at the festival was no grounds to have ownership over the photographs either, as it was still a public space and photography was allowed. We are currently chasing up their company for court costs, which they've now mysteriously stopped replying to emails for.
I'd just like to let everyone here know that if you want to take photographs at Burning Man, either as a private or professional photography, you're completely within your rights to keep any and all photographs you take and use them in any way you wish. Including for profit or for public dissemination. If someone could include this information in the articles section on photography restrictions, id would be great. 124.168.241.91 (talk) 08:12, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Legality of Burning Man photography restrictions 

message: I'm surprised that BM has not incurred any criticism notable enough for inclusion in WP, especially given the impact on the playa, the exposure in popular culture in the 2000s, incidents, issues with local and federal authorities, and the skyrocketing ticket prices making the event much more of a weekend warrior, techno-yuppie, or trust fund playground rather than the inclusive art-hippie community it seems to suggest it wanted to be. The point is, there is no mention of any criticism of the shiny happy place that is BM, and that's hard to believe.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.171.190.11 (talk) 00:19, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: If you know of any reliable sources discussing those complaints, that would be appreciated.  As is discussed in the article, Burning Man is a leave-no-trace event, so it's impact on the Playa itself is debatably fairly low. The impact on the surrounding area, on the other hand, is a lot more significant, but again, sources are needed. There was a lot of discussion in local news sources last year about a lawsuit between Pershing County and Black Rock City LLC.. It's hard to know how much weight to give that kind of thing in the article. It was, as far as I know, mostly resolved to both parties' satisfaction. There have been a few cases like that over the years. Should they be included? The issues with ticket price and inclusiveness have been heavily discussed as well, but most of what I've seen has been in blogs, forums, or other unusable sources that shouldn't be used in Wikipedia articles. Grayfell (talk) 06:49, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  No criticism anywhere 

message: There doesn't seem to be enough here for its own article. There is also only one WP:RS cited and notability seems a bit thin. There just doesn't seem to be enough here for its own article. Ad Orientem (talk) 23:16, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: This comment looks like it's about a proposal to merge Burning Man, which is a large and detailed article, into BMIR (Burning Man Information Radio), which is 84 words long plus References. In fact, it's the other way around.The proposal banner is on BMIR and says "It has been suggested that this article be merged into Burning Man". With that I can agree. --Thnidu (talk) 07:08, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Disagree. With my bias as article creator noted, BMIR should continue stand on its own. KUT — a similar article I created back in 2006 – could have began on University of Texas at Austin. In the eight years since, though, it has gained more than enough content to justify an article. (Further, I stubbed KUT with even less content than that of BMIR.) jareha (comments) 02:19, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

text: Agree. The comparison seems a little tenuous to me. KUT is a well-funded public radio operation serving a large population beyond UT itself. In contrast, BMIR is just another component of the Burning Man event. If the material ends up getting expanded like KUT, we can always split it off again later. jxm (talk) 15:51, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merge with [[BMIR]] 

message: "By 1996, the land-speed-record-holding open playa had grown to a critical mass with 8,000 attendees and was deemed too dangerous (marked with numerous vehicular incidents) to continue in the same way with unrestricted driving."
The "open playa" holds the "land-speed-record"? What does that mean and why is it relevant to the fact that the event had a lot of traffic accidents?
:It's an ironic reference to an unrelated bit of local history trivia - see Land speed record. The Black Rock desert playa was the location of the most recent highest land speed achievements, which were in 1997. This silly statement should be changed to give a better context. jxm (talk) 00:01, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  This sentence makes no sense 

message: Section 1997 to present starts:
:1997 marked another major pivotal year for the event. By 1996, the land-speed-record-holding open playa had grown to a critical mass with 8,000 attendees and was deemed too dangerous (marked with numerous vehicular incidents) to continue in the same way with unrestricted driving.
This comes out of nowhere. What "land-speed-record-holding open playa"? For that matter, what's a playa? And whoever fixes this, please disassemble that too-many-hyphen-containing excessively-multiple noun pile. --Thnidu (talk) 07:38, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, that wording is bizarre and I've rephrased it. Sfba (talk) 09:59, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Explain "land-speed-record-holding open playa" 

message: Moin, the "Leaving No Trace" policy has 2 sections in this article. The second one should be merged into the first. Cheers, Horst-schlaemma (talk) 16:54, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: The first instance (mentioned as one of the principals) is explained below. Raquel Baranow (talk) 17:46, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Of course, but still doesn't make a lot of sense. Generally we avoid that.  -- Horst-schlaemma (talk) 09:53, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Leaving No Trace" 2 times in the article 

message: Hi, do you think it'd make sense to create a Wiki template for topics surrounding Burning Man? There's a lot to cover and it'd give a bit more of an overview. Cheers, Horst-schlaemma (talk) 15:51, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: That's a good idea. I liked it enough to just be WP:BOLD and start building a footer WP:NAVBOX which is here: User:Grayfell/Burning Man template. Way, way too many of the associated articles are teetering on the brink of being deleted, so I kept getting distracted trying to clean-up WP:COPYVIOs and primary-sourced junk. I might contribute to it later, but by all means, if anybody's so inclined, pick up where I left off. Grayfell (talk) 20:09, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I guess it's good enough to start-off. Moved to :Template:Burning Man as a navbox. Feedback welcome. Grayfell (talk) 22:27, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template? 

message: Wasn't there a death that occurred at one of these effigies a year or two ago?  I seem to remember the news making a big deal of it.  (I think a drunk man ran into the fire?)  Maybe, it was some other event, but I thought that it was indeed this "Burning Man" event.  Does anyone know for sure.  If so, that information should be added into this article.  Unless it's already there, and I somehow missed it.  Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 22:21, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Death 

message: We should add discussion regarding FCC issues, how off road vehicle licensing works relative to Nevada law and the event "DMV", potential FAA issues due to the number of participants use the airport during the year vs. airport classification (has the increased growth and passengers over the years altered the airport classification/regulation requirements).  Firearm restrictions and NV concealed carry law would be interesting to discuss, past dive by shooting range history.  How about the recent ban of "laser pointers" and not simply the "inappropriate use of laser pointers".
The history of restriction of dogs and other animals aren't covered.  In previous years, there's photos of Camels at the event.  That would be interesting history about animals at BM and regionals.  Controversy of Sexually operated businesses (SOB) could be an interesting read.
Child policy (sub 13 free), public nudity (indecent exposure laws) population caps possibly violated with the uncontrolled number of sub 13'ers, and how the tax exempt status (501c3) influences the event should be noted.  I think if more than two children sub 13 years old were given tickets, that would equate to a gift of approximately $780 (2015 ticket price), that would probably raise flags (like IRS 1099 recordings?); it removes the ability to sell a ticket to a paying person to a quickly sold out event.
Does the Burning Man Foundation (501c3) violate tax law by funneling so much money into this commercial event or can it be treated somehow as a "fundraiser" / fund generating event.  
Can someone write on the drug culture at BM and arrests?  Could the whole organization meet criteria for a domestic terrorist organization?  Potential RICO act violations?
If drug use by some people qualifies an entire city as a domestic terrorist organization, all of San Francisco would have to be arrested. The event takes place on federal land, so federal drug laws apply and drug use is very hidden.   — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.144.209.8 (talk) 17:51, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Legal status and Controversy 

message: Bad job of explaining the overall point of burning man in the intro
Additionally, it isn't a festival. "Festival" implies you are paying for entertainment and that somebody cleans up after you. Here you get a camping space and porta-potties, and that's it. You are the entertainment.198.144.209.8 (talk) 17:55, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comment 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Burning Man. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20140222170040/http://www.sacredtribesjournal.org/htdocs/images/Encyclopedia/Burning_Man_Festival.pdf to http://www.sacredtribesjournal.org/htdocs/images/Encyclopedia/Burning_Man_Festival.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070911022200/http://www.current.tv:80/pods/tvfreeburningman/PD07063 to http://www.current.tv/pods/tvfreeburningman/PD07063
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 06:56, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: [...]in 1986 when Larry Harvey, Jerry James, and a few friends met on Baker Beach in San Francisco[8] and burned a 9-foot (2.7-meter) wooden man [...]. When Grauberger stopped organizing it, Harvey "picked up the torch" so to speak, and ran with it.[9] He and Jerry James built an 8-foot (2.4-meter) wooden effigy for 1986 [...].
Probably there should be some external sources added as well.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.218.52.202 (talk) 11:53, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  No clear reference to the size of first wooden man 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Burning Man. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20060923001623/http://www.nv.blm.gov/news_releases/Press_Releases/fy06_releases/nr_wfo_33.htm to http://www.nv.blm.gov/news_releases/Press_Releases/fy06_releases/nr_wfo_33.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20060525050812/http://www.nv.blm.gov:80/Winnemucca/NEPA/burningman/burningman.htm to http://www.nv.blm.gov/Winnemucca/NEPA/burningman/burningman.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 03:08, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Adding this section, since the templates exist, but the section does not. My opinion is the articles should be merged. No other articles link to BMIR and the sparse content in that article is not notabel enough for its own article. Rayukk (talk) 09:32, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merge with [[BMIR]] 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Burning Man. 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 archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091109231856/https://www.nevadadot.com/reports_pubs/state_maintained/pdf/sm_book.pdf to http://www.nevadadot.com/reports_pubs/state_maintained/pdf/sm_book.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:08, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Burning Man. 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 archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120509040545/http://www.burningman.com/on_the_playa/airport/airport.html to http://www.burningman.com/on_the_playa/airport/airport.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) 18:59, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Please see the Special Recreational Permit for this event
*DR_Burning_Man.pdf.
The event is declared a "festival" by the authorities that allow it on the premise that it resides on.  This is the same for regionals.  Do not call it anything else based on festival goer lack of NPOV.  Google the definition of "festival" and you get:
fes·ti·val
/ˈfestəvəl/
noun
noun: festival; plural noun: festivals
a day or period of celebration, typically a religious commemoration.
"a tabulation of saints' days and other festivals"
synonyms: fair, carnival, fiesta, jamboree, celebrations, festivities, fest More
"the town's fall festival"
•holy day, feast day, saint's day, commemoration, day of observance 
"fasting precedes the festival" 
•an annual celebration or anniversary.
"highlights of this year's pumpkin festival"
•an organized series of concerts, plays, or movies, typically one held annually in the same place.
"numbers that are still heard at traditional jazz festivals"
Burning Man is the items in bold above.  It's also debatable if Burning Man or "Burnerism" is considered a non theistic religion similar to Non Theistic Satanism (e.g. LeVayan) having many of the same aspects. 
*LaVeyan Satanism
Many festival goers will state "they're only principles" but they're applied in a similar commandment, rule, tenant, style "to live by" dogma as religions; the man )'( is kind of a deity or used similar as non theistic (or atheistic) Satanists use imagery of Satan.
Festival goers (AKA Burners) will try and bend words but this is not NPOV nor is Wikipedia a place to promote dogma. Another example of this is "Black Rock Rangers" provide security guard functions as described in the SRP however again in some kind of festival goer and parrot like response often it's said "they're not security guards"; they provide security functions hence Black Rock Ranger would be synonymous for "security guard".  If we did a find and replace of "Black Rock Rangers" swapping in "security guards" the article would still be accurate.  However, I'd have to read the SRP but Black Rock Rangers really describes the group the event states will provide certain functions.  Kind of like saying "Blackwater" or a security company.  A "ranger" at the event is a member of said Black Rock Ranger security organization even if they are volunteer based.  The "Black Rock Rangers" consist of security guards would also likely be accurate.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.29.191.200 (talk) 15:37, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Like, groovy, man. That's deep. EEng 12:35, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Burning Man IS a festival (same with regionals) and spiritual / religious dogma base

message: so non-profit BM bought nearby Fly Ranch? ... and they got BIGGGG plans for it.. just 'not yet'. my thoughts, input??
dont do ANYTHING to it..leave it alone!!!
ok it has non-stop geothermal potential.. do it.. improve or re-establish existing facil's.. need a example? look to the Geysers in N. Calif or the area facil near Salton Sea, S. Calif or just over the border in Mex.. doing the same QUITE successfully. And you'll have elec for the yrly festival too!! no more gas/diesel generations, to come!!! wow, what a concept!!
and of course, does it have potential for wind power??
if so, do it.. though ya all need to check you're not HARMING any birds, etc that come into the area's wetlands.. yea wetlands.. has a bunch... can you just see some 'future' eco community there?? yea right.. NOT! 2602:304:CDAF:A3D0:DCD0:A28E:EBE0:63DB (talk) 17:44, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Radical! EEng 12:36, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  B Man's Fly Ranch... 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Burning Man. 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 archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140715021506/http://sfist.com/2011/08/29/black_rock_city_architect_rod_garre.php to http://sfist.com/2011/08/29/black_rock_city_architect_rod_garre.php
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080926054118/http://www.emmyonline.org/mediacenter/news_29th_nominees_data_list.html to http://www.emmyonline.org/mediacenter/news_29th_nominees_data_list.html
*Added  tag to http://tickets.burningman.com/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121031055950/http://www.blm.gov/pgdata/etc/medialib/blm/nv/field_offices/winnemucca_field_office/nca_pdfs.Par.97441.File.dat/2009_Burning_Man_Inspection_Memo.pdf to http://www.blm.gov/pgdata/etc/medialib/blm/nv/field_offices/winnemucca_field_office/nca_pdfs.Par.97441.File.dat/2009_Burning_Man_Inspection_Memo.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080612084300/http://commongroundmag.com/2008/05/greenparty0805.html to http://commongroundmag.com/2008/05/greenparty0805.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) 12:16, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: OK, so Harvey is at pains to distance himself from The Wicker Man and "debunks" it as an inspiration; but what has Mary Grauberger to say? She did start burning wooden men on Midsummer, which Harvey has admitted gave him the idea to do likewise. Did anybody ask her opinion? Nuttyskin (talk) 03:42, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Wicker Man 

message: It was a long time ago so I don't remember much are the title or date of the episode, but there was an episode about some environmentalists chaining themselves to trees so as to prevent their being cut down.  Shortly before this event, one of their leaders gives a few reasons why it's more important to participate then to pursue other activities with "more important than Burning Man".  That's it - a vocal cameo appearance.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:1C2:4E02:3C3E:B023:9FDF:BB56:4924 (talk) 16:51, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Second Simpson's Reference for the Popular Culture section 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:22, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion 

message: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPuEK1vKGbM Victor Grigas (talk) 14:34, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Here's a video from Burning man 2000 that could be migrated to commons