Talk:Typhonian Order

message: I look for guidance as to how best to update this article to reflect the contents of "Starfire II:3" (March 2009 but published "Winter Solstice MMVIII An 105") by Michael Staley (Kenneth Grant's deputy in the Order) to the effect that the Typhonian OTO has ceased to operate as an Order and that its functions and objectives have been taken over by the newly established Typhonian Order? (Confirmed in conversation with Mr Staley on Thursday 2 April 2009.) Starfire itself, once self-described as "The Official Organ of the Typhonian OTO", is now declares itself to be "The Official Journal of the Typhonian Order". Certainly, much of the content of the article is now dated and could at the very least do with some changes of tense or perhaps a change of title. Ankhefenkhons (talk) 21:59, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, according to Wikipedia standards, such changes would have to wait until chronicled in a reliable third-party source. Until this occurs, the article will need to stay as it is. This is not unusual, encyclopedias frequently lag up to a decade behind real world changes due to sourcing requirements, especially for something as obscure as T.O.T.O. Will in China (talk) 22:55, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Understood - thanks for the clarification. Meanwhile, does it merit a passing time-limited mention based on the announcement in the official house journal of the Order? Or perhaps as a disambiguating link? And how about my update regarding the succession document forgery? Do we have to wait until Koenig, for example, reports that too? Ankhefenkhons (talk) 23:05, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I'm not inclined to remove it myself since "the perpetrator" is not named. If that person is still living and someone else adds their name, it'd probably trigger a removal. With respect to moving the article, I don't know if this sort of organization is likely to register with the UK gov't, but if so and some record of the name change can be found online on a gov't site, that might be good enough to move the article. The redirect and mention in the lead of the new name seems harmless, even helpful, so I've gone ahead and done it. Will in China (talk) 23:14, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I tend to agree with Ankhefenknons that the article needs considerable updating. For one thing, I think it concentrates too much on the legitimacy questions of the Order, which is of decreasing relevance, and not enough on what it actually is and does. I'm also confused by the policy mentioned above about needing a third-party source for the name change - surely if the organisation itself says it has changed its name, in its own official publication, that can be considered reasonably reliable information? If not, I bow to your superior experience in these matters Will :-)  --Rodneyorpheus (talk) 08:25, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

text: I've gone ahead and changed the page title to reflect the name change. Wikipedia guidelines do consider the Starfire statement valid:
Self-published or questionable sources may be used as sources of information about themselves, especially in articles about themselves
I'll update the article content slightly now to reflect this information. --Rodneyorpheus (talk) 08:56, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

text: Updated the article using language given by Ankhefenkhons above, and cleaned it up a bit. I think it reads much more clearly now. I've also toned down some of the more contentious (and contradictory) statements derived from the selective quoting of Koenig & Evans --Rodneyorpheus (talk) 23:36, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

text: Coming back to this article after a long absence. I think that you gentlemen have done some nice work. Estéban (talk) 06:07, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Guidance re article edits to reflect closure of Typhonian OTO 

message: The lead is supposed to be a summary of the article body. However, currently the lead contains claims which are not cited and not covered in the body of the article. The alleged facts need to be added to the body with citations or removed from the lead. Skyerise (talk) 22:43, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lead is a summary