Talk:Discordianism

message: Ek-sen-trik-kuh Discordia: The Tales of Shamlicht has been mentioned in this article for several years, and has had its own paragraph since 2016 as you can see at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Discordianism&type=revision&diff=750397473&oldid=742679404
It was very recently removed with the edit at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Discordianism&type=revision&diff=1006830376&oldid=1006819520 (this contains the complete paragraph as it last appeared in the article). The editor's posted reason for the removal was "(Ek-sen-trik-kuh Discordia: The Tales of Shamlicht is not considered a major Discordian work and this edit was placed here by the author.)" While the book had been listed in the article for years previously, the editor who added the full paragraph, who is not the book's author, suggested I put it back in. However, as I am listed as one of the book's contributors, I'm concerned about that looking like shameless-self promotion/conflict or interest or some such.
As it says in the link above, the book was not published by a "vanity press," and has a foreword by S. John Ross (game designer), with blurbs (short reviews of the book) by R. Crumb, Sondra London, Alan Moore, Rev. Ivan Stang, Robert Anton Wilson, and others. It was listed in the New York Review of Books. All those facts are verified by the provided links.
Could somebody please add the paragraph shown at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Discordianism&type=revision&diff=1006830376&oldid=1006819520 back into the article? If an admin gives me permission, I can add it back in, but do not want to do it myself without permission. Thanks to anyone who can help me. Alden Loveshade (talk) 19:52, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: FYI:Admins have zero authority over content. None at all. Consensus is the primary method of decision making with regard to content. Beeblebrox (talk) 20:31, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  I appreciate your help and input. While I don't know if there was a formal consensus, I would tend to believe that dozens of editors making hundreds of edits on the article for a period of years and not removing the paragraph on the book would amount to some sort of consensus to keep it in. But I'm still left with the dilemma that, as I am associated with the book, I don't want to be the one to restore it. Hopefully someone will feel motivated to do so. Alden Loveshade (talk) 23:08, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:SILENCE may be relevant here. Beeblebrox (talk) 23:38, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the link. Alden Loveshade (talk) 23:50, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ek-sen-trik-kuh Discordia 

message: Editors should please note that WP:BURDEN explicitly says that giving editors time to provide citations once they have said they intend to do so is part of the process: "In some cases, editors may object if you remove material without giving them time to provide references. Consider adding a citation needed tag as an interim step." Since multiple editors have stated that they intend to provide citations, a courtesy sensitive reading of WP:BURDEN would suggest that continued removals without first tagging and then giving other editors time to do their work would be against the clearly stated spirit of WP:BURDEN. Skyerise (talk) 22:44, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request that editors actually follow [[WP:BURDEN]] 

message: This section was removed even though Greyface seems to be a major figure in the topic and, as a descriptor, rounds out the page:
"A historical figure noted in the Principia is a man by the name of Greyface who existed in the year 1166 B.B., or 1 YOLD. Greyface believed the universe to be humorless and began teaching that anything besides seriousness was sinful. Deluded by society's view of reality as the happy romance they once knew it to be, Greyface's followers increased. Lost in the history of the Discordian society is understanding of the reason why people began following Greyface and the destruction of other cultures whose societies differed from their own, rather than continuing to look toward the humorful romance of disorder."Malaclypse the Younger, 
Principia Discordia, Page 00042"
Possible to bring it back? This has many sources but I'm not sure which are applicable to a reliable source here, some seem to be. Can others take a look, thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 11:56, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Curse of Greyface