Talk:New Age/Archive 6

message: quoting intro "The term New Age describes a broad movement of late twentieth century and contemporary Western culture, characterised by an individual eclectic approach to spiritual exploration. Collectively, New Age has some attributes of an emergent religion, but is currently a loose network of spiritual teachers, healers, and seekers." Seems to me its important to adequately represent the broad and "loose network" of teachers, beliefs, orientations, etc. Ginar 00:03, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: archived section of partial discussion as left previously on main page

message: Looking for participants in the the discussion of List of religions once classed as cults 
24.87.87.211 14:26, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Is anyone interested in the following article nominated for deletion?

message: * Hi there! Could someone inform me please what the deal is with New Age/Revised? Is that rewrite still valid? Or already incorporated? Or rejected for some reason? In the latter case, VfD'ing may be appropriate. Yours,  Radiant_* 13:22, Mar 30, 2005 (UTC)
:This article is a fork from the New Age article and was created after a major rewrite was attempted by an anonymous user which removed lot of existing good work. As I recall the rewrite itself had a lot of useful things in it and the "Revised version" was creatred as a place to keep them visible while they were incorporated into the main article. I believe this is now complete and the "Revised" fork should now be deleted.   Lumos3 21:37, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  I have begun marking New Age/Revised for deletion. If anyone disagrees please comment here or on that article's discussion page. Lumos3 14:40, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  The "fork" was a good idea, to avoid edit wars as well as to allow the anonymous user to have a visible sandbox. It may have served its purpose by now. The main article is OK ;-) I still need to get some NPOV New Age spin going for NA use of crystals. I use them but this would be a POV article, then. BF 22:31, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: New Age/Revised Article - Deletion

message: The New Thought Movement describes some movements that originated in the USA in the late 19th century. Some of which may now be described by some people as new age and others not. The New Age is the name of a late 20th century movement. There is no question they should be merged in my mind. Lumos3 21:36, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger with New Thought Movement 

message: There is a link to Crystals - but that leads to a mainstream physics/chemistry type article. It isn't
really clear what the New Age connection to crystals is. Maybe someone could add a page for this?
:New agers like crystals because they're pretty and shiny.  Just like the newage "philosophies".  Hope that helps.
I'll try to help out on this request. I removed the wiki link on crystals. BF 22:49, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Crystals 

message: Sorry - I'm very new to the whole (wonderful) Wikipedia phenomenon, so i don't know if this is the appropriate place to ask this, but would it be possible for anyone with the relevant expertise to add information about the links between early New Ageism and Nazism to the New Age pages? Thanks.
:*If you have information that can be referenced then just add it to the article , the Wikipedia maxim is " Be bold". If you are still unsure , add it to the discussion page first and a debate can take place there.   Lumos3 08:28, 22 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Just add four tilds thus ~ after an entry and the Wiki will convert this into a signature and timestamp. Only do this on a discussion page. Articles are not owned by any individual are only tracked by their history. Lumos3 12:30, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Age/Nazi Links 

message: I have started a User category for users of Wikipedia who are interested in or practise New Age concepts. If you want to be included add the following to your User page, where xxxx is your user name.
 xxxx 
Lumos3 18:03, 19 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Age Wikipedians 

message: Anon 24.108.231.21 added this to the article , moved here. 
This article speaks to the term "New Age" as a phenomena of the 20th century. The term is actually derived from awareness of the ages as measured by the precession of the Equinox. It is an astrological term and was popularized by the awareness of the coming age of Aquarius as spoken of in the popular song New Age of Aquarius which begins "It's the dawning of the Age of Aquarius.."  We are currently in the age of Pisces, so when we speak of the age of Aquarius, we say "new" and "age". What is in this article is the popular conception of what the term means, without understanding of its astrological roots. 
New Age of Aquarius  Lumos3 17:51, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Anon 24.108.231.21 comment

message: It should be called "New Age Movement" not "New Age".  "New Age" is an astrological reference referring to the coming age as measured by the precession of the Vernal Equinox(es). anon
:I would oppose any change. The term New Age is in common use for the movement as a whole. The Age of Aquarius already has an article and this article can easily reference that one. Lumos3 11:24, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Title of Article 

message: User:DreamGuy has deleted this section saying its only spam. In fact the contribution of individuals to New Age thought is significant and is the reason it is different to other forms of spirituality. Individuals form their own mix of belief, theology , spirituality within the overall umbrella name of New Age. A limited section showing a few examples (say 10) of the best of these is necessary in an encyclopaedia to illustrate this phenomenon. I will be restoring the section with an explanation of why its there. Comments please. Lumos3 13:04, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deletion of External links - Personal websites by individuals 

message: An article like this which is about a Movement and not a single well defined subject will have a larger number of links than most. There is no single entitity called the New Age and the links reflect and illustrate the range of diversity in the Movement. There is precedent for this in other articles of a similar nature which have reached Featured status. Lumos3 07:58, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Three users have trimmed this section.  That should give some indication that perhaps it doesn't belong. - brenneman {L}  12:22, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Agreed.  Nandesuka 15:28, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Defence of extended External links section

message: There is not nearly enough criticism in this article of what is ultimately a very silly thing, if we're rational adults about it. 83.146.55.85 01:51, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not clear what the objection is here.  It seems that 83.146.55.85 thinks that "New Age" is a silly thing.  Fair enough, but what has that got to do with the neutrality of the article?  Are you denying that there is such a thing as New Age or are you stating that the article is not written with a NPOV?  Please clarify.  Sunray 02:19, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the individual is disputing NPOV, fueled by his soap box mini-rant. FistOfFury 01:36, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

text: "When tested using the same types of regimens as those applied to pharmaceutical drugs and surgical techniques (for example, double blind clinical studies), these systems rarely if ever yield demonstrable improvements over standard techniques."
If you're going to be quoting "scientific superiority" you need to back it up with facts, and at the very least not use speculative language. So I removed the "if ever" part because there are some aspects of alternative medicine that actually have demonstrated effectiveness. I also fleshed out the "direct and indirect harm" part to be less mysterious sounding and more informative. Piekarnia 03:10, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV 

message: The change to the text of this section from "These often highlight the discrepancies between New Age's seemingly irreconcilable mix of occultism and acceptance of the laws of physics" to "New Age's irreconcilable mix of occultism and acceptance of the laws of physics" seemed unnecessarily POV to me, so I inserted "apparent" back where "seemingly" had been.  I think that gives a more NPOV flavor to the section, since it acknowledges that the mix seems irreconcilable while not saying that it either is or isn't.
I welcome discussion on this, but feel my change makes it a more NPOV statement than simply calling the mix "irreconcilable."
Septegram 21:57, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticism 

message: I added a cleanup marker to the Beliefs section. As this article has been upgraded, that section has fallen into dissaray. I will be going throught it in order to organize, re-word, and re-link. Anyone interested in helping please join me.
Basejumper123 19:40, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I reverted the "massive cleanup, part 1" by FieryPhoenix.  Please take it one or two points at a time per edit, and allow other interested editors a chance to respond. I agree this article's a mess right now (heck, probably will be forever); but please give the other editors a chance to respond to more specific points than a mass edit of an article that has many editors' participation to date. (For whatever it's worth, one thing that caught my attention was the change to "new age practitioners" in introducing a paragraph that purported to describe new age beliefs, practices, orientations, influences, etc.)  ... Kenosis 04:13, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup 

message: I've noticed some problems with the following links:
In the section "Power," the links to "mystical power" and "psi energy" both link to "Odic Force," as does the link to "energy" in the section "Spirit."  I question the appropriateness of this, and think perhaps "mystical power" and "energy" should not have links at all.  To link them specifically to "Odic Force" implies that this is the full and only sense in which these terms are used.
I looked into changing the "psi energy" link so that it linked directly to "psi energy," but that redirects to Cinergy, a power company in Chicago, Illinois.  My inclination is to change the link to point to Psionics and delete the redirect page.  Unfortunately, I don't know how to delete a redirect page, and I'd like some feedback before I went doing so anyway.
Anyone?  Anyone?  Bueller?
Septegram 13:54, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link issues in "Language" section 

message: From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Revision as of 04:11, 25 November 2001 by BFPlease Read:   Talk:New Age (archive)
Much of this current discussion reminds me of what had been happening since I began this article. Larry Sanger guided me and others back before you could use tildes to display your username in articles. From the first Talk:
:"We need people to write, not remove, to help not detract. If you don't like the article find another one and ruin theirs ! ~BF"
Actually, we need people to render this article the most accurate, unbiased account of the New Age movement as possible.  The purpose of this article is to give as fair an accounting of the movement, the people associated with it, its sub-movements, and above all the recent history of it, as possible.  It isn't the purpose of this article to state any one individual's take on the movement.  The subject ' is ' one that we ought to be able to collaborate about. -- User:LMS (Larry Sanger)
Many of you have adhered to this advice. I am calling your attention to the past and reminding you that the snake will bite its own tail eventually— due to the cyclical nature of history and pompous amateur writers. Lumos saw my vision for New Age and it became his vision too. New Age is inherently POV because the subject is experiential in nature. "Describe the taste of an orange." Thank you to all who helped the baby grown up. Now it is out on the street looking at the world pulled over its eyes, like some "Matrix-style" illusion. Living in denial that the New Age has become the mainstream portends of sleepwalking through life, apparently awake. Conflict makes for a nice novel, not an excellent article. ~ BF 05:27, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mama Loves her Baby 

message: I deleted a couple of paragraphs that I thought were too vague or needed sources, but the change was reverted with a request to provide sources instead of deleting.  That's a good New Age attitude, which I recently forsook myself.  Someone came and deleted almost the whole Parapsychology article I'd been working on, due to having few sources, and I said basically the same thing.  But in fact, anyone has the right to delete anything that isn't sourced.  See WP:CITE.  This article needs a lot more sources, so hereby my suggestion that the authors find some.  As far as I can tell, the paragraphs were original research, not to mention POV Martinphi 03:02, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually this only says material should be deleted if it is actually harmful. In other cases it should either have citations added or the fact tag thus  should be used. I am restoring along these lines. Deleting of established material is not colaborative working unless it is accomapied by a full rationale and justification here. I am sorry you have encountered aggressive deltionists I think they do a lot of harm to Wikipedia. Lumos3 11:40, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, but "harmful" is a matter of opinion.  To me, these unsourced slams against the intellectual cohesiveness of New Age belief (however silly many of the beliefs actually are), is harmful.  I see someone alerady tagged them, and I'm putting them here to ask for a source.  But I feel it is appropriate to delete them if they aren't sourced soon.Martinphi 20:39, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Deleting Stuff

message: Please can someone source the following POV paragraphs?Martinphi 20:39, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Please Source

message: What defines "new age" movements is that they don't understand Occam's razor - basically the principle that just because I can't prove there aren't fairies at the bottom of the garden it doesn't mean that there are. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 80.7.20.133 (talk) 00:06, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fairies