Talk:Erlendur Haraldsson

message: See talk:Dale Beyerstein. I am by the way a critical former follower of Sathya Sai Baba. Andries (talk) 15:03, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Untitled 

message: About 75% of the references for this article have the subject as an author. This article needs to be based in 3rd party independent reliable sources. If the subjects research is notable it will be discussed in such sources, otherwise this is just a detailed account of non notable work by a non notable subject. Where is the scholarly evaluation of this research? The results of the research don't belong in an encyclopedia unless they are considered important in the field. - - MrBill3 (talk) 18:43, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I think this is reputable enough http://www.staff.uni-giessen.de/~gk1415/sai-baba.htm Andries (talk) 20:24, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Primary sources 

message: Goblin Face, please do not again combine multiple reference with different page numbers. Andries (talk) 19:15, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: It's been removed, we should not be using primary sources on the article. I'm bored of this now. Goblin Face (talk) 20:08, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Combining references with different page numbers

message: Goblin face, I am completely fed up with your repeated removal of reliable refences for the statement that Erlendur Haraldsson debunked some miracles. This can be sourced both to David C. Lane's book review in the late eighties and Erlendur Haraldsson;s  Stop doing so, otherwise I will report you as a POV pusher on the appropriate noticeboard. Andries (talk) 19:24, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Completely fed up with removing reliable refences

message: Whilst David C. Lane is notable the problem is that  does not appear to be a reliable website. The website is a paranormal "spiritual" website that endorses things like chakras, new age practices and psychic powers. Goblin Face (talk) 20:50, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I changed the reference with a note that the review originally appeared in a journal, as stated on the webpage. Andries (talk) 20:59, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

text: Even if that is true, then so what, the article by Dr. Lane does not exactly endorse those things. I followed the whole affair since the year 2001 and it went exactly the way Dr. Lane wrote it. And yes, Dr. Lane played in an important role in the whole affair. Andries (talk) 21:03, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Integral World

message: Janak Pandey. (2000). Psychology in India Revisited: Developments in the Discipline. Sage Publications. p. 115
Philippe Rosinski. (2010). Global Coaching. Nicholas Brealey Publishing. pp. 186-186
Piet Hein Hoebens. (1986). Sense and Nonsense in Parapsychology.  pp. 28-39. In Kendrick Frasier. (1986). Science Confronts the Paranormal. Prometheus Books.
Daniel E. Bassuk. (1987). Incarnation in Hinduism and Christianity: The Myth of the God-Man. Macmillan. p. 91
You can read Haraldsson's paper here  where he writes "Consideration of the following points leads us to regard Sai Baba's phenomena as possibly paranormal", he then lists seven bullet points. So Haraldsson actually believes some of Baba's phenomena may have been paranormal. He was not skeptical of his materializations. The evidence is clear now. Goblin Face (talk) 23:24, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for finding these sources. With these sources it must be easy to replace Jim Lippard, because clearly some of them are of better quality. Andries (talk) 11:32, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

text: The inner beliefs of Erlendur Haraldsson are irrelevant. What is relevant if and when WP:Parity applies based on what he wrote when. I see no evidence that he wrote that the materialization or any other miracle by SSB are true in the 1987 edition of the book "Miracles are My visiting card". While I admit that he keeps the possibility open that materializations are paranormal which is equal to finding no evidence of fraud in the case of Sathya Sai Baba. But keeping the possibility open that an event is paranormal is fundamental to parapsychology. Following your reasoning parapsychology is always fringe and WP:partiy always applies, regardless what parapsychologists write, and I do not agree with that. Erlendur Haraldsson did not endorse any miralce, but debunked some miracles in that edition of the book.  Hence I see no fringe statements in the book and hence WP:parity does not apply. Andries (talk) 11:32, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: "The inner beliefs of Erlendur Haraldsson are irrelevant". No, it is entirely relevant. Haraldsson is a believer in paranormal phenomena such as materializations. He has written papers endorsing the feats of mediums. He was already a believer in the paranormal before he investigated Baba. It is not surprising he claims his materializations were 'possibility paranormal'. But back to the article that is pretty much it regarding references. I can't dig up anymore sources for now so I will leave it. I think what is on there is more than fair and his views are accurately explained. Goblin Face (talk) 22:40, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Other sources