Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Neopaganism/Archive 4

message: Talk:Starwood Festival#Request for Comment: Merging WinterStar and A.C.E. articles into Starwood article - Should the Starwood Festival, Association for Consciousness Exploration and WinterStar Symposium articles be merged into one?  A.C.E. is the organization that runs the Starwood and WinterStar festivals. The discussion is taking place on the Starwood article talk page. We could use some more eyes on this. Thanks! :-)  ~ Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 04:26, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request for Comment: Merging A.C.E. and WinterStar stubs into Starwood article 

message: Anyone willing to help out in expanding internal alchemy, or add a neopagan perspective? Any assistance would be greatly appreciated. Vassyana 13:59, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Internal Alchemy 

message: I don't know how to contribute to a page set up the way this category page is. I placed a list of many Neo-Pagan festivals I know about on the talk page, if anyone would like to reference it. Some of them deserve their own articles, but they all deserve to be included in a list. Unless a category page is just for article links, in which case I suppose they belong in an article called "List of Neo-Pagan Festivals". Rosencomet 22:15, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I just created List of Neo-Pagan festivals and events. Feel free to add to it, create notable articles to link there, and add categories. In some cases, I linked the event to the organization that runs it (if there was no separate article for the event). Rosencomet 22:43, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The category page is an automatically generated list of all the articles that have been placed in :Category:Neopagan festivals by placing Category:Neopagan festivals at the end of the article. - AdelaMae (t - c - wpn) 20:12, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

text:  I see. Thanks for the info. I see the page I created has already been added to the list. Rosencomet 01:21, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Category: Neo-Pagan festivals

message: I've gone through and roughly categorized the articles tagged with the WikiProject Neopaganism template by "importance". You can see a bot-generated table of these assessments, with links to the corresponding categories, at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Neopaganism/Assessment. What I had in mind when I was doing the assessments wasn't so much importance as priority - now I think we have a rough idea of which high-profile articles are most in need of work. For example, none of the articles categorized as Top-importance is rated higher than B-class, and two of the six (Ásatrú and Neo-druidism) are only Start-class. Several of the High-importance articles are even stubs! Anyway, if you see a categorization you disagree with, please change it; I went through the articles pretty fast and I know there are bound to be some errors of judgment. Most of all, though, please take a look at the lovely assessment table and see if there's an article there that could use a little bit of help from someone with your unique knowledge and expertise. - AdelaMae (t - c - wpn) 03:50, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Assessing articles for importance 

message: i've nominated Celtic Reconstructionist Paganism over at Wikipedia:Good_article_candidates#Philosophy_and_religion. is there some part of the process i might have missed? Whateley23 07:44, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Did I Go Too Quickly? 

message: Recently someone slimmed down the task list by redirecting British Traditional Witchcraft to British Traditional WIcca.  They're two different things, as is shown in the discussion page for the latter article.  But, hey, I'm not going to unilaterally just change it back, that would be precipitous.--Vidkun 13:46, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: *Across the pond (UK) it's a distinction WITH a difference.  BTW in the UK means the NOT-Wicca Traditional groups that practice initiatory Witchcraft.  Over there, BTWicca is just called Wicca, because the "Wicca is whatever you want to call it" groups/attitude inspired by Llewellyn books has not taken off.  Those who would call themselves Wiccan in America, who aren't BTWicca, are simply called Pagans in the UK.  Citations?  I don't have 'em.--Vidkun 16:15, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: *I disagree with you about UK usage: I live here and have yet to hear anyone ever using the phrase! We DO talk about Traditional, Family and Initiatory lines, but would talk about Traditionals, not British Traditional Witches. You're right, what in the US call themselves wiccans, in the UK would call mostly themselves pagans. I suggest we leave the redirect as it is for now until someone comes up with distinct content for a page called British Traditional Witchcraft. Kim dent brown 16:21, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: *And this explains why citations are always needed.  My UK sources told me differently than your firsthand experience.  So, for now, I agree, the redirect should stay (I don't have any sourcing other than personal observations from others), but, as you see on the British Traditional Wicca talk page, there are others who disagree.--Vidkun 16:37, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: *Thanks Vidkun. If I can find any citeable sources to back up my personal experience, I'll try and insert them at an appropriate pace. I don't think the views of the one contributor on the British Traditional Wicca talk page should be taken seriously. His edit history shows no interest in Wicca but plenty of vandalism/general misbehaviour. Kim dent brown 11:35, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  BTW vs BTW 

message: I was noticing we have a Wicca portal, but not a Neopagan one.  As many Reconstructionist traditions are not all that comfortable with being identified as Neopagan (even if it is a technically accurate descriptor), I'm wondering if there would be any interest in putting together a Polytheism portal?  Perhaps it could cover both ancient, traditional and reconstructionist polytheistic traditions?  Or is that too broad?  Anyone interested on working on such a thing?  My WP time is limited right now - I'm very busy with offline work - but I would be interested in participating in putting something like that together, if there's enough interest.  Thoughts? - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 21:31, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Portals

message: Please discuss this in a discussion here--Sefringle 03:24, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Creating a guideline that applies to all religous articles

message: There is a new WikiProject task force proposal at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals#Inter-religious content that is being proposed to deal specifically with articles whose content relates to several religious traditions. Any editors interested in joining such a group would be more than welcome to indicate their interest there. John Carter 15:09, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  New project proposal 

message: I have added a page here with a link from the main project page, which I hope may be useful. I am aware that several editors have their own custom-made reference lists for easy pasting and insertion of references into article and it occurred to me that if we were to amalgamate these we could save one another a lot of time.
It's quite possible that the format in which I have written this is not the most elegant or efficient (not being the smartest knife in the Wiki-drawer when it comes to code.) If anyone can improve on the format please do. 
Please go ahead and start to add references here for our mutual article-writing pleasure! Kim Dent-Brown (Talk to me) 10:45, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Neopaganism/References]] 

message: On the Category talk:Neopagan festivals page, it was requested that the following articles be created:
*Ancient Ways; Apple Valley Heathen Gathering; 
*CAW-Con; Celebrate Samhain; Celebrate the Spirit; 
*Desert Magic Festival 
*Fall Festival & Druid Gathering ; FireDance; FireTribe; ForestDance; Free Spirit Gathering; 
*Gathering of the Tribes; Gnosticon; Goddess Gathering; 
*Harvest Home Gathering; 
*MayFire; Merrymeet; Midnight Flame Festival; 
*Pagan Pride; Pan Pagan Festival; PantheaCon; 
*Rites of Spring; 
*Sirius Rising; Spirit Fire; Summerland Gathering; 
*Three Realms: A Pacific Druid Festival; Trillium Spring Gathering; 
*Wellspring Gathering; Wic-Can Fest; The Witches' Ball; 
Any help in creating these would be extremely welcome. John Carter 14:00, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested articles on Neo-pagan festivals. 

message: The Wikipedia:WikiProject Germanic Mysticism is currently inactive, and seems to deal with a small subsection of the neopaganism articles. On that basis, I think it makes sense to merge the two groups, possibly turning the above group into a subproject of this one. John Carter 21:09, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. Totnesmartin 15:14, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merger 

message: I did not see an appropriate section on User:NeoFreak/list, to which the main WikiProject page directs persons for deletion notifications. --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 20:56, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed deletions ([[WP:PROD]]) 

message: This article's notability has been in question since December. Is it notable? Totnesmartin 15:16, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[The Druid Network]] 

message: dab has been recently doing some extensive overhauls and changes to Polytheistic reconstructionism, Celtic Reconstructionist Paganism and List of Neopagan movements among other neopagan articles. I'm concerned because there seems to be POV pushing in these efforts, imposing his beliefs and opinions upon the articles. Mostly I think it would be helpful to have more eyes on the articles so it would be great if people checked in on them and voiced an opinion. I'm not soliciting anyone for a particular position, I just want more eyes and opinions about the situation. Thanks, Pigmanwhat?/trail 22:54, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: These are not areas in which I'm an expert, but I've had a look at the diffs from all three pages, before and after dab's edits and can't see any POV pushing myself - though this may just be my ignorance. However if you (or anyone else) can - why not be bold and improve the edits yourself? With sources if you have them? However I will keep the pages on my watchlist... Kim Dent-Brown (Talk to me) 10:38, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the feedback! Perhaps it isn't obvious but my biggest complaint was his attempt to impose a strictly rigid (and IMO) artificial division of reconstructionism and folk religion. Not that they aren't different but overlapping qualities shared by both didn't seem to fit with his ideas. This continues to play out but we're apparently finding middle ground for the discussion. Pigmanwhat?/trail 20:33, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Changes to [[Polytheistic reconstructionism]] and [[Celtic Reconstructionist Paganism]] 

message: We're talking about this issue here. --Esimal 08:49, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move "Germanic Neopaganism" to "Heathenism" 

message: * David Waldron. Witchcraft for Sale! Commodity vs. Community in the Neopagan Movement. Nova Religio. August 2005, Vol. 9, No. 1.
Could someone read the study and prove the accuracy of this statement? --Esimal 18:28, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  4.5 million (1990) to 10 million (2000s) Neopagans in the US