Talk:Tulpa

message: @BrightR: your edit removes the link to the publication "Varieties of Tulpa Experiences: The Hypnotic Nature of Human Sociality, Personhood, and Interphenomenality" which text is available at www.academia.edu. Is there any particular reason the url with the text of a publication isn't allowed to be linked to the footnote? --- Farcaller (talk) 10:48, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a different version of the same article. I'm using a peer-reviewed version, the Academia.edu version is earlier and includes some outlandish claims that didn't survive peer review. Bright☀ 11:46, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

text: "The term" doesn't exist prior to Theosophy. While Theosophy asserted a connection to an older Buddhist tradition, that doesn't mean that the Buddhist tradition gets described in this article. It's described elsewhere on Wikipedia so it can simply be mentioned and linked to, which the article does. Not sure why you're unhappy about that... it's simply how things are done in order to avoid duplication and POV pushing. Skyerise (talk) 15:41, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is there any issue with the academia.edu link on the original article? 

message: The source by Ben Joffe is a completely speculative self-published blog post and is in no way a reliable source for this topic. I have good reason to believe that the original author of this article, , is a friend of author of this post and wrote this article to drive traffic to that post. It should be removed as a source along with the speculations that it "supports". Skyerise (talk) 17:03, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Whole outline of article seems to be based on an unreliable blog post 

message: Article concerns supposedly Tibetan Buddhist practice, yet substantial portion of the article (ca. 20%) is devoted to My Little Pony fans who practice "tulpomancy" and studies on that group. History of the practice as practiced by Tibetan monks is reduced to a single sentence. This article needs more historical sources and Buddhist PoV. Searching "tulpa" in an internet search engine yields multiple resources more comprehensive than this article and since Wikipedia aspires to be an aggregate of all human knowledge, this situation is upsetting. 5.226.81.106 (talk) 07:08, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not a term used in Tibetan Buddhism. That term is trulpa, and the corresponding article is Nirmāṇakāya. Tulpa is a Theosophical concept, and that's the concept this article is about. Theosophists thought they understood and were using a Tibetan term, but they were wrong, and their concept should not be confused with the Tibetan one: they are different. Skyerise (talk) 12:03, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article is terribly unbalanced 

message: Research in Psychology and Behavioral Sciences is a predatory journal and papers published in it should not be used on Wikipedia. I'm removing the information cited to papers published on it. Taramasalata-icre (talk) 03:04, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Research in Psychology and Behavioral Sciences 

message: What is tulpa 202.8.112.30 (talk) 12:27, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is tupla 

message: The edit summary for this edit was false, I could easily find the material in the source that does not appear to be unusable.  —PaleoNeonate – 21:52, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: We actually are talking about this on the topic "Western vs Tibetan Tulpas?" I was reading the wrong source so I was confused if you want to contribute maybe you could contribute to that topic since were already having a discussion about it already. Kuia34 (talk) 23:18, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reason I reverted 

message: I think that the contents of origins category should be added to the Theosophy and thoughtforms category and the "Modern Tulpamancer" category deleed since it word for word is stating what is already said in the "Tulpamancers" category and there both talking about the same group of people. Kuia34 (talk) 16:50, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I personally think the separate origin section makes sense since it applies to the concept as a whole giving a brief overview and then splits into specifics/developments of the theosophical and modern practices. Seteleechete (talk) 23:46, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Origins and Modern tulpamancer category 

message: the topic of tulpamancy and thoughtforms are extremely interesting, but the entire article is filled to the brim with dubious sources, vague statements, and misinformation. is anyone planning on working on this article? it needs a lot more work to be considered good FROWNINGCATS (talk) 01:59, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Feel free to work on it if you want Kuia34 (talk) 22:01, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  this article needs to be rewritten