Talk:Secret Chiefs

message: Wow. This article needs alot of work. Zos 16:22, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Once I get mroe info on this, I'm deleting most of the intro to this article. Its long and rather confusing. Zos 16:57, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

text: I'm not adding web site sources. Zos 14:52, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll get around to editing the article. Agehananda Bharati was a respected author and scholar. The small article I referenced, can be found on the web for easy viewing. The article was originally published in The Bulletin of the Tibet Society, an academic journal in 1974. The views expressed in the article are quite sound, and an academic journal is usually considered a fine source.-Chai Walla 18:17, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Then you might want to cite the actual journal. Zos 19:27, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd second that.  Citing "Wilson 1987 page 48" isn't going to help anyone. See  for advice-- Ricky81682 (talk) 08:11, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: This is to inform editors on this page that this topic, along with a list of related topics, have been mentioned in a report at this link on the WP:Fringe theories/Noticeboard.  It has been mentioned in the noticeboard report that some of the articles listed in the report may be nominated for deletion. 
The report at the noticeboard was not posted by me.  I'm placing this comment here as a courtesy for the editors working on this article.  --Jack-A-Roe (talk) 06:15, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Courtesy notification of report at [[WP:Fringe theories/Noticeboard]] 

message: All one can do with any religion, let alone those apart from the mainstream, is to faithfully report their beliefs taken from the literature of the believers of their religious belief system. In doing so, we are not assesing truth claims (such as the Mormons believing that God is a physical being on another planet), one simply reports on the beliefs held, with as much accuracy as possible - with reliable sources and references. 
There is no need at all to assess the truth claims of the 20th century new religions. If people were to delve into assessing the truth claims of religion, then an entry on Christianity may as well begin with assessing whether God exists. The best approach would seem to be an accurate rendition of any movement's beliefs, nature, history and activities (regardless of what a Wikipedia editor's own views are). Questioning the validity of religious beliefs isn't the role of an encyclopedia entry. Arion (talk) 13:35, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Minority religious beliefs should not be treated as "fringe theories" 

message: To combine the presentation of the Secret Chiefs of Western occultism with the Ascended Masters of theosophy is original research or synthesis without a source saying that they are considered the same thing by the majority of researchers in the field. The same thing applies to each of the people and terms listed in the Fourth Way section. I've pointed the Theosophy section to the related articles, which seem to be well developed. I don't see any reason for more of a summary here when equivalence has not been established with at least two reliable sources. Skyerise (talk) 11:34, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Original research