Talk:List of modern pagan movements

message: The root of all Neopagan traditions is the Renaissance Neopaganism of Plethon, Cosimo De Medici and Marsilio Ficino. Plethon did have a group in Mistra which was in all likelyhood a continuation of ancient Hellenistic religion that he reintroduced to the west, there was a Platonic Academy (Florence) founded by Cosimo De Medici and Modern Hermeticism is a direct, though eclectic and occultist, develepment of Renaissance Hermetic Neopaganism.
This primary form of Neopaganism is frequently overlooked and it deserves to be featured.   — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.25.109.197 (talk) 13:35, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Renaissance Neopaganism

message: I think we should notabilty to the list, as a pagan religion could be made with no sweat, creating an indiscriminate collection of beliefs.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.159.2.59 (talk) 06:50, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Notabilty

message: Should we leave up red links to deleted articles?  What about if they were deleted as non-notable or unverifiable? Valhallaiac 20:05, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Red links

message: I propose that the page above, set up by Midnightblueowl should be merged into this section. I don't want to discourage Midnightblueowl and it's a shame he has put so much work into the page already, but I don't see how it adds to the section here (especially as it's entirely unsourced at the moment.) Frankly even if it were sourced, I think it would duplicate what's already here. I suggest a merge and redirect from Denominations in Wicca to this page. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 22:32, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that they should be merged, however this "List of Neopagan movements" is in gross need of work, to make it more than just lists with vague and unsourced dates next to them. I propose using the similar lay out to what I produced on Denominations in Wicca, and dividing this Wicca section into "British Traditional Wicca" (i.e. Gardnerian, Alexandrian, Blue Star), "Other" (i.e. Hedge Witchcraft, Dianic), and "Eclectic", and a further group for Organisations, such as Children of Artemis. I really don't think that there should be a jumbled mix of denominations and organisations all labelled "traditions". What do you all think? (Midnightblueowl (talk) 15:10, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I agree that structuring the existing list here in this tri-partite way is no bad idea. (Some of the other sections have similar structuring). I'd just suggest that the list is kept to Wikilinked titles with no further accompanying text, so as to be in line with the rest of the page. Go ahead and have a go, I'm sure if people have better ideas they'll chip in! Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 15:56, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay :) (86.145.34.120 (talk) 17:15, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Have redirected the page at Denominations in Wicca‎ to the section here as agreed. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 17:54, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merge from [[Denominations in Wicca]] 

message: This list is sadly incomplete.  It must be expanded.
--173.53.129.71 (talk) 20:26, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Expand List 

message: Please don't link directly to the italian version of the article. Translate the article to english and post it at Comunità Odinista so it's a blue link.
And please don't link the name of the societies to external links. Either you write an article and make a blue link, or it's a red link, or it's not linked at all because of whatever the reason. --Enric Naval (talk) 15:51, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comunità Odinista and other red links 

message: In light of the large number of edits from IP addresses, I've semi-protected this page for a week. IP editors and new editors will not be able to edit here. It's not that the IP edits were in any way vandalism - just that all of them seemed over-enthusiastic, none were discussed, and most had to be reverted by other editors - often after some hard work and time spent. I'd encourage the IP editor/s in question to register an account (so your contributions can all be accessed and credited in one place) and discuss your edits here. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 15:50, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page protection 

message: How is this not original research? Why should we be adding these here? I've removed it. Please don't restore it without some sort of policy or guideline based reason and discussion here. Dougweller (talk) 06:03, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Similar non-Pagan (non-European or Near Eastern) movements 

message: The main page for neopaganism redirects to modern paganism, a decision made awhile ago by others based on POV issues.  So for consistency sake, I am doing the same here.Reigndog (talk) 21:02, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redirect 

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 
The result of the move request was: Moved to "List of modern Pagan movemens".  The oppose !vote is interpreted as support for a lexical variant, which I feel is reasonable.  User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 15:04, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: List of Neopagan movements →  – Consistency with main page "Modern Paganism". At the start of the list, "Modern Pagan" is the main term followed by "Neopagan" in third place. Ingwina (talk) 12:23, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 23 April 2022