Talk:Religious discrimination against modern pagans: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous edit Next edit →Content deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 08:14, 22 July 2007 editLiftarn (talk \| contribs)Extended confirmed users48,580 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit		Revision as of 07:19, 23 July 2007 edit undoDbachmann (talk \| contribs)227,714 editsm WP:DFTT Next edit →
Line 34:		Line 34:
	both are debates of "Neopagan in the US" in general, which is why they should be discussed in this article, on Neopaganism. I won't discuss "Asatruers" further, since that's unrelated to the split, but I note you also seem convinced of the existence of the term "litterature". ] <small>]</small> 18:43, 21 July 2007 (UTC)		both are debates of "Neopagan in the US" in general, which is why they should be discussed in this article, on Neopaganism. I won't discuss "Asatruers" further, since that's unrelated to the split, but I note you also seem convinced of the existence of the term "litterature". ] <small>]</small> 18:43, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

	==Liftarn ~~and Dbachmann~~==		==Liftarn ==
	this user is persistently ignoring ]. Besides myself, his proposed edits have been rejected by {{user\|Zara1709}} and {{user\|Kathryn NicDhàna}}. Not a single user has expresssed support for Liftarn's approach, and he fails to present anything resembling a rationale for it, short of a thinly veiled intention to abuse Misplaced Pages as a lobbying platform. Nothing resembling a constructive debate has been possible. Further reverts should lead to blocks of escalating length under ]. ] <small>]</small> 14:18, 21 July 2007 (UTC)		this user is persistently ignoring ]. Besides myself, his proposed edits have been rejected by {{user\|Zara1709}} and {{user\|Kathryn NicDhàna}}. Not a single user has expresssed support for Liftarn's approach, and he fails to present anything resembling a rationale for it, short of a thinly veiled intention to abuse Misplaced Pages as a lobbying platform. Nothing resembling a constructive debate has been possible. Further reverts should lead to blocks of escalating length under ]. ] <small>]</small> 14:18, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Line 55:		Line 55:
	::::::: I wouldn't have any problem with that. Altough the stuff about Church of Jesus Christ–Christian would probably go better into the ] article. // ]		::::::: I wouldn't have any problem with that. Altough the stuff about Church of Jesus Christ–Christian would probably go better into the ] article. // ]
	:::::::: Is there anyone reasonable who wants to discuss this for Liftarn? ] <small>]</small> 07:50, 22 July 2007 (UTC)		:::::::: Is there anyone reasonable who wants to discuss this for Liftarn? ] <small>]</small> 07:50, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

	::::::::: Is there anyone reasonable who wants to discuss this for Dbachmann? // ]

	==Step forward==		==Step forward==
Line 81:		Line 79:

	:: This is not an issue between Dbachmann and Liftarn, this is an issue of Liftarn alone. Previous to this there was a similar non-discussion about ]. -] 08:06, 22 July 2007 (UTC)		:: This is not an issue between Dbachmann and Liftarn, this is an issue of Liftarn alone. Previous to this there was a similar non-discussion about ]. -] 08:06, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

	::: Indeed all attempts at discussing this with Dbachmann was fruitless. The article should comply with ], not be something Dbachmann dreamed up, but that's not really what we should discuss here. // ]

Revision as of 07:19, 23 July 2007

Neopaganism Unassessed

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Neopaganism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Neopaganism on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.NeopaganismWikipedia:WikiProject NeopaganismTemplate:WikiProject NeopaganismNeopaganism
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Religion Unassessed

	Religion portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Misplaced Pages's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

External links

Merge from Persecution of Asatru

Object // Liftarn

Keep this. This is the most NPOV title so far. -Zara1709 12:36, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Split

so, {{split}} this where? Religious discrimination against Neopagans in the United States? Why? We only have USA and Greece here. We can still split things off once the article becomes too large. I wish people would work on article content rather than bicker about issues of titling. A title needs to be justified by content. A good example is the former Ancient persecution of non-Jews by Jews (of course moved there after a flurry of dispute, from Persecution by Jews), created by people arguing "if we have 'persecution by A' it is only fair to also have 'persecution by B through to Z'". It doesn't work like that. It is flawed reasoning, and a big waste of time for everyone. No actual material justifying the article's existence was forthcoming, and so it was deleted. dab (𒁳) 13:01, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Not we have three different sections. Two based on geography (USA and Greece) and one on religion (Wicca). This makes no sense. // Liftarn

you will note that Wicca is a subsection of "USA", referring exclusively to issues of Wiccans in the US. Please don't bother to use talkpages for questions that can be answered by half a second's cogitation, and please find something constructive to do on or off Misplaced Pages. dab (𒁳) 13:33, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

What doesn't make sense is this focus on religious persecution. "Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!". -Zara1709 13:44, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

some people are obsessed with Pokemon, others with religious persecution. Both are welcome to present their stuff, as long as they are willing to provide reliable sources docmenting their respecitve hobby-horse. The problem with Liftarn is that he is all lobbyist without an ounce of encyclopedist. I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for him to present anything like a coherent case while he is filling talkpages with incoherent pushiness. WP:ENC applies. dab (𒁳) 13:49, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Some people seems to be more interested in trolling, messing up articles, kicking kittens and making ad hominem attacks on other editors, but then that's just my little view. Anyway, there is still problems with the page. 1) It is sorted by geography, not religions 2) the USA section has two subsections, one based on location (prisons) and one based on religion (Wicca). It's a mess. // Liftarn

Nonsense. Why don't you go and create persecution of neopagan kittens for an enhanced "aww" factor? I really can't be bothered to react to your tactics any longer. dab (𒁳) 14:50, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

If you are not interested in a serious and constructive discussion I see no sense in playing along in your little game any more. // Liftarn

Actual debate on split

I advocate that the Asatru section is split out to Religious discrimination against Asatruers. It was moved here without any prior discussion and it is also dubtfull if Asatru is a neopagan religion as it's more of polytheistic reconstructionism. // Liftarn

non-sequiturs. try to focus on this: (a) polytheistic reconstructionism is neopaganism. (b) "Asatruers" is not a term (c) you have no material for the split. Just the US prison debate, which concerns Asatru just as much as Satanism or Wicca. dab (𒁳) 16:57, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

a) Possibly, but it's still very different from entierly new religions. b) Yes, it is. What term would you prefer instead? The Troth's homepage says "Asatruers". c) Yes, I do. It's partly the US prision debate, that is about Asatru sometimes combined with other religions. It is also about the United States Department of Veterans Affairs who don't allow Asatru symbols on headstones and markers. It should also be noted that the material was merged into this article with no consensur or even any prior discusson at all. // Liftarn

both are debates of "Neopagan in the US" in general, which is why they should be discussed in this article, on Neopaganism. I won't discuss "Asatruers" further, since that's unrelated to the split, but I note you also seem convinced of the existence of the term "litterature". dab (𒁳) 18:43, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Liftarn

this user is persistently ignoring WP:CONSENSUS. Besides myself, his proposed edits have been rejected by Zara1709 (talk · contribs) and Kathryn NicDhàna (talk · contribs). Not a single user has expresssed support for Liftarn's approach, and he fails to present anything resembling a rationale for it, short of a thinly veiled intention to abuse Misplaced Pages as a lobbying platform. Nothing resembling a constructive debate has been possible. Further reverts should lead to blocks of escalating length under WP:3RR. dab (𒁳) 14:18, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

So now you're a mind reader too. You supported it earlier, but then you do seem to change your mind a lot. I also notice you have trouble with the difference between consensus and gang rule. // Liftarn

WP:NPOV effectively prevents "gang-rule". Present evidence for Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL (zero hits all around (except for WP mirrors). "did you mean persecution of Amateurs?") and you will get to create your article. As long as you are trying to discuss the question of fringe religions in US prisons under that title, you have no case. dab (𒁳) 14:33, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Misplaced Pages is not for promoting terms or concepts. This topic seems to be exhausted by discussing Cutter v. Wilkinson which is (a) not about Asatru in particular, and (b) amply discussed both here and in its own article. No WP:ATT, no article. dab (𒁳) 14:38, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Nice strawman. I have listed several sources for that Cutter v. Wilkinson also covered religious discrimination against Asatruers. I also listed some simmilar cases as well as the issue with veteran's headstones.// Liftarn

every time I point out that you fail to make a case you reply "nice strawman". Very mature I must say. of course Cutter v. Wilkinson also concerns Asatru. It concerns every minority religion known to man. Are you suggesting we reproduce discussion of Cutter v. Wilkinson in 200 new articles on individual faiths affected by it? That's nonsense, and you know it is. I am not against linking to the case from Asatru, nor am I against linking to Asatru from Cutter v. Wilkinson. What is your problem? dab (𒁳) 14:58, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

That is because you make a straman attack instead of dealing with the actual subject. The number of religions directly involved in the Cutter v. Wilkinson case is quite low (was it Satanism, a Christian sect and Asatru?) so it's clearly not "every minority religion known to man". My problem is that I created a valid article about the religious discrimination of modern time Asatruers and it was removed without any prior discussion. // Liftarn

But clearly the result does apply to any minority religion. Zara1709 18:31, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Actually it applies to every religion. But Asatru was one of the religions mentioned specificly in the source. // Liftarn

and even according to your logic, you'd have to rehash the same material at religious discrimination of the Church of Jesus Christ–Christian and religious discrimination of Satanism, which would be patent nonsense. There is no reason whatsoever to not address the matter with a brief note on the Asatru, Church of Jesus Christ–Christian and Satanism articles. dab (𒁳) 18:36, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

I wouldn't have any problem with that. Altough the stuff about Church of Jesus Christ–Christian would probably go better into the Persecution of Christians article. // Liftarn

Is there anyone reasonable who wants to discuss this for Liftarn? dab (𒁳) 07:50, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Step forward

Dab, please refrain from personal attacks. It may be better for you to review that linked article. On this discussion page you have three personal attacks against Lift; stop it. This is a warning that if you persist you may be blocked.

The title is very broad, which is acceptable on wikipedia; however, the content of the article needs to support the title. I would suggest that the body be expanded. Here are afew ideas:

Are there any other Neopagans that suffer discrimination? Did I misunderstand the article (I only read it briefly) that the Neopagan in prison sued along with members of other religions and one was Christian? How is it discrimination against Neopagans if Christians are also involved? It would seem like the more probable reason would be prisons are a confined, restricted location where a lot of rights are denied.
It would help to define whether this is institutional discrimination or private/personal examples in society.
It may also help to not discuss things by region or location, but by type of discrimination throughout the world.
The article has a reference for how few Neopagans there are in the areas; it might be helpful to incorporate that information in the article. Minorities are easily the target of discrimination; extremem minorities are simply overlooked. Is there any information that the discrimiation is conscious or is it out of ignorance?

As far as the split goes; Lift, Asartu is a pagan religion. It would seem appropriate to mention it here where the topic is discrimination and not the peculiarities of specific pagan religions.

Focus on article content and much less on each other. This should not be such a difficult thing to accomplish here once you put ego aside. I hope these comments help you both to contribute positively to this article. --Storm Rider 19:26, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

I agree Asatru is in the pagan group of religions, but I object to that it was merged into this article with no prior discussion. I would prefer a separate article like it was earlier. In one of the prison cases (another was entierly about Asatru) it was a group lawsuit. // Liftarn

hardly, Storm Rider. You seem to be "warning" me against calling a troll a troll, or a spade a spade. That sort of PC nonsense got us into this mess in the first place. Ego has nothing to do with it. I am happy to debate anything, with anyone at all, as soon as an actual debate is presented. No WP:RS has been presented. Liftarn is trying to coin a concept here, and I am obviously trying to pervent that since it is against Misplaced Pages policy.

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

dab (𒁳) 07:48, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

This is not an issue between Dbachmann and Liftarn, this is an issue of Liftarn alone. Previous to this there was a similar non-discussion about Persecution of Germanic Pagans. -Zara1709 08:06, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Categories: