Misplaced Pages

• Comment. With respect, merging all those articles would cause ongoing problems. The fact that they each claim some connection to Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn does not make it true. They are not at all the same thing and there is no reference or source to support their inclusion in the same article. If they are merged it will become much more difficult to disambiguate them and would create fertile ground for continual edit warring about what should or should not be included. All of that aside, this AfD is about a non-notable organization that has only self-promotional references, so this article should be deleted and not merged anyway, whatever happens on those other AfD's. --Parsifal _Hello 00:24, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

• delete I don't believe this is a noteable organisation, plus it does read a bit spammy. Note that dozens of current occult orders claim to be descended from earlier orders- so be careful when googling as they may bear no direct relation to earlier orgs of the same name/those they claim association with. (off topic- I believe Kephera may, albeit perhaps indirectly, be clearing up wiki of non-noteable orgs. Any sources in the article seem to be fringe magazines. 30 separate google mentions or something, including wikipedia.Merkinsmum 21:16, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

• Request to Close AFD Nominator seems to be acting in bad faith when he says "I am answering a challenge made..." in the actual nom itself. This ties into Misplaced Pages:Articles_for_deletion/The_Open_Source_Order_of_the_Golden_Dawn. I don't want to assume bad faith, but the nom's own words clearly indicate he has a horse in this race, or clearly a point to be made, which is reason to close discussion. In short, the entire premise of this nom is tainted, and nominating articles because you were dared, challenged or otherwise IS bad faith. Pharmboy 21:24, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

• Delete - I don't see any reliable sources which back up the notability of this organization. It's clearly not a bad faith nomination; he was requested, by another user to nominate this page, and did so. I don't see any reason to oppose on such a basis. --Haemo 21:26, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
• Comment assume goodish faith, no matter what the nominators personal feelings this org may well be worth deleting. Their war is irrelevant to the sustance of the AfD (complete lack of noteability of this org). He was half-joking about the challenge thing. We don't have to play it straight all the time you know:) His comment was in response to one by User:IPSOS and there seems to be mutual aggrevation which he is also experiencing from User:IPSOS.Merkinsmum 21:33, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
  • I don't think he was joking, and the tone and links I provide confirm this. His being tagged as a sockpuppet for someone with continuous POINT issues aside, it is inappropriate to use this as a basis (real or otherwise) for a nom. I didn't vote yes/no on the article. Sometimes policy is more important that a single article. Pharmboy 21:43, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
    • Yes, please see the talk page where myself and several other users were attempting to politely discuss the issues, when suddenly Kephera975 starts flinging accusations of bias and threatens that he thinks none of these well-established articles would survive nomination for deletion. He did this is lieu of actually discussion concerns raised in a mature manner. IPSOS (talk) 21:56, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
• delete every reference to this article is golden-dawn.com - or strange trademark registrations. Where are the outside 3rd party references that makes this notable? --Kim D. Petersen 21:35, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

• Delete absent a showing of coverage in third-party sources that establish notability. Concerns of bad faith are perhaps a reflection of this situation being a bit of a furball, but it doesn't invalidate this nomination. It probably just means everybody needs to be cool, and realize that having axes to grind isn't helpful for Wikpiedia. Mister.Manticore 21:53, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. Flunks WP:N. At best, it merits a sentence in the main article. THF 23:11, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. Not notable. Self-promotional. The website linked in the article multiple times even contains a membership order form, you can join for $99.00 plus $50.00 per year, using PayPal, right here. --Parsifal _Hello 03:16, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
• Delete - notability not established. IPSOS (talk) 19:47, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
• Fnord - the mgt. ←Ben 06:32, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
• Delete - no reliable sources, notability not established, no coverage in any third party publication. GlassFET 15:51, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

User Ipsos Inaproptiately Attempting To Cover-Up Inapproptiate Manipulation of Misplaced Pages by HOGD, Inc.

I am not a sock puppet of Fiat Lux as can easily be verified by my IP address. User IPSOS has falsely accused me of this on my talk page as a lame excuse to revert this page in an inappropriate attempt to cover-up his personal involvement in HOGD, Inc's delibertate, inappropriate, and tortuous manipulation of Misplaced Pages, as well as to inappropriately interfere in any balanced discussion for deletion of the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn, Inc. as well as of the Rosicrucian Order of Alpha et Omega. I am posting below the material that IPSOS is trying to cover up. Would someone here please tell me how to report what IPSOS is doing here to Misplaced Pages administration?

HOGD, Inc. Manipulating Misplaced Pages for Unfair Business Advantage

I would like to point out that what is actually happening here is that Misplaced Pages is allowing itself to be dragged into a fifteen-year old legal dispute between two esoteric orders. One of the parties, the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn, Inc., is presently sending its members en masse here to Misplaced Pages to “edit” in a misguided attempt to use Misplaced Pages as an advertising medium for their order in an attempt to 1. gain an unfair business advantage, 2. misrepresent the status and results of litigation, 3. misrepresent the current status of the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn trademark, and to 4. falsely portray HOGD, Inc. as the successor of the historical, Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn, while depriving the other party of its legitimate and legal rights.

The following is true and correct information that elilminates the HOGD, Inc. biased POV:

The Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn, outer order of the Rosicrucian Order of the Alpha et Omega, is, through its Chief Adept, David John Griffin, the sole and exclusive owner of the “Hermetic Owner of the Golden Dawn” trademark, registration number 000063295, in the European Union (making it the registered owner of the “Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn” trademark in all 27 member-states of the European Union, and “The Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn International” trademark, registration no. TMA 510,385, in Canada. On November 20, 1996, David John Griffin and Patricia A. Behman, as general partners of the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn (H.O.G.D.), a general partnership, as owners of the “Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn” in the European Union, and Charles Cicero, as president of the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn, Inc. (H.O.G.D., Inc.), as owners of the same mark in the United States, entered into an Agreement to manage the “Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn” mark on a worldwide basis whilst preventing infringement of the mark by third parties. On May 8, 1998 Behman sold her partnership interest to Griffin, at which point Griffin became sole proprietor of the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn. Griffin, however, always differentiated his organization in trade and commerce, while primarily identifying it as the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn, as the outer order of the Rosicrucian Order of the Alpha et Omega so as to differentiate it from a plethora of identically or similarly named groups in the United States relying on no more than the published Regardie materials.

On January 28, 2005, H.O.G.D., Inc. attempted to repudiate the November 20, 1996 Agreement by filing suit against Griffin for trademark infringement in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. Griffin counter-sued for breach of contract. This litigation consisting of 169 documents filed in the public record, may be accessed by any interested party at https://ecf.cand.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/login.pl?609863100750398-L_835_0-1 through the Pacer system of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts.

On January 17, 2007, the parties reached a Settlement Agreement read into the public record by U.S. Magistrate-Judge Maria Elena James as FTR 3:44-4:07 of date 1-17-2007.The Settlement Agreement provides that: 1) H.O.G.D., Inc. recognizes Griffin as the sole and exclusive owner of the “Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn” trademark in the European Union; 2) H.O.G.D., Inc. recognizes Griffin as the sole and exclusive owner of “The Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn International” trademark in Canada; 3) Griffin recognizes H.O.G.D., Inc. as the sole and exclusive owner of the same mark in the United States; 4) the parties will not contest the ownership of each parties respective marks and mark: 5) H.O.G.D., Inc. will not contest the use, validity or ownership of the mark “Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn, Outer Order of the Rosicrucian Order of the Alpha et Omega” in the United States; 6) the January 17, 2007 Agreement supersedes the prior Agreement between the parties; 7) the parties covenanted not to interfere with the operations of each other; 8) the Agreement inures to the benefit of the successors and assigns of the parties. On February 12, 2007, the United States District Court for the Northern District of California dismissed with prejudice both H.O.G.D., Inc.’s claims and Griffin’s counter-claims while retaining in perpetuity to retain enforcement of the January 17, 2007 Agreement through motion filed by either of the parties. Over a period of several months, editor IPSOS, who has acknowledged that he is an associate of H.O.G.D., Inc.’s Charles Cicero, has repeatedly (nearly 30 times) vandalized the H.O.G.D./A.O. article from the first below quotation to the deliberate misrepresentation in the second quote below. “According to their web site, the Rosicrucian Order of A+O is the registered owner of the trademarks Rosicrucian Order of Alpha et Omega® and Ordo Rosae Rubeae et Aureae Crucis (R.R. et A.C.)®. The Alpha et Omega is also the registered owner of the trademark Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn® in the European Union and in Canada.. The Rosicrucian Order of A+O in 2007 settled litigation with The Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn, Inc. guaranteeing the Alpha et Omega's right to use the name of its outer order, the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn, in the United States without interference.” has been repeatedly vandalized to: "According to their web site, the Rosicrucian Order of A+O is the registered owner of the trademarks Rosicrucian Order of Alpha et Omega® and Ordo Rosae Rubeae et Aureae Crucis (R.R. et A.C.)®. The Alpha et Omega is also the registered owner of the trademark Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn® in the European Union and in Canada.. The Rosicrucian Order of A+O in 1996 contracted with The Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn, Inc. a mutual "right to usage" of the trademark Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn® worldwide while acknowledging each Order's "exclusive ownership" of their respective nationally registered trademarks. A copy of this contract was filed for recordation with the United States Patent and Trademark Office." The repeated vandalism by Cicero-associate IPSOS shows a remarkable familiarity with the above-referenced litigation by the parties. Whilst Cicero’s attorney maintained that the 1996 Agreement was a “right to use” agreement in which each party accorded to the other party a “right to use” its respective mark or marks, Griffin’s attorney never characterized the 1996 Agreement but maintained that each party acquired a vested property interest in the mark or marks of the other party by virtue of the specific language of the Agreement. The matter was never settled in that the parties settled on January 17, 2007, two weeks before they were scheduled to go to trial on January 28, 2007, and the January 17, 2007 Settlement Agreement superseded the November 20, 1996 agreement. When the knowingly inaccurate and misleading defacement of the H.O.G.D../A+O article by Cicero-associate IPSOS was repeatedly corrected, IPSOS subsequently enlisted the assistance of Misplaced Pages editorial staff in freezing the H.O.G.D./A+O article; and unlawfully depriving the H.O.G.D./A+O of its legal name and mark by arbitrarily renaming the article describing the order to “Rosicrucian Order of the Alpha et Omega.” It is therefore requested that the H.O.G.D./A.O. article be unfrozen and returned to its appropriate legal name of “Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn (Rosicrucian Order of the Alpha et Omega).” In order to avoid confusion both with the HOGD/A+O, as well as with the historical “Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn,” the H.O.G.D., Inc. article should be re-named “Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn, Inc.” or “Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn (Florida corporation).”--Rondus 06:23, 8 August 2007 (UTC)