This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Celtic neopaganism article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 180 days |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The following Wikipedia contributors may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include
conflict of interest,
autobiography, and
neutral point of view.
|
On 24 March 2023, it was proposed that this article be moved to Modern Celtic paganism. The result of the discussion was no consensus. |
Celtic reconstructionism was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 20 September 2023 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Celtic neopaganism. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here. |
Well, a substantial percentage of any Neopagan movement consists of people sitting in front of their computers cobbling together websites and blogs. They are trying to start a movement, and they end up creating the impression of a movement. These are mostly terms made up by people on the internet. This is not good enough for Wikipedia. Kindly provide quality references from academic literature which is reporting on the phenomenon. In an internet-heavy phenomenon such as this, you cannot just use google results as evidence of existence, let alone notability. The worst thing that can happen to Wikipedia (and which keeps happening, unfortunately, in Neopaganism topics) is that the same people who made up the terms in the first place come to write articles about them. Then they get angry and defensive when they are told about WP:RS. The whole topic is neck-deep in WP:COI. I am just saying, don't shoot the messenger. -- dab (𒁳) 09:23, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
Anon, this is apparently just a question of terminology now. You elect to use "Celtic Neopaganism" for what we have called "Celtic Reconstructionist Paganism". The article you want to edit is the "CR" one. If you can make a compelling case that "CR" is also known simply as "Celtic Neopaganism", we can add disambiguation. If you can even make a compelling case that "Celtic Neopaganism" is overwhelmingly used for what we have called "CR" (base your case on the principles in WP:UCN) then you can make a move request. Until you do that, just limit yourself to editing the existing article, which happens to be the one called "CR".
Also, your distinction of "real" vs. "non-real" is subjective. I happen to know a little bit about the shape of the "Celtic" pagans in continental Europe. Yes, it would be relevant to add information on them. But no, they aren't any more "real" than their American counterparts. And they also spend a lot of time arguing on the internet, this is an integral aspect of "Neopaganism" anywhere. Some of them reconstructed "Celtic villages", which is certainly cool, but which simply means there is overlap between "reconstructionist archaeology", "historical reenactment" and "reconstructionist paganism". In European paganism, it is often difficutl to tell if people are just into historical reenactment as a hobby, or if they are "serious" about embracing a historical religion. The thing is that you can be extremely serious about a hobby, and at some point, a hobby becomes indistinguishable from a religion (also, Jedi census phenomenon). In fact, many people are much more enthusiastic about their hobbies than their religion even if they are church-goers, so enthusiasm certainly isn't a reliable marker of whether a stated religious adherence is "real". -- dab (𒁳) 11:01, 25 July 2013 (UTC)
Here is what I could find in Europe,
So, there doesn't seem to be very much after all beyond the usual ad-hoc and "internet" paganism. The only "serious" (long-term, organised) item would be keltendorf.at. -- dab (𒁳) 09:28, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Celtic neopaganism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 20:10, 1 August 2017 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: no consensus. ( closed by non-admin page mover) ■ ∃ Madeline ⇔ ∃ Part of me ; 16:32, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
Celtic neopaganism → Modern Celtic paganism – Consistency with Modern paganism and title in lead section. Ingwina ( talk) 08:14, 24 March 2023 (UTC)— Relisting. >>> Extorc. talk 08:46, 31 March 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. ❯❯❯ Raydann (Talk) 06:50, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Celtic neopaganism article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 180 days |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The following Wikipedia contributors may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include
conflict of interest,
autobiography, and
neutral point of view.
|
On 24 March 2023, it was proposed that this article be moved to Modern Celtic paganism. The result of the discussion was no consensus. |
Celtic reconstructionism was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 20 September 2023 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Celtic neopaganism. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here. |
Well, a substantial percentage of any Neopagan movement consists of people sitting in front of their computers cobbling together websites and blogs. They are trying to start a movement, and they end up creating the impression of a movement. These are mostly terms made up by people on the internet. This is not good enough for Wikipedia. Kindly provide quality references from academic literature which is reporting on the phenomenon. In an internet-heavy phenomenon such as this, you cannot just use google results as evidence of existence, let alone notability. The worst thing that can happen to Wikipedia (and which keeps happening, unfortunately, in Neopaganism topics) is that the same people who made up the terms in the first place come to write articles about them. Then they get angry and defensive when they are told about WP:RS. The whole topic is neck-deep in WP:COI. I am just saying, don't shoot the messenger. -- dab (𒁳) 09:23, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
Anon, this is apparently just a question of terminology now. You elect to use "Celtic Neopaganism" for what we have called "Celtic Reconstructionist Paganism". The article you want to edit is the "CR" one. If you can make a compelling case that "CR" is also known simply as "Celtic Neopaganism", we can add disambiguation. If you can even make a compelling case that "Celtic Neopaganism" is overwhelmingly used for what we have called "CR" (base your case on the principles in WP:UCN) then you can make a move request. Until you do that, just limit yourself to editing the existing article, which happens to be the one called "CR".
Also, your distinction of "real" vs. "non-real" is subjective. I happen to know a little bit about the shape of the "Celtic" pagans in continental Europe. Yes, it would be relevant to add information on them. But no, they aren't any more "real" than their American counterparts. And they also spend a lot of time arguing on the internet, this is an integral aspect of "Neopaganism" anywhere. Some of them reconstructed "Celtic villages", which is certainly cool, but which simply means there is overlap between "reconstructionist archaeology", "historical reenactment" and "reconstructionist paganism". In European paganism, it is often difficutl to tell if people are just into historical reenactment as a hobby, or if they are "serious" about embracing a historical religion. The thing is that you can be extremely serious about a hobby, and at some point, a hobby becomes indistinguishable from a religion (also, Jedi census phenomenon). In fact, many people are much more enthusiastic about their hobbies than their religion even if they are church-goers, so enthusiasm certainly isn't a reliable marker of whether a stated religious adherence is "real". -- dab (𒁳) 11:01, 25 July 2013 (UTC)
Here is what I could find in Europe,
So, there doesn't seem to be very much after all beyond the usual ad-hoc and "internet" paganism. The only "serious" (long-term, organised) item would be keltendorf.at. -- dab (𒁳) 09:28, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Celtic neopaganism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 20:10, 1 August 2017 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: no consensus. ( closed by non-admin page mover) ■ ∃ Madeline ⇔ ∃ Part of me ; 16:32, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
Celtic neopaganism → Modern Celtic paganism – Consistency with Modern paganism and title in lead section. Ingwina ( talk) 08:14, 24 March 2023 (UTC)— Relisting. >>> Extorc. talk 08:46, 31 March 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. ❯❯❯ Raydann (Talk) 06:50, 7 April 2023 (UTC)