| This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
The Satanic Temple 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:
Index,
1,
2,
3Auto-archiving period: 90 days
 |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Big controversy with chapters splitting [1] "several of TST’s chapter heads have resigned in protest over Greaves’ decision to engage the pro bono services of Marc Randazza, a free speech lawyer who has both defended and publicly supported alt-right clients like Alex Jones.)" and [2] and other sources discuss this. The article must also, see the "civil war" section. Doug Weller talk 09:43, 13 September 2019 (UTC)
- I guess the bit about the Portland group could be worth including. Obviously we aren't going to pretend that the Religion News article, which calls Satanic Temple a "joke", "troll", and "menace", is a reliable source on this subject. @
YuriNikolai: could you weigh in on what you'd like to see in the article to make it more balanced?
-- Fyrael (
talk) 04:12, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
- Insiders seem to call what happened in 2018 as a "big schism", as several groups split from TST, and IMO that's worth including. If we can't find good news articles covering the split, I'd propose including the primary statements made by the groups as they split, especially the larger Portland one. With that being said, though
this Medium post is not a RS, it does link to several sites that might be.
This one especially seems appropriate to me, even after considering
WP:RS/P's notes on Jezebel's uncertain reliability. With attribution, I'd propose this as the first appropriate source.
YuriNikolai (
talk) 23:04, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
- Hey, I would like to make an edit to justify the removal of the neutrality depute notice. It looks like this discussion is centered over TST's splintering. We could address this in the "History" section, under a subtitle of "Religious Schisms". In it, I could add some quotes from parties involved (if located) or RS news, discuss the development of TST splinter organizations (such as the Global Order of Satan, United Aspects of Satan, Coven of Satan, etc.). I think the academic monograph by Joeseph P. Laycock has some info over these schisms, so I may be able to find an academic review with a quote (I'll look into it).
DasRobo (
talk) 16:43, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
- The section over schisms and derivative groups has been created. I intend to remove the NPOV notice once the section is complete, after having satisfied Weller's original complaint
DasRobo (
talk) 01:43, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
- @
DasRobo: did you fix the problem? The NPOV tag is still on the article, probably safe to remove it if there aren't issues anyone is actively concerned with anymore.
Endwise (
talk) 14:53, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
- I haven't yet put in anything related to the Randazza controversy that @ Doug Weller mentioned, which led to TST-Los Angeles leaving. So far, I've only gotten to the separation of the chapters located in the UK, but that had a different motivation. Will work on it soon DasRobo ( talk) 15:21, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
- @
DasRobo: did you fix the problem? The NPOV tag is still on the article, probably safe to remove it if there aren't issues anyone is actively concerned with anymore.
Endwise (
talk) 14:53, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
- The section over schisms and derivative groups has been created. I intend to remove the NPOV notice once the section is complete, after having satisfied Weller's original complaint
DasRobo (
talk) 01:43, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
- Hey, I would like to make an edit to justify the removal of the neutrality depute notice. It looks like this discussion is centered over TST's splintering. We could address this in the "History" section, under a subtitle of "Religious Schisms". In it, I could add some quotes from parties involved (if located) or RS news, discuss the development of TST splinter organizations (such as the Global Order of Satan, United Aspects of Satan, Coven of Satan, etc.). I think the academic monograph by Joeseph P. Laycock has some info over these schisms, so I may be able to find an academic review with a quote (I'll look into it).
DasRobo (
talk) 16:43, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
- Insiders seem to call what happened in 2018 as a "big schism", as several groups split from TST, and IMO that's worth including. If we can't find good news articles covering the split, I'd propose including the primary statements made by the groups as they split, especially the larger Portland one. With that being said, though
this Medium post is not a RS, it does link to several sites that might be.
This one especially seems appropriate to me, even after considering
WP:RS/P's notes on Jezebel's uncertain reliability. With attribution, I'd propose this as the first appropriate source.
YuriNikolai (
talk) 23:04, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
Joseph Laycock's Speak of the Devil: How The Satanic Temple is Changing the Way We Talk about Religion, published in 2020, has been described as the first book about the Satanic Temple. But the existence of another book, published as an ebook in 2019, called Anatomy of a Crypto-Fascist Sect: The Unauthorized Guide to “The Satanic Temple” by Daniel K. Buntovnik, makes the claim that Speak of the Devil is the first book-length publication focusing on the Satanic Temple inaccurate. Self-published sources are acceptable when the claim regards the source itself. Since the claim concerns merely the sequence of publication of books about the Satanic Temple, and not the contents of these books themselves, it is appropriate to cite Buntovnik's book in order to promote accuracy regarding the first book-length study of the Satanic Temple. -- User:Almahoda — Preceding undated comment added 17:09, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
- There is no accuracy problem. A "book" is not an "academic monograph" unless it is published by an academic press. The ebook is not, it's "published" on someone's personal blog. You are engaged in spamming. I will remove the disputed tag, as it is not appropriate. What is your relation to the author of this book?
Skyerise (
talk) 17:29, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
- I have no relationship to Daniel Buntovnik, Joseph Laycock or the Satanic Temple. I am merely interested in this topic and assuring accuracy.
Almahoda (
talk) 18:04, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
- Great. Then it's time to drop it. It's well established that Wikipedia policy requires us to completely ignore self-published books as irrelevant and a potential source of legal liability, and you are one revert away from being blocked for promoting this book. Skyerise ( talk) 18:07, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
- I have no relationship to Daniel Buntovnik, Joseph Laycock or the Satanic Temple. I am merely interested in this topic and assuring accuracy.
Almahoda (
talk) 18:04, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
- Also, sites with user-generated content, such as Goodreads, are not considered to be reliable sources. You don't get to promote self-published books on Wikipedia. And you can't get around that by submitting user reviews at sites such as Goodreads. Such reviews are meaningless. The same goes for LinkedIn. Academic books are reviewed by academic reviewers, not you and your friends on social media. Skyerise ( talk) 17:36, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
- To quote WP:BKTS: "A book should have, at a minimum, an ISBN (for books published after 1975 in a country where ISBNs are normally used), and should be catalogued by its country of origin's official or de facto national library (if that country has such a national library). For example, in the United States books are catalogued by the Library of Congress..." No ISBN - no inclusion. And that's just a minimum requirement. Skyerise ( talk) 17:42, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
@ DasRobo, Skyerise, Endwise, and Hiplibrarianship: there's been an arson attack this month. I've taken this page off my watchlist and don't have the time or energy to edit it. [3] It would be nice if someone did. I don't know if this old article is relevant. [4] Thanks. Doug Weller talk 13:23, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
- @
Doug Weller: Unfortunately I'm currently living in a dead zone and have to come into town to get Internet service. It's on my radar now, but other non-Wikipedia stuff is currently taking priority for the next few days at least given my limited access. Should have more time next week.
Skyerise (
talk) 16:50, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
- @ Skyeriseno problem, thanks for replying. Doug Weller talk 17:45, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
After School Satan Clubs and pagan statues have popped up across US. What's going on? Doug Weller talk 20:41, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
I revised some of the headings, including moving Schisms into a separate heading (not under Reception). But the "Campaigns and initiatives" section is a hodgepodge of 20 items, so far, and it could keep growing with more distinct items.
Instead, I propose that we reorganize that section into subcategories. We could aim for some standard categories in religious or political studies. Or perhaps the major categories listed in their mission, such as abortion rights, equal representation, school clubs, and working against (their perceived?) hate groups. Suggestions anyone? ProfGray ( talk) 21:40, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
- Here are possible subcategories and their items:
- Communal activities
- * Sober faction
- * Black mass
- * Pentagram ritual
- * LA Satanic mass
- * Satancon
- Public domain displays
- * Baphomet statue
- * Baphometic bowl
- * Proposed flag at Mass. capitol (SCOTUS case)
- * Holiday displays
- * Invocation challenges
- * Bladensburg peace cross
- Education system
- * Prayer in schools
- * Protect children
- * After school satan
- * [ contest
- Political issues activism [besides public display and education]
- * Pink mass
- * Muslim refugee
- * Abortion rights activism
- * Abortion medical services
- Criticism of Christianity
- * Junipero Sperra
- Categories are needed because there are (and will be) more campaigns and rituals to include here. These categories are imperfect, since some items can go under more than one category. ProfGray ( talk) 03:01, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
| This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
The Satanic Temple 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:
Index,
1,
2,
3Auto-archiving period: 90 days
|
|
| This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Big controversy with chapters splitting [1] "several of TST’s chapter heads have resigned in protest over Greaves’ decision to engage the pro bono services of Marc Randazza, a free speech lawyer who has both defended and publicly supported alt-right clients like Alex Jones.)" and [2] and other sources discuss this. The article must also, see the "civil war" section. Doug Weller talk 09:43, 13 September 2019 (UTC)
- I guess the bit about the Portland group could be worth including. Obviously we aren't going to pretend that the Religion News article, which calls Satanic Temple a "joke", "troll", and "menace", is a reliable source on this subject. @
YuriNikolai: could you weigh in on what you'd like to see in the article to make it more balanced?
-- Fyrael (
talk) 04:12, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
- Insiders seem to call what happened in 2018 as a "big schism", as several groups split from TST, and IMO that's worth including. If we can't find good news articles covering the split, I'd propose including the primary statements made by the groups as they split, especially the larger Portland one. With that being said, though
this Medium post is not a RS, it does link to several sites that might be.
This one especially seems appropriate to me, even after considering
WP:RS/P's notes on Jezebel's uncertain reliability. With attribution, I'd propose this as the first appropriate source.
YuriNikolai (
talk) 23:04, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
- Hey, I would like to make an edit to justify the removal of the neutrality depute notice. It looks like this discussion is centered over TST's splintering. We could address this in the "History" section, under a subtitle of "Religious Schisms". In it, I could add some quotes from parties involved (if located) or RS news, discuss the development of TST splinter organizations (such as the Global Order of Satan, United Aspects of Satan, Coven of Satan, etc.). I think the academic monograph by Joeseph P. Laycock has some info over these schisms, so I may be able to find an academic review with a quote (I'll look into it).
DasRobo (
talk) 16:43, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
- The section over schisms and derivative groups has been created. I intend to remove the NPOV notice once the section is complete, after having satisfied Weller's original complaint
DasRobo (
talk) 01:43, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
- @
DasRobo: did you fix the problem? The NPOV tag is still on the article, probably safe to remove it if there aren't issues anyone is actively concerned with anymore.
Endwise (
talk) 14:53, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
- I haven't yet put in anything related to the Randazza controversy that @ Doug Weller mentioned, which led to TST-Los Angeles leaving. So far, I've only gotten to the separation of the chapters located in the UK, but that had a different motivation. Will work on it soon DasRobo ( talk) 15:21, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
- @
DasRobo: did you fix the problem? The NPOV tag is still on the article, probably safe to remove it if there aren't issues anyone is actively concerned with anymore.
Endwise (
talk) 14:53, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
- The section over schisms and derivative groups has been created. I intend to remove the NPOV notice once the section is complete, after having satisfied Weller's original complaint
DasRobo (
talk) 01:43, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
- Hey, I would like to make an edit to justify the removal of the neutrality depute notice. It looks like this discussion is centered over TST's splintering. We could address this in the "History" section, under a subtitle of "Religious Schisms". In it, I could add some quotes from parties involved (if located) or RS news, discuss the development of TST splinter organizations (such as the Global Order of Satan, United Aspects of Satan, Coven of Satan, etc.). I think the academic monograph by Joeseph P. Laycock has some info over these schisms, so I may be able to find an academic review with a quote (I'll look into it).
DasRobo (
talk) 16:43, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
- Insiders seem to call what happened in 2018 as a "big schism", as several groups split from TST, and IMO that's worth including. If we can't find good news articles covering the split, I'd propose including the primary statements made by the groups as they split, especially the larger Portland one. With that being said, though
this Medium post is not a RS, it does link to several sites that might be.
This one especially seems appropriate to me, even after considering
WP:RS/P's notes on Jezebel's uncertain reliability. With attribution, I'd propose this as the first appropriate source.
YuriNikolai (
talk) 23:04, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
Joseph Laycock's Speak of the Devil: How The Satanic Temple is Changing the Way We Talk about Religion, published in 2020, has been described as the first book about the Satanic Temple. But the existence of another book, published as an ebook in 2019, called Anatomy of a Crypto-Fascist Sect: The Unauthorized Guide to “The Satanic Temple” by Daniel K. Buntovnik, makes the claim that Speak of the Devil is the first book-length publication focusing on the Satanic Temple inaccurate. Self-published sources are acceptable when the claim regards the source itself. Since the claim concerns merely the sequence of publication of books about the Satanic Temple, and not the contents of these books themselves, it is appropriate to cite Buntovnik's book in order to promote accuracy regarding the first book-length study of the Satanic Temple. -- User:Almahoda — Preceding undated comment added 17:09, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
- There is no accuracy problem. A "book" is not an "academic monograph" unless it is published by an academic press. The ebook is not, it's "published" on someone's personal blog. You are engaged in spamming. I will remove the disputed tag, as it is not appropriate. What is your relation to the author of this book?
Skyerise (
talk) 17:29, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
- I have no relationship to Daniel Buntovnik, Joseph Laycock or the Satanic Temple. I am merely interested in this topic and assuring accuracy.
Almahoda (
talk) 18:04, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
- Great. Then it's time to drop it. It's well established that Wikipedia policy requires us to completely ignore self-published books as irrelevant and a potential source of legal liability, and you are one revert away from being blocked for promoting this book. Skyerise ( talk) 18:07, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
- I have no relationship to Daniel Buntovnik, Joseph Laycock or the Satanic Temple. I am merely interested in this topic and assuring accuracy.
Almahoda (
talk) 18:04, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
- Also, sites with user-generated content, such as Goodreads, are not considered to be reliable sources. You don't get to promote self-published books on Wikipedia. And you can't get around that by submitting user reviews at sites such as Goodreads. Such reviews are meaningless. The same goes for LinkedIn. Academic books are reviewed by academic reviewers, not you and your friends on social media. Skyerise ( talk) 17:36, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
- To quote WP:BKTS: "A book should have, at a minimum, an ISBN (for books published after 1975 in a country where ISBNs are normally used), and should be catalogued by its country of origin's official or de facto national library (if that country has such a national library). For example, in the United States books are catalogued by the Library of Congress..." No ISBN - no inclusion. And that's just a minimum requirement. Skyerise ( talk) 17:42, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
@ DasRobo, Skyerise, Endwise, and Hiplibrarianship: there's been an arson attack this month. I've taken this page off my watchlist and don't have the time or energy to edit it. [3] It would be nice if someone did. I don't know if this old article is relevant. [4] Thanks. Doug Weller talk 13:23, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
- @
Doug Weller: Unfortunately I'm currently living in a dead zone and have to come into town to get Internet service. It's on my radar now, but other non-Wikipedia stuff is currently taking priority for the next few days at least given my limited access. Should have more time next week.
Skyerise (
talk) 16:50, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
- @ Skyeriseno problem, thanks for replying. Doug Weller talk 17:45, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
After School Satan Clubs and pagan statues have popped up across US. What's going on? Doug Weller talk 20:41, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
I revised some of the headings, including moving Schisms into a separate heading (not under Reception). But the "Campaigns and initiatives" section is a hodgepodge of 20 items, so far, and it could keep growing with more distinct items.
Instead, I propose that we reorganize that section into subcategories. We could aim for some standard categories in religious or political studies. Or perhaps the major categories listed in their mission, such as abortion rights, equal representation, school clubs, and working against (their perceived?) hate groups. Suggestions anyone? ProfGray ( talk) 21:40, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
- Here are possible subcategories and their items:
- Communal activities
- * Sober faction
- * Black mass
- * Pentagram ritual
- * LA Satanic mass
- * Satancon
- Public domain displays
- * Baphomet statue
- * Baphometic bowl
- * Proposed flag at Mass. capitol (SCOTUS case)
- * Holiday displays
- * Invocation challenges
- * Bladensburg peace cross
- Education system
- * Prayer in schools
- * Protect children
- * After school satan
- * [ contest
- Political issues activism [besides public display and education]
- * Pink mass
- * Muslim refugee
- * Abortion rights activism
- * Abortion medical services
- Criticism of Christianity
- * Junipero Sperra
- Categories are needed because there are (and will be) more campaigns and rituals to include here. These categories are imperfect, since some items can go under more than one category. ProfGray ( talk) 03:01, 1 April 2024 (UTC)