This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Neopaganism Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Neopaganism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Neopaganism on Wikipedia. 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 articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Religion Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia'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 articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Skepticism Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory and skepticism related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SkepticismWikipedia:WikiProject SkepticismTemplate:WikiProject SkepticismSkepticism articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Christianity Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Folklore Low‑importance This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Folklore, a WikiProject dedicated to improving Wikipedia's coverage of the topics of folklore and folklore studies. If you would like to participate, you may edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project's page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to discussion.FolkloreWikipedia:WikiProject FolkloreTemplate:WikiProject FolkloreFolklore articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Women's History Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Occult Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Occult, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to the occult on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OccultWikipedia:WikiProject OccultTemplate:WikiProject OccultOccult articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

I believe that one of the "quotes" citing Magliocco's article "Who was Aradia?" (n.117) should be clarified since she does NOT use the blanket statement that "pagan themes are a minority amongst those accused of witchcraft" (I am paraphrasing. What she does say is that accounts of women accused of witchcraft who following in the train of Diana, etc. "constituted only a small minority." The use of "pagan themes" implies that any paganism within the trials/ confession were a minority in addition to the Wild Hunt of Diana. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WitchTokDILF ( talk • contribs) 00:18, 17 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Simply saying it’s entirely discredited isn’t enough, even if you provide sources later on that discredit it. You can’t make blanket statement about a theory without a source that demonstrates that it’s universally discredited. One could say that it’s “widely discredited” and list the numerous sources from academics and that would be accurate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:6010:1100:6026:7CB1:BB64:83A6:22E1 ( talk) 17:09, 14 June 2022 (UTC) reply

Yes we can. See WP:LEDE: the lead summarizes the article. Details and sources are supposed to be further down. -- Hob Gadling ( talk) 15:41, 15 June 2022 (UTC) reply

I understand that. I don’t mean putting a source in the lead. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:6010:1100:6026:960:AB9C:1711:7054 ( talk) 21:21, 15 June 2022 (UTC) reply

The bias in this article is still not remedied, and there seems to be some kind of motivation to frame the content unjustly by the frequent moderators of the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:6010:11F0:3C0:0:0:0:1071 ( talk) 14:58, 21 October 2022 (UTC) reply