Talk:Heathenry (new religious movement)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Featured articleHeathenry (new religious movement) is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on August 18, 2017.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
December 6, 2015Good article nomineeListed
March 24, 2017Featured article candidateNot promoted
May 23, 2017Featured article candidatePromoted
Current status: Featured article

Thursatrú[edit]

The following papers regarding the Heathen current of Thursatrú might be useful for further developments of the article:

  • Mokrý, Matouš (2016). "Kontrakulturní tvorba Thursatrú: Black metal coby model tvorby náboženské identity v chaos-gnosticismu" [Counter-cultural formation of Thursatrú: Black metal as a model of identity formation in Chaos-gnosticism] (PDF). Sacra (in Czech). 14 (2). Masaryk University: 18–36. ISSN 1214-5351. Archived from the original (PDF) on 23 December 2020.
  • Svartberg, Maria (2020). Thursatrún i Thursakyngi: Den vänstra handens väg genom den fornnordiska mytologin [Thursatrú in Thursakyngi: The Left-Hand Path through the Old Norse mythology] (PDF) (Thesis) (in Swedish). Linnaeus University.

Æo (talk) 15:25, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Misleading secondary sources[edit]

I know wikipedia prefers secondary sources (in contrast, academics prefer primary sources), but errors must not be included in these articles. To Say Baldr dies is misleading. Not only does he continue to exist elsewhere in the Nine Worlds after he is killed here, he returns to lead the pantheon after Ragnarök.

Using the logic that Baldr is dead because he is killed, means we must change Christianity and say Jesus is dead because he was killed.

Perhaps a compromise: if rule-obsessed wiki editors want to remove the truth, perhaps we should leave the truth out, and also delete the error. 45.53.207.255 (talk) 02:05, 3 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]


Addendum:

Primary References used for the Baldr article:

 Calvin, Thomas. An Anthology of German Literature, D.C. Heath & Co. ASIN B0008BTK3E, ASIN B00089RS3K. pp. 5–6.
Bellows, Henry Adams (1923). The Poetic Edda. American-Scandinavian Foundation. pp. 14–15, 25, 195–200.
Crawford, Jackson. (2015). The Poetic Edda: Stories of the Norse Gods and Heroes. Hackett Publishing Company. p. 106.
"Gylfaginning, XXII". Archived from the original on 30 September 2007. Retrieved 23 September 2007.
"Gylfaginning [U]: 17–21". hi.is. Archived from the original on 19 June 2009. Retrieved 11 November 2007.
"Gylfaginning, XLIX". Archived from the original on 30 September 2007. Retrieved 23 September 2007.
 Anglo-Saxons Chronicle (Winchester Chronicle).  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 45.53.207.255 (talk) 02:44, 3 June 2023 (UTC)[reply] 

Primary Sources:

Note that the Poetic Edda is a kind of scripture for Norse Neopagans, and it SHOULD be used in this article.

The Christianity article uses Biblical (primary source) references:

Acts 2:24, 2:31–32, 3:15, 3:26, 4:10, 5:30, 10:40–41, 13:30, 13:34, 13:37, 17:30–31, Romans 10:9, 1 Cor. 15:15, 6:14, 2 Cor. 4:14, Gal 1:1, Eph 1:20, Col 2:12, 1 Thess. 11:10, Heb. 13:20, 1 Pet. 1:3, 1:21

Acts 1:9–11
Jn. 19:30–31 Mk. 16:1 16:6
1Cor 15:6
John 3:16, 5:24, 6:39–40, 6:47, 10:10, 11:25–26, and 17:3
Am I right in saying that the issue is with the statement "Many practitioners believe that these deities will one day die, as did, for instance, the god Baldr in Norse mythology."?
I see no problem in this given that the belief is that Baldr will die/ is dead. This isn't making any reference to his return. Given that we see references to his death with terms like "Old Norse: Dauði Baldrs ins góða" (Skáldskaparmál 49) and his funeral, I think we can safely say it is believed it is a death rather than him just going to another place. Given that Hel is a land of the dead, he isn't necessarily depicted overly differently to the other dwellers of Hel who seem alive but critically are not due to their location and lack of freedom to leave.--Ingwina (talk) 06:39, 3 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
So who leads the pantheon after Ragnarök? A corpse?
My problem with saying he is dead is that it implies extinction. A typical wiki reader with no background in religion will think Norse pagans are honoring extinct deities.
Christianity teaches that Jesus was killed, but he exists. In contrast, the Nation of Islam teaches that Jesus is DEAD, he does not exist, and he is not coming back. See The Nation of Islam by Steven Tsoukalas and Carl F Ellis Jr.
As for the Norse Hel, Baldr does eventually leave.
Wiki articles must NOT mislead. 45.53.207.255 (talk) 07:10, 3 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Dead does not imply non-existence. Baldr is described in Old Norse sources as dying. Like in the quote above, words cognate to dead are used throughout accounts of Baldr's death and the terms seem completely fitting. One can in concept have been dead and yet no longer be. I would be fairly confident in saying many Christians believe "Jesus died for our sins". Death and resurrection are central aspects to their beliefs. There is no misleading here. Ingwina (talk) 06:38, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The Ohio-based editor at IP 45.53.207.255, who is evidently also linked to the Bluebeetle account (given that they are both edit-warring to push the same changes in the article), is almost certainly Holtj, who kept popping up at Heathenry articles from the mid-2000s through to the mid-2010s (see the sockpuppet investigation archive on that user). They were banned then for disruptive editing, edit-warring, and persistent sockpuppetry, which appears to be what they are doing again. Best to ignore them. Midnightblueowl (talk) 16:21, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism at Simple English Wikipedia's "Asatru" article[edit]

The Simple Wikipedia article "Asatru" could use more eyes. I reverted some pretty juvenile but extensive vandalism that was there for days before I saw it and I happened on it by chance. :bloodofox: (talk) 02:20, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]


Too Generalized?[edit]

Should all these different beliefs be plopped together in one page? Many of these beliefs have vastly different core values. Gurluas (talk) 19:35, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Of course, there's a great deal of variation within Heathenry, but the same could be said of almost any sufficiently large religion. Think of the huge internal diversity within Christianity, for example. We wouldn't break up the Christianity article just because the Jesuits, Positive Christianity, and Mormonism all seem very different from one another. Midnightblueowl (talk) 11:00, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah but all of those beliefs share core values, such as the belief in Jesus or their God. This is the equivalent of making a monotheistic article and plopping Zoroastrianism, Christianity, Islam, and Judaism in the same article and removing their respective articles. Norse Paganism is entirely different from Greek Paganism, or Celtic Paganism. Gurluas (talk) 15:15, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This article doesn't discuss Greek or Celtic-oriented Paganisms, only Germanic-oriented ones. In contemporary contexts, Heathenry refers to Germanic-oriented modern Paganisms, and the article makes this quite clear. Midnightblueowl (talk) 11:13, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Gurluas Hence why there isn't significant Celtic or Hellenic information? Hellenism is only referenced as an example of a cognate term and the history between the two groups, Celtic Paganism is only mentioned in the 'See Also'? FarHarBard (talk) 14:05, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

External links[edit]

User:Skyerise has recently raised concerns that the external links section of this article is getting excessively long, and I think they have a point. At present we link to the Encyclopaedia Britannica article on Heathenry and then thirteen websites operated by different Heathen groups. Should we be removing some or all of those thirteen? If we decide to keep some but not others, what criteria should be used to determine what to keep? Midnightblueowl (talk) 10:08, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think any of the current external links pass the criteria of WP:ELYES or WP:ELMAYBE. Britannica article fails WP:ELNO#1, and the individual organizations fail WP:ELNO#19. A link to a directory of organizations would be a better solution than hosting the list here. Jähmefyysikko (talk) 10:16, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I also recommend removing all of them. :bloodofox: (talk) 10:17, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Jähmefyysikko (talk) 10:25, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Asatru-Eu Network[edit]

There is a section I would like to add to the page but not exactly sure how. It should definitely be at the modern developments section, but there where exactly, not sure (maybe after the text deals with czech communities).

"An important, transnational project also emerged in Europe under the name of Asatru-Eu Network in the 2000s. This loose alliance of more than a dozen local groups organises the International Ásatrú Summer Camp from time to time and aims to create stronger bond between the communities of the continent."

And the reference would be this website: https://www.asatru-summercamp.org/asatru-eu-network/

I thank for your help, would come in handy. Ingwar98 (talk) 22:17, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ingwar98: You cannot use the project's own website as a source. You must use third-party source such as reliable news sites, academic journals and books as sources. Most brand new small organizations won't have reliable sources for twenty or more years, if they survive that long. Unless there are third-party sources, the org doesn't meet our most basic notability requirements. Skyerise (talk) 22:24, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oh okay, I am sorry! THe reason why I resorted to it, as it was included in another wikipedia page with similar self-reference (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heathenry_in_the_United_Kingdom), and also because many of the asatru communities that have official wikipedia pages, also declare themselves as members of this alliance-organisation on their official websites. But then I try to find some third-party reference, if there is any at all. Ingwar98 (talk) 22:33, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Ingwar98: I've tagged that for review. An organization's website should really only be used as a source in an article about itself - if there are sufficient third-party sources to support that it is notable. Material shouldn't be inserted into another article unless based on third-party sources, so that section you mention seems to be promotional and should probably be reduced to a sentence or two that can be supported by third-party sources. Skyerise (talk) 20:29, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]