Talk:Odin Brotherhood

Untitled comments

This page needs work. Too much on prisoner Odinism!

But, nice that someone started it!

--Heathenguy (talk) 05:26, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Why has this been categorised under anarchist culture? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.4.49.46 (talk) 15:08, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Sorry. My earlier edits deleted the relevant anarchy material. New info now added.

--Heathenguy (talk) 01:21, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Please do not recreate deleted articles. Take it to WP:DRV. --dab (𒁳) 11:15, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

I am not certain if this is relevant, but the administrator who deleted the article was later expelled from wikipedia for misbehavior. Here was one of his names. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Heathenguy (talk • contribs) 23:08, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

I am not certain if this is relevant, but the administrator who deleted the article in 2006 was later expelled from wikipedia for misbehavior. Here was one of his names. --Heathenguy (talk) 23:44, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

He is still editing as User:Altenmann, Although, of course, he is no longer an admin. --Enric Naval (talk) 10:47, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Source with trivial reference to Mirabello's book

Jeffrey Kaplan. Radical Religion in America: Millenarian Movements from the Far Right to the Children of Noah. Syracuse University Press. 1997. ISBN 0-8156-0396-7

The only mention is in a footnote: page 196, footnote 26. "The fetch is an animal or human spirit or projection, which functions in the supernatural realm in servic to a single true man or woman throughtout his or her life. In the operation of seith magic, the fetch is a central feature of the magical working. For an interesting account of an Odinist group claiming unbroken succession from the pagan era Norse see Mirabello." In reference to Mirabello, Mark L. The Other Brotherhood. Edmonds, Wash.: Sure Fire. 1993.

--Enric Naval (talk) 10:18, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

I used Kaplan for a claim attributed to Mirabello. --Enric Naval (talk) 11:42, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

fixed some stuff

There were several duplicated references that make it look as if the group has more coverage that it actually has. I also found some problems with misrepresentation of sources. All the sources always attribute all the information back to Mirabello's book, just like in the old article. The old source that makes some independent research is Harvey's Paganism Today, who says that he couldn't verify Mirabello's claims. Consequently, we should be careful to attribute all claims to Mirabello. --Enric Naval (talk) 11:42, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Image

See WP:IMAGE RELEVANCE "Images must be relevant to the article that they appear in and be significantly and directly related to the article's topic.". This article is not about Odin, and it shouldn't have an image of Odin just for the purpose of making the page look prettier. Try to upload the logo of the group, if it has a logo. There is an image in the first page of Teachings of the Odin Brotherhood, but I don't know if it's relevant, or if it's just decorative. --Enric Naval (talk) 13:22, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Focus of article

I thought that maybe Melton had some support for the actual existence of the group. But it seems that it only talks about new groups that are modelled after Mirabello's book. Consequently, following the content in all non-Mirabello sources, the article should change the focus from:

The Odin Brotherhood is a group ....

to

The Odin Brotherhood is a book that posits the existence of a group....

--Enric Naval (talk) 17:10, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

You are incorrect, Mr Naval. Please read the Melton book itself! --Heathenguy (talk) 04:58, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

I have contacted an administrator about the wholesale changes to this page by a first-time editor. --Heathenguy (talk) 23:36, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

First time, or single purpose accounts does not make any difference, they are all people and can have a say. However unilateral changes can be reverted and then discussed. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:10, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Please don't encourage him. Another editor already tried to fix the problems in the article months ago[1], and Heathenguy reverted him without discussion. My edits have fixed many problems with misrepresentation of sources and omission of anything negative. His revert restored all those problems. All my edits had explanations of why I was doing the changes, and he still has to point out any actual problem in my edits. --Enric Naval (talk) 11:01, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Melton

It looks like "Odin Brotherhood" already appears in the 2003 edition of Melton's Encyclopedia of American Religions[2]. According to the index, it is in page 1984. --Enric Naval (talk) 14:48, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Very simply, you are incorrect. The Spanish google you are using refers to a different group.

You may find the book itself in any significant library. Please check the book! --Heathenguy (talk) 04:06, 4 September 2012 (UTC)--Heathenguy (talk) 04:06, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

I live in Spain, and Spanish universities only have up to the 2003 edition. And the 2009 edition costs $316 in Amazon..... I'll try in the public library, but I don't have much hope to find it.

Anyways, your text is borderline promotional and misrepresents what several sources actually say. I don't feel comfortable accepting your assertions about what Melton actually says. In my opinion, if Melton 2009 really supports the existence of the group, your best bet is scanning the relevant pages (861 and 862?) and sending them to me via email (go to my talk page and click on "email this user"). --Enric Naval (talk) 19:07, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

I hope you are not serious. You are citing books that you do not have and you have not read? And you want me to scan them for you?

Well, if you cooperate and help write a good article, I will. Otherwise, I will not send things to you.--Heathenguy (talk) 00:34, 6 September 2012 (UTC) --Heathenguy (talk) 00:36, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

So, you could send me a copy of the source. But only if I write text you approve of? No, thank you.

Anyways, I got to see the 7th edition of Melton's Encyclopedia (December 2002). Its completely based off this old Geocities page, which is also the only cited source. It doesn't look like Melton performed any research of his own to verify the claims made in that webpage. If you look at Mirabello's official page at that time, this page was linked simply as "The Odin Brotherhood". In Mirabello's official page about the book at that time it was listed at "Another site about THE ODIN BROTHERHOOD designed and maintained by Tiffany Vincent." Oh, and the contact email already in 1999 was odinbrotherhood@hotmail, and it was still the official contact email for the group in 2005 and in 2006 and in 2010, when it was replaced by an @aol email http://odinbrotherhood.freeforums.org/odinbrotherhood-hotmail-com-t1483.html. Looks like Melton was talking about Mirabello's Odin Brotherhood and not about other group.

So, again, I can't trust your assertions about what Melton 2009 says, because it's not the first time that you misrepresent what sources say. I don't doubt that you do it in good faith. I'm just saying that you are so driven by making the group look good that you are missing what the sources actually say. --Enric Naval (talk) 12:34, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

If any mention was made of the Odin Brotherhood in the seventh edition, I stand corrected. I know Dr. Melton's research team contacted the Brotherhood for the eighth edition, however. A British documentary maker also contacted the Brotherhood about the same time, but the film was made without Brotherhood material. I think the British man wanted to do a film on Odinism as a hate group, and the Odin Brotherhood is not.

You may not realize this, but public forums and e-mails are only the visible part of the iceberg. Members have clandestine techniques for communicating.

I am assuming that Graham Harvey got the same sort of initial contact that Mirabello did. But, whereas Mirabello pursued the lead, Harvey just brushed it off.

Some people can live over oil wells and never become rich.--Heathenguy (talk) 19:19, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Clarifying Errors

1) This article is on the Odin Brotherhood. If Mr Naval wishes to discuss a book, he may do so by creating a new page. Always, however, he needs to use a neutral point of view.

2) Dr J. Gordon Melton's book, Melton's Encyclopedia of American Religions, is the definitive work on the subject. The book includes only groups that exist. The Odin Brotherhood is listed in the eighth edition. (Mr. Naval is wrong when he states the group appears in earlier editions.)

3) The Melton book is NOT a reference work on NEW religions. It is a book on religions. He discusses the Presbyterians, and they emerged in the 16th century.

4) The delete discussion was SIX years ago and referred to a different article. An attempt to delete this article was declined.

--Heathenguy (talk) 04:01, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

8 April 2012 Graeme Bartlett (talk | contribs) (speedy delete declined, completely different to material deleted 6 years ago, this has much better references)Italic text--Heathenguy (talk) 05:02, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

I am noticing in recent days the article has been changed to be about the book rather than the society. If this article turns out to be about the book then it could easily be deleted again, as that was what the original AFD and subsequent speedy delete applied to. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:51, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

The article shouldn't be about a group founded in 1421. There are serious doubts that the group exists beyond Mirabello's book. These doubts were already raised at the AFD. One of the sources, Harvey 1996, found that no other Odinist group had ever heard of this group, including one of the contacts in one of its letters. And he adds "most doubt of its existence".

The book might have inspired new groups who have called themselves "Odin Brotherhood", but I am not sure they are notable. --Enric Naval (talk) 12:02, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Mr. Bartlett, could you move the page back to the group discussed in the Encyclopedia of American Religions? I think they are turning this into a book article so they can take it down. --Heathenguy (talk) 00:38, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Compromise

Material added on the books. I do not think the books deserve a separate article, so the material has been merged here.--Heathenguy (talk) 06:02, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Odinism in US prisons

May I ask why there is no discussion in this article of the practice of Odinism in the US prisons? Gtwfan52 (talk) 06:12, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

That information would belong to the article Odinism. Currently, that article doesn't exist and it's only a section in [[Germanic_neopaganism#Odinism.

I have seen some sources discussing Odinism and paganism in prisons, but they don't mention "The Odin Brotherhood". --Enric Naval (talk) 18:25, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Odinism and Asatru (the terms are synonyms) are widespread in prisons. If I remember correctly, about 5% of the prison population in Utah belongs.

Odin Brotherhood materials widely circulate in prisons, often under the name Brotherhood of Odin. Because self-initiation is possible, it is impossible to stop.

Note that the FBI national library has two copies of the Odin Brotherhood book. (Of course, the FBI does not study something that does not exist.)

Odin Brotherhood at World Cat --Heathenguy (talk) 21:07, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

On prison, check out Gods of the Blood --Heathenguy (talk) 21:16, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Heathenguy, can you read? This article is about the specific "Odin Brotherhood" documented by Mirabello. It isn't about "Odinism in prison" or about other random Odinists described as "Brotherhoods". If you want to discuss Odinism, do it at Odinism. Also,

"the FBI national library has two copies of the Odin Brotherhood book. (Of course, the FBI does not study something that does not exist)"

Nobody disputed the book exists. The FBI can study the book as much as it wants. Please tell me you are just trying to be playful and funny (a.k.a. "trolling") and you aren't actually saying this stuff in "good faith". --dab (𒁳) 10:28, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Dab, I am not being playful. To clarify, do you think the FBI would study something that does NOT exist? They are not clueless, Dab.--Heathenguy (talk) 07:31, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

article status

This book is doubtful not due to its claims of the "existence of an Odinist secret society". Doh, such societies exist by the dozen, and they are 99% unnotable even if they weren't secret. The salient point is the claim that The Odin Brotherhood preserves genuine traditions of pre-Christian paganism in Britain. This is of course blatant nonsense, and the question, as with Gardner, is just if Mirabello is fooling his readers, or if he was fooled by the Odinists he interviewed, or if these Odinists are genuinely fooling themselves. Three possibilities. --dab (𒁳) 10:25, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

New book by "Jack Wolf from Canada"

There seems to be some confusion as to the author of the new Odin Brotherhood book. I can assure those who it appears to concern that it is not Dr. Mirabello. As far as I know Dr. Mirabello, a historian, found the Odin Brotherhood of interest, wrote a book about them and has since moved on to other things. I too have written a book about the Odin Brotherhood for it seems that there are members of that society spread all over the place - and they contacted me as well. I am not a member of the Odin Brotherhood though I am indeed a Heathen...that is about as close as I come to said secret society. Otherwise I have nothing to do with them. My book was an interesting exercise. Now that it is completed and awaiting publication I too will move on to other areas to write about.

Those who continue to speculate and otherwise try to undermine Dr. Mirabello (and others no doubt), appear to have no lives in the real world. I would advise them to try finding a life. Leodan2013 (talk) 00:22, 11 September 2012 (UTC)Leodan2013 (talk) 00:29, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Dbachmann, although you are clearly intelligent, I think you are letting prejudice rule here. Even if you have to admit that the Odin Brotherhood exists NOW (even if you cannot accept that it has existed for centuries, which it has), yet you keep posting Dr. Harvey's 17-year-old assertion (written after he received letters from the group), that the OB does not exist.

Check the web. Half a dozen OB web sites. A new book coming out by Jack Wolf on the OB. The Mirabello book has remained in print for 20 years and has been pirated at least 30,000 times. (Check out scribd). The OB forum has (Sept 2012) 21,818 posts, 2879 topics, and 1013 members.

--Heathenguy (talk) 00:24, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

So, who is, in your own words, "Jack Wolf from Canada", and why is his book so important?

About the author. Does he have "a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy", as commented in the reliable source guideline? Does he have credentials for researching religious groups? Is it just a group member that decided to write a book?

About independence from the subject it's writing about. Is he a neutral third-party independent from the group who has decided to investigate it? Or has he been closely related to the group for a long time? In the group website there a page called "From a sage" signed by "Mike Wolf from Canada"[3] and that person says he has been a friend of the group for a long time. The contact for odinbrotherhood.net is "Mike Wolf". And he lists the same contact email as "mark l. mirabello" in the official website of a book written by Mirabello.

About the publisher. It has books about parapsychology, tarot, "magick", etc. Publisher of "ocultist" books Not a scholar publisher, not "a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy". --Enric Naval (talk) 10:36, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Heathenguy, I am indeed "prejudiced" in favour of WP:NOTE. If you cannot establish that this topic has any kind of relevance in the terms of Wikipedia's definition of relevance, what are you even trying to do here? Mere "existence" is completely irrelevant. Many things exist and do not have, nor should have, a dedicated Wikipedia article. There is a bottle with soft drink right in front of me here. It clearly exists. Would you argue that I should write a Wikipedia article about this bottle? Seriously, it is right here, I can send you a photo to prove it is real. Ever since the emergence of Neodruidism in the 18th century, nay, since the invention of Rosicrucianism in the 17th, there have always been any number of secret societies with fancy names and claims to ancient traditions. This isn't interesting. If there is any positive evidence that would make any particular such group worthy of note, by all means cite it. "Odin Brotherhood" is just a name. I can form an "Odin Brotherhood" and claim ancient heritage with my mates at the pub. My "Odin Brotherhood" will then exist as a secret society in the real world, and I can write you emails in which I talk as a representative of "the Odin Brotherhood". That's very nice, but it has nothing to do with what Wikipedia is trying to do. --dab (𒁳) 06:51, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Dbachmann, perhaps your reference to the Rosicrucian story and Neodruidism clarifies the problem. You are so focused on history that you are overlooking the fact of existence.

There are many people who believe that Jesus never existed. But, the existence of Christianity is a fact.

Obviously, you agree that the Brotherhood does not go back to the 15th century (I disagree with you), but, even if you reject its past as "fabulous," the groups exists now. --Heathenguy (talk) 01:27, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

This article is about agroup and not a book

Dbachmann, please edit the article responsibly. Changing it entirely so that it can be deleted is unworthy behavior. This article is NOT about a book. If you want to write about a book, please start a new article.--Heathenguy (talk) 07:28, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Religious Hatred has no Place Here

DBachmann, I have to ask. Have you done much reading on Odinism and Asatru? The Odin brotherhood is one of the best-known groups in that tradition. Should all the articles on all the odinist groups be removed? Of course, that would be ridiculous.

You are clearly showing prejudice and hatred here against a religious group, so please desist. --Heathenguy (talk) 07:44, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

You would be surprised.

The "best known groups in that tradition" are Ásatrúarfélagið, McNallen's AFA and its offspring, and arguably Odinic Rite.

"The Odin Brotherhood" is a book published in 1992, much like Gardner's Witchcraft Today was published in 1954. "odinbrotherhood.com" is also a website which claims to represent an "Odin Brotherhood". If this is true, this group is certainly not "best known". It isn't "best known" because by their own admission they are a "secret society", so not a single member can be named. The Website went online in 2004. I presume this is just one of many "Odin Brotherhoods" that were formed in the twelve year after Mirabello's book was published.

Why a secret society would need a promotional website is anyone's guess. If I was in a secret society (I am not saying I am, I am not saying I am not, just for argument's sake), I would emphatically not maintain a website about it.

I am obviously not saying that "the group does not exist". I also do not say that "Wicca does not exist", but it did not previous to Gardner's book. We do not know how many "Odin Brotherhoods" exist today, and even the members of these groups do not know about the other groups of the same name that may or may not exist, precisely because these groups are secret. This is Wikipedia. We require WP:V. Even if 200 groups with this name existed, with heads-of-state and Nobel-prize winners as members, we could not claim as much before the fact is published elsewhere first. This is very simple, and I am sure you can understand it if you try.

Stating the facts has nothing to do with "hatred". Asking neopagan contributors to respect policy and edit honorably and honestly has is not, in fact, an "anti-Odinist" position, it is an attempt to make Odinists look better. Because, let's face it, judging from their activity on Wikipedia, they do not make the best of impressions. I believe they can be better than this, and I encourage them to try.

--dab (𒁳) 15:47, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Dab.

First, the idea that witchcraft dates from Gardner's book is one of those myths, perpetuated by Dr. Hutton and other over-specialized scholars. If DR. Hutton would read about Sicilian witchcraft, he would find ample evidence of Sicilian Strega ln the 19th century and elsewhere. Indeed, American scholars were studying witchcraft as practiced in the Ozarks BEFORE Gardner's book.

As for the Brotherhood, check out the new book on the subject by Jack Wolf. Your mid will be broadened!--Heathenguy (talk) 02:35, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Did I say that "witchcraft dates from Gardner's book"? I was talking about Wicca.

This book is of course relevant to this article, I agree. It is a follow-up publication to Mirabello's book, with the same publisher, and a preface by Mirabello.

You know what would broaden your mind? The Reallexikon der Germanischen Altertumskunde. Once they carry an "Odin Brotherhood" lemma, I will obviously be prepared to consider the claim of "preserving genuine traditions of pre-Christian paganism" is more than fantasy/fiction.

Have you heard about WP:RS? This is an example where you could practice its application. The RGA or a comparable scholarly reference, published with an academic publisher, will be a good basis for this article. Books by New Age / occultist independent publisher Mandrake of Oxford are not, they are WP:PRIMARY sources. Primary sources may be used, but they may not be used to establish notability, or to evaluate factual claims. --dab (𒁳) 12:45, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Also, according to Mirabello himself,

Since publishing my little work on the Odin Brotherhood—in 1992—my contacts with the arcane have increased in number. I have been contacted by an alleged time traveler, I have been visited by a woman claiming to be from Odin, I have received cryptic verses (postmarked from Frankfurt, Germany) supposedly written by Odin himself, I have been offered membership in a French suicide cult, I have been asked to help with an exorcism of an adolescent deaf girl, and I have been visited by a traumatized woman who claimed to be a refugee from a subterranean world where humans are “bred like cattle and hunted like rabbits.” The list is extensive.

This does not "broaden my mind". It is exactly what I would have expected, as this list corresponds precisely to the genre in which I would have placed Mirabello to begin with. --dab (𒁳) 13:01, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

By Odin, Dag. You do not fight fair. You gut articles and THEN question their quality!

Mogg Morgan, the publisher of Mandrake of Oxford, is Oxford-educated and his press put out this peered reviewed Journal:

Journal for the Acdenic Study of Magic--Heathenguy (talk) 03:40, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

As for Mirabello, is this NEW Age?

Handbook for rebels and Outlaws --Heathenguy (talk) 03:43, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

look, I am losing interest here, because you do not seem to manage to make any coherent case for your actions.

you are really pushing ignoratio elenchi now, this is not about the education of Mogg Morgan, nor is it about other work Mirabello may have done. It is about The Odin Brotherhood. No amount of hand-waving will help you side-step the glaring fact that there is no known group called "The Odin Brotherhood" other than in Mirabello's claim. So we have a clear absense of any kind of independent third-party references to "the group". The only thing which we have third-party confirmation for is the book, so this is going to be an article about a book (as suggested by the The in the title, which we only do for articles about publications: the article would need to be called Odin Brotherhood if we wanted to imply there is any group with such a name).

Now please stop wasting my time with this. If you cannot accept that this is the situation, no amount of goodwill on my part is going to help you, you will simply find yourself out of the bounds provided by the policy and guideline of the Wikipedia project. --dab (𒁳) 16:55, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

To the contrary, you are the one who is closed to growth.

Simple question: How could Jack Wolf, a second author, write new book on the subject if it does not exist? Who are the thousand plus people posting on the Brotherhood Forum? Why did Dr. Gordon Melton include the Brotherhood in his definitive academic reference work? You seem to be some nice chap in Switzerland, but do you have the credentials to pontificate on this issue?--Heathenguy (talk) 19:15, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

I am getting really tired of all this whitewashing and POV-pushing. There is no evidence of the group's existence beyond Mirabello's book. Anyone with links to the group can make up a story and get it published. The Internet group was created after the publication of the book. We have no proof or source saying that the group existed before publication. Harvey was being misrepresented (again) to weaken the evidence that the group didn't really exist. I have reverted back to a neutral version that doesn't misrepresent sources. Stop misusing wikipedia to make promotion of the ideas of this group, or I'll ask that you are blocked for promotional edits, misrepresentation of sources, non-neutral editing, and edit warring. --Enric Naval (talk) 09:24, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Mr Naval, please stop vandalizing the article. Again, for the fiftieth time, if reputable scholars, such as Dr. Gordon Melton, study the group, it exists. --Heathenguy (talk) 06:10, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

This is not vandalization. This is removing misrepresentation of sources, fluff and promotional tone.

You were mistaken about the 7th edition of Melton's book, and now, in your user talk page, you refusing to facilitate a scan of the relevant page of the 8th edition. I can no longer trust your word about what the 8th edition says, not after the problems we already had. --Enric Naval (talk) 14:53, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Mr. Naval, I cannot understand why you expect me to act as a lending library. If you are unwilling to buy the book in question, why not go to a library? A good library will have the latest Melton work in the reference section.

--Heathenguy (talk) 05:53, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Mr Naval, you may find the nearest location of a library stocking Dr. Melton's eighth edition by using WorldCat,

http://www.worldcat.org/

I know you think I can simply scan it and send it, but I own THOUSANDS of books, but I do not have a scanner. Sorry about that, friend. --Heathenguy (talk) 05:59, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

I already searched for this book. I live in Spain. Spanish universities and libraries only have the 7th edition, which I already bought from Amazon. The 8th edition costs $300 in Amazon. That's too expensive just to check one page, and I already caught you misrepresenting the content of the 7th edition. --Enric Naval (talk) 10:53, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

You claim that Melton studied the group, but the 7th edition only had a copy/paste of the group's website, as I commented in Talk:The_Odin_Brotherhood#Melton. You still haven't given me any reason to believe that the 8th edition doesn't have similar problems. --Enric Naval (talk) 11:22, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

PLEASE READ THE BOOKS YOU ARE ATTACKING

On the writing style of the dialog in Mirabello's book, Mirabello says this in his Introduction:

"The dialogue that resulted is a mosaic made from the fragments of numerous discussions that occurred over several years, and it is not the actual record of one conversation with one individual. Moreover, since most of my sources did not speak English as a first language, the quest for clarity has forced me to use my own words to express their ideas. In all instances, however, I was careful to preserve the fundamental integrity of the message."

--Heathenguy (talk) 06:13, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

So....

Looks like there are three main problems in the editing:

1. the focus of article: book or group?
2. information taken from primary sources: part of the initiation rites, polytheism
3. the interpretation of some sources

I suppose I can accept 1 and 2. But point 3 is a show-stopper for me. Harvey doesn't say that the letters were "enigmatic", and his position is being weakened all the time. And stuff like "Professor Michael discusses the Odin Brotherhood in the context of "hate" groups, but this is an error" is just editorializing. Coghlan shouldn't be removed because of the personal interpretation of an editor.

I suppose I can accept Heathenguys version, with the focus on the group, as long the misrepresentations of sources are removed. --Enric Naval (talk) 18:45, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Mr. Naval, thank you for being quite reasonable--indeed, generous. When the edit block stops, I restore the above version with the understanding that you will then add some critical material.

In the past, I have been uncomfortable with some of the criticisms because I know the back stories. I know Professor Harvey personally, for example, although that is neither here nor there as far as wikipedia is concerned.

By the way, in the book Paganism Today, by Dr. Harvey and Dr. Charlotte Hardman, this is what Dr. Harvey writes on page 61. I think you are using googlebooks so you are missing the entire quote:

"A book called The Odin Brotherhood has been circulating which claims to be a record of contacts (in Britain and elsewhere) between Dr. Mark Mirabello and a secret society called the Odin Brotherhood. Whilst I have received enigmatic letters claiming to be from members of the group I have been unable to check the veracity of Mirabello's claims. No other group that I have talked to (including one that was named in a "Brotherhood" letter as a contact) has any more knowledge of the group beyond reading the book. Most doubt its existence."

In his entire career, that is Dr. Harvey's only published statement on the Brotherhood. I have given the entire quotation without editing.

I do see that he wrote those words in 1995, and not 1993, as i have said elsewhere. My mistake! --Heathenguy (talk) 21:30, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

This is the entire entry in Melton's Encyclopedia of American Religions on the group:

Odin Brotherhood

The Odin Brotherhood is a secret society which follows a polytheistic religion devoted to Odin, Thor, Sif, and the other deities of the Norse tradition. According to the brotherhood, Odinism is an ancient religion that acknowledges the gods by fostering thought, courage, honor, light, and beauty. It traces its existence to the fifteenth century, but now, having survived in the face of Christian attempts to annihilate it, it is making itself known. The brotherhood has no buildings (temples or churches) but attempts to honor the gods everywhere, as long as outsiders are excluded; all words are "whispered," and all "abominations" (promiscuity and assassination) are avoided. From the beginning, the Odin Brotherhood has included women in its membership. The central rite of the brotherhood is called the "Glimpse-Of-Extraordinary-Beauty," during which the celebrants believe they are "enveloped and penetrated by the thoughts of a god." Members do not have faith so much as they are taught to seek knowledge. The brotherhood does, however, believe in life after death and that there are three "Other-Worlds," one of which is called Valhalla or the White-Kingdom. It is reserved for those heroes who die violent deaths. The existence of the Christian hell is denied.

The brotherhood glorifies strength, asserting that "it is only by becoming stronger that a man can realize his divinity." Initiates to the brotherhood must cut themselves three times with a dagger and "devote, hallow, and sanctify" their blood to "the gods who live."

The brotherhood has distanced itself from the racism that has infected Norse beliefs in the twentieth century and eschews the idea that there are either chosen peoples or master races.

Membership: Estimated at 1,000 individuals or more. Members are found mainly in the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, Argentina, Chile, Brazil, Spain, Italy, Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium, Russia, Scandinavia, Mexico, and other places.

--Heathenguy (talk) 21:47, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Photo on the Page

The photo on the page refers to edition 4, not the first edition, which now seems quite rare and is almost impossible to find.

The first hardcover editions seems especially rare!Odin Brotherhood (hardcover)

--Bovino (talk) 01:32, 19 April 2017 (UTC)