Talk:Neopaganism in the United Kingdom

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Neopaganism (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon 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.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Removal of link[edit]

I removed the link link to the Order of the Jarls of Baelder placed by dab as I don't believe this organisation is of nearly the same stature as the small list of others there. True, there is a website for the group but it has not been updated for over four years (the 'what's on' page refers to an update due in late 2003 [1]) I've never heard of the group myself (though that's not a reason for removing the link of course!) but a quick Google reveals few if any independent sources for what appears to be a tiny (one-man?) and eccentric group. I wouldn't want to set a precedent of every miniscule grouping needing a mention here. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk to me) 17:57, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

they are eccentric to be sure. Otoh, I don't see any danger of "list creep" just now, at a mere six entries. Anyway, Partridge (2005:230) names them as one of four "Orders" that all form part of an "Infernal Alliance". If I get around to researching this, we can link to the umbrella "Alliance" instead. I find it important to discuss both the fluffy and the fascist-satanic fringe just to make clear what a huge spectrum the term "neopagan" covers. I came across Cox' "Order" while researching Koenraad Logghe, the two being connected in this article. This is, admittedly, an article from an anti-fascist publication, the sort which are often prone to over-dramatisation.

dab (𒁳) 08:52, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Understood. My first (irrational) reaction was to want to speedy the Order of the Jarls of Baelder article but then I came to my senses: you'd sourced it convincingly and of course the group are worth knowing about. My worry with placing a link on this page was that it may appear to give them an equal weight to much larger and more significant organisations such as the Pagan Federation. I agree a list of six is not long. But it implies to me that the small number of organisations listed (from the large number of possible candidates) should be the most significant, largest or most notable organisations. Perhaps there is a place for a separate article on extreme and/or right wing and/or fascist/satanic groups? (With a link to that article from here, of course). Kim Dent-Brown (Talk to me) 09:12, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
I quite these are (sub-)lunatic fringe and should by no means be implied to be of equal notability with mainstream neopagan organisations. It's just, as you say, that they are worth knowing about. I agree that if we list them here, we should make a note regarding their relative notability. It would be a useful project to unite all these far-right fringe neopagan stub articles (Heathen Front etc.) into a single article discussing the phenomenon in context. Partridge uses the term fascist Satanism, so perhaps that would be a good title. dab (𒁳) 10:15, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
ok, I have merged this into a new Nazi satanism article. But it should be emphasized that here, black metal style "Satanism" merges with "Odinism" (Savitri Devi as "the priestess of Odin", heh). dab (𒁳) 11:14, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Battle of the Beanfield[edit]

What has the Battle of the Beanfield got to do with this article? No doubt some of those involved were Pagans, but others belonged to other faith groups or none. (talk) 09:39, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

A good point. And the only othr individual mentioned in this section is a Satanist. IMO neither New Age travellers nor Satanists are closely enough identified with neo-paganism for their inclusion here to be relevant. Hence I've been bold and removed the section on discrimination until it can be re-written specifically about neo-pagan topics. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 21:13, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

the only definition of a "neopagan" is somebody who in modern times self-identifies as "pagan". There is no way to verify if they are "really" pagan. Thus, of course New Age travellers aren't "identical" to neopagans, but the fact is that a large portion of neopaganism grows out of the New Age movement, and the two communities have significant overlap. There are similar ties between neopaganism and LaVeyan Satanism. I do think mention of the Battle of the Beanfield is relevant in this article, but I have no opinion on how to best phrase that reference. A mere "see also" link may suffice. dab (𒁳) 13:22, 20 March 2008 (UTC)