Talk:Lon Milo DuQuette

This article was nominated for deletion on 2007-01-28. The result of the discussion was no consensus.

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
	This article is supported by WikiProject Musicians.

Thelema (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Thelema, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.ThelemaWikipedia:WikiProject ThelemaTemplate:WikiProject ThelemaThelema

Can't talk?

So can we take that we cant talk about DuQuette? The libel notice is a bit over the top. My 2 cents worth about DuQuette is, that he is someone who hasnt developed Thelema in any new way. All he has done is taken Crowley's material and republished it with some lazy writing of his own. Has an occultist he has a very poor reputation amongst Thelemites and occultists since he has stifiled development in the Caliphate OTO in the US and has failed to provide fresh and new insight into Thelema. I welcome any debate on these points. ( Bongo666)

On the positive side "his" books have helped bring people to Thelema who wouldnt have been intelligent enough to understand Crowley's writing by itself. Duquettes books act has a primer for the more complicated stuff. Discuss.

I disagree that the Duquette "books" have helped people come to Thelema. Most of his work has essentially ripped off Crowleys work and hasnt added anything to the writing.

This is the wrong forum for debating personal opinion. The "talk" pages are for discussing improvements to the article. Thanks for understanding. Jkelly 22:05, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Its not a forum. It says discussion. And i am discussing Duquette's legitimacy on the occult scene. Most have Duquettes material has been second hand from other sources (Mainly Crowley) Anyone could write the simplistic books Duquette has released if they had copyright access to the Crowley archive!! So i am looking to someone to debate these points! (Bongo666)

It's not about the criticism of his books unless the criticism can be found elsewhere to substantiate said critical reviews' existence, if I understand the procedures and allowable material for Wikipedia. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.5.173.22 (talk) 05:07, 25 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Why this and not that

So why was Gerald del Campo's page deleted and this one is allowed to stay? I wouldn't have enything to do with the number of editors who are also members of OTO, would it? Or the fact that Gerald del Campo quit the OTO because it could not ethically continue to support the organization, and Lon is still a member in good standing? I thought Wikipedia was supposed to be fair and unbiased? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Solis93 (talk • contribs) 04:52, 21 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Well... I am the creator of Lon's page and "surprisingly" am not an OTO member. Wikipedia is not a place for debating "your" biases. Lon is a writer and any writer has a place in any encyclopedia. --Sepand 18:49, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gerald del Campo is a writer as well. Oddly enough, his page has been deleted.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 216.239.167.161 (talk) 20:54, 1 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Still Nominated for deletion?!

If Wikipedia's policy is to delete an article only because the corresponding debate has resulted in a "no consensus" situation, I think we should change the policy itself. --Sepand 19:20, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ordo Templi Orientis

I've noted that in several revisions of this biography people have tried to use it to make a point about their particular view of O.T.O. I don't think this is an appropriate place for such a discussion - the entry on Ordo Templi Orientis is already fairly mature and those kind of discussions have already been dealt with there in significant detail. Let's keep this article about Lon DuQuette. --Rodneyorpheus (talk) 22:37, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Start class

I've expanded and reformatted this article, and just upgraded it to Start class, which I think is reasonable now. --Rodneyorpheus (talk) 09:25, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Added the category American SubGenii due to Lon's ordainment in the Church of the SubGenius on 10/9/2010 in Astoria, NY

Lon is now an Ordained Minister of the Church of the SubGenius, having paid the prerequisite $30 ordainment fee during his appearence at the SubGenius NYC Devival in Astoria, NY. Here is photographic evidence: http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc4/hs256.snc4/40138_10150096185014989_524589988_7262776_6230490_n.jpg —Preceding unsigned comment added by Twobeans (talk • contribs) 18:47, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't the fella a musician too?

some just know his music. White album, Black album, and soon to be released studio album. Should this be added? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.92.200.250 (talk) 17:50, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Church of the SubGenius Membership?

Recently. User:Pburka removed the following pages from Category:American SubGenii.

Lon Milo DuQuette [1](Mentioned here)

Penn Jillette [2] (Mentioned here and here and here)

Rudy Rucker [3] (Mentioned here, here, here and here)

Nancy A. Collins [4] (Mentioned here, here and here)

John Shirley [5] (Mentioned here and here)

Bruce Campbell [6] (Mentioned here and here)

Del Close [7] (Mentioned here)

Paul Reubens AKA Pee Wee Herman [8] (Mentioned here and here)

These removals were perfectly reasonable, because the articles do not mention membership in the COSG, nor are most of the links I list above reliable sources. Because of this, I am putting out a call for citations to reliable sources that establish Church of the SubGenius membership for these and other celebrities. I suspect that a fair count will put the number considerably higher than the number of celebrity Scientologists. --Guy Macon (talk) 00:49, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The two parts of WP:BLPCAT that seem most relevant are "the case for each category must be made clear by the article text and its reliable sources" -- meaning we need to add something about Church of the SubGenius Membership in the text and we need a citation supporting it, and "Categories regarding religious beliefs ... should not be used unless the subject has publicly self-identified with the belief" -- meaning that we need a citation where Lon Milo DuQuette himself says he is a member or strong supporter. As I said before, I think that Pburka removing the category was entirely correct; I just want to improve the article in such a way that the category can be re-added. So, does anyone know of such a citation? --Guy Macon (talk) 04:34, 1 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Lon Milo DuQuette. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:07, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Missing info

Lon's about part had a huge list of accomplishments and such that are hidden or deleted. It looked base now it's boring. Idk 102.132.40.145 (talk) 19:39, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That material was either unsourced or sourced to the subject. Sorry, but we don't promulgate a writer's self-promotion. Anything you can cite to third-party sources, by all means add to the article. Skyerise (talk) 19:54, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]