Talk:List of dignitaries of mystical organisations
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
GUIDELINES FOR LISTING A PERSON IN List of dignitaries of mystical organisations:
The person must be a dignitary of a mystical organisation.
DEFINITIONS:
PERSON: a real physical person.
If the person in question is or believed to be fictious, or if he/she is not a physical person, note it after his/her name. It would be better to avoid listing fictious or non-physical dignitaries. for example, I could list Ascended Master Kuthumi as the secret chief of the Esoteric Rosicrucian Order, but this is not something that should be included in an encyclopedia. So list only real physical persons. Be careful with ancient historical figures, the information about them may not be so correct (Francis Bacon, Christian Rozenkreutz, King Solomon, Jesus Christ, etc).
DIGNITARY: Imperators, Grand Masters, Teachers etc. A dignitary is a person which has some special authority in a spiritual organisation.
DO NOT list mere organisation members or students. A member or student has no authority. We are interested in authority, not in membership or affiliation. We list only the chiefs and the people with authority.
MYSTICAL: See Mysticism.
ORGANISATION: Organisation is a highly organised group of physical persons, and this group must be known to the general public with a name. An example is AMORC. We dont care about small New Age groups (so dont list your local newage or meditation teacher here!). We dont care about very small or unknown groups.
Optim 22:14, 19 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Post your comments here:
The "real person" rule presumably leaves out the Secret Chiefs of the Golden Dawn.I note the Waite and Yeats articles say that each of them headed the Golden Dawn,apparently briefly.Should the Ordo Templi Orientis be traced from Reuss onwards,the Crowley line to the man who,real enough,contrives to be known only by his pseudonym Frater Hymaenus Beta? L.E./12.144.5.2/le@put.com
Contents |
[edit] Move
Unless someone moved it to [List of dignitaries of mystical organizations] in the first place, this should not be moved to [List of dignitaries of mystical organisations] since this subject is not limited to commonwealth countries, see Wikipedia:Manual_of_style#Usage_and_spelling_style. --Jiang 00:08, 16 Jan 2004 (UTC)
[edit] Freemasonry does not belong here....
First of all, we have List of Freemasons. Second of all, Freemasonry is not occult or magical in nature. Therefore, I am removing it, and it can be placed where it belongs whe it is verified. MSJapan 05:27, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
-
- I agree, Good riddance. Mahabone 10:38, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Mahabone's POV, & the consequence
"Mahabone stated & did: (Removed Roman Catholic Church... it is organized religion, not a mystical organization)"
Thus I'm removing & keeping away the "Rosicrucian Organisations" section, under the same logic. Grye 02:58, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
- Yaknow, no I'm not. This article, good or bad, shouldn't suffer because of Mahabone's POV... Grye 03:01, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] spelling
Can someone PLEASE change the spelling? It is OrganiZations not OrganiSations. It looks icky. I went through and changed the spelling all through the article.. but I cannot change the title.
Thanks.
S. LAShTAL
You're just not familiar with British English. That being said, however, this is not a Commonwealth-restricted article, so I will repoint the page. MSJapan 22:20, 28 May 2006 (UTC) Never mind. The majority contribution was in British English, so I'm actually going to rv your changes as per WP:MOS. MSJapan 22:24, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Cleanup
I moved some minor things around to get some sort of standard structure. however, I'm not sure if Martinists belong under Rosicrucians or not. Furthermore, I removed RCC, as there are no other major recognized religious groups on here, and I'm sure there's a list of Popes already. Rosicrucianism should stay, because it's either a religion or not depending on who you talk to, and I'd rather err on the side of keeping than getting rid of one of the major mystical traditions. All that being said, is the article really all that useful? MSJapan 22:44, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
