René Guénon was a Philosophy and religion good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
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 articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory and skepticism related articles 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.SkepticismWikipedia:WikiProject SkepticismTemplate:WikiProject SkepticismSkepticism articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Islam, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Islam-related articles 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.IslamWikipedia:WikiProject IslamTemplate:WikiProject IslamIslam-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject France, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of France 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.FranceWikipedia:WikiProject FranceTemplate:WikiProject FranceFrance articles
A member of the Guild of Copy Editors, Miniapolis, reviewed a version of this article for copy editing on 24 April 2018. However, a major copy edit was inappropriate at that time because of the issues specified below, or the other tags now found on this article. Once these issues have been addressed, and any related tags have been cleared, please tag the article once again for {{copyedit}}. The Guild welcomes all editors with a good grasp of English. Visit our project page if you are interested in joining! Please address the following issues as well as any other cleanup tags before re-tagging this article with copyedit: Proposed merge
Anupamakk was confirmed to be a sockpuppet of site-banned editor TwoHorned, so the edit was reverted per WP:BANREVERT. Please be aware that this article is frequently targeted by a sockmaster who has been investigated at SPI and subsequently blocked: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/TwoHorned/Archive. His latest edits was also discuss in this talkpage and was removal for sourced texts and additions of unencyclopedic language. --Dekacarandaebonelm (talk) 11:42, 26 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Good. It is unfortunately likely that there are more sockpuppets in the wp universe than one would dare to suppose in first place. To get to the core subject and come back to the article, my opinion is that both versions, yours and those reverted have serious flaws. I propose to make a discussion here to support any modifications. In any case that's what I would do soon. Thank you. GraemeKad (talk) 21:51, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Thiagovscoelho, you have created “Esotericism” template [1] and posted it under the Infoboxes of several articles. Does any Wikipedian have the right to create any template and insert it in the articles of his/her choice? The list of characters and organizations you propose in your template are based solely on your own POV = original research. Moreover, someone has modified your list, but your template has been maintained in articles that are no longer on the list; this is something absolutely unmanageable, isn't it? And if you have a look at [2], you will read: "Templates should not be used to create lists of links to other articles when a category, list page, or "See also" section list can perform the same function". To take the example of Guénon > Categories: if you click on "Esotericists", you will find the same articles you mentioned + many more. I suggest you delete your template before someone else does, unless you have arguments that I have overlooked. Thank you. Manamaris (talk) 10:04, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This should probably have been asked at the template's talk page, or my talk page, not here. "Does any Wikipedian have the right to create any template and insert it in the articles of his/her choice?" Well, no special permission was required of my account to do this, and there was no Wikipedia rule against it, so yes. We're supposed to "be bold" and all that, right? Unless, of course, it falls under "original research" as you say, but this would seem to preclude every other series template from having been created, such as the "Chaos magic" template that is featured on some relevant pages, so I don't think so – specific citations are not typically required for putting a page under a category either, so it's not like categories are any more rigorous than series templates. If you think the template is inaccurate then you are free to edit it, like User:Bafuncius did – I had supposed that the reliable sources under each page will support its association with the template, but any mistakes I made may be corrected. The "Notable figures" section of the template may perform similar functions to the category "Esotericists", but the template as a whole seems to give more context than that. Thiagovscoelho (talk) 12:16, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I'm sorry: I know almost nothing about policy and guidelines relating to templates. I think that discussion should really initially made at Template_talk:Esotericism, though you may need to open a request for comment (RfC) to get any input on the question. Ultimately, there is Wikipedia:Templates for discussion which is about deleting or merging templates. Personally, I think that this is a useful template (especially for me, entries that are about Western and Eastern esoteric traditions; the "Golden Chain"). Sorry I can't be more helpful. Esowteric + Talk + Breadcrumbs14:48, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Thiagovscoelho, If I wrote to you on this page and not on the template's talk page, it is because I thought that those who follow Guénon's page would probably react to seeing occultists lumped in with Pythagoras, Hermes, Paracelsus, Böhme and Guénon, but it was not the case. I might continue this discussion on the template TP. --Manamaris (talk) 16:35, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I see. Yes, I've heard that Guénon strongly upheld a distinction between occultism and "true" esotericism, although I have not yet read about it in his own works just yet. In making the template I went for the broader usage that Wikipedia itself makes, following the similarly scattered usage in published reliable sources. I understand that this can be a difficulty for Guénonian researchers, but I would not have been able to do anything else on Wikipedia at the moment. The template was made chiefly because someone pointed out, rightly in my opinion, that the "Chaos magic" template did not fully capture the contexts of Egregore, and I thought an Esotericism template would help with that and also be of broader interest. Thiagovscoelho (talk) 18:43, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I know that things are a lot more nuanced, but in the Frithjof Schuon article, for example, "esoteric" and variations are mentioned around 17 times, so maybe the template should not be removed from that page. Traditionalist School (perennialism), too, also has half a dozen mentions. I should note that I've tended to lump all sorts of things together under the broad umbrella of "esotericism". Esowteric + Talk + Breadcrumbs19:59, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think it was removed because, as of when User:Bafuncius edited the template, it no longer listed Schuon as a notable figure or the Traditionalist School as a key concept, although they were part of it when I first wrote it. That's definitely one for the template talk page if you disagree with these removals. Thiagovscoelho (talk) 20:25, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Revolution Saga, you have added "Transliteration" templates in front of Arabic words which are phonetical transcriptions but not transliterations (except for ʿAbd al-Wāḥid Yaḥiā and taṣawwuf, which are transliterations). Rather than transliterating all the other Arabic words, would you delete the "Transliteration" templates? WP guidelines: [3], [4]. Side question: what is the use of this "Transliteration" template? Regards, Hamza Alaoui (talk) 15:52, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello User:Hamza Alaoui, I was unaware of the special guidelines for Arabic transcriptions and have been using template:transliteration for both transliteration and other romanizations (as it says in the template description). I was going off of MOS:FOREIGNITALIC which calls for marking of most foreign language text with the "lang" template rather than manually italicizing. Since "lang" displays romanized Arabic in the wrong font, I used "transliteration" instead. I will go back and revert my changes. Although, I am still not completely clear about whether to use "lang" and when to use "transliteration" for languages not written in Latin in general. Best, Revolution Saga (talk) 18:59, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Numwide, I think your idea is good. Could you write the text? (English is not my mother tounge). Perhaps the following paragraph could be rewritten in order to include your text: René Guénon first (why "first"?) adopted Islam in 1912, he insisted on recalling that the purely religious concept of an immediate conversion did not apply to his case, indicating he had previous acquaintance with the Islamic faith.[d] According to P. Chacornac, Guénon thought that Islam was one of the only real traditions accessible to Westerners, while retaining authentic possibilities in the initiative (initiatic?) domain. First sentence: I don't see the interest of pointing out whether the "conversion" was immediate or not. Best regards,--Hamza Alaoui (talk) 11:51, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
.png)
