Here we go again (wikipedia)

[yossarian]

Yossarian, can you edit the spammed "HA HA" out of your posts please? I know you are frustrated but they are super hard to read when half the page is taken up by spam.


It does seem that The Law of One material fits the reliability definitions for books "The book has been considered by reliable sources to have made a significant contribution to a significant motion picture, or other art form, or event or political or religious movement."http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:N...ty_(books):


Reliability is in the context of the matter discussed. Many of the sources cited seem to be reliable sources with regards to claiming that LOO had a significant contribution to channeling/new age spirituality (IE Gnosis Magazine article, a magazine that was published over a decade specializing in western esotericism - I think that's a reliable source of information concerning contributions to modern spirituality).

If you disagree, who or what would you claim to be a reliable source concerning contributions to the channeling, new age, or otherwise modern spirituality movement? Are there any reliable sources of information for determining what books have affected the modern spiritual movement?

xise, you are right of course. But I beg you not to waste your life on it. My hundreds of hours of work have just been deleted by the combination of a psychotic teenager and a lazy ideological admin.

There is absolutely NO doubt that the article met the criteria for inclusion. There is no doubt at all. But THIS GUY found a way to get it deleted anyway through a combination of luck, vandalism, and the fact that wikipedia admins hate New Age books.

This discussion is no longer about the wikipedia article (it has been deleted)--all that is left to us is comedy.

SO LAUGH. HAHGAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA