Talk:Matrixism

Notes

I added Phil Johnson's blog Circle of Pneuma as a source for this article. Phil Johnson is the author of several books in this field including Jesus and the gods of the New Age Clifford & Johnson, Victor Books 2003 and Riding the Rollercoaster: How the Risen Christ Empowers Life Clifford & Johnson, Strand 1998. Therefore the blog Circle of Pneuma is considered a reliable and usable source according to Wikipedia policy WP:SPS 206.124.144.3 04:05, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Notability.

I think a reliable secondary source dealing with only Matrixism (instead of just listing it as an example of a weird new religion) would satisfy WP's notability requirements - which are exceptionally low. A blog post is not a reliable source. -- Jeandré, 2007-05-13t08:45z

The Joy of Sects is a reference book on cults and new religious movements. It has a full chapter devoted Matrixism and treats it equally alongside Kabbalah, Scientology and Freemasonry. Are you suggesting tha a whole book needs to be written about Matrixism before it is notable enough to warrant an article?

As for the blog according to Wikipedia policy WP:SPS a blog is a usable source as long as it is written by a published expert in the field and the subject of the Wikipedias article is not the original work of said author. Circle of Pneuma fits both of these requiremnts. 206.124.144.3 14:10, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would agree with Jeandre's opinion about a non-blog reliable source, with Matrixism as the subject, as satisfying the notability requirements. The current set of sources is decent.. If this remains notable, it will become clearer with time. No hurry for inclusion. See further comments and links to past discussion at Talk:Matrixism. ∴ here…♠ 18:24, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Responding to 206.* at User_talk:Here#Matrixism_Article: Not an entire book, even a chapter would work, any reliable source with Matrixism as the primary subject. Also, I expect you will find greater success if you choose to register an account, please do so to help faciliate this discussion. ∴ here…♠ 21:56, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the 'chapter' in the joy of sects. Looking at the table of contents, I see hinduism, buddhism, taoism, judaism, christianity, islam, the new age and beyond. I also notice that matrixism is not listed in the relatively comprehensive index on page 612, Matrilineal -> Matthew. I've also reviewed the blog in question, and the story is a minor story -- not enough in my opinion. Again, if this remains a notable phenomenon additional sources will continue to arise. There is no hurry for inclusion. ∴ here…♠ 22:09, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are looking at the table of contents for the wrong book. The table of contents you refer to is indeed from The Joy of Sects but it is the one authored by Peter Occhiogrosso. The Joy of Sects by Sam Jordison is the one used as a source for the article on Matrixism. It does in fact have a whole chapter devoted to Matrixism. 206.124.144.3 01:15, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies, thanks for the correction. Amazon uk has the contents available and shows 2 pages devoted to a chapter on Matrixism, which appears in the table of contents. [1] Based on this and the other sources, I'll support a shot at deletion review, but can't promise others will agree.. It appears you've created a long history of noise fighting for this article. However, before I put any work into the deletion review, I would appreciate your registering an account to facilitate discussion. If you are opposed, for some reason, to registering an account, please explain.. Thanks! ∴ here…♠ 17:18, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I currently feel this is worthy of another deletion review, but need to have everything sorted before re-initiating that process. I've added a few historical links below, please add any available wikipedia history on this topic I've missed. ∴ here…♠ 04:40, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This remains a borderline case, and the last deletion review was clear and recent. As I see no rush to return this to deletion review, I'll wait until a) 6 months / September; b) additional sources push this beyond borderline; or c) previously involved editors encourage returning to review. Nothing tragic will come of letting this lie a bit longer. User 206.* / Matrixism, I encourage you to create a new account and demonstrate constructive contributions elsewhere until that time. Thanks to Xoloz; please preserve this discussion if possible. ∴ here…♠ 17:42, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting new Religion but...

It's very similar to Psychonautisim, which is more interesting to me as a religion than this. Though this has some interesting starting points and views I am more interested in being a Psychonaut due to the fact that being a Psychonaut, with the addition of Psychedelics/Psychoactives being a "sacrament" it is more about finding the inner truth within you, and finding the secrets of your mind and Psyche, not just about seeing the truth of the world. Though seeing the truth of the world is still an important part of Psychonautisim. --NekoD 03:17, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's interesting that Psychonautism has an article that large without a single reference. Obviously Matrixism is being held to a different (perhaps overly critical) standard. By the way what does your comment have to do with this article? 206.124.144.3 07:51, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Someone left me a comment on my user page about maybe wanting to read this, I did and wanted to leave my thoughts on it and the similarities it has to Psychonautisim. I think Psychonautisim doesn't have any sources cuse there IS no published material about it, it is just more of an ideology that people have finally formed thoughts/words too but no physical material. Oh and the person who left me the message on my user page was this user Xoloz so this was the correct place to reply :\ --NekoD 07:58, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No offense but "psychonaut" is a terrible name for anything unless of course you want it to be the butt end of a joke. 206.188.56.88 02:32, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Historical

Historical and relevant links: Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2007_March#19_March_2007, Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/Matrixism, User_talk:Matrixism. Are there additional RfCs, etc? ∴ here…♠ 04:36, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

More are listed in a warning template on Talk:The Matrix, which has been copied to Talk:The Matrix (series). Philwelch 04:48, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge and Working Article

The content that was at User:Xoloz/Matrixism was deleted because it was merged with The Matrix (series). However the content on Matrixism was subsequently trimmed and altered such that it bears no resemblence to the article so many editors had been working on. Therefore a new working article on Matrixism has been started at User:TR166ER/Matrixism 206.188.56.24 18:16, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Most of the merge has been deleted. I think its preferable to have its own article now as other notable parody religions also have their own. Pass a Method talk 21:40, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Malware Link Removal

--Gary Dee 18:16, 21 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]