Talk:Power animal

Suggested Merger: Core Shamanism

I beg the pardon of any interested parties for what may come off as cynicism, but for what reason does "Power animal" deserve its own article? This article has one sole source, that being Michael Harner's "The Way of the Shaman," and for all intents and purposes I would argue that the claims made in this article are the opinions of one man and one man only - Michael Harner. Certainly fine enough, as the fellow is a popular New Age author, but I suggest to the Wikipedia community that this article be merged with the pre-existing "Core Shamanism" article.

My suggestion is based on the following: 1.) The term "power animal" as defined by the current article lacks substantial value devoid of its appropriate context. Namely, the philosophy of Core Shamanism as synthesized by Michael Harner. Thus, it is best served by appearing in the latter article. 2.) "Power animal," as a colloquial expression (e.g. in reference to athleticism, personality typology, aesthetic stylings), may have nothing to do with Michael Harner's anthropological theories, or even spirituality in the abstract. Refer to first point. 3.) I posit that the phrases "shamanistic worldview" mentioned in the article are weasel words for "Harner's worldview," as no specific animistic religions are actually referenced, and this is a vague and sweeping statement founded on the work of Michael Harner, rather than any demonstrated survey of Eurasian or American religious practices.

I fully disclose my own personal bias against the scholarship and of Michael Harner, but I believe that the above suggestions and critiques are fair to this article and respectful of his work and influence. I would greatly appreciate other opinions on my proposed article merger. If faced with no dissenting suggestions within a reasonable period of time, I will proceed to merge the article myself and copy this talk page into the one for "Core Shamanism." Thank you. A.Aboumrad (talk) 05:38, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Other approach to improvement

Thanks to Carptrash for pointing out that "Power animal" article gets a lot more traffic than "Core Shamanism." Alternative approach to resolve the issues mentioned above would be to drastically improve the current article by adding more sources, diversifying viewpoints, strengthening the Harner-specific context, and reworking/removing blanket statements about "shamanic worldviews." As is, there are comprehensive articles on "Totem," "Totemism" (including mention of individualized totems), "Spirit Guide," "Familiar Spirits," just to name the most pertinent. Not sure if perhaps that sufficiently covers the general topic in the context of more specific traditions? It might be silly to repeat information on those articles into the current one simply because Harner has his own term for it. A.Aboumrad (talk) 21:16, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Right now it looks like the only non-Harner material in this is original research and synthesis. Core shamanism has now been merged into Neoshamanism. I'm not sure where to go with this article, either. If we take out all the O.R., it's really a stub. And since the phrase can only be sourced to Harner, but is now also used by those who sincerely believe they are not doing anything based on Harner's work (even if they are), I think it might be best to cut the O.R. and put the rest in as a section in Neoshamanism? Perhaps as a subsection under Core Shamanism? - CorbieV^☊ 20:03, 30 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have just made a short expansion in the Core Shamanism subsection of the Neoshamanism article to define "power animals" as 'animal tutelary spirits.' Does this adequately define the term such that the separate Power Animal article can be deleted? If so, we need to keep in mind that the Totem article contains a link to this Power Animal article, which can also be reasonably re-linked to the tutelary spirits article. A.Aboumrad (talk) 14:48, 25 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This article has become a bit of a mess, due largely to un-sourced additions by anonymous editors... The mention of the term "Power Animal" in the movie "Fight Club" is notable, though, but perhaps this can also be moved to the tutelary spirits article? Otherwise, we're back to Harner being the only source of this article's content, which is redundant and contradictory. I'd like to make a plea for all unregistered editors and interested parties to please create a username and join the discussion here regarding merger into the Neoshamanism article. A.Aboumrad (talk) 22:07, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]