Talk:Shax (demon)
 | This article was nominated for deletion on 6 January 2010. The result of the discussion was redirect to List of demons in the Ars Goetia. |
 | The contents of the Shax (demon) page were merged into List of demons in the Ars Goetia on 24 January 2010 and it now redirects there. For the contribution history and old versions of the merged article please see its history. |
I have a copy of Crowley's Liber CCCLXV, The Preliminary Invocation of the Goetia. It is the revised 1904 translaton of Ars Goetia. I am wondering where exactly alot of this information is coming from. Some of it is good but some appears to be cruft? Is anyone working from the original Key of Solomon text? Refs would be appreciated --Weev 9 July 2005 14:18 (UTC)
A point should be made that Shax is also used as shorthand for Shakespeare —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.152.162.129 (talk) 20:16, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Deleted sections
[edit]I've deleted several very detailed descriptions of Shax's appearances in the show. I believe this is a form of original research. If you're considering adding it back in, I'd like to suggest taking at look at Wikipedia:WikiProject Television/How to write an episode article and Wikipedia:Television episodes. While not completely applicable to fictional characters, they are good starting points. I'd be happy to help and answer questions on this. Pigman 23:54, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Removal of charmed content
[edit]I was going to split out the content related to Charmed, but that article (Shax (Charmed)) had already been removed at a previous AfD, and I didn't want to recreate an already deleted article, so I added a summary blurb to the Goetic demons in popular culture that seems to cover the matter in the appropriate level of detail. Mintrick (talk) 02:25, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
- Sorry, but I think the Charmed section should stay, Shax is one of the major demons that needs more than a blurb. And as I say on your discussion page, you need more opinions before you make a huge change like this. Tavy08 (talk) 02:36, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
- That's debatable, and I disagree. In any case, that information doesn't belong here; it needs to be on either the pop culture page, or a separate article. Mintrick (talk) 02:50, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
- Also I should point out you are not deleting it all in the first place, and deleting some information that does not need deleted making for a very messy deletion.Tavy08 (talk) 02:41, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
- Please explain this further. Mintrick (talk) 02:50, 6 November 2008 (UTC)