User talk:Erewhonian

Hello, Erewhonian, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to ask me on my talk page or place {{Help me}} on this page and someone will drop by to help. Red Director (talk) 01:19, 20 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

January 2020

Hello, I'm Robvanvee. I noticed that you recently removed content from Trip hop without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Rob van vee 06:53, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:56, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:42, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:57, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Idries Shah; John G. Bennett

Hi, just a note re. your edit to Idries Shah. Alan Tunbridge's A Noose of Light: Memories: 1940 – 2015 (CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform) is self-published, so it is not an acceptable reliable source, and I had to revert the edit. Thanks for your work, and sorry. Ditto John G. Bennett. Esowteric + Talk + Breadcrumbs 15:28, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No prob, you reminded me I first read of this in Stairway to Subud, published originally by Dharma Press (1965) and by Undiscovered Worlds Press - the expanded 2005 edition I just cited.

On the subject of self publishing, what is the status of Human Givens books? An extended para of quotes in the I Shah article is sourced to the owners of HG who publish their own books. Cheers Erewhonian (talk) 10:59, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, Alan Tunbridge is clearly a self-published author. Anthony Bright-Paul is not, though the cover gives the impression of a self-published book. Most of Tahir Shah's work is now clearly self-published, even though he's called his imprint "Secretum Mundi". So, it's pretty clear which of these would pass as reliable secondary sources independent of the subject (and giving significant mention of the subject).

People like Shah set up Octagon Press and later the Idries Shah Foundation (strictly speaking ISF Publishing) which is, in a way, self-publishing; and Human Givens have their own publishing company, Human Givens Publishing Ltd. These are a bit more questionable, and I'm not sure what the answer to that is. Maybe you could ask at the Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard, maybe additionally pointing them to that paragraph at Idries Shah, as your example? I'm not sure who added that: it could have been an editor innocently looking for material on the teaching stories, or it could have been someone wishing to promote Human Givens (perhaps with a conflict-of-interest (?)).

As well as that, we can't use Shah's books in articles about Shah (a primary not secondary source; certainly not independent of the subject), except sparingly to back-up basic and uncontroversial facts. Likewise Human Givens books in articles related to articles about their work. Something written about Shah in a Human Givens publication would be independent of the subject (though, of course, some of the people involved have in the past had a relationship with Shah (say)). Regards, Esowteric + Talk + Breadcrumbs 11:51, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I just noticed the two Notes in the IS article are sourced from a self-published book. Tractus Books only published Omar Ali-Shah, his student Augy Hayter (plus a few reprints of Ikbal A-S). Erewhonian (talk) 08:40, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Again, you may need to take this to (say) the Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard. Simply removing all this material may be unfortunately disruptive. Esowteric + Talk + Breadcrumbs 08:45, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'll look into that. I've no intention of removing anything before discussion. Erewhonian (talk) 08:48, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's also important to maintain a neutral point of view (see WP:NPOV). For example by not simply picking out the words about Shah applying extreme pression on JGB, if there are other factors involved and not mentioned in the article, indicating, say, that this gave JGB, and he felt that it gave him, freedom; or that Shah bought JGB somewhere to live. Esowteric + Talk + Breadcrumbs 12:06, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. However I thought it improved NPOV by including neglected contributory factors. Previously it appeared as if IS got the Doubleday contract on his own, and Bennett gave away Coombe Springs without pressure. Erewhonian (talk) 08:51, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. Esowteric + Talk + Breadcrumbs 08:53, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]