Talk:Ordo Aurum Solis

Occult Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Occult, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to the occult on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OccultWikipedia:WikiProject OccultTemplate:WikiProject OccultOccult articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Secret Societies (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Secret Societies, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Secret SocietiesWikipedia:WikiProject Secret SocietiesTemplate:WikiProject Secret SocietiesSecret Societies articles

United Kingdom

	United Kingdom portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Untitled[edit]

I just wonder if the Roger Hunt who is linked to this article - the British football player -- is the correct Roger Hunt referenced here as a member of the Order of the Sacred Word.

Alferian 06:32, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Relevance of a recent contribution to this article[edit]

Recently, the following lines were added to this article:

"However, Barcynski's declaration contains a few inconsistencies ..."

I wonder to what extent the lines above are in any way useful or relevant to the general public. These lines are highly speculative and subjective, and reflect too much their author's bias. As a result, they do not meet the standards of objectivity/accuracy that Wikipedia demands of its contributors (cf. Wikipedia policies and guidelines: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view; Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:No original research). These lines should be removed.

Ogdoadic, 3 June 2007

Addendum: These lines have been revised.

Ogdoadic, 5 June 2007

Leon Barcynski's statement (January 1, 2007)[edit]

The contributions to this article of the past few weeks suggest that their authors have personal problems with Mr. Barcynski's declaration featured on the website of the Aurum Solis (http://aurumsolis.net/20070101_osborne_phillips.htm).

Yet it bears repeating that Wikipedia is intended as a serious and reliable resource, and therefore expects of its contributors the highest possible amount of objectivity and accuracy. Wikipedia is clearly not the place for speculation and personal interpretation.

Inasmuch as the said contributors cannot refrain from commenting upon Mr. Barcynski's declaration, it is now reproduced on this page in full, so as to let the facts speak for themselves.

Ogdoadic, 6 July 2007

Discussion page[edit]

The additions and changes of the past few weeks make it clear that there is some measure of disagreement among the contributors to this page.
The Talk/Discussion page accompanying each Wikipedia page is intended to discuss modifications to the main page and one's reasons for making them. Would the other contributors to this page agree to communicate on this Talk page and express their motivations for making changes? A useful link in this regard is the Talk page guidelines page.

Ogdoadic 12:47, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Notes on sources[edit]

A number of sources have problems. For one, the website titles "The Ogdoadic Notes" does not appear to be a reliable source. It does not cite its own sources, and appears to be someone's personal website. As such, it can't be used as a reference. Also, the use of yahoo group, emails, blogs, etc. as references is not permitted. GlassFET 14:37, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No documentary proof of this group prior to 1970s[edit]

John Michael Greer points out in the New Encyclopedia of the Occult (Llewellyn, 2003, p. 52) that "In actuality no trace of a self-identified Ogdoadic Tradition can be found anywhere in the history of Western occultism and philosophy before the publication of the first Aurum Solis book". Greer supports the suggestion that the entire system was based on published accounts of the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn system. Unreg user 10:28, 12 October 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.244.105.252 (talk)

No independent references[edit]

All sixteen references are self cites to books by former/present grand masters (de Biasi, Denning and Phillips) of the order and/or the orders website. Note the publisher for these books, Llewellyn Publications/Worlwide, is run by Carl L. Weschcke, another former grand master of Ordo Aurum Solis [1]. --92.4.177.142 (talk) 20:42, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Self-Promotional[edit]

This article has felt very self promotional for awhile now. Every reference in this page is from primary source, either published directly by the group or by people affiliated with the group. In particular, lines like

"It is a vehicle of the Ogdoadic Tradition, itself an important element of the Western Mystery Tradition."

and

"Despite a few similarities to the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn, some of its descendants, various Thelemic orders, and other groups stemming from the Rosicrucian revival of the 19th century, Ordo Aurum Solis represents a distinct and unique system of magical philosophy and practice based on the Ogdoadic Tradition"

feel very polemic and self promotional. If I were to hazard a guess, I would say that this article was written by members of this group. It seems to me that this entire article is in violation of WP:NOR and desperately needs a rewrite, if not deletion.

Reply[edit]

I think this organization is definitely notable, however it seems to be highly influenced by the Golden Dawn. It shouldn't be too hard to find sources discussing its origins and relations to other Hermetic/Rosicrucian groups. AnandaBliss (talk) 00:50, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]