Talk:Cognitive science of new religious movements

Notability problem
The entire article is sourced by Muhammad Afzal Upal writings. Not exactly significant coverage by reliable sources independent of the subject. ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 02:34, 25 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Based on how the article is written currently, I agree that it seems to rely mostly on Upal's publications and may have a notability issue. But I do think this topic has potential though, considering that other people such as Ketola have also contributed to the development of this field and their publications can also be found. The article should probably include more information from sources other than ones written by Upal. Happy to hear what you think. 23impartial (talk) 21:12, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I've added more info and sources. Still working on adding more, but now the article should have multiple reliable sources other than Upal's writings. If you don't disagree, I'll remove the and  tags. 23impartial (talk) 22:30, 20 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Out of 16 citations, only 5 are not Upal's. I tried reading just the first one (Lockhart) and it is full of esoteric terms that make it unreadable to the average person (me, in this case). Even your article is impossible to read without, I presume, some basic understanding of what "cognitive science" is, or how it might be applied to religion—neither of which are in my wheelhouse, nor my interests. (I can't recall how or why I came upon this article.) I am unable to decipher if the 5 non-Upal sources discuss the topic in depth. The banners for notability and for one-source are not just hoping to find a few other mentions of the topic. Therefore, I still think the banners should remain because of the heavy reliance on a single author. However, you should try to get some collaboration from some other editors who understand this, or related, fields. Maybe post on one or more of the related Wikiproject's talk pages.   ▶ I am Grorp ◀  01:04, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your input. Your points and concerns are definitely reasonable and I agree with them. Let me see what I can do. I'll try to keep working on it and use Cognitive science of religion as a template. If that doesn't work out, I'll seek help from other editors. 23impartial (talk) 15:13, 21 April 2024 (UTC)