Talk:Spiritual transformation

"See also" section
Do you think "* 2012 phenomenon" should be added? Twipley (talk) 17:34, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

My first impulse is no, though possibly a case could be made for its inclusion. For guidelines about why it is probably bad to include it, see WP:Fringe:

Fringe theories should be mentioned in the text of other articles only if independent reliable sources connect the topics in a serious and prominent way. However, meeting this standard indicates only that the idea may be discussed in other articles, not that it must be discussed in a specific article. If mentioning a fringe theory in another article gives give undue weight to the fringe theory, discussion of the fringe theory may be limited, or even omitted altogether. If no independent reliable sources connect a particular fringe theory to a mainstream subject, there should not even be a link through a see also section, lest the article serve as a coatrack. Health Researcher (talk) 01:34, 25 November 2009 (UTC)