Talk:Thule Society

fiction (In addition to "In popular culture" section of the article)
the thule society appears as a prominent element in the Fullmetal Alchemist movie, and possibly in other works of fiction, which may be worth mentioning

There is an important reference to occult societies of nazi era, including Vril, Thule or Schwarze Sonne, in the short novel by Chilean author Roberto Bolaňo Distant Star (Estrella distante, 1996). The book examines mystical influence of German nacism in South America (as much as authors fictional opus magnum Nazi Literature in the Americas) and secrete alliance between art and evil, following story of phantom-like sadistic poet during Pinochet era in Chile. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2a02:8308:a140:7e00:fcb7:b9ae:5d6:27d2 (talk) 15:18, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

Centrism??
How exactly is "centrism" listed under ideology? They most certainly WERE NOT centrists by any stretch of the imagination. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.100.44.34 (talk) 14:54, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

semi-protected edit request
requesting access to edit page to add details of Rudolf von Sebottendorf escape from prison and exile to Turkey.

Current wording reads in (Dissolution tab, 3rd Line of second Paragraph) "Sebottendorff's book was prohibited and he himself was arrested and imprisoned for a short period in 1934, afterwards departing into exile in Turkey."

Should read, ((Sebottendorff's book was prohibited and he himself was arrested and imprisoned for a short period in 1934 later escaping (presumably due to some friendship from his Munich days) and fled to Turkey.))

this new addition is written in Sebottendorff's own article here (in Tab Later Life, Second paragraph, Second line.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Skillerious (talk • contribs)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Jannik Schwaß (talk) 20:10, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

Headquarters in Berlin?
How can this be so? The big names associated with the group had very strong Munich connections - and it is well known that the Hotel 4 Seasons on Maximilian Staße was used for their meetings.

Anyone able to shed any light on an actual physical address for their HQ?

DaioftheTriffids (talk) 22:20, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Category:Satanism and Nazism
Conspiracy Theory is not the most appropriate section to tell about the link existed between Nazism, and, more particulary, the Thule Society, and Satanism. There have been cited a variety of sources and this seems to be enough to categorize the current WP article under Category:Satanism and Nazism. At least, their founder Rudolf von Sebottendorf can be categorized under Category:German Satanists, just not to leave it empty and to avoid its deletion. Any eventual comment would be kindly appreciated. Best regards, Theologian81sp (talk) 23:49, 5 July 2021 (UTC)


 * , This is the section you have entirely removed (apart some typos):

"In 1940, Lewis Spence's book Occult Causes of the Present War started a new litterary genre about the links existing between Nazism and Satanism . In 1971, the German writer Wilhelm Landig proposed a trilogy about a perennial battle between the forces of evil and the faithful to Jahve, where the roles were inverted in favour to the Devil.

The symbol of the Thule Society was a couple of lightning bolts Moreover, the Thule Society practicized "rituals of unknown nature" and that were connected with other Satanic groups and Satanic symbols"

I've replaced most of them in last section which was poorly sourced since 3 years. I didn't see academica.edu link some inappropriate banners and I've removed the related link. Apart of that, all the cited sources are freely available on the web. Most of the cited authors have a WP article and come from a variety of biographical profiles (academic teaching, a reiglious leader, a psychiatrist and universitt professor). About their reliability:
 * 1) Lewis Spence's Occult Causes of the Present War and the Wilhelm Landig's trilogy are sourced by an academic monography:
 * 2) The Thule's symbol is WP:relevant and it is sourced by a PhD dissertation, on .gov website which is presumably a WP:reliable source;
 * 3) the practice of "rituals of unknown nature" is sourced by an university academic press and a professional psychiatrist who dealed with ther matter of Satanism:
 * 4) the connection with other Satanic groups is sourced by an Indian religious leader :

We can't discuss each author and any single source, to avoid so long topics and the disruptive contributions of some users. The rules all the same for all of us and here there was a short open topic about the matter. About some typos, I apologize for WP (even if the software allows to add them in a second moment and out of any chronology, and this isn't obviously the case). The first part concerning Lewis Spence and Wilhelm Landig is reliable, relevant and can be moved to "In popular culture". But also the symbol is relevant and had no concerns in the article. Maybe, for it there is the neeed of a different type of source: monography, website or paper. So, I replace this paragraph.Theologian81sp (talk) 06:41, 6 July 2021 (UTC)


 * Spence's book tells the reader that Satan and Lucifer are real entities. Colin A. Ross is a proponent of the witch-craze-like Satanic panic that destroyed families, ruined innocent people's reputations and put some of them in jail for decades. The fact that you want to use those two as sources makes it abundantly clear that you are not here to build an encyclopedia, but to misuse Wikipedia as a propaganda platform for dangerous fantasies about evil people in league with the Devil. As you say, I do not need to look at the rest of the sources. They are probably just as bad.


 * Next: Read WP:BRD. After your bold edits have been reverted, you discuss them first. You do not reinstall them. --Hob Gadling (talk) 09:55, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
 * , a lot of persons believe in the real existence of the angel named Satan, like Sanders affirmed. Is he a relatively populare author? Is he the starting point of a new litterary genre?It is sourced by an academic paper. Si, what's matter? It has WO:relevance and it is justified by a WP:reliable source. To delete is WP:NPOV and is interest of the Satanist Freemasonry to hide the truth about the Satanic symbols and rituals of many Nazi leading figures. All what is dangerous is to deny the truth, given that angels are immutable, can't change neither their will nor their political idea. Demons have no interests in freedom and democracy, while they opt for a dictatorship which forces people to live according to a Satanic religion.
 * Lastly, where is the propaganda you are talking about? Wilhelm Landing wrote a trilogy in the subject matter. I've solely added that the role of real forces was inverted. May anyone say the God of Israel was the evil? Is this the common and acceptable knowledge to be included in WP? I don't think so. And personal opinions on the inexistence of Satan are totally irrelevant.
 * Let me give an example: Talk:Trinity has been deleted due to the lack of sources. Your religion, instead, can be hosted in WP at your pleasure. This allow users with your beliefs to potentially delete any reference to the real existence of the Devil. There is something wrong and WP:POV in it. To remove an edit corroborated by reliable sources on an issue relevant for WP, other contributors would have to provide other relevant sources, and not to do what they want according to their personal beliefs.
 * I've opened the topic at the time of the first edit and it was reverted without any reply. I've changed my edit again and discussed it there.--12:36, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I do not know who or what Sanders is, unless you mean Colonel Sanders. And you do not know what a reliable source is. Neither do you know what WP:NPOV is and how it is achieved. Wikipedia cannot affirm the existence of fairy tale characters like Satan, Rumpelstiltskin, or the Redcap in Wikivoice. This is very basic. The rest of your contribution is just incoherent chatting, about Landig, fish, "my religion" (huh? that does not compile) or whatever, and does not belong here. You have given no reason why the stuff you found on the internet which agrees with your personal superstitions should go into the article. --Hob Gadling (talk) 14:10, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Good evening, you are saying Satan is a "character" and he doesn't exist really. This is not the place to demonstrate its truthfullness, but religious beliefs like this still belong to the common acceptable knowledge, which is a primary policy of WP. This a personal belief, and unovoidably it deals with religion. You defined my edit as "stuff"; Wwll, I simply ask: do Satanic symbols exist? Do Satanic rituals exist? Do the angel named Satan exist? I've given a series of academic sources about that. Infact, is the Toronto University Press an academic source? Is researchgate a scientific/academic and thus authoritative website? Have I invented anything which was not written in the cited sources? Is an Indian religious leader competent to judge the relation between Nazi groups and a religion like Satanism is? As anyone can see by himself/herself, I've modestly cited a variety of sources, even not Christians, to give a pluralist knowledge of the truth. And you've said I've done a some sort of propaganda. What you are saying here sounds like a chit-chat. Practically, you are imposing your point of view (Satan doesn't exist, to talk about Satanism is stuff), you are obliging the other WP users to share your personal beliefs. Someone will object: the weight of the proof isn't mine. Well, for this aspect you are right. But the cited source wouldn't demonstrate the existence of Satan and didn't propose it. If more Nazi groups have chosen a Satanic symbol (p. 42)), if the Thule Society made strange rituals linked to Satanism, if in 1940v and 1970 there were two popular authors writing on this matter, then it is WP notable and deals with WP:reliable sources, mainly with publications, all of which are freely reradable on the web, and that fall within the first type of WP:acceptable sources. Hence, it seems what was written can stay in the "Popular culture" section or in another one, but it has not to be rollbacked at all. If my sentence "where the roles were inverted in favour to the Devil" results on being POV, then it can be deleted at all any reference to the Landing's works, which are briefly described in the related.
 * To write an edit is time-consuming; if the rules are interpreted so discretionally, no one of the potential WP user reading this topic -and predictably many other who will meet similar topics following your discretionary rollbacks- will be encouraged to contribute to Wikipedia. If an open project becomes monodirectional (thanks to a very limited number of persons, and in the complete silence of many other), then WP will loose a lot of contributors and a lot of readers. In my modest opinion, in this case, you are not doing the good of the encyclopedia. In short, if the angel Satan did exist -and I and many other Roman Catholics or Christians or of other confessions believe this is true-, then he was the first cause and the strongest source of the Nazi power on crowds and of the sudden and extensive consensus it reached in Germany (and in Italy as well). Nobody can exclude it could happen again, since to identic causes (and angels are immutable) necessarily follow identic effects. So far, any proof linking Satanism to Nazism, even indirect (like symbols and rituals are), results on being notable for a lot of persons and thus it has a full right to be hosted within a WP article.Theologian81sp (talk) 19:46, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I stopped reading after the third rhetorical question, then skimmed the rest. It is just not worth it. You simply do not understand how Wikipedia works. Balancing one type of crank with another type of crank does not make a reliable encyclopedia article.
 * No, a belief is not knowledge; it is a belief and needs to be portrayed as a belief, if it is relevant to the article. We cannot use freaks and weirdos as sources except as for their own beliefs, and that only if the article is about them, if we quote reliable sources (so, not themselves) and if we balance them with what mainstream scholars have to say about it. So, this article should contain the opinions of the Thule crackpots, plus what science says about them. The viewpoints of other crackpots need to stay out of this article, though they have a place in the articles about those other crackpots. In the article Colin A. Ross you can write what Ross thinks about Thule, if it has been reported on by reliable secondary sources.
 * Please read WP:FRINGE, then WP:YWAB and WP:LUNATIC. If you want to edit an encyclopedia without such restrictions on making stuff up, maybe Conservapedia is the right place for you. --Hob Gadling (talk) 20:14, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

(See also Hitler's Nuremberg speech of 6 September 1938 on his disapproval of occultism.)[citation needed]
Citation: Adolf Hitler and Domarus M, Hitler : Speeches and Proclamations 1932-1945 : The Chronicle of a Dictatorship. Vol. 1 the Years 1932-1934 (IB Tauris 1990) p. 1146

“Populism”?
How was the Thule Society in any way “populist”? Perhaps it was an attempt to translate “Völkisch” into English? I can’t think of any other reason to put “populism” in the ideology box for a secretive organization full of aristocrats… 138.51.80.35 (talk) 00:36, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 September 2022

 * The Thule Society is featured in the video game[|Dracula 3: The Path of the Dragon]. Dntnv (talk) 06:58, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. There needs to be secondary sources discussing this to demonstrate that it is noteworthy. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 11:27, 6 September 2022 (UTC)