User talk:S.jensen

AfD nomination of The Third Testament
An editor has nominated The Third Testament, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not"). Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. Jayden54Bot 19:22, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Warning
Please don't re-create all that previously deleted material on Martinus (Martinus Thomsen) and his books. It was validly deleted by an AfD (Articles for deletion/The Third Testament). Most likely all the rest of your articles are going to be deleted too. Fut.Perf. ☼ 12:27, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

List for reference:
 * Articles for deletion/The Third Testament
 * Martinus (Martinus Thomsen) (previously deleted by AfD, recreated)
 * The Third Testament (The third Testament) (deleted per AfD, recreated under new title)
 * Livets Bog (Livets bog, The book of life, Book of life (Martinus))
 * Spiritual science by Martinus
 * The cosmic analyses (Cosmic analysis)
 * The Eternal World Picture
 * Cosmic symbols (deleted previously per prod), also The cosmic symbols by Martinus and multiple redirects)

Sorry, but in order to have anything included, you'd need multiple, non-trivial, independent sources dealing with this person. And even then, it would probably only warrant one single, short, article on the author himself, not a huge big separate article on every single book of his. Right now, you have the new AfD nomination where you can argue the case and people will tell you what best to do. Fut.Perf. ☼ 13:15, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

This is not true. For instance this is mentioned under the article ”Martinus Thomsen”: “A Danish author and natural scientist “Kurt Christiansen” made a deep investigation which is published in two massive vol. entitled: “Martinus og hans livsværk Det Tredie Testamente” (only printed in Danish) in order to investigate Martinus private life and actions.” This is a quite independent person as well as me. I'm no "believer". I understand now that you dont want an overview of his books on the page. I did not (!) make an "huge big separate article on every single book of his". What do you mean? I did describe the books under the article Third Testament (not an easy task!!)and I did present the main books in one separate article (this book Livets Bog contains 3000 pages of quite unusual analyses) and one article about his symbolbooks because this is quite unusual and special too.

But please let me khow how to present the content of this work if not by its content and intentions (presented as postulates).

Now knowing that you didn't want me to make 3 different articles I'll ask you whether you want one???

As you might know now (?) Martinus work contains 43 books, 8000 pages of spiritual literature being translated to 19 languages until this day and in progess, (but till not mentioned here on Wikipedia. I don’t know why). These books are quite amazing and therefore I thought it good to describe the content, (but if you believe I'm wrong please let me know why)

I find it quite difficult to understand why you want to delete. I have folloved the POV as best as I could. This is a start, and soon other people will join and the article will become more and more clear. Process in progress...

In order to prepare this articles again – which I already spend days preparing – I have to know exactly which parts are not seen as “reliable”, exactly what to do. I can't add lots of other peoples opinions because this work is rather unknown to the public, and in danish newspapers it is mentioned by listing the postulates in the work. The critical Person I mention (Kurt Christiansen) is discussing the content. In this case he ends up being positive, I'm sorry but I can't see why he's more reliable if his conclusion was negative?

I want to make a presentation of this work which is totally unknown to the English speaking people. Therefore also the lack of discussion until this day. How to write about this without mentioning the intention of the content of his collected work, giving some minor examples and mentioning the most remarkable postulates made here, marking them as exactly what they are “the author claim..”? as I do again and again, even asking whether it is possible to know such stuff?

All postulates might be right or wrong, but how to know if they’re deleted? I do understand that the work here is quite unusual, and therefore I understand that I need to explain a little in order for this work not to be misunderstood and interpreeted according to bad experiences from sects, propagandists etc. But no, this work is not some craziness, just look at the volumene and the amazing precise details in all of his text and symbols (look here for instance:

I wonder if you took the time to investigate a little bit, did you?

Friendly wishes, Søren Jensen --S.jensen 17:07, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

OK ... I took a look at the neutral preferences and found this quite strong reference considering the English speaking readers: Paul Brunton. He was (as you can read in wikipedia) one of the world most famous authors concerning mystics, religion etc. working as a journalist and mystic himself he visited the real mystics of these days. Paul Brunton visited Martinus first time in 1948 which is documented by Paul Bruntons own words in the Danish 1952 edition of his book: "The Secret Path"). He visited Martinus again in 1950 and during the months may to aug. 1950 (4 month) he stayed with his wife at Martinus Institut Denmark where he was tought by Martinus (!). A Danish documentary: “Martinus som vi husker ham” contents a very positive description on Martinus written by Paul Brunton. He visited Martinus again in 1956 and made a prescript for one of Martinus book: Mankind and the world picture. This prescribt (along with the book) can be read in the Magazine “Cosmos Special Issue", 1990-4. BUT in the printed final edition of the book it is brought without the preface by Brunton because of a decision not to introduce the work of Martinus through other known people. Martinus

Is this enough reference? I cant add it and prepare the Third Testament website, because it is deleted. What do you want me to do?

Friendly wishes, Søren Jensen--S.jensen 19:53, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Deleted articles
Hi Søren - you may ask an administrator for a re-creation of deleted articles in your user space in order to have the texts. Wait then how the running AfD outcomes and try to learn how Wikipedia works and how to format and source articles here. I hope that it will be possible to re-create the Martinus article after the Afd - concentrate on it and try to have it very encyclopedic and sourced. Best wishes,--Ioannes Pragensis 06:09, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Thank you friend! Thanks for your comment. I'll let time work a little, and see what is best to do. Friendly wishes, Søren Jensen--81.216.131.252 11:12, 21 May 2007 (UTC)