Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Absence from Felicity: The Story of Helen Schucman and Her Scribing of A Course in Miracles


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result of the debate was delete. W.marsh 13:10, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Absence from Felicity: The Story of Helen Schucman and Her Scribing of A Course in Miracles
Apart form the horrible title (which can be fixed) this is part of what appears to be a walled garden surrounding A Course In Miracles. This is a biography of Helen Schucman, it might deserve a mention in that article but I really don't see the value of this as a separate article. Just zis Guy you know? 12:01, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment. If you are referring to the inclusion of the subtitle in the article title, that is one thing. But if you are referring to the main title, "Absence from Felicity", I don't think that dislike of a book title can be legitimate grounds for deleting a page. The book, by the way, is named after a verse of Shakespeare's Hamlet: "O good Horatio, what a wounded name, Things of Standing thus unknown, shall live behind me! If thou didst ever hold me in thy heart, Absent thee from felicity a while (italics mine, AP), And in this harsh world draw thy breath in pain, To tell thy story." Shakespeare was Helen Schucman's favorite author, and Hemlet was her favorite Shakespeare work. Major chunks of A Course In Miracles are written in Shakespearian blank verse. -- Andrew Parodi 02:31, 30 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete with per nom. Ste4k 12:39, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom; most everything about ACIM, apart from the ACIM book, appears to be self-referential and relying on ACIM-linked sources, even the ghits look that way. Angus McLellan (Talk) 13:44, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom, this is getting into ACIMcruft territory. "External reference" status as per Schucman article as it is now is about right for this. --DaveG12345 23:07, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. Wow. You guys really don't like ACIM, do you? I would think that being the ONLY biography of this woman, a woman other editors have said is notable, would make this book notable. My mistake. I'm really starting to think I need to exit Wikipedia entirely because I have apparently missed something here. I thought that notable meant, um, notable ... and I thought that meant that it deserved its own page. As for this being a "walled gate", I'm not even sure that that means. But if it means that others can't edit it, that's incorrect. And if it seems that most ACIM-related items are self-referential, that is simply because it is a very new movement that only began in 1975. So, will we have to wait until 2020 before we can make more pages about ACIM-related material? -- Andrew Parodi 09:06, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Ambivalent about ACIM.  Deeply dislike crap, walled garden articles about deeply, deeply marginal figures. -- GWO
 * Comment Well, just to let you know, the book is written by a PhD psychologist about another PhD psychologist (who worked for Columbia University and was personally liked by Mother Teresa), and it is named after a verse from Shakespeare. You can consider it "crap" all you like, but if it is "crap", you'd have to admit it is very highbrow crap. And both the author and subject -- Helen Schucman and Kenneth Wapnick -- are notable enough to have their own Wikipedia pages, which, though nominated for deletion, look as though they may be kept after all. -- Andrew Parodi 03:40, 30 June 2006 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.