Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aethericism


 * 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 was delete. -- Patar knight - chat/contributions 01:29, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

Aethericism

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I'm having a hard time finding any secondary references for this. It seems to be a WP:NEO coined by an artist named Degard who has published a book related to the term,. Also of concern is the use of a PR company to "Writing and working with Degard to complete 15 Wikipedia pages ready for publication there",. Derek Andrews (talk) 12:46, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete -- Aethericism or aetherism? Devine or divine? All the references have been removed. If the author put in some effort, fine. Otherwise, it needs to go.
 * And more -- Of the eleven references given, (1) is a hardback book without access, even to pages 1-2; (2) ditto; (3) an hour and forty minute video; (5) journal article behind a paywall; (6) I found one citation of this journal article, but not even the journal; (7) a dangerous website. Search for article unsuccessful; (8) Only Google result led to dead site; (9) citation found in a book, found the journal but not the article; (10) not by the listed author (11) Behind a paywall. Rhadow (talk) 17:17, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:29, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philosophy-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:29, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:29, 1 September 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete Looks like a pile of unreferenced original research. Google search didn't turn up any reliable third-party mentions.PohranicniStraze (talk) 02:35, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete This is a manifesto, not an encyclopedic article about a notable Art manifesto. Mduvekot (talk) 17:52, 5 September 2017 (UTC)


 * aethericism has been discussed at a symposium at the royal society of art in march 17 by a dozen acclaimed academics. i have seen the footage of this event. maybe it isnt online yet.
 * because someone gets help from another company to write content means the piece is even better i would suspect — Preceding unsigned comment added by PainterABC (talk • contribs) 17:56, 3 September 2017 (UTC)


 * Aethericism is the term used to describe an artistic movement initiated by Degard, which seeks to re-establish the vital relationship between Art, Science and Divinity that has been disrupted by the advance of modern scientism. As such it has an important place in Wikipedia and deserves to be developed further, showing, for example, how it is akin to the scientific understanding of 'natural inclusion', pioneered by Alan Rayner and to the theological principles of what is known as 'panentheism'. When this is done, the article will have abundant secondary references to draw upon, making it less dependent on the work of Degard herself, and enabling the reader to explore further and deeper.


 * References
 * Christ, Carol P (2003) She Who Changes, Re-imagining the Divine in the World. Palgrave Macmillan.
 * Rayner, Alan (2017) The Origin of Life Patterns in the Natural Inclusion of Space in Flux. Springer.
 * — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.114.125.199 (talk • contribs) 08:42, 4 September 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete - Unambiguous promotion for what appears to be a non-notable new-age movement. — Paleo  Neonate  – 22:30, 5 September 2017 (UTC)


 * And even more -- Thank you, PainterABC for the url to First Book of Aethericism. It has a picture of the cover, but no text. Should I buy it as you suggest? It costs £150.00. As to other sources not yet online, I find the whole matter far-fetched -- as I do your WP:SPA and editing out my comments. Rhadow (talk) 13:42, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

The book is a book of art and costs a lot to produce and therefore sell. have you noticed how much decent artwork costs? Aethericism is a serious debate amongst hundreds of academics worldwide.
 * DO NOT DELETE THIS POST *** ***AND EVEN MORE*** - EVERYTHING I HAVE JUST WRITTEN HAS BEEN DELETED OFF THIS POST WHICH IS ILLEGAL - Derek requested that nothing is deleted Rhadow - you should be deleted off wikipedia because it is clear that you have done this damage.

•	http://www.degard.org •	https://explore.scimednet.org/index.php/annual-gathering-2016-abstracts/ •	https://explore.scimednet.org/members/degard/profile/ •	http://opensciences.org/about/manifesto-for-a-post-materialist-science •	http://www.aethericism.com The Royal Society of Arts are publishing a blog post on this very topic shortly Degard, MONAD and Transition are putting together a series of exhibitions covering the whole of this year and next year on the subject of aethericism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PainterABC (talk • contribs) 14:32, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
 * do not delete ***
 * Only one of the independent references you mention even mentions Aethericism, and that states Degard will be launching a new art movement, to be called Aetheric Art, in the very near future. At best this is WP:TOOSOON, so maybe if and when this gets off the ground, this topic may have a chance of meeting WP:GNG. In the meantime, see WP:NOTSOAPBOX. Derek Andrews (talk) 00:22, 7 September 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete. The article is a somehow "re-worked" version of what Degard writes in her self-published manifesto of 28 pages: The First Book of Aethericism (see in the book, passim, esp. section "Aethericism"). I don't see -even in the above listed links etc.- any third-party sources on Degard and her "movement". ——Chalk19 (talk) 15:04, 6 September 2017 (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.