Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bestian Order of Aestheteka


 * 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 Sock infested, but obvious consenus. -Docg 23:53, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Bestian Order of Aestheteka

 * — (View AfD)

Delete - non-notable organization, no verifiable sources, most likely self-promotion. Tunnels of Set 05:26, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. MER-C 07:29, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom, and the 22 unique Google hits (and that's including Wikipedia and mirrors) aren't exactly a good sign either. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  14:20, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete The article lacks any independent references, and I could not find any in Proquest. So a worldwide religious order with claiimed number of adherents in the hundreds has not yet gained sufficient notability for an article. And nothing here to meet WP:CONG. Edison 16:22, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete smacks of a hoax, lacks clear verifiability, a movement with several hundred members would have some evidence for its existence. I had a quick look at the linked "Theistic Satanism" and "Left-Hand Path" articles, they're getting into some murky waters but just about pass the test for inclusion, but there's nothing in them to clearly back up this article. PatGallacher 01:29, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. Aestheteka is a new and growing inluential group.  I've seen their ideas independently through a few different websites and I know they have two books out.  I've heard that their system is pretty unique and innovative.  Either way, I know they are a legitamate group and I don't see a basis for deletion as in learning about them I've spent some time talking to various members from all over the globe. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Woe Unto Thee (talk • contribs)  — Woe Unto Thee (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * KeepI am writing to enquire why the Bestian Order of Aestheteka entry - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aestheteka%2C_Bestian_Order_of - is up for deletion. We are a legitimate group. The several hundred members that have been 'questioned' would quite like to post their comments concerning whether the page should be Kept or Deleted, but thereisno option for them to do so, unlike the several other Satanic groups which youhave also decided to delete. we are registered in the Slovak Republic as a company entity. our teachings are legitmate and are published in the form of two books - both by Crystal Dreams Publishing in the United States - and by Aestheteka itself elsewhere. As for legitimate links - there were several links to discussion groups, forums and otehr internet entities, due to our globally located membership, yet these have been deleted from the reference page. As for the legitimate existence of the Bestian Order of aestheteka, just do a google on 'Aestheteka' and you will see how substantial both our membership and our coverage is. Please advise - it is hardly non-discriminatory for the refernce to be deletd if its members and adherents cannot comment. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aestheteka (talk • contribs) — Aestheteka (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Note - the article has been updated. However, a simple google on 'aestheteka' would have answered any queries you might have had. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aestheteka (talk • contribs)
 * Delete unsourced. To answer the author's complaint, the process here is definitely discrimintory - we're trying to discriminate subjects that should have articles from those that shouldn't.  This falls into the latter group. WilyD 17:45, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep! Bestian Order of the Aestheteka is a legitimate group that has maintained contact, worldwide, via the internet. Open discussions on a variety of spiritual concepts is a main function of this group. It is a budding religion focused on the need for self to be recognized more intimately. This is not a religion based on strict code of moral or dogma. These are discovered and worked through by each individual, with the aid and support of the groups members. The importance of this order, is the melding of ancient wisdom (as passed down through the ages) and more modernistic concepts from the likes of Jung and Crowley. It is a religion focused on self, but not exclusive of the world at large. - Kevin W. Craig — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.232.223.38 (talk • contribs) — 209.232.223.38 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * KeepTo answer Wilyd's comments - perhaps he does not know how to google or how to look up sources himself? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aestheteka (talk • contribs) - second keep vote by this individual (Jefferson Anderson 23:27, 9 January 2007 (UTC))
 * Source 1, as stated in the article - Sophia Bestiae, published by Crystal Dreams publishing; source 2 - Grimoire Bestiae, ditto. Both of these texts are the fundament of Aestheteka ideology - a legitimate ideology with several hundred adherents worldwide.
 * source 3 - the ammendment to theistioc Satanism (the original ammendment was to Satanism but was later split into two topics). This was not done by Aestheteka but by another Satanic Group after the Church of Satan's and Sinagogue of Satan's reading of the Sophia Bestiae (relevance already stated in previosu thread)- sources here:

http://churchofsatan.com/Pages/News.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Rev._Michael_S._Margolin/Sinagogue_of_Satan http://www.anathemabooks.com/satan.shtml http://www.eyeofthoth.com/history.html http://www.red-ice.net/specialreports/2006/08aug/cthulhucult.html http://www.dpjs.co.uk/animal.html (where we are quoted as source material due to the reasons stated in the previous comment)
 * Aestheteka is recognised by many in the Left Hand Path communities and is known globally as a melting pot of Dark Art and teh dark Arts. To remove the entry would be to discriminate solely on religious terms. Should you wish us to edit the entry to make it more Wikippealing, then please state how. The sources are plentiful; as previously stated on two occasions 'just google aestheteka'. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aestheteka (talk • contribs)
 * I know how to google - what google does not give (as far as I can see) is reliable, third party sources. It's now also glaringly evident to me the article fails WP:VAIN. WilyD 19:32, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Perhaps WilyD would be good enough to explain why he is so obsessed about the removal of a page describing a religious order? Sources have been cited, yet these have been ignored. it is clear that WilyD is being objectionable on something other than purely academic grounds andhis comments such be taken into account in such light. The article may be updated to fit those sources (if they are not removed again by hands unseesn), but it is intolerable for such discriminatory behaviour to be enacted upon given suchlegislation as UN Human Rights Committee’s General Comments Article 18. Wikipedia is supposed to be about information and it is an invaluable research tool. One learns from using it. Perhaps those who had notheard of aestheteka due to theirlack of connection to LHP activities, now have access to its basic tenets (as opposed to its stated Occult Ideology here - http://www.aestheteka.com/aestheteka%20occult%20ideology.htm ). As the Aestheteka Forum is currently ranked c.60,000 out of all internet sites, it is clearthatmore than a handful of people know of Aestheteka and its activities. but again a simple google would have shown that.
 * Happy to oblige. I really don't like spam, except maybe fried with ketchup.  In any event, it doesn't taste good in an encyclopaedia. WilyD 20:46, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
 * There is no need to advertise your lack of taste either gastronomically or philosophically. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Aestheteka (talk • contribs) 20:57, 9 January 2007 (UTC).
 * You asked, so I obliged. Unfortunately for you, Wikipedia's policy is that spam has no place in an encyclopaedia. WilyD 21:46, 9 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep The Bestian Order of Aestheteka equates to a post-modern intelligent construct with creativity at warp-drive. Deleting the entry pertaining to this, will, in my opinion, rock the boat on Wikipedia offering pertinent, useful and up-to-date information on getting outside the box that we came in. In deep respect, Su Leybourn —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 144.138.13.60 (talk) 19:17, 9 January 2007 (UTC). — 144.138.13.60 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Keep  The Bestian Order of Aestheteka is an innovative and active system of LHP initiation.  The Order currently has three published texts outlining It's initiation ceremonies, core ideology, and practices.  The The Bestian Order of Aestheteka Has an international hub on the Internet as well as local groups in Slovakia, Germany, and the US.  I, along with the hundreds of other members, were shocked to hear that the entry on our order is being considered for deletion on the supposition that we don't exist.  We find this humorous, but disturbing.  The The Bestian Order of Aestheteka is endorsed by the Magickal Paradigms Occult group and myself it's moderator.  Thank you.  68.206.197.128 19:52, 9 January 2007 (UTC)Jay Krodel. — 68.206.197.128 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Keep While not everyone may find Aesthetheka politically correct, there are many individuals who find it relevant, and having access to this information for both research and networking, on Wikipedia, is necessary. If Wikipedia wants to maintain any credibility as an impartial tool for information, and not an instrument of arbitrary censorship, Aesthetheka should not be deleted.  Mr. O'Toole has several books published, an E-zine, and a worldwide internet  following. This is all easily verified.… Based on those facts alone, Aesthetheka should not be deleted. Chaosmom 21:00, 9 January 2007 (UTC)Chaosmom — Chaosmom (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Delete - That "coverage" is illusory. Yes, there are over 9000 hits for the word, but if you exclude Wikipedia and its mirrors, aestheteka -wikipedia, there are less than 1000. Most of the "coverage" is generated by an active campaign of Google-bombing Wikipedia and other sites where a "listing" can be posted by anybody. Jefferson Anderson 21:04, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
 * 'Listings' generally 'are' posted by somebody... So the fact that we exist now works against us? One factual entry on Wikipedia is hardly google-bombing. Perhaps those calling for deletion should also state their name, age, location, occupation and religious beliefs - otherwise they could be just 'anybody' and as has been claimed in the previous post, an 'anybody' has no worth to their post. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Aestheteka (talk • contribs) 21:14, 9 January 2007 (UTC).


 * Keep- As a member of the Bestian Order of Aestheteka, I can state here and now that this organization is far from insubstantial. We have scripture, we have philosophy and we have creed. While we are a widely ranged group of individuals, Aestheteka is our anchor in that it gives us common grounding for our own pursuits in the occult paths.
 * To remove such a tiny entry purely due to a few religious bigots who are basing their argument on lack of source material and at the same time ignoring the fact that the leader of our group, Edward O'Toole, is an author whose work (our founding tenets - the Sophia Bestiae and the Grimoire Bestiae) is registered and easily accessible to anyone who either understands ISBN numbers or the internet, or Amazon, etc, and that the Aestheteka symbol is a copyrighted symbol with an extremely indepth meaning (originally copyrighted by the English and US magazine Phenomena - countless sources concerning O'Toole's writings, including Coast-to-Coast may be accessed using online search engines).
 * Maybe you would be kind enough to explain how the article may be improved rather than deleted? After all - we are real, you just haven't taken the time to establish that fact. LJ, Liverpool, England — Preceding unsigned comment added by LolaJane (talk • contribs) — LolaJane (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

This entry does not violate any of the following Wikipedia Policy as is claimed by WillyD: 1)WP:RS Reliable Published Sources. The material given here is based on reliable published sources: Sophia Bestiae is published by Crystal Dreams Publishing, ISBN 1-59146-075-1, as is Grimoire Bestiae, 1-59146-666-0) 2)WP:OR Is also used to refer to material that has not been published by a reliable source or is a "novel narrative or historical interpretation." This is negated by the above explanation and also by the fact that Aestheteka exists as an international occult group with hundreds of members and therefore should be listed for the same reasons that Wikipedia lists Christianity. 3)WP:SPAM Articles considered advertisements include those that are solicitations for a business, product or service, or are public relations pieces designed to promote a company or individual. This article is not selling or promoting anyone or anything and does not meet the criteria for being spam. This article is designed to provide information on a rapidly growing religious-philosophical movement. 4)WP:V Verifiability, not truth. That The Bestian Order of Aestheteka is an fast growing International Occult Order with local groups in three countries, with three texts published by a well-known publishing company and available on Amazon.com and is endorsed by several external organizations (linked to above in this article) is easily verifiable by anyone capable of a web search. 5) WP:VAIN or WP:COI The only Conflict of interest in the move to have this article deleted is on the part of the editor who is obviously prejudiced by the inclusion of the terms Luciferian and Satanist. The comments made by WillyD constitute mere intolerance, but the deleting of this article would constitute an illegal act of religious discrimination and censorship. 6) WP:KITCHEN SINK States that: Wikipedia is an online encyclopedia and, as a means to that end, an online community of people interested in building a high-quality encyclopedia in a spirit of mutual respect. Therefore, there are certain things that Wikipedia is not. IF Wikipedia wishes to remain true to it's commitment to providing a high quality encyclopedia it is important that it not delete relevant articles relating to important religious movements just because some prejudiced editor has a personal problem with the articles ideology. Wikipedia is incomplete without reference to the one of the occult community's fastest growing sub-cultures; Aestheteka. Unless one of the certain things that Wikipedia is not happens to be - unbiased. 7) It appears that this article has been attacked by an unscrupulous character calling himself WillyD who is determined to convince Wikipedia that this article violates Wikipedia policy, which it does not, due to his personal dislike of the content of this page. Aestheteka is an innovative and rapidly growing international quasi-religious organization. Any Online Encyclopedia not including it would be incomplete. 68.206.197.128 23:45, 9 January 2007 (UTC) Jay Krodel.
 * Keep. I have dealt with the Bestian Order of Aestheteka and they are a real group.  as Wiki suggests, a head count does not determine the validity of anything.  even if there are a dozen members of this organization, it should be recorded and available on Wikipedia. signed 24.177.130.98 21:44, 9 January 2007 (UTC) Venger Satanis, Cult of Cthulhu High Priest
 * Unforetunately, our polcies and guidelines WP:RS, WP:OR, WP:SPAM, WP:V and WP:VAIN andWP:KITCHEN SINK all disagree with the assertion that it should be recorded and available here, but insist that it be deleted. If you're looking for free web hosting, you can find lots of such services, but this isn't one.   WilyD 21:49, 9 January 2007 (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.