Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jedi realist


 * 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. I note that all the 'keep's are from accounts which have only edited this AfD and the article. While this in itself does not exclude their comments, it is telling that no established editors have recommended keeping the article. The consensus is that there is insufficient evidence of this movement's notability. A merge with Jediism would appear to be an incorrect call, as the two are apparently very different. --  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 09:01, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Jedi realist

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

I declined speedy deletion, as the article isn't nonsense and doesn't meet any other criterion for speedy deletion. The article was redirected to Jediism by, but the author reverted it. (talk) 03:45, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Jediism.-- &#x03C6; OnePt618Talk &#x03C6;  04:02, 6 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete. Nothing to show that this is a notable movement, and based on the article text, it's not used interchangably with Jediism. —C.Fred (talk) 04:08, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete & Redirect to Jediism. Not notable in its own right, and not enough information available on the internet for it to not be more appropriate to be a subsection of Jediism. Smoking Newton   (MESSAGE ME)  15:10, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Jedi Realism is as much a notable movement as Jediism, they are not the same as Jediism is a religion, based off of the Philosophy of the Jedi realist. These are not interchangeable, if anything Jediism is a subsection of Jedi Realism. A simple google search for Jedi Realist brings up 440,000 results, to include the IJRS,Jedi realist academy, jedi realist training at 43things.com, jedisanctuary.com, jedi realism at beliefnet.com, and more, I don't understand the comment about not enough information on it available on the internet unless smokingnewton just didn't bother to even look. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.127.110.233 (talk) 03:25, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. Do not redirect to Jediism, as the two claim to be very different things. ---  RepublicanJacobite  The'FortyFive'  16:33, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Merge into Jediism, then delete. As it has been claimed to be different, a section of Jediism can be about Jedi realism, should enough reliable sources be present.  Bramble  claw  x   03:41, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep The majority of those who emulate the 'way of the Jedi' are NOT those who follow the religious dictates under Jediism. Historically, Jedi 'followers' and Jedi Realists came a decade and more before the first 'churches of Jediism' came along... so why do so many here want to push all things Jedi under the Jediism umbrella?  Because Jediism has more press online (due to the census pranks and idiots sueing claiming their hoodie is official Jedi wear?  User:Kol Drake  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.119.83.174 (talk) 04:53, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete as article fails WP:GNG: no third party reliable sources.  Armbrust  Talk  Contribs  08:58, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
 * KEEP as you pointed out Armbrust, below is what you pointed to, how many Books do you need about the subject to consider it notable? Currently a search of Amazon brings up several books on the subject as listed in the article itself. Heck one of them is even listed in the link you yourself posted.

Notability requires verifiable evidence The common theme in the notability guidelines is that there must be verifiable objective evidence that the subject has received significant attention to support a claim of notability.

The evidence must show the topic has gained significant independent coverage or recognition, and that this was not a mere "flash in the pan", nor a result of promotional activity or indiscriminate publicity, nor is the topic unsuitable for any other reason. Sources of evidence include recognized peer reviewed publications, credible and authoritative books, reputable media sources, and other reliable sources generally.User:Memnoich —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.148.159.10 (talk) 14:52, 8 June 2010 (UTC)  — Memnoich (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Keep and redirect article should fall under the PRIMARY source which is JEDI and not Jediism. If one studies the history of groups 'following the Jedi path', Jediism is a late comer compared to the Realists who have had BBSs and online 'schools' since the late 80s and early 90s.  That stated, perhaps Jediism should be redirected to JEDI as a footnote rather then making it the PRIMARY reference. User:Kol Drake

I find myself in agreement with Kol Drake's suggestion. JEDI should be the primary reference, with an appropriate disambiguation page to differentiate between the Jedi Order in fiction, Role-playing groups, and those who we consider the 'real-world Jedi.' Jediism is one branch under that. Jedi Realisism is another. Jedi Mysticism is yet another. There are quite a few segments of Jedi in the world, after 30+ years of inspiration and hard work. For the most part, Jedi Realists are defined by their lack of a religious overtone. Jediism, as a term, is less consistent, as non-religious groups have used that term, but typically is referring to groups who have put a religious slant on their philosophy. Wikipedia could, thus, serve to help edcuate the masses, rather than confuse them further, on the various branches of real-life Jedi that have formed over the years, and what their distinctions really are. There are several active online communities of Jedi Realists that we can cite as significant coverage and recognition that Jedi Realisism is somethign very much different from Jediism. It is improper, and a gross disservice to wikipedia users, to attempt to subcategorize Jedi Realism under Jediism when the two have diverged into very seperate and distinct philosophies. Kol Drake's suggestion, I think, would minimize future challenges to any entries relating to the 'real-world Jedi' and the movement at large. We wouldn't want to subcategorize Mormonism under Judaism, even though there is some lineage there. This particular debate strikes me as being very similar to that scenario. --Stryse (talk) 18:38, 8 June 2010 (UTC) — Stryse (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. Hmmm, invited sites, unless you are meaning sites that ask you to join, I think you're looking at them wrong. With all the spammers out there, does it really surprise you that most sites are asking for a membership. As for forums and Blogs being the top ones, well what do you think gets the most action, if you you actually go to the Home page of those sites you'd see that.Memnoich (talk) 21:44, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep if you look at the history for the Jediism page they, user:Ren, even recommend a Separate page for Jedi Realism as they themselves see it as being different Memnoich (talk) 18:44, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete without redirect This is an essay not an article. It also incorporates some semi-philosophical 'how-to' which is distinctly non-encyclopaedic. I've just flicked through the first 10 pages of ghits for "Jedi Realist", and all bar one seem to be blogs, forums or involved sites. (The one looks like a directory of sorts.) Peridon (talk) 19:10, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Typo for 'involved', sorry. Sites connected to the subject. As to blogs and forums - they just simply are no use for establishing notability, for the same reason that Wikipedia itself can't be used as a prime reference. Editable. Peridon (talk) 21:56, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Books found on Google Books Jedi Realist, Google Books Jedi Realism, Google BooksMemnoich (talk) 22:58, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep Three independent books in the first Google search just above, with one going on to discuss the difference between Jedi realism and Jediism that was brought up earlier in this discussion. Additionally, while the page maybe doesn't meet style and content guidelines yet, it's more encyclopedic than it was when this discussion began.  No reason this page shouldn't be given an opportunity to mature.  There are plenty of pages that fail WP:GNG far worse than this one does, and this one at least has the potential to become something. -- Atticus Rex &Delta; 05:33, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:GNG, WP:RS, WP:ESSAY, and seems-to-be-attracting-mostly-obvious-socks-arguing-keep. --EEMIV (talk) 15:57, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * There are several books listed that come from established, reliable Publishers that speak about Jedi Realism. So I guess the question is, how many reliable source's do you feel are needed before it conforms to the Notability requirements?Memnoich (talk) 17:43, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Way to WP:AGF, and have you read WP:ESSAY? -- Atticus Rex &Delta; 14:39, 10 June 2010 (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.