Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Postmodern religion


 * 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   keep. Spartaz Humbug! 03:43, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Postmodern religion

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Violates WP:No original research by putting together odds and ends to create a general topic. None of the sources seem to use the expression "postmodern religion," but use the word "postmodern" (and sometimes not even that) in connection with some religious issue. Wolfview (talk) 06:46, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Note the origins of this article in, whose AFD discussion is relevant reading. Uncle G (talk) 12:50, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

(Also, why is postmodern Christianity being proposed for deletion at the same time as postmodern religion - this article has been around for ages?)
 * Keep If we can have postmodern art, postmodern music, postmodern architect., postmodern psychology, postmodern film etc it would seem to be a bit odd and unfair to argue that we can't also have postmodern religion. You can't just exclude or marginalise religion from the subject of postmodernism.
 * Postmodern religion, Postmodern Christianity and Postmodern Buddhism are all simultaneously being nominated for deletion, again you can't just exclude religion from the subject of postmodernism.

- Please consider whether your article for deletion suggestions are being very inclusive, because postmodern religion is a wonderful topic and I can't see how the research is original I personally have found over 50 sources and they are from University of California, Harvard, Yale and very notable philosophers. Also, I have worked very hard trying to take a difficult and hard to understand topic and make it easy for the average reader to understand so it is a bit mean to just place the article here for deletion without even trying to improve it or work on it. Here is the article I have written in tact, because it keeps getting edited. this section. (Also, the sources are valid and relevant - so this article can be expanded to consider many different religions and there are many books about many other religions that postmodern religion could expand on, for example, Postmodern Judaism see here)

"This paper argues that Jewish Goddess feminism illustrates the complexity of alternative religious identities and their fluid, ambiguous, and sometimes intimate historical, cultural, and religious connections to mainstream religious identities. While Jewish Goddess feminists find contemporary Judaism theologically and politically problematic, thealogy (feminist discourse on the Goddess and the divinity of femaleness) can offer them precisely the sacralization of female generativity that mainstream Judaism cannot." --Kary247 (talk) 16:19, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
 * ^ Powell, Jim (1998). Postmodernism For Beginners. ISBN 978-1-934389-09-6
 * ^ "Postmodernism." Encyclopedia of Science and Religion. Ed. Ray Abruzzi and Michael J. McGandy. Macmillan-Thomson Gale, 2003. eNotes.com. 2006. 27 Dec, 2010
 * ^ Patton, K.; Ray, B. (2008). A Magic Still Dwells: Comparative Religion in the Postmodern Age. University of California Press, Berkeley - "a postmodern study of religion" p199
 * ^ French, Rebecca Redwood (Spring 1999). "From Yoder to Yoda: Models of Traditional, Modern, and Postmodern Religion in U.S. Constitutional Law". Arizona Law Review 41:49: (abstract). "Based on an analysis of the actual language used by the Supreme Court to characterize religion, this Article argues that the Court takes a common-sensical approach to each religion brought before it.".
 * ^ Oxford University Press - Journals - Aaron Stuvland http://jcs.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2010/08/12/jcs.csq055.extract
 * ^ On Deconstructing Life-Worlds: Buddhism, Christianity, Culture (Atlanta: Scholars Press of American Academy of Religion, 1997; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000; ISBN 0-7885-0295-6, cloth, ISBN 0-7885-0296-4, pbk
 * ^ a b Clarke, Peter (2009). The Oxford Handbook of the sociology of religion. Oxford University Press. Page 306.
 * ^ Lévi-Strauss, Claude. Structural Anthropology. Trans. Claire Jacobson and Brooke Grundfest Schoepf (First published New York: Basic Books, 1963; New York: Anchor Books Ed., 1967), 324.
 * ^ Eve, Raymond. "Wiccans vs. Creationists: An Empirical Study of How Two Systems of Belief Differ". The University of Texas. [1]
 * ^ BBC Religions: Postmodernism http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/atheism/types/postmodernism.shtml
 * ^ Hatcher, B. (1999). Eclecticism and Modern Hindu Discourse. Oxford University Press USA.
 * ^ a b Lewis, James (1996). Magic religion and Modern Witchcraft. New York University Press. Page 46: "While pre-modern themes form the foundation for this movement it is the manner that such themes are reworked to be appropriate in the contemporary context that form the greatest relevance to the significance of Witchcraft as a postmodern form of spirituality".
 * ^ Winston Churchill Quote
 * ^ Creative Quotes
 * ^ Patton, K.; Ray, B. (2008). A Magic Still Dwells: Comparative Religion in the Postmodern Age. University of California Press, Berkeley - p132
 * ^ Heelas, Paul (1998) Religion, modernity, and postmodernity - page 4 and 5
 * ^ Raphael, Melissa (April 1998). "Goddess Religion, Postmodern Jewish Feminism, and the Complexity of Alternative Religious Identities", ‌Nova Religion, Vol. 1, No. 2, Pages 198–215 (abstract can be found at: [2]
 * ^ Patricia M. Mcdonough, Peter Mclaren (1996). "Postmodern Studies of Gay and Lesbian Lives in Academia", Harvard Educational Review, Summer 1996 Issue
 * ^ Riggs, J. (2003). Postmodern Christianity: Doing Theology in the Contemporary World - ix-x
 * ^ Lewis, James (1996). Magic religion and Modern Witchcraft. New York University Press. Page 46, "... While premodern themes form the foundation for this movement it is the manner that such themes are reworked to be appropriate in the contemporary context that form the greatest relevance to the significance of Witchcraft as a postmodern form of spirituality."
 * ^ Smith, Diane. Wicca and Witchcraft for Dummies
 * ^ Patridge, Christopher. "Alternative Spiritualities, New Religions, and the Reenchantment of the West", in James Lewis (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of New Religious Movements (2004)
 * ^ Anderson, Walter Truett. "Four Ways to Be Absolutely Right", in Anderson (ed.), The Truth About the Truth: De-confusing and Re-constructing the Postmodern World (1995)
 * ^ Fisher, Amber. Journal of Western Mystery Tradition, Vol. 1. [3]
 * ^ Raphael, Melissa (April 1998). "Goddess Religion, Postmodern Jewish Feminism, and the Complexity of Alternative Religious Identities", ‌Nova Religion, Vol. 1, No. 2, pp. 198–215
 * ^ Werner, Michael. "Ecofeminism, Neopaganism, and the Gaia Movement in the Postmodern Age", Humanism Today, vol. 7 (1992)
 * ^ Eilberg-Schwartz, Howard. “Witches of the West: Neopaganism and Goddess Worship as Enlightenment Religions”, Journal of Feminist Studies in Religion, vol. 5, no. 1 (1989)


 * Firstly, the fact we have other "postmodern" articles is not relevant. I happen to think a few of those should be deleted as well. Secondly, the sources you list here are really not specifically about "postmodern religion".--Pontificalibus (talk) 12:09, 1 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep A quick google search seems to show that there are legitimate sources for "postmodern religion." If the sources in the article are insufficient, I see that as a reason to add a refimprove tag for now, rather than deleting the article outright. YardsGreen (talk) 12:01, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Would you add the sources, because I certainly can't see them? Adding tags isn't a solution to anything. --Pontificalibus (talk) 12:09, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
 * WP:PGL states that WP:AfD is appropriate if an article has one of the listed issues "and cannot likely be improved." Considering that the page was created only about two weeks ago, and no attempt was made to discuss the problems on the talk page, I believe outright deletion is premature. Consider WP:CHANCE. You are right that adding tags is not a solution, but it would encourage discussion. If it fails to encourage discussion after some time, that may be the appropriate time to delete the article. YardsGreen (talk) 13:08, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete The subject is not even mentioned in Religion. If it becomes a sizeable section within that article, then we can consider splitting off a seperate one. Right now it doesn't need it's own article. I am struggling to find sources that even define it is a concept. --Pontificalibus (talk) 12:09, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
 * You will stop struggling if you simply click on the word "books" in the nomination statement. Those links are provided to enable people commenting in discussions to give at least partially informed opinions, so why not use them? Phil Bridger (talk) 23:40, 1 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep. Links from books above as mentioned by Phil Bridger convince me, regardless of any criticisms of the article as it currently stands. I think this article could probably stay while the other examples of postmodern religions are no-hopers. Incidentally, I don't think the existence of Postmodern psychology i a good argument for keeping this article - looks ripe for an AfD itself! Kim Dent-Brown   (Talk)  23:52, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philosophy-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 20:28, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 20:28, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep per Phil and Kim. Yworo (talk) 23:55, 1 January 2011 (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.