Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Urban shamanism


 * 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   no consensus. Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:10, 18 January 2012 (UTC)

Urban shamanism

 * – ( View AfD View log )

No evidence of notability, listed references but no footnotes make verification difficult, previous AfD had a clear "delete" consensus but was for some reason closed as "no consensus" Yworo (talk) 02:53, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philosophy-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 19:59, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 19:59, 28 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talk about my edits? 10:29, 4 January 2012 (UTC)




 * Keep This is obviously notable. For example, see Anthropology Today which states that "'urban shamanism' is now a familiar term in the literature". Warden (talk) 11:23, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete The previous undecided "AFD" was a "Votes for deletion" before the advent of AFD, and had very different standards. The article found by Warden doesn't seem to have anything to do with this article, since it is about people in Siberia going to a "Buryat shaman" in the city of "Ulan Ude," and this article is about a modern New Age digital-techno-psychedelic movement in the west. Multiple independent and reliable sources with significant coverage are needed to satisfy notability. It fails notability because it refers to the writing of one person, T. Roberts, with a possibly unrelated article from Japan thrown in. Inline references would help in trying to determine the coverage in the latter article. Edison (talk) 15:29, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
 * If you read the sources rather than this weak stub, you will soon find that urban shamanism is quite eclectic. For example, in Transcultural Psychiatry (1993) we read that "Urban shamanism is a fascinating phenomenon because of the diversity of the sources (traditional shamanism, Roman Catholicism, New Age consciousness, contemporary physics) its practitioners draw upon for inspiration...".  In The International Journal of Pagan Studies - The Figure of the Shaman as a Modern Myth (2008)  - the concept is interpreted in four ways: "neoshamanism, the ‘urban shaman’ as cultural critic and rebel, technoshamanism/cybershamanism, and the field of performing and visual arts".  As the topic is barely started, it is too soon to say exactly what its scope is.  Our editing policy is to improve weak starts, not to delete them. Warden (talk) 16:31, 4 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Weak Keep Having trouble finding references, but I've heard this term used for years. Unfortunately I can't back that up other than quoting Google hits. However, the article as it stands needs a total rewrite as it's far too focused on a specific use of the term. Madam Fatale (talk) 16:13, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Wifione  Message 22:23, 11 January 2012 (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.