Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/World Pantheist Movement (2nd nomination)


 * 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.  Sandstein  07:29, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

World Pantheist Movement
AfDs for this article:


 * – ( View AfD View log )

I recently found a previous AfD discussion held seventeen years ago. I relisted it, but after that I just closed it as No Consensus to delete. The question is still valid; this article still seems to be lacking in reliable sources. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 17:33, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 17:33, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 17:33, 26 July 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete as it stands - I can't find much evidence either, even now 17 years later. Surprised it stuck around this long. There is apparently a passing mention in an Oxford Press book. There was some press in 1999, but it turns out to have been written by Harrison (and another) - apparently he had a book out. Google Scholar has passing mentions and pieces by Harrison. Not sure what our notability guideline on religious organisations is; but I'd first assume that, like our organisations guideline, it's basically WP:GNG, and I'm not seeing anything that passes that - David Gerard (talk) 21:39, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Comment notability on the four external sources mentioned
 * Keep - I would very strongly disagree with the arguments put forward. The World Pantheist Movement is the largest and, besides the Universal Pantheist Society, the only international organization devoted to pantheism. In addition, there must have been only a one-time significance (see: Notability). I will adapt the article to the standards of Wikipedia. - Lothaeus (talk) 21:00, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
 * You haven't really addressed the lack of RSes per WP:ORG - every source in the article at present except one is primary-sourced or user-generated content from the primary source - but if you can do that, then that would be an argument - David Gerard (talk) 22:46, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
 * So, why were the Universal Pantheist Society or The Paradise Project not proposed for deletion, although your argument of low relevance is also applicable there (with even less sources as in the case of the UPS or no media coverage for years as with the TPP)? - Lothaeus (talk) 23:07, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
 * The answer is: this is a discussion about this article, not those articles; if you have problems with those articles existing, then you should consider a discussion deletion on those articles. WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is not a winning excuse in a deletion discussion; other bad articles existing is not a reason to keep this bad article, especially when you're still not addressing the particular issues raised with this bad article - David Gerard (talk) 23:29, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
 * It is in this case because they are similar organizations which are important to consider in order to the relevance of this article. Also, I don't understand deleting an article just because it's "bad", regardless of relevance. And by the way, I count four external sources: Encyclopaedia of Religion and Nature, Candid, SETI@Home and World Religions & Spirituality Project. I believe that personal reasons could play a role here, especially since this is an issue from the religious spectrum. - Lothaeus (talk) 06:47, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Encyclopaedia of Religion and Nature carries weight, i'll give you that, but we'd need a few more sources like that to truly call the subject of this article notable.
 * Candid is considered a primary source, because the text in Candid entries is generated by the organizations themselves.
 * SETI@Home doesn't contribute to notability, in this case, because it looks to be (a) a primary source just like Candid and (b) does not got in-depth about the source.
 * While the World Religions & Spirituality Project is a secondary source, it isn't considered reliable enough on Wikipedia to go beyond routine or unreliable coverage. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 07:50, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 17:47, 2 August 2021 (UTC) I refer to the General notability guideline with Significant coverage in Reliable sources, Independent of the subject and therefore it is Presumed that this subject merits an own article. Here are the books I have found that contain content about the World Pantheist Movement:
 * Comment - I would want to make another argument: Pantheism is overall underrepresented in most of the societies worldwide. From my own experience, I can say that many people identify with pantheistic ideas, but have never heard neither of the conceptualization nor the specific term. If we delete this article of its largest organization, then this philosophical worldview would be even less discoverable on the Internet and pantheism would continue to lose relevance, in my opinion. The historical and current relevance is evident from the related article Pantheism - Lothaeus (talk) 18:25, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
 * This would be a good argument for removing the present article, and redirecting it to Pantheism - David Gerard (talk) 20:00, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Somehow I doubt your neutrality towards pantheism, David Gerard, as the following discussion points out quite well: Talk:Carl_Sagan/pantheism. - Lothaeus (talk) 20:26, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Addition - And look who made it finally on the list (User_talk:David_Gerard/archive_1). By the way, Carl Sagan was already 7 years dead at the time of the previous cited discussion about him and therefore could not further externalize his views. - Lothaeus (talk) 20:45, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
 * hi there! Please confine your arguments to the guidelines that can be found at WP:GNG and WP:NORG. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 20:48, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

1. “Encyclopedia of Religion and Nature”, Bron Taylor, 2008; weblink:

2. “Pantheisticon: A Modern English Translation”, John Toland, 2014; weblink:

3. “Religious Naturalism Today: The Rebirth of a Forgotten”, Jerome A. Stone, 2008 (page 10); weblink:

4. “Natural History of Cognition: Mind over Matter”, Chuck Baxter, 2020; weblink:

5. “The Lonely Mind of God: An Acosmist Answers the Primordial Existential Question by Solving the Omniscience Riddle”, Sherman O'Brien, 2021; weblink:

6. “Cumulative List of Organizations Described in Section 170 (c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954”, United States. Internal Revenue Service, 2004 (page 3444); weblink:

7. “Dark Green Religion Nature Spirituality and the Planetary Future”, Bron Raymond Taylor, 2010 (page 159); weblink:

8. “Pandeism: An Anthology of the Creative Mind. An Exploration of the Creativity of the Human Mind”, Knujon Mapson, Amy Perry, 2019; weblink:

9. “Saved by Philosophy – A Novel About Philosophy, And the Amor Dei Intellectualis”, Steven H. Propp, 2007; weblink:

10. “Expanding Humanitys Vision Of God”, Robert Herrmann, 2009 (page 251); weblink:

11. “Godless Paganism: Voices of Non-Theistic Pagans”, John Halstead, 2016 (page 37); weblink:

12. “The Case Against Theism. Why the Evidence Disproves God’s Existence”, Raphael Lataster, 2018; weblink:

13. “Science & Religion: A Handbook for Interpersonal Dialogue, Discussion and Debate”, John Ross Jr., 2016; weblink:

14. “Theory of Knowledge for the IB Diploma”, Richard van de Lagemaat, 2014 (page 535); weblink:

15. “Alternative Concepts of God. Essays on the Metaphysics of the Divine”, Andrei Buckareff, Yujin Nagasawa (editors), 2015 (page 274); weblink:

16. “Spirited. Taking Paganism Beyond the Circle”, Gede Parma, 2012 (page 168); weblink:

17. “The True American Manifesto”, Richard W. Fredericks, 2010 (page 75); weblink:

18. “The Routledge Handbook of Religious Naturalism”, Donald A. Crosby, ‎Jerome A. Stone, 2018; weblink:

19. “A Companion to Atheism and Philosophy”, Graham Oppy, 2019 (page 156); weblink:

20. “Pandeism: An Anthology”, Knujon Mapson, 2017; weblink:

21. “Goethe's 'Exposure Of Newton's Theory': A Polemic On Newton's Theory Of Light And Colour”, Michael John Duck, Michael Petry, 2016 (page xxxix);

22. “Margaret Atwood: A Reference Guide”, 1988-2005”, Shannon Hengen, ‎Ashley Thomson, 2007 (page 309); weblink:

23. “Encyclopedia of American Religions”, J. Gordon Melton, ‎Gale Group, 2003 (page 675); weblink:

24. “Schopenhauer's Philosophy of Religion. The Death of God and the Oriental Renaissance”, Christopher Ryan, 2010 (page 150); weblink:

25. “The New Encyclopedia of Unbelief”, Richard Dawkins, 2007 (page 14); weblink:

- Lothaeus (talk) 22:30, 2 August 2021 (UTC)


 * I'm not going to got through all of these, but all of the ones that I checked contained mostly a passing mention. Not enough to contribute towards WP:GNG. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 22:46, 2 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Okay, I will help you. Please check: 3., 4., 7., 8. (continues but not available on Google Books), 10., 16. (same as with 8.), 18., 21. (good reference for the symbol of the WPM), 23. (short but very good source), 25. (citation only but Richard Dawkins is a worldwide known author). - Lothaeus (talk) 23:09, 2 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete The sources provided in the article and in the comments above are some combination of superficial, non-independent, and dubiously reliable. Passing mentions in the vein of "Paul Harrison, founder of the World Pantheist Movement, wrote that..." are not significant coverage of the World Pantheist Movement as an organization. Nor are directory entries and other such items that testify to the group's existence but little more. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 01:14, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Notice - To the administrator concerned – please also read the discussion on User_talk:David_Gerard before considering the deletion of this article. Thank you. - Lothaeus (talk) 21:16, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm not the administrator who will close this discussion, or an administrator of any sort for that matter, but I don't see how anything there matters to the question at hand. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 02:10, 4 August 2021 (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.