Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eclectic Paganism

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. (non-admin closure) sst✈ 11:51, 22 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Eclectic Paganism

Eclectic Paganism (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This page has numerous issues; I would like for the community at large to give their opinion as to whether or not it should be kept. I believe it was already deleted in the past, but I am not entirely sure of this. Rambunctious Racoon (talk) 05:11, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: This was deleted via WP:A7 on 21 August 2015, by Sphilbrick. Just by a glance I'm not entirely sure if this really expands on Modern paganism. The idea of this is already somewhat covered with this portion:

The term neopagan provides a means of distinguishing between historical pagans of ancient cultures and the adherents of modern religious movements. This category of religions includes syncretic or eclectic approaches like Wicca, Neo-druidism, and neoshamanism at one end of the spectrum, as well as culturally specific traditions, such as the many varieties of polytheistic reconstructionism, at the other. However, some reconstructionists reject the term neopagan because they wish to set their historically oriented approach apart from generic neopagan eclecticism. Scholarly writers often prefer the term contemporary paganism to cover all new polytheistic religious movements, a usage favoured by The Pomegranate: The International Journal of Pagan Studies, the leading peer-reviewed journal in the field.

I suppose that this could probably be redirected to the article on modern paganism. It's slightly a neologism in this specific format, but the above section does show that the term "eclectic" has been used to describe modern paganism so it'd likely be a reasonable redirect. I'm going to perform a little more research before making a final decision, though. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 09:36, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• It looks like it's considered to be both separate and part of modern paganism depending on who you read. Some classify it as separate, some as part. I've found two good sources and if I can find at least one more, I'm going to argue for this to be kept separate since the academic source argues that it's separate from modern paganism. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 09:50, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep or merge/redirect. I've found mention of this in reliable sources like academic texts and this seems to be viewed as separate from modern paganism to a certain extent. The article in its original format kind of gave off the impression that the above (now struck) paragraph would roughly cover this enough to where it'd be redirectable to the page for MP, but the sourcing I've added shows that this is not the case. On a side note, I can't remember if Llewellyn is reliable or not. I'm leaning towards not, but I've included it just sort of to show that this is a thing. It looks like part of the issue with finding sources for this is mostly because the terminology for this is a little loose. It is covered however, and mentioned as a specific version of paganism in this one by NYU Press. Part of the reason for the confusion is that sometimes it's sort of generalized with MP and other forms of paganism, but it is considered to be separate by its practitioners for the most part. I think that there's enough to keep, in any case. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 10:06, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• It looks like this is also termed "Universalist Paganism" per this source. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 10:13, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• I'm finding the term "Druidcraft" attached to it as well and it'd fit the initial version of the article, but this was put out through a non-academic publisher so I'd like to make a search for this term and find an academic source before putting this in the article. ([1]) Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 10:28, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• I'm not opposed to this being merged and redirected into modern paganism, so I'm slightly altering this to take into consideration a merge/redirect. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 10:32, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Paganism-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:30, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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.