Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Soul loss

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. Stifle (talk) 11:22, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Soul loss

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Poorly sourced to largely web content none of which appears to be WP:RS Acous mana 20:22, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Paranormal, Mythology, Religion, and Spirituality. Acous mana 20:22, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The edit summary tells us that this is a translation of ru:Потеря души, where the sources come from. The support for linking this to Christian theology in any way is some dodgy exegesis on a WWW site. There's an awful lot about souls in Christian theology, but connecting it to a completely different religion in this way is just ridiculous ad hoc conflation. It just doesn't belong here at all. So I've removed it. That done, this leaves us with soul loss in Shamanism.
A quick search reveals that this is quite real and there is serious anthropological study of this idea, in both North American and Asian shamanism, e.g. ISBN 9780520212770 page 31 and ISBN 9780306477546 page 148. There's all sorts of additional stuff such as soul loss as the cause of illness per the Temiar people in ISBN 9780520082816 page 8. Were this currently poorly sourced it could still be properly sourced. Editors would just have to read books. But, indeed, editors can read the books cited as sources in this article. Contrary to the nomination, which doesn't seem to recognize a chapter of a book, fully footnoted and authored by Mircea Eliade (it being xyr 1951 book on Shamanism), this is not sourced largely to web content. Indeed, the book is cited three times over in two different ways. The translator, Immanuelle, could have done a much better job with translating the citations, but ru:Мирча Элиаде isn't that hard to find. As noted, there are other books by anthropologists and the like that address this, too, so this is not just one author's pet invention, either. Not that Eliade is exactly just some random bloke in this field. There is no policy reason for deleting this.
Uncle G (talk) 08:40, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Russian sources are also apparently translations of English originals, but I have not found the English originals, they are written by serious academics though. Immanuelle 💗 (please tag me) 09:38, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment irrespective, doesn't warrant an entire article, unless someone is prepared to do a proper job of this, at best it's a subsection in the 'soul' article. Acous mana 10:28, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Soul or Shamanism. It is a notable subject and a belief that some people do hold. It is at least worth a mention, but maybe not enough for its own article. ArdynOfTheAncients (talk) 15:26, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep There's plenty about this in anthropological literature and it's not only restricted to the shamanic traditions. https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=%22Soul+loss%22&btnG= AtFirstLight (talk) 19:52, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Since it's been relisted, this is Britannica's view on it. https://www.britannica.com/topic/soul-loss AtFirstLight (talk) 14:52, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Joe (talk) 09:59, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is a key concept in the anthropology of traditional medicine and as such merits a Wikipedia article that is distinct from either soul or shamanism. As noted, there is plenty about this in anthropological literature. The problem with the article as it stands is not so much the merit of having it, but the fact that it does not have enough sources. These sources do exist, they just need to be added to the article in order to make it clear that this is a significant topic. For this reason, I think we should 'keep this article but seek for it to be improved though quality content and references. Hoopes (talk) 20:17, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@HoopesI agree and I added a more citations template Immanuelle 💗 (please tag me) 22:06, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's a stub, about an aspect of shamanism, doesn't require standalone in current form, merge if not delete. Acous mana 12:49, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:56, 10 May 2022 (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.