Talk:Contemporary Witchcraft

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Discussion at Talk:Witchcraft

[edit] Merge with Wicca?

Please do NOT add this to Wicca. This is NOT Wicca. It is not even religion. I hate people getting witchcraft and Wicca mixed up. - A concerned Witch
Hi there, just wanted to let you know that I've posted a request for feedback on the talk page at Witchcraft, relating to your new articles. I've posted it there because it's a long-established page with many people watching it, and I wanted to see how other people feel about the range of articles you've written. Please don't infer any criticism: I'm only ever delighted when a new editor joins us who is keen to contribute constructively! But I wonder if we might harness your energy and help you focus it a little more. Reply here if you wish, but best of all at Talk:Witchcraft as this will be visible to more people. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 17:11, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
I oppose the merger. "Contemporary Witchcraft" should be used to talk about all modern witchcraft traditions, including Wicca, Stregheria and Hedge Witchcraft. (Midnightblueowl (talk) 19:22, 23 March 2008 (UTC))
I oppose the merger as well, but for different reasons than some. Most people assume that all Witches are Wiccans, and this is just not true. I am a non-Wiccan witch, and it drives me bonkers that people constantly act as if all witches believe the same things or have the same practices. They don't. There are many branches on the tree of witchcraft, and Wicca is one of them (but it's not the entire tree!) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Glamrockboy (talkcontribs) 03:13, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Neutrality

Section headed 'Criticism' repeatedly uses the word "many" - "many criticisms", etc. - without citing sources.

[edit] Improving this article

The article has had 'references needed' tags on it for a while now, and although some sections have citations (eg to Marion Green's work) others do not. I'm concerned that there are sections describing different strands and traditions which seem to me to be very similar, and with no descriptions or citations to distinguish between them. I've heard of Hedgewitches of course, and there's a citation to confirm the term. But some of the other sections seem very tenuous.

May I propose that, if these sections are not expanded and justified with citations, they should be deleted or merged into a single paragraph? In the absence of some quality control this article is falling well short of the standards we are reaching in some of the other related articles in this area. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 16:38, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

I have gone ahead and removed the sections of the article which were unsourced, such as several of the traditions named and the 'criticisms' section noted above. Lest this seem like a 'gutting' of the article, I will add some sourced material (Doreen Valiente and Janet Farrar have some useful things to say about non-Wiccan contemporary witchcraft) and I'll do that tonight or tomorrow. Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 06:48, 2 June 2008 (UTC)