Talk:Rosicrucian Fellowship

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Occult Portal Rosicrucian Fellowship is supported by WikiProject Occult in order to expand, improve, and standardize articles related to the occult. Feel free to edit the article attached to this talk page and/or become a participating member.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Secret Societies, a WikiProject which aims to improve all articles related to Secret Societies.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale.
Low	This article is on a subject of low-importance within Secret Societies articles.
This article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.

I have trimmed most of the external links because they were repetitive, with lots of sub-pages. Wikipedia is not a link farm, and we need to work hard to keep such links to an essential few. I also made a few style changes to fit Wikipedia style, such as taking out unnecessary bolds/italics and removing the "headline" at the beginning. - DavidWBrooks 17:03, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)

This seems a very odd article: it appears to be entirely based upon self-published books and websites. Is the organisation notable? Does it even exist? There are related articles with similar problems: The Rosicrucian conception of God and the scheme of evolution, Rosicrucian Monographs, Ancient Order of the Rosicrucians. LeContexte (talk) 16:37, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi! Some clarifications to your questions, as far as i am able:

• The article presents self-published references since, in spite of this organization-school being almost one century old and spread worldwide, it is very scarce the knowleadgeable third party studies about it (at least i am not acquainted with them). One could present published references and studies available in foreign languages (as in my mothertongue) and from individuals with the finest intellectual background (either academic and/or professional), yet they all relate to the school and, in that case, one would have to consider them also 'self-published' (although they are public and verifiable).
• About being notable: well, one may consider it notable since it is spread across several countries, mainly in American and European continents (the article contains an external link to those locations), that is, in the western world.
• About its existence: in the country, in western Europe, where i am located it exists since the 1920's and the local main headquarters (address available at the same mentioned previous external link) were sieged and vandalized by the secret police of the dictatorial regime back in the 70's. Still, keeping its usual low-profile, far from the vanity of current-day modern society, it continues to do its work and it publishes one of the oldest magazines in the country, started in 1926.
• The wikilink The Rosicrucian conception of God and the scheme of evolution that you refer belongs to the article about the book The Rosicrucian Cosmo-Conception, which was written by the founder of this school and had innumerous editions in the U.S. alone by the school upon reference [1] as well as by third-party editors [2] and even added to the historical collections that exist in digital format at the IA [3].

All in all, the current article about The Rosicrucian Fellowship [4], being slowly built since October 2004, is currently maybe the most comprehensive third-party one available online to our readers (and perhaps even among those which may exist in paper format) based solely upon the knowledge of the individuals contributing during this period of time and in the limited available resources. As such, i am reverting your previous tagging edition: should you not be convinced about the above focused points then please be free to re-insert them again and present your point of view. Thank you. See you! --Tekto9 (talk) 01:11, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure I understand how an organisation can be 100 years old but have nothing written about it - if there are independent foreign language sources then it would be helpful to cite them. I'm also not sure it's appropriate for parts of the article to based solely upon the personal knowledge of contributors. LeContexte (talk) 12:15, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Indeed, it makes one recall the words The Fraternity should remain secret one hundred years [5]. Anyway, i am adding three independent references (two of them available online) that, although presenting brief and superficial analysis, support the main historical and geographical aspects in the article, one of them (from local news) even shows the active existence of the Fellowship and the headquarters. Glad to be of service. --Tekto9 (talk) 15:46, 28 November 2007 (UTC)