Jibz
He/Him- 3,111
- 2,505
Its much like the rise of mormonism in that regard.No. L Ron Hubbard was explicitly authoring with the intention of engendering the advent of a new religion.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Its much like the rise of mormonism in that regard.No. L Ron Hubbard was explicitly authoring with the intention of engendering the advent of a new religion.
Ironically, Cthulhu is actually Tier 0 in Typhonian Thelema. R'lyeh resides in a metaphysical plane of existence referred to as "The Mauve Zone", which is the threshold betwixt Existence and Nonexistence. It is the place from which all preternatural phenomenon and worldly knowledge emerges.Holy Zeus.
I am converted.
I now protest against the pages of the Cthuhlu Mythos. They offend me.
Although no wait. They're Tier 0. And that's cool. Keep them.
Ironically, Cthulhu is actually Tier 0 in Typhonian Thelema. R'lyeh resides in a metaphysical plane of existence referred to as "The Mauve Zone", which is the threshold that resides betwixt Existence and Nonexistence. It is also the place from which all preternatural phenomenon and worldly knowledge emerges.
Huh… interestingTyphonian Thelema.
I think that we should preferably leave the Mormons out of this to avoid controversy.Its much like the rise of mormonism in that regard.
Well, even as they are now, the cosmology blog and the profile itself are quite terrible.Do you guys really wanna go down with this? What about all the cosmetology blogs and calculations made for the profile?
Your point of "if the author believed it to be real and represented it" is irrelevant, again, you can believe in God and still write about God in your fictional story. It can even be close to accurate, the Shiva trilogy is an example of this in modern time. That point is irrelevant. I repeat for the 900th time, it DOESN'T MATTER what the author believes, because all fiction is derivative of what someone believes in.we only make exceptions for mythologies that are based on specific fictional works separate from any mainstream religion, such as Journey to the West and the Shahnameh, that can provide reasonably high coherence and accuracy for our purposes, and lessen the offence to religious believers.
All i did was compare Scientology to Mormonism in the regard they are both legitmate religions in the sense they were conceptualized to be taken as fact? I mean sure, we can drop the subject, but it was an innocent comparison to refute a false equivalance.I think that we should preferably leave the Mormons out of this to avoid controversy.
I mean what is different beetwen the bible who is obviously a fiction for numerous people and real for other and jjtw who is fiction for some and real for other?Ok so I'll be more monitoring rn, please don't chime in unless you're saying something immensely important.
For the OP, unless you want a sitewide policy to be introduced, our standards for Mythology files say this and this alone:
Your point of "if the author believed it to be real and represented it" is irrelevant, again, you can believe in God and still write about God in your fictional story. It can even be close to accurate, the Shiva trilogy is an example of this in modern time. That point is irrelevant. I repeat for the 900th time, it DOESN'T MATTER what the author believes, because all fiction is derivative of what someone believes in.
If you have an issue that the concepts are "too accurate" to the real world beliefs, go blame the author. I don't see for a fraction its relevance, unless YOU PURPOSELY ROB CONTEXT OF THE PAGE, that being of the supposedly fictional story not the real world concept which can very well have far more depth than you associate with.
If you disagree with what I said, I infer you to make a thread suggesting a sitewide policy against it, because we just don't have a single rule that says what you're saying.
The only point here is that it is meant to not be fictional altogether, but you NEITHER ELABORATE ON IT, AND KEEP BRINGING BACK YOUR OTHER POINT NOT CONSIDERED, and that along with 50 users chiming in to say the same things redundantly and acting offended is why this thread is so long.
Intention, the Bible was written as fact and to be the truth while JttW was originally written as Fiction. Sure some people would come to see it as fact but a difference still remains in the originally intentions.I mean what is different beetwen the bible who is obviously a fiction for numerous people and real for other and jjtw who is fiction for some and real for other?
The point is, the moment that it exist a believe from not only the author that the text is not a fiction but real, like here with sun wukong when jjtw have become a sort-off canon of the real sun wukong religion. Then the Op is not wrong.
I see.
As Psycho said, intention. If Journey to the West is mean to be historical account then and believed by a substantial number of people believe it as so I'll be glad to have it removed.I mean what is different beetwen the bible who is obviously a fiction for numerous people and real for other and jjtw who is fiction for some and real for other?
The point is, the moment that it exist a believe from not only the author that the text is not a fiction but real, like here with sun wukong when jjtw have become a sort-off canon of the real sun wukong religion. Then the Op is not wrong.
I suppose JttW has withstood the test of history, so it is high likely not offending.Meh, do we have like, any other 3rd party buddhism enthusiasts?
I know it's alot of work but still, if it has the potential to offend directly, don't think it should be kept.
JttW is never considered as a historical texts.As Psycho said, intention. If Journey to the West is mean to be historical account then and believed by a substantial number of people believe it as so I'll be glad to have it removed.
I think there are grounds to delete Sun Wukong's profile, among them being you can't accurately scale it without stepping into Theology.I think that @Udlmaster is interested in Journey to the West.
To not create another Barney the Dinosaur but with Religion so it'll be even worse.Whats the basis for the rule anyways? That its harmful to others? That its against fandom’s policy? Im curious to know whats the reasoning behind it.
if this is a joke, its lost on me. Is this a euphimism for somethingTo not create another Barney the Dinosaur but with Religion so it'll be even worse.
Oh, so basically, Barney the Dinosaur was a really popular profile, as in probably the most popular among VSB regulars and it was being treated as meme fodder for a while and it just kept on getting out of hand.if this is a joke, its lost on me. Is this a euphimism for something
What on Earth does that even have to do with religionOh, so basically, Barney the Dinosaur was a really popular profile, as in probably the most popular among VSB regulars and it was being treated as meme fodder for a while and it just kept on getting out of hand.
It got so overwhelming the profile got Banned from ever appearing again.
They brought it back and I believe they banned it again.
They flip a coin, heads they stick to lore, tails they make Atilla the Hun a giant Kaiju anime ayy lmao girl.
What on Earth does that even have to do with religion
Oh, that will change soon.Now, for real, we'd need more solid numbers on "proper" believers (Questionable or not) to delete the page out of potential religional concerns, we don't want terrorists hanging around here just because their favorite deity is rated weaker than furrybait
Barneyism best religion (lmao), but anyways, Barney's still on the site, the site no longer bans preschool aimed media out of being "inappropiate" to have, especially if they have proper indexable stuff to begin with, even if they would never fight and so on, so long they're indexed appropiately and all.
Now, for real, we'd need more solid numbers on "proper" believers (Questionable or not) to delete the page out of potential religional concerns, we don't want terrorists hanging around here just because their favorite deity is rated weaker than furrybait if the number is significant, needless to say, most religions rely on what to us are NLFs and flowery language (statements with "multiple meanings" that aren't meant to be taken literal get poor results here as we can't rely on interpretations or else it's no different from fanfiction for these purposes), and stuff like "omnipotence" can't be used for our purposes, so it's no surprise some mainstream religions struggle to even reach tier 2.
For instance, we deleted the original greek mythology pages because there were apparently 5000 believers (Which frankly is a small number, there are tongues with more speakers than that) to this day and age, and it'd set a bad precedent to allow anything whatsoever to be deleted just because someone believes in it, that'd unironically lead into any user to claim they believe in something and so should be deleted, which will get chaotic fast and compromise the site's infrastructure.
Then I'm not sure if you object the deletion.
This need not be complicated. Journey to the West is a novel that has themes borrowed heavily from real life religions. So does a lot of media? American Gods is a series who's entire concept hinges on your religious knowledge. Unsong is a comedy that heavily borrows Jewish themes. JTTW is like either of these but written ages ago. I don't see why it should be treated any different.
Right. More accurately and fairly index, scale and interpret data are things I support. Actually, I feel that JttW Sun Wukong profile has set a good example in this (how we VS Battles Wiki transforms a composited profile into an accurate profile).I think there are grounds to delete Sun Wukong's profile, among them being you can't accurately scale it without stepping into Theology.
But the profile right now? No. I don't think it uses Religious scaling, it uses Religious words, sure, but using Religious aspects such as Yin and Yang is common, because they've spread beyond their religion. (We're not about to delete Naruto for using the Shinto God's names as attacks now, are we?)
Similarly, it's why The Buddha isn't on an auto-ban list when we see him pop up in a verse, same with Jehovah/YHVH/God or Satan. The current profile is so stripped down from its religious connections that its fine as a profile, even if it is incomplete due to the remove of the Cultural and Religious aspects.
So, while I do think the profile should be deleted, I don't think it should be for these reasons.
Looking more to the future too, to what this sets as precedence, we'd have to tighten the rules on Religious iconography in fictional verses. Many, many, profiles would have to be deleted along similar lines, either because they contain desperate religious elements.
And it should be noted, many verses get to Tier 1 through the use of inspired Religious elements (Again, see Transdualism and Yin and Yang).
Realistically, we should be working to loosen these restrictions so we may more accurately and fairly index, scale and interpret data, rather than to further limit our scope.
TL;DR: No, I don't think it should be deleted for these reasons and it would set a terrible precedent too.
We mainly deleted them mainly because mythology is usually too self-contradictory to get coherent tiers out of, as there were different versions of them even back when they were considered as religions, and that was thousands of years ago, which has severely diluted the full contexts further, and made them even more incoherent and fragmentary.For instance, we deleted the original greek mythology pages because there were apparently 5000 believers (Which frankly is a small number, there are tongues with more speakers than that) to this day and age, and it'd set a bad precedent to allow anything whatsoever to be deleted just because someone believes in it, that'd unironically lead into any user to claim they believe in something and so should be deleted, which will get chaotic fast and compromise the site's infrastructure.
I have sent a request to the Wayback Machine Internet archive service to do so, but the queued backup process will be initiated first in 18 minutes or so.By the way, could anyone object the deletion help archiving the profile page? I feel that it is valuable.
I agree, and I feel that this thread alone has attracted staffs' comments, so maybe it is unnecessary to create a staff thread againWe can close this thread, further debate anyone can make a staff thread on.