Talk:Annalee Skarin

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled[edit]

Within huge segments of the global New Age/Metaphysical community (within which I have participated as a healer and teacher for the last 13 years), Annalee Skarin is acknowledged as a major influence. However, accounts of her death (or translation/ascension, with deliberately faked death) to this day are hotly debated. One one hand, spiritual/metaphysical luminary Robert Coon asserts she failed in her quest for Physical Immortality, and that he has even located a death certificate. On the other hand, pioneering Rebirthing-Breathwork leader Sondra Ray claims to have met someone who physically witnessed her ascension and dematerialisation. Perhaps the real truth will never be known.

With this page, I have tried to reach an early NPOV, and hope that the article will attract meaningful, civilised and balanced contributions. Apologies for the lack of t-crossing and i-dotting with respect to references/citations - not my strongest point. I acknowledge that there are many folks much more qualified than me to write on this topic. Aum108 (talk) 02:34, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I made a lot of edits this week![edit]

There were a number of errors of fact on this page so I started by correcting one, then another, then I got on a roll and filled in a lot of details. I'm going to visit a library soon that has the actual documents used in Annalee's excommunication. That will be amazing. I will obtain the necessary permissions and publish transcriptions on this page. I hope to get permission to display some photos as well. I am a total Wikipedia novice so if I messed up anyone's entries, I apologize. Seat108 (talk) 06:16, 15 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussions at the nomination pages linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 02:48, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is supposed to be built on secondary not primary sources[edit]

Just a quick glance tells me this article is using too many primary sources. A letter from Hilton to Elder Spencer W. Kimball of the quorum of the 12 is a primary source. Wikipedia editors in general do not have the expertice to properly understand the context of primary sources, and even if they do that is not the purpose of Wikipedia. Things should be found in secondary sources, and if they are not findable in secondary sources that probably show the article is going more indepth than coverage of the subject justifies.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:26, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]