Talk:Materialization (paranormal)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Materialization (paranormal) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

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

Archives: 1: 30 days

The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to pseudoscience and fringe science, which has been designated as a contentious topic.

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

Arbitration Ruling on the Treatment of Pseudoscience

In December of 2006 the Arbitration Committee ruled on guidelines for the presentation of topics as pseudoscience in Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Pseudoscience. The final decision was as follows:

Neutral point of view as applied to science: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, a fundamental policy, requires fair representation of significant alternatives to scientific orthodoxy. Significant alternatives, in this case, refers to legitimate scientific disagreement, as opposed to pseudoscience.
Serious encyclopedias: Serious and respected encyclopedias and reference works are generally expected to provide overviews of scientific topics that are in line with respected scientific thought. Wikipedia aspires to be such a respected work.
Obvious pseudoscience: Theories which, while purporting to be scientific, are obviously bogus, such as Time Cube, may be so labeled and categorized as such without more justification.
Generally considered pseudoscience: Theories which have a following, such as astrology, but which are generally considered pseudoscience by the scientific community may properly contain that information and may be categorized as pseudoscience.
Questionable science: Theories which have a substantial following, such as psychoanalysis, but which some critics allege to be pseudoscience, may contain information to that effect, but generally should not be so characterized.
Alternative theoretical formulations: Alternative theoretical formulations which have a following within the scientific community are not pseudoscience, but part of the scientific process.

This article was nominated for deletion on 5 September 2014 (UTC). The result of the discussion was no consensus.

Psychology

	Psychology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Skepticism

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory and skepticism related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SkepticismWikipedia:WikiProject SkepticismTemplate:WikiProject SkepticismSkepticism articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Paranormal

	This article falls under the scope of WikiProject Paranormal, which aims to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to the paranormal and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the attached article, help with current tasks, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and discussions.ParanormalWikipedia:WikiProject ParanormalTemplate:WikiProject Paranormalparanormal articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Daily pageviews of this article

A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org

Is this topic notable enough for its own article?[edit]

Seriously. This article is essentially a list of alleged feats performed by spiritualist mediums. Although I'm hard pressed to find the words "paranormal materialization" in these sources, it appears that mediums have historically claimed to make stuff appear during seances using "spirit fluid" or "teleplastics" or whatever their name for ectoplasm is/was. That's fine, however "materialization", an area of specialty within mediumship, doesn't deserve it's own article. I recommend merging any well sourced useful material to Ectoplasm (paranormal) ‬or Mediumship. - LuckyLouie (talk) 12:27, 2 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Strikes me as a fine idea. Dbrodbeck (talk) 12:40, 2 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There is a basic problem: the two are different. Ectoplasm is related directly to the spirits/ghosts etc., materialization on the other hand, is a general concept. Both skeptical and channeled sources confirm that. Additionally, ectoplasm (spirit) is the antonym of material. False prophetism aspect should also be taken into consideration, as materialisation is one of their miracles. What prompts luckylouie into thinking that a merge would be fine, may stem from the possibility that some of the material in this article might actually belong to the ectoplasm topic. Logos (talk) 19:07, 3 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If I remember it well I started this article and ectoplasm is not a term that is associated with Indian miracle mongers. Andries (talk) 06:02, 4 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The question of notability would rest on the level of discussion in reliable sources. Is this article a WP synthesis of a variety of apparently similar (OR) frauds by a variety of moderately notable charlatans? Is there a source which discusses this set of frauds together? If the sources don't identify these individual frauds as "paranormal materialization" why does WP create this identification? If a reliable source does not discuss the subject as a specific subject, where does the basis for an encyclopedia to do so originate? Aren't each of these frauds, myths and unsubstantiated phenomena covered at their main articles? What reliable source groups these all together and labels them "paranormal materialization"? - - MrBill3 (talk) 05:29, 5 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Materialization is extensively treated in the book Miracles are my visiting cards by Erlendur Haraldsson. The book is about the miracles attributed to Sathya Sai Baba. The book does not openly endorse miracles and it was considered a reliable source in mediation regarding Sathya Sai Baba. Andries (talk) 05:58, 5 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This would seem to be sourcing for content on the article on Sathya Sai Baba, but not something tying the group of examples currently in the article together, nor enough to base an article on. - - MrBill3 (talk) 06:06, 5 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You will get your answers on Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Materialization_(paranormal), but I'm sure you will never learn though. Logos (talk) 15:19, 5 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Aw come on, that was uncalled for. Please remove the 'but I'm sure you will never learn' and then feel free to remove this comment. Thanks. Dbrodbeck (talk) 15:21, 5 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Materialization (paranormal). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160603123943/http://www.archive.org/stream/physicalphenomen00carr to https://archive.org/stream/physicalphenomen00carr
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.scientificexploration.org/journal/jse_08_3_haraldsson.pdf
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.thepost.co.za/index.php?fSectionId=154&fArticleId=375687

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:47, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 17 May 2018[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: No move. Cúchullain ^t/c 16:50, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Materialization (paranormal) → Materialization – Everything else at the disambiguation page is more of a dicdef than actually mentioned in the linked pages. This is the only actual article for the term. _{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 22:07, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - fails the WP:ASTONISH test mostly due to many sci-fi usages. I also think the article might be misnamed, "materialization" was a word coined later (1870s or so) when more sophisticated spiritualists claimed to produce tangible "material" objects. Because of this, I suggest Manifestation (paranormal) as a better, broader term because it includes any evidence of spiritual presence, including simple audible or visual "apparitions", in addition to more complex "materializations". Google Ngram for evidence (hit the blue button if you don't see a graph). I think the article is conflating the two words in some spots, but I don't have access to several of the sources used to directly verify. -- Netoholic @ 00:56, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose the sci-fi meanings will be far commoner for most readers than ghosts. In ictu oculi (talk) 07:03, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- I usually hear "materialize" in the form of supernatural phenomena. e.g. "The ghost materialized in front of me." I dispute that the use of the term in sci-fi is "far more common". Rather than "dematerialized", teleported things are usually described as, well, teleported._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 08:16, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. There's enough doubt here for disambiguation to be the best choice. Andrewa (talk) 01:26, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.