Talk:Raël

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Portal:Biography
 Biography Portal
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. [FAQ]
Peer review A request has been made for this article to be peer reviewed to receive a broader perspective on how it may be improved. Please make any edits you see fit to improve the quality of this article.
 
Portal:Religion
 Religion Portal
This article is supported by WikiProject Religion. This project provides a central approach to Religion-related subjects on wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.

Contents

[edit] Claude Vorilhon

  • Article: fr:Claude Vorilhon
  • Corresponding English-language article: None yet, presumably Claude Vorilhon
  • Worth doing because: No corresponding English article
  • Originally Requested by: Jmabel 08:29, 11 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Status: Completed by Bogdangiusca 12th February 2004.
  • Other notes: Founder of Raelism. I don't really care about this article, I'm just putting it here as an example request. Jmabel 08:29, 11 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Nothing on cloning?--35.11.210.84 14:19, 5 August 2005 (UTC)

this article has some false informations..it need to be re-written i suggest that youg get the right informatino about rael and raelism from the offical website try www.rael.org

i suggest that you delete the external links.... becaus its attacking the movement....its ok to put the critics view but also you have to put answers from the movemnt it self to make this article just

love

[edit] Nonsense

Wikipedia deals with neutral information. Technically, the Raelian "movement" falls under the definition of a cult, as well as a cult of personality, and therefore is the context in which the article must reflect, along with facts.

"In religion and sociology, a cult is a cohesive group of people (often a relatively small and new religious movement) devoted to beliefs or practices that the surrounding culture or society considers to be far outside the mainstream. Its marginal status may come about either due to its novel belief system or because of its idiosyncratic practices."

Although whether the Rael "movement" ever falls under the definition of a malignant cult, or simply remains a source of attention, adulation, affirmation and free income for the silly profi..er, prophet, remains to be seen. As to the external links, I've re-inserted the article by Sam Vaknin, an authority on the subject, as this is within the context of other external links and explores the psychology of cult leaders. If anyone disagrees with the external links, they must rebute the entire article dealing with the subject of cults, unlike last time. Also, if you notice any factual errors please cite sources.

-- Sir Louis

The true definition of a cult should be a group of people who believe in something different then most others hence in the minority. Because isn't that really what a cult is? Wouldn't that have made every religion on the planet a cult at some point in time? When Christianity was in its infancy wasn't it considered a cult? To me a cult is a slanderous word used by those who are afraid of other peoples ideas that don't fit into some definition of normalcy that usually a government or larger religious organizations impose on others. Research yourself the different historical examples of this. There are plenty. All of our greatest inventors, scientists, musicians, writers, philosophers were men who were marginal, considered not “normal” and who thought outside the box. Imagine a world where all these great men could not create with the freedom of expression and creativity. We would still think the world is flat, we would be listening exclusively to music 300 years old and would still be using the pony express. Actually many our early great men were condemned for the way they thought and many were killed for it. So I would like to suggest that unless a person or a group of people are harmful to humanity (obviously the harmfulness of Rael or another can be debated) that they should be left alone to create, practice whatever they want. By labelling a person or a group of people who do not harm anyone borders on racism. If you want to debate whether the Raelian Movement is good for humanity then go ahead. But to sling mud and call any group a “cult” at a group who simply thinks differently then you is simply barbaric.

-- Ramzez

Academic definitions of cult try to neutral, and are meant to be descriptive rather than pejorative. Please try to keep it WP:CIVIL. AndroidCat 03:51, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Largest UFO religion?

I hesitate to delete this without some sort of consensus, but isn't Scientology the world's largest UFO religion? Granted technically UFO stands for unidentified flying objects, but in common usage it come to be understood as alien spacecraft. The Xenu space planes in Scientology arn't exactly unidentified because adherents believe they are exact replicas of DC_8's with rocket engines, however I think to most people that would qualify as a UFO.

I went ahead and made the change

[edit] Cloning

There were reports on the movement wanting to use cloning techniques... surprising this information isn't found in the article. Sfacets 04:57, 20 April 2006 (UTC)


There was CLAIMS of sucessfull human cloning by Clone-aid. Rael now says, there is no affilatione with Clone-aid in Raelian Movement.

Martin Honore.

[edit] Wikipedia is not a coorporate tool

Please chease from deleting "unofficial" links.

Sincerely,

Martin Honore.

[edit] Book

On this page, the book shown is described as Raël's second book, but on the Raëlism page, it's described as his first. Any ideas on which is right? 70.224.36.53 02:43, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

The books are as follows:

Intelligent Design (2006)
The Message Given to me by Extraterrestrials (1986), The Message Given by Extraterrestrials (1998), The Final Message (1998), True Face of God (1998)
no. 1 The Book Which Tells the Truth (1974)
no. 2 Extraterrestrials Took Me to their Planet (1975)
no. 4 Let's Welcome the Extraterrestrials (1979), Let's Welcome our Fathers From Space (1986)
no. 3 Geniocracy (1978)
no. 5 Sensual Meditation (1980)
no. 6 Yes to Human Cloning (2001)
no. 7 Maitreya (2003)

This hierarchy shows which books contain other books, which ones have more than one name, and which ones are independent.Kmarinas86 15:04, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] NPOV section

As I read the section about Raël being a predicted prophet, it seemed to me as if the author was attempting to prove that this man was such. For instance, when discussing the idea that Raël is Maitreya, the author clearly states that a certain proof is "hard to find on the internet". Certainly, this inability to find the proof shows that it is not widely accepted fact. I briefly glanced at the website and it seems to have been written by a fairly small group with a love for clipart. Furthermore, this section refutes his own claim of an Islamic Messiah while he states that "According to Islam, however, there is no "Muntazar"." This refuting would be fine if it was proven that Rael claimed himself to be the Islamic Messiah, but it seems as though a person tried to link him to this figure through original "research". Also, many religious leaders ask people (and may I add even modern scientists) "to stop simply believing and start to understand." One quotation is no basis for a Messianic fulfillment. The linking of Raël to the Hopi Messiah is also very stretched as this man is to carry "the Swastika, the cross and the power symbol of the Sun." I look at the Raëlian symbol, and it no longer contains a Swastika or a cross, and the Magen David is not a sun symbol. I would request that the section be rewritten or deleted altogether. Further discussion is certainly welcome. Eduard Gherkin 19:35, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Surely, the reason why it is not a widely accepted fact is simply because it's not a calendar that is widely accepted. Rather, one simply need to find another source proving that this indeed a genuine calendar whose year 3000 corresponds to the year 1973 AD in the Christian Calendar. History will show that this is true. In the meantime, me or someone else has to find yet another source which says that this is so, and again, without being a Raelian source. The Muslim reference needs fixing, and yes the Star of David got confused with the symbol of the sun (King David is not a sun)...Kmarinas86 21:28, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Beddou = Fot . 1027 BC. See google search results for "Beddou OR fot" : http://www.google.com/search?q=beddou+OR+fot+born+1027&btnG=Search . If 1027 BC is the first year, then 1 BC is the 1027th year, and 1973 years later is 1973 AD. 1027+1973=3000. There you go.Kmarinas86 21:36, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. Eduard Gherkin 16:41, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Useless trivia section

Why is the coincidental trivia section mislabelled "Footnote" even here? Is there any connection with Raël other than the name? AndroidCat 03:45, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I find this section weird. I don't know why this information was added. I tried moving it to a trivia section then the footnote section, but it still seems out of place. I'll remove the parts that don't include the line about the hispanic surname.Kmarinas86 12:28, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Serious POV issues

This article has serious POV issues. Several claims contradict those made in the french wikipedia, and the article doesn't even mention the controversy surrounding his cult (classified as such by his. For now, I've tagged it as NPOV. Yandman 14:19, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

The fact that the French and English articles differ does not tell us that the English article is more POV than the French article. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ra%C3%ABl#Criticism - I put this section here, and apparently, no one has put anything there at this time. Its for criticism of Raël not of his movement. Criticism of his movement properly belongs in History of Raëlism. In fact, the first thing I will do after I finish this post is add a "main article" link on the Raël page to the History of Raëlism page.Kmarinas86 16:11, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons
"Any assertion in a biography of a living person that might be defamatory if untrue must be sourced. Without reliable third-party sources, a biography will violate No original research and Verifiability, and could lead to libel claims."
"Information available solely on partisan websites or in obscure newspapers should be handled with caution, and, if derogatory, should not be used at all. Information found in self-published books, newspapers, or websites/blogs should never be used, unless written by the subject (see below)."
J. Wales - "I can NOT emphasize this enough. There seems to be a terrible bias among some editors that some sort of random speculative 'I heard it somewhere' pseudo information is to be tagged with a 'needs a cite' tag. Wrong. It should be removed, aggressively, unless it can be sourced. This is true of all information, but it is particularly true of negative information about living persons."
"Real people are involved, and they can be hurt by your words. We are not tabloid journalism, we are an encyclopedia."
"Editors should be on the lookout for the malicious creation or editing of biographies or biographical information. If someone appears to be pushing an agenda or a biased point of view, insist on reliable third-party published sources and a clear demonstration of relevance to the person's notability."
"The views of critics should be represented if their views are relevant to the subject's notability and are based on reliable sources, and so long as the material is written in a manner that does not overwhelm the article or appear to side with the critics' material. Be careful not to give a disproportionate amount of space to critics in case you represent a minority view as if it were the majority one. If the criticism represents the views of a tiny minority, it has no place in the article.
"Criticism should be sourced to reliable sources and should be about the subject of the article specifically. Beware of claims that rely on guilt by association."Kmarinas86 17:52, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claude_Vorilhon

http://64.233.179.104/translate_c?hl=en&u=http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claude_Vorilhon

Here is the translation from French to English. I bolded and italicized the inaccuracies, unencyclopedic terms, and sentences which repeat themselves. I put a line through the off topic assertions which focus on the Raelian movement not on Rael. I also underlined that which is not in the english version of the article.Kmarinas86 15:37, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Claude Vorilhon , known as Raël (born it September 30, 1946 with Vichy in Allier, France -), is the founder and guru of movement raëlien. This movement is classified in France like sect by rapport of 1995. Claude Vorilhon was before journalist sport yew and singer. == artistic and sporting Carrière == It passed its childhood to Ambert, raised by his/her aunt and her grandmother. Its visit at a druid in 1953 impresses it much. It attends a catholic boarding school with Puy-in Velay where it obtains poor results (even if it reveals a certain potential in poetry and the drafting) and there causes a scandal while taking part in the communion without being baptized. His/her parents withdraw it then boarding school to put it at the school of Ambert. The results better, especially that it are not hardly made there very often the school buissonnière. Impassioned guitar, it goes to Paris in 1961 to make street singer. Under the pseudonym of Claude Celler , it left several songs inspired by its idol Jacques Brel in 1966, of which: Honey and cinnamon , Madam' Wee , Mister your wife misleads me , When one marries , and its cultissime Sacrée salts mouth ; in 1971: My love Patricia . It enters to Disc' AZ with Lucien Morris, where it makes six discs, of which Honey and Canelle. However, in September 1970, its producer commits suicide and the career of Claude Celler, “small Brel”, stops there. A little later, it created with Clermont-Ferrand a review of automobile sport ( Car-Pop ). Its review was quickly a failure, after the oil crisis and the prohibition of the automobile competitions. In 1974, it gave up its occupation of sports editor and was devoted to the movement which it had just created.== Révélation == Claude Vorilhon affirms to have lived two experiments of meeting with extra-terrestrial which are the bases of its ideology. According to its description, it December 13, 1973 at the evening, whereas it walks to puy of Lassolas (or with the puy of the cow, the versions differ according to the sources), it sees one flying saucer which is posed gently. An extraterrestrial being leaves there, which speaks French and being come says to him to meet it and give him a message that it will have the role of spreading through all the nations. Always according to him, it receives its name of prophet, Raël , which means the Messenger . The talks will last five days and will be its first book object the book which says the truth which affirms that all the forms of life on Earth were created by these extraterrestrial, them Elohim, thanks to a control of genetic engineering and a scientific advance of 25  000 years. All many prophet the S which this Ground knew would have been sent by Elohim but their messages misunderstood and deformed by the human ones would have been perverted. Claude Vorilhon affirms to have received the mission of informing the world on his origins and that to build one embassy (pretext to finance the sect monthly by puncturing its followers) for return of Elohim. The extraterrestrial ones give him explanations on certain mysteries (which it will report in its book) while being based on new readings of the crowned texts, such as Bible. It also explains why, it October 7, 1975, it returns again in contact with Elohim which takes it along on their planet where it finds it Buddha, Moïse, Jésus and Mahomet and receives many lesson which it will describe in its second book, the extraterrestrial ones took along me on their planet . It affirms y to have discovered marvellous, harmonious and peaceful beings which teach one to him philosophy founded on pleasure, it love, it knowledge and it conscience. Its political doctrines (“géniocratie”) are opposed to the democracy and the equality citizens. Only the people equipped with a high intelligence quotient could occupy of the leading functions. Claude Vorilhon attacks Roman catholic Church. He launched a campaign of apostasy (“debaptisation”) and “dechristianization of Africa” (campaign posting and distribution of layers “Africa, awakes! ”) and its militants launched a campaign against the priests paedophiles which was condemned like defamatory and racist by several courts. In November 2005, Claude Vorilhon received the visit of the writer Michel Houellebecq, who took as a starting point him for the character by guru of sound roman the Possibility of an island , like that of the humorist and political activist Dieudonné Me bala Me bala. However, neither one nor the other belong to sect of “Raëliens”. On March 4, 2006, Michel Onfray was seen allotting by Raël the honorary title of priest of the Raëlien Movement, which it refused. Onfray answered on March 16 by an article: Raël, sidereal cretin, or bad smell of the journalists. [1] == Contradictions == “science must be your religion” it is written in a book of Raël. The raelism is not “not a belief but a comprehension” according to an interviewed raëlienne with ONPP (France October 3, 2004). To judge some by its literature, Raël does not have anything a well of learning. “Comprehension” raëlienne consists in distorting scientific facts in order to adjust them with its dogma creationnist and extraterrestrial. Its writings are truffés inconsistencies and boobs pseudo-scientists which it sometimes describes as “apparent contradictions”, in order to clear them with an additional layer of wild imaginings… As for the raëliens, they are évertuent to make fall down their guru on his feet at the price of often burlesques intellectual distorsions. They perceive the “message” only through the filters posed in front of their eyes by the guru. They take care well not to call it into question in order not to give up a feeling élitiste and comforting, learnedly maintained within the movement. But when they are with court of arguments, they answer you that Elohim can do everything with their science in twenty-five thousand years advance on ours, but which we are still “too primitive” to be able to explain and include/understand… Finally, the raëliens make confidence and believe in alleged “the message” transmitted by Raël, since it is included in supposed the “plane one of Elohim”… ==Sur the plate of Everyone speaks about it, in Canada == At the time of the first of the Québécois version of Everyone about it speaks about it (animated by Guy A. Lepage), the passage of Raël and its remarks on the democracy and the cloning caused Malayan and aggressiveness around the table. The top was reached when the caricaturist Serge Chapleau treated joke , ridiculed its costume and clutched to him the chignon, Raël leaving the plate followed by its faithful which were in the room. Also in this same emission the deputy was present péquiste Pauline Marois who treated Raël of insane to bind (“I did not think that it was as insane as that”). Thereafter, it movement raélien required of Pauline Marois of the excuses, which it refused to present, Claude Vorilhon complaining in addition to “to be attacked physically” by Chapleau. The interview is available into integral at these addresses left 1 left 2 left 3 (with Serge Chapleau) ==Avenir== Installed with Quebec since many years, the raéliens would think of settling elsewhere, according to recent interviews'. The sect at fort bad press in Canada, however recognized for its tolerance towards the worships which are practised there. In addition to the blows of publicity and the stories of cloning, Raéliens were passably shaken by a series of report of the journalist Brigitte McCann of Newspaper of Montreal. The young woman and an assistant infiltrated the sect lasting of the months, before giving a series of reports devastators, which were elaborate in a book, Journal of one infiltrated , published in 2004. The movements caused by the investigation were even worth with the two journalists to be interviewed on CNN. In the months which followed, of Raéliens tried to attack physically Brigitte McCann at the time of a living room of the book, an incident highly décrié by his/her colleagues journalists. Claude Vorilhon stated to have settled in Quebec for the climate of tolerance and respect that it found there at the time, but that the things had changed. According to him, it Japan, it Italy or it Africa would be ready to accomodate it, him and its sect. == Bibliographie == * 1973: The Book which says the truth * 1975: The extraterrestrial ones took me along on their planet * 1978: The géniocratie * 1979: Accueillir extraterrestrial the * 1980: Sensual meditation * 2002: Oui with the human cloning * 2005: Maitraya ==Littérature secondaire== * 2004: Michel Salamolard and Pierre Rottet, the Reality of Raël , editions Pillet/La Freedom * 2004: Annie Cathelin, the movement raëlien and its prophet: Sociological approach complexes Charisma , Harmattan * 2004: Brigitte McCann, Raël: Newspaper of one infiltrated , Stanké * Maryse Peloquin, Rael: robber of heart or Biography of a liar . == Discographie == 1966: * In wine glass * Madam' Wee * Honey and Cinnamon * Mister your wife misleads me * When one marries * Sacrée salts mouth * the Eyes out of almond == Sources ==

  1. ^ Text of Onfray on Rael

2005- Fiers to be raëliens- “Answers to the incentive campaigns to hatred fomented by pseudo-journalists.” Collective ED NOVA 2005 ISBN 2-940252-21-1 ==Autres articles== * Sect * Conditioning * mental Handling * guru * Movement raëlien == external Liens == * Prévensectes * June 21, 2006 - Judgement given against Claude Vorilhon in a business of continuation in slandering. Interesting reading, loquacious judge * musical Career of Claude Vorilhon * Claude Vorilhon and Dieudonné Me bala Me bala * Raël: Messiah or Liar?

It appears the french version of the article is very POV. It is obviously selective as to what appears in the article and what does not. As we know, the majority do not live in France or Canada. What is notable in France and Canada is not necessarily notable elsewhere. It also violates the biography tag someone added. It's not written in an encyclodedic and understated tone, which the biography policy of Wikipedia asks for. Additionally the french article strays from being a biography and inserts repetitive information about the Raelian Movement, though probably true, it only shows the Raelian Movement through "a hole in a door." In any case I think it will be fair to take the acceptable parts and put them into the Rael article.Kmarinas86 15:37, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ulcer?

How does one "almost" get an ulcer? That's sort of a bizarre claim. Deleuze 18:22, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Grabbed him by the what?

Chignon doesn't translate too well. Ponytail, queue, hair-braid, ...? AndroidCat 03:29, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Rat tail? Sfacets 04:01, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Slice and dice of quotation

The quotation from The Rael Deal has been badly broken up with the front section (which says who Dechevanne is) missing, and the In Court break slapped in the middle of the remainder. The Threats from critics section title also seems a bit POV—if nothing else, there is only one person named there. AndroidCat 01:09, 8 October 2006 (UTC)


[edit] The Maitreya section

I'm afraid nearly all of that is complete nonsense from a Buddhist point of view. There seems to be an immense amount of gibberish out there, most of it of a millenarian mindset, that has adopted him as a figure of either a saviour or some kind of antichrist. This selection should really carry a disclaimer that it deviates from the view Buddhists actually hold. 81.109.148.20 21:28, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Results of automated peer review

[edit] (cur) (last) 16:13, 16 November 2006 74.98.243.249 (Talk)

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, Kmarinas86 21:59, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] (cur) (last) 16:58, 22 November 2006 Kmarinas86 (Talk | contribs)

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, Kmarinas86 21:59, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] (cur) (last) 15:21, 8 March 2007 Kmarinas86 (Talk | contribs)

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, Kmarinas86 16:23, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../r/a/%C3%AB/Talk%7ERa%C3%ABl_e860.html"