User talk:AlexanderLevian

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Professor London

Your sources for LaVey's supposed lack of involvement for Rosemary's Baby are quite questionable. One is a Wikipedia page, the other an entry for IMDB, both of which are easily edited by users. Oddly enough, the role of the Devil in Rosemary's baby is uncredited. Could you please provide a better source? If you feel my edits are vandalism, you are free to report them, however, my contrib hist will show nothing but constructive edits. Professor London 16:40, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Professor London, I did give proper sources, Please look at ALL of the sources I cited and don't ignore the two literature sources. no wikipedia pages were used (as you can see by the edit again) and IMDB entries can only be edited by the site's administration, users are allowed to request edits however (and are required to cited sources also). I have given my official response to your claims about my sources on your disscusion page[1]. thank you. AlexanderLevian 23:59, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Naming Conventions and Religious Satanism

Please make proper use of naming conventions (specifically [2]) when creating disambiguation pages. I am redirecting Religious Satanism to Theistic Satanism, which is a much more popular term. If you think the article should be entirely wiped and replaced with a redirect to a Satanism disambiguation page, please make your request in AfD and gain consensus before doing so. Thanks. -- goatasaur 17:36, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Traditional satanism is a misleading term to redirect to Theistic satanism in the fact that no traditions of satanism in any organization have been found to have existed prior to Anton LaVey's organization. And with our current difinition of religion, it is also misleading to say that theistic satanism is the exact same as religious satanism in that LaVey's system of satanism is reconized as a religion. therefore, until proper definitions of the terms "Traditional Satanism" and "Relgious Satanism" can be changed. their definitions must dictate the redirect to the disambiguation page. this is not to praise lavey or to tear down theistic satanism. The only matter of for debate is purely in the difinitions. If there are any oraganizations of satanism (with said name "Satanism") then traditional satanism may be redirected to theistic satanism. for the time being, however, I will not revert the redirectiong of traditional satanism in that the most popular, although purely unofficial, view of satanism is that their is worship of satan. Religious Satanism, however, can by definition ONLY refer to a religion with emphasis on satan, therefore it shouldn't redirect to theistic satanism (which worship an external diety) in that it doesn't include lavey's system (which worship internal deity, or self). the redirection for religious satanism will be reverted. Thank you.AlexanderLevian 18:14, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
Make sure you redirect to the proper disambiguation page at Satanism (disambiguation). -- goatasaur 19:01, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
If I didn't redirect to the proper disambiguation page, then I sincerely apologize. thank you. AlexanderLevian 19:15, 21 September 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Anton LaVey

Hi, you'll be lucky to keep that bit on LaVey - the controversy section. I added bits in in excellent fashion regarding his real name with 100% researched citations. And a section on plagariasm but that was moved by the same guy to the book, the satanic bible, and re-written ion a way that could only be done by a LaVeyanist! Please see the talk page for LaVey under the heading "Jewish Heritage". I can give you my information on lagiarism adn his real name if you like but talke a look at the references I give in talk for now. Good luck! FK0071a 21:01, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Thank you, I will look at your sources and try to reason with the Satanic community once I establish fact from rumor. I have very little free time with two kids at home. Once again thank you for the message and I hope that this will soon be over and we can all go on with our lives/edits. AlexanderLevian 19:48, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Rosemary's Baby/Clay Tanner (LaVey Related)

I couldn't help but notice that you left a large comment on the Clay Tanner article on the matter of him playing Satan in Rosemary's Baby (which I'm pretty confident Tanner did!) and I thought I should point to the fact that the same changes keep being made to the Rosemary's Baby page. Not sure where I should revert it to but since you'd looked into the thing (as mentioned on that discussion page) I thought maybe you'd know better how to seperate fact from fiction on the subject. --Thetriangleguy 19:12, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Project Occult

Welcome to the project! Lately I've been windering as to the overall state of our articles, so I was wondering if you could send me some links to disputes you've settled and their articles. Regards! --Whytecypress 00:48, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WP:FILMS Newsletter

The December 2006 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. Please also, if you have not already, add your name to the Member List. Cbrown1023 00:16, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Occult Again

Sorry If i'm disturbing you, but I relly need your help with the Occult project. There's very little member communication for such an important project. Please assist us.--Whytecypress 03:04, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] I saw that you are a member of Wikipedia: WikiProject Occult

I saw that you're a member of Wikiproject Occult. Would you like to participate in my new Wikipedia: WikiProject Kabbalah? I would greatly appreciate it. Thanks. Lighthead 04:33, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Response to WP:OCCULT

I'm sorry that my interest have led me away from occult, I problably won't be returning. My best wishes though AlexanderLevian 01:25, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Varg Vikernes

Hi Alex. I was afraid that the use of "ideologue" might be contentious, but I didn't mean it in a negative way, but I wanted to mean that his work is part of an ideology of sorts. I also used "racialist" because I consider that central to his thinking. He has other concerns, but it seems to me that his thoughts on paganism and politics stem directly from his opinions on race. I guess with someone like him coming up with an NPOV two-word description is kind of tough. Something like "writer" doesn't mean much though, and I wanted to give some idea of his beliefs. Bartleby 04:37, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

I didn't think you were being negative. I do, however, think that the current "Musician, Writer, Song Writer" label is the best as far as occupation goes. Currently there still seems to be a user that believes that he is a nazi and an occultist. This is contrary to his writings, and I believe her prejudice comes from a wish to demonize him for being a racialist. This is okay for blogs, but not wikipedia. please take some time to see his disscusion section, we can use the help, thank you AlexanderLevian 17:34, 2 October 2007 (UTC)