Talk:Destructive cult

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Destructive cult article.
Article policies
Archives: 1
To-do list for Destructive cult: edit · history · watch · refresh

Here are some tasks you can do:
  • Requests: Add some free-use images as available, to improve the article.
  • Cleanup: Standardize all citations with Wikipedia:Citation templates, for uniformity.
  • Expand: Expand upon the Documented cases subsection, change it to a paragraph/prose format.
Archive
Archives


Contents

[edit] Additions

I guess you're supposed to list sources when you add, but the two I added I think are fairly solid. Still just to be on the safe side BBC on the Movement for the Restoration of the Ten Commandments of God and CNN on Mansons.

[edit] Documented cases

Why has the 'Documented cases' section been deleted. It existed in an earlier version of the article, 17:41 10 Oct 07 by Lonewolf BC?

ITSM that it provided useful links to well-sourced information about a number of groups that fit the definition of 'religious groups that have intentionally killed people ...'.EmmDee 16:25, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

That section was original research. First, it was not well-sourced, because no sources were cited, there were only internal Wikipedia links. Second, it is original research to compile a list of groups here just on the basis that some editors think they meet the definition. This article is about 'destructive cults', if there are sources that describe groups in that context then it would be approprate to further develop the article using those sources. -- Really Spooky —Preceding comment was added at 19:43, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for responding. As regards your first point, I've only looked through the first 4 groups, but for those 4 at least, the internal Wikipedia links are to articles which are based on and/or contain cited RSs, so I can't see how the section is original research. (unless the first 4 are atypical)

As regards your second point, there are sources that describe at least some of the groups in the context of 'destructive cults' - eg.the 2cd reference, the book 'Malignant Pied Pipers of Our Time: A Psychological Study of Destructive Cult Leaders' mentions Rev. Jim Jones, David Koresh, Shoko Asahara, Osama bin Laden. The first three are the leaders of groups listed in the 'Documented cases' section (and the last of a group in the Terrorist and paramilitary organizations section).

And, unless the first 4 groups listed are atypical, the respective Wikipedia pages linked to seem to be properly sourced, and give information about how that particular group was a religious group that had intentionally killed people, which perfectly meets the article definition of 'destructive cult'.

I agree with your (implied) point that the list would need further development before it was up to encyclopedia article standard. It might be better if there was a short (< 4 lines?) summary of the nature of the groups listed, and their destructive activities. OTOH, that might just duplicate RS information already available within the respective articles. So I am unsure about how to do this. The 'To-do list for Destructive cult' banner at the head of this talk page includes 'Expand upon the Documented cases subsection, change it to a paragraph/prose format.' So presumably someone else thinks it would be a good idea too.

I am personally more interested in the al Qaeda/terrorist aspect of the article, not so much in the other groups, so I don't personally feel motivated to do the work to develop this section at present. But someone else might - articles do often grow organically or piecemeal over time. So I think it would be a good idea to re-instate the 'Documented cases' section, perhaps with a banner saying 'This section is a stub, you can help by expanding it.' I think re-instating this section would help towards improving the article, and making it more comprehensive. EmmDee 21:10, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Unsourced material moved from article

I moved this to the talk page from the article:

BBC News 24 Tuesday 13 June 2006 broadcast a news conference given by the two brothers, Abul Kahar Kalam, and Abul Koyair Kalam, following their release after being arrested during the (abortive) anti-terrorist raid in Forest Gate, East London, 2 June 2006. At one stage Abul Kahar Kalam (the one who had been shot) was asked if he supported terrorist groups like al Qaeda. He replied that he didn't, that al Qaeda was a 'cult' (he used this word), and not real Islam, which was a religion of peace, in his view. [citation needed]

Please provide us with the name of the article, and if possible, the name of the host, author, person to attribute the piece to, and we can get a full cite out of this. Otherwise, it's just a "newscast" from that date, which is not much to go on. Curt Wilhelm VonSavage (talk) 14:29, 21 November 2007 (UTC).

I watched the press conference broadcast on BBC News 24, and Abul Kahar Kalam did describe al Qaeda as a cult, as above. But the broadcast is not available on the internet AFAIK. Probably the BBC would be able to verify this if one approached them directly, but they might charge a search fee to find the recording.

Some of Steven Hassan's views should go back in:The press conference was reported elsewhere in the media, but AFAICS none of these sources report the particular question and answer where Mr Kahar describes al Qaeda as a 'cult'

Eg: [1] '[...]Under persistent questioning from reporters as to whether he supported militant Muslim groups, Mr Kahar described himself as an ordinary Briton who loved his country.[..]'
But the BBC is generally rated as a RS ... EmmDee (talk) 15:45, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Yeah, but for verifiability we probably at least need the title of the piece of the broadcast. Curt Wilhelm VonSavage (talk) 21:46, 21 November 2007 (UTC).
BBC News 24 is primarily a 24 hour rolling news service. They broadcast the news conference live, starting a little after 2pm on 13 June 2006. I expect they keep a recording of their output somewhere, but AFAIK this is not readily available to the public, or available on the internet.
So I think the material is verifiable, just not very easily or conveniently verifiable. I might email the BBC when I get round to it, to see if they are willing to make the material available, but I suspect they might want to charge a fee to cover their costs.
I think it would be good to include the Abul Kahar Kalam item, it provides useful balance - he is a Moslem saying al Qaeda is a cult, as is Dr. Banisadr, the other sources (Olsson, Hassan etc.) are all non-Moslems (and might be interpreted by some more fundamentalist-type Moslems as being part of the 'war on Islam', as they see it). 82.22.65.236 (talk) 17:06, 22 November 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Steven Hassan's views are not just self published

See Talk:Destructive_cult/Archive_1#Sources_for_term_.27Destructive_Cult.27. Steven Hassan's is the most notable proponent of the term and not only in self-published materials. See note 8 in the article Combatting_Cult_Mind_Control., (published among others by Inner traditions and bear company) (I do not have access to the book). Andries (talk) 20:36, 15 February 2008 (UTC

[edit] Wrong forwarding link

Hi,

I am a rank luddite with no idea how to edit this page, so I'm hoping someone can help me... currently, a search for "death cult" in wikipedia redirects the searcher to this article ("destructive cult"). It's wrong: a death cult isn't a cult that kills people, it's the portion of a religion that deals with death. For instance, the Ancient Egyptians had a death cult: there were religious proscriptions that taught them how to relate to death. The theorist Lawrence Rickels has said that California is "the death cult of America". So I have no idea how to change this, but somebody really ought to. Thanks wikiworld! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.3.246.130 (talk) 15:05, 9 April 2008 (UTC)