User talk:GustavusPrimus

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Re: Aset Ka content deletion

Hello Gustavus and thank you for your note. Although the new article contained material not present in the original draft, its contents did little to address the concerns behind the initial deletion. The only easily verifiable source is an obscure recently published book of dubious scholarship and the accompanying website. Alone Marques does little to validate the existence of the Aset Ka order and I could not find any critical commentary of his extraordinary claims. Without any corroborative sources or published peer reviews of Marques' work the Aset Ka article remains an unverifiable piece of original research at best and a deranged and superstitious hoax at face value.

I am not willing to restore this article or the accompanying images. If you wish to contest the deletion, please follow the instructions at WP:DELREV. Let me know if you have any questions. Regards, ˉˉanetode╦╩ 06:33, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

We may disagree on a number of things. I do not doubt the existence of the publisher of Aset Ka or of the website. However, the article presented claims backed entirely and only by that author, be it through his website, book, or workshops. The author offers no physical evidence that verifies the historicity of an "Asetian Bible" or of any other part of his thesis. For the purposes of evaluating a basis for a Wikipedia article, I find that the new draft fails to address any concerns behind the original consensus to delete. At the risk of offending you, which is not my intent, I'd like to point out that while any number of self-proclaimed historians of the occult may posit any number of made up secret organizations, Wikipedia's editorial standards discount unsupported hypotheses and self-published sources. An article must be supported by reliable third-party sources, in this case published commentary on the order by academics not affiliated with its propagation. Workshops, self-published materials, and documentaries are all essentially sounding boards, they do not verify any of the Aset Ka claims, they merely reiterate them. Again, if you wish to contest this deletion, your only recourse is WP:DRV. Regards, ˉˉanetode╦╩ 15:52, 15 May 2008 (UTC)