User talk:Tsmollet

Please fill in the subject box above, then REPLACE ALL OF THESE INSTRUCTIONS with your question, and don't forget to sign by leaving the following four tildes (~'s) in place which automatically formats to your signature once you click "save page" below. Tsmollet (talk) 00:11, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. An anonymous user is defacing a wiki page under ip 64.247.68.54 and ip 79.70.221.138. I tried to post a caution on his "talk page," but I cannot make the post correctly. Please help.

His vandalism at Mandrake of Oxford, a British publishing house in Oxford, England that specializes in occult books. He seems to be motivated by a religious intolerance. Thanks!

--Tsmollet (talk) 00:11, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:VANDAL#Warnings can help you with this. There is also a list of most used warning templates there. Cheers. Chamal ^talk 00:39, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

I always use: this page. Please rememeber to use warning templates in a responsible manner, cheers Spitfire^Tally-ho! 08:55, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the help! --Tsmollet (talk) 21:27, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

--FYI 64.247.68.54 also defaced pages on TinWiki and pagan.wikia.com [corrected]. I've added a description of what they did to the talk page. 71.221.97.60 (talk) 14:32, 20 November 2008 (UTC) -- edit 71.221.97.60 (talk) 02:13, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your welcome ... I'm pleased to have been able to help.  :) -- 71.221.97.60 (talk) 04:37, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/User:Tsmollet. Sorry, I forgot to warn you when I tagged your page two days ago. --Enric Naval (talk) 22:37, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's to delete the content. It has nothing to do with blocking anyone. The issue here is not leaving userspace littered with articles that were deleted from mainspace (it would be packed full with garage music bands, vanity articles, and all sort of crackpot science articles if we didn't cleanup it, it would look like a mix of

geocities

).

Try blanking the page and put instead something about yourself as an editor (what you do on wikipedia, what you like or dislike about it -without ranting too much so you don't get accused of soapboxing-), I will withdraw the nomination and the closing admin will probably close it without deleting (although I can't guarantee that it doesn't get deleted anyways, so be sure make a copy of the text on your computer!). If it's not deleted, then the text will still be available on the history in case you need it some day. --Enric Naval (talk) 11:23, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, sorry for confusing you with so many acronyms. I think that I have no more advice left, try asking the guys at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Neopaganism. --Enric Naval (talk) 05:24, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tsmollet, you say is not a good source on Odinism. I agree. What I was saying was, verbatim, Goodrick-Clarke is our best source for racism in Germanic neopaganism. He isn't a source for Odinism in general. If you want to discuss blot or sumbel, Goodrick-Clarke will be useless. He discusses "neo-völkisch" racism, including but not exclusively within Germanic neopaganism. This makes him a quotable source on this topic, although he isn't one on topics outside the scope of his study.

You and I both know that "Folkish thought" is very common within Asatru/Odinism. Goodrick-Clarke is, as you say yourself, an execllent source on that, and nothing else.

Now we also know that Asatru isn't exclusively "folkish", although this does seem to be the predominant approach in the English-speaking world. Asatru-according-to-McNallen is "folkish", period. McNallen is a racial mysticist, and he attracted the white supremacist crowd, without necessarily being a white supremacist himself. I understand that in 1986, the ideological tension between the mere racialist mysticists and the positive Neo-Nazis within US Asatru grew too severe, and we ended up with the landscape as it presents itself now. Asatru remains largely folkish, with the exception of The Troth, which group seems to be at a loss as how to call their own religion, "the polytheistic religion known as Northern European Heathenry or Asatru", precisely because "Asatru" has come to mean "white racialist mysticism".

Concerning "Odinism", this term appears to be currently used by Odinic Rite almost exclusively. OR is the precise counterpart of US folkish Asatru, so in this sense you are correct, if you take "Asatru" to mean "Asatru according to McNallen", and "Odinism" as meaning "Odinism according to OR", the two terms are equivalent. But the existence of liberal, non-racialist groups, The Troth in the US, and most organizations in Europe and Scandinavia, makes this more complicated. I believe that the US mainstream is very different from the European mainstream, probably more so that most American or European heathens realize. McNallen appears to be considered pretty much mainstream in the US, while his approach is considered all-out racist lunatic fringe by moderate European groups. This became evident recently in the hubbub surrounding the upcoming summercamp organized by the Scandinavians -- I am not sure if you have been following that drama, but it is certainly very instructive on where the individual groups stand.

Please understand that I am not trying to portray one approach or the other as flawed, or superior, or "correct". I am simply dedicated to documenting the considerable rifts hidden beneath the single term "Asatru" as accurately and straight-forwardly as possible. If you have indeed been active in both Europe and America, your expertise will be greatly appreciated. I certainly do not claim to know all about this, and I have no wish to present a polemic or exaggerated picture: the more detached and matter-of-factly this is dealt with, the better. In order to do this, we need to completely forget about our own biases. Ideally, it should be impossible to second-guess the personal opinions of the article's authors. --

A majority of the votes to keep were from either anonymous or first-time contributors. As such, they were and are heavily discounted in the decisionmaking process. Only 3 community members in good standing voted to keep. The decision was a straightforward one. If you wish to contest it,