Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sex magic
If anything, neologism, POV, probably pseudoscientific, a hoax...non-enyclopedic, shall we say? Delete. -- Natalinasmpf 9 July 2005 14:04 (UTC)
- Keep. I'm almost completely uninterested in paganism, but even I've heard of this. 72 000 google hits once you exclude the Red Hot Chili Peppers. See [1], for example. Strange belief systsms are encyclopedic. Pburka 9 July 2005 15:34 (UTC)
- Merge and Delete. If there's anything verifiable in here, roll it into the existing magick article. Not enough info to merit an article of its own. Fernando Rizo 9 July 2005 16:48 (UTC)
- Merge with magick. Dcarrano July 9, 2005 18:00 (UTC)
- Keep definitely not a neologism, but usually spelt "sex magick". Connected to Aleister Crowley. ~~~~ 00:44, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
- Keep and expand. Some notability. JamesBurns 07:30, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
- Cleanup. It is a valid subject, but this is definitely POV. It is written from the perspective that magic is real, and it gives nothing like a scholary overview of the subject. --Fergus 02:29, July 12, 2005 (UTC)
- Keep Not neologism. At least the initial paragraphs should be from the perspective of believers / knowledgeable people on the subject. If the validity of "magic" itself is questioned/disputed, such views would belong in a controversy section. Intersofia 01:40, 13 July 2005 (UTC)
- Cleanup. I'm a practitioner of sex magic. This article is of poor quality and cites no sources. A recommended source would be Thelemapedia's entry on the subject.[2] Aleister Crowley wrote some useful information on this subject too. Morningstar2651 06:52, July 18, 2005 (UTC)
- Cleanup. It's entirely valid, and i'm sure there's a history for the term going back a decade or two; which is enough to put it in the OED, at least. The article is very POV, and desperately needs to be completely revised and brought up to a reasonable standard of quality. Lucky Number 49 7:08, July 22 2005