Talk:John Lockley

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Autobio / COI issues[edit]

I love how this page states such things as prophetic dreams as if they were unchallenged fact. Wikipedia is not a place for telling stories. 99.231.200.55 (talk) 03:42, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at the contribs of the article creator, I strongly suspect this is an autobio advert. The claims of being a spiritual leader for an Indigenous African community, in a role filled by elderly Black women, are also highly questionable. I have yet to see support of these claims from within the communities this young white man claims to represent. The only coverage I've seen is not from Black South Africans. I question the notability of this rather low-profile workshop presenter. The article creator's name, WP:SPA activity, and the self-promotional text added right before the subject of the article goes on tour also adds to the problematic nature of this article. - Slàn, Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 20:22, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you re probable conflict of interest, but this Times source was written by a black South African (although the original is no longer accessible online). HelenOnline (talk) 14:12, 10 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Also this Daily News source and this Daily Sun source now cited. HelenOnline (talk) 11:03, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I also agree regarding the probable conflict of interest, however I have noticed that no-one has notified TurnLock of the possibility of a COI and how to avoid it. This would suggest that we need to WP:AGF and highlight to the user how to request for edits on this talk page, if the article creator is closely connected to John Lockley or is John himself. I will add a COI notification to TurnLocks talk page. Mycelium101 (talk) 12:09, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The claims of being a spiritual leader for an Indigenous African community, in a role filled by elderly Black women, are also highly questionable. I have yet to see support of these claims from within the communities this young white man claims to represent.

A couple of points to make on the above statements by Kathryn NicDhàna :

  • Although the majority of sangomas are, in fact women, this is not a formal role specific to women, nor even elderly women. Male sangomas are quite common right across South Africa. Sangomas can be 'called' to thwasa at any age and can be initiated as a sangoma at any age or gender.
  • The very act of initiation is a form of acceptance by the community. The initiation is very much a public affair and the whole community partakes as the initiate is tested. The testing and initiation does not happen by the student's teacher, but by other sangomas within the community. They ensure the thwasa has learnt the correct skills necessary to practice within the capacity of a traditional healer.
  • The very photo's on John Lockley's website, such as this [1] or this [2] suggest strong support within the communities of where he was trained. The attire that John is wearing is specific to initiated igqirha (Xhosa sangomas) and suggests that not only has he undergone thwasa, but has also been succesfully initiated.
  • It should also be noted that a person cannot choose to be a sangoma. It must be a practicing sangoma who determines that someone must become a sangoma. (Very often, multiple sangomas have told the person that they must thwasa and be initiated before they actually heed the calling and undergo thwasa.) It is more than likley that John's teacher, Mum Gwevu, or someone close to her, determined that John should thwasa and become a sangoma. Mycelium101 (talk) 12:09, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Though some media outlets have done interviews with him, almost all of this data comes solely back to the subject's self-reporting, including photos he's posted himself, with the data of who these people are solely based on his claims. All of this seems geared towards his new age, workshop-culture career of selling ceremonies to those outside of the culture who could say if he's doing this appropriately or not. His workshop schedule shows him teaching Harner shamanism classes at New Age centers in New York City, along with "Tibetan Dream Yoga." These things aren't traditional; they are new age. This man is making some highly suspect claims that don't line up with his activities. - Slàn, Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 22:30, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Kathryn, your statements so far, demonstrate a clear lack of understanding or knowledge about sangomas, the traditional healing culture in South Africa, and the ways and protocols of how people are initiated into the traditions. Yet, your statements and edits come across as if you have expert knowledge, however, your mannerism makes it clear that you have never spent time nor have you had any experience with sangomas or any southern african traditional healers in general. That being said, there is nothing wrong with asking questions or even raising concerns, however, the reasons for your edits, such as this [3] or this [4] are clearly WP:SOAPBOX and WP:ORIGINAL, yet you make them sound as if they are facts and that you are an authority on the subject, when, clearly you are not. As I said, ask questions or raise concerns on the talk page, stop adding WP:ORIGINAL and WP:SOAPBOX edits and we will help you add any concerns or issues into the page if you provide suitable sources or references for your edits, and keep this and other articles WP:NEUTRAL. HelenOnline did an excellent job of addressing your concerns and aligning this article to a WP:NEUTRAL tone, so lets keep it that way. (Also, please see her below section reference to claims versus says).
In light of this, I am reverting this edit [5] as it contains original research. I could not find any place within the source you have provided where it mentions that he runs Harner Shamanism or Dream Yoga and therefore I can only conclude that you added this under WP:ORIGINAL - The only reference I could see was to workshops to discover ways of dreaming and connecting to the Ancestral world. If you can provide better references, then please do so. I am also reverting this edit [6] until the notabability dispute here is settled and you have provided proper references to explain why you think it is 'highly questionable' that he is an initiated sangoma. Mycelium101 (talk) 00:52, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Mycelium101, I have been looking over this discussion on the COI board. Do you have any personal or professional stake in John Lockley's career? - Slàn, Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 23:01, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the question. No, I have no direct or indirect personal or professional connection to John Lockley, his career or any workshops that he runs either in South Africa or overseas. I have never communicated with him (except to add the Conflict of Interest notice on his talk page here [7] nor have I ever knowingly communicated with anyone that represents him or is connected to him. My interest as an independant is solely in providing a proper, educational and realistic perspective of how tradtional healers operate within a modern South African culture. Mycelium101 (talk) 01:01, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Claims versus says[edit]

For future reference: I changed the word claim to the word say in the context of a prophetic dream as claim is a loaded word and not neutral language appropriate for a Wikipedia article. See also Wikipedia:Neutral point of view#Words to watch and WP:CLAIM. HelenOnline (talk) 10:08, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What is not neutral is the POV that an article's subject can be used as a sole source for their claim, even when said claims lack credibility. If there are not reliable sources from within the culture who support his claim, that's all it is; a claim. The predominant source for the article is the subject's own website. Wholesale reverts of removal of sources that are not WP:RS is not mainting NPOV. The problem with this article is less about "claim" versus "reports" or "says" than the reliance on self-reporting. - CorbieV☊ 19:41, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Please read this article very carefully and thoroughly. Although there is other valid referenced material, this article alone, which is referenced in the page, by itself counters your entire argument of this solely being sourced only by the article's subject. This was written by a 3rd party that witnessed John's initiation and interviewed both John and his teacher, MamGwevu. Although your knowledge of South Africa is severely limited, the IOL is most definitely a credible reliable source and has reported that he is initiated as a sangoma, trained with MamGwevu and removes the entire report/claim argument, as a 3rd party witnessed it and wrote in a WP:RS about it. Like it or not, those are the facts.
Before you argue about doubting the likelyhood of media coverage of his initiation, understand a bit about South African culture, and understand that Sangoma initiations by whites are **very** newsworthy, as they are rare and exceptional cases. Whites that eventually earn the ability to cross the cultural barrier into a world that is still very secretive and shrouded in mystery, attracts great media attention and massive crowds at their initiation by blacks that are very curious to see whether whites can possess the skills and ancestral blessings to be a sangoma. This article states, that his initiation tests was successful and therefore, like it or not, he is, by definition, an igqirha ie a sangoma of the Xhosa traditions.
I am reverting your edits, as they, once again, contain original material, distorted interpretation of references and as this is a WP:BLP, there are going to be very strict standards of your POV agenda pushing, which I will discuss in the above section's conversation Mycelium101 (talk) 08:53, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I have no personal interest in the subject of this article, but I recall spending some time cleaning it up. Online sources may be on the subject's website, but that is simply for ease of reference. If we removed the links, which is easy enough, your whole argument falls away and people who want to check them will find it more difficult so I don't see how that really helps anyone. HelenOnline 09:07, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User:Uyvsdi, Thank you for taking an interest in an article that is about a part of South African specific culture and South African Indigineous affairs and issues. It is not often we get an enrolled Native American or member of the Indigineous people of America project [8] taking an interest in the affairs of our little area of the woods. Welcome. I'm sure you will find many similarities between South African indigineous culture and Native American culture, however, please be aware also that there are many, many differences, and South African culture has it's own unique flavour of problems and solutions. Therefore, please avoid assuming that indigineous African culture is an extension of the way things happen or work in the US. It's not and there are some major fundamental differences, that one must not assume about. Nevertheless, I see that Helen has already reverted your posts [9], however, I will give you the courtesy of providing some comments on your edits, so that, if you wish to re-edit we don't get into an edit-war, as what has happened with previous editors :

  • is a New Age practioner, who offers workshops based on South African healing traditions, shamanism and yoga. - Unless you can find a specific reference to either John calling himself a New Age practitioner or a reliable source calling him one, this is WP:ORIGINAL. As this article is a WP:BLP, please do not add any original research.
  • Sangomas are usually elderly African tribeswomen. - Please see my above comments on this to User:Kathryn_NicDhàna [10] - There are a number of issues with how this is written. This implies that young female sangomas or male sangomas are unusual. They are not. They are very common. The way this statement is written is offensive to the recognition of the efforts and sacrifices of legitimate male and non-elderly female sangomas. Yes, elderly women are a majority and tend to hold senior roles within their communities, however, please be aware that a sangoma's definition of elderly is defined from the time they complete initiation, and not from their physical age. Also, if you wish to reference it, please use a specific page. A single sentence doesn't need a 14 page reference. John's initiation is unusual because he is white, not because he is male or middle-aged. If you wish to work together to make some sentences that isn't offensive to other sangomas and that points out the unusualness of white sangomas, then I am happy to work with you to get that right.
  • He claims to be trained as a sangoma in the Eastern Cape townships - Please read my above comments to User:CorbieVreccan carefully [11] - The claims of his training and initiation are not sourced from him, but from a witness from an independant reliable source. Therefore, they are sourced and there is no need to have claimed/reported/whatever other words can be used. The source verifies it. End of story.

Again, welcome, and, as this article seems to attract contention by non-South Africans, if you wish to collaborate to achieve a better article, I ask you to engage and reach consensus through discussion on the talk, instead of edit-warring disputed material. Mycelium101 (talk) 08:11, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

BLP noticeboard[edit]

HelenOnline 08:22, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Discussion has been archived here. HelenOnline 11:58, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Given the lack of discussion here and also lack of response to raising issues on the BLP Noticeboard, I believe we can now safely assume consensus as defined by WP:TALKDONTREVERT Mycelium101 (talk) 10:57, 10 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on John Lockley. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:28, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This article needs sources other than the subjects own website[edit]

While some of the sources archived on the subject's own site are scanned, some have been retyped before being posted on his website. This means they cannot be trusted as secondary. At this point there are very few sources that are not links to his personal website. This is a problem. The article does not exist to be a guide to various pages on one person's website. - CorbieV ☊ ☼ 23:07, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Which ones have been retyped? I think we can remove those. Can you point to the policy about not allowing archived articles on a subjects website? The scanned articles are all independent articles written by secondary sources in other media. They are not readily accessible online. This is a common problem with South African articles. Your privilege of online availability in the USA does not reflect South African reality. Many SA published media do not have an extensive online presence but are still either reliable sources or valid secondary sources. Anyway, this is a further reading section, not references. So, unless you can point to a specific policy that does not allow it, your interpretation of primary source is invalid and so is your subjective opinion on the matter. So I suggest you outline which links you think are rewritten or primary sources, and we can look at those specific ones more closely. I am reverting your blanket reversions/deletions as they are not helpful, as you have already reverted independent reading or valid archived sources. If you revert my reversion one more time, we will go back to the last stable version from 6 May and resolve linkrot issues as per WP:STATUSQUO. Mycelium101 (talk) 23:38, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:John_Lockley&oldid=1208357612"