This article falls under the scope of WikiProject Paranormal, which aims to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to the paranormal and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the attached article, help with current tasks, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and discussions.ParanormalWikipedia:WikiProject ParanormalTemplate:WikiProject Paranormalparanormal articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory and skepticism related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SkepticismWikipedia:WikiProject SkepticismTemplate:WikiProject SkepticismSkepticism articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spirituality, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of spirituality-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SpiritualityWikipedia:WikiProject SpiritualityTemplate:WikiProject SpiritualitySpirituality articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Occult, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to the occult on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OccultWikipedia:WikiProject OccultTemplate:WikiProject OccultOccult articles
This article was nominated for deletion on 20 May 2007. The result of the discussion was keep.
Cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards?[edit]
Please list them so this article can improve. If no, will be removing tag. J. D. Redding 20:32, 22 January 2008 (UTC) (PS. it been tagged for a year without commnent.)[reply]
The lead is vague to the point of vacuity.
The article body is an arbitrary-seeming grab-bag of WP:FRINGE claims without either sources, underlying commonality (other than rejection by mainstream science), or in many cases any direct connection to the 'Earth' in the topic's title.
This should probably be a disambiguation page. The term in the narrow sense is equivalent to ley line, and in the widest sense to Forteana. --dab(𒁳) 14:51, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Per above suggestions, formally proposing merge with Ley line. One notion, really, no need to go through the same explanation twice. Itsmejudith (talk) 15:19, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support: neither topic seems to have much WP:SECONDARY coverage, so combining them should bring a small improvement on that front. HrafnTalkStalk(P) 15:56, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support per the above reasoning. Vsmith (talk) 16:03, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose related concepts, but one is effectively the superset of the other, and they are sufficiently different to justify two articles. Some rewriting to make the relationship clearer may be required. Artw (talk) 00:14, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I am going to be working on this article, I will add many references. 212.219.63.252 (talk) 17:54, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
After the recent discussion at WP:Articles_for_deletion/Place_of_power (which concluded with the article being deleted) I think the issue of title and content should be raised here. Is "earth mysteries" the most common name or description for the topic of the article? It seems better than "place of power" however I think it may have the same problem of being used in only a subset of material on this topic. Ideally the most neutral and descriptive term in plain English should be used unless a clear term in the relevant fields exists. Also there is the question of whether sources should be required to actually refer to the term being used and if it is WP:OR to associate material using different terminology (like a source only about "ley lines") with the title of the article. I'm pinging Slatersteven, Darker Dreams, Permstrump and Jytdog who were involved in the AFD. —DIYeditor (talk) 10:11, 4 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
On the last point. Do we only allow sources that use the term "Indian Rebellion of 1857" in the article on the Indian mutiny? As far as I know there is no rule that says that if different terms are used for the (obviously) same subject that we cannot use them. So then the discussion becomes what would such a page be about.Slatersteven (talk) 11:04, 4 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Well, rebellion and mutiny are synonyms. "Ley line" is not synonymous with "place of power" or "earth mystery" and I'm not sure what abstract class I would put it in. I would hope for secondary (or even primary) sources on the topic that use the terms in combination. Even if we ignored the usual quality of these sources it's not clear to me how they relate to each other without drawing some conclusions. —DIYeditor (talk) 12:18, 4 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
So is "site of mystical energy" not the same as "place or power" (ignoring things like power stations of course)? What about "site of spiritual power"? These all discus similar (if not the same) concept, that geographic sites can posses mystical energy.Slatersteven (talk) 12:34, 4 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
To me the unusual phraseology and dodgy sources make it difficult to judge how reliably cited these kind of articles are. How "spiritual", "esoteric" and "mystical" relate to each other is not clear and I would need citations to explain the definitions of the terms and to justify using them interchangeably. —DIYeditor (talk) 13:48, 4 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
.png){kind=small}
