Revision as of 06:55, 21 October 2011 editHomunculus (talk | contribs)Pending changes reviewers5,194 edits →Rationale for my edit on the Controversies section: Re← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 04:05, 18 December 2024 edit undo49.180.253.95 (talk) →Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 3 December 2024: ReplyTags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit Reply | ||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{ |
{{Skip to talk}} | ||
{{ |
{{Talk header}} | ||
{{Contentious topics/page restriction talk notice|topic=fg|1RR=yes|BRD=yes}} | |||
{{controversial3}} | |||
{{Controversial}} | |||
{{WP1.0|v0.7=fail|class=B|category=Philrelig|importance=Mid}} | |||
{{Calm}} | |||
{{WikiProjectBannerShell|1= | |||
{{Not a forum}} | |||
{{WikiProject Law|class=B|importance=Low}} | |||
{{Article history | |||
{{WPReligion|class=B|importance=Mid|NRM=yes|NRMImp=High|FalunGong=yes|FalunGongImp=Top|attention=yes}} | |||
|action1=FAC | |||
{{WPCHINA|class=B|importance=Top}} | |||
|action1date=00:00, 29 September 2012 (UTC) | |||
|action1link=Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Falun Gong/archive1 | |||
|action1result=failed | |||
|action1oldid=515080906 | |||
|action2=GAN | |||
|action2date=03:15, 20 July 2014 (UTC) | |||
|action2link=Talk:Falun Gong/GA1 | |||
|action2result=passed | |||
|action2oldid=617660534 | |||
|action3=GAR | |||
|action3date=21:13, 27 December 2015 (UTC) | |||
|action3link=Misplaced Pages:Good article reassessment/Falun Gong/1 | |||
|action3result=delisted | |||
|action3oldid=696886966 | |||
|topic=Philosophy and religion | |||
|currentstatus=DGA | |||
}} | |||
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=B|vital=yes|1= | |||
{{WikiProject Law|importance=Mid}} | |||
{{WikiProject Religion|importance=High |NRM=yes |NRMImp=Top |FalunGong=yes |attention=yes}} | |||
{{WikiProject China|importance=High }} | |||
{{WikiProject United States|importance=Low}} | |||
{{WikiProject Politics|importance=Low}} | |||
{{WikiProject Conservatism|importance=Mid}} | |||
}} | |||
{{User:MiszaBot/config | |||
|archiveheader = {{aan}} | |||
|maxarchivesize = 150K | |||
|counter = 47 | |||
|minthreadsleft = 4 | |||
|algo = old(14d) | |||
|archive = Talk:Falun Gong/Archive %(counter)d | |||
}} | }} | ||
{| name="notice" class="messagebox" id="bizan standard-talk" style="background: #bee; border: 1px solid #666666; text-align: center; font-size: 100%;" | |||
| | '''Notice: ] and his ] and ] are banned from editing this article {{ #switch:i | i=indefinitely | for a period ending i.}}''' | |||
|- | |||
| style="text-align: left; border-top: 1px solid #666666; " | The users specified have been banned by the ] from editing this article. These users are also prevented from discussing or proposing changes on this talk page. | |||
<sub>Posted by {{{4|] 06:43, 9 May 2007 (UTC)}}} for the Arbitration committee. See ].</sub> | |||
|} | |||
{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn | {{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn | ||
|target=Talk:Falun Gong/Archive_index | |target=Talk:Falun Gong/Archive_index | ||
|mask=Talk:Falun Gong/Archive <#> | |mask=Talk:Falun Gong/Archive <#> | ||
|indexhere=yes}} | |indexhere=yes}} | ||
{{User:MiszaBot/config | |||
|archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav}} | |||
|maxarchivesize = 100K | |||
|counter = 37 | |||
|minthreadsleft = 5 | |||
|algo = old(60d) | |||
|archive = Talk:Falun Gong/Archive %(counter)d | |||
}}{{Archive box | |||
| index=/Archive index | |||
| age= 60 | |||
| collapsible= yes | |||
| auto = long | |||
| search= yes | |||
| collapsed= No | |||
| style= | |||
| image= | |||
| bot= MiszaBot | |||
}} | |||
== In relation to qigong and its roots in Chinese culture == | |||
In 1992, Li Hongzhi introduced Falun Gong and along with teachings that touched upon a wide range of topics, from detailed exposition on qigong related phenomenon and cultivation practice to science and morality. In the next few years, Falun Gong quickly grew in popularity across China to become the most popular qigong practice in Chinese History.<ref name=Ownby /> Falun Gong was welcomed into the state-controlled Scientific Qigong Research Association, which sponsored and helped to organize many of his activities between 1992 and 1994, including 54 large-scale lectures. In 1992 and 1993 he won government awards at the Beijing Oriental Health Expos, including the ''"Qigong Master most acclaimed by the Masses"'' and ''"The Award for Advancing Boundary Science."''<ref name=Fellow> The Past, Present and Future of Falun Gong, A lecture by Harold White Fellow, Benjamin Penny, at the National Library of Australia, Canberra, 2001, , accessed 31/12/07</ref> | |||
According to academics, Falun Gong originally surfaced in the institutional field of alternative Chinese science, not religion. The debate between what can be called "]" and "]" schools of ''qigong'' theory has produced a considerable amount of literature. Xu Jian stated in The ] 58 (4 November 1999): "Situated both in scientific researches on ''qigong'' and in the prevailing nationalistic revival of traditional beliefs and values, this discursive struggle has articulated itself as an intellectual debate and enlisted on both sides a host of well-known writers and scientists — so much so that a veritable corpus of literature on ''qigong'' resulted. In it, two conflicting discourses became identifiable. Taking “discourse” in its contemporary sense as referring to forms of representation that generate specific cultural and historical fields of meaning, we can describe one such discourse as ] and ] and the other as ] and ]. Each strives to establish its own order of power and knowledge, its own “truth” about the “reality” of ''qigong'', although they differ drastically in their explanation of many of its phenomena. The controversy centers on the question of whether and how ''qigong'' can induce “supranormal abilities” (''teyi gongneng''). The psychosomatic discourse emphasizes the inexplicable power of ''qigong'' and relishes its super-normal mechanisms or which causative factors which go beyond wht canbe explained by presentday scietific models, whereas the rational discourse strives to demystify many of its phenomena and to situate it strictly in the knowledge present day modern science." The Chinese government has generally tried to encourage ''qigong'' as a science and discourage religious or supernatural elements. However, the category of science in China tends to include things that are generally not considered scientific in the West, including ''qigong'' and ]. | |||
David Aikman has written in ] (March 2000): "Americans may believe that ''qigong'' belongs in a general category of socially neutral, New Age-style concepts that are merely subjective, not necessarily harmful, and incapable of scientific proof. But China's scientific community doesn't share this view. Experiments under controlled conditions established by the ] in the late 1970s and early 1980s concluded that qi, when emitted by a ''qigong'' expert, actually constitutes measurable infrared electromagnetic waves and causes chemical changes in static water through mental concentration. Qi, according to much of China's scientific establishment, for all intents existed."<ref>American Spectator, March 2000, Vol. 33, Issue 2</ref> | |||
Li Hongzhi states in : | |||
<blockquote> | |||
''"Since the time Dafa was made public, I have unveiled some inexplicable phenomena in ''qigong'' as well as things that hadn’t been explained in the ''qigong'' community. But this isn’t the reason why so many people are studying Dafa. It’s because our Fa can truly enable people to Consummate, truly save people, and allow you to truly ascend to high levels in the process of cultivation. Whether it’s your realm of mind or the physical quality of your body, the Fa truly enables you to reach the standards of different levels. It absolutely can assume this role."'' | |||
</blockquote> | |||
Andrew P. Kipnis is quoted as stating: "...to the Western layperson, ''qigong'' of all sorts may seem to be religious because it deals with spiritual matters. Because Li Hongzhi makes use of many concepts from Buddhism and Taoism in his writings, this may make Falun Gong seem even more like a religion to the outsider; bur Falun Gong grew initially into a space termed scientific , but was mostly insulated from the spaces formally acknowledged as institutionalized science in Western countries"<ref>Porter 2003, pp. 38-39. Available online: </ref> | |||
The term 'qigong' was coined in the early 1950s as an alternative label to past spiritual disciplines rooted Buddhism or Taoism, that promoted the belief in the supernatural, immortality and pursuit of spiritual transcendence. The new term was constructed to avoid danger of association with ancient spiritual practices which were labeled "superstitious" and persecuted during the Maoist era.<ref name=Ownby> Professor David Ownby, Department of History, University of Montreal, , accessed 31/12/07</ref> In Communist China, where spirituality and religion are looked-down upon, the concept was "tolerated" because it carried with it no overt religious or spiritual elements; and millions flocked to it during China's spiritual vacuum of the 1980s and 1990s. Scholars argue that the immense popularity of qigong in China could, in part, lie in the fact that the public saw in it a way to improve and maintain health. According to Ownby, this rapidly became a social phenomenon of considerable importance.<ref name=Ownby /> | |||
== Membership and finances == | |||
<!--The following quote from Porter seems to be "apropos of nothing", i.e. not really related to the rest of the section. It might be useful but perhaps it belongs somewhere else, not here. | |||
== Bias in the international reception section == | |||
Porter writes that "Most who have written about Falun Gong have simply relied upon the writings of Li Hongzhi, the websites, and newspaper articles for their information about Falun Gong, and then applied the theoretical perspective of their discipline and their personal perspective in analyzing it."<ref name="Porter"> Noah Porter, (Masters Thesis for the University of South Florida) July 18, 2003, , retrieved June 14, 2006 </ref>Porter writes that he has hoped to "bridge" this communications gap with an anthropological study of Falun Gong, "to promote a broader understanding." He states in his thesis that "…practitioners do not isolate themselves from non-practitioners"<ref name="Porter"/> and are always exposed to different "identity streams," which he defines as "different forms of media, people, and ideas."--> | |||
There is section in the "International Reception" about Adam Frank which straight up says that the isn't a cult and the "cult" definition is due to stigma. Can somebody remove it, because it's quite biased. ] (]) 20:38, 13 July 2024 (UTC) | |||
<!--This bit about Palmer's field notes and preliminary research report interrupts the flow. It's not directly relevant although it could be added as a note. | |||
] Susan Palmer's ] and a preliminary research report on Falun Dafa practitioners were released in the ] journal (nr. 4, 1 October 2000).--> | |||
:@] Denied. These are attributed opinions from academic sources. They do, however, need full citations, which I will add shortly. ] (]) 19:16, 17 August 2024 (UTC) | |||
] Susan Palmer writes that, "...Falun Gong does not behave like other new religions. For one thing, its organization - if one can even call it that - is quite nebulous. There are no church buildings, rented spaces, no priests or administrators. At first I assumed this was defensive now, I'm beginning to think that what you see is exactly what you get - Master Li's teachings on the Net on the one hand and a global network of practitioners on the other. Traveling through North America, all I dug up was a handful of volunteer contact persons. The local membership (they vehemently reject that word) is whoever happens to show up at the park on a particular Saturday morning to do qigong." | |||
::@]@] It's also heavily outdated. Last source is 2007. After they started supporting Trump, media outlets have less motivation to keep a blind eye and have finally been acknowledging how dangerous their teachings are like with a more updated article from ABC. There should be a section that Australian national broadcaster, ABC, criticised them for teaching people that race mixing is an evil alien plot to corrupt man and reports of Australian practioners have died from taking the advice that modern medicine is not in their interests. It's obviously a cult when you brainwashed people to believe the leader can read your mind and has supernatural powers and that has been heavily criticised by Australian national media. ] (]) 04:12, 11 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:::@] Again, those are accurately reproduced, attributed quotes from valid sources. Academics tend to talk about these groups differently than you or I do, and usually avoid the word "cult" entirely. See also ]. (That's partly based on the realization that a lot of cult doctrines aren't objectively any "weirder" than those of mainstream religions—Tibetan Buddhists and Catholics both believe that some of their holy men command supernatural powers, for example. But I digress, and this isn't the place for that discussion.) If you come across sources of similar quality that give an opposing view, you can incorporate them. ] (]) 07:42, 11 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
::::Firstly, it's not appropriate to compare Falun Gong to Catholic Christianity or other long-established religions. Falun Gong is a modern movement entirely invented by its founder, who self-claims to possess divine authority and is still alive today, continuing to reap its benefits. (That should be in the lead) | |||
::::Additionally, it is misleading to treat one lone source as definitive and accurate without considering context. The whole point of talk here is to gain consensus over whether a source is reliable and enough especially since more recent investigations highlight concerns that contradict the notion of Falun Gong not being a cult. | |||
::::Here are excerpts from the ABC report, and I encourage you to read these critically and tell me, without bias, whether these findings don't align with what we’d typically classify as cult-like behavior? | |||
::::''In those early years, Anna watched as her mother gradually became absorbed in Falun Gong. She pulled Anna and her sibling out of a Catholic school and quit her job in the family business to take up selling books for Falun Gong. Her time was increasingly spent doing exercises, meditating, and reading the movement’s teachings.'' | |||
::::''“The leader of Falun Gong claims that race mixing in humans is part of an alien plot to drive humanity further from the gods,” says Anna. “He says that when a child is born from an interracial marriage, that child does not have a heavenly kingdom to go to.”'' | |||
::::''As she struggled with her illness, Anna says her mother rejected doctors’ attempts to put her on medication, quoting Falun Gong teachings. “It means you are a bad practitioner. It means you do not fully trust Master Li. If you take any kind of medication or go to a hospital, even.”'' | |||
::::I am not suggesting we remove sources that state Falun Gong is not a cult. However, like articles on ] or the Unification Church, where the leadership’s actions and teachings are critically examined, the same standard should apply here. The ABC joint investigation highlights significant harm caused by Falun Gong’s teachings on medicine, along with troubling ideological beliefs espoused by its leader. | |||
::::We should include this investigation in the article and others , clearly attributing these findings to the ABC as a reliable source but we don't have to call it a cult. If we cannot reach an agreement, I propose settling the matter through the arbitration process.] (]) 09:32, 11 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
::::Cults can even influence the most trusted individuals, so a single academic research is not enough. | |||
::::Also, comparing regular religions to cults is ridiculous, since regular religions allow you to leave and do not force you to pay the head of the Church, whilst cults do the opposite. | |||
::::Moreover, the "weirdness" is not a factor to determine a cult from a regular religion. ] (]) 11:48, 12 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
::::Also, the German wiki does include a lot of bias to Falun Gong, so we need to be careful to make sure this page doesn't have the problems ] (]) 11:52, 12 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
== https://en.wikipedia.org/Falun_Gong#Texts "" == | |||
===Finances=== | |||
In section 1.4 "Texts" a paragraph that ends "available on Falun Gong websites." is terminated with ''' | |||
In his thesis, Noah Porter takes up the issue of Falun Gong and finance in Mainland China. He quotes and responds to some of the allegations of the Chinese Communist Party that Li benefited financially from teaching the practice. Porter writes that when teaching seminars, there was an admission of 40 yuan per new practitioner and 20 yuan for repeat practitioners--with the repeat practitioners making up for 50-75% of the admissions. He goes on to say with respect to the CCP's claims: "...but the Chinese government figures for the profits of the seminars counted all attendees as paying the 40-yuan fee charged to newcomers. Also, the Chinese Qigong Research Society received 40% of admission receipts from July 1993 to September 1994. Falun Gong's first four training seminars took in a total of 20,000 yuan, which is only 10% of the 200,000 figure cited by the Chinese government. Finally, from that 20,000 yuan, they had several operating expenses..."<ref>Porter 2003, p 197</ref> | |||
''' | |||
https://en.falundafa.org/falun-dafa-books.html << this is the citation. It is only a short google away, but we can save people the search and delete one of our useful | |||
Ian Johnson points out that during the greatest period of Falun Gong book sales in China, Li Hongzhi never received any royalties because all publications were bootleg.<ref name=wildgrass>Johnson, Ian. ''Wild Grass: three stories of change in modern China''. Pantheon books. 2004. pp 23-229</ref> | |||
I understand the resistance to funnel curious minds towards such an organisation, especially when Falun Gong is conspicuously absent from https://sacred-texts.com ] (]) 10:27, 31 August 2024 (UTC) | |||
James Tong writes about the competing claims by Falun Gong and the Chinese government in 'The China Quarterly' journal, 2003. He writes that the government has attempted to portray Falun Gong as being financially savvy with a centralized administration system and a variety of mechanisms for deriving profit from the practice. He also looks over Falun Gong's claims of having no hierarchy, administration, membership or financial accounts, and that seminar admission was charged at a minimal rate.<ref> James Tong, "An Organizational Analysis of the Falun Gong: Structure, Communications, Financing", The China Quarterly, 2002, 636-660: p 636</ref> Tong writes that it was in the government's interest, in the post-crackdown context, to portray Falun Gong as being highly organised: "The more organized the Falun Gong could be shown to be, then the more justified the regime's repression in the name of social order was."<ref>Tong 2002, p 638 </ref> He writes that the government's charges that Falun Gong made excessive profits, charged exorbitant fees, and that Li Hongzhi led a lavish lifestyle "...lack both internal and external substantiating evidence" and points out that that despite the arrests and scrutiny, the authorities "had disclosed no financial accounts that established the official charge and credibly countered Falun Gong rebuttals."<ref>Tong 2002, p 657</ref> | |||
:falundafa.org is a ] source and therefore does not comply with ]. It's not reliable. ] (]) 18:42, 6 September 2024 (UTC) | |||
Li Hongzhi stipulates in his books ''Falun Gong'' and ''Zhuan Falun'' that practitioners should only voluntarily help others learn the exercises and that this could never be done for fame and money, and also stipulates that practitioners must not accept any fee, donation or gift in return for their voluntarily teaching the practice. According to Falun Gong, Li's insistence that the practice be offered free of charge caused a rift with the China Qigong Research Society, the state administrative body under which Falun Dafa was initially introduced. Li subsequently withdrew from the organization. | |||
::That's arbitrary. Nobody should consider them as reliable facts but it should be fine to quote them and attributes appropriately, because they are the official teachings of Falun Gong. One can definitely say that they teach this and that, and cite their articles literally doing just that. ] (]) 01:27, 3 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:::Fringe sources are notoriously unreliable, particularly about themselves, and in this case often deceptive. ] (]) 01:36, 3 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:::I mean, if you step back and think about it for a moment—should we be trusting what groups we consider fringe purport about themselves, even in terms of how they present media for consumption? I would say better safe than sorry there, silly as that may sound. <span style="border-radius:2px;padding:3px;background:#1E816F">]<span style="color:#fff"> ‥ </span>]</span> 01:37, 3 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
== Misses the source's entire key point == | |||
Falun Gong website often state on their pages that "All Falun Gong Activities Are Free of Charge and Run by Volunteers"<ref>Learning the Practice, , accessed 21 July 2007</ref> | |||
In extraterrestrial chapter, it uses a source that itself says "''Some practitioners have "explained" Master Li’s teachings as metaphorical, such as his claims that aliens walk the Earth and disguise themselves as people to corrupt mankind. But Anna learned it as literal truth''." The source was to emphasize that people do learn it as literal truth yet that's completely cut out. And if you read Li's teachings and interview, it's obviously not metaphorical as he goes into too much specific detail about how the advanced aliens look like. The source should be properly covered and not misrepresented. For one - you don't know if those practitioners are just lying to avoid public scrutiny so you can't say they "believe" it's merely metaphorical especially when contradicted. Instead it should say they "claimed" this, as well as adding that others like Ben and Anna deem it as"dangerous" brainwashing where they and others, are made to believe the leader has literal supernatural abilities and can save them from ] (]) 01:37, 3 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
In an interview in Sydney on May 2, 1999, mentioning his financial status, Li said : "In mainland China I published so many books, but added together, they haven't exceeded twenty thousand Renminbi (equivalent to US $ 2,469). This is what the publishing company gave me. When publishing books in other countries of the world, you know there is a rule, which pays 5 or 6% royalties to the author, so each time I can only get a little bit, a few hundred, or a few thousand dollars." <ref>Li Hongzhi, Lecture in Sydney, 1999, , accessed 21 July 2007</ref> | |||
</div></div></br> | |||
:It's not generally our prerogative to directly analyze primary sources—we're an encyclopedia, a tertiary source. <span style="border-radius:2px;padding:3px;background:#1E816F">]<span style="color:#fff"> ‥ </span>]</span> 01:38, 3 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
{{reflist}} | |||
::Exactly. What gives us the right to claim that some practitioners believe it's only metaphorical? The source NEVER said that and instead immediately contradicts that claim with verified witnesses. The same source also added another article reporting others like Ben and Anna encountered dangerous "brainwashing" that the leader also has literal supernatural abilities and can save them from these aliens. There's no chapter stating that the leader seld claims to have supernatural abilities despite it should as reliable sources confirms it. ] (]) 01:43, 3 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
::'''It's not our prerogative to directly analyze primary sources'''. Hence we shouldn't add in our own completely '''unsourced''' claims and assumptions into the article. The source '''never''' said some practioners believe it's only metaphorical. ABC source sa "some practioners explained or claimed it's metaphorical". That should be corrected aswhere the rticle should change to (claimed) and not (believed) ait's not our job to believe they believe. Only that they made those claims and not up to us to claim they are honest with those claims. ] (]) 01:47, 3 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:::You won't find me disagreeing. <span style="border-radius:2px;padding:3px;background:#1E816F">]<span style="color:#fff"> ‥ </span>]</span> 01:48, 3 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
::::ok, then please correct as I cannot do that. In the chapter for Beliefs and practices / and subchapter - extraterrestrials - Change sentence to say (some practioners claimed) instead of saying (some practioners believed). As it's faithful to what the source actually said. Also add in what ABC news reported; key context that a girl who is verified to had been part of the group, learned it as the literal truth and contradicting those claims. ] (]) 01:55, 3 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
::::@] hello. I am earlier user 49.195.11.45 and just wanted to say that initially, your replies were so quick I couldn’t even fix my typos before you responded. The website weirdly messes up my replies and I needed to fix it, and I tried to quickly but you keep responding quickly before I could finish fixing. Nothing wrong with replying fast but when I asked you to make the agreed changes, 8 hours passed with no response. Perhaps you went to sleep. But if you’ve decided not to make the changes, it would be helpful to let me know so I’m not left waiting. I’ve made a formal request below in the meantime, but you’re welcome to respond if you’d like. ] (]) 11:22, 3 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
== Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 3 December 2024 == | |||
== Sources == | |||
{{edit extended-protected|Falun Gong|answered=yes}} | |||
It seems to me that, maybe, we have not paid a great deal of attention to some of the more recent works on this subject. ''Revenge of the Forbidden City'' was a fairly well received book a few years ago about the Chinese reaction to FG, and the more recent ''Cultural Economy of Falun Gong,'' which has only been out a month or two and hasn't yet gotten a lot of reviews, is probably also very useful. Also, I note that Ownby and Palmer have both written and helped collect some articles for publication in ''Nova Religio,'' which seems to be the journal which has been selected for the publication of writings on the subject of FG as a movement in general. They would certainly be reasonable to be included. I can't e-mail books to anyone, but, if they were to want any articles, including the Nova Religio articles, and can't get them, I could e-mail those articles out. ] (]) 21:11, 12 August 2011 (UTC) | |||
Please update the chapter on '''Beliefs and Practices''' under the subchapter '''Extraterrestrials''' to include details about the claim that race mixing is part of an alien plot to drive humanity away from the gods. Additionally, want to clarify that the source from ABC News never stated that some practitioners '''believed''' this claim to be metaphorical. The ABC report only explained that some practitioners '''described''' it as metaphorical. It is both unsourced and original research to say these practitioners were honest in their verbal claims and actually believed them, especially considering the same ABC report quickly included a contradictory statement from a former member who said she was taught this as the literal truth and not metaphorical | |||
Proposed revision; | |||
:I believe a few of these are already found in the article, including some Nova Religio pieces. Correct me if I'm wrong. ''Revenge of the Forbidden City'' is cited at length in the section on the conversion campaign. Tong not being an expert on Falun Gong as a religion (except, perhaps, its organization), I suspect his research will be more useful on the persecution page. But I would suggest being aware of the limitations of his research, which ended in 2005 and relied overwhelmingly on primary source, official literature (and zero field work, it would seem, or even interviews with former detainees and the like). I have not read Xiao Ming's book, but if you happen to have a pdf, send it my way. In my last round of edits to this page, I made a pretty feable attempt to incorporate some of the more recent scholarly and journalistic literature, including Vivienne Shue's excellent contribution to ''State and Society in 21st Century China.'' It's a worthwhile endeavor, but on the other hand, I worry already (as previously expressed) than the page already contains more scholarly exegesis than is useful to an average reader, so it needs to be balanced against the needs of brevity and clarity.] (]) 00:52, 27 August 2011 (UTC) | |||
Replace fourth sentence - | |||
'' Li purported that in general extraterrestrials disguise themselves as human in order to corrupt and manipulate humanity, but some practitioners claimed that to be only metaphorical]''. | |||
== He and Luo, two years later. == | |||
With this; | |||
I see that the issue with He and Luo is still basically unresolved. Did we just run out of steam like every other instance and let it be? See: ], and my arguments prior to my departure from Falun Gong articles: ]. ]+<small>(])</small> 03:22, 15 September 2011 (UTC) | |||
''Li Hongzhi alleged that extraterrestrials disguise themselves as humans to corrupt and manipulate humanity, a claim some practitioners have downplayed as metaphorical. Li also claims that racial mixing among humans is part of the "alien plot" to hurt and distance humanity further away from the gods.'' | |||
== Rationale for my edit on the Controversies section == | |||
] (]) 11:20, 3 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
1) PCCP's statement about non-scholarly anti-cult activists like Rick Ross is undue weight next to the opinions of numerous credible scholars. 2) The references were also messed up and misplaced in his earlier edit. 3) He included material that was taken out of context, like Palmer's quote about the "absolute centralization" of money, organization, and healing. The quote was explaining that local practice sites are not allowed to take money; it's not about Falun Gong being tightly organized. 4) He added in Craig Smith's quote saying that Falun Gong believes mixed-race people are the "spawn" of the dharma-ending period. The primary sources (i.e. Falun Gong's teachings, the sole corpus of teachings that determines what Falun Gong "believes") do not include such allegations. <font color="green">'''✔</font> ]''' <font color="darksalmon" size="+1">]</font> 07:29, 17 October 2011 (UTC) | |||
:I don't understand your edit (or at least the one part that I was paying attention to). On the one hand we have a reliable secondary source, the New York Times, in an article about Falun Gong saying that Li Hongzhi "''said interracial children are the spawn of the ''Dharma Ending Period,'' a Buddhist phrase that refers to an era of moral degeneration. In an interview last year, he said each race has its own paradise, and he later told followers in Australia that, "The yellow people, the white people, and the black people have corresponding races in heaven." As a result, he said, interracial children have no place in heaven without his intervention.''" and on the other we have a Misplaced Pages editor talking about what primary sources say as the basis for the removal of the ] compliant material. Please could you explain how the removal of the material is consistemt with policy ? Thanks. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 4px 1px 3px;white-space:nowrap">''']''' - ''']'''</small> 07:41, 17 October 2011 (UTC) | |||
::I'm '''not''' trying to reject the idea of including what Li Hongzhi has said about the the mixed-race issue; I'm talking about the opinionated, inflammatory wording in that article. There are no reliable academic sources contesting the idea that Li Hongzhi's lectures are the sole criterion for determining what Falun Gong "teaches". In fact, many sources explicitly state just the opposite. In this case, the primary sources are in no way ambiguous nor can they be dismissed when we evaluate what has definitively been said. Using another source is just like playing ]—the further we get from the source, the less likely we are able to preserve the original meaning without distortion. | |||
:Which practitioners? Without a direct quote or citation of them, the sentence reads like ] imo ] 10:29, 17 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
::This is perfectly consistent with Misplaced Pages policies and guidelines, including the verifiability of sources. "''The accuracy of quoted material is paramount and the accuracy of quotations from living persons is especially sensitive. To ensure accuracy, the text of quoted material is best taken from (and cited to) the original source being quoted. If this is not possible, then the text may be taken from a reliable secondary source (ideally one that includes a citation to the original). No matter where you take the quoted text from, it is important to make clear the actual source of the text, as it appears in the article. Partisan secondary sources should be viewed with suspicion as they may misquote or quote out of context. In such cases, look for neutral corroboration from another source.''" Craig Smith is very partisan; all his articles by this era had become propaganda pieces for the CCP, a fact we can easily corroborate by comparing them with scholarly accounts of Falun Gong. Given that his account is contentious (i.e. the "spawn" thing, and the idea that people of mixed race are doomed without Li's intervention), we should seek an additional source on it. And since no other sources make these same claims, it shouldn't be included. | |||
::It's in the mentioned ABC source. What other source could I possibly even mean? ABC never wrote that they believed that. This is original research that's '''unsourced and should be removed'''. What ABC wrote was that they "claimed" it was hypothetical, without making any judgement that they were telling the truth or not. Though the ABC source hints they are flat out lying because they quickly follow up by saying a confirmed ex member contradicted them and said that she learnt it as the literal truth. Hence I request that the sentence should be more closer to what ABC actually said and remove the unsourced Weasel wording. ] (]) 03:21, 18 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:::Sorry if I came across as rude. I'm working on the article now. ] 03:53, 18 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
::Here is the ABC source: . | |||
::The article states: ''"Some practitioners have explained Master Li’s teachings as metaphorical, such as his claims that aliens walk the Earth and disguise themselves as people to corrupt mankind. But Anna learned it as literal truth."'' | |||
::The current Misplaced Pages edit wrongfully writes practitioners "believe" this as "metaphorical", but the ABC article provides no such consensus and instead ''highlights'' Anna's contradictory account to suggest the honesty of their claims are questionable. | |||
I request that the completely UNSOURCED claim of (some practioners believed) be removed or replaced with this more accurate reflection of the ABC source without distortion: | |||
::Moreover, ''the idea is already touched upon'' in the Ian Johnson quote. If you think that more needs to be said about it, you should attempt to accurately present these beliefs by first checking them against Li Hongzhi's teachings, and then refer to credible scholars of Falun Gong for insight into how to understand them. <font color="green">'''✔</font> ]''' <font color="darksalmon" size="+1">]</font> 08:22, 17 October 2011 (UTC) | |||
''Li Hongzhi alleged that extraterrestrials disguise themselves as humans to corrupt and manipulate humanity. According to an ABC investigation, while some practioners downplayed this as metaphorical, a former member, Anna, said she was taught it as literal truth '' | |||
Hundreds of people have written thousands of pages on Falungong, but that does not mean that everything they have said should be included in this article simply because their writing it is verifiable. In determining whether this particular quote should be included, we need to ask, first, if the quote attributed to a living person is accurate; second, if it is given due weight; third, if it is relevant. | |||
(https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-07-21/inside-falun-gong-master-li-hongzhi-the-mountain-dragon-springs/12442518)] (]) 03:44, 18 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
The answer to the first question is disputed, and the most inflammatory elements of the NYT article are not properly attributed. On those grounds alone, I would be reluctant to include it. To the question of due weight, we currently have two quotes in this section (one from Smith, one from Johnson) that touch on this topic, but no response from Falungong, and no evidence that this is actually notable. Which brings me to the third point of relevance. I checked Ian Johnson and David Ownby’s writings to see if they say more on this subject of mixed races, and they do not. Both only allude to the issue in passing as an example of novel Falungong beliefs, but do not return to it. Ownby devotes a lengthy chapter to exploring Falungong’s teachings, but does not think that this one is sufficiently notable to warrant any further discussion. Furthermore, this section of the page is about controversies. Craig Smith was not reporting on a controversy caused by this teaching (if anything, it seems he may have been trying to manufacture one). Aside from the fact that Falungong’s views on mixed races are antiquated and idiosyncratic, there’s nothing notable here. The single reference by Ian Johnson is certainly enough on this topic. | |||
:{{Done}}. I moved it to a new paragraph as I felt like it didn't fit in the middle of the current one. ] 04:02, 18 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
There is a legitimate controversy that is not currently explored in the article, which is the question of Falungong’s teachings and impacts on health. Namely, the charge that it discourages conventional medical treatment. On this topic, quite a bit has been said—not only by Falungong and PRC sources, but more importantly by academic observers. I will work on drafting this section when time allows. | |||
::Thank you and also no offense taken. I am just glad someone finally replied and answered the request. Thanks again. ] (]) 04:05, 18 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
== Add in quotes from Times interview and ABC report == | |||
Regarding the David Palmer quote, I agree with Olaf’s assessment that it was quoted in the article to convey quite a different meaning than was intended. Palmer recognizes that Falungong is loosely organised, just as do Ownby, Tong, (Susan) Palmer and others, so his statement should not be used to present the impression of dissent on that particular issue. Information from that section of Palmer could be included in a discussion of Falungong funds, but his statements should be used to explain the issue, not dramatise it.—'''<font color="darkred">Zujine</font>|]''' 13:49, 20 October 2011 (UTC) | |||
Li's interview is very revealing. He claims not just aliens but that there are things that modern science cannot understand. And that the only person in the entire world who understands how to save humanity is himself. He self claims himself as a saviour who learned supernatural powers and known many people who can literally levitate. None of this information is in the article despite this is major stuff. It should be included as it's well sourced by Times Magazine. ''At the beginning you asked why I did such things. I only tell practitioners, but not the public because they cannot comprehend it. I am trying to save those people who can return to a high level and to a high moral level. Modern science does not understand this, so governments can do nothing. The only person in the entire world who knows this is myself alone.'' ] (]) 00:47, 5 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:I noticed that an editor attempted to restore his preferred version of the page, ignoring edits that have been made in the interim, and disregarding the discussion process. In so doing, he reintroduced edits that do not seem to comport with WP:UNDUE or WP:BLP, deleted source content, and mangled some references. I restored to the last version of the page, and suggest that any potentially controversial edits be discussed on the talk page.] (]) 05:15, 21 October 2011 (UTC) | |||
:To be clear, article should mention in a chapter about FG teachings; the main facts from that interview, that he is preaching that not only does he have supernatural abilities but is telling people that modern medicine / science and governments cannot help them in the future challenges. And rather in his own words, that the only person in the entire world they should trust is him. I also read this article(https://www.abc.net.au/religion/the-abc-is-right-that-falun-gong-teachings-are-dangerous/12538058) and it reveals that practioners have died because they believed in his advice that modern medicine was pointless for them. And that his followers find it hard to not see the leader Li as just a man but instead as some omniscient deity that is always watching them as; ''they believed that Li could read their minds, and that his fashen or “law bodies” — basically, copies of himself that exist in a spiritual dimension — were always next to them and watching their every move and thought.'' | |||
:So there should be a minimum mention in the lead that the leader Li Hongzhi claims to be a saviour of man and has attained supernatural abilities since his youth. And also in the article somewhere, that there's been credible reports of practioners who have died, believing too much in his controversial claims about modern medicine.] (]) 01:49, 5 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:Is there nobody replying on this page? It's been a week and nobody has replied to the thread. It's a stark difference to getting a response within only minutes initially. However I like to stress and emphasize that what should be included is that the religion teaches people that their leader can read their minds and have supernatural abilities. There's no reason to not mention this when it's true and supported by a national broadcaster who has the integrity and courage to address. Below is an excerpt that supports those facts - | |||
''Anna waited. A few minutes later, Master entered the room. He spoke first to the woman and then to Anna’s mother. Then he looked at Anna, looked right into her eyes. He raised his arms, waving them in the air, then he was chanting something she couldn’t understand. Anna as a young girl. “By then it was pretty clear what this was supposed to be,” says Anna, now 25. “This was supposed to be an exorcism.” She was face to face with the man reckoned a God-like figure among his followers at The Mountain, who Anna had grown up believing could read her mind and listen to her dangerous thoughts. But now the spell was broken. | |||
::I'm restoring the NYT reference, considering that none of you offered concrete evidence that why it fails WP:RS, and seemed to edit upon a personal dislike of the NYT article. The controversy section was distorted to read like an apology for FLG controversies and make as if all of FLG's controversies are manufactured by the Chinese government.--] (]) 06:49, 21 October 2011 (UTC) | |||
“I remember looking into his eyes and thinking, ‘you are just another regular, pathetic man’,” she says.'' | |||
The point is people who follow Li, believe he can read their minds and always observe them. That he is extremely powerful in a supernatural way. That kind of information definitely deserves to be in the article too. And hope I don't need to wait for long for someone with editing rights, to add it in.] (]) 04:33, 11 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:::PCPP, I don't like being accused of bad faith in your edit summaries. It seems that you have fallen back into your old patterns of reverting without discussion. Other editors have offered sound reasons for removing the NYT quote. In addition, you have not provided any justification for your other edits, which are problematic. A controversy section should be balanced. That is, it should present actual controversies, giving due weight, and explaining the different perspectives on those issues in accordance with their importance and value. I suggest you cool off. ] (]) 06:55, 21 October 2011 (UTC) |
Latest revision as of 04:05, 18 December 2024
Skip to table of contents |
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Falun Gong article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47Auto-archiving period: 14 days |
Warning: active arbitration remedies The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to Falun Gong, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:
Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
Please stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. If consensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute. |
This page is not a forum for general discussion about Falun Gong. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Falun Gong at the Reference desk. |
Falun Gong was one of the Philosophy and religion good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | ||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||
Current status: Delisted good article |
This level-4 vital article is rated B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Bias in the international reception section
There is section in the "International Reception" about Adam Frank which straight up says that the isn't a cult and the "cult" definition is due to stigma. Can somebody remove it, because it's quite biased. Yippt (talk) 20:38, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Yippt Denied. These are attributed opinions from academic sources. They do, however, need full citations, which I will add shortly. Nicknimh (talk) 19:16, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
- @Nicknimh@Yippt It's also heavily outdated. Last source is 2007. After they started supporting Trump, media outlets have less motivation to keep a blind eye and have finally been acknowledging how dangerous their teachings are like with a more updated article from ABC. There should be a section that Australian national broadcaster, ABC, criticised them for teaching people that race mixing is an evil alien plot to corrupt man and reports of Australian practioners have died from taking the advice that modern medicine is not in their interests. It's obviously a cult when you brainwashed people to believe the leader can read your mind and has supernatural powers and that has been heavily criticised by Australian national media. 49.186.112.179 (talk) 04:12, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
- @49.186.112.179 Again, those are accurately reproduced, attributed quotes from valid sources. Academics tend to talk about these groups differently than you or I do, and usually avoid the word "cult" entirely. See also MOS:CULT. (That's partly based on the realization that a lot of cult doctrines aren't objectively any "weirder" than those of mainstream religions—Tibetan Buddhists and Catholics both believe that some of their holy men command supernatural powers, for example. But I digress, and this isn't the place for that discussion.) If you come across sources of similar quality that give an opposing view, you can incorporate them. Nicknimh (talk) 07:42, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
- Firstly, it's not appropriate to compare Falun Gong to Catholic Christianity or other long-established religions. Falun Gong is a modern movement entirely invented by its founder, who self-claims to possess divine authority and is still alive today, continuing to reap its benefits. (That should be in the lead)
- Additionally, it is misleading to treat one lone source as definitive and accurate without considering context. The whole point of talk here is to gain consensus over whether a source is reliable and enough especially since more recent investigations highlight concerns that contradict the notion of Falun Gong not being a cult.
- Here are excerpts from the ABC report, and I encourage you to read these critically and tell me, without bias, whether these findings don't align with what we’d typically classify as cult-like behavior?
- In those early years, Anna watched as her mother gradually became absorbed in Falun Gong. She pulled Anna and her sibling out of a Catholic school and quit her job in the family business to take up selling books for Falun Gong. Her time was increasingly spent doing exercises, meditating, and reading the movement’s teachings.
- “The leader of Falun Gong claims that race mixing in humans is part of an alien plot to drive humanity further from the gods,” says Anna. “He says that when a child is born from an interracial marriage, that child does not have a heavenly kingdom to go to.”
- As she struggled with her illness, Anna says her mother rejected doctors’ attempts to put her on medication, quoting Falun Gong teachings. “It means you are a bad practitioner. It means you do not fully trust Master Li. If you take any kind of medication or go to a hospital, even.”
- I am not suggesting we remove sources that state Falun Gong is not a cult. However, like articles on Scientology or the Unification Church, where the leadership’s actions and teachings are critically examined, the same standard should apply here. The ABC joint investigation highlights significant harm caused by Falun Gong’s teachings on medicine, along with troubling ideological beliefs espoused by its leader.
- We should include this investigation in the article and others , clearly attributing these findings to the ABC as a reliable source but we don't have to call it a cult. If we cannot reach an agreement, I propose settling the matter through the arbitration process.49.186.112.179 (talk) 09:32, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
- Cults can even influence the most trusted individuals, so a single academic research is not enough.
- Also, comparing regular religions to cults is ridiculous, since regular religions allow you to leave and do not force you to pay the head of the Church, whilst cults do the opposite.
- Moreover, the "weirdness" is not a factor to determine a cult from a regular religion. Yippt (talk) 11:48, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
- Also, the German wiki does include a lot of bias to Falun Gong, so we need to be careful to make sure this page doesn't have the problems Yippt (talk) 11:52, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
- @49.186.112.179 Again, those are accurately reproduced, attributed quotes from valid sources. Academics tend to talk about these groups differently than you or I do, and usually avoid the word "cult" entirely. See also MOS:CULT. (That's partly based on the realization that a lot of cult doctrines aren't objectively any "weirder" than those of mainstream religions—Tibetan Buddhists and Catholics both believe that some of their holy men command supernatural powers, for example. But I digress, and this isn't the place for that discussion.) If you come across sources of similar quality that give an opposing view, you can incorporate them. Nicknimh (talk) 07:42, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Nicknimh@Yippt It's also heavily outdated. Last source is 2007. After they started supporting Trump, media outlets have less motivation to keep a blind eye and have finally been acknowledging how dangerous their teachings are like with a more updated article from ABC. There should be a section that Australian national broadcaster, ABC, criticised them for teaching people that race mixing is an evil alien plot to corrupt man and reports of Australian practioners have died from taking the advice that modern medicine is not in their interests. It's obviously a cult when you brainwashed people to believe the leader can read your mind and has supernatural powers and that has been heavily criticised by Australian national media. 49.186.112.179 (talk) 04:12, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
https://en.wikipedia.org/Falun_Gong#Texts ""
In section 1.4 "Texts" a paragraph that ends "available on Falun Gong websites." is terminated with
https://en.falundafa.org/falun-dafa-books.html << this is the citation. It is only a short google away, but we can save people the search and delete one of our useful
I understand the resistance to funnel curious minds towards such an organisation, especially when Falun Gong is conspicuously absent from https://sacred-texts.com alexx (talk) 10:27, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- falundafa.org is a WP:PROFRINGE source and therefore does not comply with WP:RS. It's not reliable. :bloodofox: (talk) 18:42, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- That's arbitrary. Nobody should consider them as reliable facts but it should be fine to quote them and attributes appropriately, because they are the official teachings of Falun Gong. One can definitely say that they teach this and that, and cite their articles literally doing just that. 49.195.11.45 (talk) 01:27, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Fringe sources are notoriously unreliable, particularly about themselves, and in this case often deceptive. :bloodofox: (talk) 01:36, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- I mean, if you step back and think about it for a moment—should we be trusting what groups we consider fringe purport about themselves, even in terms of how they present media for consumption? I would say better safe than sorry there, silly as that may sound. Remsense ‥ 论 01:37, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- That's arbitrary. Nobody should consider them as reliable facts but it should be fine to quote them and attributes appropriately, because they are the official teachings of Falun Gong. One can definitely say that they teach this and that, and cite their articles literally doing just that. 49.195.11.45 (talk) 01:27, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Misses the source's entire key point
In extraterrestrial chapter, it uses a source that itself says "Some practitioners have "explained" Master Li’s teachings as metaphorical, such as his claims that aliens walk the Earth and disguise themselves as people to corrupt mankind. But Anna learned it as literal truth." The source was to emphasize that people do learn it as literal truth yet that's completely cut out. And if you read Li's teachings and interview, it's obviously not metaphorical as he goes into too much specific detail about how the advanced aliens look like. The source should be properly covered and not misrepresented. For one - you don't know if those practitioners are just lying to avoid public scrutiny so you can't say they "believe" it's merely metaphorical especially when contradicted. Instead it should say they "claimed" this, as well as adding that others like Ben and Anna deem it as"dangerous" brainwashing where they and others, are made to believe the leader has literal supernatural abilities and can save them from 49.195.11.45 (talk) 01:37, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- It's not generally our prerogative to directly analyze primary sources—we're an encyclopedia, a tertiary source. Remsense ‥ 论 01:38, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Exactly. What gives us the right to claim that some practitioners believe it's only metaphorical? The source NEVER said that and instead immediately contradicts that claim with verified witnesses. The same source also added another article reporting others like Ben and Anna encountered dangerous "brainwashing" that the leader also has literal supernatural abilities and can save them from these aliens. There's no chapter stating that the leader seld claims to have supernatural abilities despite it should as reliable sources confirms it. 49.195.11.45 (talk) 01:43, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- It's not our prerogative to directly analyze primary sources. Hence we shouldn't add in our own completely unsourced claims and assumptions into the article. The source never said some practioners believe it's only metaphorical. ABC source sa "some practioners explained or claimed it's metaphorical". That should be corrected aswhere the rticle should change to (claimed) and not (believed) ait's not our job to believe they believe. Only that they made those claims and not up to us to claim they are honest with those claims. 49.195.11.45 (talk) 01:47, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- You won't find me disagreeing. Remsense ‥ 论 01:48, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- ok, then please correct as I cannot do that. In the chapter for Beliefs and practices / and subchapter - extraterrestrials - Change sentence to say (some practioners claimed) instead of saying (some practioners believed). As it's faithful to what the source actually said. Also add in what ABC news reported; key context that a girl who is verified to had been part of the group, learned it as the literal truth and contradicting those claims. 49.195.11.45 (talk) 01:55, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Remsense hello. I am earlier user 49.195.11.45 and just wanted to say that initially, your replies were so quick I couldn’t even fix my typos before you responded. The website weirdly messes up my replies and I needed to fix it, and I tried to quickly but you keep responding quickly before I could finish fixing. Nothing wrong with replying fast but when I asked you to make the agreed changes, 8 hours passed with no response. Perhaps you went to sleep. But if you’ve decided not to make the changes, it would be helpful to let me know so I’m not left waiting. I’ve made a formal request below in the meantime, but you’re welcome to respond if you’d like. 49.181.65.24 (talk) 11:22, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- You won't find me disagreeing. Remsense ‥ 论 01:48, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 3 December 2024
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please update the chapter on Beliefs and Practices under the subchapter Extraterrestrials to include details about the claim that race mixing is part of an alien plot to drive humanity away from the gods. Additionally, want to clarify that the source from ABC News never stated that some practitioners believed this claim to be metaphorical. The ABC report only explained that some practitioners described it as metaphorical. It is both unsourced and original research to say these practitioners were honest in their verbal claims and actually believed them, especially considering the same ABC report quickly included a contradictory statement from a former member who said she was taught this as the literal truth and not metaphorical
Proposed revision; Replace fourth sentence -
Li purported that in general extraterrestrials disguise themselves as human in order to corrupt and manipulate humanity, but some practitioners claimed that to be only metaphorical].
With this;
Li Hongzhi alleged that extraterrestrials disguise themselves as humans to corrupt and manipulate humanity, a claim some practitioners have downplayed as metaphorical. Li also claims that racial mixing among humans is part of the "alien plot" to hurt and distance humanity further away from the gods.
49.181.65.24 (talk) 11:20, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Which practitioners? Without a direct quote or citation of them, the sentence reads like MOS:WEASEL imo Cmrc23 ʕ•ᴥ•ʔ 10:29, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- It's in the mentioned ABC source. What other source could I possibly even mean? ABC never wrote that they believed that. This is original research that's unsourced and should be removed. What ABC wrote was that they "claimed" it was hypothetical, without making any judgement that they were telling the truth or not. Though the ABC source hints they are flat out lying because they quickly follow up by saying a confirmed ex member contradicted them and said that she learnt it as the literal truth. Hence I request that the sentence should be more closer to what ABC actually said and remove the unsourced Weasel wording. 49.180.253.95 (talk) 03:21, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry if I came across as rude. I'm working on the article now. Cmrc23 ʕ•ᴥ•ʔ 03:53, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Here is the ABC source: .
- The article states: "Some practitioners have explained Master Li’s teachings as metaphorical, such as his claims that aliens walk the Earth and disguise themselves as people to corrupt mankind. But Anna learned it as literal truth."
- The current Misplaced Pages edit wrongfully writes practitioners "believe" this as "metaphorical", but the ABC article provides no such consensus and instead highlights Anna's contradictory account to suggest the honesty of their claims are questionable.
- It's in the mentioned ABC source. What other source could I possibly even mean? ABC never wrote that they believed that. This is original research that's unsourced and should be removed. What ABC wrote was that they "claimed" it was hypothetical, without making any judgement that they were telling the truth or not. Though the ABC source hints they are flat out lying because they quickly follow up by saying a confirmed ex member contradicted them and said that she learnt it as the literal truth. Hence I request that the sentence should be more closer to what ABC actually said and remove the unsourced Weasel wording. 49.180.253.95 (talk) 03:21, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
I request that the completely UNSOURCED claim of (some practioners believed) be removed or replaced with this more accurate reflection of the ABC source without distortion:
Li Hongzhi alleged that extraterrestrials disguise themselves as humans to corrupt and manipulate humanity. According to an ABC investigation, while some practioners downplayed this as metaphorical, a former member, Anna, said she was taught it as literal truth
(https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-07-21/inside-falun-gong-master-li-hongzhi-the-mountain-dragon-springs/12442518)49.180.253.95 (talk) 03:44, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Done. I moved it to a new paragraph as I felt like it didn't fit in the middle of the current one. Cmrc23 ʕ•ᴥ•ʔ 04:02, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you and also no offense taken. I am just glad someone finally replied and answered the request. Thanks again. 49.180.253.95 (talk) 04:05, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
Add in quotes from Times interview and ABC report
Li's interview is very revealing. He claims not just aliens but that there are things that modern science cannot understand. And that the only person in the entire world who understands how to save humanity is himself. He self claims himself as a saviour who learned supernatural powers and known many people who can literally levitate. None of this information is in the article despite this is major stuff. It should be included as it's well sourced by Times Magazine. At the beginning you asked why I did such things. I only tell practitioners, but not the public because they cannot comprehend it. I am trying to save those people who can return to a high level and to a high moral level. Modern science does not understand this, so governments can do nothing. The only person in the entire world who knows this is myself alone. 49.180.244.73 (talk) 00:47, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- To be clear, article should mention in a chapter about FG teachings; the main facts from that interview, that he is preaching that not only does he have supernatural abilities but is telling people that modern medicine / science and governments cannot help them in the future challenges. And rather in his own words, that the only person in the entire world they should trust is him. I also read this article(https://www.abc.net.au/religion/the-abc-is-right-that-falun-gong-teachings-are-dangerous/12538058) and it reveals that practioners have died because they believed in his advice that modern medicine was pointless for them. And that his followers find it hard to not see the leader Li as just a man but instead as some omniscient deity that is always watching them as; they believed that Li could read their minds, and that his fashen or “law bodies” — basically, copies of himself that exist in a spiritual dimension — were always next to them and watching their every move and thought.
- So there should be a minimum mention in the lead that the leader Li Hongzhi claims to be a saviour of man and has attained supernatural abilities since his youth. And also in the article somewhere, that there's been credible reports of practioners who have died, believing too much in his controversial claims about modern medicine.49.180.244.73 (talk) 01:49, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- Is there nobody replying on this page? It's been a week and nobody has replied to the thread. It's a stark difference to getting a response within only minutes initially. However I like to stress and emphasize that what should be included is that the religion teaches people that their leader can read their minds and have supernatural abilities. There's no reason to not mention this when it's true and supported by a national broadcaster who has the integrity and courage to address. Below is an excerpt that supports those facts -
Anna waited. A few minutes later, Master entered the room. He spoke first to the woman and then to Anna’s mother. Then he looked at Anna, looked right into her eyes. He raised his arms, waving them in the air, then he was chanting something she couldn’t understand. Anna as a young girl. “By then it was pretty clear what this was supposed to be,” says Anna, now 25. “This was supposed to be an exorcism.” She was face to face with the man reckoned a God-like figure among his followers at The Mountain, who Anna had grown up believing could read her mind and listen to her dangerous thoughts. But now the spell was broken. “I remember looking into his eyes and thinking, ‘you are just another regular, pathetic man’,” she says.
The point is people who follow Li, believe he can read their minds and always observe them. That he is extremely powerful in a supernatural way. That kind of information definitely deserves to be in the article too. And hope I don't need to wait for long for someone with editing rights, to add it in.49.186.112.179 (talk) 04:33, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
Categories:- Misplaced Pages controversial topics
- Delisted good articles
- B-Class level-4 vital articles
- Misplaced Pages level-4 vital articles in Philosophy and religion
- B-Class vital articles in Philosophy and religion
- B-Class law articles
- Mid-importance law articles
- WikiProject Law articles
- B-Class Religion articles
- High-importance Religion articles
- B-Class New religious movements articles
- Top-importance New religious movements articles
- New religious movements articles
- Religion articles needing attention
- WikiProject Religion articles
- B-Class China-related articles
- High-importance China-related articles
- B-Class China-related articles of High-importance
- WikiProject China articles
- B-Class United States articles
- Low-importance United States articles
- B-Class United States articles of Low-importance
- WikiProject United States articles
- B-Class politics articles
- Low-importance politics articles
- WikiProject Politics articles
- B-Class Conservatism articles
- Mid-importance Conservatism articles
- WikiProject Conservatism articles