Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 05:32, 9 August 2022

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Reincarnation article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4Auto-archiving period: 30 days

Template:Vital article

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Death High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Death, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Death on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DeathWikipedia:WikiProject DeathTemplate:WikiProject DeathDeath High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Folklore Low‑importance This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Folklore, a WikiProject dedicated to improving Misplaced Pages's coverage of the topics of folklore and folklore studies. If you would like to participate, you may edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project's page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to discussion.FolkloreWikipedia:WikiProject FolkloreTemplate:WikiProject FolkloreFolklore Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Hinduism High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hinduism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Hinduism on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HinduismWikipedia:WikiProject HinduismTemplate:WikiProject HinduismHinduism High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Jainism Low‑importance This article is part of WikiProject Jainism, an attempt to promote better coordination, content distribution, and cross-referencing between pages dealing with Jainism. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page for more details on the projects. Guidelines: Manual of Style – Naming conventionsJainismWikipedia:WikiProject JainismTemplate:WikiProject JainismJainism Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Religion: Interfaith Top‑importance Religion portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Misplaced Pages'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 Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is within the scope of Interfaith work group, a work group which is currently considered to be inactive. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Spirituality High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spirituality, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of spirituality-related subjects on Misplaced Pages. 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 High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Psychology Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article has been marked as needing immediate attention. Parapsychology (inactive) This article is within the scope of WikiProject Parapsychology, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.ParapsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject ParapsychologyTemplate:WikiProject ParapsychologyParapsychology Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Skepticism Mid‑importance 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 Misplaced Pages. 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 Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article has been marked as needing immediate attention. Template:WP1.0

This article has been mentioned by a media organization: Mohit M. Rao (February 6, 2016). "Article retracted after 'overlapping text' from Misplaced Pages found". The Hindu.

Section sizes Section size for Reincarnation (51 sections) Section name Byte count Section total (Top) 6,935 6,935 Conceptual definitions 6,877 6,877 History 13 56,802 Origins 631 631 Early Hinduism, Buddhism, and Jainism 12,372 21,917 Rationale 2,241 2,241 Comparison 7,304 7,304 Classical antiquity 4,131 7,109 Mystery cults 1,745 1,745 Later authors 1,233 1,233 Celtic paganism 2,964 2,964 Germanic paganism 527 527 Judaism 2,538 2,538 Christianity 3,088 4,460 Gnosticism 1,372 1,372 Taoism 944 944 European Middle Ages 1,522 1,522 Renaissance and Early Modern period 2,671 2,671 19th to 20th centuries 11,506 11,506 Religions and philosophies 34 72,387 Buddhism 12,096 12,096 Christianity 4,087 9,621 Early 4,881 4,881 Roman Catholic Church 653 653 Druze 1,811 1,811 Hinduism 7,548 7,548 Islam 2,052 3,199 Ghulat sects 1,147 1,147 Jainism 7,153 7,153 Judaism 7,717 7,717 Inuit 937 937 Ho-Chunk 1,886 1,886 Sikhism 2,943 2,943 Yoruba 2,421 8,251 Ipadawaye 2,369 2,369 Abiku 1,368 1,368 Akudaaya 2,093 2,093 New religious and spiritual movements 76 9,191 Spiritism 1,314 1,314 Theosophy 1,658 1,658 Anthroposophy 1,853 1,853 Modern astrology 1,450 1,450 Scientology 2,110 2,110 Wicca 730 730 Reincarnation and science 2,154 15,928 Claims of memories of past lives 8,751 8,751 Past life regression 5,023 5,023 See also 396 396 References 28 28 Sources 388 388 External links 929 929 Total 160,670 160,670

Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4

This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 10 sections are present.

Is this a reliable source?

This discussion has been disrupted by block evasion, ban evasion, or sockpuppetry from the following user: Dr2Rao (talk · contribs · block log · spi) Comments from this user should be excluded from assessments of consensus.

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

In the section titled, "Investigations of children who seem to remember a past life", I want to add this citation, but is it a reliable source?—Dr2Rao (talk) 17:22, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

Doesn’t appear to be a WP:FRIND source. - LuckyLouie (talk) 20:02, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

I would say "No". CaptainEek ⚓ 20:06, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

Edit request

It is requested that edits be made to the following semi-protected pages: D (edit · history · last · links · protection log) Ambiguous request. Please be more specific regarding WHAT you suggest to add (edit · history · last · links · protection log) This template must be followed by a complete and specific description of the request, that is, specify what text should be removed and a verbatim copy of the text that should replace it. "Please change X" is not acceptable and will be rejected; the request must be of the form "please change X to Y". The edit may be made by any autoconfirmed user. Remember to change the |answered=no parameter to "yes" when the request has been accepted, rejected or on hold awaiting user input. This is so that inactive or completed requests don't needlessly fill up the edit requests category. You may also wish to use the {{ESp}} template in the response. To request that a page be protected or unprotected, make a protection request.

Someone please add a sentence using this as a reference here. I dunno how.

Move Carl Sagan paragraph

I think the paragraph under "Western World" speaking of the dialog between the Dalai Lama and Carl Sagan should be moved to the section "Skepticism" as it does not relate to how reincarnation is received in the West but rather a particular skeptic's ideas on the subject. Tac62184 (talk) 15:34, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Merger proposal

I propose merging Punarjanman and Reincarnationism into Reincarnation. I think that the content in both the Punarjanman and Reincarnationism articles can easily be explained in the context of Reincarnation, and merging will not cause any article size problems there. Shenrichs (talk) 21:16, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

Hadith proposal

Can you show the hadith Sahih Bukhari 2972? Egon20 (talk) 10:46, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

Quranic Verse About Reincarnation

Hi, Can We Add This Verse in Islam Section

كَيْفَ تَكْفُرُوْنَ بِاللّٰهِ وَكُنْتُمْ اَمْوَاتًا فَاَحْيَاكُمْۚ ثُمَّ يُمِيْتُكُمْ ثُمَّ يُحْيِيْكُمْ ثُمَّ اِلَيْهِ تُرْجَعُوْنَ

How can you disbelieve in Allah when you were lifeless and He brought you to life; then He will cause you to die, then He will bring you to life, and then to Him you will be returned.(Quran 2.28)

Sufi Muslim In Indonesia use This Verse To Supported Their Belief About Reincarnation 112.215.240.129 (talk) 13:39, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

Reincernation (recloning of deads) with microversians

Normally microversian probably are used to recloned new entities out of dead entities. They can be nativity grown or can be generated throw preonic engineering as AI's and so on. 2A02:AA11:9102:3D80:FCC4:743A:8198:A16A (talk) 08:20, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Reliable sources

@LightProof1995: Your sources fail WP:RS. tgeorgescu (talk) 00:21, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

Hey Tgeorgescu, this page is about Reincarnation. The section is on children remembering their past lives. The story of Barbro Karlén is one of the major ones along with James Leinenger. Barbro is at least a prolific author who recounted her experiences remembering past-life memories of Anne Frank and visiting the Anne Frank House and recognizing it, and I cited her book, along with two websites not affiliated with her. The sources are reliable given what the subject is and I think you're letting the subject of the material misguide you on whether it counts as a reliable source or not. LightProof1995 (talk) 00:25, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

@LightProof1995: Now this is being discussed at WP:FTN. tgeorgescu (talk) 00:29, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

You say that Karlén and Leinenger are the "major" claims to children remembering past lives. Do you have an independent source which identifies them as such? The sources you tried to insert did not really pass the muster for that. jps (talk) 23:10, 25 July 2022 (UTC)

@ජපස: Recognizing Anne Frank's house? I don't know how anyone in the sane mind could construe that as evidence that she is the reincarnation of Anne Frank. tgeorgescu (talk) 23:25, 25 July 2022 (UTC)

I was rather hoping for a source that identified these particular claims as being important to the reincarnation-believing community. I bet that Jim B. Tucker takes this claim as "serious evidence" FWIW. That's not particularly surprising, though. For Misplaced Pages's purposes, we would need someone who was examining the reincarnation-believing community to identify this claim as important. I tend to imagine it is likely not that important. jps (talk) 23:38, 25 July 2022 (UTC)

@ජපස: Yup, I saw some Discovery documentary about research about reincarnation through hypnosis. And the subject remembered very well details from his previous life in the US Civil War. Alas, he remembered very well using a carbine which was only invented some two decades after he supposedly died. So: don't look for confirming details, but look for Popperian falsification. Americans have read a shipload of books about the Civil War and have seen hundreds of films thereupon, so they "remember" details from such stories. When they remember something impossible (anachronistic) is when you know that their reincarnation story is bogus. tgeorgescu (talk) 01:09, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

Human memory is unreliable anyway. We misremember details about our own lives. Dimadick (talk) 08:26, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

Past life regression is, indeed, the most popular form of "research" into "past lives". But it, of course, is not considered legitimate research by anyone but the believers in the technique. It was even pooh-poohed by the likes of Ian Stevenson. jps (talk) 10:03, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

Hello jps, in regards to your edit where you said "This is really all this is. It's not really academic because most of this work was not published in the relevant journals but instead in obscure or parapsychology outfits." please note that this is entirely incorrect as the past-life memory stuff has been published in the following peer-reviewed (i.e. academic) journals: Specifically, the "Childhood Gender Nonconformity and Children’s Past-Life Memories" is peer-reviewed in the International Journal of Sexual Health, "The phenomenon of claimed memories of previous lives: Possible interpretations and importance" is peer-reviewed in Medical Hypotheses, "The explanatory value of the idea of reincarnation" is peer-reviewed in The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, and "Reincarnation and Biology: A Contribution to the Etiology of Birthmarks and Birth Defects" was peer-reviewed in two journals: Omega, and the Journal of the American Society for Physical Research. We need to fix this back because all of the references are messed up. I have no clue why tgeorgescu bothered to undo my Barbro Karlén edits when the Misplaced Pages Fringe Theory noticeboard literally said it is a notable reference. Also I am upset tgeorgescu took away my "Further Reading" links as they were meant to provide the scientific explanation for this without me having to spell it out. So I'm adding this all back. LightProof1995 (talk) 13:29, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

I also want to add, the title "Past-life memories as an academic field" is neutral!!!!!! It says nothing about whether the pursuits show reincarnation and past-life memories are real or not. LightProof1995 (talk) 13:43, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

It's not "neutral" when it isn't factual. The facts of the matter are that reincarnation is not really studied by anyone but a vanishingly few number of fringe academics. To give it the veneer of respectability by not couching it as as the WP:FRINGE work it is would be misleading to the reader. jps (talk) 17:11, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Hey jps, I also added cyclic model back, which undoes your edit where you commented: "cyclic model has nothing to do with reincarnation except for perhaps the appeal it has to believers in such.", not necessarily permanent, I just ask this from you: Why would we not have "further reading" links here for both those who believe and for those who don't believe in reincarnation? LightProof1995 (talk) 14:03, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

According to WP:FRIND we need sources from journals that are high impact and highly regarded, not out-of-the-way outfits and not pocket journals. Certainly not the horrible sources you are proposing. Note that right now you are engaging in WP:PROFRINGE editing. I am going to revert now and we can discuss one by one. No one in science or academia save the very few we already identify takes reincarnation seriously. The attempt to shoehorn in concepts from physics which say absolutely nothing about reincarnation is not okay. jps (talk) 17:04, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Also, what are the "horrible sources" I am referencing? Surely you don't mean the peer-reviewed journals...

I also found this book written by an Indian physicist, Dr. Amit Goswami, that mentions both reincarnation and string theory: "Physics of the Soul: The Quantum Book of Living, Dying, Reincarnation, and Immortality". LightProof1995 (talk) 18:11, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

As is sometimes said around here, " is not magic pixie dust." Journals are only as good as the editors and reviewers that they get. For example, the journal Medical Hypotheses is known to be absolutely problematic and I think is on our list of sources never to use (at WP:RS). Amit Goswami is a blast from the past. You can see where his page redirects to on Misplaced Pages. In short, not exactly the sort of up-and-up physicist we would rely upon. I can name all sorts of pseudophysicists like Goswami who use their credentials to hawk problematic claims. The proof is in the citation. Goswami is making extraordinary claims for which he does not have extraordinary evidence. If he did, he'd probably have a Nobel Prize. jps (talk) 19:07, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Wow you are right about the Medical Hypotheses hahahaha. Journal of the American Society for Physical Research seems to be specifically paranormal as well. I think the International Journal of Sexual Health, the Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, and Omega are all good peer-reviewed journals though. As for Goswami, the documentary he was in seemed to be criticized for having a bunch of experts in it, but then maybe misconstruing what they said. So I am not holding it against him that he was in that film lol, and his book sounds like it has both a lot of physics and reincarnation in it even though it doesn't sound like it attempts to explain everything down to the quark, so I included it in further reading along with Barbro's book. LightProof1995 (talk) 22:05, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

I think the problem here is that these articles are pretty obscure according to their citation count. Two of them featured on retraction watch which I think may be indicative. I think we need more independent notice before discussing them at this broad article. jps (talk) 16:52, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

Also, I can find absolutely zero reliable sources which connect the cyclic model of cosmology to reincarnation. Sources which do so would be interesting, to say the least. We would want someone who knows enough about physics/cosmology writing the source, by the way. jps (talk) 17:11, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Hey jps, thank you for the WP:PROFRINGE link. I am a newer editor so I didn't know the rule about how there must be source about the topic that also mentions the topic I am trying to reference. LightProof1995 (talk) 17:41, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Also, I edited out this half-sentence: "Psychiatrists who believe in past lives have made claims that they can..." LightProof1995 (talk) 17:50, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Good catch. I think your movement of Stevenson's xenoglossy claims down to past life regression was a mistake. I moved that back. jps (talk) 18:11, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

It was not an accident lol. I felt the xenoglossy fit better under the past-life regression section, but it also doesn't fit as the last paragraph of the section, so I'm not sure where it should go lol. I don't think it should go with the "children remembering past life memories" section though because it was adults under hypnosis, instead of children spontaneously stating details/memories of someone else. LightProof1995 (talk) 18:15, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, it's true that these accounts Stevenson argues for are not just kids, though I think Stevenson's cases are all about people who first reported remembering past lives as children. Stevenson did not like past life regression, but for some reason he did make an exception for people speaking other languages. Hmm... as usual, things get more complicated the more carefully you look. I think Stevenson really did not like the bad name the regression people gave to his work, but at the same time he dabbled in similar dubious hypnotic/suggestive evidence gathering (although I believe he himself never performed hypnosis). Maybe we just remove children and leave it at that? jps (talk) 18:20, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

I do want to make it clear that we need to be as honest to the reader as possible when it comes to what the most famous claims actually are. I think Stevenson and Jim Tucker are right up there. However, there are a lot of others who make these claims that may be famous. What we need to establish fame is references that outsiders consider to be relevant and important claims in the area. Ben Radford, for example, mentions Bridey Murphy. I'm not clear whether that deserves mention or not, but a systematic treatment of sources is something that we've been needing for a while now. jps (talk) 18:11, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

I just read about Bridey Murphy. I've been on the Vital Misplaced Pages pages because I just discovered them. I propose we can use similar methods here to determine which reincarnation cases to include.

Method #1 Voting -- A Suggestion for a reincarnation case to include is made. After 15 days have passed, if there are 3+ votes with 2/3%+ to add, we add.

Method #2 Bold -- We assume if someone bothers to make a bold edit and just include a reincarnation case, if it is well-written, then it is a notable case.

Method #3 Discussion -- The importance of a reincarnation case being included is determined by discussion alone. No one should add a case without at least mentioning it on here with a case for why it should be included, and if no one writes a better discussion arguing why someone shouldn't be included, whoever propositioned the case may go ahead and include it.

Here's a list of cases, feel free to add:

==Real memories, i.e. children usually ages 2-5==

King James IV --> Ada F. Kay (Note her page currently states she had memories only the night before visiting where KJ4 was killed, but according to her psi-encyclopedia page linked below, she had memories of being him from a young age).

Anne Frank --> Barbro Karlén

The Dalai Lama (14th) (Already included)

Ibrahim Bouhamzy --> Imad Elawar

James Huston --> James Leininger

Marilyn Monroe --> Sherrie Lea Laird

Marty Martyn --> Ryan Hammons

Princess Diana --> Billy Campbell, son of David Campbell

Said Bouhamzy --> Sleimann Bouhamzy

==Fake memories, formulated by an adult's mind under hypnosis==

Bridey Murphy --> Virginia Tighe

Links to Psi-Encyclopedia pages (I am not from there lol):

https://psi-encyclopedia.spr.ac.uk/articles/famous-past-life-claims

https://psi-encyclopedia.spr.ac.uk/articles/imad-elawar-reincarnation-case

Right now we are using both Methods 2 and 3. I'm personally only using 3 but am okay with 1.

No, we are not merging these as one category. Here is why.

"Dr. Ian Stevenson's work cannot be evidence of reincarnation because there is no proposed scientific mechanism for it, therefore it can't be true." is a false statement.

"Dr. Ian Stevenson's work could be evidence that reincarnation is real and we just don't understand the science of our world well enough to describe how it occurs." is a true statement.

Besides, the answer is string theory. LightProof1995 (talk) 23:47, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

String theory isn't physics, it is applied maths, since there's not a shred of evidence that string theory could be true. Mainstream science does not study God, the supernatural, and reincarnation, so those who claim to do science about these do in fact pseudoscience and their writings do not fulfill the requirements of WP:RS. tgeorgescu (talk) 23:55, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Both string theory and reincarnation are science. Even Spiritism, where mediums were interviewed, is science. Science is not always about explaining or understanding phenomena. Instead, it is the scientific method. Ian Stevenson and Allan Kardec both used the scientific method and came up with astounding results, but that doesn’t mean the results are wrong. My sources are good for this page. Please see AdS/CFT correspondence as proof string theory is in fact 1. Physics and 2. Highly cited physics. Also, I vote James Leininger as first to be added.LightProof1995 (talk) 05:29, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

EXPLORE

I don't think we would consider EXPLORE to be indicative of the kind of source we would want to include at Misplaced Pages. jps (talk) 20:04, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Deletion of Bibliography and Further Reading

Hey @jps, I see you deleted the Bibliography and Further Reading, and you say you left a note... but where is all of that information now? I agree it was superfluous to have inline references, a bibliography, and a further reading section. Still, we can't just delete all of that. Maybe everything that was in the Bibliography and Further Reading can be in the box at the bottom? LightProof1995 (talk) 19:55, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

We need to incorporate any relevant information into the article. See Template:Further_reading_cleanup. If you find that there is some text missing from the article that can be cited to those sources, do so! jps (talk) 20:11, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

That sounds insanely difficult and a lot of work but I'll try lol LightProof1995 (talk) 20:45, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

It is, but it benefits the reader a whole lot more than an unadorned list of sources. Try adding sources where you think they may be most appropriate first to already existing text. Then, if there is no place to put the idea, try adding a sentence. Workshop it here if you need to. jps (talk) 22:00, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

1. Jim Tucker, The Case of James Leininger: An American Case of the Reincarnation Type, University of Virginia School of Medicine, 2016.
2. National Public Radio, "Searching for the Science Behind Reincarnation", Podcast, 2014, https://www.npr.org/2014/01/05/259886077/searching-for-science-behind-reincarnation
3. Ted Christopher, "Science’s Big Problem, Reincarnation’s Big Potential, and Buddhists’ Profound Embarrassment" 2017. https://www.mdpi.com/2077-1444/8/8/155/htm
4. Jesse Bering, "Ian Stevenson's Case for the Afterlife: Are We Skeptics Really Just Cynics?", 2013. https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/bering-in-mind/ian-stevensone28099s-case-for-the-afterlife-are-we-e28098skepticse28099-really-just-cynics/

• All unassessed articles
• B-Class Death articles
• High-importance Death articles
• B-Class Folklore articles
• Low-importance Folklore articles
• WikiProject Folklore articles
• B-Class Hinduism articles
• High-importance Hinduism articles
• B-Class Jainism articles
• Low-importance Jainism articles
• B-Class Religion articles
• Top-importance Religion articles
• WikiProject Religion articles
• B-Class Spirituality articles
• High-importance Spirituality articles
• B-Class psychology articles
• Low-importance psychology articles
• Psychology articles needing attention
• WikiProject Psychology articles
• WikiProject templates with unknown parameters
• B-Class Skepticism articles
• Mid-importance Skepticism articles
• Skepticism articles needing attention
• WikiProject Skepticism articles
• Misplaced Pages pages referenced by the press
• Misplaced Pages semi-protected edit requests