User talk:Berkeleysappho
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Thoughts on Editing Aileen Wuornos
I am a beginning Wikipedian. I dipped my toes in the water with minor copyediting on a controversial article this week. I would like to do more, but don't want to step on anyone's toes. Aileen Wuornos is a fascinating subject and deserves a quality article. I don't believe in her guilt or innocence. I feel the same way about Susan Polk, a local woman who was recently convicted of murdering her husband, who was also her child psychologist when she was 14. I'm more interested in the aftereffects of molestation. We don't know why some victims become violent, while others become withdrawn, or self-injure, or have little damage to their psyches.
It is challenging to present facts without opinions on an inflammatory subject. I believe in being factual, with a neutral tone, and letting readers form their own opinions. When an issue has developed sides, perhaps external links to each side of the controversy are in order. Including controversy about a subject may be part of the subject. There are medical articles on abortion, for example, and sociological articles on the abortion debate. Both should be factual. One wouldn't want the sociology in a medical text, yet an encyclopedia should include both aspects, in my opinion.
[edit] Jahbulon
Interesting idea, but the problem is that it's not really a "theological concept", at least for Freemasonry (I can't speak for how OTO uses it). That misconception is what started the issue with the "word" in the first place, and since it's only those people who are hostile to Freemasonry for its supposed "religious beliefs" who are interested in Jahbulon, that's all we have to work with. To most people who are Freemasons, it doesn't mean anything at all, and it's debatable as to whether they've even ever heard of it. How do you research something that doesn't mean anything to the people that would actually know about it, and only means something to people who don't know the first thing about it? That is the quandary, and that is why the sources are what they are. There's also nothing to use for graphics, because there's no actual representation of it. MSJapan 18:48, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for the response, MSJapan. Independent ceremonial magicians, occult scholars, and occult historians are interested in Freemasonry's supposed religious beliefs without being hostile to Freemasonry. Alex Jones had a graphic alleged to be Jahbulon in one of his videos--he lead the hostile camp, with no pretensions to scholarship.Berkeleysappho 12:30, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
