Talk:List of new religious movements

Lists such as this one are intended to be lists of Wikipedia articles, but several entries here do not meet that standard. I will be going through in a few days to remove entries that do not link to articles addressing the NRM itself, and wanted to give a heads-up to other editors. Stubs are fine for now, but understand they will need to be expanded into proper articles that meet Wikipedia guidelines. TechBear | Talk | Contributions 23:07, 13 July 2022 (UTC)

Lists such as this one are intended to be lists of Wikipedia articles
Are they? That's not what WP:LISTN says:

Notability of lists (whether titled as "List of Xs" or "Xs") is based on the group. One accepted reason why a list topic is considered notable is if it has been discussed as a group or set by independent reliable sources [...] Because the group or set is notable, the individual items in the list do not need to be independently notable

— Guarapiranga ☎ 21:36, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

This article claims that they have a emphasis or focus on the self, but the main article on NRM says that they can be individualist or collectivist. 2603:6010:11F0:3C0:E0CA:C788:E8EA:D60E (talk) 04:22, 29 October 2022 (UTC)

Does any original source actually refer to the Spaghetti Monster Satire as a cult? It's an obvious satire. There is no authoritarian leader, no indoctrination program. No catechism other than its belief in a cartoon monster. It doesn't belong being listed on the NRM/Cult page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:4040:90CF:A600:6017:264:56B7:5052 (talk) 17:48, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Per the lead of the main article, New religous movements, the earliest date proposed by scholars for NRMs is 1830; yet the article lists quite a few founded before that date. They should be removed, especially considering that other scholars only apply the term to groups formed after 1945. Skyerise (talk) 23:08, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

The date of founding wouldn't necessarily be the determining factor. Often changes in society at large, the movement moving beyond its initial base and becoming more widespread/noticed/influential, significant alterations in the tenets or practices, etc. can result in a movement having older origins becoming regarded as an NRM. In addition, some scholars group movements by typologies based on degree of development and/or social integration, rather than date of origin, and some movements have yet to progress beyond an embryonic state of growth. I think it best to leave it up to whether reliable scholarly sources (not necessarily universally) class a group as an NRM. I'd agree that the lead's statement about "relatively modern origin" might easily be misconstrued by some readers. • Astynax ^talk 19:57, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

Shows up in the article. Can someone fix that?

Melledelle (talk) 21:13, 5 August 2024 (UTC)