Talk:Isis Unveiled

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Alternative views Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Alternative views, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of significant alternative views in every field, from the sciences to the humanities. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion.Alternative viewsWikipedia:WikiProject Alternative viewsTemplate:WikiProject Alternative viewsAlternative views articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Occult Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Occult, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to the occult on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OccultWikipedia:WikiProject OccultTemplate:WikiProject OccultOccult articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Religious texts (defunct) This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religious texts, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.Religious textsWikipedia:WikiProject Religious textsTemplate:WikiProject Religious textsReligious texts articles Skepticism Low‑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 Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SkepticismWikipedia:WikiProject SkepticismTemplate:WikiProject SkepticismSkepticism articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Regarding this removal of newspaper review quotes: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Isis_Unveiled&diff=prev&oldid=1143753758 The Blavatsky.net website is in general, of course, not a reliable source for this topic. But the newspapers quotes themselves are quite useful secondary sources for that section - and such reviews are very difficult to find 150 years after the fact. My question is if it is fully justified to remove them completely. They are merely 'quoted in' the linked to website. If today a publisher places the quotes of reviews on a book cover - is that really so problematic a source to copy? Do you need to have seen the newspaper/review itself? I understand it is better if they are corroborated using another source, but in the meantime my suggestion is to add them back, additionally listing the need for a (better) source for each quote. I tried to google a bit, but it is difficult to find these old newspapers - many were abolished long ago. I heard there is a 'collected writings' edition of all Blavatsky's work and that it is published by a different publisher. Part of the editorial process was that every reference in Blavatsky's writings was double checked. That may be a lead. 2001:1C02:280A:5600:CC51:39E5:A7F8:4268 (talk) 23:23, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

None of it is reliable I am afraid. You need scholarly sources written by historians or academics published by recognized publishing companies, or from peer-reviewed academic papers. Psychologist Guy (talk) 23:47, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]