Talk:Alexander (magician)

Entire stub consisted of copyvio, now rectified

When i found this page the entirety of the text was plagiarized from http://www.loc.gov/shop/index.php?action=cCatalog.showItem&cid=14&scid=183&iid=3281 and so i have rewritten it. 01:33, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

"C. A." versus "C." Alexander

Every print book in my possession that refers to this man calls him "C. Alexander." Every book he wrote himself which is in my possession is attributed to "C. Alexander." Aside from this single Wikipedia article, there is nothing that turns up in my library or online in which he is called "C. A." Alexander. I am beginning to think that the original author of the article made an error. Can anyone demonstrate that he ever performed or published under the name "C. A." Alexander?

cat yronwode -- 14:29, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Call for assistance with name change to article

I am not sure how to draw an editor here to help with the renaming of this article. I do not know how to do it, and would not wish to do so single-handedly anyway, as it requires a bit of corroboration from someone else before undertaking it. The subject is quite notable in the field of stage magic but there is not much online about him, due to the time priod in which he lived. There is quite a lot about him in print, however. The problem, as stated in my post directly above, is that the article seems to have been created with the title "C. A." Alexander in error. During his career he was known exclusively as Alexander while on stage an as C. Alexander while writing and publishing books. There is no evidence to be found (by me, at least, through searches both online and in my print library) that he ever went under the name "C. A. Alexander" -- and even if he did, it would be a very minor variation on his professional names, C. Alexander and Alexander. For this reason i have added the category about bios needing attention, hoping to draw in an editor with more experience who is willing to make the change to the title. If this was incorrect procedure, please forgive me and let us see how best to proceed. I can provide copious proof of the fact that he consistently worked on stage as Alexander (Alexander the Crystal Seer, Alexander the Man Who Knows, etc.) and consistently wrote as C. Alexander -- but to disprove that he *ever* worked as "C. A. Alexander" is an impossibility, given the passage of time. Help!

cat yronwode 19:50, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Stub tag removed

Due to the current length of the article, and despite my strong reservations about its title as "C. A." Alexander rather than "C. Alexander", it is now too long and detailed to rate as a stub, thus my removal of the stub tag. I hope this is all right with other editors.

cat yronwode 20:13, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks to Ali

I just wanted to publically thank Ali for making some redirects and adding the image to this page. THANK YOU, ALI! 03:46, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

No problem! I'm glad I could help. Ali ^(t)_(c) 20:59, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Sources for material

I tried to copy edit and look at the sources. It seems like this article could use alot of work on referencing the cited material. Anyways, --Tom 14:35, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

I have added a reflist; certainly more sources would be helpful, but the Charvet biography is the only deeply researched book available, due to the mysteries surrounding Conlin's life until his grand-neice recently allowed the family scrapbooks to be used as a source. cat yronwode Catherineyronwode 17:45, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Too much mention of Charvet

This article reads like a commercial for David Charvet's book. It should be noted that he was not the only biographer who wrote a book. Soapy 23:56, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

• addendum: Someone has added a lot of good information about the other biographers..good work! Soapy 04:44, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Alas, the marterial added about Beckmann's book consisted of advertising material from amazon.com, which is a copyright violation. I managed to retain the interesting discrepency between the two books (Charvet says seven marriages, Beckmann says eleven marriages) and a quote that Beckmann called Alexander a "con man" -- but Wikipedia does not allow direct quotes from ads like that, so i hope someone will try again, using original writing and not plagiarism. cat Catherineyronwode (talk) 04:18, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

The truth of this article

I am concerned about this article, coming from the fact I am a direct relative of Claude Alexander Conlin and the information listed on this webpage is not accurate. I am wondering who check for correct information when posting these? Also listing that direct relatives have given information that is very inaccurate is sad to see. This is implying to readers that this information is truthful. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cdconlin (talk • contribs) 19:37, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia is the encyclopedia that YOU can edit. If you know more, please add it or fix things that are incorrect. Be sure to cite sources. 64.142.90.33 (talk) 07:21, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Revival of the Crystal Silence League

Some group republishing Alexander's book along with a claim to have revived his League is not adequate. Self-publishers can claim whatever they want, true or not, and are rarely notable. Unless the revival is discussed in third-party reliable sources, it should not be mentioned here. Yworo (talk) 09:10, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

The group is called The Crystal Silence League. The revised book has an ISBN number -- which means that RR Bowker, which administrates the ISBN system, is a verifiable third party source.

In addition, you will find a number of churches participating in the revival of the Crystal Silence League. These are churches located in Alabama, Texas, and California.

You removed a web site ref link to the new Crystal Silence League and claimed it was "not verifiable" -- but surely all of these church web sites would constitute verifiability. I am not putting these in the article, of course, but the revival of the CSL is mentioned on the following church web sites:

* Crystal Silence League web site here:

: http://crystalsilence.org

* Sacred Clarity Spiritual Church, Texas, mentions the Crystal Silence League here:

: http://sacredclarityspiritualchurch.org/

and here:

: http://sacredclarityspiritualchurch.org/Crystal_Silence_League.html

* Santisima Muerte Chapel of Perpetual Pilgrimage, California, mentions the Crystal Silence League here:

: http://santisimamuertechapel.org/Crystal_Silence_League.html

* House of Prophecy Spiritual Church, Alabama, mentions the Crystal Silence League here:

: http://www.houseofprophecy.org/main/?page_id=57

* Missionary Independent Spiritual Church, California, mentions the Crystal Silence League here:

: http://missionaryindependent.org/crystalsilenceleague.html

Obviously the Crystal Silence League exists, has republished the book, is reviving Alexander's spiritual techniques and organization in a number of churches in several states -- and is more substantial than you thought when you deleted all mention of the revival of the CSL.

Initially you said that the reprinted book was not "verifiable" -- I have proven that the book's existence is verifiable through ISBN records.

Now you claim that the revival of the CSL is not "notable" enough to be mentioned as a legacy of Alexander. That is called "changing the goalposts" and it is not good form when engaging in an editorial dispute. However, be that as it may, I have now proved to you that the revival of the CSL is ongoing at a number of churches in several states. It is my understanding that at least three more churches will be participating in the revival of the CSL in the coming months and will be distributing the book to their congregants, bringing the number of states with CSL-affiliated churches to four and the number of churches to seven.

Please note that i have not attempted to start an entry for the Crystal Silence League in its own right (either the original version or the current one), but that i have merely stated, with quite a bit of verification, that the CSL has been revived and Alexander's book has been republished and is being distributed through churches as part of this revival, and that this is a valid "Legacy" of Alexander.

I have reinserted the mention. Please do not delete it again without further discussion here, including a clear statement of exactly how many more churches participating in the CSL you would need to know about or how many pastors of those churches you would need to talk to before you accept that the revived CSL has a "verifiable" existence.

Thank you for your understanding

64.142.90.33 (talk) 10:04, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

You misunderstood my complaint. Self-published books may only be used in articles about themselves: see WP:SPS and WP:SELFPUB. The existence of the book is not in question: the reliability of the book as a source is what is in question. Bowker issues ISBNs to anybody. Having an ISBN does not prove reliability. If you want to include this claim, you must cite it to an independent source. Yworo (talk) 14:03, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

I am particularly concerned about your claim above that "and that this is a valid 'Legacy' of Alexander." According to whom is this a "valid legacy"? You? Wikipedia editors don't get to make this kind of judgment. Third-party sources which express this opinion are required. People claiming to have revived something are not in a position to make accurate judgments. Third-party verification is what we need here. Yworo (talk) 14:07, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

I asked you to please not delete the material again without discussing it first on this talk page. You deleted it again anyway, without discussion.

To quote you, "Wikipedia editors don't get to make this kind of judgment." But you did just that.

It is preferable at Wikipedia that editors discuss things, and if there is an inability to achieve consensus, to bring in other editors to help mediate the issue. I am attempting to do that. You are not.

You define the book as "self-published." The book is published by a church denomination and is distributed through a number of churches in several states to church parishioners. Churches can and do act as publishers of liturgical material and have often done so, and they are not deemed "self-publishers" at Wikipedia when they do so.

We are not allowed to use sales via Amazon or hits via google as markers that a book is not "self-published," but i should think that the wide distribution of the book through multiple churches would be evidence of its legitimate publication.

This church denomination has published four books to date, namely two "Ladies Auxiliary" cookbooks (one in 2010 and one in 2011), a "Candle Service Manual," and the "Crystal Silence League" book. How many books does a publisher have to publish, or in what manner are they to be distributed, or how many copies must be sold (under what standards of verifiability) before you accept a publisher as not a "self-publisher"? For instance, in your opinion, is the Church of Scientology a "self publisher? Is the Catholic Church a "self=publisher?

• 1) You will not accept R. R. Bowker and the book's ISBN as a "verifiable" source,
• 2) You will not accept mention of the Crystal Silence League at multiple church web sites around the nation as "verifiable" evidence,
• 3) Wikipedia cannot accept sales at Amazon or hits via google as "verifiable" evidence of book publication and distribution,

-- then what (and please be specific and stick by what you say) constitutes "verifiability" to you?

Would a write-up about the Crystal Silence League in another book constitute "verifiability"? If so, what would stop you from claiming that the REFERRING book was "self-published" and therefor "not verifiable?

Would mention or review of the book in a Spiritualist newspaper constitute "verifiability"? I ask this with a bit of wry disbelief that it will work for you, because you have recently tagged the 78-year-old "Psychic News" newspaper as "not notable," and slated its article for deletion from Wikipedia -- but this is exactly the kind of "verifiable third party" that would review a book about Spiritualism.

Do you keep a private list of "authorized" publishers (i know there is no such list as part of Wikipedia policy)?

I await your response.

64.142.90.33 (talk) 21:28, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Your post is full of red herrings. You claim I didn't discuss, right below my discussion response (that's a personal attack, by the way). You don't seem to get the concept of independent, third-party source. Until you deign to stop pretending not to understand what's required, further discussion is pointless. Again the existence of the book is not in question (oh, except that the ISBN 978-0-9636483-1-4 provided was invalid, click it and see!), so a review wouldn't help in the least. A report about the Crystal Silence League revival in a reliable source not affiliated with it in any way is what is required. Yworo (talk) 21:56, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Besides having an invalid ISBN, said book is not listed on Amazon.com or on Amazon.co.uk. A Google search on the title turns up nothing but the 1920s edition, and a Google search for the ISBN turns up nothing but the last scrape of this very Wikipedia article. Unfortunately, it is common for self-publishers to simply make up an ISBN despite the fact that they are easy to obtain. That seems to be the case here. Next! Yworo (talk) 23:04, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

About the ISBN number. I apologize. My eyesight is quite poor and i apparently copied it out incorrectly. The correct ISBN number is ISBN 978-0-9836483-1-4 (i seem to have mistaken the second 8 for a 6).

I had asked you not to delete the material in an edit summary -- when i placed it online the second time, as a book reference rather than a web referwence). You deleted it anyway. Then you posted here. In other words, your statement that you are discussing it comes after your having twice deltied the material in less than 24 hours, even as i was trying to cooperate with your insistence on verifiability.

I have no idea what you mean by "red herrings" and i have no interest in discussing metaphors of speech. Since we already seem to have difficulty understanding one another, please, let us stick to plain speech. To speak plainly, then, I had no intention of insulting you and i apologize for having offended you inadvertently.

Moving on to the questions i asked, i am asking for specific answers.

You say that i "don't seem to get the concept of independent, third-party source. I do, but since you do not accept R. R. Bowker as an independent, third-party source and the book is church literature -- that is, it is distributed through churches, not as an article of commerce -- and additionally, since during the same 24 hour period that you deleted this material, you also tagged as "non-notable" and therefore subject to deletion other pages that deal with the religion of Spiritualism, including the Tony Stockwell page (Stockwell is a well-known UK TV psychic) and the Psychic News page (PN is the oldest continually published Spiritualist newspaper in the world) -- i believe that i have legitimate cause for concern as to your possibly having a bias against articles on the religion of Spiritualism being allowed at Wikipedia.

I am trying to work with you despite my misgivings, and am taking a lot of time to do so in a respectful manner. If i am mistaken, and your sudden sweep through dozens of Spiritualism pages, cite-tagging, mass-deleting content, and listing articles for potential deletion, was not evidence of bias, please forgive me. As i said earlier, i am trying to be as respectful and extremely courteous in dealing with you on this subject.

So, to avoid any misunderstandings or further conflicts, i am revisiting what i see as an area of potential dispute. Please allow me to phrase my view to the best of my understanding.

At various times on this page and in your own talk page, where we first discussed the matter (since deleted), you have co-mingled three different concepts -- "non-verifiability," "non-notability," and "self-publishing" -- as reasons that you deleted the material about the revival of the Crystal Silence League. These three concepts are not the same.

I am asking you for a firm and specific definition of how you apply the terms "non-verifiability," "non-notability," and "self-publishing", because once i have your definitions in print, here on this talk page, it is my intention to make a good-faith attempt to satisfy your terms in an undeniable and concrete manner that will no longer leave the material in contention. In other words, i want you to simply state your terms so that i can meet them.

These are my concerns, and the questions that they give rise to:

* 1) I wish to avoid your deletion of the material by your claiming that the existence of the Crystal Silence League is "non-verifiable": Would a write-up about the Crystal Silence League in another book constitute "verifiability"? Would a write-up about the Crystal Silence League at a non-CSL web site constitute "verifiability"?

* 2) I wish to avoid your deletion of the material by your claiming that the book "The Crystal Silence League" is "self-published" despite the fact that the publisher is not The Crystal Silence League, but rather Missionary Independent Spiritual Churches: How many books does a liturgical publisher have to publish, or in what manner are they to be distributed, or how many copies must be sold (under what standards of verifiability) before you accept the liturgical publisher as not a "self-publisher"? For instance, in your opinion, is the Church of Scientology a "self publisher? Is the Catholic Church a "self=publisher?

* 3) I wish to avoid your deletion of the material by your claiming that the existence of The Crystal Silence League and/or the publication of the "Crystal Silence League" book is "not notable" due to your having attached a "not notable" tag to "third-party sourcing" that might mention it: Would mention of the CSL in an independent Spiritualist periodical constitute "notability" even if the notice appeared in a newspaper that you had already tagged for deletion from Wikipedia as "non-notable" despite the fact that it is the longest-running independent Spiritualist news source in the world?

* 4) I wish to avoid your deletion of the material by your claiming that the existence of The Crystal Silence League and/or the publication of the "Crystal Silence League" book is "not verifiable" due to a "self-publishing" tag being attached by you to "third-party sourcing" that mentions it: If The Crystal Silence League were written about in another book, and if that book were also a liturgical book, published by a Spiritualist church or Spiritualist publisher, would you claim that the REFERRING book was "self-published" and that the required "third party source" was therefore invalid?

I look forward to your specific and timely replies to these questions, as these answers, clearly stated, will hasten my ability to meet your requirements and thereby prevent an edit war.

Again, my apologies for the typo on the ISBN. My only excuse is very low vision (a congenital problem, not correctable), and i regret that this has heightened the tensions between us.

Cordially yours, 64.142.90.33 (talk) 05:33, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

The phrase "independent third-party source" refers to the author of the material. Bowker didn't write the material, they just issued an ISBN. They did not write, edit, or vet the material in the book. Read the damn page about reliable sources. You're clearly not an idiot, but you seem to be pretending to be one. The book isn't even listed in Worldcat. Yworo (talk) 12:59, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Since you clearly don't bother to read the relevant policies I've linked, I'll quote them here:

"Anyone can create a website or pay to have a book published, then claim to be an expert in a certain field. For that reason self-published media—whether books, newsletters, personal websites, open wikis, blogs, personal pages on social networking sites, Internet forum postings, or tweets—are largely not acceptable." (from WP:RS)

To clarify so you cannot continue to play dumb, self-published means that the person or organization who wrote the content is also the publisher. A representative of the Crystal Silence League wrote the introduction or other material containing the claim, and the Crystal Silence League is also the publisher. That's exactly the definition of self-published. Having an ISBN issued by Bowker has nothing to do with whether the book is self-published.

To clarify the concept of third-party source - a third-party source is a source written by someone not involved in what they are writing about - the neutral report of an outside observer. See the essay WP:THIRDPARTY and What counts as a reliable source?.

In short, people or organizations writing about their own activities are never considered reliable. This include press releases, personal websites, blogs, and self-published books. If you still believe that I am wrong about this, take it to the reliable sources noticeboard for a second opinion, which I guarantee will agree with me. Otherwise, this conversation is over, and any further fits of feigned ingenuousness will be ignored. Yworo (talk) 13:26, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Wonderful! Thank you so much for stating your limitations so clearly. Now, let us examine the situation:

1) The book was not written by the publisher. The book was written by Claude Alexander Conlin (whose article page this is) and he has been dead for more than 50 years. Therefore the publisher, Missionary Independent Spiritual Churches, is not the author.

2) A member of the Crystal Silence League wrote a 2 page introduction to the 2011 reprint of Conlin's 1919 book, but the Crystal Silence League is not the publisher. The publisher, as stated previously, is Missionary Independent Spiritual Churches, which has also published books on other topics, such as "Candle Service Manual For Use in the Work of Spiritual Churches (2007) and two Ladies Auxiliary cookbooks (2010 and 2011).

3) The organizations that distribute the book are not writing about themselves. The book is a republication of a book from 1919, before the current book stores and churches that distribute it existed. Therefore the entities that distribute the book are not writing about themselves in the book.

4) The book is not a press release, a personal website, or a blog. It is a printed and published book that is distributed and sold to the public.

5) The publisher is not claiming to be an "expert" in any way. Any claims of "expertise" in spiritual development are Conlin's alone, and he is not the publisher, being dead and all.

In short, beginning about 92 years ago, and continuing for a number of years, the author Claude Alexander Conlin wrote a series of books covering the broad topics of spirituality, affirmative prayer, self-help techniques, divination, and psychology (see the Bibliography on the article page). In 2011, one of Conlin's books was republished in order to bring his theories, techniques, and practices before the modern public. A group formed to put these theories, techniques, practices into action, and this group now has branches at six separate churches across the USA.

It's a perfect;y legitimate mention, according to the all the rules you have outlined above.

I do not feel the need to bring in another editor to mediate, because i believe that i have fully satisfied your legitimate concerns.

Although you have stated that you will not discuss this with me any further (a shame, really, as we cannot reach a mutually respectful resolution if you walk away from editorial negotiations), i am going to pause for 24 hours awaiting your response. After that, barring any further objections, i will reinsert the mention of the group and the book citation in the article.

Thank you for helping me to understand your objections, which i believe are sincere, but were apparently based on a faulty understanding of the nature of the material and the history of its publication.

64.142.90.33 (talk) 17:16, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Then the publication data you provided was inaccurate. You gave the publisher of the 2011 book as "The Crystal Silence League". In any case, the book can't be used because violates Wikipedia verifiability policy. Privately printed and distributed books are not verifiable. Books used as sources must be available from bookstores or libraries: the general rule is that if it isn't in Worldcat, it's not verifiable. Yworo (talk) 18:56, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

I also note that your email address given in the domain registration for readersandrootworkers.org is "church@missionaryindependent.org" which is the website of "Missionary Independent Spiritual Churches" which you now claim is the publisher - it seems that you are engaging in self-promotion of a non-notable fringe organization with which you are affiliated. I advise you to desist or I will take the issue to the conflict of interest noticeboard. Yworo (talk) 19:04, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Time marches on. It is now 2014 and Yworo's dismissal of Missionary Independent Churches' publication of two of the Crystal Silence League books of Claude A. Conlin as "unverifiable" and "self-published" seems dated. Since the last exchange of opinions, after which Yworo unilaterally deleted all public page mentions of the current state of publications of Conlin by Missionary Independent Spiritual Churches (MISC) and the current state of the CSL which Conlin had founded, several things have happened:

• MISC has published a number of other books, all available through the church, through book dealers, and via Amazon. All of these are professionally produced books printed on paper (none are electronic books) and all of them bear the MISC imprint. Titles currently in print from MISC include "The Art of Hoodoo Candle Magic in Rootwork, Conjure, and Spiritual Church Services," "Hoodoo Food!" "The Black Folder," "Hoodoo Bible Magic: Spiritual Secrets of Scriptural Sorcery" and -- as before -- the same two books by C. A. Conlin. MISC now has a publication record of six books, encompassing the collected writings of more than two dozen authors, all available with ISBN numbers through regular bookstore channels. Surely at this point the existence of MISC as a publisher must be deemed "verifiable" -- so, please, take a moment to verify it.

• The Crystal Silence League, founded by C. A. Conlin, has both a dedicated web site and a Facebook presence that, between the two of them, engage hundreds of members on a daily basis. See the prayer page at the CSL web site for confirmation of the daily posts made by those in search of prayer support. The CSL web site is administered by Mother Katrina Mead, with two assistants. This is an ongoing and verifiable activity -- so, please, take a moment to verify it.

• The Crystal Silence League, founded by C. A. Conlin, publishes an electronic newsletter that reaches thousands of subscribers who must sign up to receive it. Again, this is a verifiable activity, and any editor of Wikipedia may sign up at the CSL web page and check it out. The current editor of the CSL newsletter is Rev. Jon Saint Germain. This is verifiable -- so, please, take a moment to verify it.

• The Crystal Silence League, founded by C. A. Conlin, is launching its own weekly internet radio show in November 2014 under the aegis of Rev. Saint Germain, who is billed as "The Voice of the Crystal Silence League." This is verifiable -- so, please, take a moment to verify it.

It is deplorable to me that an editor like Yworo, whose deletionist rampage through the Spiritualism entries in Wikipedia back in 2011 is adequately documented above, went unchallenged, and that no mediating editor stepped in to rectify his obvious bias against the religion of Spiritualism as practiced and advocated by the author C. A. Conlin and his successors. By denying the "verfiablility" and "notability" of Conlin's legacy at the present time, Yworo sought to -- and succeeded in -- diminishing Conlin's role in both the New Thought and Spiritualist religions.

Plans for the publication of further collections of the writings of C. A. Conlin are underway at MISC, and as these books, in annotated editions, are brought into print, Yworo's bizarre campaign of suppression of information about Spiritualism in general and Conlin's legacy as a leading New Thought and Spiritualist author in particular will continue to be brought forward for re-examination on this page. Stay tuned. 70.36.137.221 (talk) 19:28, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

And still time moves onward! I have added a new title to the Bibliography in the article. It is:

* Secrets of the Crystal Silence League: Crystal Ball Gazing, The Master Key to Silent Influence, Missionary Independent Spiritual Church, 2019. (An edited posthumous collection comprised of Personal Lessons, Codes, and Instructions and Crystal Gazing: Lessons and Instructions in Silent Influence compiled into one volume.)

Need to "verify" it? See the cover here: http://missionaryindependent.org/Secrets-of-the-Crystal-Silence-League-Complete-Front-and-Back-Cover.jpg

The previous two Alexander books published by Missionary Independent Spiritual Church are, as of this month, officially out of print, after eight years and seven years, respectively. The new book, half-again longer than the two earlier publications put together, with additional illustrations and text, is for sale through the church and multiple bookstore outlets, along with a number of other new titles.

I look back on the 2011 dust-up with Yworo, documented above, as a difficult situation, and now that i know who that editor is, i gladly affirm, as always, that i use my real name here and i stand behind my editorial activities in an upright manner. Doing so prevents edit-wars and i believe it should be the standard for all Wikipedia activities. -- cat yronwode, not logged in. 75.101.104.17 (talk) 10:39, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Great Granddaughter of Carl Rosini

This was a stage name. Carl Rosini A.K.A. Johan Carl Rosenzweig. Alexander the Great was his brother. Alec Rosenzweig. After great-grandpa made some money, then he went back for Alec. They came to America, and were sworn in by Theodore Roosevelt. Carl Rosini had Alec, Selma,and Emanuel as siblings. 2600:6C54:7AF0:A60:6D68:9ED7:8C94:5943 (talk) 22:17, 17 June 2024 (UTC)