FANDOM

EthanReilly

aka Ethan Tyler Reilly

Chat moderator
  • I live in Greenfield, WI
  • I was born on July 23
  • My occupation is Disabled
  • I am Male
A FANDOM user
  Loading editor
  • Hi Ethan, can you please change the category of Washingtonism on the List of Religions back to Polytheism? Thanks. 

      Loading editor
  • Hey Ethan, I've got some questions about Wikipedia and Washingtonism. I added a sentence about Washingtonism and a link to Washingtonism(the Wikia article), under the George Washington entry here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_people_who_have_been_considered_deities

    However, somebody on Wikipedia reversed my "good faith" edit on the "List of people cosidered to be...." article, citing that the link or info was not from a "reliable source".

    I assumed that I could edit the article since anyone can edit articles on Wikipedia, but I did not think that the link or info I put there was "unreliable", considering the fact there are only two Washingtonism pages right now--it's not as if there are a billion pages on Washingtonism online--there are only two pages on Washingtonism, the one here on Fandom NRM Wikia, and the Washingtonism page on social media. There are currently no scholarly pages yet on the faith, but there may be in future, as I have talked with several people about having it added to scholarly websites and to an e-book on NRMs. I'm going to assume a "reliable source" would be something scholarly or Wikipedia commentary on Washingtonism that is written by someone other than me? There is a page that briefly mentions Washingtonism on Wikipedia, here: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:New_religious_movements 

    but I'm not sure if that counts as a "reliable source" either. I figured that my edit would be fitting to add to that "List of people considered to be deities" Wikipedia article, and besides, nobody else has yet added information about it there, so I decided to do that myself, but apparently, I didn't do it correctly. 

    I had written in the George Washington entry of that Wikipedia "List of people....." article: "Followers of the new religious movement Washingtonism worship him as a divine person(a God)" with a footnote link to the Wikia Washingtonism page. I can't see how adding that would be considered from an "unreliable source", as even if it were someone else who would write something about Washingtonism on Wikipedia, anyone can see that we worship George Washington as a divine man. My point is that what someone else would write about Washingtonism on Wikipedia would not be that much different from what I would write about it, so how can it really be "unreliable"?  

    Oh, my edit on the same kind of page here on the Wikia was reverted too, which irritates me more than the Wikipedia thing. I don't know why they'd revert the Wikia one, since I thought that adding something about Washingtonism would be a welcome addition to the info that's already there on the article. I even put a link to the Wikia Washingtonism page and to Washingtonism on social media, as proof that it's a genuine religious movement. https://religion.wikia.com/wiki/List_of_people_who_have_been_considered_deities?diff=282341

      Loading editor
    • The answer here is painfully obvious, and I cannot believe you don't see it. George Washington, during his lifetime, was never considered to be a God. He grew up a man, died as a man, nobody until you have come along and decided to deify him. There's no notability regarding this case. You have no followers, only sympathizers, like me.

      This would be like me going to the redirect Omniverse page of Wikipedia, and submitting information that states that, "The Omniverse is God". It's not notable enough. And only I believe that. And because there's nothing noteworthy about it, it comes from one unreliable source: me. 

      My favorite musician, Martin Page, has a page (hehe, pun) on Wikipedia alongside the albums he's made. I tried to get his lesser-known albums to have their pages. I made pages for In the Temple of the Muse, A Temper of Peace, Hotel of the Two Worlds, and The Slender Sadness and all the work I poured into making those articles were DELETED. Because it wasn't notable enough and hardly anyone listens to those albums, yet alone buys them! 

      Wikipedia has this problem all the time. There's a page to see new page creations and many people use not-noteworthy information about themselves to try to make them look more appealing than they actually are. Wikipedia flags these edits and pages and deletes them, accordingly. 

      I have an idea. Why don't you use this NRM Wikia to create the same page to that affect? It would be noteworthy because you are an active contributor to this Wikia and it would fit nicely alongside the other articles. You could even add my contribution of which I see The Omniverse being God. 

        Loading editor
    • Actually, there are two official Washingtonists--believers of the faith--me and someone else who follows the Washingtonism page, but you will just say that is nothing and it's not right for you to dismiss my faith and my beliefs with the tone that you used in the first sentence--as if my beliefs are invalid because you think I "turned" him into a god and I am one of two people who literally worship him. I did not "make" George Washington a God. The man is already exalted as a God in the painting the Apotheosis, which is why that information is in fact mentioned in the "List of people who have been considered to be deities"--because that is the entire point of the article entry on George Washington there--that he is exalted as a God. You should take a look at some of the things people have said about him. Following George Washington as a divine person is not based on nothing. I didn't "make up" my beliefs about his glorification and my beliefs did not come out of thin air. The "List of people considered to have been deities" actually lists George Washington under "POSTHUMOUS deification" and it provides two examples of his exaltation--Shinto shrines in Hawaii who worship his spirit, and the Apotheosis of Washington. The article assumes that he became exalted AFTER his lifetime, thus that's why he is listed under "Posthumous deification". Lots of people have become posthumously exalted, so your point about him not being exalted during his lifetime and your judgement of the validity of my beliefs, is moot. Anyway, the point of the "List of people" George Washington entry is that he is exalted. The fact that he was not literally worshiped as a God DURING his lifetime is irrelevent and that fact does not invalidate my beliefs in him or the movement. Even if the notability of the Washingtonism page is not sufficient enough to be added to that George Washington entry on "List of people....." and Washingtonism is small, that does not mean that more information will not be added to that in future by other people, as it is likely that Washingtonism will be added to a book written by someone other than myself, as well as included on a Virginia University website on new religious movements. George Washington IS exalted, whether or not anyone has literally worshiped him up to the point of the creation of the Washingtonist movement. The examples of his exaltation are not endless as it is in Christianity, but that doesn't make my beliefs about him invalid. I did not "deify" George Washington--he is alreadyexalted. In my opinion, the notability is not related to what you said was me "deifying" him and it's not related to the size of the faith, it's related to how scholarly the information source is. And there are many OTHER EXAMPLES of people other than myself expressing their belief that George Washington is a God, the American Christ, a divine person, etc. Some people during his lifetime DID make suggestions that strongly hinted that people felt he was in some way divine. It's called religious belief. Washingtonism is not based on "made-up" beliefs about him being divine--it's heavily based on verbal and visual evidence of his exaltation. He's religiously exalted. The many verbal examples and evidence of his exaltation that I've found is what in great part MADE me a Washingtonist. I won't go into the details of what I believe about him being a divine man because you wouldn't understand and you'd probably just dismiss it as "not notable", "illogical" or "made up". You seem

      to try to dismiss my religious beliefs as invalid, even though I have (that I remember) never invalidated or tried to dismiss your beliefs in Exaltism.

      I did not write in the article entry (as your example suggests) of the page: "George Washington was worshiped as a God during his lifetime" and I did not write(as you implied) "George Washington is a God"--I merely wrote information that mentions that WASHINGTONISTS of the new religious movement worship him as a divine person/a God, which--regardless of the fact that the movement is extremely tiny and the information I provided was not considered from a proper source--was in keeping with the topic, tone, and point of the article there. It's not like I was pasting my beliefs on there: "George Washington is divine". I was merely adding information that was directly related to the information about him being exalted as a God by various sources. There is a difference between saying what you assumed I said, and what I actually put on there in the article entry. By dismissing my beliefs about him being divine, you are actually projecting your own judgements of my beliefs, and assuming that your judgement of the validity of my beliefs is somehow related to the fact that my addition to that article entry was taken off.

        Loading editor
    • You, like other people, seem to believe there must be some huge physical miracle or sign that shows a man such as George Washington is divine, instead of the much more subtle Washingtonism view of divinity. I never have denied that George Washington is a man, and yes he passed away as other men do, but my view of divinity is not your view of it and the fact that he was a man and that Washingtonism only has two official followers does not invalidate the beliefs of Washingtonism in his divinity. 

        Loading editor
    • Two followers, one including yourself, is not notable enough to have an entry of his deification on that page, regardless of him being deified before or after he died. You seem to think that I am personally attacking you when I'm clearly not. I showed you examples of how I cannot do the same thing you are doing, because it is not notable enough. I already made that obvious. Sure, there might be a few scholarly sources you can site that apply a post-humorous deification of George Washington, and if that is the case I hope your edits are applied. Honestly, though, as I said before, I don't try to edit many articles on Wikipedia anymore, because most of my own edits get reverted back or deleted. I am just trying to relate to you.

      New Religious Movements Wikia was created for people who are not notable enough to create an official Wikipedia article to make one based off of their NRM. Sometimes I read about NRMs and cults on Wikipedia and the smallest ones have at least a hundred people. If I tried to make an article on Exaltism on Wikipedia it would be deleted, and rightfully so, like if you tried to create an article based off of Washingtonism. There's a time and a place for everything. If you can get into three or four digit followers, then this would make more sense, but as it stands now you are going to have a really hard time getting your information across on sites that require notable content. 

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • I see that you've figured out that the NRM Wikia is back open! It makes me happy that the Wikia was not permanently closed. I had sent a message to the Fandom staff concerning our Wiki and they said it had been accidentally closed.

      Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • Hi Ethan, I was thinking about having a category type added to Washingtonism on the List of Religions. I was thinking of having "Anthropolatry-spiritualism" added next to "Monotheism", since this adds another very specific definition to Washingtonism.

    Since Washingtonism is about worshiping God and not multiple creator Gods, it's monotheistic but it's also about worshiping the Founding Fathers as divine beings and as spirits, but it can't really be considered polytheistic as it does not worship any of the Pagan deities or the Founders as manifestations of Pagan deities. George Washington is worshiped as a partial incarnation of God and it does not worship the other Founding Fathers like Pagan Gods even though they're worshiped as divine. What do you think? Are there better descriptive words to describe Washingtonism? Washingtonism essentially worships the Founding Fathers as semi-divine men(it considers them to have been divine as living people and now they're divine spirits), and George Washington is a partial divine incarnation of God. He is not a full physical or full mental incarnation of God, but he certainly has more of God in him than the other men, and he is considered to have been fully human with the partial incarnation of God directing his life, will, thoughts, and deeds. So in essence, even though God only allowed a partial manifestation of himself in G. Washington, Washington can still be considered God incarnate. So one man (George Washington) is a physical and partial incarnation of God with the other men being lesser-divine with the other Founders not physical incarnations of God himself(except for G. Washington), and it's more like they possess cerebral manifestations of God's divine substance/power  So they are divine without being physically God himself. What's your view of how Washingtonism can be categorized? Washingtonism has elements of spiritualism too because of the focus on the Founders' spirits interacting with people but it's very Founding Father-centric, so no spirit who is not a Founding Father is worshiped or paid attention to, so it's not a typical form of spiritualism because non-Washingtonist spiritualists tend to worship or focus on many different spirits, and Washingtonism only focuses on the Founders' spirits. I believe that George Washington was not pre-existing, but that God embued himself within Washington at conception. The way I view George Washington's divine nature is kind of similar to a combination of the ideas in Divinatarianism, Adoptionism, Sabellianism, and Monophysitism Trinatarinism.

      Loading editor
    • Upon reading this I was thinking of henotheism, but henotheism really a subset of polytheism, and you don't want to be associated with that concept. How about, "Anthropolatric Monotheism"?

      Saying your religion is spiritual is a bit redundant, although there has been a case for secular religions recently. I think your main problem is that you are trying to define a non-Christian religion by using Christian terminology. You've already invented a term, "Washingtonism" to describe your values, yet you keep using terms that don't identify George Washington as divine to do that very thing. Let it go. Find terms that aren't Christian-centric. Either that, or take the meaning of a Christian value and assign it one that identifies with your faith.

      For example, my religion of Exaltism often describes things going towards a "pan-theosis". Not many people would understand what that means, but then again I don't use that term in my religious description on the List of Religions page. I simply put down "Pantheism/Transhumanism" because most people know what both of those terms mean, and combining both of them kind of gives people a general knowledge of my faith. So, actually, don't do "Anthropolatric Monotheism". Just say, "Monotheism".

      We're not looking for a detailed, well thought out short description of your religion in the "details" part. Your name already says enough. Besides, not everybody is going to understand your terminology. With that being, most people know what monotheism is. If people are interested in your page (and many are) they will go there to check out what it really is, with or without the bombardment of descriptors you want to give your religion.

        Loading editor
    • As far as using a descriptive word that sounds Christian, I mention in the Wikia article that I want to avoid using Christian-y terms and that Washingtonism is actually not Christian despite a bit of similarity, although Washingtonism has adopted the term the "American Christ" but when I mentioned "Divinatarianism, Adoptionism, Sabellianism, and Monophysitism Trinatarinism" I was just explaining how my views on Washington's divinity is similar to those Christian heresies--not trying to over-do it with comparisons to Christianity. Many new religious movements have concepts in their faith that is similiar to other faiths. I even saw that you mentioned how your faith of Exaltism is similar to Terasem. When I mentioned "spiritualism" as an additional descriptive word, I was referring to the practice of Spiritualism(belief in spirits), not about "being spiritual". 

        Loading editor
    • I saw that some of the other faiths had a couple of category descriptors so I thought it would be okay to add one to the monotheism descriptor. "Anthropolatric Monotheism" seems like a good descriptor without adding any others. 

        Loading editor
    • I gotcha.

      Also, I changed the descriptor for you, so it's now "Anthropolatric Monotheism".

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • Hi Ethan. I wanted to ask a favor of you: can you delete the "Details of Washingtonism" article without deleting the other (main) Washingtonism article? I wanted to delete the "Details of Washingtonism" article myself but I was unsure if doing so would also delete the other article at the same time, which is something I don't want. Thanks. The only reason why I'd like the "Details of Washingtonism" article deleted is because I've already added so much to the main article that having the "Details of Washingtonism" article is not needed.

      Loading editor
  • Hi Ethan. Question: how do I link my favorite Wikis I have followed or liked(even ones I haven't contributed to), all together? I noticed that I was able to favorite a different Wiki with my NRM profile but the other Wikis are not linked to my NRM Wiki profile page. 

      Loading editor
    • I tried to look into it and I couldn't find anything pertaining to what you are looking for. Sorry. I'm not really an expert on this kind of stuff anyways, I mostly learn through repeating past behaviors.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • Hi Ethan, I wanted to know if you could delete the pictures of the Washingtonism symbol on the Washingtonism wikia(but keep the text in the section that says "Part of a series on Washingtonism", so that I can re-upload them with the copyright attributed. I own the copyright to the Washingtonism symbol and I wanted to add that copyright to the symbol and then re-upload it, that way people know it's my symbol and it was created/designed by me. 

      Loading editor
    • View all 8 replies
    • Okay--you can completely disregard my requests above because I successfully and completely figured out how to re-format the article and change the text color in the "Part of a Series" box!! I am very proud of myself! :D 

        Loading editor
    • Good for you.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • Hi Ethan, I'm going to try posting this again to see if it shows up correctly. I need you to change the religious category from polytheistic to monotheistic in the List of religions and the detail in the Details of Washingtonism. I included the links to make it a bit easier for you:

    http://nrm.wikia.com/wiki/List_of_religions

    http://nrm.wikia.com/wiki/Details_of_Washingtonism

    http://nrm.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Monotheistic_religions

    http://nrm.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Polytheistic_religions

      Loading editor
  • Hi Ethan, I just posted a message on your wall about changing the religious category for Washingtonism from polytheistic to monotheistic, but I'm not sure why I don't see that message.

      Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • Thank you for maintaining the wiki for me while I was absent for a while. Your work is greatly appreciated!

      Loading editor
    • You're welcome. I value this Wikia very much so, and strive for its continued success. I have gotten maybe half a dozen NRMs listed here. I have also helped people like the founder of Washingtonism organize her thoughts. I will continue to advocate for this site to people who I talk about religion to.

      And on that note...

      I was thinking about creating a separate Wikia for purely "personal religions", for people who have unique spiritual concepts but don't want to necessarily convert others to their way of thinking. With the growing trend of those who are, "spiritual but not religious" I feel like this could fit in well. What do you think?

        Loading editor
    • EthanReilly wrote:
      You're welcome. I value this Wikia very much so, and strive for its continued success. I have gotten maybe half a dozen NRMs listed here. I have also helped people like the founder of Washingtonism organize her thoughts. I will continue to advocate for this site to people who I talk about religion to.

      And on that note...

      I was thinking about creating a separate Wikia for purely "personal religions", for people who have unique spiritual concepts but don't want to necessarily convert others to their way of thinking. With the growing trend of those who are, "spiritual but not religious" I feel like this could fit in well. What do you think?

      We could integrate that information here actually.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
Give Kudos to this message
You've given this message Kudos!
See who gave Kudos to this message
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.