Talk:Azeztulite
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
Azeztulite is part of WikiProject Gemology and Jewelry, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Gemstones, Jewelry, and related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page. | ||
| Start | This article has been rated as start-class on the quality scale. | ||
| Low | This article has been rated as low-importance on the importance scale. | ||
|
Article Grading: This article REALLY needs cleanup. Right now it reads as a POV against gems in religion (as much as I agree with the POV). SauliH 16:55, 30 January 2007 (UTC) |
|||
 |
This article is supported by WikiProject Gemology and Jewelry, gemstones subpage. | ||
 |
This article is supported by WikiProject Gemology and Jewelry, Culture and Society subpage. | ||
|
WikiProject Gemology and Jewelry To-do:
|
|||
 |
This article is being improved by WikiProject Rational Skepticism. Wikiproject Rational Skepticism seeks to improve the quality of articles dealing with science, pseudosciences, pseudohistory and skepticism. Please feel free to help us improve this page. | |
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the Project's quality scale. See comments | |
 |
This article has been marked as needing immediate attention. | |
[edit] Merger with Quartz
Actually, I think it's ok to leave it as a separate page dealing only with the new age mumbo-jumbo/scam. I have just classified it solely in the category Category:Quackery to reflect that. The page could use some editing in particular the first sentence had me a bit confused. Pascal.Tesson 05:48, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
I agree, it should be kept as a separate category. There is a long list of fake, forged and treated minerals - Azeztulite and Aqua Aura are just the start of a long list. Also, there is a fine line between enhancement of minerals/gemstone and downright forgeries. For example all the citrine sold in mineral shops is fake, its heat-treated amethyst; heating causes purple amethyst to turn yellow. Whereas ruby and sapphire can be heat treated to improve their transparency, this is not forgery but enhancement. Diamond Dave 18/09/2006 15:32
- Fair enough! But let me suggest again that it might then be appropriate to start the fake mineral article (with due references) so that the whole status of Azeztulite is clerer. Pascal.Tesson 14:40, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
Much of the article is incorrect. There seems to be some confusion with Satyaloka Quartz which is called this for a reason as explained its from the Satyaloka region and looks completely different. The confusion is a result of ebay sellers selling Satyaloka Quartz with the key word Azeztulite because the two stones have been described as similar (See The Book of Stones- Robert Simmons) Azeztulite is a white quartz and it is only called this if it is from the North Carolina (original find) and more recently Vermont. Interestingly Robert Simmons now owns the Trademark for Azeztulite.
You also need to reconsider using wikipedia as a soap box for your personal beliefs about metaphysics. Crystals and precious stones have and always will become assciated with various properties and that is peoples choice to believe what they wish. Last time I checked we did not live is a communist state?
Good luck - A. Johnson —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.102.17.232 (talk) 19:06, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Completely Inappropriate
I think this article needs a complete rewrite. Articles about miracles attributed to Catholic relics (for example) are written respectfully. This should be as well. As the person above mentioned, it's not appropriate to include your opinion about whether the beliefs of others are "scams" or "fakes." I would also like to note that Robert Simmons (who owns the trademark) states very clearly in The Book of Stones that Azeztulite is plain quartz. Yes, he goes on to attribute metaphysical properties to it, but if those are his beliefs so be it.
There are eBay scams involving those Catholic relics, too, but those scams don't negate the possibility that the relics have power.
The stigma surrounding "new age" ideas is getting tiresome, and calling such ideas scams or lies is insulting to a lot of people who have direct experience with the power of stones. You can probably guess that I am one of those who know such power exists. Even so, I would certainly be capable or rewriting this trash without bias, and will probably do so when I have the time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.243.203.74 (talk) 00:51, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
