Talk:Dolores Cannon

Contested deletion

This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because:

Is about an American author that has written 17 books.

Is about an American hypnotherapist. a profession that in many American states does not required licensing for its practice.

Is about one of the most well know past life regression therapist in the 20th century.

I also consider that the other 3 articles about Dolores Cannon in the Dutch Wikipedia, Russian Wikipedia and Chinese Wikipedia should be preserved--Zchemic (talk) 12:57, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

List of sources available

I found mentions of Dolores Cannon, the author, hypnotherapist, past life regressionist, and ufologist in these mainstream sources:

• https://encyclopediaofarkansas.net/media/dolores-cannon-10471/ ("The CALS Encyclopedia of Arkansas is a project of the Central Arkansas Library System (CALS) in Little Rock, Arkansas. It is the only state encyclopedia in the country to be produced by a library system.")
• https://www.vice.com/en/article/k7894e/past-life-regression-therapy-mind-zoom
• https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/16/books/review/tracy-k-smith-interview.html
• https://www.theportugalnews.com/news/2023-08-25/what-is-quantum-healing/80827
• https://www.mirror.co.uk/3am/celebrity-news/cheryl-been-meditating-reading-aliens-24354598
• https://www.brantfordexpositor.ca/news/local-news/conference-puts-focus-on-hypnosis-alternative-healing
• https://www.digitaljournal.com/pr/meet-the-woman-behind-the-popular-awakening-starseeds-series-radhaa-nilia
• https://www.newspapers.com/newspage/204592570/
• https://www.newspapers.com/newspage/144854786/
• https://www.newspapers.com/newspage/498412971/
• https://www.newspapers.com/newspage/177845281/
• https://www.newspapers.com/newspage/207695974/
• https://www.newspapers.com/newspage/427682921/
• https://www.newspapers.com/newspage/427682735/
• https://www.newspapers.com/newspage/83793704/
• https://www.newspapers.com/newspage/259528587/

The article just needs a more citations and improvement flag at top from WP:CLEANUPTAG. 5Q5|^✉ 15:14, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

Source analysis of the first seven sources from Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dolores Cannon (3rd nomination): ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 18:55, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

Source	Text on D. Cannon	Comments
https://encyclopediaofarkansas.net/media/dolores-cannon-10471/	"Dolores Cannon directed the Ozark Mountain UFO Conference from 2013 until her death in 2014. She is shown here in 2013."	Consisting of two sentences and an image, this clearly does not meet SIGCOV.
https://www.vice.com/en/article/k7894e/past-life-regression-therapy-mind-zoom	"I reached out to Teja Priyadarshini, a certified past life regression therapy practitioner from India, who uses a technique called Quantum Healing Hypnosis Therapy developed by Dolores Cannon, a self-proclaimed hypnotist, past life regressionist and… UFO investigator."	Consisting of half a sentence clearly dismissing D. Cannon as WP:FRINGE, this is clearly not in-depth, significant coverage.
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/16/books/review/tracy-k-smith-interview.html	"Dolores Cannon, who refined a method of regressive hypnotherapy by which subjects felt able to encounter their own past lives, has been an enormous consolation and inspiration to me during times of anxiety and 21st-century world-fear."	One sentence from the poet Tracy K. Smith on what she likes to read in her spare time. SIGCOV? No.
https://www.theportugalnews.com/news/2023-08-25/what-is-quantum-healing/80827	Now, there are various ways in which to practice quantum healing. One of these is the hypnosis technique, created in the 1968 by author and hypnotist Dolores Cannon. “QHHT© achieves the deepest level of hypnosis possible, the Somnambulistic level of trance,” according to the official QHHT© (Quantum Healing Hypnosis Technique) website. “By creating a safe and effective method that bypasses the chatter of the conscious mind and focuses on obtaining unlimited information in the somnambulistic state, Dolores Cannon discovered that time travel is possible at any time or place to relive anyone’s past lives.” Cannon also claims that this technique allows for access to our unconscious minds, what she calls The Subconscious, or The SC, which is “that greater part of ourselves that is always connected to The Source, or God, and has unlimited knowledge and an unlimited ability to heal the physical body.” Dolores Cannon passed away in 2014, seemingly not having used the aforementioned unlimited ability to heal the physical body on herself, but you can still learn the basics of what she made up for just $997.	Two paragraphs, most of which is quotes to ridicule a technique the author explicitly states is made up, not SIGCOV of Cannon.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/3am/celebrity-news/cheryl-been-meditating-reading-aliens-24354598	"And she also said that the one book that "changed her life" is New Earth by Dolores Cannon. Dolores Cannon is a UFO investigator, hypnotist and past-life regressionist who believes alien spirits have been sent to Earth to help humanity ascend to the 'New Earth'."	Two sentences (not SIGCOV) from an interview with Cheryl (singer) on what she does in her spare time, published in a marginally reliable newspaper specializing in tabloid journalism.
https://www.brantfordexpositor.ca/news/local-news/conference-puts-focus-on-hypnosis-alternative-healing	He will offer a group regression workshop based on the work of Dolores Cannon, an American hypnotherapist and psychic researcher .	Half a sentence, not SIGCOV.
https://www.digitaljournal.com/pr/meet-the-woman-behind-the-popular-awakening-starseeds-series-radhaa-nilia	Another author whose books influenced me is Dolores Cannon. Her book, The Three Waves of Volunteers and New Earth. I highly recommend both of these timeless books.	Three sentences from an interview with Radhaa Nilia, a self-proclaimed "visionary leader, expert in the Sacred Feminine and Archetypes, Goddess Activator, Publishing Priestess, etc. Not reliable or SIGCOV.

I am shocked that a Wikipedia post...

...includes critism of some scientist. So far, Wikipedia is a provider of information without judgement. Just because some scientist calls it rubbish, says more about him than about her. I would like the passage to be deleted. This has no place in Wikipedia. 2003:FB:9716:A200:B49A:173D:B1F8:4E2D (talk) 16:51, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

I'm a bit confused as to what you consider "judgement." Wikipedia is a source of information on a subject, whether positive or negative. AriTheHorse^{talk to me!} 18:26, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

Since this is your first post to Wikipedia, you may not realize that our goal as editors is to provide neutral coverage of a subjects. I refer you to WP:FRINGE but will also quote from it as well:

• The term fringe theory is used in a broad sense to describe an idea that departs significantly from the prevailing views or mainstream views in its particular field. Because Wikipedia aims to summarize significant opinions with representation in proportion to their prominence, a Wikipedia article should not make a fringe theory appear more notable or more widely accepted than it is."
• Articles about hypotheses that have a substantial following but which critics describe as pseudoscience, may note those critics' views.
• Proponents of fringe theories have used Wikipedia as a forum for promoting their ideas. Policies discourage this: if the only statements about a fringe theory come from the inventors or promoters of that theory, then "What Wikipedia is not" rules come into play.
• The neutral point of view policy requires that all majority and significant-minority positions be included in an article. However, it also requires that they not be given undue weight. A conjecture that has not received critical review from the scientific community or that has been rejected may be included in an article about a scientific subject only if other high-quality reliable sources discuss it as an alternative position.

Rublamb (talk) 19:56, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

I was disappointed with Wikipaedia after reading their article on Dolores Cannon. Definitely biased. 124.171.78.191 (talk) 06:46, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

Neutral... Wikipedia has no opinions. Scientific reliable sources all agree, thats what were writing. If they disagree, then it will be presented as debated. No room for 'game the system' tactics, there is no system. Generally we need reliable sources, and aside from niche subjects, yours edits would most likely get reverted if you didn't provide any. Reverted by actual people who have full time jobs, not reverted by a bot. Thats why on many complex issues, wikipedia is the wrong source, and its sources will not be the best. In short, no bias to be seen here. Provide us with reliable sources, and we can talk. Heck, reliable sources should exclude the press if better sources are found, as a matter of precaution. On the german wiki thats even a guideline. Encyclopédisme (talk) 18:29, 13 February 2024 (UTC)