Talk:Master Numbers (Numerology)

Numerological Examples

One example of 'Master Number', that I can think of, that could be explored as an example? Jesus was purported to have been crucified when he was 33 years old. Jesus and the number 33? A bit like all the rock stars who have died at 27 years old , dont you think? Well, I'm not a numerologist, so we need to find numerological writers/practitioners/diviners to help expand the content here, or this will just be trashed as pseudoscience. Drakonicon 14:34, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also the second line "... they are very hard to handle..." Who said this? Or beleived this? Why?Drakonicon 14:36, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In the introduction the job of the article is to adequately explain the 'difficulty' of the numbers; not just pass over them with an incomplete explanation. Another word could be used or phrase to explain 'difficult', unless you are alluding to the duality of meaning in Master Numbers? More content... references and citations needed. Most definitely.Drakonicon 14:41, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merger of 11, 22, and 33

This article, along with the ones under 11 (numerology), 22 (numerology), and 33 (numerology), are all rather thin on content, and long on mess. I'm proposing that 11, 22, and 33 be merged into this master document, where all the POV disputes and calls for experts can be distilled into one reasonable-length article, rather than four short, non-encyclopedic ones. -- kaosfere 16:01, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. I am far from expert on how numerology operates. Still looking for someone to do the job. Merger is a good idea.Drakonicon 09:50, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Swift 23:39, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support --AgentPeppermint 17:28, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings Friends,

The article in question, while may not rise to your own special brand of perfection, is in fact, valuable and quite accurate.

I am a professional dowser, Reiki Master, writer and researcher. I have been studying the #22 for over 18 years. For those of us who are open to the non physical realms, the #22 and the #11 are profoundly significant.

There are many websites on the net where one can go and learn about the number 11 as it relates to ancient peoples, and most importantly, The Great Pyramid. There are many people all over the globe who are seeing 11:11 on their digital clocks and elsewhere. Same with 22 or 222. There is a lot to learn.

Sacred Geometry is something one could learn about to further understand and digest the relevance of the numbers 11,22 and 33. And much more.

One article on Wiki will not a mind make when it comes to the esoteric matters, but please understand that there is truly a wealth of vital information on it, and much work/research being done in the name of these numbers and more.

Peace and blessings for you all.

Sheree Rainbolt-Kren

--

Coincidence has never equated to science, no matter how peculiar, no matter how grand a scale. Construing coincidence as supporting facts for your superstitions does not make either valid. Wikipedia has never aligned itself with baseless claims, and never will, as its goal is to compile information which has a standing in factuality. If what you say is to be taken as scientific fact, I would then drop what I was doing and label every part of my house with as many favorable numbers as I can in an effort to ward away evil number spirits and prevent cancer. Imagine how disappointed I'd be if, despite my clever and scientifically-valid wards, I caught a cold or was assailed by door-to-door candy salesmen.

What's more, I cannot imagine how you or anyone else could verify this information as being accurate when it states bluntly that such numbers are important without providing evidence or any other form of support. "Research" on the subject, as I understand, means going over events in history, forming mathematical quantum out of irrelevant and unrelated information, and then drawing correlations based on these figures and assigning importance to them. Simply put, it's creating evidence to support a claim made after the fact. Also it should be noted that Web sites are by no means made to be accurate and using them as a font of research material is with some argument the dumbest thing anyone can do these days.

It is for this reason I motion for the articles in question to be merged and labeled as superstition (if no "Total Bullshit" template is in circulation): It's better to group them together as it takes up less space. Also, each article requires cleanup that borders on outrageous, as it appears they were written by a middle-schooler whose fondness for the subject rivaled his lack of understanding for the same.

Support