Talk:List of fictional religions

Selection criteria

Anyone against restricting this list to only notable entries per WP:LSC? --Ronz (talk) 19:56, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Looks like examples from notable books, films, etc. would be a better fit. Most of the examples in the list do not have their own article, but are mentioned in an article about the fictional source. Rublamb (talk) 22:20, 1 June 2026 (UTC)

Potok's fictional religion

I believe that even though there is no entry for Potok's fictional religion, since it is central to two of his major works, it should be included. This is a bit more than an inappropriate inheritance of significance. Kdammers (talk) 03:22, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

Notability is not inherited. Potok is clearly notable, that does not make a fictional religion in a couple of his books notable. For that you need independent coverage in reliable sources focusing on the religion in Potok's work Edward321 (talk) 13:31, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

Agreed. WP:IPCV may be worth reviewing with regards to this. DonIago (talk) 15:17, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

WP:NLISTITEM clearly says that "The notability guideline does not apply to the contents of articles. It also does not apply to the contents of stand-alone lists." Thus, each item in the list does not need to be notable, just the subject of the article. However, you are correct that a source is needed for each item that is included in the list. Rublamb (talk) 22:23, 1 June 2026 (UTC)

Proposal to clean up and standardize the list format

This LLM-generated text has been collapsed and should be excluded from assessments of consensus.

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

Hi all, I’d like to propose a few improvements to this article to enhance clarity, consistency, and verifiability:

1. Standardize entry format: Currently, entries vary in length, tone, and structure. I suggest adopting a consistent format for each item:
   • Name (bolded)
   • Source (e.g., book, film, game)
   • Brief description (1–2 sentences)
   • Citation (if available)
2. Clarify inclusion criteria: Some entries are fictional religions that exist only within fictional worlds (e.g., Bokononism), while others are real-world practices inspired by fiction (e.g., Dinkoism, Jediism). Should we consider splitting the list into:
   • Fictional religions within fictional works
   • Fiction-inspired real-world religions?
3. Encourage citations: Many entries currently lack references. Adding reliable sources—especially for real-world practices—would improve the article’s credibility.
4. Improve structure and navigation: Some entries are out of alphabetical order. Adding subheadings (e.g., A–F, G–L) could improve readability.
5. Add a "See also" section: Linking to related articles like Fictional religion, Parody religion, and Religion in science fiction could help readers explore related topics.

I’d love to hear your thoughts on these suggestions. If there’s consensus, I’d be happy to help implement the changes. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by KatieKat1992 (talk • contribs)

Yes please. All this sounds good if you have time to improve the article! — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:38, 10 November 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for the initiative, sounds good! I have changed the one case I've seen which was out of alphabetical order. Are there more remaining? I am not so sure if subheadings like A-F are really necessary at this point. I am neutral on a split of fiction-inspired real-world religions, but if it is done it should be sectioning within this list, not splitting out into a separate article: Some of the arguments in the deletion discussion revolved around if there are enough notable entries to warrant a list in the first place, so making things smaller seems not helpful at this time. Daranios (talk) 15:57, 10 November 2025 (UTC)