Inclusion of "fan favorites" somewhere in the body?

edit

There was a poll on IntegralWorld.net about which books are Wilber's best. Although the results of the poll shouldn't be featured in the lead section (because the opinions aren't professionally published ones), I think that it should be mentioned somewhere in the body of the article what the top picks were, in order to give other readers interested in Wilber a good idea of where to start with his large output. Do you agree? If not, why? AndrewOne (talk) 17:07, 8 August 2020 (UTC)Reply

Wikipedia is based on scholarly sources, not on fan's favorites. That's what fansites are for. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 18:12, 8 August 2020 (UTC)Reply

Q-link?

edit

So nothing about the pseudo-scientific 'Q-link' that Wilber endorses (see: 'Norman Einstein ...')? And no mention of 'NORMAN EINSTEIN, The Dis-Integration of Ken Wilber', and 'Stripping the Gurus: Sex, Violence, Abuse and Enlightenment' by GEOFFREY D. FALK? YadaYadaYetMoreYada (talk) 15:28, 26 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

No mention of his second marriage, spirital life

edit

He was married to and divorced from Marcy (forget her last name). Early 2000s. Just putting that out there. Probably should mention his debt to and achievements in Zen and Dzogchen and the centrality of "spirit" in his work. 97.115.77.107 (talk) 05:24, 19 September 2024 (UTC)Reply