Content deleted Content added
24.124.84.133 (talk) repeated vandalism on Plato's Republic article |
SeraphimXI (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
{{RFCheader|Religion and philosophy}} |
{{RFCheader|Religion and philosophy}} |
||
<!--<nowiki>Add new items at the TOP. Use ~~~~~ (five tildes) to sign </nowiki>--> |
<!--<nowiki>Add new items at the TOP. Use ~~~~~ (five tildes) to sign </nowiki>--> |
||
*[[Talk:Jahbulon]] Some editors insist the word is nonsence and the article should be deleted, despite the fact that an AFD already failed on the basis that the word is not notable. The talk page is extremely long and complex, the only issue i'm requesting comments on in is if after reading the article you feel the word is infact notable. 10:21, 26 February 2006 (UTC) |
|||
*[[Talk:Republic_(dialogue)]] A user continues to insert an inappropriate paragraph (around 10 times by now). The guy seems rather hurt by the fact that everyone else keeps removing it and responds with statements like "''Since you rejected a compromise, I'll never surrender''". I've laid out my case on the article's discussion page.02:29, 25 February 2006 (UTC) |
*[[Talk:Republic_(dialogue)]] A user continues to insert an inappropriate paragraph (around 10 times by now). The guy seems rather hurt by the fact that everyone else keeps removing it and responds with statements like "''Since you rejected a compromise, I'll never surrender''". I've laid out my case on the article's discussion page.02:29, 25 February 2006 (UTC) |
||
*[[Talk:Bible_Broadcasting_Network]] Main section recently edited for NPOV. One editor continues to add POV section to end of article. Last section added by said editor ,who seems to have personal knowledge of the network, POV. Dispute about [[no original research]] rule. 20:01, 20 February 2006 (UTC) |
*[[Talk:Bible_Broadcasting_Network]] Main section recently edited for NPOV. One editor continues to add POV section to end of article. Last section added by said editor ,who seems to have personal knowledge of the network, POV. Dispute about [[no original research]] rule. 20:01, 20 February 2006 (UTC) |
Revision as of 10:21, 26 February 2006
- Talk:Jahbulon Some editors insist the word is nonsence and the article should be deleted, despite the fact that an AFD already failed on the basis that the word is not notable. The talk page is extremely long and complex, the only issue i'm requesting comments on in is if after reading the article you feel the word is infact notable. 10:21, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
- Talk:Republic_(dialogue) A user continues to insert an inappropriate paragraph (around 10 times by now). The guy seems rather hurt by the fact that everyone else keeps removing it and responds with statements like "Since you rejected a compromise, I'll never surrender". I've laid out my case on the article's discussion page.02:29, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
- Talk:Bible_Broadcasting_Network Main section recently edited for NPOV. One editor continues to add POV section to end of article. Last section added by said editor ,who seems to have personal knowledge of the network, POV. Dispute about no original research rule. 20:01, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
- Talk:Nishan-E-Haider Editor refuses to accept the evidence and claims from three other editors, since they all are Shi'a. quote: "but he's also a Shi'a" and "You guys may be right. But given that it's the Shi'a editors pushing this, and given behavior I've seen in the past". Is this bad faith?13:16, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
- talk:Beliefs_and_practices_in_the_Sathya_Sai_Organisation and User:BostonMA/Mediation#Links_in_Beliefs_and_practices_article dispute about the external links section. The closely related article Sathya Sai Baba is the subject of wikipedia:mediation by user:BostonMA. 13:09, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
- Talk:Zhuangzi — dispute over, among other things, the claim that Zhuangzi influenced Western philosophy on the grounds that his work was an indirect influence on the film The Matrix which is a piece of Western philosophy. 08:53, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
- Talk:Jahbulon a AFD request for the page failed and a user deleted the entire contents of the page systematically over a few sucessive edits diff link. I don't wish to get involved on the page, was hoping other editors would comment on the talk page. 08:30, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
- Talk:Intentional stance has been rewritten extensively and could use some more eyes on it. 18:23, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
- Talk:Joseph Smith, Jr. Major NPOV dispute, NPOV tag keeps being removed while dispute still in progress bcatt 14:09, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
- Talk:Freemasonry Link to a cite being constantly removed based on the statement that it is not-accurate. Newer cites are not available as they are secrets. Should the older cite remain in article untill a reputable source says it is not-accurate (and then such disagreement described in text), or should the older cite be removed based on the say-so of those privy to the newer cites? 14:04, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
- Talk:Answers in Genesis
We are looking for opinions from third parties who have no opinion on the creationist organization Answers In Genesis (AiG). We have an editor who insists on including a section criticizing the salary of the CEO. This organization had over $10 million in revenue in 2004 and CEO was compensated $185K for that year.[1] Charity Navigator, a website that evaluates non-profit charities, has given AiG favorable ratings and has statistics showing CEO salary is comparable to other charities of similar size. Several editors are calling the salary criticism Original Research since there are no sources directly criticizing the CEO's compensation. Editor of criticism section claims two indirect sources justify inclusion in article. See talk section Looking for outside input on salary criticism for more details. 19:01, 3 February 2006 (UTC)Dispute between parties has been resolved. 18:37, 10 February 2006 (UTC) - Talk:Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy Dispute over whether this page should include the cartoons in question, and where they should be placed in the article.
- Talk:Pope Pius XII - Issues about the extent to which facts require sourcing, and about balance as to presentation of pro-Pacelli and con-Pacelli viewpoints.
- Talk:Jonathan Sarfati -
ongoing dispute over deletion of unsourced 'some critics' section named "Scientist?" that violates Wikipedia:verifiability policy 07:26, 30 January 2006 (UTC) {editted} 13:27, 1 February 2006 (UTC)Comments on this dispute seem unable to resolve. RfM filed[2] and now supported with recap of main dispute. 03:33, 2 February 2006 (UTC) - Talk:Solipsism - what cannot be explained by appealing to the free will of an omnipotent solipsist?
- Talk:Reason - debate between two editors over the question of whether Reason may be considered a "faculty of first truths." Large sections of quotes to support this view have been removed and reinstated. Additional input would be helpful.22:16, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
- Talk:Buddhism - slow edit war over a featured article between immediatists and eventualists; article has been taken to WP:FARC in an attempt to force immediate change.
- Talk:Dianetics:_The_Modern_Science_of_Mental_Health#pasting_here.2C_discussion_of_the_significance_of_the_volcanoA certain Church of Scientology Confidential citation which only one editor has access to.19:08, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
- Talk:Altruism - Ongoing edit war concerning whether and to what extent Objectivist criticisms of altruism should be incorporated. I've temporarily incorporated both views in a side-by-side box, but this fork is not the ideal solution. 01:43, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
- Talk:Islamofascism (term) Propsed merger to Neofascism and religion.21:02, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
- Aryan invasion theory and Max Müller POV dispute concerning the content of paragraphs repeatedly added and deleted concerning the origin of the theory of Indo-Aryan migration into India. 00:25, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
- Talk:Cartesian materialism POV dispute involving the definition of Cartesian Materialism. 09:59, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
- Talk:Louisiana Baptist University - Entry is locked to discuss if diploma mill accusations should be included. The school is unaccredited. 07:12, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
- Talk:Islamist terrorism#I'm back from the block - Debate over whether the page should be moved to 'Islamic terrorism'. There is no such debate at christian terrorism and jewish terrorism, and resolution can't be reached.--19:08, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
- Talk:Kwanzaa Disagreement about relevance of a reference to the SLA. Please help. --22:06, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
- Talk:The_Skeptic's_Annotated_Bible dispute about "no original research" rule. There are two resources that are in question and they are currently listed on the page as links; one to a copyrighted book on Amazon.com and the other to a web site. 22:15, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
- talk:transcendental meditation a mess. NPOV removed and replaced. Anything critical of TM orgnaization is explained away. A very critical study of the TM technique is removed, another rebutted, inside the article. Quotes that challenge the validity of TM are taken out or paraphrased, so meaning is lost. See also the Rfc on TM article in Maths, science, and technology 23:13, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
- talk:Sathya Sai Baba dispute about extensive quoting of a homepage. 22:29, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
- Talk:Pope_Pius_XII,Talk:Pope_Pius_XI, Talk:Centre_Party_Germany, Talk:The Great Scandal, Talk:Hitler's Pope, Talk:Ludwig Kaas, Talk:Rhenish_Westphalian_Industrial_Magnates, Talk:Holocaust(Jews section-accession to power), Talk:Adolf Hitler ( no linking to Kaas, Pius XII or Hitler's Pope or Reichskonkordat . All related to EffK provision of source to all and more articles, and showing Talk:Systemic Abuse, though not allowed airing there . Not a content issue, but a revisionism issue. Painful and un-admissable truth prevented from good faith sourceing by neverending disputes. Avro Manhattan 50 edition book classed as hate, and proves longstanding controversy from 1949. Discussions on all pages with verifiability . EffK 19:01, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
- Talk:Israel_Shamir Can someone please take a look and advise whether the 'Controversial Views' section is Original research? It contains no outside references and puports to be a representation of the subjects views based on his published work. Argument about the merits does seem pointless if it is simply OR.JohD 06:37, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
- Talk:Ontological_argument#Removed_link - Dispute whether this link on the ontological argument constitutes vanity material, e.g. does the fact that the page is owned by a person make it a "personal web page"? --Wade A. Tisthammer 23:10, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
- Talk:List of 10 longest-reigning popes#Citing_Sources - Dispute over source of list and St Peter's papacy. 19:57, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
- Talk:Charles Chiniquy Dispute over NPOV language and whether the article should mention and link to Jack Chick. 00:43, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
- Astrology -- Disputes over NPOV, including/removal of skeptical views. New opinions required. 08:43, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
- Talk:Intelligent_designer -- Request for comment about whether this article, which has survived an AfD, gives undue weight by essentially duplicating the content of the Intelligent design article. 18:27, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
- Category talk:Lamas -- Request for comment about style use. --Dorje 01:46, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
- Talk:Mythology -- Evil on the attack! Or defence!
- Talk:Nostradamus -- Huge disputes over NPOV, promotion of him as a psychic, including/removal of skeptical views. There are at least three different versions that are repeatedly reverted to by various editors. Need new blood, especially those well-versed in NPOV issues, as all three sides claim their side is NPOV. 21:26, 26 December 2005 (UTC)