Misplaced Pages

:Requests for comment/Religion and philosophy: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 14:12, 23 June 2006 editSiddharth srinivasan (talk | contribs)265 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit Revision as of 04:10, 24 June 2006 edit undoHis excellency (talk | contribs)1,381 editsNo edit summaryNext edit →
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>-->
*] Article essentially a reservoir for negative opinion regarding Islam, with no room for positive views (save in response to criticisms). As such, the article title makes the article effectively POV-biased. I'm suggesting a rename to "Divergent Views On Islam" or something similar where contrasting views can be included. 04:10, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
* ] - Deadlock over various issues which have been listed. Main disputes are over violations of ], ], undue weightage to minority views, failing to realise that astrology is a pseudoscience, etc 14:12, 23 June 2006 (UTC) * ] - Deadlock over various issues which have been listed. Main disputes are over violations of ], ], undue weightage to minority views, failing to realise that astrology is a pseudoscience, etc 14:12, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
* ] - Dispute over whether this article, ], about a "philosophical system", is the proper place for "Cult accusations", rather than ], and whether this article ought to be placed in ]. 18:15, 22 June 2006 (UTC) * ] - Dispute over whether this article, ], about a "philosophical system", is the proper place for "Cult accusations", rather than ], and whether this article ought to be placed in ]. 18:15, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Revision as of 04:10, 24 June 2006

Shortcut
  • ]

Template:RFCheader

  • Talk:Criticism of Islam Article essentially a reservoir for negative opinion regarding Islam, with no room for positive views (save in response to criticisms). As such, the article title makes the article effectively POV-biased. I'm suggesting a rename to "Divergent Views On Islam" or something similar where contrasting views can be included. 04:10, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:Astrology - Deadlock over various issues which have been listed. Main disputes are over violations of WP:POINT, WP:V, undue weightage to minority views, failing to realise that astrology is a pseudoscience, etc 14:12, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:Objectivism (Ayn Rand)#Request for Comment: Cult accusations - Dispute over whether this article, Objectivism (Ayn Rand), about a "philosophical system", is the proper place for "Cult accusations", rather than Objectivist movement, and whether this article ought to be placed in Category:Cults. 18:15, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:Rotary_International Probable pro-Rotarian fiddling around this article. We introduced criticisms due to anti-women segregation fight, had to insist to introduce second "gender-free" RI 2004 motto who terminates that fight, support of conservative politicians only, use of Internet by Rotary International, honorary membership given to politicians close to racists movements (Woodrow Wilson or Harry Truman) or extreme-right coup (Augusto Pinochet), honorary membership given to people having antisemistic positions (Charles Lindbergh), problem of use of "paid studies" program to renew membership. All langages pages in all wiki langages were about the same (template still active in Indonesian wiki for Rotary international) before our actions and without any negative points. All negative aspects, and only negative aspect, including Supreme court judgment forcing RI to allow women are ACTUALLY smoothed, faded or grayed, some repeted blankings are presented as minor edits. These smoothings were done by Rotarian user (CeeGee) or probable pro-Rotarians wikipedians who edit ONLY negative parts. The structure of criticism is even changed (a criticism against anti-women rotarian segregation as members becomes a "female membership" sub-paragraph with a smoothed content). We need help to review structure, find facts, allow a consensus to facilitate opinions and critics. We will put in the coming hours an official claim for Arbitration for wikipedia fiddling against Rotary International. Please note that is was recently done against Dianne Feinstein, the only actual Democrat Senator who is Honorary Rotarian. This is put here as the activity of Rotary (is a service club but) claim ethics (, and plays a role as a supporter of conservative politicians). Salutations from Belgium and ... France (sorry :-) PierreLarcin2 19:45, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:Charles Webster Leadbeater - dispute about use of non-reputable sources in section accusing subject of pederasty. 16:35, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Gana Dispute about the meaning of the Hindu term in a religious and political context. 09:20, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
  • talk:Sermon of the roar of a camel We're not sure about what to do with a partial copy vio. Can someone who understands this come have a look? 23:39, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
  • talk:Islam dispute over whether a summary style section from the lead section from Islamic extremist terrorism should be added. 10:56, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
  • talk:list of groups referred to as cults dispute about WP:V. Is it okay to use a non-reputable source citing a reputable source as the basis for inclusion of Sathya Sai Baba? 21:12, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
    Also is it allowable to not even USE sources when including Objectivism? 14:49, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn - same issue as next item. 22:09, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:The Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn, Inc. - a single editor with socks keeps attempting to remove cited information and replace it with offtopic uncited original research. Four editors are nearly unanimous in rejecting it. 23:58, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Christmastime greetings—a brand new article I have created as a merge of former articles Merry Christmas, Happy Holidays, Season's Greetings. Would like comments20:48, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:Guru#Removal_of_critical_websites dispute between two editors regarding the inclusion or exclusion of one website (Sarlo's Guru Rating Service) in the external link section. 07:26, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:Rick Ross (consultant): Dispute over amount of criticism in article and whether a NPOV tag should be added to the article. 09:49, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Dispute about the use of the article talk pages of talk:Sikhism where the controversy is described and other article talk pages. Contributor nr. 1 has archived what he sees as inappropriate off-topic announcements made by contributor 2 purportedly to recruit other contributors sympathetic his POV on the article talk:guru. Contributor 2 opposes this archiving and says that it is fine to make announcements on article talk pages. Other talk pages involved are Talk:International_Society_for_Krishna_Consciousness, and Talk:Sikh_Gurus 15:05, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:Muhammad: Dispute re the age of Muhammad's wife Aisha is covered in the Aisha article; section in the Muhammad article pointed to that article to cover the controversy. Editors introducing language and references in the Muhammad article stating their position as fact. They have been asked to let the dispute stay in the Aisha article, where there is room for it; they insist that the other side of the dispute is original research, or supported by what they believe to be low-quality references, and that it can therefore be ignored. 09:17, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:Opus Dei: Debate over whether article is neutral and encyclopedic in tone, how much space should be devoted to supporters vs critics, and whether a NPOV dispute tag should be on the article page. 10:04, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:Patrick Henry College: Disagreement over whether or not media sources indicate a conflict over the Administration's narrow interpretation of the school's Biblical Worldview or a lack of academic freedom caused by the school's Biblical Worldview. 01:25, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:Roman Catholic Church/Name: An ongoing discussion (most of which can be found at Talk:Roman Catholic Church) of whether this article, and related articles, should be styled "Catholic Church" or "Roman Catholic Church." Part of the argument relates to whether or not the various articles dealing with the Church should be merged into one, and what it should be called. Underlying the discussion are the claims made by other Churches to be independent from Rome and yet remain Catholic. The involved editors have been invited to contribute arguments and proposals at Talk:Roman Catholic Church/Name (few have so far done so). A similar debate occurred earlier this year, and can be found archived at Talk:Roman Catholic Church/Archive3. Fishhead64 05:17, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:Aleister Crowley and Talk:Aleister Crowley (biography) - Is it ever acceptable on Misplaced Pages to fork a person's biographical details off as a separate article from their primary one? 01:36, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:God -- Dispute is over external links section. A link that is interactive in nature but concerning issues involved in the philosophy of conceptions of God is opposed on grounds that its format is interactive--not a point by point text. Its removed with the edit summary of, "Rm flippant, frivolous, unencyclopaedic links." I disagree, and find them apropos for the external links section. The 2 editors who oppose me generally oppose my POV on all other articles. I need more editors to comments so I can see what the consensus is on the dispute, and if these types of links are really not allowable in this format in the extrnal links section.06:43, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:Acharya S -- In discussing this author's two books, there is a debate over whether or how much of her critics' (positive and negative) opinion to discuss, include, or quote. 23:40, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:Islam_and_anti-Semitism -- There have been several issues on this page. The most recent are the removal of entire sections. The other debate is on: whether or not the quotes put in the section of "historic events of Muslim persecution", are indeed examples of "persecution" . 10:07, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:Wendy Doniger -- Pranathi has a proprietary interest in this page, which is largely devoted to airing a particular point of view regarding her scholarship. Balance could be achieved by adding more about other elements of her career. Pranathi had removed the POV tag, so I have replaced it. -17:26, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
I had merely replaced a POV tag with an 'Off balance' tag and explained myself on the talk page. I welcome adding other elements of her career. But User:Hornplease has responded to this RfC and proposes to severly trim criticism and will not respond to my specific valid objections. I believe he is not neutral and entered the debate with a marked POV. Would someone really neutral please step in? --Pranathi 22:04, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
Whoops, fascinating. Had no idea I was mentioned here. Yes, somebody else neutral please step in, I can't do this all alone. One of the worst cases of article ownership I've seen, going back months and months. Hornplease 06:41, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:Traditionalist Catholic -- An editor has proposed a wholesale renaming of the references to traditionalist Catholics to traditional Catholics, on the grounds that a numerical majority of traditionalists appear to refer to themselves as traditional rather than traditionalist. This is contentious because those who accept Vatican II (i.e. the great majority of all Roman Catholics worldwide) may also justly themselves as following the Catholic tradition, and therefore being traditional Catholics. Although there are numerous "breaks with tradition" in the history of the Church, Vatican II does seem to be one of the more contentious. There is no one defined group of "traditionalist Catholics", it is (as usual with resistance to change in large and well-established churches) a disparate group of loosely associated fellow-travellers, of which the most notable group is probably the Society of St. Pius X. Which just about exhausts my knoweledge of the topic, as an Anglican and former Methodist :-) It's a bit of a teapot tempest, but there are strong feelings very much in evidence and I believe that wider input will serve to calm tempers and come to an appropriate resolution. Just zis Guy you know? 19:04, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:Passover -- Dispute over whether a section called Passover in the Christian tradition (now moved by an editor to a new article) should remain in this article. Fishhead64 05:48, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:Rapture -- A dispute over whether a section called "God's 40 Day Warning of the Rapture" should be included in article. 20:01, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:Prem_Rawat -- Dispute as to whether a small group of Prem Rawat's critics are a significant enough group to warrant mentioning. Article would benefit from genuinely neutral comment especially with regard to clarification of Wiki policy on this.23:51, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:Passover (Christian holiday). There's a problem between ASmolderingWiki and me on one side and Csernica aka TCC on the second side. In my view no one can insert NPOV template without real effort to find a compromise. TCC refused to improve the article. 11:58, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
  • talk:Gurunath. AfD on this issue has been met with complete apathy except from two editors at odds with each other. It would be good to get other people's opinions here. Thanks. 03:12, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:Jehovah's Witnesses controversy. A revert war is occurring between two versions of the article. The main issue seems to revolve around the section "Common Critical Blood Questions" and whether or not it should be included. 00:18, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:Islamism. The discussion is currently centered around proporly defining Islamism without including adherents of Islam and demonizing their scripture. A new introduction has been proposed. 19:41, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:Roman_Catholic_Church#Temporary_solution:__Catholic_Church_disambiguation_page. Part of the ongoing discussion of what to do with the article Catholic Church - in this case, a proposal to remove it as a redirect to Roman Catholic Church and keep it temporarily as a disambiguation page until consensus is reached on rewriting the article with merged material from Catholicism, Catholic, and One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. 01:27, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:Martyrdom of Guru Tegh Bahadar. Like other articles by the same editor, it is full of such statements as "fundamentalists thrust Islam by hook or by crook... by sexual harassment and forcible abductions of the daughters of Hindus and other satanic misdeeds". Please comment. 14:41, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:Muhammad Recently, there has been quite a dispute over whether the point-of-view by some that Muhammad is the founder of Islam should be included and, if so, how. 02:42, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:Pope Stephen A long argument about the oportunity to rename Pope Stephen III into Pope Stephen II and so on until Pope Stephen X into Pope Stephen IX (and to keep Pope Stephen X as a redirect to Pope Stephen IX). Švitrigaila 07:59, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:Jesus Issues remain, possibly requiring input from impartial (non agenda!) linguists, regarding what is known about etymology of the Hebrew and Aramaic forms, etc. in the "Name" section of the article. 19:45, 27 March 2006 (UTC); updated 19:05, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:Jesus-Myth and Talk:Historicity of Jesus There are disputes on how minority issues dealing with the non existence of Jesus as a real historical figure should be represented and the levels of competence required to be classed a scholar. 18:25, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:Early Christianity and Talk:Christianity The details of history of the very early church are in dispute. 18:25, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:Father David Bauer Should "Father" be in the article title? 23:59, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:Roman Catholic Church#REQUESTED MOVE to Catholic Church Based on naming conventions, what is the appropriate article title? 01:17, 24 March 2006 (UTC) VOTING CLOSED.
  • Talk:Prem_Rawat#Finally.2C_definitive_proof_of_the_accuracy_of_the_Mishler_Interview_transcript Dispute about whether or not an endorsement by a radio station director renders a radio broadcast transcript as 'official' enough not to require that it be posted in articles as an 'unofficial transcript'.05:02, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:Gotama — dispute about Gotama's dates (and a related dispute about sources and reference). 21:43, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:Prem_Rawat#Anti-wikipedia_article_by_ex-premies Dispute about the inclusion of an external link. 17:45, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
Dispute is resolved, external link is now included. If there are revert wars these can be addressed. ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 21:09, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
Categories:
Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Religion and philosophy: Difference between revisions Add topic