This is an old revision of this page, as edited by RobertMfromLI (talk | contribs) at 15:37, 19 October 2011 (→I have collapsed and archived the discussion on Talk:Muhammad#Question_good_article_status.3B_view_overall_article_as_apparently_biased: Incorrect). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 15:37, 19 October 2011 by RobertMfromLI (talk | contribs) (→I have collapsed and archived the discussion on Talk:Muhammad#Question_good_article_status.3B_view_overall_article_as_apparently_biased: Incorrect)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)I have collapsed and archived the discussion on Talk:Muhammad#Question_good_article_status.3B_view_overall_article_as_apparently_biased
Please keep in mind, this does not in any way preclude you or prevent you from raising points on how to fix the issues you perceive with the article, but:
- Article talk pages are for discussing improvements to (or issues with) the content of the article - that includes indicating which sections and how you perceive they can be improved (with relevant suggestions).
- Article talk pages are not for discussing changing policies, including policies related to article talk pages. You may wish to visit the Village Pump or elsewhere to discuss that.
- Continued off-topic and irrelevant discussions are not permitted on article talk pages.
- Disruption of article talk pages and articles is against policies and guidelines - such discussions will continue to be closed.
With that said, you may, if you are willing to, start a new section on the biases you perceive, if you are now ready to discuss specifically where you perceive such biases to be and how they can be fixed. This is assuming such issues are not related to changing policies to push your point of view, in which case, again, Village Pump or similar would be the proper venue - and not the article's talk page. Best, ROBERTMFROMLI | /CN 15:26, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
- well I notice your post on user:Qwyrxian talk page asking if it was to his satifaction it's obvious who you side with
- As I responded on my talk page:
- Incorrect. Though it may not have been clear to you, I know it was to Qwyrxian. I was discussing the method I used - not whether Q was happy with me doing it. I closed it because *I* deemed it unproductive and disruptive. My message on your talk page should have indicated that very clearly, as well as my closing message on the article talk page. ROBERTMFROMLI | /CN 15:35, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
- Feel free to keep the conversation in one place. I can answer you here or there - no need to double post. Also, please remember to sign your posts by putting ~~~~ at the end of them. Best, ROBERTMFROMLI | /CN 15:37, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
This is the discussion page for an IP user, identified by the user's IP address. Many IP addresses change periodically, and are often shared by several users. If you are an IP user, you may create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other IP users. Registering also hides your IP address. |