User talk:AlvisFreeman: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 07:26, 25 March 2008

Help

{{helpme}} I want to start getting more involved in the wiki-community and I have a question about editing articles. The page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus claims the years in which Jesus was born and died and provides sources. I'm confused though. There is another article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus#Jesus_as_myth on the page which shows sources to say he was a myth. How do we decide which sources to choose from and how did we come about deciding to put Jesus as a real figure? And how do I challenge it, how do I challenge someones sources or how do I change the article so it claims Jesus as a myth by showing evidence/sources?

The thing here is reliable sources. However, the Jesus article provides a date range, not a specific year, which is backed up by a reliable source. Did you mean Jesus was a myth? It would be pretty hard to back that up, because there's lots of out-of-the-bible sources to confirm that he did exist. You can challemge someone's sources via the talk page, or providing a more scholarly source, but be careful. You can add it to the legacy section, but it would need to be backed up by at least two reliable and scholarly sources. I'm not a great contributor to religious articles, but for me it sounds like calling Alexander the Great a myth, because there's so much evidence to the contrary. Does this help? Drop me a line if you need more. Best, PeterSymonds | talk 08:19, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:ASJump.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:ASJump.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 07:05, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings, Fellow Apollo Sunshine Fan

Great work on the article, it's really been improved by your contributions. I'm not 100% sure the NYT quote ought to be in there as it's a bit of a POV element, even if it's sourced. You might consider including it as an external link on the bottom. I'm going to look over the Wiki guidelines on POV material and reviews and see if there's anything specific to that. Other than that, excellent work improving the article. They're a great band and deserve a good look on here! Ginsengbomb 15:24, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I looked at some other band pages and noticed a number of them featuring articles "describing their sound." So I made some slight formatting revisions to your NYT quote to bring it in line. Do you by any chance have a link to the review you're referencing? It'd be good to cite it. Ginsengbomb 15:15, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jesus

Hi Alvis. The thing is the reliability of sources. For example, if the article "Jesus was a myth" appeared in The Sun, it wouldn't be considered reliable. However, if it appeared in a scholarly book by a well-regarded scholar, it would be considered more reliable. The reason I ask you to be careful is the controversial nature of the subject. Jesus, obviously the focal point of some religions, is considered to have definately existed in a biographical sense. (the debate about whether he really was the son of God is being put to one side). This is backed up by numerous scholarly sources which are not only in the Bible. Therefore, if you put in something like "It is considered by some that Jesus was a myth and never existed at all", I guarantee that it'll be removed within minutes, if not seconds. The claim must be backed up by a citation: who wrote it, the date, the publisher, and the date you accessed the information (if it was on the internet).

Challenging someone's sources is fine. If you don't think a source is reliable, then you can say so on the Jesus talk page. It'll be answered very quickly, so just say why you think a certain source is inaccurate or unreliable.

The legacy section is number 5 on the contents list. It's there to talk about how Jesus's teachings and so-on are relevant today, so it might not be the best place to put it. If you find enough information, from enough reliable sources, you can add a section to the article and put it in there. It would be best if you write what you plan to put in, and who is supplying the information, on my talk page before you put it in the aricle, so I can help with anything. Hope this helps. Best, PeterSymonds | talk 07:26, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 19: / Line 19: @@
 I looked at some other band pages and noticed a number of them featuring articles "describing their sound."  So I made some slight formatting revisions to your NYT quote to bring it in line.  Do you by any chance have a link to the review you're referencing?  It'd be good to cite it. [[User:Ginsengbomb|Ginsengbomb]] 15:15, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
+== Jesus ==
+Hi Alvis.
+The thing is the reliability of sources. For example, if the article "Jesus was a myth" appeared in [[Sun (newspaper|The Sun]], it wouldn't be considered reliable. However, if it appeared in a scholarly book by a well-regarded scholar, it would be considered more reliable. The reason I ask you to be careful is the controversial nature of the subject. Jesus, obviously the focal point of some religions, is considered to have definately existed in a biographical sense. (the debate about whether he really was the son of God is being put to one side). This is backed up by numerous scholarly sources which are not only in the Bible. Therefore, if you put in something like "It is considered by some that Jesus was a myth and never existed at all", I guarantee that it'll be removed within minutes, if not seconds. The claim ''must'' be backed up by a citation: who wrote it, the date, the publisher, and the date you accessed the information (if it was on the internet).
+Challenging someone's sources is fine. If you don't think a source is reliable, then you can say so on the Jesus talk page. It'll be answered very quickly, so just say why you think a certain source is inaccurate or unreliable.
+The legacy section is number 5 on the contents list. It's there to talk about how Jesus's teachings and so-on are relevant today, so it might not be the best place to put it. If you find enough information, from enough reliable sources, you can add a section to the article and put it in there. It would be best if you write what you plan to put in, and who is supplying the information, on my talk page before you put it in the aricle, so I can help with anything. Hope this helps. Best, [[User:PeterSymonds|PeterSymonds]] | [[User talk:PeterSymonds|<small>talk</small>]] 07:26, 25 March 2008 (UTC)