| Revision as of 01:20, 30 April 2009 editKeithbob (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers47,111 edits comment← Previous edit | Revision as of 19:15, 4 August 2009 edit undoFladrif (talk | contribs)6,136 edits →Editors aren't just editors: new sectionNext edit → | ||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
| Luke, it seems your name is mispelled in your signature, is that intentional? If not check your 'preferences'. Also when you comment on a discussion page it is traditional that each new comment is indented by putting one more colon that the previous comment. If you look at the page you'll see what I mean. Welcome to Wiki--] (]) 01:20, 30 April 2009 (UTC) | Luke, it seems your name is mispelled in your signature, is that intentional? If not check your 'preferences'. Also when you comment on a discussion page it is traditional that each new comment is indented by putting one more colon that the previous comment. If you look at the page you'll see what I mean. Welcome to Wiki--] (]) 01:20, 30 April 2009 (UTC) | ||
| == Editors aren't just editors == | |||
| especially when they're busy pushing the POV of their employers. We've got MUM employees, SIMS employees and others with direct finanical ties to the TM Org, busily editing the TM-related articles in between (and for all I know, during) bunny hopping sessions, repeating the same TM-Org talking points over and over and over again through 21 and counting archives in the TM article alone. These are not casual practitioners of TM. And anytime anyone who doesn't owe their livlihood to the Maharishi's vast financial empire tries to edit the article, including Administrators, they're the enemy, and pointing out that the editor is hopeless conflicted, and his or her arguments baseless is uncivil and a personal attack. Look, I've got no dog in this fight - I'm neither a devotee of, nor opponent of, TM or any other competing product/religion/ideology/whatever. (My own approach to self-improvement is "If you cant' fix it with duct tape or a martini, it isn't worth fixing.") I'm just trying to achieve a balanced, encyclopedic article.] (]) 19:15, 4 August 2009 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 19:15, 4 August 2009
Luke,I see that you are working on the Guna article. This is great, I just put a banner on there asking for help with references. I see that you have added something from Maharishi. That is OK but it appears that you have quoted directly from his book. This is not permitted on Wiki unless the person is being "quoted" and then quotation marks are used. Generally we paraphrase info from sources unless there is a specific reason to quote the author. You can check WP:CS for more details. thanks --Kbob (talk) 01:10, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
- I am finished with my edits to the Guna page. I did rearrange some of your edits by Feurstein. I hope that's alright. I will let you take care of the Maharishi quote which needs to be edited as mentioned above. --Kbob (talk) 21:05, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
Thanks Kbob, I rearranged the quite and will research further to insure it's all right, I am also working on some other quotes on this article. Thanks for the inputLuke Warmater101 (talk) 22:18, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
Did I say "quotes"? I meant to say "references" Luke Warmater101 (talk) 22:20, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
Luke, it seems your name is mispelled in your signature, is that intentional? If not check your 'preferences'. Also when you comment on a discussion page it is traditional that each new comment is indented by putting one more colon that the previous comment. If you look at the page you'll see what I mean. Welcome to Wiki--Kbob (talk) 01:20, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
Editors aren't just editors
especially when they're busy pushing the POV of their employers. We've got MUM employees, SIMS employees and others with direct finanical ties to the TM Org, busily editing the TM-related articles in between (and for all I know, during) bunny hopping sessions, repeating the same TM-Org talking points over and over and over again through 21 and counting archives in the TM article alone. These are not casual practitioners of TM. And anytime anyone who doesn't owe their livlihood to the Maharishi's vast financial empire tries to edit the article, including Administrators, they're the enemy, and pointing out that the editor is hopeless conflicted, and his or her arguments baseless is uncivil and a personal attack. Look, I've got no dog in this fight - I'm neither a devotee of, nor opponent of, TM or any other competing product/religion/ideology/whatever. (My own approach to self-improvement is "If you cant' fix it with duct tape or a martini, it isn't worth fixing.") I'm just trying to achieve a balanced, encyclopedic article.Fladrif (talk) 19:15, 4 August 2009 (UTC)