Misplaced Pages

Talk:Christianity/to do: Difference between revisions

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.
< Talk:Christianity Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 17:01, 2 April 2012 editReelAngelGirl (talk | contribs)869 edits Undid revision 483981190 by 95.45.227.59 (talk)rvv← Previous edit Revision as of 02:25, 28 December 2012 edit undo173.168.140.188 (talk)No edit summaryNext edit →
Line 1: Line 1:
*add more references to assist with ] policy, as per request from ] on the talk page at ]. *add more references to assist with ] policy, as per request from ] on the talk page at ].

* Remove the Criticism section on this page and on the Islam page. In fact, on all wiki pages on religion there should not be anything that only acts as an outlet for people to attack it. On both this page and the Islam page the criticisms are baseless and quote weak sources. It is easy to find criticism from bias people and sources. If the section should exist then it should only reflect criticism of scholars within the religion. Though, this seems to be a whole series of web pages on its own. If you look at the answering Islam and answering Christianity websites they have a well documented and extensive set of arguments with points and counterpoints. Also for some of the criticisms there are already wiki pages for it, so why have random nonsense(my bias) listed here? ] (]) 02:25, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Revision as of 02:25, 28 December 2012

  • Remove the Criticism section on this page and on the Islam page. In fact, on all wiki pages on religion there should not be anything that only acts as an outlet for people to attack it. On both this page and the Islam page the criticisms are baseless and quote weak sources. It is easy to find criticism from bias people and sources. If the section should exist then it should only reflect criticism of scholars within the religion. Though, this seems to be a whole series of web pages on its own. If you look at the answering Islam and answering Christianity websites they have a well documented and extensive set of arguments with points and counterpoints. Also for some of the criticisms there are already wiki pages for it, so why have random nonsense(my bias) listed here? 173.168.140.188 (talk) 02:25, 28 December 2012 (UTC)