139:
566:
hypothetically, a course that someone is teaching could be cancelled for any number of valid reasons and the individual could self-publish their own total fabrication of why as a form of retaliation against being effectively fired; and
Knowledge doesn't get in the middle of such situations; it avoids that possibility by requiring that an independent third source publish the info or reference first, after which it's basically acceptable for inclusion in an article. —
188:
167:
77:
53:
198:
22:
525:, Bube was formerly an editor, the vice-president, the president, a member of the executive council, a fellow, and now a fellow emeritus of this non-scholarly, religious organization. Given these facts, I can't see any way that this reference could be considered anything other than self-publication and therefore unacceptable in a Knowledge article under
87:
501:
I removed the reference because, as indicated in the edit summary, I was going to re-word the sentence to tie in the reference in which Prof. Bube publishes his own "factual case history of what happened". I figured that, although it was his own story of what happened, if properly framed in a
565:
Perhaps if this article is referenced elsewhere (approvingly as to its accuracy of facts), in some truly third-party publication, it can be re-added; but other than under such a circumstance, I just can't see it being acceptable. The problem is, and I'm not saying it's the case here, but
312:
Though, I do grant that you do show a lot of talent in copy-editing, I don't think that unsolicited, undiscussed copy-editing really adds all that much to wikipedia. At least nothing to get upset about if another editor has a different view.
334:
is very clear: "You should not add a descriptive title to an embedded HTML link within an article. … However, you should add a descriptive title when an external link is offered in the
References, Further reading, or External links section."
518:, given it was published by a third-party it would still be acceptable; but, while reviewing the publication and trying to better identify the site's credibility, I eventually discovered, as a later review of the article revealed in the
390:
is fairly unclear in this matter. For example, external link sections are almost always separate from reference sections. Nothing in
Moslinks supports any sort of removal, simply a change in style. The better guidline is
633:
628:
433:"Moslinks supports removal" of link titles outside the those sections by stating that they should not be added to the article (body), but rather be restricted to these (appendix) sections.
148:
63:
353:: #4 "In the 'External links' section, try to avoid separate links to multiple pages in the same website; instead, try to find an appropriate linking page within the site."
638:
653:
254:
244:
658:
648:
512:; following the cancellation Bube eventually published his "factual case history of what happened" in the Journal of American Scientific Affiliation
643:
220:
105:
623:
109:
211:
172:
113:
104:, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Knowledge's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to
605:
286:
intrepretation of guidelines. I strongly disagree with it, especially the fact that you did it without any talk page discussion.
294:? Not to be disrespectful, but is this action supposed to be some sort of punishment for having made changes to the new layout?
100:
58:
33:
485:
374:
356:
Editing to comply with policy & guidelines does not require 'solicitation' (nor is that required in any case, per
392:
21:
418:
mean that "external link sections" aren't "separate from reference sections" -- it means 'the
References
571:
39:
601:
567:
400:
318:
303:
552:"Obtaining Approval for a Seminar on Science and Christianity in a Secular University: A Case Study"
509:
203:
219:
on
Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
437:
387:
350:
331:
138:
534:
276:
What's going on? I mean you don't seem to be acting in a friendly, civil way. For example:
92:
590:
530:
519:
396:
357:
314:
299:
551:
526:
361:
617:
339:"intrepretation" necessary. You can "disagree" all you like, that does not change it.
491:
404:
380:
322:
307:
451:
216:
76:
52:
481:
370:
193:
187:
166:
82:
589:
weak without this information in the introduction, let alone the categories.
410:
Your response demonstrates a lack of comprehension of the
English language.
346:(unlike your frequent and false accusations of anti-Christian bias) incivil.
197:
395:
and it doesn't support any sort of removal for style violations either. --
609:
575:
430:.' It simply omits the unnecessary repetition of the word "section".
112:. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the
585:
Okay, then what kind of scientist is Bube? This article seems
414:"the References, Further reading, or External links section."
15:
342:
Removal of non-compliant material is perfectly normal and is
634:
Unknown-importance biography (science and academia) articles
137:
292:
289:
280:
629:
Stub-Class biography (science and academia) articles
215:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
470:Please stop bothering me with concerns that have
497:Removal of self-published/first-person reference
474:in the guidelines, particularly when you do so
349:Instead of imputing "punishment", kindly read
8:
454:doesn't say anything about them. That means
161:
47:
19:
639:Science and academia work group articles
547:
545:
558:. Volume 41. December 1989. pp. 206-212
541:
163:
49:
7:
654:Low-importance Christianity articles
209:This article is within the scope of
98:This article is within the scope of
508:…until it was cancelled in 1988 by
149:the science and academia work group
38:It is of interest to the following
229:Knowledge:WikiProject Christianity
14:
659:WikiProject Christianity articles
462:the EL section (which is WP:EL's
232:Template:WikiProject Christianity
649:Stub-Class Christianity articles
196:
186:
165:
85:
75:
51:
20:
458:about whether they are allowed
249:This article has been rated as
122:Knowledge:WikiProject Biography
644:WikiProject Biography articles
125:Template:WikiProject Biography
1:
624:Stub-Class biography articles
223:and see a list of open tasks.
146:This article is supported by
576:01:23, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
492:09:34, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
443:states that link titles are
405:15:59, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
110:contribute to the discussion
675:
282:? This comment is merely
255:project's importance scale
521:Professional affiliations
271:
248:
181:
145:
70:
46:
610:22:17, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
478:after my original post.
393:Knowledge:External links
381:16:09, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
323:16:00, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
308:15:48, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
212:WikiProject Christianity
388:WP:MOSLINKS#Link titles
332:WP:MOSLINKS#Link titles
142:
28:This article is rated
235:Christianity articles
141:
101:WikiProject Biography
581:"American scientist"
426:, or External links
64:Science and Academia
510:Stanford University
472:no basis whatsoever
204:Christianity portal
456:absolutely nothing
447:in the EL section
422:, Further reading
143:
128:biography articles
34:content assessment
598:
594:
269:
268:
265:
264:
261:
260:
160:
159:
156:
155:
666:
596:
592:
559:
549:
516:
506:
490:
379:
272:What's going on?
237:
236:
233:
230:
227:
206:
201:
200:
190:
183:
182:
177:
169:
162:
130:
129:
126:
123:
120:
106:join the project
95:
93:Biography portal
90:
89:
88:
79:
72:
71:
66:
55:
48:
31:
25:
24:
16:
674:
673:
669:
668:
667:
665:
664:
663:
614:
613:
608:
583:
563:
562:
550:
543:
517:
514:
507:
504:
502:sentence like,
499:
488:
479:
377:
368:
274:
234:
231:
228:
225:
224:
202:
195:
175:
127:
124:
121:
118:
117:
91:
86:
84:
61:
32:on Knowledge's
29:
12:
11:
5:
672:
670:
662:
661:
656:
651:
646:
641:
636:
631:
626:
616:
615:
600:
582:
579:
561:
560:
540:
539:
537:#2 & #5).
533:(particularly
513:
503:
498:
495:
484:
468:
467:
434:
431:
409:
385:
373:
366:
365:
354:
347:
340:
327:
296:
295:
287:
273:
270:
267:
266:
263:
262:
259:
258:
251:Low-importance
247:
241:
240:
238:
221:the discussion
208:
207:
191:
179:
178:
176:Low‑importance
170:
158:
157:
154:
153:
144:
134:
133:
131:
97:
96:
80:
68:
67:
56:
44:
43:
37:
26:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
671:
660:
657:
655:
652:
650:
647:
645:
642:
640:
637:
635:
632:
630:
627:
625:
622:
621:
619:
612:
611:
607:
603:
599:
588:
580:
578:
577:
573:
569:
557:
553:
548:
546:
542:
538:
536:
532:
528:
524:
522:
511:
496:
494:
493:
489:
487:
483:
477:
473:
465:
461:
457:
453:
450:
446:
442:
439:
435:
432:
429:
425:
421:
417:
413:
412:
411:
407:
406:
402:
398:
394:
389:
383:
382:
378:
376:
372:
363:
359:
355:
352:
348:
345:
341:
338:
333:
330:
329:
328:
325:
324:
320:
316:
310:
309:
305:
301:
293:
290:
288:
285:
281:
279:
278:
277:
256:
252:
246:
243:
242:
239:
222:
218:
214:
213:
205:
199:
194:
192:
189:
185:
184:
180:
174:
171:
168:
164:
151:
150:
140:
136:
135:
132:
115:
114:documentation
111:
107:
103:
102:
94:
83:
81:
78:
74:
73:
69:
65:
60:
57:
54:
50:
45:
41:
35:
27:
23:
18:
17:
586:
584:
564:
555:
520:
500:
480:
476:three months
475:
471:
469:
463:
459:
455:
448:
444:
440:
427:
423:
419:
415:
408:
384:
369:
367:
343:
336:
326:
311:
297:
283:
275:
250:
226:Christianity
217:Christianity
210:
173:Christianity
147:
99:
40:WikiProjects
438:WP:MOSLINKS
351:WP:ELPOINTS
618:Categories
568:Who R you?
535:WP:SELFPUB
529:and given
441:explicitly
397:Firefly322
386:Actually,
315:Firefly322
300:Firefly322
30:Stub-class
587:extremely
466:concern).
449:of course
445:permitted
119:Biography
59:Biography
531:WP:NOTRS
416:DOES NOT
358:WP:OWNER
527:WP:NPOV
523:section
460:outside
428:section
424:section
420:section
362:WP:BOLD
253:on the
360:&
36:scale.
486:Stalk
482:Hrafn
452:WP:EL
375:Stalk
371:Hrafn
606:cont
602:talk
597:otto
593:arth
572:talk
556:JASA
464:sole
401:talk
319:talk
304:talk
284:your
108:and
436:As
344:not
245:Low
620::
574:)
554:.
544:^
403:)
364:).
337:NO
321:)
313:--
306:)
298:--
291:,
62::
604:•
595:B
591:D
570:(
515:”
505:“
399:(
317:(
302:(
257:.
152:.
116:.
42::
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
