| Revision as of 08:55, 13 July 2008 editAsdfg12345 (talk | contribs)Pending changes reviewers6,640 edits archiving talk for new section discussion← Previous edit | Revision as of 09:02, 13 July 2008 edit undoAsdfg12345 (talk | contribs)Pending changes reviewers6,640 editsNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 54: | Line 54: | ||
| (This message should only be placed on talk pages, please.)</noinclude>{{check talk}} | (This message should only be placed on talk pages, please.)</noinclude>{{check talk}} | ||
| |} | |} | ||
| ==Teachings section== | |||
| Mainly to Mr Naval. Let me know that you have read through both of the parts on offer and that you firmly think the original is better. Clearly the most important part of Falun Gong is its beliefs and teachings, so I think it's appropriate that this section be longer than other sections on the page. As for the duplication, I personally don't think that's an issue. You will notice that every section on this front page duplicates content from its daughter article, and the same for their daughters (for example the tiananmen square self immolation introduction on the persecution page is the lede of that main article--know what I mean?) I'm unaware of a wikipedia policy advising against this. It seems like a rational way to do it. The content and the subject is going to be the same. I don't mind how it goes in the end, but I'd submit two key points for consideration: | |||
| *The old teachings stuff on this page was a little unsophisticated and did not draw on any relevant literature on Falun Gong; it was simplistic and not well written. It failed to introduce the subject in an intelligent and intellectually coherent way. It didn't really give people a full idea of what Falun Gong teaches, or use quality sources to do so. | |||
| *The other section did; I don't think there's a problem to c&p a lede and other stuff as appropriate. Basically I think the altered and expanded version was much better--I think the scrutiny should be on why we ''shouldn't'' go with it? Just a few thoughts. Let's deliberate. --<font style="bold">]</font><font color="black" style="bold">]</font> 09:02, 13 July 2008 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 09:02, 13 July 2008
| Notice: Samuel Luo and his Category:Misplaced Pages sockpuppets of Samuel Luo and Tomananda are banned from editing this article indefinitely |
| The users specified have been banned by the Arbitration committee from editing this article. These users are also prevented from discussing or proposing changes on this talk page.
Posted by Srikeit 06:43, 9 May 2007 (UTC) for the Arbitration committee. See Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Falun Gong. |
 | Please stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. If consensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute. |
 | This topic contains controversial issues, some of which have reached a consensus for approach and neutrality, and some of which may be disputed. Before making any potentially controversial changes to the article, please carefully read the discussion-page dialogue to see if the issue has been raised before, and ensure that your edit meets all of Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines. Please also ensure you use an accurate and concise edit summary. |
 | This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
|
|
Archive note: Kindly consult the archived discussions should you wish to make any substantial changes or additions. It is likely that an issue of concern has already been discussed. As a result, a would-be poster can save the wikipedia community time spent on otherwise rehashing an issue already discussed.Template:Archive box collapsible
|
|
(This message should only be placed on talk pages, please.) | |
Teachings section
Mainly to Mr Naval. Let me know that you have read through both of the parts on offer and that you firmly think the original is better. Clearly the most important part of Falun Gong is its beliefs and teachings, so I think it's appropriate that this section be longer than other sections on the page. As for the duplication, I personally don't think that's an issue. You will notice that every section on this front page duplicates content from its daughter article, and the same for their daughters (for example the tiananmen square self immolation introduction on the persecution page is the lede of that main article--know what I mean?) I'm unaware of a wikipedia policy advising against this. It seems like a rational way to do it. The content and the subject is going to be the same. I don't mind how it goes in the end, but I'd submit two key points for consideration:
- The old teachings stuff on this page was a little unsophisticated and did not draw on any relevant literature on Falun Gong; it was simplistic and not well written. It failed to introduce the subject in an intelligent and intellectually coherent way. It didn't really give people a full idea of what Falun Gong teaches, or use quality sources to do so.
- The other section did; I don't think there's a problem to c&p a lede and other stuff as appropriate. Basically I think the altered and expanded version was much better--I think the scrutiny should be on why we shouldn't go with it? Just a few thoughts. Let's deliberate. --Asdfg12345 09:02, 13 July 2008 (UTC)