User talk:Green108: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
|||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
== Reference tags == |
|||
Hi, if you have to cite two different pages from the same book, you can either use different ref tags or use separate sections called Notes and References. |
|||
The example for first method could be: |
|||
<blockquote><pre><nowiki> |
|||
Lorem ipsum<ref>{{cite book |
|||
| title="MyBook" |
|||
| author=Mr. Writer |
|||
| ... |
|||
| pages=21 |
|||
}}</ref> |
|||
Foo blah foo blah<ref>{{cite book |
|||
| title="MyBook" |
|||
| author=Mr. Writer |
|||
| ... |
|||
| pages=46-49 |
|||
}}</ref> |
|||
==References== |
|||
{{reflist}} |
|||
</nowiki></pre></blockquote> |
|||
The second method will result in two sections: Notes section consisting of "{{tl|reflist}}", and the References section consisting of books cited multiple times: |
|||
<blockquote><pre><nowiki> |
|||
Lorem ipsum<ref>Mr. Writer. ''MyBook''. p. 21.</ref> |
|||
Foo blah foo blah<ref>Mr. Writer. ''MyBook''. p. 46-49.</ref> |
|||
==Notes== |
|||
{{reflist}} |
|||
==References== |
|||
* {{cite book |
|||
| title="MyBook" |
|||
| author=Mr. Writer |
|||
| ... |
|||
| pages=21 |
|||
}} |
|||
</nowiki></pre></blockquote> |
|||
[[User:Utcursch|utcursch]] | [[User talk:Utcursch|talk]] 04:25, 23 July 2007 (UTC) |
|||
[[WP:MOS]], both the styles are OK, but only one style should be consistently used throughout an article. |
|||
==The Bk article== |
|||
(Copied from my talk page.) |
|||
:Regarding "changing meanings" I have no point of view at all on this subject, and therefore no reason to want to change meanings. My only interest is that the subject is covered in a neutral and encyclopedic way. The phrase "entirely different from" is not neutral, nor is it encyclopedic. If unbiased references state that the practices are unrelated, then that is how they can neutrally be described -- unrelated. There are other similar examples. I am happy to continue putting time into this article if there is sufficient goodwill to ensure cooperation. I will try to understand the subject, and express it in an acceptable Wiki style, and other more knowledgeable editors can, in a friendly way, tell me if I got it right. At the moment I don't feel there is enough goodwill, but I would be happy to be proven wrong. [[User:Rumiton|Rumiton]] 10:06, 31 July 2007 (UTC) |
|||
== [[Brahma Kumaris World Spiritual University]] == |
|||
I should like you to note that it is considered [[WP:CIVIL|uncivil]] to dismiss another editor due to their organizational affiliations. Could you please keep a more civil tone on the talk page? Also, you choice of section heading could be considered to be intentionally disruptive, and your insistence on changing it back could be considered to be aggressive. These sorts of actions could easily lead to a block. Please try a more constructive and collaborative attitude. I will be toning down the section heading myself. I ask that you not revert it. [[User:IPSOS|IPSOS]] ([[User talk:IPSOS|talk]]) 12:23, 31 July 2007 (UTC) |
|||
== Blocked == |
|||
{| style="clear:both; border: dashed 2px #c00; border-width: 2px 0 2px 0; background: #ffc;" class="user-block"> |
|||
|- |
|||
| [[Image:Crystal Clear action button cancel.png|50px]]|| |
|||
'''You have been [[Wikipedia:Blocking policy|blocked]] from editing Wikipedia {{#if:{{{time|}}}|for a period of {{{time|}}}}} as a result of your {{#if:{{{page|}}}|disruptive edits to [[:{{{page}}}]]|disruptive edits}}.''' You are free to make constructive edits after the block has expired, but please note that [[Wikipedia:Vandalism|vandalism]] (including page blanking or addition of [[Wikipedia:Patent nonsense|random text]]), [[Wikipedia:Spam|spam]], deliberate misinformation, privacy violations, [[Wikipedia:No personal attacks|personal attacks]]; and repeated, blatant violations of our polices concerning [[Wikipedia:Neutral point of view|neutral point of view]] and [[Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons|biographies of living persons]] will not be tolerated. {{{sig|{{{1|}}}}}} |
|||
|} |
|||
==Black and White== |
|||
Hello Green108. You wrote:''Black is entirely different from white..........whats not neutral about that!?!'' |
|||
''"some people believe that black is a kind of white albeit an absence of white whilst others believe that white is a very light grey with aspect of blanckess about it!?!'' |
|||
''In this case , BK Raja Yoga and Patanjali's Raja Yoga are wholly and entirely unrelated..........its black and white and folks you be allowed to be aware of that.'' |
|||
''you see , the bks use the language of classical hinduism to attract others whilst claiming to be nothing to do with it'' |
|||
''in fact......the Bks believe that Hinduism is the mere worship of them and their leaders from last kalpa , if you have followed Maharaj Ji you will know about the kalpa cycles.........for the Bks it is 5,000 years only , there is only one , and all other religions follow them ... even though they only started in 1930s.'' |
|||
''to them , becaue of his fame, wealth and power , Maharaj Ji would be considered merely a new soul , come down from the soul world to start a new religion'' |
|||
Often it's a question of how things are expressed. Biased expressions stand out very clearly among articles that are better worded. "Unrelated" is more encyclopedic. |
|||
Your allegations about Bk may be entirely correct, but unless you can find a scholarly researcher willing to say so, Wiki cannot accept them. And even if it one day does, they must still be couched in encyclopedic language. |
|||
Your assumptions about Maharaji are incorrect. He speaks about living life with peace, dignity and awareness, and that is his whole deal. He never touches on religious dogma, and I personally would not be interested if he did. I assure you, I have never heard of a Kalpa. |
|||
The thing I am interested in here is Wikipedia. This is a way for "common wisdom" to spread, but that does not mean "common opinion." If someone wants to look into the Bk teachings, beyond the sketchy outline here, they should be free to. We shouldn't be trying to warn people about something, even if we have had a negative experience. There is always something of value in all directions a person might take, and that is what life is about, it seems to me. I don't mean to preach. Thank you for your understanding. [[User:Rumiton|Rumiton]] 11:08, 3 August 2007 (UTC) |
|||
== Vandalism == |
|||
{{{icon|[[Image:Information.svg|25px]] }}}Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia{{{{{subst|}}}#if:Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Religion and philosophy|, as you did to [[:Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Religion and philosophy]]}}. Your edits appear to be [[Wikipedia:Vandalism|vandalism]] and have been [[Help:Reverting|reverted]]. If you would like to experiment, please use the [[Wikipedia:Sandbox|sandbox]]. {{{{{subst|}}}#if:{{{2|}}}|{{{2}}}|Thank you.}}<!-- Template:uw-vandalism2 --> Please feel free to act in good faith and file your own Rfc, but this does not include rewriting other editors' posts as you did [http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Religion_and_philosophy&diff=prev&oldid=148594463 here]. --[[User:Reneeholle|Renee]] 13:29, 3 August 2007 (UTC) |
|||
==[[Wikipedia:Sock puppet|Sockpuppetry]] case== |
==[[Wikipedia:Sock puppet|Sockpuppetry]] case== |
||
{| align="left" |
{| align="left" |
||
Line 97: | Line 5: | ||
You have been accused of [[Wikipedia:Sock puppet|sockpuppetry]]. Please refer to [[{{highssp|1={{BASEPAGENAME}}}}]] for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with [[Wikipedia:Sock puppetry/Notes for the suspect|notes for the suspect]] before editing the evidence page.{{do not delete}} [[User:IPSOS|IPSOS]] ([[User talk:IPSOS|talk]]) 19:45, 3 August 2007 (UTC) |
You have been accused of [[Wikipedia:Sock puppet|sockpuppetry]]. Please refer to [[{{highssp|1={{BASEPAGENAME}}}}]] for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with [[Wikipedia:Sock puppetry/Notes for the suspect|notes for the suspect]] before editing the evidence page.{{do not delete}} [[User:IPSOS|IPSOS]] ([[User talk:IPSOS|talk]]) 19:45, 3 August 2007 (UTC) |
||
{{unblock|}} |
|||
{{unblock|I need to respond to an accusation of sockpuppetry, here [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Suspected_sock_puppets#User:Green108]. There is no evidence to connect me to any other individual. I would like to see what the previous judgements were made on. I edit mainly on one small area of speciality of which I have personal experience [[BKWSU]] and have done considerable research. If you look at my edits, the vast majority over the last year have been firstly supplying academics references and then secondly grunt work cleaning them up into template form. |
{{unblock|I need to respond to an accusation of sockpuppetry, here [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Suspected_sock_puppets#User:Green108]. There is no evidence to connect me to any other individual. I would like to see what the previous judgements were made on. I edit mainly on one small area of speciality of which I have personal experience [[BKWSU]] and have done considerable research. If you look at my edits, the vast majority over the last year have been firstly supplying academics references and then secondly grunt work cleaning them up into template form. |
Revision as of 12:11, 4 August 2007
Sockpuppetry case
You have been accused of sockpuppetry. Please refer to [[Template:Highssp]] for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with notes for the suspect before editing the evidence page.Template:Do not delete IPSOS (talk) 19:45, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
Green108 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Change
{{unblock}}
to {{unblock | reason=your reason here ~~~~}}
Notes:
- In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
- Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.
If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:
{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2= |3 = ~~~~}}
If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}}
with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.
{{unblock reviewed |1= |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}
If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here
with your rationale:
{{unblock reviewed |1= |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}
Green108 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Change
{{unblock}}
to {{unblock | reason=your reason here ~~~~}}
Notes:
- In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
- Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.
If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:
{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=original unblock reason |3 = ~~~~}}
If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}}
with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.
{{unblock reviewed |1=original unblock reason |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}
If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here
with your rationale:
{{unblock reviewed |1=original unblock reason |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}