Talk:Spanish missions in California: Difference between revisions
→Use of "Father" as a priest-title is unacceptable in Wikipedia: Father correct in this case |
m Archiving 1 discussion(s) to Talk:Spanish missions in California/Archive 2) (bot |
||
Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
{{Old peer review|California mission|archive1}} |
{{Old peer review|California mission|archive1}} |
||
{{archives|search=yes|bot=MiszaBot I|age=90}} |
{{archives|search=yes|bot=MiszaBot I|age=90}} |
||
== Mdhennessey, you edit others! == |
|||
Mdhennessey, you've inserted your little paragraph on the ice age and the Beringian land bridge of 13,000 years ago into every single article about every individual Spanish mission in California; you've and responded to observations that it really doesn't relate to the articles with accusations of woeful ignorance (among other things). Yet I notice that you've gone through and unilaterally moved the question about its relevance from those discussion pages--deciding for everybody that the discussion should be moved to here. You seem to have a very high opinion of your own opinion--apparently regarding it as definitive. [[Special:Contributions/140.147.160.34|140.147.160.34]] ([[User talk:140.147.160.34|talk]]) 18:47, 21 March 2008 (UTC)Stephen Kosciesza |
|||
:He's been on a "mission", so to speak, starting in early March. Editing other peoples' comments is yet another rules violation. He's looking at a [[WP:ANI]] incident at some point, that could derail his little crusade. [[User:Baseball Bugs|Baseball Bugs]] <sup>''[[User talk:Baseball Bugs|What's up, Doc?]]''</sup> 18:52, 21 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::Where do you assert that I edited anyone else's comments? And moving the discussions to one central page, with the appropriate link, is within WP guidelines and makes far more sense than spreading them out over 2 dozen talk pages. As far as my opinion being "definitive" is concerned, all I have asked for is to have references provided that support removal of the material, and have instead been responded to with specious arguments, irrelevant analogies, and borderline uncivil remarks. I am the only regular contributor to this group of articles, so there is clearly nothing Machiavellian in my adding material to the group "en masse." If there is a systematic objective here it is the two of you who are perpetrating it. I can't believe that you can't find some constructive contributions to make. [[User:Mdhennessey|Mdhennessey]] ([[User talk:Mdhennessey|talk]]) 19:07, 21 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::I've reported to [[WP:ANI]] what I believe to be your rules violations, and we'll see if the others agree or not. [[User:Baseball Bugs|Baseball Bugs]] <sup>''[[User talk:Baseball Bugs|What's up, Doc?]]''</sup> 19:22, 21 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::::And no sooner had I put him on notice, he bugged out. [http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=199890664&oldid=199889515] I take this as license to revert his changes to these articles. [[User:Baseball Bugs|Baseball Bugs]] <sup>''[[User talk:Baseball Bugs|What's up, Doc?]]''</sup> 19:30, 21 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
Take it as whatever your opinion directs you to, though it is nothing more that an indication that I will not devote any more of my time responding to one unfounded argument after another. And so far as editing the various articles goes, "You own them now." [[User:Mdhennessey|Mdhennessey]] ([[User talk:Mdhennessey|talk]]) 19:36, 21 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:I don't own anything here, nor do you. I will refrain from actually reverting your paragraph until or if someone comments on the [[WP:ANI]] page. [[User:Baseball Bugs|Baseball Bugs]] <sup>''[[User talk:Baseball Bugs|What's up, Doc?]]''</sup> 19:44, 21 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::That issue is marked resolved. Another user already removed the paragraph from the San Francisco page. I'll see what I can do about doing likewise for the others. [[User:Baseball Bugs|Baseball Bugs]] <sup>''[[User talk:Baseball Bugs|What's up, Doc?]]''</sup> 19:10, 24 March 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== misleading name == |
== misleading name == |
Revision as of 00:18, 3 September 2015
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Spanish missions in California article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
Spanish missions in California received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article. |
|
||
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
misleading name
The name of this article is confusing as hell. If you are going to call it "Spanish missions in California" you should cover Alta and Baja. You have a "Spanish missions in Baja California". Or is there some f**ed up policy to use modern day place names? Then could you say "Spanish missions in Modern Day California" or "Spanish missions in California (US State)" or some thing? "Spanish missions in California" when I wanted to know about "Spanish missions in Baja California" damn confusing... should it be "Spanish missions in the Baja California Peninsula" or "Spanish missions in Baja California and Baja California Sur" because it covers both modern day states using the historical name so make this one say "Alta" or merge the two into one story please. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.107.125.117 (talk) 20:04, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
- I hardly think this article's title is "misleading", let alone "confusing as hell". But to address the issue of California missions v. Alta California missions, I have created a redirect so that anyone searching for Spanish missions in Alta California will be directed to this article. --anietor (talk) 02:18, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
California Statehood
In the "california statehood"-section, it says that the president was negotiating treaties with indians. But it doesn't say about what. Land? Property? Their acceptance of the white government? Does somebody know? --PaterMcFly talk contribs 19:29, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
Protect the page?
Maybe you should somehow protect the page against vandals:
http://www.chainsawsuit.com/20091202.shtml
91.156.150.117 (talk) 20:13, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Use of "Father" as a priest-title is unacceptable in Wikipedia
In Wikipedia, the names of priests should not be preceded by the title Father. Note this guideline concerning use of Father as a title:
Father
Use the Rev. in first reference before the names of Episcopal, Orthodox and Roman Catholic priests. On second reference use only the cleric’s last name. Use Father before a name only in direct quotations.
(Religious titles | Religion Stylebook -- http://religionstylebook.com/entries/category/religion-and-culture/titles) Mksword (talk) 19:29, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
Use of the term Father or Father-Presidentes in this case is historic. During the time of the Californa Missions existence Father was the proper term. Notice in the section itself individuals are references as The Rev.. I would argue that the first entry is actually wrong because here in California we are taught and we allways say Father Junípero Serra never Reverend Junípero Serra.
- All unassessed articles
- B-Class Architecture articles
- Mid-importance Architecture articles
- B-Class California articles
- Top-importance California articles
- WikiProject California articles
- B-Class Christianity articles
- Low-importance Christianity articles
- B-Class Catholicism articles
- Mid-importance Catholicism articles
- WikiProject Catholicism articles
- WikiProject Christianity articles
- B-Class Historic sites articles
- High-importance Historic sites articles
- WikiProject Historic sites articles
- Unassessed Spain articles
- Unknown-importance Spain articles
- All WikiProject Spain pages
- Old requests for peer review