| Revision as of 20:41, 15 February 2008 editCebactokpatop (talk | contribs)252 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 21:03, 15 February 2008 edit undoSeminarist (talk | contribs)347 edits →NPOV on John Zizioulas pageNext edit → | ||
| Line 28: | Line 28: | ||
| ] (]) 20:41, 15 February 2008 (UTC) | ] (]) 20:41, 15 February 2008 (UTC) | ||
| If you observe the chain of communication, I have always expressed my desire to work together for consensus. I would be very happy for you to provide ] descriptions of criticisms of Zizioulas. Previously you did not appear to be providing descriptions of criticisms, but to have been criticising him yourself. | |||
| Again, I hope you will provide ] descriptions of criticisms of Zizioulas. But please do not revert my contributions. Please see the talk page for the Zizioulas article. | |||
| I hope we can achieve consensus. | |||
| ] (]) 21:03, 15 February 2008 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 21:03, 15 February 2008
Image copyright problem with Image:MZizijulas.jpg
Thank you for uploading Image:MZizijulas.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Misplaced Pages takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.
If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 23:57, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
NPOV on John Zizioulas page
Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Misplaced Pages articles, as you did to John Zizioulas. Doing so violates Misplaced Pages's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you.
That is not my peronal analysis, but overview of the analysis of the other people. Besides, addition od the section "Traditional ..." makes the whole article neutral. Before that, it was strictly in favor of the work of that man. Cebactokpatop (talk) 13:25, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
Please make sure that your edits conform to BLP. My revision was intended simply to report the content of Zizioulas' views; I did not add anything arguing for or against them. To say that Zizioulas' views are not 'traditional' displays a POV and so fails to meet Misplaced Pages NPOV standards.
I hope we can work together to produce a full and balanced article on John Zizioulas.
Seminarist (talk) 18:49, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
Oh... now you are willing to cooperate. Great. Reporting on his work is one thing. Preventing the public to know that there are people who do disagree with his work is vandalism. Letting the people to know that there are those who disagree with him is not violation of the NPOV, but the freedom of speech.
Cebactokpatop (talk) 20:41, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
If you observe the chain of communication, I have always expressed my desire to work together for consensus. I would be very happy for you to provide NPOV descriptions of criticisms of Zizioulas. Previously you did not appear to be providing descriptions of criticisms, but to have been criticising him yourself.
Again, I hope you will provide NPOV descriptions of criticisms of Zizioulas. But please do not revert my contributions. Please see the talk page for the Zizioulas article.
I hope we can achieve consensus.