The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Media, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Media on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MediaWikipedia:WikiProject MediaTemplate:WikiProject MediaMedia
This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBTQ-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.LGBTQ+ studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesLGBTQ+ studies
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Virginia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Virginia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.VirginiaWikipedia:WikiProject VirginiaTemplate:WikiProject VirginiaVirginia
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Conservatism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of conservatism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ConservatismWikipedia:WikiProject ConservatismTemplate:WikiProject ConservatismConservatism
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business
Latest comment: 1 year ago13 comments6 people in discussion
As much as I really don't lament the passing of (Redacted), WP's rules are there for a reason. I had to undo a move vandalization-- some passing admin might wanna consider breaking out the green lock, 's all I'm sayin'. Xterra113:21, 8 June 2023 (UTC)Reply
Fair enough; I hadn't checked the edit log before I made that comment. Plus, I'd just woke up. Heh, guess that's why I don't have the blockhammer! :-P -Xterra115:08, 8 June 2023 (UTC)Reply
Assuming that by "protections" you mean contentious material, BLP can (and should) still apply. We don't throw those kinds of protections out the window immediately upon someone's death. Generally, it's up to editorial consensus based on the situation and the material in question (WP:BDP). ButlerBlog (talk) 16:47, 8 June 2023 (UTC)Reply
Your comment itself is a BLP attack, Xterra1 and I've redacted it. Let's refrain from editorializing like this, please, as this encourages others to escalate it even further. Dennis Brown - 2¢22:05, 8 June 2023 (UTC)Reply
Was just stating my own opinion, so...whatever. Sorry for violating policy, I guess. Whatever the case, I wouldn't have taken my opinions to the article itself. Mainly saying "Hey, I share the negative opinion of the guy, but let's not vandalize the article to express it" on the talk page, like, y'know, you're *supposed to*. Xterra122:19, 8 June 2023 (UTC)Reply
That's why I didn't make a big deal of it, but yes. Just as I'm supposed to say something when someone expresses opinions like that ;) Dennis Brown - 2¢22:33, 8 June 2023 (UTC)Reply
When it comes to protection, the general rule is you try to just block the one editor if that is the problem. Typically by the third instance (the same person or not) we protect. Sometimes quicker if it is obvious that it is going to be (or is) a target for vandalism. That applies to more or less any kind of protection. Dennis Brown - 2¢15:51, 29 June 2023 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 1 year ago3 comments3 people in discussion
The following sentence (n.53) makes no sense: 'Robertson added that Jerusalem is a "spiritual symbol that must not be given away" because "Jesus Christ the Messiah will come down to the part of Jerusalem that the Arabs want," and this would be "not good."' As it stands, it alleges that PR is opposed to the Second Coming happening at Jerusalem. Can you Wikipeople write English? 145.224.21.211 (talk) 01:07, 27 July 2023 (UTC)Reply
I do not see anything particularly wrong with that sentence in the article. The text (quote and all) is taken almost exactly from the referenced source. There are not many ways to summarize what Robertson said. Any better phrasing would only come after finding a better source than what was used and one which had the full text of Robertson's remarks. Whether the text of the article "alleges that PR is opposed to the Second Coming happening at Jerusalem" (your statement) appears to be your conclusion, not necessarily that of Robertson, nor that of the WP article writer. The reader can determine for himself what Robertson might have meant by his remarks. --L.Smithfield (talk) 06:02, 27 July 2023 (UTC)Reply