We are creating the world's most trusted encyclopedia and knowledge base.
Once you join us and log in, you'll be able to edit this page instantly!

Talk:Jewish views of Jesus

From Citizendium, the Citizens' Compendium

Jump to: navigation, search

Image:Statusbar1.png
Main Article
Talk
Definition [?]
Related Articles  [?]
Bibliography  [?]
External Links  [?]
 
To learn how to fill out this checklist, please see CZ:The Article Checklist. To update this checklist edit the metadata template.
Move Cluster

Checklist and Archives
 Definition:  Please add a brief definition or description.
 Workgroup category:  Religion Workgroup [Categories OK]
 Article status:  Developed article (complete or nearly so)
 English language variant:  Not specified  Underlinked article?:  Yes
 Talk Archive:  none (to start Archive 1)
To do.

Please write a brief definition or description of this article at Jewish views of Jesus/Definition


  • A language variant needs to be assigned.
Metadata here


removed template

I removed the template giving credit to wikipedia and ensured the radio button title "from wikipedia" was checked, however, there is nothing in the article citing wikipedia. I do notice in the history there is a W rahter than an N. Is that all I should see, or is the option not full functional? Chris Day (Talk) 20:07, 5 February 2007 (CST)

I have set the Wikipedia flag. You have to accompany it with an edit. (I usually add a carriage return somewhere that doesn't matter.) Petréa Mitchell 13:12, 1 April 2007 (CDT)

Thanks, at the time I made the comment there was a bug that messed it up. It has been fixed now but I didn;'t come back here to sort it out. Chris Day (Talk) 14:11, 1 April 2007 (CDT)

No long quotes, please

The reasons we should have a policy against many and long quotes are (1) this prevents collaboration on the substance of the quote (quotes are uneditable); (2) it is inherently biased to have an extended quote that speaks for CZ, since in that case CZ is made to endorse that source's idiosyncratic views; and (3) it is inherently not uniformly generalizable. Probably, (3) is most important and most generally applicable. If we have a long quotation that supports one point, why should we not have long quotations that support every point? There is a vast universe of books and other potentially supporting verbiage. We can find long quotations for everything, folks. Unless there is some particularly good reason to use a quotation beyond one sentence, don't do it; summarize.

The exceptions will, perhaps, be in cases where texts themselves are the primary subject of an article. As someone who has written quite a bit about history of philosophy, though, I can tell you that even in this case, extended quotations are used sparingly and only with excellent justification.

--Larry Sanger 12:12, 6 February 2007 (CST)

Views
Personal tools