Talk:Samuele Bacchiocchi: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 03:55, 13 November 2011

Biography Start‑class

	Biography portal 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 articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

Seventh-day Adventist Church Start‑class High‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Seventh-day Adventist Church, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Seventh-day Adventist Church 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.Seventh-day Adventist ChurchWikipedia:WikiProject Seventh-day Adventist ChurchTemplate:WikiProject Seventh-day Adventist ChurchSeventh-day Adventist Church articles

Start

This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Hoch

This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

To-do list:
edit history watch purge Expand "Glacier View Controversy" section, to include more background, history, theological issues, and details of the Glacier View meeting itself Add to "Adventist Responses to Criticisms" section, ideally with material from Adventist scholars etc.

Conspiracy theory

I tagged the conspiracy theory as non-neutral because it seems to be a biased account of events written by someone with a vested interest. Is it important enough to show up in any independent reliable sources? If no, I suggest it be removed altogether. --Flex (talk/contribs) 14:39, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The non-neutral is unwarrented due to the nature and subjectivity of conspiracy theories themselves. I do not have a vested interest. I wish to present other conspiracy theories that have been well documented other than the one given. [[User:hop_goblin (talk/13:10, 11 September 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hop goblin (talk • contribs)

Wikipedia does not judge the truth-value of conspiracy theories or any other point. Rather, it merely outlines the different arguments and those who represent them, on a disputed point (WP:NPOV). Thus it outlines who makes the argument, with the length of treatment given corresponding to the significant of the perspective. If a perspective is very small (within the context of a particular article) then it should not be mentioned at all, by due weight. Colin MacLaurin (talk) 02:48, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I do think the minority POV suspicious of Bacchiocchi is maybe worth including, but only very briefly per due weight. Hence I have shortened it considerably. I kept the Alberto Rivera reference, as he is the most prominent source apparently – he is notable enough to have his own Wikipedia article. However he is a very questionable source. I justify the inclusion only on the basis that a small but visible segment actually believe this. Colin MacLaurin (talk) 07:23, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What Colin MacLaurin did seems fine to me; it puts the source in its likely proper perspective. By the way, is there any way we could find a photo of Mr. Bacchiocchi? Kansan (talk) 03:55, 13 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 13: / Line 13: @@
 :Wikipedia does not judge the truth-value of conspiracy theories or any other point. Rather, it merely outlines the different arguments and those who represent them, on a disputed point ([[WP:NPOV]]). Thus it outlines ''who'' makes the argument, with the length of treatment given corresponding to the significant of the perspective. If a perspective is very small (within the context of a particular article) then it should not be mentioned at all, by [[WP:DUE|due weight]]. [[User:Colin MacLaurin|Colin MacLaurin]] ([[User talk:Colin MacLaurin|talk]]) 02:48, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
 ::I do think the minority POV suspicious of Bacchiocchi is ''maybe'' worth including, but only very briefly per due weight. Hence I have shortened it considerably. I kept the [[Alberto Rivera]] reference, as he is the most prominent source apparently – he is notable enough to have his own Wikipedia article. However he is a very questionable source. I justify the inclusion only on the basis that a small but visible segment actually believe this. [[User:Colin MacLaurin|Colin MacLaurin]] ([[User talk:Colin MacLaurin|talk]]) 07:23, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
-:::What Colin MacLaurin did seems fine to me; it puts the source in its likely proper perspective. By the way, is there any way we could find a photo of Mr. Bacchiocchi? ~
+:::What Colin MacLaurin did seems fine to me; it puts the source in its likely proper perspective. By the way, is there any way we could find a photo of Mr. Bacchiocchi? [[User:Kansan|Kansan]] ([[User talk:Kansan|talk]]) 03:55, 13 November 2011 (UTC)