Talk:Alice Bailey: Difference between revisions
imported>James Davis No edit summary |
imported>James Davis No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Note: I was the primary author of the Alice Bailey article on Wikipedia. When I left, I brought the best portions of it here (or rather what the article use to be before non-experts ravaged it). I've done major revisions, reworking, and condensing on the Citizendium version so that the material reflects Baily's main themes together with that of her more reputable critics. When I last looked, the Wikipedia version was being turned into an article on race and politics, which are significant but relatively minor threads in Alice Bailey's writings. [[User:James Davis|James Davis]] 13:56, 12 October 2007 (CDT) | Note: I was the primary author of the Alice Bailey article on Wikipedia. When I left, I brought the best portions of it here (or rather what the article use to be before non-experts ravaged it). I've done major revisions, reworking, and condensing on the Citizendium version so that the material reflects Baily's main themes together with that of her more reputable critics. When I last looked, the Wikipedia version was being turned into an article on race and politics, which are significant but relatively minor threads in Alice Bailey's writings. [[User:James Davis|James Davis]] 13:56, 12 October 2007 (CDT) | ||
Just FYI--my observation is that articles which contain more quotes than substance, or significant quote amounts often come under scrutiny. I'm pretty sure that's what happened to the article on Mien Kampf (it's redlinked now.) --[[User:Robert W King|Robert W King]] 18:34, 11 October 2007 (CDT) | Just FYI--my observation is that articles which contain more quotes than substance, or significant quote amounts often come under scrutiny. I'm pretty sure that's what happened to the article on Mien Kampf (it's redlinked now.) --[[User:Robert W King|Robert W King]] 18:34, 11 October 2007 (CDT) | ||
Robert, thanks for your observation. I've followed your implicit suggestion and radically reduced the number of quotations and made the whole article much tighter. [[User:James Davis|James Davis]] 10:51, 12 October 2007 (CDT) | Robert, thanks for your observation. I've followed your implicit suggestion and radically reduced the number of quotations and made the whole article much tighter. [[User:James Davis|James Davis]] 10:51, 12 October 2007 (CDT) | ||
Revision as of 12:57, 12 October 2007
Note: I was the primary author of the Alice Bailey article on Wikipedia. When I left, I brought the best portions of it here (or rather what the article use to be before non-experts ravaged it). I've done major revisions, reworking, and condensing on the Citizendium version so that the material reflects Baily's main themes together with that of her more reputable critics. When I last looked, the Wikipedia version was being turned into an article on race and politics, which are significant but relatively minor threads in Alice Bailey's writings. James Davis 13:56, 12 October 2007 (CDT)
Just FYI--my observation is that articles which contain more quotes than substance, or significant quote amounts often come under scrutiny. I'm pretty sure that's what happened to the article on Mien Kampf (it's redlinked now.) --Robert W King 18:34, 11 October 2007 (CDT)
Robert, thanks for your observation. I've followed your implicit suggestion and radically reduced the number of quotations and made the whole article much tighter. James Davis 10:51, 12 October 2007 (CDT)