Talk:Audianism

Christianity Low‑importance

	Christianity portal 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 articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

POV tag

This concerns POV tag cleanup. Whenever an POV tag is placed, it is necessary to also post a message in the discussion section stating clearly why it is thought the article does not comply with POV guidelines, and suggestions for how to improve it. This permits discussion and consensus among editors. From WP tag policy: Drive-by tagging is strongly discouraged. The editor who adds the tag must address the issues on the talk page, pointing to specific issues that are actionable within the content policies, namely Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, Wikipedia:Verifiability, Wikipedia:No original research and Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons. Simply being of the opinion that a page is not neutral is not sufficient to justify the addition of the tag. Tags should be added as a last resort. Better yet, edit the topic yourself with the improvements. This statement is not a judgement of content, it is only a cleanup of frivolously and/or arbitrarily placed tags. No discussion, no tag.Jjdon (talk) 00:06, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The sentence: Anthropomorphism was also a charge^{[neutrality is disputed]} made against other early Christian writers such as contained a POV-tag. I deleted it. "They were accused" is just the same as being charged. Fading it to "It was said that" adds nothing. That they were charged does not mean that they were guilty as charged. —Mendelo (talk) 19:08, 16 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Non-neutral point of view

I think it's deeply problematic for Wikipedia to try to judge the truth and falsehood of religious doctrines. I don't know how to edit the article to address the problem. 96.231.17.131 (talk) 00:48, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I see what you mean. —Mendelo (talk) 18:49, 16 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Am încercat să corectez lipsa de neutralitate și propaganda CONTRA a autorului, ca subiectul sa fie NEUTRU dar se pare ca discreditarea si neadevarul sunt permise daca ai cel putin o sursa si aceea creata tot de către apropiați... Audianismul (talk) 07:17, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Which belief reappeared in Northern Italy?

The whole Audian system? The anthropomorphism? The easter-dating? Or some combination of the latter two? The article doesn't say and doesn't offer any info.96.231.17.131 (talk) 01:44, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The last mentioned in the article, which is: anthropomorphism. See http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01558c.htm —Mendelo (talk) 18:49, 16 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please take a look at the online sources before asking for sources. —Mendelo (talk) 19:48, 16 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sources for article expansion

Audæus in the EB 9th edition. — $Llywelyn II$ 06:28, 18 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Audianism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130216020033/http://wittenburgdoor.com/why-benny-hinn-became-our-wacky-neighbor.html to http://www.wittenburgdoor.com/why-benny-hinn-became-our-wacky-neighbor.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:55, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]