Talk:Unshackled!

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.

Radio

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Radio, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Radio-related subjects 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.RadioWikipedia:WikiProject RadioTemplate:WikiProject RadioRadio articles

???

This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

To-do List:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Create: Missing years and articles in radio, National Association of Radio Distress-Signalling and Infocommunications (Hungary)
Assess : Unassessed Radio articles; Unknown-importance Radio articles
Cleanup : Radio articles needing attention
Expand : Midweek Politics Bob Crane
Maintain : Portal:Radio
Stubs : Expand: Radio stubs
Verify : Unreferenced BLPs
Other : Collaboration of the Week:
Requests for Radio peer review:

I'm a Muslim convert and I have always loved this program even when I was a child before I became a Muslim. Not because of the religious element but because it is really one of the most funny things to listen to. It's so campy and silly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.72.98.80 (talk) 22:25, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fundamentalist organization?

Hi everyone,

I see that this article is part of Category:Christian fundamentalism. Are there any references that say it is a fundamentalist program?

--Kevinkor2 (talk) 13:15, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

/* References */

Well, I seem to have stepped in a little pile of Wikipoo here...always stings to have one's edits undone, especially just hours later, and even more especially when as much care was put in as I put into this one. Did BilCat just reflexively hit "Revert" because the word "References" showed up in the edit history, or did anyone take the trouble to do what I did before saving changes: hand-check each footnote and and each external link individually to make sure that each reference matched and everything looked & worked exactly the same as before from the user's end? Isn't that what counts? You'll notice that I didn't sweep through with a bot and make wholesale functional modifications to an important article. Did I break something, or make a change that might have affected other articles? --2603:6081:8004:DD5:497E:E054:AD55:9B4E (talk) 23:40, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you removing the references from the text of the article? That's an optional style, and shouldn't be changed without a consensus first. If yourself write an article from scratch, you're free to choose whatever reference style you prefer. BilCat (talk) 00:12, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]