User talk:DharmaMountain

Welcome!

Hello, DharmaMountain, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or click here to ask for help here on your talk page and a volunteer will visit you here shortly. Again, welcome!

Reference Errors on 7 November

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

On the Krishna Venta page, your edit caused a cite error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:30, 8 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Help me!

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

Please help me with... I have edited the article on Sathy Sai Baba twice to remove bias, yet each time the change has been deleted. This is the line: "His acts were based on sleight of hand though his devotees considered them signs of his divinity.[7][8][9]" There is no proof of this slight of hand except the opinion of a few people whose opinions were published in books and articles and which are cited here as references. On the other hand there are hundreds of thousand of people who have witnessed his miracles personally, and about which there are many secondary references. I cited one of these references in #7. I changed the line to read "Some say his acts were based on slight of hand...." (adding "Some say.") I find this to be a reasonable edit to remove bias and do not see a reason to delete this change except for the personal prejudices of some editors who are angry about gossip about the subject's possible sexual improprieties. Wikipedia is supposed to remain neutral and not introduce bias into all aspects of an article even though the subject is suspected of committing immoral acts. Keep in mind that none of the Gospel writers were alive to witness the "alleged miracles" of Jesus, but now those supposed miracles are considered to be fact. Kindly tell me how to get my editorial change to remain. Thanks for any assistance!DharmaMountain (talk) 00:49, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

DharmaMountain (talk) 00:49, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia content should be a summary of what reliable published sources have reported. Books published by academic publishers like Oxford University Press or news reports published by reputable news organizations like CNN are reliable sources. The self-published memoirs of a disciple do not meet Wikipedia's standards of reliability. "Neutrality" doesn't mean that we give all viewpoints equal weight but that we don't inappropriately deviate from what the most reliable sources report. Thus your edit introduced bias by putting an unreliable source's viewpoint next to what highly reliable sources say. And no, Wikipedia does not consider Jesus' supposed miracles as fact. If you look up our article on the miracles of Jesus, you'll find the following summary: "To many Christians and Muslims, the miracles are actual historical events.[6][7][8] Others, including liberal Christians, consider these stories to be figurative.[9] Since the Enlightenment, scholars have taken a highly skeptical approach to claims about miracles.[10]" So we say that some believers think they're factual while and others don't. We don't say they're factual. Huon (talk) 01:20, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Peter Mt. Shasta

Hello, DharmaMountain. I wanted to let you know that I’m proposing an article that you started, Peter Mt. Shasta, for deletion because it's a biography of a living person that lacks references. If you don't want Peter Mt. Shasta to be deleted, please add a reference to the article.

If you don't understand this message, you can leave a note on my talk page.

Thanks,

Nick Moyes (talk) 08:30, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please help me to remove a Neutrality Notice

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

Please help me with...removing a neutrality notice. No mention is made of what statement is not neutral, so there is no way to correct any issue. Also, how do I make the tone more encyclopedic? I would like to correct all issues on this page and remove all citation notices. Many thanks! DharmaMountain (talk) 02:10, 17 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

DharmaMountain (talk) 02:10, 17 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi DharmaMountain. I'm not sure which page you're referring to, but if there is no indication of what the issue is on the talk page, you can remove the notice yourself at any time. If an editor sees an issue with the page and it is not immediately obvious (like, if the page has no categories, that's plain to see) then it is usually their responsibility to at least make a note of what the problem is on the talk page of the article. Alpha3031 (t • c) 11:09, 17 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your assistance. The article I received the notices on is: Peter Mt. Shasta. I searched many Wikipedia links and could not find any way to remove these tags. This article does not contain any controversial material, so I don't see how it could not be neutral or not encyclopedic? I would appreciate your assistance. DharmaMountain (talk) 04:30, 18 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I just removed the code from the page and that removed the tag. What should I do if the unnamed person replaces the tags? DharmaMountain (talk) 04:33, 18 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I replaced them. There's the start of a discussion on the talk page and I've mentioned the article at WP:FTN as it doesn't meet our policies and guidelines. Doug Weller talk 18:29, 22 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Peter Mt. Shasta for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Peter Mt. Shasta is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Peter Mt. Shasta until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. GPinkerton (talk) 17:15, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]