Difference between revisions of "Talk:Deseret Sunday School Songs, 1909"
m |
m |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
I take it the NPOV fetish that prevails at Wikipedia hasn't come hither. ;-) --[[User:Haruo|Haruo]] 13:49, 18 May 2007 (MDT) | I take it the NPOV fetish that prevails at Wikipedia hasn't come hither. ;-) --[[User:Haruo|Haruo]] 13:49, 18 May 2007 (MDT) | ||
| − | Ah - this is a great point. It hasn't come hither, actually - at least not yet. I didn't write the article, myself, FYI. I actually tend to disagree - I think I know who wrote it, though, and he probably wrote it light-heartedly. I figure, for now, if people don't agree, they can always change it. However, it makes sense to put this in force. I mean, I would hate to have people bashing a compilation or hymn directly in the article. If people really want to state their opinions, they can do it on the forums (in this case, it would be on the [http://www.nabble.com/HymnWiki%3A-Hymnal-Discussion-f22711.html hymnal discussion forum] or perhaps rather the [http://www.nabble.com/Hymnal-Reviews-f22707.html Hymnal Reviews forum]). Whatever the case, it won't be ''exactly'' like Wikipedia's way if I institute it. I'll probably just say 'do not post biased content' and let people interpret that for themselves; this is, after all, a site for hymns (and not everything controversial the world has to offer). Yeah, I think I'll just tell people not to state their own opinions in articles. I can't tell people not to post biased hymns, as some historical hymns really are biased (and many hymns are biased to one religion or another, anyway) - but editor commentary/bias should be labeled appropriately. I've added this to the [[HymnWiki:Appropriate content|appropriate content]] page, though I suppose it still needs work. [[User:Veramet|Veramet]] 19: | + | Ah - this is a great point. It hasn't come hither, actually - at least not yet. I didn't write the article, myself, FYI. I actually tend to disagree - I think I know who wrote it, though, and he probably wrote it light-heartedly. I figure, for now, if people don't agree, they can always change it. However, it makes sense to put this in force. I mean, I would hate to have people bashing a compilation or hymn directly in the article. If people really want to state their opinions, they can do it on the forums (in this case, it would be on the [http://www.nabble.com/HymnWiki%3A-Hymnal-Discussion-f22711.html hymnal discussion forum] or perhaps rather the [http://www.nabble.com/Hymnal-Reviews-f22707.html Hymnal Reviews forum]). Whatever the case, it won't be ''exactly'' like Wikipedia's way if I institute it. I'll probably just say 'do not post biased content' and let people interpret that for themselves; this is, after all, a site for hymns (and not everything controversial the world has to offer). Yeah, I think I'll just tell people not to state their own opinions in articles. I can't tell people not to post biased hymns, as some historical hymns really are biased (and many hymns are biased to one religion or another, anyway) - but editor commentary/bias should be labeled appropriately. I've added this to the [[HymnWiki:Appropriate content|appropriate content]] page, though I suppose it still needs work. Please tell me any comments/advice you might have. I'm pretty flexible with ''most'' things. Thanks for joining HymnWiki, by the way! [[User:Veramet|Veramet]] 19:26, 18 May 2007 (MDT) |
Latest revision as of 18:26, 18 May 2007
I take it the NPOV fetish that prevails at Wikipedia hasn't come hither. ;-) --Haruo 13:49, 18 May 2007 (MDT)
Ah - this is a great point. It hasn't come hither, actually - at least not yet. I didn't write the article, myself, FYI. I actually tend to disagree - I think I know who wrote it, though, and he probably wrote it light-heartedly. I figure, for now, if people don't agree, they can always change it. However, it makes sense to put this in force. I mean, I would hate to have people bashing a compilation or hymn directly in the article. If people really want to state their opinions, they can do it on the forums (in this case, it would be on the hymnal discussion forum or perhaps rather the Hymnal Reviews forum). Whatever the case, it won't be exactly like Wikipedia's way if I institute it. I'll probably just say 'do not post biased content' and let people interpret that for themselves; this is, after all, a site for hymns (and not everything controversial the world has to offer). Yeah, I think I'll just tell people not to state their own opinions in articles. I can't tell people not to post biased hymns, as some historical hymns really are biased (and many hymns are biased to one religion or another, anyway) - but editor commentary/bias should be labeled appropriately. I've added this to the appropriate content page, though I suppose it still needs work. Please tell me any comments/advice you might have. I'm pretty flexible with most things. Thanks for joining HymnWiki, by the way! Veramet 19:26, 18 May 2007 (MDT)
