Talk:Kesh temple hymn

Kesh Temple Hymn.
The entry titled "Kesh Temple Hymn" contains some very good information and is nicely detailed. However, the entry also has bias overtones which make it difficult to take serious. Describing the religious references in the ancient texts, the word "myth" is frequently used. When searching through libraries (or some other web-based resources) for raw data for professional purposes I seldom come across information that has been presumed by the author... I hope for the same experience from such a widely growing organization as Wikipedia. I have read resources that quoted many other aspects of daily life in ancient times but without the insistence that they were mythological. Regardless of anybody's theological beliefs, any entry in Wikipedia should be solely "fact bases" without the authors point of view. Wikipedia is a great resource and can provide quick feedback for research topics or general knowledge but not if the writer is allowed to interject (or elaborate) using his/her own opinion. I understand that Wikipedia entries are largely introduced by non-Wikipedia staff but researchers should be able to gather information with a reasonable expectation of accuracy and without individual conjecture. I have no reason to doubt that these texts may indeed be mythological however, the entry seems to be attempting to make that decision for the reader. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.96.45.149 (talk) 12:25, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

CBS?
Constant references to CBS? What is CBS? I added an to the first reference, this should be expanded in first mention. Mercster (talk) 11:53, 13 October 2017 (UTC)