User talk:Reconguy

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place  before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! --Fl e x (talk/contribs) 11:51, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Thanks!

Flex, Thanks for the helpful links.

I have questions on how to revise the Table of Contents and references to improve the article.

If you look deeper on the Talk page for Christian Reconstructionism, you will see that I've run into Cberlet before. He seems to want to use Wiki guidelines as a club for his POV. My chess tournament analogy probably is not his favorite.

The Dominionism web page also needs some balance. Cberlet previously challenged my use of Reconstructionist authors as not being scholarly sources on Reconstructionism, but now he has been challenged on the scholarship of published authors he cited, who who write as journalists. Even Karen Armstrong, whom Cberlet worships as a scholar, was only called "a leading commentator on religion" (and not a scholar) on the publisher's dust jacket of "The Battle for God" (BFG). (Karen Armstrong had no cited to Reconstructionist authors at all in BFG, though she wrote at length about CR there.)

I'll enjoy the irony, but focus on edits that express various sides of the debate. I know this is unfair when the Cberlet side on Dominionism and Dominion Theology can be shown to be based on association fallacies, an artificial classification scheme, and slanders copied without attribution from fundamentalists with very poor scholarship.

Reconguy 18:04, 6 May 2007 (UTC)


 * If you think an article does not adhere to the neutral point of view policy then you can add NPOV or Totallydisputed or try to remove the non neutral txt yourself, but be careful you do not removed valuable info and you specify in your edit summary why you are removing all the info. Hope this helps! The Sunshine Man 18:27, 6 May 2007 (UTC)