User talk:Williamgdunbar

Welcome

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia! We appreciate encyclopedic contributions, but some of your recent contributions do not conform to our policies. For more information on this, see
 * Wikipedia's policies on vandalism
 * Policies on banned or discouraged content

If you'd like to experiment with the wiki's syntax, please do so on Sandbox rather than in articles.

If you still have questions, there is a new contributor's help page, or you can write   below this message along with a question and someone will be along to answer it shortly. You may also find the following pages useful for a general introduction to Wikipedia. I hope you enjoy editing Wikipedia! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Feel free to write a note on the bottom of if you want to get in touch with me. Again, welcome! Doc  Tropics  19:16, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style
 * Policy on neutral point of view
 * Guideline on external links
 * Guideline on conflict of interest

April 2008
Please do not delete content or templates from pages on Wikipedia without explaining the valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Gwernol 19:20, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Gwernol 19:30, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Please do not vandalize pages, as you did with this edit to Temple garment. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing. The  Helpful   One  (Review) 19:33, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Warning

 * [[Image:Stop hand.svg|left|30px]] Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing. However, unconstructive edits, such as those you made to Temple garment are considered vandalism. If you continue in this manner you will be blocked from editing without further warning. Please stop, and consider improving rather than damaging the work of others. Thank you.

I considered some of the entries about the Temple Garment (which I respect sacred to Mormons), especially showing them in photograph etc as offensive. These articles were produced by 'anti-mormon' groups and that is why I deleted them

When they were reinstated, I attempted to balance the article by including a link to an official Latter-day statement which explained why Mormons consider the temple garment to be sacred in their religion.

By deleting my link, you have upset the balance and returned the article to a state of ridicule.

I would be interested in your comments.

William in Aberdeen Scotland


 * Hello. I am sorry you feel offended by the content of the project however Wikipedia has a strong stance against any form of censorship. I would recommend you take your concerns to the talk page of the article and try to reach consensus with the group.  Gtstricky Talk or C 20:23, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah, on Wikipedia, you have to use different methods of persuasion and deletion without consensus will never work. Regarding the offensive temple garment picture, we worked really hard to get it to what it now is from its original. Anyway, I hope you'll review the pointers listed above on how to properly contribute to Wikipedia, so you can help defend your beliefs constructively. Best wishes --Eustress (talk) 05:20, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

helpme

Thanks for your reply. I am new to Wikipedia, as you can probably tell... I do not think that your recommendation will be positive as in my experience the 'anti-Mormon' groups have a strong infuence and they would campaign to prevent any change, so the introduction of the link that I made (that was then removed) would be blocked. I understand your policy of non-censorship but I still consider that your article does not have a proper balance.

If Wikipedia had any 'offensive' material about the Muslim religion, you would quickly find a hate campaign announce against it with threats of death against your officials, as has been shown in the past.

Respectfully, Williamgdunbar (talk) 07:30, 26 April 2008 (UTC)


 * The link that you inserted wasn't removed because we're suppressing the truth, it was removed because it's a duplicate of a link that alrady exists. Also, links belong in the "External Links" section of the article, not in the body of the text. If you look carefully, you'll find that the info you're trying to present is already there. As an aside, Wikipedia contains lots of things that offend Muslims, especially articles like Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy.   Doc   Tropics  07:42, 26 April 2008 (UTC)


 * There are also a couple images of Muhammad on Wikipedia and other stuff which is offensive to Muslims.  Jaakobou Chalk Talk  07:44, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Anyways, If you're certain that there's a problem with the article, you can try and follow WP:DR.
 * Cheers,  Jaakobou Chalk Talk  07:46, 26 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia indeed contains material that some Muslims find offensive. Our article on Mohammed has images of the prophet, which some Muslims consider deeply offensive. Despite the continual stream of vandalism to that article and yes, death threats, we continue to display these images because we believe that they increase the quality of the article. Similarly there have been persistent and organized campaigns by some Mormons to have the images of the temple garments removed, to have pro-Mormon statements added to Mormon-related articles and to have any criticism (perceived or actual) of the LDS church(es) excised.


 * Wikipedia's primary goal is to present verifiable, neutral material in all articles. We will not bow to pressure to present a pro-Mormon perspective that is sanctioned by the church. We would not publish an article on Microsoft written by their PR department, nor will we publish an article that solely conforms to the views of the Mormon church. Similarly we will not allow an article to be driven by anti-Mormon views.


 * Please do not make a blanket assumption that all editors of these articles are anti-Mormon. If you put forward a view that is balanced, factually accurate and representative of published opinion, you will be able to influence the content of the articles. What you won't be able to do is reduce the knowledge available in Wikipedia simply because you find some of the material offensive.


 * Good luck, Gwernol 07:51, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your explanation. I will examine the article to find the already existing link - maybe it was the one I put in previously. I accept that Wikipedia is unbiased and hope I did not give the wrong impression - and will get off my 'high horse'. I give my word that I will not make any more alterations to any article without first consulting Wikidedia.

Regards. Williamgdunbar (talk) 16:27, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

PS - Now that this matter is concluded, can you removed this page
 * There's no reason to remove a talk page, usually. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 16:33, 26 April 2008 (UTC)