Talk:Rimé movement

message: I paired back the Dorje Shugden controversy to a mere mention, since it only vaguely relates to Rime in my opinion and is covered in significant depth on other articles as we all know so well by now. I'd also like to archive all of the discussion on this page into an archive subpage soon so I don't have to keep looking at the personal attacks. But if someone thinks that the discussion is still going we should wait and archive later. What say you? - Owlmonkey (talk) 20:49, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I have no objections, and I want to thank Owlmonkey in particular for trying to find a middle way.  --Dspak08 (talk) 08:46, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you. Discussion archived. - Owlmonkey (talk) 05:25, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Moving Forward

message: If we check the the activities on this page over the last month or so, it is clear that it is better to keep the referencing of the Dorje Shugden controversy to a minimum.  Otherwise, this page becomes simply a reproduction of an already existing article, as both sides seek to put in their POV.  So for balance, we just mention that these are related issues and we send people over to the DS controversy article. This was an agreement reached by the editors of this page after some very ugly back and forth.  Therefore, I kindly request those seeking to put their views on the DS controversy into this page to consult the archive of the talk pages.  This is already an explosive issue, but to rediscuss it on every page where there is something even remotely related can quickly make things quite messy.  So my understanding of the agreement is in this space we agree not to go into it other than refer people to the main article on the controversy.  Do we all agree?  --Dspak08 (talk) 08:46, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd prefer to keep it just to a mention. My reasoning is primarily that it's not really a rimé issue. It's worth a mention because it purportedly concerns orthodoxy, but as the Dorje Shugden controversy article shows, it's much more complex than just an argument about sectarianism. Further, the rimé movement itself is not entirely idealistic in its origin, so to even paint it as an idealistic anti-sectarian view is not entirely right either. - Owlmonkey (talk) 14:52, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discussion of Dorje Shugden controversy on Rimé page 

message: I added a link to the Rime article to Ringu Tulk’s main centre. Then I deleted a section here that was inserted anonymously and is part of a campaign of New Kadampa Tradition people to denounce me and my work. There was nothing substantial in it and it was posted without being signed or contributing to the discussion. Kt66 (talk) 09:19, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Added another link and removed a passage from this talk page

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Rimé movement. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080514154615/http://www.tibet.com/dholgyal/hhdl.html to http://www.tibet.com/dholgyal/hhdl.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080603175322/http://www.simhas.org:80/chatral.html to http://www.simhas.org/chatral.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 23:50, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified