Talk:Audianism

message: This concerns POV tag cleanup.  Whenever an POV tag is placed, it is necessary to also post a message in the discussion section stating clearly why it is thought the article does not comply with POV guidelines, and suggestions for how to improve it.  This permits discussion and consensus among editors.  From WP tag policy: Drive-by tagging is strongly discouraged. The editor who adds the tag must address the issues on the talk page, pointing to specific issues that are actionable within the content policies, namely Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, Wikipedia:Verifiability, Wikipedia:No original research and Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons. Simply being of the opinion that a page is not neutral is not sufficient to justify the addition of the tag. Tags should be added as a last resort.  Better yet, edit the topic yourself with the improvements.  This statement is not a judgement of content, it is only a cleanup of frivolously and/or arbitrarily placed tags.  No discussion, no tag.Jjdon (talk) 00:06, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The sentence: Anthropomorphism was also a charge[neutrality is disputed] made against other early Christian writers such as contained a POV-tag. I deleted it. "They were accused" is just the same as being charged. Fading it to "It was said that" adds nothing. That they were charged does not mean that they were guilty as charged. —Mendelo (talk) 19:08, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV tag 

message: I think it's deeply problematic for Wikipedia to try to judge the truth and falsehood of religious doctrines. I don't know how to edit the article to address the problem. 96.231.17.131 (talk) 00:48, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I see what you mean. —Mendelo (talk) 18:49, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

text: Am încercat să corectez lipsa de neutralitate și propaganda CONTRA a autorului, ca subiectul sa fie NEUTRU dar se pare ca discreditarea si neadevarul sunt permise daca ai cel putin o sursa si aceea creata tot de către apropiați... Audianismul (talk) 07:17, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Non-neutral point of view 

message: The whole Audian system? The anthropomorphism? The easter-dating? Or some combination of the latter two? The article doesn't say and doesn't offer any info.96.231.17.131 (talk) 01:44, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: The last mentioned in the article, which is: anthropomorphism. See http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01558c.htm  —Mendelo (talk) 18:49, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

text: Please take a look at the online sources before asking for sources. —Mendelo (talk) 19:48, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Which belief reappeared in Northern Italy? 

message: * Audæus in the EB 9th edition. — LlywelynII 06:28, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Sources for article expansion

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Audianism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130216020033/http://wittenburgdoor.com/why-benny-hinn-became-our-wacky-neighbor.html to http://www.wittenburgdoor.com/why-benny-hinn-became-our-wacky-neighbor.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:55, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified