Talk:Om Festival

Om Festival neutrality issues

Discuss neutrality issues here.

Should the Om Festival/ Om Community pages be merged?

well, should they be?

Suggestions December 26 2005

I was the one who originally added the cleanup tag. Here are my suggestions for improving the article.

1. The tone of this article seems inappropriate, just read the first paragraph. The classification of the festival goers does not belong in an Encyclopedia. I recommend a complete rewrite of this paragraph. Please go over this article with a fine tooth comb and remove all other words that are non neutral (another example is muckraker).
2. This article has way too much passive voice. Fragments like "it has been suggested" need complete rewrites to specify who did the suggesting, where they did the suggesting and when they did the suggesting, with an easily verified source.
3. As is, there is no way for a user to verify the factual accuracy of the article, removing the passive voice should take care of most of it, however please check all facts and figures for accuracy.
4. If you take care of the above, the neutrality issues will probably take care of themselves.

Please don't remove anymore templates.

thanx

TheRingess 03:02, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

the templates have been removed

thank you for your input three of the four templates hve been removed until the issue can be cleared up. thank you. please contact me to discuss the template issue. it was unnecessary to clutter the page with multiple templates, so i have left but one of the four (!) you placed on this site.

I explained why the templates are necessary, please do not remove them. I consider it bad faith to remove templates before any actual changes are made. Why not cleanup the article and then remove the templates? I'm going to have to reinstate them.

For example, there is no effort made to make this article conform to a neutral point of view, so it deserves a POV template Also, there is still too much passive voice in this article, so the weasel template is still necessary. Regarding the verify template, how can you expect an ordinary reader to verify anything in this article.

I say keep all of them until you make a good faith effort to rewrite the article. TheRingess 04:06, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

Riiiight!

"Regarding the verify template, how can you expect an ordinary reader to verify anything in this article."...or anything on the web for that matter. regards ringess Sumkidz 04:15, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

Please read Wikipedia's guidelines on providing sources and references.

You seem to be rehashing the same tired old argument that basically boils down to "Everyone else is doing it so why can't I?"

Once again, I implore you to read the guidelines on sources and references.

TheRingess 04:19, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

template replaced.

as per wikipedia pov-check and NPOV guidelines, your template has been replaced. thank you for your input. Sumkidz 04:34, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

Keeping the article(s) neutral

There is a new thread on the OMIE message board inviting people to come here and edit. That is fine, but any edits made by newcomers will last a lot longer if everyone follows a few simple etiquette guidelines:

• The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
• Picture tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Naming conventions
• Manual of Style
• If you're ready for the complete list of Wikipedia documentation, there's also Wikipedia:Topical index.

I hope everyone enjoys editing here and being a Wikipedian. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~~~. Four tildes (~~~~) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages or add a question to the village pump. --Fire Star 07:30, 27 December 2005 (UTC)