User talk:Johnparkw/Sandbox

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 This is a test 1.1 Image handling 1.1.1 Sub sub heading 1a?? 1.2 Sub heading #2 2 Partners 3 partial edits 4 Suggestions 5 citation templates

[edit] This is a test

This is how a citation gets marked.^{[citation needed]} John Park (talk) 17:12, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image handling

[edit] Sub sub heading 1a??

[edit] Sub heading #2

SMITH Raccoon John.jpg

[edit] Partners

• User talk:Good Olfactory
• User talk:Secisek —Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnparkw (talk • contribs) 18:19, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
• User:Tb -- John Park (talk) 16:51, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] partial edits

This article is about the Christian Church (Disciples). It shares common roots but is no longer affiliated with two other groups:

• Churches of Christ which went their separate way officailly in 1906.
• Independent Christian Churches/Churches of Christ which separated in the years following 1968.

For information on those movements, please read the articles about them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnparkw (talk • contribs) 13:10, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Suggestions

My question is this: Do you have any suggestions for proper protocol for removing extraneous material from an article, without prompting a battle? My inclination on my next round of edits, is to first move it into the history section headed "Divisions" and then remove it completely when I get to the polishing stage. Is there a better approach? John Park (talk) 16:21, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

You didn't ask me but I have been following your edits with interest, and am excited about the improvements you are making. I would say that I think it is important that the article say something about the relation of the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) with the other Churches of Christ. There is an existing section titled "Division" which I think is nicely written to address the issue. But I think that, from the perspective of the other Churches of Christ, the article might seem a little POV-centric. It sounds a bit as if the history section is written in such a way as to suggest that the current Disciples of Christ was founded back then, oh, and there were these other groups that split off. From their perspective, they were founded back then too, and have an equal share in the majority of that history. Perhaps it might work to do two things: take the paragraph you rightly deleted (IMO) and see if there are particular facts or perspectives that might well be incorporated in the existing Division section; and have the history begin with some kind of acknowledgement that the current Disciples are only one strand that originated in the story of Scott and Campbell. Tb (talk) 16:30, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Good advice. Remember to ask that additions be cited or you will never get it to FA. -- Secisek (talk) 17:00, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the help and the affirmation! I see the value of collaboration, and appreciate the help, from both of you! John Park (talk) 17:11, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] citation templates

Wikipedia:Citation templates —Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnparkw (talk • contribs) 06:15, 29 March 2008 (UTC)