Talk:PostMormon Community

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Billboard links

Hey there. I wonder about the appropriateness of having so many links to the various billboards - remember, this is an encyclopedia, not an advertisement for this organization. The article already walks the thin line between information and advertisement... maybe these should be removed. A link to one of them, in-line in the article, is probably sufficient. Tan | 39 16:31, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough. This is my first article. The billboards are what the group is best known for externally, and what has generated most press coverage it has received, so I though it might be appropriate. I'll take them down. Cheers! Rich mccue (talk) 22:49, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi Rich, I hope you don't mind that I've gone ahead and made a few grammatical and spelling corrections, which you can see. Are you going to mention the hosting of Peepstone and Postmormon magazines or is that advertisement? I'm wondering if it might not be a good idea - and a fair description - to mention that Postmo often functions beyond its remit viz. Mormon concerns, as a very lively and even zany social forum often addressing personal, religious, social and philosophical questions on a more general level. And as Tan says, this is an encyclopedia article, so I think it would be wise to include what many wiki articles of this sort include, which is 'criticisms'. This may forestall any idea that it's simply an advertisement, and may dissuade anyone from putting together a 'Criticisms of Postmo' section themselves. It would show a certain forthrightness in the article from the very start, which itself would be in postmo spirit. Bamboom Bamboom2 (talk) 21:56, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the help with grammer & spelling. You're right a criticisms section would be good. I'll work on that next. Rich mccue (talk) 06:43, 6 June 2008 (UTC)