User talk:Kleinbell

Welcome!

Hello, Kleinbell, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome!

Articles can span several pages

Hello there, I thought it might help to explain the intricacies of what an article is. It's important to understand that an article can take up several pages, it's not unusual when the subject has a lot of information. For technical reasons we usually try to keep articles from getting larger than 80-100k. When this happens, the guideline Wikipedia:Summary style explains how to spread the information into dedicated pages. Here are some examples of articles requiring multiple pages:
Small:

L. Ron Hubbard <article main page>
- L. Ron Hubbard and the military <page 2>

Medium:

Stryker <article main page>
- M1126 Infantry Carrier Vehicle <page 2>
- M1131 Fire Support Vehicle <page 3>

Large:

World War II <article main page>
- European Theatre of World War II <page 2>
  - Battle of Normandy <page 2a>
    - Normandy Landings <page 2a-1>
- Pacific War <page 3>
  - Attack on Pearl Harbor <page 3a>

Anynobody 01:41, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In response to your belief that Atheism and Criticism of atheism is a POV fork, together they would be about 90 kb and you're talking about adding more criticism meaning the merged page would probably surpass 100 k in no time. As the amount of criticism increases the number of pages does too, could you imagine trying to fit all the pages in Category:Roman Catholic Church sex abuse scandal into the Roman Catholic Church main page? Anynobody 07:15, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:CANVASS

As a friendly reminder, please read WP:CANVASS in regards to your personal requests here. [1] [2] [3] [4] You have made your case on the talk page, and also on the NPOV page. Consensus may not always go your way. Thanks! Redrocket (talk) 09:01, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop asking for other editors to "please help." It is a violation of WP:CANVASS, as above. Redrocket (talk) 09:57, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

JPII and theology of sex

I appreciate that JPII wrote on the subject and was concerned with it during his papacy. The references do not confirm that the teaching is the universally accepted, authoritative teaching of even the RCC, however in line it might be with the thought of many of its leaders.

However, the DETAILS of one pope's interest and opinions on the subject do not warrant the comparitively LENGTHY treatment in the article. It reads to me like an intrusion into a rather scientific topic, where only brief mention of religion and philosophy are appropriate, with the details of religions or philosophical viewpoints (especially those of an individual, regardless of how important or influential that individual may be) appropriately going in the related article on sexuality and religion / sexuality and philosophy (in addition to other related articles on Catholic theology, JPII, etc.)

Other topics that are much more important historically and closely linked to the topic are societal/religious views on such related issues as: coitus interruptus, virginity, sexual "rights" within marriage, etc. I'm sure popes have plenty to say on these issues as well.

I am not trying to stifle anyone's creativity or enthusiasm for contributing, but the text is simply misplaced. Please edit it down if you don't want to remove it altogether. I'll revisit it in the future. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Robpinion (talk • contribs) 22:38, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]