Talk:Equanimity

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Ethics

Religion Low‑importance

	Religion portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

==Should more of the Christianity section be in speech marks? Some of the language there is pretty archaic. Cleisthenes2 (talk) 19:42, 15 March 2020 (UTC)Reply

etymology

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

can any1 give a shot on etymology? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.212.128.173 (talk) 18:10, 10 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

Baha'i Faith original research

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Baha'i section appears to be written from the perspective of a devotee delivering certain articles of faith. The lack of citation reinforces that impression. Original author should reference the qoutes directly, and remove all original items (e.g., "...filled with thousands...") unless supported by references to the source material. This section has been in this state since 25 April 2014. Due to the overall poor quality and lack of adherence to Wikipedia standards, I believe the section should be ultimately removed if no action is taken. Primaryspace (talk) 13:33, 10 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

Potential NPOV violation in the 'Abrahamic Religion - Christianity' subsection

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Some of the content in the second paragraph of the 'Abrahamic Religion - Christianity' subsection is written such it expresses the Wikipedia page writer's religious views, and not a neutral point of view which Wikipedia supports. For example, 'In I Corinthians 4:1,2, ..... Forbearance is a part of our stewardship responsibility, as Stewards we are required to be found faithful...' I have visited the site in the citation of that sentence (citation 12) and those same words are in the site as well as in the Wikipedia article, but the citation site article isn't reported to have expressed the view (like 'In an article of "http://www.dawnbible.com/", it is written "....."'), making it seem as if this is Wikipedia's view on the matter. I think that sentence will have to be restructured in reported speech identifying the source website so it's more neutral. I hope I'm being constructive here; I'm a newcomer registered Wikipedia editor and I may need a bit of guidance in editing well, so please be patient with me. Thanks! - Factthinker (talk) 21:31, 5 February 2021 (UTC)FactthinkerReply

Add topic