Talk:Nicolas Notovitch/Archive 1
 | This is an archive of past discussions about Nicolas Notovitch. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 |
Page number
I have tried to follow the source given in the source named in fn. 10. There it says: "Footnote: (3 The Chief Lama of Himis on the alleged "Unknown Life of Christ," The Nineteenth Century, XXXIX (1896), 667--78." If I did not look in the wrong publication, there does not seem to be a volume XXXIX from 1897, only a volume 93. And on the pages in questionwas nothing about the abbot of Hemis, but a novel:
Could someone either maybe helpfully mark the correct page here or perhaps enter some cirticism about the criticism ? --219.110.233.74 (talk) 07:00, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
Old talk
Someone edited the Nicholas Notovich page to include the name of Professor Fida Hassnain as a member of the Ahmadiyya sect. He contacted me to say this is a false statement, he is not and never was an Ahmaddi Muslim. He made several attempts to remove his name but failed. I have successfully removed his name from the Notovich-Ahmaddi controversy at his request. Thank you.SuzanneOlsson (talk) 11:59, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
- It is no longer there in any case. History2007 (talk) 21:53, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
J. Archibald Douglas?
There was no Government college at Agra. Professor Douglas left no other trace in the world of letters. It seems more likely that he was a British fabrication. The quick confutation of the Issa document, real or no, may have been seen as a necessary counter to gathering Russian sentiment for entering Tibet. An H. Archibald Douglas was at hand in Agra, however; he'd just graduated from Eton. The suave travel writer out of Bombay, James Douglas was around too.
Max Müller the famous Indologist who affirmed Douglas' take, received a nice letter from the prime minister shortly thereafter. Klasovsky (talk) 08:36, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
Controversial scholar
Ehrman is controversial for his debates with fundamentalists. He isn't controversial among scholars, pretty much the same way the theory of evolution is controversial for the public, but not for scientists. Tgeorgescu (talk) 19:40, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
In fact, Ehrman has been attacked for being too mainstream. Tgeorgescu (talk) 21:02, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
James G. Crossley criticized Ehrman for constructing a neoliberal center in historical Jesus scholarship, see Crossley, James G. (20 October 2014). Jesus in an Age of Neoliberalism: Quests, Scholarship and Ideology. Routledge. p. 13. ISBN 978-1-317-54612-2. Ehrman is open in his desire to provide the public with work on Jesus and Christian origins which reflects broad consensus views in scholarship:
. On Google Books: [1]. Tgeorgescu (talk) 21:13, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Nicolas Notovitch. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120215031916/http://www.scribd.com/doc/55685655/Forged to https://www.scribd.com/doc/55685655/Forged
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:02, 17 January 2018 (UTC)