Wikipedia:Peer review/Dion Fortune/archive1

This article has recently been accused of being biased. I am therefore seeking peer review to see if this is justified and if so, or even if not, how the article can be improved.

Morgan Leigh 07:17, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Can you be a bit more clear about the problem? Talk:Dion Fortune is very hard to understand. If the only problem is that someone is objecting to calling The Mystical Qabbalah her "magnum opus", just lose the phrasing or source it to some reliable source that calls it that. Jkelly 03:57, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Please see Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-06-21 Dion Fortune for the full explanation of the problem. Part of the problem is user 67.185.57.48 keeps editing the talk page, and not just their own posts but the posts of others as well. I know it is hard to read presently, but because of the nature of 67.185.57.48's edits it is too much work to revert it. i.e. they made 17 edits on one day. Magnum Opus has been changed. I did cite a source for it but it kept getting deleted regardless. The disagreement is about the 'Magical Battle of Britain' section. It is alleged to lack NPOV. Morgan Leigh 04:56, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'll watchlist the article and take a look. Jkelly 05:03, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I really appreciate your efforts. Bear in mind the user in question is banned presently so it might be a few days before they surface again. Morgan Leigh 05:44, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • It can be improved by reducing links to solitary years. A monobook tool allows this to be done with one click on a 'dates' tab in edit mode. You can then accept or reject the changes offered and/or do more editing before pressing 'Save'. Simply copy the entire contents of User:Bobblewik/monobook.js to your own monobook. Then follow the instructions in your monobook to clear the cache (i.e. press Ctrl-Shift-R in Firefox, or Ctrl-F5 in IE) before it will work. Hope that helps. bobblewik 19:30, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]