Difference between revisions of "Talk:King David"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
:: That's what I'm going to try to work on -- making it more concise. It would be much more beneficial for conservapedia editors to add information here and there on different articles, instead of overdoing some articles and leaving others very empty.[[User:Korvex|Korvex]] ([[User talk:Korvex|talk]]) 16:27, 18 April 2017 (EDT) | :: That's what I'm going to try to work on -- making it more concise. It would be much more beneficial for conservapedia editors to add information here and there on different articles, instead of overdoing some articles and leaving others very empty.[[User:Korvex|Korvex]] ([[User talk:Korvex|talk]]) 16:27, 18 April 2017 (EDT) | ||
:::OK. Sounds great. If you remove any information that could be put on other articles, please do so. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 16:28, 18 April 2017 (EDT) | :::OK. Sounds great. If you remove any information that could be put on other articles, please do so. --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 16:28, 18 April 2017 (EDT) | ||
| + | :::: Remove information that can be put on other articles? Technically, that would mean we can delete almost the entire section on David and Jonathan, and simply refer people to [[David and Jonathan]]. Thoughts? | ||
Revision as of 02:52, April 19, 2017
Added a good amount of material, as i am working on a separate article on David and Jonathan, by the grace of God, and David's background is relevant. Needs more proofing.Daniel1212 22:25, 8 April 2009 (EDT)
Too much
I find that the discussion on this page on David's battle with Goliath, and the general text in general, is far too long and needs to be made more concise. I already redid the part on David's historicity, adding relevant sources etc. I plan to do further edits in the future and add a section on the historicity of David's kingdom. --Unsigned comment by User:Korvex
- I like the detail on David's life. It's good to see a detailed article on Conservapedia. If you can find a way to make the article more concise without actually removing information, I would really appreciate that, though. Thanks for the edits you have already done, regardless. --1990'sguy (talk) 22:22, 17 April 2017 (EDT)
- That's what I'm going to try to work on -- making it more concise. It would be much more beneficial for conservapedia editors to add information here and there on different articles, instead of overdoing some articles and leaving others very empty.Korvex (talk) 16:27, 18 April 2017 (EDT)
- OK. Sounds great. If you remove any information that could be put on other articles, please do so. --1990'sguy (talk) 16:28, 18 April 2017 (EDT)
- Remove information that can be put on other articles? Technically, that would mean we can delete almost the entire section on David and Jonathan, and simply refer people to David and Jonathan. Thoughts?
- OK. Sounds great. If you remove any information that could be put on other articles, please do so. --1990'sguy (talk) 16:28, 18 April 2017 (EDT)
- That's what I'm going to try to work on -- making it more concise. It would be much more beneficial for conservapedia editors to add information here and there on different articles, instead of overdoing some articles and leaving others very empty.Korvex (talk) 16:27, 18 April 2017 (EDT)