User talk:StAnselm/2012c
 | This is an archive of past discussions with StAnselm. 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. |
| 2012c |
| All Pages: | 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7 - 8 - 9 - 10 - 11 - 12 - 13 - 14 - 15 - 16 - 17 - 18 - 19 - 20 - 21 - 22 - 23 - 24 - ... (up to 100) |
Category:People known by acronyms
Category:People known by acronyms, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. DexDor (talk) 19:51, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
MassResistance edit war
I'm not going to count reverts or report you, but you are clearly edit-warring on MassResistance. I'm StillStanding (24/7) (talk) 03:22, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
Edit warring
You have twice reverted a large amount well-sourced content (content blanking) at MassResistance. This is a good faith effort to ask you to stop edit warring and to stop content blanking. If you continue to edit war and engage in further disruptive editing, you may be blocked from editing. 00:09, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
ANI Warning
Do not strike other user's comments, like you did here[1]. Refacting other user's comments is disruptive and dishonest and can lead to a block. Make a note below it, ask someone to clerk it, but we generally only strike sockpuppet comments, or remove them outright as it looks like warring. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 12:35, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
- My mistake, I didn't know that was an active sock investigation. Apologies. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 21:02, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
Parable of the Good Samaritan
Dear StAnselm
I am sorry that you have seen fit to delete my link to a parody of the Parable of the Good Samaritan.
Humour and poetry are as much art forms as painting and the page contains links to paintings of the Good Samaritan.
It is my opinion that while such links should never take more than a small fraction of a Wikipedia entry they are generally harmless and occasionally useful.
I first heard that parody as a digression in a sermon - if preachers looking for inspiration find this link they may find good use for it.
Best wishes
JMBryant (talk) 20:51, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
New Jerusalem
You removed my edits on New Jerusalem. I'd like to know why.
The info I added is the latest published research and theory on size and shape. The theory has solved a question that was unanswered for 2000 years. Why would you delete it when it is relevant to the page? The info is easily verified by a simple google search.
http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2011/03/04/deadly-tragedy-spurs-janet-willis-to-write-book-on-heaven/ http://www.amazon.com/What-Earth-Heaven-Janet-Willis/dp/1935507494 http://scottandjanetwillis.com/What_on_Earth_is_Heaven_Like.html
If you feel the text lacked a reference you could have checked and added it your self. Aren't these references good enough? Will you add the text back now? I see no reason to deny new academic knowledge. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.186.136.110 (talk) 14:05, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
No R. in Clarence Bouma
Greetings. Thanks for following up my new article on Clarence Bouma. I don't believe the initial "R." is warranted. The only source seems to be the Records of the Evangelical Theological Society found in the Billy Graham archives at Wheaton, but every other reference omits the R. I believe that is was (at the time) shorthand for Reverend, rather than an initial for his first name. Older and more official records (such as the bulletins for Princeton and Harvard) probably would have used his given first name if there was one. Ἀλήθεια 12:48, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Hi from Clemson
Hello my name is Jason and I am a student at Clemson University. I have started a page for Matt Chandler in my sandbox for my english class and am hoping you would be willing to aid me or advise me in making my article worthy of wikipedia. My sandbox: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:ClemsonScholar4/sandbox Thank you, ClemsonScholar4 (talk) 12:48, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
With regards to your edit summary on your deleting my edit to 'Sigismund III Vasa'
Crass name-calling is not called for. I am merely trying to mark it as an opinion. I am not a 'weasel'. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.193.5.116 (talk) 11:20, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
new Jerusalem
The book has been referenced by at least two other scholars. Just because you don't know it or somebody hasn't proved it to you yet, doesn't mean it is not so. You are arguing from ignorance. Why not just ask and I can provide details? How many other scholars need to reference or quote a book before it meets your approval? What is your qualifications for scholar? On this particular subject, I have talked with Janet and know she has talked to the leading theology people at Dallas Theological Seminary and Moody Bible Institue, both respectable institutions. These people are quoting Janet as more knowledgeable on this question than they are. If you need names and book titles, then I can get that detailed info. I just don't want to do all that work and you again censor things for another reason.
If you don't like a sentence or two, then why didn't you just remove what you though objectionable? By rejecting the whole thing you are censoring legit info, and that is against the whole point of an open source wiki. I wondered and debated the very sentences you objected to so I don't necessarily disagree with you on these specifics. I don't claim to be a scholar, just a tech guy who wants to help a scholar. You might not like the tone, but you did not raise facts to contrary. As an analysts I am used to not just reporting the facts but the ramifications of the facts. If this is not considered scholarly then no problem I guess people can figure out 4 is the answer of 2 + 2 on their own. However, from my experience, many people fail to do so.
You state that mentioning the contradiction between OT and NT has gone largely ignored for 2000 is objectionable. Maybe so. However, maybe we can better say that a simple harmonizing or the two size differences has not been accomplished for 2000 years. You certainly did not state this in the wiki article anywhere. If you knew of thi solutions, then why didn't you include it? The biggest question is why did you exclude it? Is not the job of editors to take good data and make sure it is in proper form? If so, then you need to fix this.
So I think you raise some valid points, but also some invalid points. Together we should be able to fix all this and produce a synthesis. What do I need to do and what are you going to do? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.186.136.110 (talk) 21:36, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
With regards to your removing all my contributions to 'Sigismund III Vasa
since you insist on deleting facts published elsewhere in Wikipedia and in Europe by Norman Davies that clearly are relevent to the article in favor of the opinion of a small pseudo-intellectual elite I will just have to tell people that Wikipedia is a sham and a propoganda tool. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.193.5.116 (talk) 22:47, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
Edit warring warning
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on List of organizations designated by the Southern Poverty Law Center as anti-gay hate groups. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:
- Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
- Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Dominus Vobisdu (talk) 22:12, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 06:34, 27 October 2012 (UTC)
|
The Christianity Barnstar | |
| Thank you very much for your work in helping to bring this article up to its current level of quality. John Carter (talk) 19:07, 28 October 2012 (UTC) |
My apologies for the delay in this message, by the way. Things have been a bit hectic lately. John Carter (talk) 19:07, 28 October 2012 (UTC)
The Lot of a Contributor
Hello StAnselm: You recently deleted a link to my book "A Guide to the Psalms of David" which I had under "Non-denominational Translations for "self-published and not-noted" but at least you were kind enough to state "good faith." Your deletion was not unreasonable, although I could argue the greatest writers of the 15-19 centuries self-published their books, and since mine just came out, one could not expect it to be notable. But I do challenge you to find a book of ALL the Psalms that has a modern English translation that is not from either a Jewish or Christian perspective. I couldn't although I was hoping to reference a book other than mine for the millions who need the wisdom and guidance of the psalms without feeling they are being "prosyletized" by the author. I might add,that considering my book has been out less than six months I have already testimonials such as:
“Steve Rosner has captured the universal and modern meanings of the Psalms of David in a compelling new book. The reader will find inspiration and wisdom for today’s complex world in a brilliantly expressed interpretation of the 3000 year-old text." Bob Turner, U. S. Representative, NY 9th Congressional District
Steve, your book is a wonderful contribution to the use of Scripture. I continue to enjoy it and it sits next to my chair for easy access. Pastor Coleman Moore
Besides that, Dr. George Goldstein, former Superintendant of Schools in a Nassau County district will review it on Amazon; the Director of the Library at Ashland University wrote "the University will purchase a copy for our collection. I'm sure this title will be of interest to our undergraduates majoring in religion, our seminary students, faculty, layman, and pastors in Ashland, Ohio." and recently Dr. William B. Allen (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_B_Allen) Dean Emeritus James Madison College, Emeritus Professor of Political Science Michigan State University bought a number of copies for his students.
But I'm not writing to lobby for the link to my book to be allowed, but as you seem like a decent sort, attached is my response to one MrOllie who capriciously needed to threaten me with being barred from Wikipedia because of what he considered spam, when you had already deleted the reference and I made no attempt to override you. That action shows a meanness of spirit that is not uncommon among editors who look for the most flimsy of exuses to delete text. And as we are essentially helpless against this sort of nonsense, Wikipedia is only made poorer by losing many worthwhile contributors.
All The Best!
Steve
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> MrOllie: Your threat is empty, because I'm effectively already excluded from editing on Wikipedia as everything I've contributed in the past about the psalms has been deleted by you and others who are far from experts for the most tenuous of reasons. Moreover, you didn't even have the courtesy of answering my previous communication seeking some sort of compromise, so I could share my knowledge of the psalms with others. So while other editors were probably well-meaning, it is clear from your behavior as well as your history, you have no interest in helping contributors but get some perverse pleasure in sabatoging their efforts. In any case, my entry was already reverted, so your communication was unnecessary and shows your true character. Best stay away from me as I have no interest in anything you have to say.
Livebymyheart (talk) 03:58, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
This is an automated message from MadmanBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Moriarty (name), and it appears to be a substantial copy of http://wpedia.goo.ne.jp/enwiki/Moriarty.
It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.
If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) MadmanBot (talk) 04:38, 30 October 2012 (UTC)
See also links in Belshazzar
That you for referring met to wp:see also. I am familiar with that rule, but when a link is very relevant, I would repeat it in a see also section. Just like sometimes we do repeat a link inside an article, even though normally that would be overlinking. It is ultimately a judgment call, but in this case I would repeat the "writing on the wall" link, although I agree that the link to "Book of Daniel" is actually not necessary. Debresser (talk) 09:29, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
Australian Christian Lobby
Thank you for your edit here http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Australian_Christian_Lobby&diff=520953070&oldid=520885429. However, the entire sentence and the citations are all synthesised research. Contravening WP:NOR. If you have not seen it, Talk:Australian_Christian_Lobby#The_corruption_of_Wikipedia, may be of interest. Sam56mas (talk) 00:43, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
Nice job
Nice job creating the new little article, Photobombing. I've added some sister links. — Cirt (talk) 11:04, 3 November 2012 (UTC)
ESV War
Can you chime in on the talk page on this? ReformedArsenal (talk) 02:23, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
English Standard Version
Your recent editing history at English Standard Version shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Basileias (talk) 02:58, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
Adding another UTS
Hello, StAnselm! Please know that I am adding another "Union Theological Seminary" in the Philippines to this disambiguation page to avoid confusion. I also linked it to an article waiting for review. - Patnubaypatnugot (talk) 17:05, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
Koine Greek & The Bible
Hi there. Are you absolutely sure about Koine Greek pronouncing that sound as "b"? I accept it may be different from modern Greek, and given that the origin in Semetic was a "b" sound (from where be derive Bethlehem - house of bread), it is possible that the Greek language itself went through the change. If you're not sure, I believe the best course of action will be to learn for certain what was how and go from there. I know for a fact that Modern Greek invariably transcribes the sound as 'V' with no exceptions (eg. Velo from Βέλο). The "b" does exist in Greek and may appear alone at the start of a word but the Greek representation for this phoneme is "μπ". I just say this for there to be no confusion. So, are you aware of the actual fact? Or shall I look into it? I'll need some time as I am not on Wikipedia as often as I had been these days, I'm busy but I'll be back proper soon. Evlekis (Евлекис) (argue) 22:56, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
- Very good. Thanks. The article is fine in this case. Evlekis (Евлекис) (argue) 23:04, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
WP:OWN
As I have not contributed (or removed) even 1 word to the ESV article, WP:OWN does not apply. Can we keep this discussion on ESV's talk page. In any case I have not prevented you from editing the article (because I cannot). RobertRosen (talk) 10:18, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
TB
Message added 05:19, 11 November 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
But hey
If it makes you feel any better, the guy on WP:RFC/AAT who thought we should seriously examine using "Anti-choice" as the base for what's presently titled United States pro-life movement -- he wasn't too happy with me either. —chaos5023 (talk) 06:16, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
re Abortion-rights movements
I'd rather just keep it to my one initial comment, good luck with the discussion, I hope it is productive and amiable. :) — Cirt (talk) 00:27, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
I think Note # 16 backs up the claim of pilgrimage: nine same-sex couples have had weddings there (but the source is only a blog, so maybe we can better source it). Thanks for keeping me honest. Bearian (talk) 18:02, 14 November 2012 (UTC)
DYK for Diego de Guevara
 | On 16 November 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Diego de Guevara, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Diego de Guevara (pictured) is said to have thrown himself over the dead body of his master Charles the Bold to protect it on the battlefield? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Diego de Guevara. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
The DYK project (nominate) 00:01, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
Category Christians
So there is no way to see all persons tagged as Christians in one list without searching through all the sub categories... that seems like an oversight. ReformedArsenal (talk) 12:48, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
A cupcake for you!
|
Thanks for helping out so quickly in the Philip Wollen article! It's great to see such instant feedback. Tobias (Talk) 18:52, 17 November 2012 (UTC) |
BC
You were right, using BC in Belshazzar, for consistency. My mistake. Thanks. Debresser (talk) 09:11, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
Talkback
Message added 07:25, 20 November 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
-- Cheers, Riley Huntley 07:25, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
A good idea...
It would probably be wise not to edit war with the new IP at the Minnesota Family Council article. I would hate to see anyone get blocked. - MrX 21:25, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you.
- I'd like to understand why you continued to revert the IP after MrX took the trouble to gently remind you about edit-warring. There are now two reports at WP:ANEW about this article, one against the IP and one against you. I've warned the IP because they are arguably new, but, honestly, I don't see any excuse for your conduct. Please post a comment at WP:ANEW explaining what you did and whether you still think it was acceptable.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:08, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
Merge Category:Reformed Christians
Hi, and thanks for the barnstar! I thought you might want to weigh in here. Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2012 November 26#Category:Reformed Christians --JFHutson (talk) 03:36, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
Authorship of the Bible - divine authorship
I agree that sourcing is needed, but the entire section needs work. Unfortunately I have other demands on my time. No doubt you do too. But if you want to take this in your hand, I'll be happy to help - I respect you as an editor and only want to get a good article. PiCo (talk) 07:51, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
Your warning to SkepticalRaptor
While I am sure you meant well, you were also edit warring, and in addition you were the one removing sourced content. This could easily be seen as falling under the umbrella of Page Blanking Vandalism - you weren't, IMO, but it would be plausible to view your edits as such. I have left a note on the Ham talk page to SR advising him; I advise you also drop the warnings and so on. He's an experienced editor; you leaving 3RR warnings are almost certainly viewed as snarky attacks rather than helpful information, as they are intended to be. There is no useful purpose served by that. One puppy's opinion. KillerChihuahua?!? 16:40, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
Tekoa (ancient town)
Regarding an article you started, Tekoa (ancient town), would you mind joining the discussion here; Talk:Tuqu', thanks, Huldra (talk) 14:53, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
Hand-coding
Hey all :).
I'm dropping you a note because you've been involved in dealing with feedback from the Article Feedback Tool. To get a better handle on the overall quality of comments now that the tool has become a more established part of the reader experience, we're undertaking a round of hand coding - basically, taking a sample of feedback and marking each piece as inappropriate, helpful, so on - and would like anyone interested in improving the tool to participate :).
You can code as many or as few pieces of feedback as you want: this page should explain how to use the system, and there is a demo here. Once you're comfortable with the task, just drop me an email at okeyes
wikimedia.org and I'll set you up with an account :).
If you'd like to chat with us about the research, or want live tutoring on the software, there will be an office hours session on Monday 17 December at 23:00 UTC in #wikimedia-office connect. Hope to see some of you there! Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 23:14, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
Plz Can you help me
http://so.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Madaxweyneyaashii <--< No good http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:SomaliaPres <--< Good
help me if possible --abshir (talk) 10:30, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
James Dobson's comments after Sandy Hook Elementary School
Hello, StAnselm: I recently updated James Dobson's page to include his comments in the wake of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting; however, you were involved in the process of removing my update pending further discussion. Mr. Dobson chose to opine on this very serious and significant event merely days after it occurred, and the nature of the statement he delivered on his broadcast is very much in keeping with his views on American culture and values. Wikipedia serves a multitude of purposes, not least of which is to provide clear and (hopefully) unbiased materials that may be used by others to amass factual information and formulate their own views and opinions. I believe that Mr. Dobson's prompt commentary on this significant current event warrants inclusion in his Wikipedia page, particularly when other pieces of information, such as Dobson's delivery of the pre-race invocation at a NASCAR event in 2010, are deemed suitable for his Wikipedia page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.126.16.114 (talk) 04:56, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
Abortion clinic
Your version "Protesters often engage in sidewalk counseling, in which they warn people entering the clinic about the risks of abortion or communicate information regarding the status of fetuses." implies that the information they give is accurate, which is POV. Wouldn't "Protesters often engage in sidewalk counseling, in which they try to convince people not to choose abortion." be better ? VictorVVV (talk) 01:07, 22 December 2012 (UTC)
I reverted your revert and used http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/06/nyregion/06abortion.html?_r=0 as a reference.VictorVVV (talk) 02:04, 22 December 2012 (UTC)
...
Merry Christmas!
History2007 (talk) 20:37, 22 December 2012 (UTC)
Meetup invitation: Melbourne 26
 |
Hi there! You are cordially invited to a meetup next Sunday (6 January). Details and an attendee list are at Wikipedia:Meetup/Melbourne 26. Hope to see you there! John Vandenberg 06:57, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
(this automated message was delivered using replace.py to all users in Victoria)
TB
Message added by Jayarathina (talk) 06:22, 29 December 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.