Miscellaneous desk
< February 26	<< Jan \| February \| Mar >>	February 28 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Miscellaneous Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

February 27[edit]

Userbox[edit]

I wanted to make my page more creative. Can anyone give me tips on making a Userbox. Thanks!

Eg:

This user has been editing Wikipedia for more than 15 years.

I Copied this from a random page

MynameisShaun (talk) 03:51, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

One thing you can do is look at the code for userbox templates, and then custom-build your own. And in so doing, you can lose the pretentious third-person usage. --←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:19, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Here's Category:Userboxes. Do you want to create a new one or just browse the existing ones? Card Zero (talk) 06:01, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@MynameisShaun: There's Help:Userbox Maker if you want to make a userbox yourself, and there's also a list of editors willing to make custom userboxes at Wikipedia:Userboxes#Users who make userboxes upon request (of which I am one). ––FormalDude talk 06:44, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks MynameisShaun (talk) 10:31, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Westboro Baptist Church and the invasion of Ukraine[edit]

"We don't answer requests for opinions, predictions or debate"

After reading this blog post, would it be correct to assume that the Westboro Baptist Church is not condemning the recent invasion of Ukraine but instead expressing their approval? JIP | Talk 16:27, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

In other news, the WBC has declared that the Pope is a Catholic. --←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:07, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Why is this question considered a "request for opinions, predictions or debate"? Can't we respond by finding sources (besides the linked blog) where members of this "church" have indeed publicly expressed their views on the war in Ukraine? I'm not sure whether such sources exist, but surely it's not beyond the realm of possibility? I propose unhatting this question, even if the WBC are, um, (adjectives self-censored). Eliyohub (talk) 12:25, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The OP already has the blog post. We can't really interpret what it means to them. If anyone were to, they would be violating out expected norms. --Jayron 32 12:51, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Jayron32: ah, now I get where you're coming from. You are correct in that we cannot "interpret" the blog post. What I was thinking that we can potentially do, is look for any other mentions or statements by WBC members regarding the Ukraine war. Eliyohub (talk) 13:27, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The question was whether after reading a specific blog post, it would be 'correct to assume' something. Which would only ever involve interpretation and opinion, even if it wasn't quite obviously a rhetorical question anyway. AndyTheGrump (talk) 13:35, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

My original question was poorly worded. What I meant was: "Is it true that the Westboro Baptist Church approves of the invasion of Ukraine, instead of condemning it? This blog post was the only source material I have found out so far but I have trouble interpreting it." JIP | Talk 17:16, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It is explicit from the post that its author believes a raging mad God directed the invasion. The author then praises God. How might this be interpreted otherwise than as approval? What more evidence do you need to draw this conclusion? --Lambiam 00:26, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Well, Lambiam, the praise part alone is not an argument; seriously devout Christians can praise God even for the hardship they and their loved ones experience. So, there might be some way to interpret this more kindly if you want to challenge your extreme WP:AGF skills.

But I agree with you on the grounds of what else is on that page: That page has nothing to do with what Jesus Christ stood for; the web page oozes self-righteousness that would have made Jesus very angry (as explained in #4 here). Frankly, it's my main gripe with Christians nowadays that they too seldom publically distance themselves from these co-religionist who deviate so far from what was so important to Jesus. ◅ Sebastian 03:14, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you condemn an act, it is in my opinion inconsistent to praise God for making someone commit that act. Obviously, the WBC believe that the mainstream Christianity view of Jesus as a mealymouth hippie-wimp who was soft on sin is a satanic lie. So they have a different doctrinal view on what Jesus Christ stood for. --Lambiam 06:00, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you might think it's inconsistent, but it's not clear that they do. WBC's position seems to be that almost everyone is going to Hell, and ought to go to Hell, and if God makes them do things that make them go to Hell, then that's good, because that's where they belong. You might search for "why did God harden Pharaoh's heart?" to see positions of a logically similar form from somewhat more mainstream groups. --Trovatore (talk) 18:13, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The same complaint has been made about mainstream religion members; Muslims, for example, who decline to condemn extremist behavior by other Muslims. And, ironically, some of those complaints come from the same Christians who decline to comment on joints like the WBC. --←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 06:12, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Given the above commentary, I should clearly propose that this page be renamed Wikipedia:Miscellaneous forum, and that the claims that this is a reference desk should be removed as misleading. AndyTheGrump (talk) 09:44, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Have you read that blog post? --←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:23, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]