User talk:Logophile

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~~~. Four tildes (~~~~) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! -- Francs2000 | Talk [[]] 20:43, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Edward Hicks

Thanks for starting this article. It had been sitting on my "missing articles" list for a long time, because I decided I had to at least start history of chemistry before getting to the painterly Hicks. --Eric Forste 04:57, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks...

...for your contributions on Friends. See also this list at Meta. BCorr|Брайен 17:31, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Holiness movement

Thanks for the kind words! KHM03 22:45, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you.

Thank you. For the time being, I'd be happy to make any small contributions in a small way. I just have my doubts about any bigger commitment. You can put me down as on the project, though. I'm very impressed at how the articles have changed and improved over the past year. MaxHund 21:39, 2005 May 3 (UTC)

[edit] Don't mention it

I'm using wikipedia as my study tool for this intense one month american art history class, I figured improving the articles would help me absorb the material better. Thanks for the note though, glad to know that my work isn't going into the void :) Cobalty 10:20, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Inclusion not Deletion

(AIW) can you take a look at Wikipedia "apartheid"? There is a movement to delete a two-word inclusion that is fact and true. It's gotten to the point that everyone is focused on the disputing editors and not the edit itself.

" Deletionists are disputing the following statement: "South Africa was settled initially by the Dutch, Germans and French from the 17th century onwards. English, other European settlers, and Diaspora Jews followed in the 19th century." This statement is true, and it therefore should not be deleted.69.217.125.53 15:10, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Apartheid

Thanks!

I was also spammed with this, it is not an inclusionist/deletionist issue, it's an edit war. — PhilHibbs | talk 08:30, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Kenneth Taylor

Very nice article on Kenneth Taylor. You have saved me a lot of work! - Hoshie.Crat 03:02, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Talk:History of Christianity

Given your interests, you may want to chime in under the "Zoroastrian influence" on this talk page. KHM03 2 July 2005 00:39 (UTC)

[edit] Joel Bean

Thanks for the excellent article on Joel Bean. This would have been a difficult one for a Pacific YM'er to write with proper NPOV. --Eric Forste 03:51, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Rhode Island

Thanks for the kind words! Glad to help. —Charles O'Rourke 12:22, August 24, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Theodore Monod

Hi,

A while back you wrote the Higher Life movement article, which mentions "... the Very Reverend Dean of Canterbury, Theodore Monod ...". As far as I can tell Monod wasn't the Dean of Canterbury then or any other time... but I'm not completely convinced I've got that article right. Do you have any idea where you found this reference, so I can clear this up?

Thanks. Shimgray 13:30, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for that; it's helpful to know where it came from. I'm now a little less worried about the accuracy of my list of Deans :-) Shimgray 13:24, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Pehr Kalm

With regard to categories, the policy is not to include both a parent category and its sub-category. As Kalm was already in Category:Finnish botanists, he shouldn't also be in its parent category Category:Ginnish naturalists. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 18:30, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Edit summaries

Please use edit summaries, especially when you are deleting information. You removed category:Naturalists from several articles with no indication of why you'd done so. -Willmcw 22:50, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. The other admin was correct in regard to parent/child categories. The undescribed removal of [Category:American naturalists|Burbank, Luther] was what initially alarmed me. However, on reflection, Burbank was not much of a naturalist so you were right. In any case, when I do categorization projects I try to always leave some summary, even as little as "+cats". I appreciate your diligence and care, and your contributions to Wikipedia. Cheers, -Willmcw 09:22, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
Er, just to step in here, the general rule that the other admin stated was correct but there are exceptions. It's best to check the policy itself at WP:CLS. -- Antaeus Feldspar 17:48, 27 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Bounty on RSOF

I've replied at Talk:Religious_Society_of_Friends#featured. – Quadell (talk) (bounties) 14:32, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Fox, founder?

Wow, that I didn't know. I had just assumed that Fox was the founder, but thinking about it, his journal never really makes that claim, and he tends to depict himself running into people who have seen the light (figuratively speaking) independently (though he does a fair amount of convincing himself.)

If you have some good knowledge of exactly what was going on, I strongly urge you to put it in! It is "Common Wisdom" that Fox is the founder, it would be great if wikipedia, at least, could get it right. Sdedeo 06:54, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Elias Hicks

Thanks for the kind words. I'm not an authority on some of the articles to which I contribute images. I usually know something about them or I wouldn't bother with them at all; but my basic m.o. is to scavenge PD images from the Library of Congress collection. I'm surprised that more Wikipedians don't do that. I'm not a Quaker, either. I'm a United Methodist. My contributions to articles about Quakers have come through my interest in the Underground Railroad. Cuppysfriend 18:05, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Rhode Island Capitol

I found a reliable source saying that the capitol in Providence has the fourth-largest self-supporting marble dome. I have put it into the article with a citation attached. Logophile 11:44, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks! While I like the other stat better, I'd rather have the proper one. :-)--SarekOfVulcan 15:16, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Christianity, tolerance, and equality

This is an article that was started (not by me!) in relation to Criticism of Christianity. When you have an opportunity, please take a look at it and give your take on the article talk page or make edits. I had redirected it to the "Criticism" page, but the original author didn't seem to care for that option. Any help would be great...thanks...KHM03 13:16, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Supporting citations?

Can you please provide a suporting citation for your insertion. As has been discussed at great length on the ID talk pages, even Behe has admitted that there is no research into ID, and a foundation which offered to support ID research had no takers. So what research into ID are you talking about? In addition, if their research has been refused by real journals, why have they not published it elsewhere? While there have been papers which claim to show problems with evolutionary theory, this is nowhere near the same as publications in support of ID. Guettarda 04:15, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

How can you add a "conclusion" which flatly contradict all evidence? You added "The proponents of Intelligent Design are caught in a vicious cycle: their papers are excluded from publication and then this exclusion is used to denounce the theory." What papers are you talking about? "Are excluded" suggests that there is some conspiracy to exclude them. And what theory? ID is at best an hypothesis, not at all a theory. Guettarda 05:02, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
The article clearly says "The failure to follow the procedures of scientific discourse, and the failure to submit work to the scientific community which withstands scrutiny". The Sternberg paper, which was mentioned above, was withdrawn because it was improperly published - it was published despite being rejected by its reviewers in terms of its scientific merit (or lack thereof). Your idea of a "vicious circle" implies some sort of conspiracy. Nothing in the paragraph supports this conspiracy theory, nothing I have come across elsewhere supports this conspiracy theory...so you must have some other source. I simply asked that you cite that source. I find your attitude puzzling for an established Wikipedia editor. Guettarda 15:20, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Merry Christmas

I pray you have a very merry Christmas and a truly blessed 2006. KHM03 19:40, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Edit summary

Hello. Please remember to always provide an edit summary. Thanks and happy editing. JoaoRicardotalk 14:32, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hymn of creation

On this AFD discussion, you voted that Hymn of creation (AfD discussion) should be transwikied to Wikisource. However, a later comment by User:Uncle G brought to my notice that the entire Rig Veda already exists at Wikisource, including The Rig Veda, Hymn 10.129 and The Rig Veda, Hymn 10.130, since September 2005. Transwikification is, thus, not an option. Please change your vote to reflect this. Thank you.--May the Force be with you! Shreshth91($ |-| r 3 $ |-| t |-|) 12:46, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Articles For Deletion

Hi, one or both of the following situations applies to you, and you may therefore be interested in related discussions.

You may also be interested in a discussion of whether or not the entire text of a whole bible chapter should be contained in the 6 articles concerning those specific chapters, and whether or not they should only use the translations favoured by fundamentalists. This is being discussed at Wikipedia:Centralized discussion/Whole bible chapter text.

--Victim of signature fascism | Don't forget to vote in the Wikipedia Arbitration Committee elections 17:54, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Personal Greeting

Hi! Got your message on my talk page. Thank you for the greeting. :) Wynler 18:12, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] proposed policy

Hi, you recently commented on bible-verse articles, and may therefore be interested in commenting about a proposed policy covering roughly 50 specific verses:

--Victim of signature fascism 20:18, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks, once again

Last time I looked at Valiant Sixty it was a red-linked request of a dream article. Thanks for making my dream article come true once again. --arkuat (talk) 14:00, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Leonard Verduin

Have you read any of Leonard Verduin's books? If you value the separation of church and state, then you must read his That First Amendment and the Remnant, ISBN 1890050172. DFH 17:12, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Proposal on Notability

Because you're a member of the Association of Inclusionist Wikipedians, I'm notifying you that the inclusionist proposa Wikipedia:Non-notabilityl is in progress to define the role of notability in articles. Please help us make this successful! Also note the proposal Wikipedia:Importance is a deletionist proposla that seeks to officially introduce notabiltiy for the first time. --Ephilei 04:45, 4 July 2006 (UTC)


[edit] List Cleanup

Hello! One of your artilces is marked for cleanup, and I thought you'd like to be in on it before any heavy editing got on the way! Join in on the discussion here. ParticularlyEvil 05:14, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Francis Daniel Pastorius

Hi, Logophile. Knowing your interest in things Quaker, I wanted to let you know about the article I started on the remarkable Francis Daniel Pastorius. Feel free to add to it. -- Cuppysfriend 19:11, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Quaker articles

Thanks for your encouragement. I am planning to do more work on Robert Were Fox F.R.S., the Quaker scientist who demonstrated that temperature rises as you drill deeper into the earth (he went down some very deep mines to show this). He and his family seem to have adopted a post-creationist belief system in the 1840s. Do I gather from this Talk Page that you have a positive attitude to Intelligent Design? I have been zapping around the WP links on this topic I am inclined to the cosmological views of Martin Rees.
Best
---Vernon White 22:39, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../l/o/g/User_talk%7ELogophile_14f8.html"