User talk:Andrew c/archive1
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This is an archive of past discussions. 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. |
A welcome from Sango123
Hello, Andrew c/archive1, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions; I hope you like the place and decide to stay. We're glad to have you in our community! Here are a few good links for newcomers:
- If you haven't already, drop by the New user log and tell others a bit about yourself.
- Always sign your posts on talk pages! That way, others will know who left which comments.
- The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
- Simplified Ruleset
- How to edit a page
- Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
- Picture tutorial
- How to write a great article
- Naming conventions
- Manual of Style
- Wikipedia Glossary
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Though we all make goofy mistakes, here is what Wikipedia is not. If you have any questions or concerns, don't hesitate to see the help pages or add a question to the village pump. The Community Portal can also be very useful.
Happy editing!
-- Sango123 (talk) 22:21, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
P.S. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you need help with anything or simply wish to say hello. :)
In response to Image copyright problem with Image:Kirby sad.gif
What is wrong? The company distributing this made it as an icon, meaning it can be downloaded and used by anyone.
--CherryT 01:35, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
- I think I uploaded this as a test upload, please delete it if your are an admin.
CherryT 20:33, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
Sorry
I'm not sure if you are monitoring the talk page of Emergency contraception, if you aren't I appologized publicly to you. I don't mean to be hasty or revert blindly, and I am sure that you are trying to help wikipedia. It is just that when you removed some of those paragraphs I felt it not only disrupted the flow, but also got rid of some information. In the future I hope we can discus things, before engaging in any revert wars. Chooserr 02:54, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks. I was initially caught off guard about your revert without any discussion on the talk page, but it wasn't a big enough deal to me for me to get in a revert war. I'm glad we can attempt to talk this out, and I hope you like the suggestions David Ruben made on the talk page. Seriously, thanks for contacting me, and apologizing. And likewise, I hope I haven't done anything to offend you. Cheers! --Andrew c 00:31, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
- I've looked briefly over it, but my primary concern is Hipocrite who seems to be opposing me on three articles. If you were to look back to the originally version by me you will see that I readded the section on ECs effects on pre-born babies and even cited a link by planned parenthood that said while no effects are known they wouldn't recommend use if you were pregnant. Also I think my wording was considerably NPOV. Chooserr 00:46, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
Sorry about the imprecise links, just being lazy! Andycjp June 2006
Abortion revert(?)
I added additional information. I found that I'd put 3rd world instead of Developing and have since changed that too. I also made it a subsection. Chooserr 02:09, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
Roe v. Wade
Thanks for added the informaiton on the South Dakatoa case. I added the house bill number and the fact that it does not provide exceptions for rape and incest (amendments to do so failed in the Senate. I'm in Virginia, too, in Roanoke. --Beth Wellington 18:04, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
Yeshua
Yes, this should be added to my outline. Arch O. LaTalkTCF 20:55, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
Honestly, I don't know anything about adoptionism or Marcionism. Care to contribute what you know? Arch O. LaTalkTCF 02:51, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
Your userpage
No problem. It was a bit humourous, though. lol - Tangotango 06:38, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
- Andrew, you seem to have p'od an anonymous IP. All I got was a sarcastic remark...and this lousy T-Shirt. Arch O. LaTalkTCF 06:56, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
-
- He knows what he did. 68.188.139.55
- I'm afraid not, but I'm flattered by the attention anyway! --Andrew c 07:05, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
- He knows what he did. 68.188.139.55
Life and Teachings, but why limit it to the gospels?
I guess I was thinking in particular of higher Biblical criticism, which attempts to place the Bible in its historical and cultural context. What we have now lacks this context; it's basically a minimalist version of the Biblical Jesus that people will either consider to be too secular or too religious/hagiographic, depending on their own POV. I left a longer explanation at Talk:Jesus. Arch O. LaTalkTCF 03:19, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
Destubify
Hey there, I see you have a degree in Communication Design. What do you know of broadcast designer? All I know is that it needs to be destubified. Arch O. LaTalkTCF 02:36, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
Libraries Holding the Jesus books
Sanders is at:
VA ALEXANDRIA LIBR VAX VA ARLINGTON CNTY DEPT OF LIBR VIA VA AVERETT UNIV VBA VA BLUE RIDGE COMMUN COL LIBR PZF VA BLUE RIDGE REG LIBR VMA VA BRIDGEWATER COL VBC VA CENTRAL RAPPAHANNOCK REG LIBR RR1 VA CHESAPEAKE PUB LIBR SYST TWA VA COLLEGE OF WILLIAM & MARY VWM VA COUNTY OF HENRICO PUB LIBR VHP VA DANVILLE COMMUN COL, LIBR PZH VA EASTERN MENNONITE UNIV VEM VA GEORGE MASON UNIV VGM VA GRAY RES CTR QMC VA JAMES MADISON UNIV VMC VA LONGWOOD UNIV VLC VA MARYMOUNT UNIV MMV VA MASSANUTTEN REG LIBR PFN VA OLD DOMINION UNIV VOD VA RANDOLPH-MACON COL VRM VA RICHARD BLAND COL PZC VA RICHMOND PUB LIBR VRP VA UNION PSCE VUT VA UNIV OF MARY WASHINGTON VMW VA UNIV OF RICHMOND VRU VA UNIV OF VIRGINIA VA@ VA US AIR FORCE, LANGLEY AFB LIBR LBA VA VIRGINIA BEACH PUB LIBR SYST VPL VA VIRGINIA TECH VPI
Jesus Christ, King of the Jews:
VA ALEXANDRIA LIBR VAX VA ARLINGTON CNTY DEPT OF LIBR VIA VA AVERETT UNIV VBA VA CENTRAL RAPPAHANNOCK REG LIBR RR1 VA CHESAPEAKE PUB LIBR SYST TWA VA COLLEGE OF WILLIAM & MARY VWM VA EMORY & HENRY COL VEH VA GEORGE MASON UNIV VGM VA HAMPDEN-SYDNEY COL VHS VA HAMPTON PUB LIBR VAJ VA JAMES MADISON UNIV VMC VA LYNCHBURG COL VLY VA LYNCHBURG PUB LIBR VCQ VA MARY BALDWIN COL VMB VA MARYMOUNT UNIV MMV VA MOUNTAIN EMPIRE COMMUN COL LIBR PZP VA NEWPORT NEWS PUB LIBR SYST PEQ VA PAUL D CAMP COMMUN COL TWF VA RADFORD UNIV VRA VA RANDOLPH-MACON COL VRM VA REGENT UNIV VCB VA ROANOKE COL VRO VA SALEM PUB LIBR RNS VA SHENANDOAH UNIV VAQ VA SOUTHWEST VIRGINIA COMMUN COL PZX VA TIDEWATER COMMUN COL, PORTSMOUTH TWI VA UNIV OF MARY WASHINGTON VMW VA UNIV OF RICHMOND VRU VA UNIV OF VIRGINIA VA@ VA VIRGINIA BEACH PUB LIBR SYST VPL VA VIRGINIA STATE UNIV VSC VA VIRGINIA TECH VPI VA VIRGINIA THEOL SEMINARY VTS VA WASHINGTON & LEE UNIV VLW VA WASHINGTON CNTY PUB LIBR PGF VA WILLIAMSBURG REG LIBR VAK VA WYTHEVILLE COMMUN COL PZZ
In the Fullness of Time
VA COLLEGE OF WILLIAM & MARY VWM VA ROANOKE COL VRO VA UNION PSCE VUT VA VIRGINIA BEACH PUB LIBR SYST VPL VA VIRGINIA THEOL SEMINARY VTS
Hav fun! --CTSWyneken 19:25, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
Nice Work!
Nice work on the Jesus Talk subpages! Maybe we'll get this all done one day. --CTSWyneken 02:06, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks for the compliment, and thanks for the list of libraries! I have the easy part out of the way, quoting the sources already cited under note 1 for the dates. Now I just have to sift through the others to find the appropriate information (and track down those last few books). It looks like the Cohen book doesn't have a date range for Jesus (he is seriously only mentioned in passing on maybe half a dozen pages). I'll keep updating over the next few days. I'll have these books in my possession for the next month and a half, so if there is anything else you want me to check up on, just holler.--Andrew c 02:46, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
Nice work also on Ebionites and Marcionites. I just think they need to be condensed to one paragraph apiece, to avoid giving undue weight. We can then remove the subheaders ;) Also, what's the difference between Gnostics and Marcionites? Arch O. LaTalkTCF 02:48, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
- I was wondering if a better approach might be to just describe terms like adoptionism and docetism, and briefly link to early Christian groups who held these views? Or we could just rework what we have. Anyway, the difference between Gnostic and Marcionites was significant. While Marcionites had their own Churches and had split off from Orthodoxy, Gnostics were a secret elitist group hidden within Orthodox Christian sects. By 'day' they appeared as any other member of the Chruch, but by 'night' they believed they held the secret teachings of Jesus that gave them the wisdom to escape the evils of the material world. It also seems that while there were some Gnostics who had similar docetic views to Marcionites, most Gnostics believed that Jesus was a regular human who was possessed by the Spirit of The Christ at baptism (in the symbolic form of a dove), and was later abandon by the Christ at the crucifixion (thus the 'Why have you forsaken me?' bit), only to return to resurrect the body of Jesus. Hmm... I might change the Gnostic section. I'm pretty happy with the Ebionites section (but if we need to shorten it, we could loose the last paragraph), and I feel like the Marcionite section needs major work. I'll see what I can do, but would appreciate suggestions and revisions once I'm done.--Andrew c 03:10, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
-
- Are you going to do that now? I just removed the quote from the Marcionite section, so it's back down to one paragraph, but still more about their schism than about their views of Jesus. When the editor came by yesterday, he added some stuff that really belongs in History of Christianity. Arch O. LaTalkTCF 03:21, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
Ebionite fact check: Did Ebionites view Jesus as the Messiah, or a potential Messiah? Also, are we talking about the Davidic Messiah, the Josephic Messiah, a fusion of the two (as in Christianity) or some other concept of Messiah?
I ask because I found the following paragraph in the Ebionite article:
The Ebionites emphasized the humanity of Jesus as the mortal son of Mary and Joseph, who was 'adopted' as a son of God when he was anointed with the Holy Spirit at his baptism, and therefore could have become the messianic king-priest of Israel (by virtue of also being both a descendant of king David through his father and a descendant of high priest Aaron through his mother) but was chosen to be the last and greatest of the prophets.
.
Arch O. LaTalkTCF 04:06, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
- From Schaff:
- 1. The common Ebionites, who were by far the more numerous, embodied the Pharisaic legalism, and were the proper successors of the Judaizers opposed in the Epistle to the Galatians. Their doctrine may be reduced to the following propositions:
-
- (a) Jesus is, indeed, the promised Messiah, the son of David, and the supreme lawgiver, yet a mere man, like Moses and David, sprung by natural generation from Joseph and Mary. The sense of his Messianic calling first arose in him at his baptism by John, when a higher spirit joined itself to him. Hence, Origen compared this sect to the blind man in the Gospel, who called to the Lord, without seeing him: "Thou son of David, have mercy on me."
-
- (b) Circumcision and the observance of the whole ritual law of Moses are necessary to salvation for all men.
-
- (c) Paul is an apostate and heretic, and all his epistles are to be discarded. The sect considered him a native heathen, who came over to Judaism in later life from impure motives.
-
- (d) Christ is soon to come again, to introduce the glorious millennial reign of the Messiah, with the earthly Jerusalem for its seat.
- I believe a major issue here is that all we really have about a lot of these early sects are from Church Fathers writings about Heresies, sometimes contradicting each other (see Gospel of the Ebionites vs. The Gospel of the Hebrews vs. The Gospel of the Nazareans). There very well may have been Ebionites who didn't accept Jesus as the Jewish Messiah, but Ehrman and Schaff suggest otherwise, generally speaking.--Andrew c 04:28, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
- Since you have the sources, you may need to edit and update Ebionites. A complication is that modern Ebionites (established 1985) are Jews who believe that Jesus was a prophet but not the Messiah. I've posted my questions to Talk:Jesus#Ebionite Messiah?. Arch O. LaTalkTCF 04:58, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
I would love your help.
Hi,
I know you are interested in christianity, and I recently started a new wiki over at wikicities which is on the subject of christianity. [1] is the site.
The goal is to have a knowledgebase on christianity from a distinctly "C(hristian)POV" rather than the NPOV. It is not meant to be a mere Christian Encyclopedia, but to foster a real sense of community. I'd like to include things like current events, news, stories, and anything that would add to both an understanding of Christianity, but also its enjoyment. I'm looking for help to build a resource that could really enrich the lives of Christians.
I know you are busy but I am actively seeking new sysops/admins to help me build this site up, and I would be positively thrilled if you could contribute in any capacity whatsoever. nsandwich 01:09, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks for the invite, but I cannot, in good faith (no pun), contribute to this project: I am not Christian.--Andrew c 01:18, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
Condoms
The section of controversy on the Condoms page doesn't really belong. Or so I believe. The reason is stated on the talk, and I was wondering if you might look it over. Chooserr 00:35, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
Starbucks
Okay, I'll leave the section along in regards to planned parenthood until I can find a source, but what about the section on their labor dispute? It has been deleted several times. Chooserr 01:30, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
STO'PP
I'm not sure about Starbucks, because I haven't been able to find much on the web, but I did find a list of other companys that are funding Planned Parenthood. I intend to add it to the Planned Parenthood article under funding. Chooserr 01:27, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
- The webpage you linked to is not a verificable source. Furthermore, I am skeptical of a website that says you have send them money in order to get access to the 'real' list. Seems fishy to me. It's a good start, but hardly WP:V.--Andrew c 04:43, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
Helping Verifiability
Please leave a note for GTB User_talk:GTBacchus#Sources. I'd like to settle the argument on death, and both the policy-friendly and simplest way to do that is to use the sources.--Pro-Lick 21:56, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
Re: Dating of Matthew's Gospel
Regarding my link to the Catholic Encyclopedia which you summarily deleted: The date being 1911 or 2006 is irrelevant- this is a question that spans 19 centuries, and there have been no recent developments in the case that I have read about in the news. So the teachings of the Catholic Church have no relevance to the dating of their canonical books? Thank you for deciding the issue for the rest of us.--josephconklin 28 March 2006
Amiatinus and Vaticanus
I'll grant that Vaticanus is debatable, however the large full page miniature of Ezra the Scribe in Amiatinus makes it, in my mind, an illuminated manuscript (see image here). This image, with the enlarged and decorated initial and the green bar decorated with the three crosses to indicate the start of Hebrews pushed it into the illuminated column for me. Others may vary, but I see this as one of the early steps in marking divisions of the text with decoration that lead to the fully decorated text of the Insular manuscripts and all that followed them. Dsmdgold 02:48, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
- It would be a bit redundant to have both since illuminated manuscripts is a sub-cat of manuscripts, and it would be my inclination just to have illuminated. But the Earth probably won't come to an end if we have both. Dsmdgold 02:59, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
NYT abortion article
Since the NY Times is a newspaper not known for being biased, so its article cannot be seen as supporting either Pro-life or Pro-choice, therefore, it is more appropriate to put the article in the article on abortion. In addition, it includes information, like pointing out various problems associated with a country that has zero tolerance for abortion, which could be of importance to the article.
Thanks for the speedy edits, for clearly the article is heavily watched by many people.--Ryz05 04:38, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
Abortion
I support your version of the abortion intro and I continue to do so, but I no longer have the patience to deal with these people. They are so biased that they don't have a clue of what neutrality is. Good luck with them. Alienus 04:46, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
Talk subpage
Thanks for the comment about the poll movement on the main page, I wasn't sure what to write. I am going to archive the subpage now, as my browser crashed once because of the length.
Also thanks for all the work you are putting in on trying to get consensus on this intro, I'd never have thought it would be such a nightmare. |→ Spaully°τ 16:04, 11 April 2006 (GMT)
Rhetoric or reality?
My rhetoric ("abortion rights has now come to mean that a pregnant woman has a right to a dead fetus if the child is not wanted") is not as off the mark as you may think. I am simply repeating what a prominent well-respected abortionists has himself stated:
- "[T]he abortion patient has a right not only to be rid of the growth, called a fetus, in her body, but also has a right to a dead fetus. . . [I] never have any intention of trying to protect the fetus, if it can be saved. . . as a general principle [t]here should not be a live fetus." - Dr. Robert Crist, abortion doctor, testifying in federal court in 1980
____G_o_o_d____ 00:20, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
Beautiful map
Hi colleague, great job at Image:First century palestine.gif. It looks very professional. I think it is worth to consider to: 1) transfer it from GIF format (see Wikipedia:Image use policy#Format) and 2) move it to Wikimedia Commons. What do you think? ←Humus sapiens ну? 10:06, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
Re: History of Abortion
Your praise is very much appreciated (slip a little Kaldari's way, too, as he's helped out quite a bit). :-) I look forward to continuing to improve the article in new ways. -Severa | !!! 03:26, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
Dierks Lake
Hi. Yes, the content came from the sources you listed, but as far as I can tell, it's public domain. i.e. its a U.S. government website with no warning of containing other copyrighted material. Regards, Mark83 21:32, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
Partial Birth abortion
Thank you for your consideration of my edits. Thanks for changing "outcries". Please take a look at talk - I have invited suggestions for wording relevant factual information to add to the article. ____G_o_o_d____ 15:13, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
Also, I have invited input here (see my second remark on the bottom of the sub-section). It is, of course, better to have some input prior to going forward. I appreciate your efforts. ____G_o_o_d____ 15:17, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
My RfA
 |
Thank you for voting for me at my RFA. I am thankful for your kind words and confidence in me. Even though it failed, constructive criticism was received. In the next few months, I intend to work on expanding my involvement in other namespaces and try a few different subjects than in the past. - CTSWynekenTalk |
Talk:Abortion/First_paragraph#Version_5.0
Feedback please. - RoyBoy 800 04:09, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
Re:SVG Fonts
Hm, You bring up a very good point... I hadn't considered this. Technically speaking, I feel it's OK because i'm not literally uploading the font iself. One could argue that they can easily go to [2], set the sample text as 'abcdefghijklmnopqurstuvwxyz', put it into illustrator, and convert it into outlines as well. But yeah, hm. I'll think about this; thanks for bringing it up. atanamir 00:30, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
- In fact, adobe even posts [3] all the characters to their fonts in PDF format -- PDF stores the acutal paths for the fonts as well. atanamir 00:31, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
Thanks
Thank you for putting the time in to do the Partial Birth Abortion merge with IDX - it's a great improvement for NPOV. Sophia Gilraen of Dorthonion 23:02, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
"False" statement
Thanks for your post on may talk page, Andrew. I have replied on Talk:Christianity. Sorry if I offended you. Str1977 (smile back) 15:37, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
Been really busy
HEy
Sorry i havent' done anything with the typeface SVGs yet; i've gotten to be really busy the last week. I didn't forget about it -- but i'll get to it as soon as some free time clears up. atanamir 01:46, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
Ancient Greece/Hellenic
Thank you for the suggestion regarding Hellenistic civilization and Hellenistic Greece. I was using the various alternatives on the "Hellenic" disambiguation page, and those weren't there. Thanks for letting me know they exist--they will certainly be much better for the post-Alexander references. I will add them to the dab page too. --Iggle 06:33, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
It occurs to me belatedly that if "Hellenistic civilization" and "Hellenistic Greece" are the appropriate articles to link to in a particular context, then the linked word should be "Hellenistic," not "Hellenic." Perhaps you can keep an eye out for those too. --Iggle 03:58, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
Earliest Christian Art
The earliest Christian art suggests Jesus being known as a young worker of magic by some early Christians from the late 3rd and early 4th century. This gives some support of The Secret Gospel of Mark and of Jesus being thought of as a wonder-worker in the legit Gospel of Mark. I thought it held some importance. Plainly you disagree.User:Kazuba 12 May 2006
==Thanks Andrew== Took a shot at the Images of Jesus. User:Kazuba 12 May 2006
Mary, Mother of Jesus Page
The reason I added the table with all the data was so that it would show all the relevant Bible verses regarding her virginity. I could have also just come to the conclusions that the table might show, but I thought it better to let people realise it themselves, and yes, a lot of it is the same reason over and over again, but it is a requirement to prevent any possible doubt. The table is still available on the history tab of the page (it shows the time when you took it off), and you can see for yourself. JBogdan 11:04, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
Naming "pro-life" and "pro-choice"
Andrew --
I've added a discussion blurb to Talk:Emergency_contraception#Pro-life_vs_anti-abortion_and_pro-choice_vs_abortion-rights.3F; I'm not sure the link you provided (WP:NCI) applies or ought to apply to political groups. Let me know what you think --
Thanks,
--Rocketfairy 13:43, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
Didache
I would say go ahead and make your changes. There does not appear to any opposition to it. (Simonapro 16:13, 18 May 2006 (UTC))
Embroys as alive
Yes, yes -- embryos are definately alive in the same sense that a liver is. There's a debate as to whether they constitute a living thing, in the sense of being a separate, autonomous living organism.
--Rocketfairy 22:11, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
Your recent Email to me
Thank you for pointing out the 3RR rule to me. You are, of course, correct that I overstepped a rule of Wikipedia. Being aware of it now, I will try to be more careful in the future.
In regard to the Christian views of Jesus page, I'm not sure how much of a middle ground can be reached. If a topic that is not a Christian view of Jesus is pasted in, it is pretty much inappropriate by definition. I try to be respectful of others. I don't go into the Jewish view of Jesus site and make changes or impose a Christian viewpoint. It doesn't matter if I agree or disagree with the content posted there; it's Jewish views and I have no place in telling Jews how to think or what the Christian view is in a site called Jewish views of Jesus. I would hope this same courtesy would be extended to Christian views of Jesus. That it is not, is certainly unfortunate.
You have stated my disclaimer at the top of the page is against the MOS. Please provide more information. It appeared to be an appropriate addition based on word choice, but I am certainly willing to listen to your thoughts and knowledge.
Thank you,
Bbagot 00:47, 20 May 2006 (UTC) Bbagot
Edit Wars Matthew and Luke
I feel I have tried to do my best to retain as much of the information that you have presented as I felt I could. I understand our viewpoints on what is worthy may not agree. I think you'll agree I didn't just revert several layers of posts wiping out important factual information as was done recently by others in Luke. (Including information that you had entered.)
What information do you feel was removed unfairly? You are probably in a better position to tell me than I would be to find it.
Personally I feel you have probably received a pretty good picture of my views from the talk page on Matthew. I would like to see the articles be as factual as possible. I do not believe that straight facts without opinion should be edited unless they are off topic or rambling. I try to listen to your concerns and sometimes even go back and edit my work in ways that I think will be more harmonious. I'm not a big fan of the need to label majority and minority views, especially without a common understanding of how those numbers are arrived at, but then you are probably already aware of this. I'm also not a big fan of quoting cute comments from writers apart from factual information. We can all add in witty sayings from sources, but how does that help to truly discuss the Gospel of Luke or Matthew?
It has seemed to me that you are following me. If I post to a different topic than the one where we have had our discussion, suddenly you are there altering or removing my edits. Part of this is probably my fault. I had intended to start with Matthew and move to Luke followed by Mark and John. When I moved to Luke and made my first series of edits, I didn't realize until after I saved the work that you were the preceding user. Under the circumstances, I would have waited for more alterations to be made before first posting. This may have created consternation in you that I didn't didn't mean to occur. I apologize for that.
I hope this is a good starting point for discussion. I am always available to listen to your views or concerns.
Bbagot 01:21, 20 May 2006 (UTC) Bbagot
Thank you for replying, but I think you'll find that there are reasons that people negotiate behind closed doors instead of in public forums. It was not prudent to change the venue.
Bbagot 06:17, 20 May 2006 (UTC) Bbagot
Our previous discussion was limited to the Matthew board, and I did respond to all inquiries or thoughts. You didn't talk to me about Luke, but did go to other sites to tell people you were having difficulty with me. I thought it would be best to communicate with you directly. I have been reluctant, especially with Luke because the talk section has been so small, to monopolize or fill a board with a large volume of discussion when misunderstands, or, especially on boards where there is no human contact, hard feelings could be involved that could be soothed first on a personal level. I'm not sure, when all is said and done, that our viewpoints are going to be worth the amount of space that we take up on those talk areas.
Bbagot 18:14, 20 May 2006 (UTC) Bbagot
I will make updates and comments based upon our discussions, and respond to Matthew concerns (which I haven't yet read). I don't have the time right now, but I don't want you to think I've forgotten our conversation or in any way deemed it unimportant. Bbagot 03:34, 22 May 2006 (UTC) Bbagot
I'll get back to Matthew and Luke but I'm not sure how much I'll be around during the holiday. They still take some thought so I can't just pop in for a minute and get anything meaningful accomplished. Bbagot 01:11, 26 May 2006 (UTC) Bbagot
3RR Report
"I'm sorry you feel I am trying to censor your view. I said in my report that I thought a block would probably be premature at this point, and you have shown an effort to work out some concerns on talk pages on the gospel articles..."
Indeed Andrew, but your words and actions don't match, and when that occurs the correct interpretation is to follow the actions. You chose to report me before an infraction occurred, and, when you saw I had a 3hour suspension, chose to provide added information that would increase this. Did you want me to be censored? Of course you did. I'm not sure why, but that's not my concern. You should, however, try to be honest with yourself. I hope we can continue to work together to improve the overall quality of Wikipedia articles in those areas where our paths cross. Bbagot 16:15, 24 May 2006 (UTC) Bbagot
WikiSmile
romarin
[talk to her ] has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Smile to others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk pages. Happy editing!
For the real-life work that you do on the weekends, and for your edits to the relevant pages. Keep it up! romarin[talk to her ] 03:56, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
minor response re:IDX
Am I supposed to reply to you here, or on my talk page? Sorry, new to this.
I didn't read the cited article. It just didn't make sense to remove the brain if it doesn't make the skull any smaller. I'm not sure where one would look to support one side or the other. My experience has been that every article on abortion is pretty much slanted to one point-of-view or another (and that includes allegedly-neutral sites like WebMD)
So... I guess it was forward of me to make the edit, as I really don't know for sure, but on the other hand I can't prove that it doesn't, either.
Perhaps someone who has a better understanding of the procedure will review it. xxxyyyzzz 21:59, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
Matthew see also Gospel of the Hebrews
I am not sure what you want on the Matthew talk page to justify the top see also diversion. Let me know if what I put is insufficient. Bejnar 15:47, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
Abortifacient
Hi Andrew. You and I have encountered one another on talk pages for various abortion-related articles. I thought your input may be of use on the abortifacient article. Someone recently removed the whole section on drugs and other devices which prevent implantation. I think it should be there, but I could use some support. Anyway, thanks ahead of time for taking a look. MamaGeek TALK CONTRIB 13:31, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
Matthew
Yes, I am aware of Bibleverse, Bibleref, niv, wikisource, and one or two others. The slight problem is that none of these are supported on standalone copies of WP or paper copies, nor can we rely on them to always be there. I am also aware of the heateed discussions about bible verse articles. I also think a user is entitled to expect the text (a text) of a bible verse, plus some information about it if they look it up on WP. I am planning on writing a modest proposal, in the next few weeks, to try to solve some of these problems. This exercise is a warm up for that, as much as anything. Incidentally I have just read the article New Testament apocrypha, and am amazed at how much more there is to know about the early church. Rich Farmbrough 17:41 6 June 2006 (UTC).
George Tiller
The article is of very low quality and quite POV. More to the point, it's not even clear that it should exist. As far as I can tell, Tiller is not notable. So either the article should be deleted outright or cut down to a stub. Al 20:56, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
I'm in agreement with Al. In addition to being badly-formatted, and of dubious notability, the article reads as utter hearsay. Its almost complete dependence upon the non-specific citation of pro-life organizations is especially problematic. If notability could be established, reliable sources found, and the critical tone neutralized, perhaps a good article could be made. -Severa (!!!) 23:02, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
pro-life activism
It is good thayou chaged babies to fetuses, but the "Face the truth display" is thesam thing as the truth dipslay. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Staggering234 (talk • contribs) 01:29, 11 June 2006 .
Template creation Birth control
re you offer to create the templates - Awwwl :-( , well ok then :-) Having just been shown how to use optional parameters on template:drugbox, i had been looking forward myself to such coding (quite aside from whether anyone agrees it would be a good idea or not) ! :-)
Being more serious, if you are experienced at such things, then I would welcome your guidence to further my proficiency at template table markup & design. But I think we need quite a lot/reasonable consensus as to the idea and the required elements before what will be a major change to the structure of quite a lot of dearly-held articles. Recent tussle over NFP & NBC seems to have been triggered by my creation of template:BirthControl and the discussion of how this should be ordered. So I'm inclined to sit back a few days and let other issues get resolved whilst we see how this proposal is received....(?) Yours David Ruben Talk 02:16, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
I've tried to make this live with added conditional testing (as works with Template:Drugbox), but I seem to have 2 problems:
- Getting optional captions to display and more importantly
- For optional paramters whose row should not be shown at all if undefined, a blank line is still appearing. See Template talk:BirthControl infobox where I show the problems as related to an example mark-up for condoms
Can you help fix coding using the parsefunctions ? PS I shall be on a wikibreak from Monday for 10 days, so catch up with you then... :-) David Ruben Talk 03:17, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
quick message
for ya on fetal pain. lil tip- you may want to be able to communicate privately with other wikipedians from time to time. I know I do. CrackityKzz 16:49, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
AWB edits
Is there a purpose behind changes such as your recent edit to Frost heaving? It looks like only whitespace was changed, and it seems to me that such formatting is best left as a matter of editor preference. Wmahan. 01:15, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks for the reply. The edits didn't upset me, and I'm sorry if I gave the impression that they did. I only asked out of curiosity and the desire that you not spend time on pointless changes that could be spent on useful edits. It looks like the vast majority of your changes were indeed useful. The change wasn't problematic; I didn't revert it and wouldn't ask you to do so. Hope that clears things up, Wmahan. 01:34, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
