User talk:74.184.10.144

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Your recent edits

Hi, there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. On many keyboards, the tilde is entered by holding the Shift key, and pressing the key with the tilde pictured. You may also click on the signature button Image:Wikisigbutton.png located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot 01:04, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Edits to Daniel Sidney Warner article

Please do not remove the SME request until this issue has been reviewed and resolved or appropriate references have been provided. Thank you. Absolon S. Kent (talk) 02:24, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] [Why did you change the Warner article?]

It seems that you are determined to "hide" the past teachings of the COG and you somehow believe that although this is an Encylopedia that it is your place to change articles and slant the truth concerning the Movement and what she believes now. You can continue with this as it is your right to play these games......but you will find that I will continue to let the truth be known concerning the Movement and the changes that have taken place. Most of the Ministers that I have talked to in the Movement do not try to hide it as you are doing. They freely admit that they do not believe what Warner taught as truth. They freely admit that they do not teach Holiness and a holy life as Warner and the Reformation ministry taught it. So why would you? [Http://WWW.DSWARNERLIBRARY.COM] --74.184.10.144 (talk) 01:41, 19 January 2008 (UTC)Tom Wingate

Mr Wingate: I did not remove any of the information you are obviously so passionate about. I simply did a little article cleanup. Even though I personally believe it is not encyclopedic and adds nothing to the article I left your text alone. I have no need to “hide” any information and I actually care nothing about what you wrote. You obviously have some need to prove you are right no matter how many editors have addressed the issues with you. My only point is this article was poorly formatted and is poorly referenced. I encourage you to step off of your personal pulpit and view this article as a novice read would (someone seeking information). If you want the truth to be told then provide third party sources (not the library you obviously have some connection to). If it is as true as you say it should be easy to find such sources. I’m defiantly not going to get into some sort of theological war or edit war with you about the article (I have far better things to do with my time). I wish you much success in providing what ever point your trying to prove. Absolon S. Kent (talk) 02:43, 19 January 2008 (UTC)