User talk:Wrp103

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archived on August 2006: Conversations that are probably finished Jul 2004-Jul 2006 (Not sure why anyone cares, but just in case. ;^)

/Jeff Lindsay — My original attempt at a rewrite of his page.

/Cockburn — My sandbox for Bruce Cockburn

/Reverts — Conversations about reverting articles, welcomes, etc.

/Admin — Discussions about admin nomination and related issues

/Sandbox — Just what it says. ;^)

Contents 1 List of Chrono Trigger Endings 2 Regarding Radiata Stories 3 Dialogue at CoJCoLDS 4 Smile 5 207.63.115.12 User 6 Congratulations 7 Advice for new admins 8 Thanks! 9 Bruce Cockburn/former agnostic 10 First Vision - time for action 11 RFM - First Vision 12 Thanks for the welcome message 13 Request for Mediation 14 The LDS church page 15 Request for Arbitration - First Vision 16 Significant vision 17 FYI 18 Just, out of curiosity, a question. 19 The Legend of Zelda (series) 20 Joseph Smith, Jr. 21 Speedy delete? 22 First Vision article 23 Your note 24 The Welcoming 25 Are we ok? 26 Bigamists 27 Submitted Request for Comments on John Foxe 28 How old am I? 29 Re:Vandalism 30 Deleting rather than archiving messages 31 Church of Jesus Christ (Not Bickertonite) 32 On the Gorilla Thing 33 Thanks 34 Thanks 35 Citations and Memory Leak 36 Lock (computer science) article 37 AfD nomination of Treasure chest (video games) 38 Book of Abraham - Joseph Smith's translation 39 Your comment April 2007 40 I swiped some stuff from your userpage without even asking permission 41 I'm 212.183.248.25

[edit] List of Chrono Trigger Endings

It's very cool to see the guy who wrote the classic list I used way back in the day and referenced recently while compiling some game information myself. If you're still a Chrono Trigger fan, I'd appreciate your feedback on a guide I've been working on: http://strategywiki.net/wiki/Chrono_Trigger

I've broken the walkthrough into chapters based on the name of the Save Game File since its an easy reference point, and also because there's a one to one mapping between chapters and endings in all but two cases (the ending where Crono talks occurs in the same chapter as another ending, and two endings can fall on the chapter: "The Masamune" depending upon whether you have Frog in your party or not)

That mapping makes it easy to reference what ending is possible if you beat the game at any point during the walkthrough, and it makes it clear on the "endings" list what the possible intervals for each ending are. I've also tried to map out the one other tricky sequence in the game, The Trial, which is slightly glitched based upon my observation: http://strategywiki.net/wiki/Chrono_Trigger/Walkthrough/Chapter_4

Anyway, you've helped me out (indirectly) in the past, if you can provide any advice or edits to the wiki guide, it'd be much appreciated. Thanks!--BigCow 20:17, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Glad to hear from somebody who enjoyed my FAQ. When the PS version came out, I couldn't find my original HTML file - only the text file in gamefaqs. I then used google and found several copies of my original file with other peoples' names on it, so I guess others enjoyed it was well. ;^)

I looked at your wikistrategy entry and made a few tweaks, but don't have much time to spend on it right now. I'll look closer later. wrp103 (Bill Pringle) 23:46, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Regarding Radiata Stories

Just wanted to let you know that when I deleted the spam links, I never meant to imply that yours was, too! I checked the link out and was greatly impressed, and wanted to keep it in there, I just didn't know the protocol. I know I've tried selectively deleting links like that in the pas, only to get hounded by the guys whose links came out on the short end of that stick, so on this instance I took an all or nothing approach. But glad to see it's back up. Keep up the good work. --Bkessler23 18:43, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

I didn't think you were implying it was a spam link, although me adding it back in could be called that. ;^) I had considered deleting those same links, so I was glad to see that you had done it. wrp103 (Bill Pringle) 18:58, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Dialogue at CoJCoLDS

Thanks for reverting that; for some reason (dyslexia? didn't know I had it), I misread that as something like "A dialogue of Mormons" or something else that appeared inane. Tijuana Brass^¡Épa! 23:23, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

No problem. I was glad to see that it was online, and got a chance to re-read my favorite article: "The Meeting" wrp103 (Bill Pringle) 03:30, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Smile

[edit] 207.63.115.12 User

I will track down the junior vandals at 207.63.115.2. Also, do you know who to talk to regarding getting the IP address banned, and how to confirm that a logged-in user at a banned IP Address will still be able to contribute? Timdearborn 17:44, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Congratulations

I'm pleased to inform you that you are now an administrator. Please read all the material on the administrators' reading list before testing out your new privileges. For instructions, please see the administrators' how-to guide. Best of luck — Dan | talk 22:10, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations. I was a bit worried there after a couple of the early voters got hung up on the procedure. Sorry about that, but I'm glad you made it through. COGDEN 23:20, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for all you (and others) have done. In a ironic balance of karma, the end of the process was as confused as the beginning. I am having problems with my Internet connection at home, and am still on a rush program at work, so my start might be a bit slower than I had expected. :-( wrp103 (Bill Pringle) ^(Talk) 15:40, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry that I wasn't there to voice my support for you, Bill. You clearly are one of those who "gets it", and the project will be helped by your adminship, as you have time. — Mark (Mkmcconn) ** 17:23, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

congratulations! I know you will do well. I will add you to my "scream for help" list. WBardwin 09:36, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Advice for new admins

I would like to thank all those who have participated in my RfA, and invite suggestions on things that a new admin should know, do, or not do. wrp103 (Bill Pringle) ^(Talk) 15:37, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks!

Thanks for your input and guidance! I am reading the pages that you suggested. I reverted the page back to the edit that the ip user made, also I apologized on their talk page for my mistake. If I am unsure on a page rather is vandalism or not, I will leave it for a more experienced user such as yourself! :) If a user makes an edit to a page, such as "This is the best thing ever!!" what should one do? Should they leave it alone and on the users talk page ask them to please keep it neutral and hope they fix it? Or should one revert the page in good faith? Thanks! :) Also most of the edits I made in such a short period of time were in fact, clear acts of vandalism. Please take the time to look at the list before you accuse me of randomly reverting pages because I don't agree with them! Thanks again! Dillard421 03:26, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Bruce Cockburn/former agnostic

Bruce Cockburn is a former agnostic.

"I was brought up as an agnostic... and when I first became a Christian in the Seventies I didn't really know what it was I'd adopted." Faith in Practice: Holding on to the Mystery of Love, by Bruce Cockburn as told to Cole Morton, Third Way, September 1994, page 15. Rambone (Talk) 04:31, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] First Vision - time for action

I appreciate the efforts of Visorstuff to resolve the situation at First Vision. I now understand that he was hampered by his past involvement in this article and with John Foxe. No one is editing the article right now, but I believe that John Foxe's comments on the talk page demonstrate that he either cannot understand or refuses to comply with the WP:NPOV policy. I'm trying to gain a consensus on his inappropriate behavior, and I invite you, as a past contributor to this article, to add your comments to this discussion. If you think that my behavior also warrants criticism, I invite that as well. I will be posting this invitation on several other user talk pages, but with your past history on this article you might be aware of other editors who have walked away. Please feel free to let them know what is going on and invite their input at Talk:First_Vision#Time_for_action. 74s181 13:35, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] RFM - First Vision

A request for mediation has been filed with the Mediation Committee that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/First Vision, and indicate whether you agree or refuse to mediate. If you are unfamiliar with mediation, please refer to Wikipedia:Mediation. There are only seven days for everyone to agree, so please check as soon as possible.

[edit] Thanks for the welcome message

Hi, Thanks for that warm welcome message :) I am not a regular Wikipedian, but I have editing experience with other sites which use MediaWiki. I included that link because I thought it would be better instead of listing links to all those drafts within the article's external links. I have started conversation in talk page of ANSI_C.--Avsharath 07:26, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Request for Mediation

A Request for Mediation to which you are a party was not accepted and has been delisted. You can find more information on the mediation subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/First Vision. For the Mediation Committee, Daniel This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to perform case management. If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.

[edit] The LDS church page

Question, you reverted an edit today that I had ignored. The editor deleted the phrase similar to LDS having a differnent view of the nature of Jesus Christ. I felt is was a redundant phrase given the phrase before it addressed the doctrine of the Trinity, which I think is the major issue. The impact of Jesus on Christianity, his virgin birth, his crucifixion, his resurrection, and his grace are all similar beteen LDS and other Christians. Where we disagree most is that the Trinity. Do you think there is more about Jesus than I think there is? --Storm Rider ^(talk) 17:29, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

That phrase sounded like something that many Anti-Mormon folks say (including my brother, who I hear that from regularly). Most traditional Christians believe that Jesus always was God, and that he is totally different than us. Our belief that Jesus is literally our elder brother is quite upsetting to them, although the concept that Heavenly Father was like Jesus at some point is even more upsetting.

I reverted that deletion because there was a {{fact}} tag, but the date was July 2007, which meant it hadn't been there that long. I was assuming the tag was because of the "fundamentally different" phrase that had been deleted. I added a welcome message along with a note on User talk:Ohahl to inform the editor why their change was reverted. -- wrp103 (Bill Pringle) ^(Talk) 18:06, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Request for Arbitration - First Vision

I have submitted a request for arbitration with the Arbitration Committee. You are listed as a party. The arbitration process requires that all parties listed in an arbitration request must be notified. You have an opportunity to comment on the request at Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration. 74s181 02:14, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Significant vision

I was uncomfortable when I wrote that; the emphasis is the 1838 vision rather than the less complete, prior accounts. Do you have some alternative language that would work?

On one hand I was comfortable with it because of the few times God the Father and Jesus Christ have appeared jointly to man; I think it is unquestionable that it is significant. On the other, it just does not sound right, there is something that makes me uncomfortable, which I think is where you are at. --Storm Rider ^(talk) 21:40, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

I wasn't thinking about which account was being quoted, but whether the First Vision can be considered "the most significant" vision. As we have discussed, during Smith's lifetime, his second vision was considered more significant. If you are going to quote sections from the first vision, the 1838 account is the logical one to use (at least from the LDS perspective) since it is considered canonical. -- wrp103 (Bill Pringle) ^(Talk) 22:28, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] FYI

You've received multiple requests to expand on your input at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Julia_Murdock_Smith. Not that you have to, but I just thought you'd like to know. –SESmith 22:22, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Just, out of curiosity, a question.

How many pages do you currently have on your watchlist? --Trevdna 00:41, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Good question:

1,295 pages watched not counting talk pages.

Many of those are users who have vandalized other pages on my watchlist. Every once in a while, I will go through the list and remove any user accounts that have been blocked indefinitely. -- wrp103 (Bill Pringle) ^(Talk) 13:33, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Legend of Zelda (series)

My apologies, and thank you for the reversion. I usually do so, but the top five articles in my watchlist were in the midst of a vandalism chain, so I was editing a bit more quickly than usual. Being more careful never hurt anyone though, right? Point taken. Thanks again! =David^(talk)_(contribs) 19:42, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Joseph Smith, Jr.

Hi Warp103 --You recently undid a "bot" revert of a recent edit. I would urge you to reconsider and look over the material involved. Some of the potentially deleted/changed material has long been in the article and has been heavily discussed. Much of the material removed or altered presents aspects of Smith's life that are open to criticism so, IMO, removing the material reduces the article's neutral POV. If I were to choose, I would revert back to my edit on August 18th. Best wishes. WBardwin 21:05, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

I undid the bot revert because it looked like a good-faith edit. I don't see how a bot could determine it was a bad edit, and therefore should not have reverted. I'm guessing the bot reverted because no edit summary was provided. As to the actual content of the edit, I wasn't taking sides. Feel free to revert that edit on content grounds. -- wrp103 (Bill Pringle) ^(Talk) 21:10, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Then I will revert back to my edit on 18 August. There has been a lot of activity on the article in recent days, and the accumlated changes need to be reviewed and edited, I think. I have placed that opinion on the JS,Jr. talk page. If you have time?...... More below. WBardwin 21:56, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Speedy delete?

As you are an admin, this article Heñor looks like a speedy delete to me. Best....... WBardwin 21:56, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

I am swamped at work, so you might want to tag the article and see what happens. -- wrp103 (Bill Pringle) ^(Talk) 18:55, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] First Vision article

I am trying to build a case for another arbitration request. The last request failed because it was perceived to be a content issue. I intend to submit a more narrowly focused complaint this time. I think that allowing plenty of rope may increase the odds of success. I'd appreciate your help with this over the next few days. Thanks! 74s181 01:37, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

I will continue to monitor the article and attempt to maintain a NPOV article. I am taking my grandson to college on Sat, Sunday is more busy than most, and Monday will be my first day back from two days vacation, so don't count on my for too much help. -- wrp103 (Bill Pringle) ^(Talk) 08:32, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

I appreciate and agree with your efforts to improve the article, but when you do a full revert of JF's edits the case I'm trying to build about his incremental reverts becomes less clear cut. My original posting was a bit cryptic because I suspected that he might be lurking, it was a mistake to try to hide my intent, sorry for not being more clear. 74s181 13:47, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

I am not interested in trying to trap anyone or help anybody build a case. I am interested in improving the article in spite of Foxe's efforts. Foxe is a person who will continue to behave in the manner that he believes is right. He has already ignored attempts at mediation and arbitration, and has scoffed at a number of Wikipedia policies. I'm not sure if he truly doesn't understand (or accept) WP:NPOV, or if that is just the excuse that he uses. I am just trying to work around him. -- wrp103 (Bill Pringle) ^(Talk) 22:20, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

I understand. I also believe that JF is unable or unwilling to understand WP policies, but I'm tired of trying to work around him. Progress is possible, it just takes 10 times as much effort, that's why I'm going to try sanctions. 74s181 23:29, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your note

Hi Bill,

The WP:AN3 page is specifically designed and intended for 3RR violation reports. Your report does not indicate a 3RR violation, as multiple incremental edits by an editor only count as a single edit. Everything else you mention may well be true, but does not impact the 3RR violation. Please adhere to the 3RR format next time you report someone. Thanks, Crum375 03:38, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Welcoming

Yes, I looked back on some of my welcomes, and they are confusing with the warnings that have been placed, I am truly sorry for all the confusion that may have been caused. Dreamy ^\*/_!$! 13:46, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Are we ok?

I know that I can be very annoying. My experience has been that the longer people know me the more annoyed they become.

Here on Wikipedia that usually isn't as much of a problem, but I've been so focused (obsessed?) on the FV article that I worry that it may become so. I really don't care if some editors are annoyed with me, but you are not one of these, I don't want you to be annoyed with me. Please let me know if I have become annoying to you, and if so, what it is about my behavior that is annoying so that maybe I can change it. Thanks, 74s181 01:28, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

BTW, I would prefer to let you fix the 1830 allusion statement. I'm afraid that if I fix it, JF will just revert it. If you think it is ok the way it is, well, I don't agree, but I think there are much bigger problems with the article right now. 74s181 01:28, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

I don't recall anything you have done that might bother me. Don't worry about it. -- wrp103 (Bill Pringle) ^(Talk) 02:16, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Bigamists

Considering your involvement with historical LDS pages, I would be interested in getting your input HERE. Thanks. Rich Uncle Skeleton 09:33, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Submitted Request for Comments on John Foxe

For more info, see Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/John Foxe.

One other person needs to certify the RfC within 48 hours or it will be deleted. More information 74s181 06:30, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Apparently, you didn't look at the page before you added this comment. I had already signed it about 2 hours before. ;^) -- wrp103 (Bill Pringle) ^(Talk) 17:38, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Great summary on the RfC, I agree with everything you said and I think it will be much more effective coming from you than from me. My biggest worry has been that others who take a quick look may perceive the situation as nothing more than a personal feud between John Foxe and I, or as a POV dispute between two religious fanatics. I think that your admin status and your involvement with many other articles outside of the First Vision may influence other editors to take this dispute more seriously. I thank you for all of your time and effort! 74s181 11:52, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] How old am I?

Since you just took your grandson to college, I know that you, like me, are over sixty.--John Foxe 15:50, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Very astute. Sherlock Holmes would be pleased. ;^) Of course, the fact that this is not my first marriage can skew your deductions. I could have married an older woman who had a child very young, who in turn had a child very young. So, your logic is a bit flaky, but your conclusion is correct. (I am 63.) -- wrp103 (Bill Pringle) ^(Talk) 18:41, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

In other words, my conclusion is WP:OR and WP:POV but true ;^)--John Foxe 22:08, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re:Vandalism

Ummmm, one other incident directly above your message definitely does not constitute "fairly often". Please WP:AGF before calling someone out. As for the FFXII thing, that can legitimately be called vandalism because of that user's edit history ([1], [2], [3], probably more via IP). He has repeatedly tried to insert his POV into the article using weasel words ("many fans") and trying to twist the words of the citation. In addition, he has been reverted at least twice by different people, indicating that there is, at the very least, opposition to his edits. It also shows that he has ignored it several times, finally falling into the vandalism category. Axem Titanium 17:46, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Deleting rather than archiving messages

While it is true that you can delete messages on your talk page, it is considered by many to be bad form. Some even consider it a form of vandalism (or, more properly, a method of concealing vandalism). A more proper action would be to archive messages rather than delete them.

Deleting messages from the talk page can be seen as an attempt to conceal a dispute. It is not uncommon for others to restore the deleted messages to the talk page. -- wrp103 (Bill Pringle) ^(Talk) 23:50, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

I rarely delete messages from my talk page unless they're inconsequential, originated by bots, or tendentiously offensive.--John Foxe 11:23, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Church of Jesus Christ (Not Bickertonite)

Interested parties who voiced opinions on this in the past, read all about it - the raging debate on moving the article on the Church of Jesus Christ (a.k.a. Bickertonite, or not) has flared up again, at Talk:The_Church_of_Jesus_Christ#Requested_move.2C_take_two. Come back for more fun and games if you care to - thanks for playing... - Reaverdrop _(talk/nl) 05:06, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] On the Gorilla Thing

Hey its true about the 'half gorilla, half human', well sort of. He features in New Zealand, but not openly. He's not really half gorilla, half human, he just acts it out. Sorry for the inconvenience. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wes45 (talk • contribs) 00:28, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Thanks for the admin help. Hey do you want to put in a good word for me? Please?

[edit] Thanks

Thanks for the admin help. Hey do you want to put in a good word for me? Please? Wes45 03:41, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Citations and Memory Leak

Hi Bill,

Thanks for your note about citations regarding my recent contribution to Memory Leak.

Rather than respond to your comments here, I've added some notes to the discussion on that page, as I'm sure other people should have the chance to get involved if they wish.

Cheers Dominic Cronin 22:49, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Lock (computer science) article

Thanks for repositioning my entry to the Lock (computer science) article. I'm new to Wikipedia and took for granted the most recent on top was been the norm. But then I wonder why isn't it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Andahazy (talk • contribs) 03:13, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of Treasure chest (video games)

Treasure chest (video games), an article you created, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that Treasure chest (video games) satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Treasure chest (video games) and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Treasure chest (video games) during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Miremare 00:30, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Book of Abraham - Joseph Smith's translation

From the BOA article:

• Joseph Smith may have received the account by revelation, rather than a standard "translation" of text from one language to another, in a process similar to his translation of the Bible.^[1] Critics note that the existence of the “Egyptian Alphabet and Grammar” shows that Smith did attempt a direct translation.^[2] Others note that the revelation theory contradicts Smith's own statements that the Book of Abraham is a translation as described in the original handwritten manuscript of the book as well as in other church documents.^[3]

That's what I mean when I say that the Criticism of Mormonism is still POV. Apologist viewpoints are easily available, but not present in the article. -- wrp103 (Bill Pringle) ^(Talk) 19:50, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your comment April 2007

Hi Bill-

Thanks for your comment on 'My Talk', it is nice to see people around here who care enough to leave a message and make Wikipedia a better place.

I have an unrelated question, what do you do in cases such as these? I recently undid a change by this dynamic IP and wonder if it is pointless to try to even do anything about it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:69.125.110.223

Are you a member of the LDS faith?

My gratitude, Dylock —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dylock (talk • contribs) 23:01, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] I swiped some stuff from your userpage without even asking permission

Thanks! :P. I do have to figure out how I want to arrange it, though. Enigma ^msg! 01:36, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] I'm 212.183.248.25

You are right, sorry for not including a comment when editing the article. :)

After I edited the article, I saw there is more discussion about that paragraph, so possibly someone will revert it again in some hours/days. It is hard to prove wheter the paragraph is correct or not (I would have to search for a good reference), my point was that such kind of statement should have a more solid reference and should not be in the introduction.

Over the years I have seen too much fanatism about classic VB. It is right that it is still very used on some old environments and countries; however, it is not competing anymore with modern languages (like its successor VB.NET).

212.183.248.25 (talk) 17:50, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

yo bro my bad i thought i was in the sandbox so i was making every name italian because i was studying for my italian test.

                         DA biGgEsT iTaLiAnOoO (talk) 17:04, 2 May 2008 (UTC)JimcenzoDA biGgEsT iTaLiAnOoO (talk) 17:04, 2 May 2008 (UTC)