User talk:CTSWyneken/Archive5

hey

Sorry for the major changes I made to the contents in Mao Zedong without prior knowledge of how wikimedia is operated. And I can only access wikimedia through secured links otherwise I'd be blocked by the Great Firewall...

My reason to revise Mao Zedong is that its language is totally unbearable, at least according to my understanding and limited knowledge of English language. However, I'm learning from you all here. I think, I certainly shall make progress.

dhg

Luther

Paul didn't cite anything for his insertion. The citation was already there, and Paul decided to insert a little original research into the introduction and attribute it to the citation. Jayjg ^(talk) 16:28, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There's hardly a point, is there? What in Paul's edit history would induce you to imagine that he was capable of entering properly sourced NPOV material into the article, or that he actually had available to him the source that was cited by someone else? Not to mention the fact that it is unlikely that there are any historians who make the claim that Paul made. Jayjg ^(talk) 16:38, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The only books by Paul I was able to find were Concordia the Lutheran Confessions: A Readers Edition of the Book of Concord (Hardcover - not yet released) and Communion fellowship: A resource for understanding, implementing, and retaining the practice of closed communion in the Lutheran parish (Unknown Binding - Jan 1, 1992). Are those his scholarly works? Jayjg ^(talk) 19:21, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey

Thankyou for the email...Im going to contribute to wikipedia in the martial arts section.

Ive added my links to a few pages because we are going to be a free publication as of the end of this month...we want to fight racisim and bring the commuity together.

I would also like to do a page on martialedge for wikipedia, how we set up, history, and our aim for the future, would you help me with this?

peter

Lay theologians

I have no idea. Arch O. La ^{Grigory Deepdelver} 12:49, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re:IP 207.195.51.94 Vandal Back Again

Sorry but I'm in a generous mood (to the vandal that is), and as it was one quick burst of vandalism I've given a test4. Next vandal edit that looks like it's from the same user let me know (if it's another quick one-off) or report to WP:AIV if an urgent block is needed. Be sure to note that it looks like the same user or the report will probably just get removed off that page with little action. Petros471 20:09, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Article section that needs to be written.

Eucharistic discipline#Lutheran practice. Arch O. La ^{Grigory Deepdelver} 20:30, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Christian Wiki

Hi CTSW,

Just wanted to let you know about a christianity wiki that was recently started and has now moved to it's own server. Because of your interest, I think you would be a valuable member of our team and I'd love to have your contributions.

We are just about ready to go live!

As soon as we finalize the CPOV policy, I think we're ready to "go public" with this project and invite the world! We can submit to DMOZ and Google and start getting some real active hits on that site.

Please take a look and see if this project is something you would like to get behind. the URL is: ChristWiki

-- nsandwich 04:21, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Justification

Greetings,

If you have time, please check out the Justification (theology) article. I have begun to massage the text currently in the Lutheran section, and thus the language is less than ideal. I am looking for a good strong Pieper quote to place in the article, and perhaps a rewrite of it entirely. Any help would be appreciated! --Rekleov 14:24, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the support on my RfA!

File:Danavecpurpletiger.jpg

A belated thank you to you for Supporting my RFA! It passed 54/2/3, much better than I expected! I am still finding my feet as an Administrator, and so far I am enjoying the experience. I am honoured that you felt I was ready to take up this position, and wish to thank you formally! I hope I can live up to your expectations of me. Once again, thank you! --Darth Deskana (talk page) 19:23, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Bob, thats really cool advice and I liked your personal info too...very interesting. Im just in my last year at Leeds University in the United Kingdom..very tough going at the moment!!

All the best Peter

Welcoming Committee

Hello, I was just wondering, how do you know when a new user has joined Wikipedia? Thanks, JP 16:52, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

New Users

Thanks for the info! Jean-Paul 20:38, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See changes and comments on justification

I left thoughts there, so I won't repeat them here. Thanks for your help! jrcagle 04:58, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A small issue has arisen on the Justification (theology) article concerning the Lutheran view of the loseability of justification. See the discussion page there. jrcagle 17:55, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Question?

I just read your Rfa and the reasons people opposed it, and my question was why people opposed you. I have only been a Wikipedian for a short while, but I read the oppositions supposed "proof" why you shouldn't be an admin., and I have to say that I think that they are ridiculous. Even the discussion about what to title something that Luther wrote about Jews was a petty argument, and being Jewish myself, I was not at all offended by what you proposed. If you are ever nominated again, please tell me, because my vote will be for a strong support. Your strong supporter, Thetruthbelow 18:15, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thank you for your quick reply to my message. While I don't have too much knowlege in Martin Luther, the Reformation, and 16th Century Judaism in Germany, I do have an extensive knowledge of the history of anti-semitism. In fact, I have written and read many papers, reports, encyclopedias on that topic, and I can heavily contribute to anything you would wish for me to on that subject. Just leave me a message on an article you think I could assist you on about anti-semitism, and i will gladly contribute. Write me back...Thetruthbelow 23:24, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On the Jews and Their Lies (Martin Luther)

I definetly will make a comment after I read what everyone has wrote on the topic. I actually just contribued a new sub-paragraph to On the Jews and Their Lies (Martin Luther), and my new section is under Influence on Modern Anti-semitism, under the new sub-heading titled Impact that Lutheran Writings had on Adolph Hitler. I would appreciate any feedback or added information on my writings, and I will make sure to leave comment on the Martin Luther Introduction. Shalom, Thetruthbelow 00:11, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I just commented on what I thought of the introduction and also wrote a potential sentence for the one that people wished to change. What do you think? Thetruthbelow 00:21, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you strongly about showing both sides of the argument. As I'm typing this, I am doing more research on information that shows the opposite of my point in my last edit, just to make sure I don't misquote or edit unfairly. I would extremly appreciate the source you offered to show me, and i think that this conversation that you and I have shows a productive way to edit an article and conduct a civil discussion between people of different faiths and beliefs. Thank you my friend, Thetruthbelow 01:13, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On the Jews and Their Lies (Martin Luther)

I just finished my section that said Martin Luther did not influence Hitler. I think it is pretty good, but I know that you are more knowledgeable about this subject than me, but I feel it better rounds out my edit. Any info or feedback would be greatly appreciated. Shalom, Thetruthbelow 02:12, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

barnstar award!

		The Original Barnstar
		I award CTSWyneken the Orginal Branstar award for histireless and amazing editing on the Martin Luther article and the various other articles related to Martin Luther that he has so vastly improved. Your friend Thetruthbelow 04:00, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Martin Luther

I just made a comment on the sanitizing intro comment that SlimVirgin made that said that you should not change the article about Martin Luther. I think it made sense, but others will of course argue. What I was wondering was if you could possibly send me that article you propsed to me last night about the lack of influence Luther had on Hitler. I would really appreciate it, as it would greatly strengthen my article that I wrote. Thanks, and write me back, Thetruthbelow 01:13, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Email

hey, for some reason i only just now recieved the email on Martin Luther. I will get to work immediatley to improve my article. By the way, did you agree with my comment on martin luther at the very bottom of the talk page?

just dropped you an email.Thetruthbelow 01:21, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

sorry

sorry about rushing you...I had a long day dealing with some not so intelligent people, so my patience was a little short. Thanks for all your help, and sorry for rushing you. Your friend, Thetruthbelow 01:52, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, i just read the dialouge between you and SlimVirgin, and i can completly identify with what you said. I think our way is best, but that is no cause for others to insult us, which i wrote in my comment back to SlimVirgin. What i wonder about is how people dislike our idea for the sentence that is in debate, as ours makes the most sense.

Resilient Silver Barnstar

I award CTSWyneken the "Resilient Silver Barnstar" for his tireless work to make Wikipedia NPOV and of high quality. He does it with class, finesse, and with a smile all the time! Drboisclair 21:12, 9 May 2006 (UTC)]][reply]

Quite a collection of barnstars you've got there, CTS! I only have two myself—and a monkey to boot!Arch O. La ^{Grigory Deepdelver} 02:38, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Now if I could just figure out how to arrange them all on my user page! --CTSWyneken 19:32, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On the Jews and Their Lies (Martin Luther)

Thank you so much for the article you provided me. With it, I cleaned up my article on the sub-heading about whether Martin Luther did not influence Hitler. I also added many citations to the sub-heading before it about whether Martin Luther did Influence hitler. I think that they are much better now that they have citations, and if you get the time you should read them and tell me what you think. Thank you again, Thetruthbelow 23:19, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I know people can be harsh to me, but I believe that they are not saying what they are with a mean heart. I'm new, so I dont know all the rules, but I will try to learn them all so that potentially my criticism's will go down. Also, there is you my friend. For every mean thing someone else has said, you have said something nice and encouraging. I thank you for that and for all your help, and I want you to know that if ever you need my help, I will be there. Thank you my friend, Thetruthbelow 00:41, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

SlimVirgin

My Friend, I need your help. SlimVirgin removed my edit On the Jews and Their Lies without my consent, citing various reasons that I do not agree with and make no sense. Will you please help me, as that edit took me a long while, with the various sources and authors, yet he removed it before i had a chance to prove my point. Please help me. Thetruthbelow 02:46, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Welcome

Dear Sir,

Many thanks for your message of welcome. I am an Anglican based in Worcester, England. Last Sunday we had the plerasure of two Luteran Pastors visiting us - excellent to hear the Gospel in German!

Kidn regrads,

John Wedgwood Pound

On the Jews and Their Lies (Martin Luther)

Hello, I'm back from school and ready to work. I'm still a little bit confused about your instructions, can you possibly show me an example. I don't want to mess up any more, and I would like for the edit to be perfect. By the way, thank you for coming to my defense. I really appreciate it. Thetruthbelow 22:54, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I Get It! Yay!

Sorry about that headline, but I'm excited. Thanks to you i finally understand! :). I'm going to get to work now, and I want to thank you (again) for your exceptional amount of help. And yes, I did notice that about yoda. Thats wierd. Thanks, [[User:Thetruthbelow|Thetruthbelow]] 23:38, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the help. Just wanted to ask your opinion...how did i do on the citations? Any deathly errors? :,)

Just changed it. I think I finally (hopefully) got it right. I couldn't find the issue number however, but I got the rest. Tell me what you think. Thetruthbelow 01:00, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On the Jews and Their Lies (Martin Luther)

Hey,SlimVirgin just completed changed the page again. He/she (I dont know what she/he is, they never told me) keeps on changing the page without discussing it, and now it looks completley different. Thetruthbelow ^(talk) 01:15, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

houston astros

dang...I wish I could type that artice. But yeah...Ive been looking for other stuff. The good news is that I put that cite stuff in what was left of my artice. Oh well, you can't win them all. I know Wikipedia is full of changes, but I wish slimVirgin would tell me before she makes such drastic ones. Anyway, thanks for the article...It really helped. By the way, did you find any other interesting articles that maybe we could both work on? I certainly have had enough of the "drama" at ML. Thanks for everything, Thetruthbelow ^(talk) 01:23, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

actually, now that I read SlimVirgin's version, I have to say that I like it possibly as much as mine. I think it is acceptable to stay, what's your thougts? Thetruthbelow ^(talk) 01:28, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thank you for the nice welcome. JAbeach 03:53, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Martin Luther

Hi CTSW, I am not editing that article with a 10 foot pole thank you :) I got chased off the Turkey page when I made mention of the Armenian genocide so FAST my head spun. My lastest "project" is reverting biographies of persons of Jewsih decent. It seems that 100s maybe even 1000s of biographies had "Jewish American" inserted into the header of the article. ALOT got reverted but still ALOT didn't due to obscurity. See Slimvirgin's talk page for my further reasons/discussions on the matter. Anyways, again, it looks like Luther's introduction is being tweaked for "agenda" reasons and really doesn't read well, IMO, and as I state on my user page, "my agenda is to STOP people with agendas" :). I will defer to the experts on the topic however and will watch and chime in on talk page as needed. Cheers!--Tom 17:02, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not well read on Luther and so don't contribute to the article. My original point concerned readability - he's an important figure and so deserves some length in the intro, but not that much: think of the reader. As for voting, my view is that the Holocaust should only appear in a section at the end of the article, dealing with his influence. Holocaustitis and Anti-Christianity is prevalent on WP, and I've had enough trouble on the Hitler article.--shtove 19:43, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Copyvio?

According the website in question:

According to the Library of Congress online database, this fine translation didn't have it's copyright renewed in 1983, and has fallen into the public domain.

So, it doesn't appear to be a copyvio. Jayjg ^(talk) 20:33, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou for coming to the fore

Thankyou for the timely information. I have saved a copy of this circular on my computer. This is "Quod erat demonstrandum" (Q.E.D.) as St. Thomas Aquinas used to write! Drboisclair 21:07, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My RFA

Hi CTSWyneken/Archive5,

Thank you for any constructive criticism you may have given in my recent unsuccesful RFA. I will strive to overcome any shortcomings you may have mentioned & will try & prove myself worthy of your vote in the future.

Cheers

Srik e it^{(talk ¦ ✉)} 09:56, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

François-Marie Bissot de Vincennes

This site has a brief mention of him: [1] Rmhermen 02:36, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Jesus:Capsule Author bios.

I'm not sure of the exact policy, but when User:JeffW objected to the article subpage, I simply merged it back into the Talk subpage. The speedy delete was added by a bot. I'd suggest asking JeffW. Arch O. La ^{Grigory Deepdelver} 03:11, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"But I thought it was a subpage of the talk page." Sort of. Jesus/Cited Authors Bios is in the main namespace, while Talk:Jesus/Cited Authors Bios is in the Talk: space. It's my fault for putting the bios in the main space while separating the comments (now at Talk:Jesus/Cited Authors Bios/1) from the bios. Arch O. La ^{Grigory Deepdelver} 03:20, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Subpages says that subpages of Talk pages are only allowed for archiving talk pages. And I don't know anything about the speedy delete. --JeffW 03:27, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That was an edit by user:Tawkerbot2. The same bot reverted my attempt to blank Jesus/2nd Paragraph Debate, which is already archived in the Talk: space. Arch O. La ^{Grigory Deepdelver} 03:43, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Luther as Monk

What I want to ask is why you want to use the English term "monk" so definitively. I have to say that from my POV it struck me immediately as an error - one that Augustinians would react to immediately, and which therefore creates an initial tension in believing the rest of the article to be well-researched (whether well justified or not, it did this for me - and I have two degrees in theology). I was studying my undergad degrees at the time when the Lutherans and Catholics had just resolved (at last) the dispute over Justification - so I have an interest in Luther. But it goes without saying that English speaking Augsustinians now don't regard themselves as "monks" except in the loosest possible way. There are friars or hermits; from the French "frere" and Greek "eremos" respectively (which no doubt you already know). The issue I have is that if you leave the term "Augustinian monk" in the lead of the article, it is a Shibboleth for many who will read it; and a Shibboleth that may show the author(s) perhaps either don't speak English as a first language or perhaps are not familiar with the modern ecclesiastical nomenclature among Catholics. I know it is pretty specialised, but do you know if the German of the time (ie. Luther's time) had a clear vocab distinction between "monk" and "friar"? This would help clarify the matter.

On the matter of Luther and the Jews- my POV is that scholars ought be careful not to confuse contemporary values and attitudes with historical ones. I would have no doubt that Luther was an anti-Semite by modern standards - but so was most of Europe at the time (including Popes and "Saints" of the church). It needs to be seen in its perspective rather than using an historicasl article to fight over contemporary issues. I think the argument over this is perhaps being fuelled by too much emotion. Luhter whould neither be sanitised nor criticised on this matter - simply described accurately and as objectively as possible. Cor Unum 07:29, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cor Unum speaks for me. Luther should neither be sanitised nor criticised.... I Rfc'd Talk:Martin Luther to the WP:RFC/HIST page. Hopefully, this will get more eyes to the page, and we can hash out a balanced, neutral introduction. Mytwocents 19:21, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Luther

Maybe the copy could just say Luther was an "Augustinian" without either monk or friar? He could also be described as an "Augustinian priest", or a "member of the Augustinian order" - and then I won;t be jarred by it. Could this work for you?

super thanks

Hi Revered - I'm very sorry to have disappointed your expectation in me, but it had become impossible for me to compromise my principles. I don't covet adminship at all, so it wasn't a difficult decision - I simply cannot accept misrepresentation and nonsense. However, I cannot tell you how greatly joyous I feel at the enthusiastic, wonderful support you expressed for me. I don't know how hard it will be to understand that your supports means extremely a lot to me. I thank you from my heart, and please let me know if I can ever be assistance or help in anything. Rama's Arrow 21:14, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just as a note, it was Christ and Mahatma Gandhi who are my inspiration for this. Rama's Arrow 21:14, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd just like to clarify that I withdrew the nomination. The count was in my favor, but I couldn't ignore comments that thoroughly misrepresented me. Rama's Arrow 21:26, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Comment

which one would you like my imput on? Thetruthbelow ^(talk) 01:19, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Read and made my point. By the way, sorry for not contributing to the Lutheran pages recently, but I was taking a break to restore my sanity following the many heated debates on those pages, but now I am back and stronger than ever. :)Thetruthbelow ^(talk) 01:33, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, It certainly is good to be back. I actually have a question for you. Why does everyone consider Martin Luthers main contribution to be the spread of anit-semitic ideas? I have learned that he was a reformer, a man who was sick of people who could "Buy their way into heaven", yet from what SlimVirgin and others say, his greatest contribution was On the Jews and Their Lies, and not his 95 thesis's and other works. Write me back, Thetruthbelow ^(talk) 01:40, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

comment

hey, could you make a comment on the Talk page under the new heading that I made titled Question?. Thanks, Thetruthbelow ^(talk) 01:50, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

reply

Got your note. Are you a Lutheran Minister? I wondered about the "Fr" and "priest" comment you made. Maybe we have discovered a small disconnect here between ecclesial backgrounds or traditions that appears when we both look at Luther? It still jars me to see "monk" but I take your point. I'm sure Augustinians won't committ Suttee over this - but it is weird to look at from a Catholic POV. In my studies we always corrected (or qualified) this word "monk" when we spoke of Luther (in English that is). I'm sure in time to come there will be scholarly development on this. I'll look about to see if I can locate credible (non-partisan) sources that refer to Luther as friar (but perhaps there was no German equivalent at the time?). I'm not in a rush - but I'm sure I won't be the only one to note this apparent anomoly.

On the other matter in journalism- Uwe Siemon-Netto- I'll have a look and write some considered comments over time. I didn't know about this guy (but should have I think). Lutheranism is relatively small numerically here in OZ, and tends to be concentrated in South Australia and Queensland - so I don't look as regularly at its journals. Our public Broadcaster is, of course, supposed to cover all denominations adequately- so I'll bone up on it and see if I can make a useful contribution. cheers Cor Unum 12:51, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RFa

I have just decided that i would like to nominate you for another try at becoming an admin. Would you accept? If so, leave me a message, and I will start right away. Thetruthbelow ^(talk) 00:27, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine, just tell me when.Thetruthbelow ^(talk) 01:18, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Let me know, too. BTW what ever happened to Avery Krouse? AFAIK he was the first to propose the idea, but he seems to have disappeared. Arch O. La ^{Grigory Deepdelver} 01:55, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

>Thanks for remembering me while I'm off the Jesus radar.

You're welcome. At least no one's promoting a Luther-myth hypothesis—yet.

>How goes it, BTW?

There's been a long discussion on how to phrase the arrest, trial and execution section. Drogo Underburrow seems to be arguing that it's POV and OR to even have a Gospel summary. Someone even proposed the idea that the Gospels might be about four different trials of four different Jesuses. From there it's gotten kind of surreal.

>Did you catch I had a failed RfA? (I can't remember if you were by)

I was by, and I saw that. Strangely enough, SOPHIA and Giovanni33 suggested nominating me for RfA, even though my edit/article count is higher than yours! Of course, I've been avoiding the Martin Luther pages. I don't want to be faced with another set of cabal accusations ;)

>Anyway, check my edit counts. I've been a busy beaver in a lot of places.

Cool. I've been busy at Christianity Knowledge Base and ChristWiki—there's been a schism ;(

>BTW, what do you know of French Canadian explorers? 8-)

Absotutely (sic) nothing. Oh, and before I forget:

Archola 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! Archola

Arch O. La ^{Grigory Deepdelver} 02:17, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

TINC

Oh good grief, Atheist Cabal, Christian Cabal, Lutheran Cabal, Circumcision Cabal, Jewish Cabal, and all the rest: why are people so quick to assume bad faith? It's all perception, not reality. Or rather, the only cabals are created through social reification and self-fulfilling prophecies (but that's my sociology minor talking). Arch O. La ^{Grigory Deepdelver} 02:40, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Clearly, you are a member of the dreaded Sociology Cabal. Your secret goal is to force us to take endless, probing surveys until you have the justification to make broad, politically-motivated generalizations. :-) Al 14:40, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, you caught me. It explains all the polls we took at Jesus a while back. ;)

OTOH, this morning I've had cause to wonder whether there might be a cabal to block dial-up Earthlink and/or Qwest IPs. I can still edit at the Oskaloosa Public Library, but it's a bit inconvenient. Arch O. La ^{Grigory Deepdelver} 15:16, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sometimes blocks get a little bit too aggressive: I blame the Blocking Cabal. For my cabal affiliation, take a quick look at the bottom of my user talk page. Al 15:39, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Are you talking about your fan club Al? Sophia 15:41, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

NEVER!!! If I mention them, I get banned for another week. Al 04:47, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Threatening comments

Please let me know if it happens again, and I'll take care of it. Jayjg ^(talk) 22:07, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, in that particular case it's really best to ignore it. Jayjg ^(talk) 03:49, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not threatening anyone, Robert!

Do not lie, please. And read Wikipedia:Ignore all rules —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gooverup (talk • contribs)

False Charges Against Gooverup?

I was intrigued by CTSWyneken‘s claim here and here that User:Gooverup "threatened" him. Not surprisingly, I could find no evidence supporting the accusation. Please read WP:Bite and this: "Neither shall you bear false witness against your neighbor. If threats were actually made, please post the diff right here and I will stand corrected. Doright 06:33, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Luther

Could we please discuss the article on the article talk page? The intro is far too long at six paras. That's already been discussed on talk. The suggestion is 3-4 paras for an article that length; no more than 4. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 21:25, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why wasn't it ok the way I modified it last? What is the problem here Slim? Why are you so adamant on it being in the form *you* want it in? Is there some Wiki policy that gives you the right to do this? --Ptmccain 21:44, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Christianity

CTSWyneken, would you be willing to keep an eye on "Christianity"? Several editors are trying to make the intro hedge on whether or not it's monotheism. —Aiden 06:33, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I said my piece, even though I had to drag Zoroaster into it ;) BTW, how's Martin Luther these days? Arch O. La ^{Grigory Deepdelver} 17:14, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]