User talk:Coralapus

Copper Scroll

Thanks for all the improvements you have made to this article. Frankly, I didn't think there could be anything new at all. Changes make me nervous since (in the past), they have usually come as the result of a History Channel program which is pretty far out. If it has been up to me, i would have permanently locked the article! :) But your changes have definitely enhanced the article. There is a small problem with naming an author who himself has no article which I have discussed on the talk page.

Thanks again! Student7 (talk) 15:03, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Look. Here is the problem. If we allow nn editors to clutter supposedly "factual" articles with nn authors and have to argue them each out one by one within each quotable article, we might as well throw in the towel on Wikipedia. It will be the end. You have made important contributions to this article which has had almost no important contributions in a very long time. Can you let it go at that and rest on your laurels? It will be so much easier. The next step is for me to request a second opinion. The opinion of the other guy is maybe not worth much. I will have to take this to mediation and failing that to arbitration.

We already have a mechanism for determining notability. It is called creating a new biography. If it survives the scrutiny of other knowledgeable editors, then he is then "notable."

It would be so much easier and spare us all a lot of work, if you would just stub out (or whatever) this supposed genius. It would also be nice to tell us why he alone of all geniuses has to clutter the article when we are mainly interested in the Copper Scroll and not people, but that, at least is a secondary issue. Student7 (talk) 20:44, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Greenfield

Can you add some meat to the Jonas Greenfield article stub?--Ihutchesson (talk) 20:29, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Qumran

Hello. Your most recent edit to qumran was justified by saying that material is included by default. This is not true, the policy is "be BOLD, revert, discuss" WP:BRD. You were bold by inserting the material, but another editor reverted it, so now both of you should discuss it and find an acceptable solution before continuing. It seems like you were unaware of this policy, so I won't accuse you of edit warring, but some editors might interpret it that way.

It is likely that both of you will have to compromise on the material, rather than seeing it as a yes or no situation. My recommendation to you is to figure out what the other editor's objections are, and modify the material accordingly, rather than re-adding the same material. --Elplatt (talk) 17:23, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Limerick

Hey, that's a discovery! How'd you happen across so obcure a reference? Nice job! DavidOaks (talk) 16:05, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Orion links

Coralapus, could you please put Orion material in the Orion article which is linked to at the bottom over every DSS related article? And could you stop posting those links to your materials where they do not belong? They are not directly related to the site. You know that. Be good. I have attempted to to deal with the issue on the Discussion page for Qumran, but you don't seem to have read it. -- Ihutchesson (talk) 13:46, 30 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Administrator discussion about Qumran started

The following should interest you:

Ongoing conflict over links and content of the Qumran article

-- Ihutchesson (talk) 17:05, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Jolly Roger

Hi Coralapus, could you please fix the punctuations, brackets, format, quotation, ref etc. that you copypasted in there and make it readable. Thanks. --Trofobi (talk) 11:27, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

October 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Alexander Jannaeus may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

*[http://people.duke.edu/~goranson/jannaeus.pdf "Jannaeus, His Brother Absalom,and Judah the Essene,"

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 17:51, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

February 2014

Your recent editing history at Portraits of Shakespeare shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Ghmyrtle (talk) 12:42, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:52, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

re Qumran silver coins

Hi, Coralapus, see my replies on my Talk page, and in Qumran Talk section. I generally agree with you. Y-barton (talk) 19:45, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Coralapus. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Coralapus. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Coralapus. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Coralapus. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]