User talk:Ouddorp

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Ouddorp, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially what you did for List of disasters in Australia by death toll. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Tutorial
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! John Vandenberg ^(chat) 12:40, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Strict Baptists

Please stop adding unsourced POV material to Strict Baptists as you have done several times over the past year. Your edits have been reverted by multiple other editors, and likely will be again if you do it again. In addition, it could get you reported to the relevant notice board and lezd to gou being blockex. Novaseminary (talk) 18:48, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wattisham Strict Baptist Chapel

Hi Ouddorp - I saw your note in the edit summary of Bethel Strict Baptist Chapel, Wivelsfield. (The best way to reach other editors is via their talk page; mine is at User talk:Hassocks5489.) I will have a look at the Wattisham article and see what I can do. As long as there are enough sources available, there is no reason for it to be deleted – and I know a few places to look, so I am hopeful. Kind regards, Hassocks5489 (tickets please!) 11:29, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Hassocks - thanks for your response. I would like to help with the article, but all my contributions are removed. I go back to the Dutch wikipedia:) Good luck with the article! Ouddorp (talk) 11:58, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Don't be discouraged; sometimes other editors can be a bit quick to remove content! Always make sure you cite the sources you have used: that makes it much more difficult for material to be challenged or removed. I'll do a bit more work on the article soon. I specialise in churches/chapels of all denominations in the county of Sussex, and I have a large amount of reference material, but I can get access to the other sources I mentioned at the Wattisham talk page (they are in my local library). Hassocks5489 (tickets please!) 12:17, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Photos

Please read WP:IMAGE before inserting any more images at Strict Baptists. Adding a photo of one particular church (that in no way represents any sort of commoness among such buildings or otherwise illuminates the subject) to this general article is inappropriate. Novaseminary (talk) 15:54, 5 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Removing unsourced tags without adding a source

Please stop removing tags without fixing the issue as you did at Netherlands Reformed Congregations. And please remember that sourcing facts, especially about sensitive topics like religion, is very important. You might take a look at WP:V and WP:RS. Thank you. Novaseminary (talk) 13:38, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Hi Ouddorp

I noticed your comment to Hassocks on the Wivelsfield chapel edit history. It would be a pity if articles on these interesting buildings get deleted for lack of references. It only took a few minutes using google to find good refrences for Ebenezer Chapel, Melksham and add them. You really should do this instead of leaving it to others.--Charles (talk) 21:46, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	For excellent work on Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland. St Anselm (talk) 21:24, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much!! Ouddorp (talk) 19:22, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

List of Strict Baptist churches

Thanks. Yes, I had seen what was happening on the article, but wasn't sure what to do. It's not as clear cut as Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland, where there is a strict (pun intended) definition of which churches belong. But with the Baptist churches, why take Gospel Standard as the standard (again, pun intended)? Why is Bethel Strict Baptist Chapel, Wivelsfield, for example, listed under "former" Strict Baptist churches? What your list really is, is a List of Gospel Standard churches, but that list would probably violate WP:NOTDIR - list articles should generally only contain notable objects. So, I'm afraid to say that on this one I agree with User:Novaseminary. St Anselm (talk) 11:10, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your reply. Bethel Strict Baptist Chapel, Wivelsfield is deleted from the list of "former" Strict Baptist churches. But is a List of Gospel Standard churches realy WP:NOTDIR? Ouddorp (talk) 11:26, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ouddorp – thanks for your note. In relation to the above, I can see from my Watchlist that quite a few changes have happened in terms of renamings, reversions etc. I'll need to take a look over the weekend to see all that has happened; I think we might all need to have a discussion on the article talk page to determine the best way forward for the article. My main worry is that the scope is a bit broad and we may run into problems defining exactly what should be included. Basically I agree with what StAnselm says above in his second and third sentences. Although I am not of a Strict Baptist background (I am in fact Catholic), I have done quite a lot of research into Strict, Particular, General and Reformed Baptist chapels in the context of my research for Sussex places of worship (such chapels are quite common in Sussex, as you probably know!), and into Independent and Calvinistic groups more generally. I think we need to define our scope and perhaps consider a smaller-scale approach — perhaps regional. Kind regards, Hassocks5489 (tickets please!) 13:58, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of List of Gospel Standard Strict Baptist chapels for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of Gospel Standard Strict Baptist chapels is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Gospel Standard Strict Baptist chapels until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 06:44, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Free Presbyterian photos

Hello - I have removed three of your photo links on the page Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland as they were not of the relevant building. You had linked both Inverness and Ness to a new building in Ness which I believe belongs to the Free Church of Scotland (Continuing), and the Lochcarron photo was of the East Church, a disused Church of Scotland building. --PeterR (talk) 21:35, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you PeterR. Ouddorp (talk) 12:14, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Further I have done major editing to St. Jude's Church, Glasgow and the corresponding Dutch article as part of your article had become completely inaccurate due to confusion with a previous building. I believe your opinion regarding the reasons for numerical decline was also inaccurate as the FP church is in fact, now largely urban (e.g. Inverness, Edinburgh, Dingwall, Stornoway), whereas it is reduced to scattered handfuls of people in much of the heartland of its rural past, for instance in Wester Ross and Raasay. Leverburgh, Harris, would be one exception to this urban drift, and there may be others.

Polandball

May I ask - what makes you believe that Polandball were interesting for zealandic Wikipedia readers? Xx236 (talk) 07:10, 22 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Maritime disasters

Hi, Ouddorp! I see that you recently added several entries to List of maritime disasters. That page is very badly sourced and one way to improve it would be to ensure that all new entries to the list have proper citations. Do you have any sources you could add for the changes you made? Thanks very much, Dricherby (talk) 11:08, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dricherby: http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lijst_van_Nederlandse_rampen. 92.71.202.66 (talk) 11:31, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

One Wikipedia project cannot be a valid source for another one. _W^\|/_haledad (Talk to me) 18:36, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

June 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Genemuiden 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:

[[File:KerkzaalGGGenemuiden.JPG|260px|thumb|Church interior of the [[Reformed Congregation]] ([[Jachin en Boazkerk, Genemuiden|Jachin en Boazkerk]] of Genemuiden.]]

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 14:26, 12 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 28

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2013, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page September 2013 Pakistan bombing (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:54, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Recent year pages

Please refrain from unargumented re-adding of contested entries. We're trying to filter out events with no international importance at recent year pages to keep them useful and relevant. If you feel that an event should be included, explain why on the appropriate talk page. — Yerpo ^Eh? 09:00, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

		The Christianity Barnstar
		Dear Ouddorp, I award you The Christianity Barnstar for all of your contributions to WikiProject Christianity, especially your recent creation of Groote Kerk, Cape Town. You are making a difference here! Keep up the good work! With regards, Anupam^Talk 06:40, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much! Ouddorp (talk) 13:16, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (Dutch Reformed Church, Franschhoek) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Dutch Reformed Church, Franschhoek, Ouddorp!

Wikipedia editor OccultZone just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Add references

To reply, leave a comment on OccultZone's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Disambiguation link notification for May 15

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Groote Kerk, Cape Town, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Andrew Murray, William Robertson and Charles Morgan (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:53, 15 May 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) 14:25, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Ouddorp. 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]