User talk:Rasmitaz

Welcome!

Hello, Rasmitaz, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! - CobaltBlueTony 18:38, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I understand what you're trying to do with the Jehovah's Witnesses article. However, Witness and non-Witness editors alike have worked strenuously to produce a WP:NPOV series of articles that are heavily referenced. No opinion should be presented, even "Witness thought", without the proper reference material cited. Your edits, while in harmony with Witness beliefs, needs to be sourced as such; without it, trouble-making editors, such as those who actively oppose Jehovah's Witnesses come in and nitpick their way through every last detail with spurious and inflammatory edits designed to shade the tone of the article(s) to their slant. Only by complying strictly to Wikipedia's guidelines have we been able to produce a neutral tone such as it is. Please feel free to discuss your edits with the rest on the discussion pages. Thanks! - CobaltBlueTony 18:38, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As one of Jehovah's Witnesses myself, I have spent painstaking hours of time discussing the wording of nearly every article in some form or another with other editors, not to mention fending off the undermining work of dissenters who were obvious in their opinionated edits. You are by all means welcome to discuss your recommendations on the talk page, as the current set of non-Witness editors are much more amenable to compromise. However, making changes, especially that even "smell" of Witness-thought, can provoke lurking apostates and other opposers to renew old edit wars and make our lives miserable again. If you see a negative connotation, by all means bring it up in the talk page of the corresponding article -- PLEASE! -- and allow the discussion process to produce a more neutral concensus. Since this process is attended to by voluntary individual participation, "new blood" is always welcome.

At times, both positive and negative opinions will appear instead of none, since some issues are highly charged with emotion and/or opinion. Balance is by its definiton really tricky, so the more the merrier, as the saying goes. Again, please feel more than free to discuss your proposals. Hopefully, 'many hands making the load light' will amount to a fine-toothed comb being run through all of these articles, weeding out unncessary slants. All the best, CobaltBlueTony 20:24, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. - Please sign your comments with four tildes(~~~~). Wikipedia correctly translates it into your user name and places a time/date stamp behind it. Thanks!