User talk:ReformedArsenal/Archive 11

This is an archive of past discussions about User:ReformedArsenal. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 5

←

Archive 9

→

Please comment on Talk:List of new religious movements

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:List of new religious movements. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:05, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (policy). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:02, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot's suggestions. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information on the SuggestBot study page.

IMPORTANT CHANGES: We have modified the selection of articles SuggestBot suggests and altered the design to incorporate more information about the articles, as described in this explanation.

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information.

Views/Day	Title	Tagged with…
32	Pontifical Council for Social Communications (talk)	Add sources
840	East–West Schism (talk)	Add sources
13	Reformed confessions of faith (talk)	Add sources
87	Unconditional election (talk)	Add sources
140	Supersessionism (talk)	Add sources
43	Pseudoscientific metrology (talk)	Add sources
3	Bangladesh Islamic Students Forum (talk)	Cleanup
126	Kansas City crime family (talk)	Cleanup
1,342	Treaty of Paris (1763) (talk)	Cleanup
19	Marie-Dominique Chenu (talk)	Expand
36	Novatian (talk)	Expand
592	Bomb (talk)	Expand
146	Faith in Christianity (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
375	Vaio (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
410	Infant baptism (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
105	Jesus in the Talmud (talk)	Merge
32	Nicene Christianity (talk)	Merge
147	Alleluia (chant) (talk)	Merge
103	Papal name (talk)	Wikify
79	Christian observances of Jewish holidays (talk)	Wikify
66	Hybrid airship (talk)	Wikify
4	St. Thomas Evangelical Fellowship of India (talk)	Orphan
1	Augsburg Confession of the Catholic Faith (talk)	Orphan
2	Robert P. Imbelli (talk)	Orphan
9	Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society (talk)	Stub
15	Transignification (talk)	Stub
10	Memorialism (talk)	Stub
6	Consensus Tigurinus (talk)	Stub
5	Thiyaganur (talk)	Stub
12	Derek Thomas (theologian) (talk)	Stub

Changes to SuggestBot's suggestions

We have changed the number of suggested articles and which categories they are selected from. The number of stubs has been greatly reduced, the number of articles needing sources doubled, and two new categories added (orphans and unencyclopaedic articles). We have also modified the layout of the suggestions and added sortable columns with various types of information about each article. The first two columns are:

Views/Day: Daily average number of views an article's had over the past 14 days.
Quality: Predicted article quality on a 1- to 3-star scale. Placing your cursor over the stars should give you a pop-up describing the article's quality (Low/Medium/High), current assessment class, and predicted assessment class.

The method we use to predict article quality also allows us to assess whether an article might need specific types of work in order to improve its quality. The work needed might not correspond to cleanup tags added to the article, since our method is not based on those. We have added five columns reflecting this work assessment, where a red X indicates improvement is needed. Placing your cursor over an X should give you a pop-up with a short description of the work needed. The five columns seek to answer the following five questions:

Content: Is more content needed?
Headings: Does this article have an appropriate section structure?
Images: Is the number of illustrative images about right?
Links: Does this article link to enough other Wikipedia articles?
Sources: For its length, is there an appropriate number of citations to sources in this article?

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:56, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

Saint Paul

Regarding the faulty support for Luke, and the book of Acts, see Peerbolte, Paul the Missionary, page 105 - and Maccoby, The Mythmaker, passim. The burden of proof is actually on you - show me some reliable historians of the first or second century who quote Luke. The "Gospel According to Luke" was not even written by Luke (it's in 3rd person for one thing). Eusebius (c. 310) wrote that mere "tradition" is why the books have those names on them (Eusebius, Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew, VI, 25.4-5).MithrasPriest (talk) 14:06, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

The burden of proof is on the one changing a long standing article. If you believe that the citations are faulty, prove it. At this point all you did is come in and add some negative peacock words. ReformedArsenal (talk) 14:45, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

I already proved it, above. Luke is NOT a valid source, neither is Acts. And regarding "long standing article" please see the logical fallacy "argument from authority" and stop reverting my valid edits please.MithrasPriest (talk) 15:04, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

This isn't a debate, and Wikipedia operates on sources and precedent. The article is long standing, and changes to a long standing argument required WP:RS. Saying "no recognizes Luke" isn't an argument, and it certainly doesn't constitute proof. The article has TONS of WP:RS who consider both Luke and Acts to be reliable enough. Unless you have published sources that say otherwise, your simply making assertions. ReformedArsenal (talk) 15:16, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

You asked for sources, and I supplied 3. An hour later you give me DIFFERENT reasons why my edits are to be rejected - so I assume you got your copies of Peerbolte, Maccoby, and Eusebius, and you agreed with me, so you needed other excuses to use the UNRELIABLE words of the UNKNOWN authors of Luke and Acts? I'm sorry, this IS a debate, and your talk page alone proves you are anything but an unbiased contributor! "Wikipedia operates on sources and precedent" - no, WP has rules, and "it was that way for a long time on WP" is not one of them. "Unless you have published sources that say otherwise..." - I PROVIDED THREE INCLUDING EUSEBIUS HIMSELF!!! Utter failure.MithrasPriest (talk) 16:41, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Firstly, Wikipedia editing is based on consensus. According to the policy: "In discussions of proposals to add, modify or remove material in articles, a lack of consensus commonly results in retaining the version of the article as it was prior to the proposal or bold edit.".

Secondly, Macoby's "The Mythmaker" is strongly criticized by contemporary scholars and does not reflect the mainstream scholarly view. Eusebius does not qualify as a WP:RS any more than Luke, and he is much further removed from the events. By the way, it doesn't matter if the author of Luke-Acts was really called 'Luke'. What matters is that it was written in the 1st century by a contemporary of Paul. That fact is not disputed in scholarly sources, and that is the reason 'Luke' is commonly used as a (fallible) source for Paul's life.

Finally, you need to be more specific about the changes you are making. For example, the addition of "self-claimed" asserts that Paul may have falsely claimed to be both a Jew and Roman citizen. That in itself requires a source and not just a general statement such as 'Acts is unreliable'. And in the sentence "Paul began to preach that Jesus is the Christ, who he believed was the Son of God", what exactly is the purpose of the qualification "who he believed was"? The article is saying that this was Paul's preaching, not that Jesus was actually the Son of God. The fact that this was part of Paul's message is really not in dispute, or you would need to provide a specific reference for that.

PS, may I suggest that discussions like this one should take place on Talk:Paul_the_Apostle, rather than on a user talk page? This concerns suggested changes to the content of the article, and is not a personal matter. EDIT: I've copied this thread to Talk:Paul_the_Apostle, post make any additional comments there. - Lindert (talk) 17:23, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:John Calvin

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:John Calvin. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:03, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:International Churches of Christ

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:International Churches of Christ. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:03, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot's suggestions. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information on the SuggestBot study page.

IMPORTANT CHANGES: We have modified the selection of articles SuggestBot suggests and altered the design to incorporate more information about the articles, as described in this explanation.

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information.

Views/Day	Title	Tagged with…
	Tarek El Aissami (talk)	Add sources
268	Predestination (Calvinism) (talk)	Add sources
2,359	Trinity (talk)	Add sources
	Football records in Spain (talk)	Add sources
22	Ligon Duncan (talk)	Add sources
73	Christianity in the 19th century (talk)	Add sources
36	Catholic Church in the 20th century (talk)	Cleanup
9	Alfonso Muzzarelli (talk)	Cleanup
111	Christian views on sin (talk)	Cleanup
5	Index of Christianity-related articles (talk)	Expand
143	Mormonism and Christianity (talk)	Expand
147	Fairbanks International Airport (talk)	Expand
483	Antinomianism (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
	History of Calvinist–Arminian debate (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
476	Papal infallibility (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
	Christian Reconstructionism (talk)	Merge
737	Catechism (talk)	Merge
15	SyntheSys Research (talk)	Merge
6,362	Martin Luther (talk)	Wikify
208	Oneness Pentecostalism (talk)	Wikify
12	Paphnutius of Thebes (talk)	Wikify
3	George Habib Bebawi (talk)	Orphan
8	Women in law enforcement (talk)	Orphan
2	Thomas Ascol (talk)	Orphan
53	Henk Krol (talk)	Stub
4	Andrew Purves (talk)	Stub
	Impanation (talk)	Stub
24	Johann Baptist Metz (talk)	Stub
8	Pseudo-Ambrose (talk)	Stub
	GCHQ Bude (talk)	Stub

Changes to SuggestBot's suggestions

We have changed the number of suggested articles and which categories they are selected from. The number of stubs has been greatly reduced, the number of articles needing sources doubled, and two new categories added (orphans and unencyclopaedic articles). We have also modified the layout of the suggestions and added sortable columns with various types of information about each article. The first two columns are:

Views/Day: Daily average number of views an article's had over the past 14 days.
Quality: Predicted article quality on a 1- to 3-star scale. Placing your cursor over the stars should give you a pop-up describing the article's quality (Low/Medium/High), current assessment class, and predicted assessment class.

The method we use to predict article quality also allows us to assess whether an article might need specific types of work in order to improve its quality. The work needed might not correspond to cleanup tags added to the article, since our method is not based on those. We have added five columns reflecting this work assessment, where a red X indicates improvement is needed. Placing your cursor over an X should give you a pop-up with a short description of the work needed. The five columns seek to answer the following five questions:

Content: Is more content needed?
Headings: Does this article have an appropriate section structure?
Images: Is the number of illustrative images about right?
Links: Does this article link to enough other Wikipedia articles?
Sources: For its length, is there an appropriate number of citations to sources in this article?

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:36, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Acharya S

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Acharya S. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:12, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot's suggestions. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information on the SuggestBot study page.

IMPORTANT CHANGES: We have modified the selection of articles SuggestBot suggests and altered the design to incorporate more information about the articles, as described in this explanation.

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information.

Views/Day	Title	Tagged with…
108	Universal priesthood (doctrine) (talk)	Add sources
5	The Denial of the Historicity of Jesus in Past and Present (talk)	Add sources
22	Elva (album) (talk)	Add sources
148	Hypostasis (philosophy and religion) (talk)	Add sources
474	Christian Church (talk)	Add sources
1,860	Baptism (talk)	Add sources
65	Saint Titus (talk)	Cleanup
29	Tritheism (talk)	Cleanup
90	Concordat (talk)	Cleanup
148	History of Christian theology (talk)	Expand
120	Advanced Access Content System (talk)	Expand
949	History of the Catholic Church (talk)	Expand
30	Subordinationism (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
240	Devil in Christianity (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
303	Filioque (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
556	Brahma Kumaris World Spiritual University (talk)	Merge
1	Brahma Kumaris at the United Nations (talk)	Merge
168	Bethany (biblical village) (talk)	Merge
87	Thou shalt not steal (talk)	Wikify
49	Anti-Protestantism (talk)	Wikify
49	Intendant of New France (talk)	Wikify
3	Coptic Orthodox Healing Among Egyptians (talk)	Orphan
1	Valid Bishops (talk)	Orphan
1	References to the Antichrist in ecclesiastical writings (talk)	Orphan
52	Populorum progressio (talk)	Stub
5	Andrew Sandlin (talk)	Stub
2	Cedar Rapids Transit (talk)	Stub
5	Achaicus of Corinth (talk)	Stub
9	Rocks and Shoals (talk)	Stub
14	Anthony A. Hoekema (talk)	Stub

Changes to SuggestBot's suggestions

We have changed the number of suggested articles and which categories they are selected from. The number of stubs has been greatly reduced, the number of articles needing sources doubled, and two new categories added (orphans and unencyclopaedic articles). We have also modified the layout of the suggestions and added sortable columns with various types of information about each article. The first two columns are:

Views/Day: Daily average number of views an article's had over the past 14 days.
Quality: Predicted article quality on a 1- to 3-star scale. Placing your cursor over the stars should give you a pop-up describing the article's quality (Low/Medium/High), current assessment class, and predicted assessment class.

The method we use to predict article quality also allows us to assess whether an article might need specific types of work in order to improve its quality. The work needed might not correspond to cleanup tags added to the article, since our method is not based on those. We have added five columns reflecting this work assessment, where a red X indicates improvement is needed. Placing your cursor over an X should give you a pop-up with a short description of the work needed. The five columns seek to answer the following five questions:

Content: Is more content needed?
Headings: Does this article have an appropriate section structure?
Images: Is the number of illustrative images about right?
Links: Does this article link to enough other Wikipedia articles?
Sources: For its length, is there an appropriate number of citations to sources in this article?

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:42, 15 October 2013 (UTC)