User talk:TheNeutralizer

Welcome!

Hello TheNeutralizer, welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Our intro page contains a lot of helpful material for new users - please check it out! If you need help, visit Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on this page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. TravellingCari 17:40, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Real Life Ministries

Welcome to Wikipedia. I suggest you use the talk page for this article, as edits tend to be controversial. Thanks TravellingCari 17:41, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the advise and the very nice welcome. This page does seem to be a hot bed for controversy. I've looked over some of the history and discussion. It appears the common thread for the controversy seems to stem from this BG357. Is he allowed to keep posting because he started the article? From what I've read of the wikipedia policies, I thought you can not be directly employed at the place the article is at and continue to edit outside the Neutral Point of View? He seems to be pretty bold about going outside a neutral point of view. It appears that he was even warned by you for erasing a page that was not to be touched and then talked smack when you warned him. What gives?

Well, the Realife ministries page isn't my only interest. I'm interested in starting a new article spinning off of the Williams International page. There is an article for the F107 gas turbine but not the F112. Is it okay to copy a pages format and change the content?

Thank you for your help and again for the wonderful welcome. --TheNeutralizer (talk) 18:20, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! The history of that article is such a mess, it's been deleted a few times. I regret getting involved but I think it's calmer than it was. While COI guidelines don't prohibit editing, they bear watch on. There are a number of us watching the article (how I noticed your edit to welcome you) to make sure it doesn't get out of hand. It does periodically but at the moment its under control.

No problem copying format, that's how a lot of articles are created so that similar articles retain the same look and feel, if that makes sense. You may find that there are some templates commonly used on these articles. I know nothing about turbines ( or megachurches for that matter) but you can see the one we use on museum articles here: Staten Island Children's Museum. So yout idea of format is a good thing. I'm on and off line, but feel free to ask questions and I'll answer as I can. TravellingCari 18:30, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your point of view, it seems we all come with our own set of biases. You'll quickly learn that not everything you read is to be believed, especially on discussion pages.

As far as the RLM article goes, I've spent most of my time there trying to maintain NPOV against multiple disruptive editors. I've never deleted any Wiki-page regardless of what you've read. If you review the history more carefully, you'll find that TravellingCari eventually noted that it was not I who deleted whatever it was that I was accused of deleting. I did accidentally delete a tag that had been placed on the article, for which I apologized. Furthermore, I'm not an employee or staff member of this church, never have been. All claims to the contrary are baseless accusations by the aforementioned disruptive editors.

Welcome to Wikipedia, it's either a very engaging place or the most frustrating you've ever encountered... It depends on the day! Hopefully you'll be more fair in your editing than you've been in your characterization of my contributions. Bg357 (talk) 19:21, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

BG357, Thanks for the welcome.

I'm not much into propaganda. I can read and draw my own conclusions. I can see who's fair, who's trying to be fair and who's blowing smoke to appear to be fair. I can see Travellingcari and the other neutral third party are quite fair and neutral. The IP98 has been quite a bit less than neutral point of view but once the neut third party stepped in appears to be trying to be fair and neutral. Either to blow smoke or is a genuine, either way, the IP seems to have been trying. You on the other hand don't seem to be. You have tried to keep to a Neut point of view on a few occations but for the most part you seem to have a problem with your temper and name calling and snide comments even one of your most resent edits to the IP. You seem to be the one offering less than Neutral edits or suggestions and dont seem to want anything negative printed about this church. Why is that? You keep denying being an employee or staff member but as far as I have read you have not said what is your affiliation to Realife ministries. I see IP98 has admitted being a former disgruntal member who doesn't seem to like the churchs actions and handling of money. Which does explain why the IP wants to include negative points. The disclosure does seem to point out that the IP seems to be genuine in its attempt to be fair and neutral. I've seen both sides of the fence. I've seen churches be needlessly attacked and I've seen people attacked to shut them up because wrong was being committed by the clergymen. Eitherway, I'll keep my contributions neutral and fair. I hope the same from the IP, BG357 and any others that join in. I doubt I'll be doing much with this article, I have other interests but I will offer a hand in keeping this neutral. Let's try starting off with a good relationship. Be honest and up front and I'm sure it will go along way to put you in the light as as fair and neutral too. What is your affilation to this church? Do you live in the community? Do you attend or are you a member? Thank you for your honesty and straight forwardness. Have a great evening. I'll check back after supper. --TheNeutralizer (talk) 20:35, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bg, just moved your comment down as it's easier to read if all comments from one person are together. I agree, you have maintained an NPOV much of the time - none of us is perfect. I think if we as a whole continue the recent trend of discussing it will make things a lot smoother. TravellingCari 19:50, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't hold my breath for BG to answer any questions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.145.64.25 (talk) 04:42, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the community. As a "new" member, be sure to fully familiarize yourself with Wikipedia polices, particularly WP:SOCK. Have a nice day! Eyes of Truth-Trackerizer (talk) 20:32, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]