User talk:Soc8675309
|
Holy Spirit capitalized for mindset and numina?
[edit]Thank you for asking for an explicit rule regarding "Holy Spirit", at Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style_(capital_letters)#Holy_Spirit.3F.
You may be interested in the article section Holy_Spirit#Non-Trinitarian_views.
The section intro and subsections show that most nontrinitarian Christians do not believe the "holy spirit" to be a person (that is, a proper noun). They believe it's a mindset or an impersonal force (like numina). Yet, even when the term is not used as a proper noun in the article, the term is forcibly capitalized by editors apparently more interested in trinitarianism than grammar.
There is actually a theologically-based contention at the article Holy Spirit about this very topic. I don't mind capitalizing Holy Spirit, but I still believe that capitalizing non-proper-noun instances of the term to be unscholarly and ungrammatical. You may be interested in sharing your thoughts there at Talk:Holy_Spirit#Capitalization_II.
--AuthorityTam (talk) 16:28, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
The Watchtower redirect
[edit]Actually, Jeffro is correct concerning the redirect. The name The Watchtower does refer to the magazine, not to the Society. Again, while The Watchtower Announcing Jehovah's Kingdom is its official title, the magazine itself (over 99% of the time) and the public in general use the common name The Watchtower. As for "the name of the Society", the short terms the Society and the public use are Watchtower or Watch Tower without the prefix "The" attached. A phrase commonly used by the public when they see Witnesses at their door is: "Are you Watchtower (sometimes 'the Watchtower') people? We're not interested." The official abbreviations used are WTS for Watch Tower / Watchtower Society and WTB&TS for both Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania and Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York, Inc. Note that "WT" is used in the abbreviation when referring to either "Watch Tower" or "Watchtower". —Preceding unsigned comment added by Glenn L (talk • contribs) 16:23, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
Discussion for renaming the article was open for over a week, during which time you didn't bother to provide any input. No one says Are you reading The Watchtower Announcing Jehovah's Kingdom? Where can I get a copy of The Watchtower Announcing Jehovah's Kingdom? and if someone says I'm reading The Watchtower, people don't look at them funny and say but isn't that a corporation. The confusion you allege does not exist, and The Watchtower is exceedingly the most commonly used title. I have asked an admin to move the article back to the correct name.--Jeffro77 (talk) 22:08, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
- Actually, it wasn't moved properly, so I've just reverted the invalid edits. If you copy and paste the content again to avoid the correct process for moving articles, your actions will be reported as disruptive.--Jeffro77 (talk) 22:15, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
- Sorry I'm not an expert at doing this stuff.--Soc8675309 (talk) 15:49, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
Citation requested
[edit]
Welcome to Wikipedia. I'd like to thank you for your contributions to Wallkill, Ulster County, New York. When adding new facts, it is important to provide references to reliable sources so that these facts may be verified by others. Another editor has requested a citation that supports your contributions. Unreferenced facts can be altered or deleted if challenged by other editors. To protect your contributions, consider providing references, which you can learn about from Wikipedia:Citation templates. If you need help, you can leave a message here or on my talk page, or type {{helpme}} on your talk page, followed by your question. Happy editing! --JBC3 (talk) 06:57, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
Article Alexander Thomson nominated for deletion
[edit]Article Alexander Thomson nominated for deletion
If you're familiar with the range of Wikipedia articles about Jehovah's Witnesses, you've likely come across the name Alexander Thomson a few times. He wasn't a Witness, but he (very) occasionally had favorable things to write about Watch Tower publications. By no means was he a shill.
Someone (see diff) has moved to delete the article about Thomson, claiming that he is not notable (is not worthy of even a brief encyclopedic article). That seems odd to me, because Thomson is listed among only twelve persons having "played a significant role in the work of the Concordant Publishing Concern", publishers of the Concordant Literal Version of the Bible. He edited and wrote much Bible commentary under his own bylines, some of which is still in print. He contributed and edited articles in Unsearchable Riches[1] (now in its 100th year). Primarily because of having had his scholarship so substantially influence a notable Bible, Thomson is himself notable.
I have no sentimental attachment to Thomson, but I believe he is notable enough to keep from deletion. Feel free to add references to improve the article, or chime at the article's Talk regarding whether or not you'd prefer Wikipedia delete its article about this Alexander Thomson.--AuthorityTam (talk) 17:14, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
The City of Milaca
[edit]Thanks for pointing that out. Next time, just use a different process as per Wikipedia:Deletion.--Tikiwont (talk) 19:51, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
- Like what? I'm inexperienced. --Soc8675309 (talk) 19:52, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
- Well obvious vandalism can be tagged with {{db-vandalism}}, dubious hoaxes should be sent to Articles for deletion and simple duplications can be redirected.--Tikiwont (talk) 19:55, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
I thought it was a hoax since the article was created from the start with the questionable information. Sorry if it's a real town! --Soc8675309 (talk) 19:59, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
- No problem at all. You were right that this should not stay as it was.--Tikiwont (talk) 20:01, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
November 2009
[edit]
Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit that you made to http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Sikh-history&action=historysubmit&diff=326200685&oldid=325819688 has been reverted or removed because it was a misuse of a warning or blocking template. Please use the user warnings sandbox for any tests you may want to do, or take a look at our introduction page to learn more about contributing to the encyclopedia. Thank you. Sikh-History 08:02, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
- The offended editor apparently refers to a third party's postings at this thread on his Talk page. --Soc8675309 (talk) 17:03, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
- I'm not offended, but you clearly got the warning wrong in this instance. You are also persisting on my talk page. Please stop. Thanks and Best Wishes. --Sikh-History 08:21, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
In reference to this post.
I assure you that making an edit you and I do not support is not abuse. It is simply a disagreement about content.
wp:AGF - "Pointless defensiveness." - does not show an assumption of good faith. I assure you I am not defending anything. I am simply disagreeing with you, as I simply disagreed with SH about a number of things.- Sinneed
Disambiguation link notification
[edit]Hi. When you recently edited Paul Christoforo, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sleuth (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) 10:54, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
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) 14:06, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
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) 14:09, 24 November 2015 (UTC)