This is an archive of past discussions. 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 1 | ← | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
I was looking for arguments in my efforts to ensure that we devote any kind of substantial thought to the effects, facts and implications before the current furious purge of fiction articles is brought to its conclusion, and found that you here made a routine message using longhand instead of masses of acronyms, thereby ensuring with a bit of extra work that the message would be easily legible and that little experience was necessary to follow it. So thanks for your courtesy. -- Kiz o r 20:23, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
Please weigh in on the merger proposal between History of the Latter Day Saint movement and Mormonism and history. I saw that you were a recent contributor of one of the pages in question, and thought you would be interested.-- Descartes1979 ( talk) 21:23, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
I hope you have been well lately. I am looking copyright situation similar to what we discussed previously (in fact re-reading that discussion reminds me some of the questions I asked elsewhere were things I had already known!). This one is a s:Russian POW suicide note related to the Betrayal of the Cossacks. I have most of the issues clarified, but I was wondering what you thought about the last sentance ('Let the Americans and the whole world know that our death is the commencement of the struggle against the dictatorship of Stalin.) being consent to publication. Do you think such a remark should qualify as consent from the author(s)?-- BirgitteSB 18:40, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
Golden plates has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. Serpent's Choice ( talk) 19:08, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
Please weigh in on the merger proposal between Angel Moroni and Moroni (prophet). You are receiving this notice since you were identified as a recent editor on one of those pages. Thanks! -- Descartes1979 ( talk) 07:12, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
I see you are an admin that is involved in religion articles. Can I request some advice/help from you concerning a "dispute" with User:Fullstop? I feel that s/he has been uncivil in comments to me and s/he has been blanking and manually emptying some categories I recently created. See a discussion on my talk page here. The catgories are Category:Zoroastrians by nationality and its subcategories if you'd like to look at them. Without getting into the technicalities of the issue of nationality/status as a Zoroastrian, my position is simply that the editor should nominate the categories for WP:CFD if s/he has a problem with the existence of the categories or the way they are being applied. Is this not correct? I don't understand why the editor can't use the provided-for procedure. S/he sounds quite frustrated and it may be that most of that frustration results from past similar disputes the editor has been in, but I don't really appreciate him/her taking it out on me either. Do you have any advice for what I should do? Thank you very much. Good Ol’factory (talk) 07:09, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
I've just stumbled across the "no original research" RFC, and I want to tell you that your statement may be the most lucid scholarly writing I have ever seen on wikipedia. Normally, when confronted by a wall of diffs and dates (usually on an arbcom subpage), I reach for my mouse wheel almost immediately, but you were able to hold my attention. I hope that, in the future, that proceeding results in fewer people being dragged through the mud while discussing policy improvements. Xeriphas1994 ( talk) 20:56, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
The Barnstar of Diligence | ||
Awarded for your conscientious work on Golden Plates |
All the best, John Foxe ( talk) 23:17, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
Once again I must express appreciation for your work, in this case the careful comparison of the Golden Plates with Noah's Ark.-- John Foxe ( talk) 11:38, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
I have nominated Mormonism and violence, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mormonism and violence. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Otolemur crassicaudatus ( talk) 20:47, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
Someone is suggesting that one of the references you added to this article (Buerger, David John (2002), The Mysteries of Godliness: A History of Mormon Temple Worship) is unreliable and extremist. He doesn't seem to have actually read this source so perhaps you can clear up the issue easily with a simple explanation of what you know about the source.-- BirgitteSB 00:52, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Template:Citation/authors/testing requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.
If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{transclusionless}}</noinclude>).
Thanks. -- MZMcBride ( talk) 22:16, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Template:Citation/patent/testing requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.
If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{transclusionless}}</noinclude>).
Thanks. -- MZMcBride ( talk) 22:17, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
A
proposed deletion template has been added to the article
Shit happens, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's
criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "
What Wikipedia is not" and
Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{
dated prod}}
notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on
its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the
proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the
speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to
Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if
consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{
db-author}}
to the top of
Shit happens.
Neitherday (
talk) 17:19, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
I have nominated Shit happens, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shit happens (2nd nomination). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Neitherday ( talk) 19:37, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Shit happens, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the page appears to have no meaningful content or history, and the text is unsalvageably incoherent.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add {{
hangon}}
on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) and leave a note on the page's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself.
If the page you created was a test, please use the sandbox for any other experiments you would like to do. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Mschilz20 ( talk) 01:29, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi, COGDEN, I want to ask you a favor which you should feel free to do in your own time or not do if you are uncomfortable with it.
I had a small dispute with User:Storm Rider, who I assume you are familiar with somewhat b/c you both seem to have been active in editing LDS pages. You may not be familiar with me, but I am relatively new on WP and have been involved in editing some LDS pages as well. If you could, would you review the interaction here and let me know if/how I am off base. I hold no animus towards Storm Rider but for some reason he seemed to really take offence at my comments, and I wondered: am I being a dick, or is he like this with a lot of users? If I'm being a dick, can you tell me so I won't be a dick anymore? I would appreciate it. Feel free to comment on my page or e-mail me; I don't see any need to prolong the dispute at Talk:Master Mahan unless you feel it's necessary to comment there. Thanks very much, Good Ol’factory (talk) 21:51, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
I notice you commented on this one after I closed it. I appreciate that you did try to work. The section you added is an improvement in terms of POV. But the entire article needs to be audited in the same way. It's hard to come up with an analogy, and the best I have is this: if Golden plates were a movie, our article would be a plot summary and little else. I would rewrite as much as possible, compressing the story and adding as much scholarship as you can. The bulk of it is not in any way critical. It is, literally, "Smith said..." for far too much of it.
As for "said" more generally, I realize it can be used as a qualifying term and things in this article require qualification. But it's used far too much. As a basic prose consideration, it should be reduced as much as possible. Marskell ( talk) 20:32, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
I would like to invite you to consider taking part in the AGF Challenge which has been proposed for use in the RfA process [1] by User: Kim Bruning. You can answer in multiple choice format, or using essay answers, or anonymously. You can of course skip any parts of the Challenge you find objectionable or inadvisable.-- Filll ( talk) 14:51, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
Citations requests for details on the legal/social/organizational structure of the Church, found in the background section, are becoming an issue. I suspect your library on the topic is larger than mine. Could you take a look when you get an extra minute? Best wishes. WBardwin ( talk) 00:57, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
Please see the new section at Talk:Joseph_Smith, Jr.. Écrasez l'infâme ( talk) 19:02, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
Sir: in my efforts to improve Wiki coverage of US Western explorers, I came across John Williams Gunnison. I removed inflamatory language and POV from the article, also noting that sources are needed. As you have been involved in the work on the Utah War and Mountain Meadows massacre, perhaps you or other associated editors have material which might improve this article. Thank you. Just me! ( talk) 02:49, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
I turned my attention to this page a little while back and ran into the "thou shalt not edit here" wall created by the page owners, Taivo and wanderer57, with a few smaller players too. If you want we can collaborate on this page...I am willing to stand up to these guys and I think they may have gotten the point that I won't be held from editing there, but maybe not. I tried to splice parts of your revision back into the lede...some of it stuck, but I also tried to add a few things I thought were missing but was severely blocked from adding a "13 milion follower" comment about the scope and reach of the book. My idea is that there should be a greater "BOM influence" section talking about the renaissance the BOM created and it's wide reaching effects connecting to the history of the LDS movements pages etc. Just let me know if there is anything I can help with...we've fought over worse on the Golden Plates page, so let's kick another bee's nest and try to reach at least GA status with this article again. Twunchy ( talk) 22:10, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
Since you have been actively involved in past discussions regarding PSTS, please review, contribute, or comment on this proposed PSTS Policy & Guidelines.-- SaraNoon ( talk) 18:41, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Logo of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (1995).gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice?
Anyways, the image has been replaced by an SVG version: Image:LDS Logo.svg. Just thought I'd give you a heads up. — SuperRad ! ☎ 18:49, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
Based purely on the fact that you are the earliest person listed on the Revision history of Template:Citation/patent, I assume that you are the author of the Citation/patent template. If so, I greatly appreciate the work that you have done and apologize for punishing competency by asking questions. However, I am trying to learn template scripting in general and selected the Citation/patent template due to some initial use. I asked a question at the template's talk page, but have not received any response. (I also have further analysis of the template's code on my home page.) Accordingly, I am leaving this message at your home page in case you might be able to assist.-- Rpclod ( talk) 14:57, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
A concern was raised that the clause, "a primary source may be used only to make descriptive claims, the accuracy of which is verifiable by any reasonable, educated person without specialist knowledge" conflicts with WP:NPOV by placing a higher duty of care with primary sourced claims than secondary or tertiary sourced claims. An RFC has been initiated to stimulate wider input on the issue. Professor marginalia ( talk) 18:38, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
On the BOM page I have run into a great question...that you might know about or have an idea of where to find the info. The question is "Who titled the Book of Mormon?" I have no clue! And I'm pretty sure I'm not the first person to ask such a question...hopefully. If you know, just head here here to put your 2 cents in. Twunchy ( talk) 19:42, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
I'd love your input again for a new policy for Wikipedia regarding religious articles. Take a look at what I've started and lend me any input you wish. It's at Wikipedia:Religion. Thanks, Twunchy ( talk) 22:40, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
Hello. I noticed you've made edits to articles related to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and thought you might be interested in participating in the LDS Church work group, part of the Latter Day Saint movement WikiProject. The group aims to serve as a hub for collaboration on Church-related articles. You don't have to be a member of the Church to participate, and the only requirement for active membership is that you edit at least one Church-related article per month. Best wishes! — Eustress talk 02:01, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
I had to laugh when I read this. I was not aware that you were perceived as an orthodox Latter-day Saint. As many disagreements as we have had over the years over your divergence from orthodoxy, it is comical to see those who are completely ignorant of LDS theology and teachings attempt to put you in an orthodox box. It really makes me laugh out loud.
Please understand that I do not wish to insult you. You have always appeared, IMHO, to edit from a historical standpoint and LDS Church teaching be damned. I honestly trust your knowledge of LDS history; you are by far the most knowledgeable editor on LDS history working on Wikipedia. Our disagreements in the past always revolve around your desire to actually cast off orthodoxy for the minutiae of history. Regardless, you have now joined the ranks of the orthodox. Be welcome! -- Storm Rider 17:03, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
this. http://www.juvenileinstructor.org/transcript-of-the-mountain-meadows-massacre-panel-at-uvu-turley-and-bagley-and-cuch-oh-my/ Right? :^) ↜Just me, here, now … 01:48, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
As you are known as someone with both an interest in Mormon history and a familiarity with of published academic research in that area, I'd like to invite you to the discussion at Talk:Mormon Corridor#Guidelines for inclusion. -- 208.81.184.4 ( talk) 23:58, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
I noticed your name amongst those contributing at Talk:Primary source.
Will you take a look at what I've pulled together at Primary source -- see here?
What do you think? I wonder if you'd be willing to suggest how this analysis might be improved?
Perhaps you may want to argue that using Nihon Ōdai Ichiran is not helpful as a strategy for illustrating the differences among primary, secondary and tertiary sources? -- Tenmei ( talk) 00:10, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
Hi COGDEN,
I just barely know "of" you from your Latter Day Saint-related editing. I know you're an administrator and am wondering if you would be willing to review an administrative action I recently took. If you don't have time I understand, but if you could it would be helpful to me.
I blocked an editor who is on an arbcom-imposed editing restriction. Links to pretty much everything relevant can be found here, where I left some reasons on his talk page. My main concern is that the editor has stated that I have a clear conflict of interest in blocking him. The reason for that would be that I have participated in the deletion review discussion where his comments in question were made, and my opinions conflicted with his. The comments he was blocked for were directed at another editor, and at the time of blocking, I didn't consider myself the target of his attack.
Anyway, I'd appreciate it if you could simply review what I have done. If what I did was inappropriate, you could unblock the user, and then either re-block him or leave him unblocked as you see fit. Thanks for your help, if you can give it. Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:31, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for your effort in this regard. I know how pesky these types of requests can be, but they do serve a valuable purpose, I think. Good Ol’factory (talk) 22:01, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
See my inquiry here. Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:18, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
COgden, I know you have recently edited the Holy Spirit article. I have a degree of discomfort with Carlude's edits; though I have left with with little editing. The Holy Ghost is a spirit son of God the Father is stated. The problem is the the Holy Spirit is eternal, without beginning or end, just as it is with Jesus. When LDS speak of the Son of God in Jesus or discuss the Holy Spirit (the few times we ever discuss where did he come from), we do say they are sons of God the Father, but we do not mean that they are not eternal without beginning or end. Do you have any ideas how the article could concisely be edited and still retain the information that Carlude wants in the article?-- Storm Rider 23:10, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
See this rename proposal that I made to match the category name to the article you recently renamed. I didn't tell you about it earlier because I didn't want to risk being accused of canvassing. But now that it looks like the rename won't go forward (thanks to some entertaining insight from some users who are obviously not too familiar with the Latter Day Saint movement), I thought I'd let you know about it. Maybe you can at least make a comment that could demonstrate that I'm not completely loopy. Ultimately, I suppose either name works. Good Ol’factory (talk) 10:45, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
There is a proposed merge that I think would interest you at Talk:Limited geography model#Several merge proposals - my take. I am posting this notice because I saw that you were a recent editor at one of the pages listed below:
-- Descartes1979 ( talk) 17:59, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
You may be interested in some recent additions at Mormonism_and_violence#Violence_against_LGBT_people. I've tried to clean up the section a bit but I don't know enough about the topic to do it justice. I'm not sure that most of the information there is appropriate, as it doesn't really qualify as "violence" as such. Good Ol’factory (talk) 22:57, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.
If you have any questions please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 13:54, 14 July 2009 (UTC)Hi. Could you please #redirect the deprecated
Template:Harvard reference to
Template:Citation? As you know, :) the parameters of the former are recognized by the latter, so a simple redirect (rather than calling Citation/xxxx) would work fine. (ps: {Harvard reference} is actually calling the sandbox. Ouch.) --
Fullstop (
talk) 13:11, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
pps: I'm very glad to see that you are still active, and that the silly games haven't driven you away. Be well.
In this edit of 12 February 2007 you deprecated {{ Harvard reference}}. Nevertheless this template is still very much in use. Are you sure the template should be tagged as deprecated? Debresser ( talk) 08:27, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
Hello COGDEN. There is currently a discussion to get a title change in the "Criticism of the Latter Day Saint movement" article. Stormrider mentioned that you had an excellent understanding of church history, and I would very much appreciate your input on the talk page, especially under the section "Title", which discusses the current proposal. It is a somewhat long discussion, and I apologize if reading it is tedious, but your opinion would be valuable, especially with the level of controversy surrounding the topic. Thanks for your time. Sharpsr1990 ( talk) 13:18, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
I thoroughly read your changes to the Criticism article. How about instead of deleting information that's critical of your church, you discuss it first. I don't see how you can attempt to cover up the argued illigitimacy of Joseph Smith because it's a very widely discussed topic. GnarlyLikeWhoa ( talk) 17:28, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
The Diplomacy Barnstar | ||
For level-headedness, tact, patience, wisdom, and excellence in editing. -- Noleander ( talk) 16:38, 17 October 2009 (UTC) |
An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Pentecostal Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and " What Wikipedia is not").
Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pentecostal Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).
You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.
Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. -- Erwin85Bot ( talk) 01:21, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi; I've nominated a LDS movement category for deletion here. I really don't expect that it's going to get much input at CFD given its obscure nature, and you're the only user I could think of who I thought may even have a clue what this topic is about. Would you consider taking a look and seeing what you think? I don't want this to be seen as a canvass, so let me just be clear that I'd be just as happy if you told me my rationale for deletion is off base than if you agreed that it should be deleted. It just seems like a weird category to me, and want it deleted if it's just a made up thing. Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:10, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
Re [2]; is the internet version referred to here the official 2006 version of the handbook? I've seen several internet copies but they are all old 1998 versions. Good Ol’factory (talk) 05:56, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
POV on the Joseph Smith, Jr. article seems to me to have swung a little to the left of center -- promoting a 'denigration' viewpoint -- in the last few months. Quotes, even from more neutral sources, have been selectively used and many of Smith's accomplishments downplayed and/or eliminated. Would you agree? Should some effort be made to restore a better balance? The LDS project page is noticably inactive, but I can help at intervals over the next couple of weeks. WBardwin ( talk) 03:54, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
Template:Harvard reference has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. — Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 05:53, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for addressing the issues on the lead paragraph, considering I was having difficulty in agreeing with the changes to the other editors. I think I am satisfied with that area of the article now, later I'll post some points about the "early life" section of the article on the talkpage, regards. Routerone ( talk) 21:17, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
Hi Cogden. When you move text in an article, please try not to cut it in one edit, then paste it in the next. (like this: cut, paste) Instead, just edit the whole article.
With disputed articles, it makes it more difficult to gauge the intent, and makes the edits appear more controversial than they need to be in watchlists. Thanks, tedder ( talk) 06:22, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
I’m a newer editor on Wikipedia and I’ve seen many of your posts on the article discussion pages. As such, where can I connect with other LDS members (either on Wikipedia or off-site) and discuss various points of inquiry? Or can I create my own forum on my personal talk page? I would like to intelligently engage many academic / theological questions but most can’t be relevantly addressed on the talk pages – the discussion always leads to off-article conversation. Please let me know. Thanks HBCALI ( talk) 17:05, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
Hello, this is a friendly notification.
In the past, you supported promoting wp:quote into protocol. Currently, there is a discussion in an attempt to gather consensus to this ratification.
If you are interested, you can show your support there.
Thank you. 174.3.110.108 ( talk) 02:22, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Oliver Cowdery photograph, c. 1848.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. FASTILYsock (TALK) 03:32, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
I like the work you are doing in List of sects in the Latter Day Saint movement. However, I do have one a very friendly suggestion that you are welcome to ignore is you choose. I was born into the LDS church so to me the words "Mainstream Mormonism" are natural and make since. However, there are a number of editors of this page that are ether part of another sect (like Community of Christ) or not LDS at all. In my opinion, they go to great lengths, using NPOV, against the Church being the "Mainstream" chruch. Especally since you listed the LDS church, I know they are going to argue that ALL sects claim to be “Mainstream”, or that your changes make the church out to be more important, etc. I would suspect that one or more of them is going to revert all your edits just to get ride of that one word "Mainstream" instead of trying to improve it and I would hate for that to happen.-- ARTEST4ECHO talk 19:56, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
The Barnstar of Integrity | ||
Awared for being so receptive to suggestions and his willingness to incorporate others ideas and inputs, without being personally offended. -- ARTEST4ECHO talk 12:47, 8 April 2010 (UTC) |
The Categorisation Barnstar | ||
Awarded to COGDEN for your outstanding work on the List of sects in the Latter Day Saint movement article. Your work in categorizing the Rocky Mountain Saint churches has taken this article to a whole new level of usability. Thanks for all your hard work! - Ecjmartin ( talk) 00:11, 9 April 2010 (UTC) |
Just wanted to say "thanks so much" for your hard work, and that of your fellow editors, on this article. You guys have definitely taken it to a whole new level of usability, and this barnstar is well-deserved. Thanks again for all your hard work! -
Ecjmartin (
talk) 22:43, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
I would appreciate your insight here. I've cleaned up the edit in question a bit but have let it stand for now. Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:25, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
Hello, I saw that you wrote School of the Prophets
A two-day conference 22-23 Jan, 1833. [3]
22 Speaking and praying in tounges. [4]
23 Foundingday of the School of Prophets. [5]
24 The School of Prophets begins. [6] Zebedee Coltrin, qtd. in Journal History, Jan. 24, 1833. 90.231.11.211 ( talk) 21:52, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for your interest in Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#MediaWiki extension that supports "Harvard" references. X-romix ( talk) 09:51, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I am currently involved in a proposal for a guideline on primary, secondary and tertiary sources. I have just discovered that you were once involved in a similar proposal a while ago - either in contributing to it directly or in discussing it on its talk page. You may wish to get involved in the current proposal and I would encourage you to do so - even if you just want to point out where we have gone wrong! Yaris678 ( talk) 23:54, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
Are you Jeff Lindsay? You're both LDS and Chemical Engineers. Hope you are him... -- Loofus5 ( talk) 20:42, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
In reading past discussions, I came across the following proposal you made for the first paragraph of the LDS Church article:
"The LDS Church teaches that it is a restoration of the original Christianity of Jesus. While sharing many common elements of Christian doctrine and practice, it is distinct from traditional Christianity because of its additional authority other than the Old and New Testaments."
It seemed to be well received by others in the discussion. It seems clearer and more balanced to me than the current wording: "is a restorationist Christian church" in that Mormons and non-Mormons would probably agree with your wording.
At this point I realize this general issue has been discussed to death, but I was curious to ask if you ever actually posted your wording. What became of this good (IMHO) solution? Scoopczar ( talk) 18:36, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
The article Church of Jesus Christ in Zion has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{
dated prod}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{
dated prod}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. The
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion. --
ARTEST4ECHO
talk 01:59, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
Hi cogden, I just created this account on wikipedia so I could ask you and a few other people some questions about Mormons. 1' Is the book of Abraham translation from the book of breathings? 2' Did John taylor try to hide polygamy? 3' Has reformed egyptian writing been found yet? 4' Were the cows and horses just other creatures in the book of Mormon? 5' Do you believe Smith was a prophet? Thanks and have a good day. Steve -- Stevemccardell ( talk) 16:18, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
Hey I have a question. Is this article - Secret combination (Latter Day Saints) correct? Is this a valid entry for Wikipedia? LoveMonkey ( talk) 15:18, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
Would it be acceptable to replace the phrase "traditional Christianity" with the phrase "orthodox Christianity"? Laurel Lodged ( talk) 21:16, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and the page that you created has been or soon will be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}}
to the top of
the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on
the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact
one of these administrators to request that the administrator
userfy the page or email a copy to you.
Mhiji 02:01, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
The article Archaeology and the Book of Mormon is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Archaeology and the Book of Mormon 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 good 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. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ( Otters want attention) 01:19, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
The Press Barnstar | ||
Thank you for lending your experience at Joseph Smith, Jr.-- John Foxe ( talk) 19:43, 1 February 2011 (UTC) |
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Latter Day Saint movement#Template:LDSproject. This invitation is being extended because you have previously edited this template, which indicates you may have some level of interest in it. 208.81.184.4 ( talk) 17:07, 9 February 2011 (UTC) (Using {{ pls}})
Hey there - I ran across this on the Internet the other day - did you know that FAIR is tracking your wikipedia edits? I was a little perturbed on your behalf when I saw this. http://en.fairmormon.org/Mormonism_and_Wikipedia/Editors -- Descartes1979 ( talk) 22:25, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
I guess I am being 'arbitrated' [7] again; this is getting to be routine, so I don't know when I will get back to you on that other. The last kangaroo court went 'their' way, so I guess it was time to ramp up the action; watch editors come out of the woodwork for some old fashioned swarming. Duke53 | Talk 08:07, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
I post this completely unsolicited by Duke53. Though Duke53 has already been blocked the following needs to be stated for the record. Duke53 is merely being attacked by a group of Wikipedia Mormon apologist, who have targeted him and others linked here [8]. The only statement in this link [9] to provide any examples is BFizz. Without examples, those above are merely saying soap boxing about Duke53. Not being their friend is not a reason to block him. Furthermore, the examples provided by BFizz are rather weak. They are merely examples of it takes two to tango. Further still yet, Analyst has engaged in the same behavior in the examples provided by BFizz. Take for example ridicule of a user name linked here [10] As for a mistreating a new user, Alanyst and Stormrider team up against User:Thewayandthelight [11] and successfully ran this insightful editor off. Alanyst and Stormrider have a record of using wikipedia manipulation techniques to supress and censor facts from wikipedia, instead of incorporating them. Editors such as Duke53 have repeated frustrated them in this. Now they are merely manipulating wikipedia to censor the editor himself. All statements against Duke53 were from Mormon apologist wikipedians. Without a state from a even a centrist editor such as John Foxe, the block of Duke53 comes off as manipulation. Mormography ( talk) 06:43, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
I'd like you to review my response to the 'cooling off period'. Thank you. -- Avanu ( talk) 03:37, 5 April 2011 (UTC) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:The_Church_of_Jesus_Christ_of_Latter-day_Saints#.22Are_Mormons_Christian.3F.22_question_closed_for_a_7_day_cooling-off_period
I'm am through attempting to reason with User:Entropy's 1 at Talk:Mormonism. The user is now repeatedly re-adding in the material they originally added about how JSJ was criticised by the Palmyra Reflector, etc. The user seems to have simply ignored what everyone said in the discussion. Yes, I violated 3RR in trying to work this out, and now Entropy is accusing me as being a person who sees no value in Mormonism, so I'm through trying. Perhaps you could do something there to help the situation .... Good Ol’factory (talk) 13:04, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
Hi! Hey, I believe Latter Day Saint is most properly is a disambiguation page. COgden, If you believe consensus still supports its remaining a redirect, do you think it advisable to file an AfD? Btw, curiously, it's never had one.-- Hodgson-Burnett's Secret Garden ( talk) 01:11, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
The media file you uploaded as File:Nauvoo, Illinois daguerreotype (1846).jpg appears to be missing information as to its authorship (and or source), or if you did provide such information, it is confusing for others trying to make use of the image.
It would be appreciated if you would consider updating the file description page, to make the authorship of the media clearer.
Although some images may not need author information in obvious cases, (such where an applicable source is provided),authorship information aids users of the image, and helps ensure that appropriate credit is given (a requirement of some licenses).
If you created this media yourself, please consider explicitly including your user name, for which:{{subst:usernameexpand|COGDEN/Archive 5}} will produce an appropriate expansion,
or the {{ own}} template..
If you have any questions please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 14:32, 18 May 2011 (UTC)Hey, COgden. I'm not getting a response at Joseph Smith Jr. Perhaps I could ask the question here as to whether you are indeed an active LDS member. I mean no disrespect if you are not, but it would help me understand better some of your positions which seem to contradict the current teachings of the leaders of the Church.-- Canadiandy talk 14:54, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
I just wanted to ask. . . it seems like you favor using terms like Mormon and Mormonism in your editing over terms and links like LDS, Latter-day Saint, LDS Church, Latter Day Saint Movement, and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. I was wondering if there are reasons behind that and what they are. Was there a discussion on this a while back that I missed? Adjwilley ( talk) 03:21, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
Hey there COgden. I don't want to bog down the discussion pages with this one, sorry if it bogs down yours. First, thanks for your input as it relates to the discussion on the term 'nontrinitarian.' I just stumbled across a link to past complaints which suggests in fact that 'nontrinitarian' might be a term initiated at Wikipedia. Either way I'd be interested in your research into whether the term 'nontrinitarian' as it relates to the Church is not WP original research that has gone on for so long it has formed some sort of erroneous WP precedence that will take a fair bit of work to fix. To paraphrase that great Latin sage Inigo Montoya, "[Wikipedia] keep[s] using that word. I don't think it means what [they] think it means."-- Canadiandy talk 05:47, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
I would appreciate your input here if you have a few minutes. -- Adjwilley ( talk) 01:08, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
Sorry to continue bugging you on your talk page. There is a discussion going on at the redirect Talk:Mormon where I think your input would be most helpful. -- Adjwilley ( talk) 03:39, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
After many years, some people are getting around to a practical wikicite implementation. If you are still interested, please take a look as the pages develop on meta. – SJ + 04:03, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
Hi. Do you think White Horse Prophecy could realistically become a Good Article? What are your thoughts on this idea? Richwales ( talk · contribs) 04:44, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
Your input would be welcome at Talk:Homosexuality and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints#References. -- 208.81.184.4 ( talk) 16:35, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
Category:Restorationism, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. — Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 18:23, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
Template:Policycontroversy has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 15:14, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
The December 2011 issue of the WikiProject United States newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
--
Kumioko (
talk) 04:16, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
The January 2012 issue of the WikiProject United States newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
--
Kumi-Taskbot (
talk) 18:51, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
Category:Persian religions, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. — Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 19:40, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
Template:Harvard citation has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. -- Alan Liefting ( talk) - 23:08, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
The Mormon article is undergoing a GA review, and has been put on hold to deal with concerns. More details at Talk:Mormons/GA1. Your input would be valued. SilkTork ✔Tea time 14:49, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
I was hoping that I could get a specific opinion from you on the paragraph. If you'd prefer not to offer an opinion, that's ok, I just wanted to ask. ~ Adjwilley ( talk) 00:17, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
Dear COGDEN,
My name is Jonathan Obar
user:Jaobar, I'm a professor in the College of Communication Arts and Sciences at Michigan State University and a Teaching Fellow with the Wikimedia Foundation's Education Program. This semester I've been running a little experiment at MSU, a class where we teach students about becoming Wikipedia administrators. Not a lot is known about your community, and our students (who are fascinated by wiki-culture by the way!) want to learn how you do what you do, and why you do it. A while back I proposed this idea (the class) to the community
HERE, were it was met mainly with positive feedback. Anyhow, I'd like my students to speak with a few administrators to get a sense of admin experiences, training, motivations, likes, dislikes, etc. We were wondering if you'd be interested in speaking with one of our students.
So a few things about the interviews:
Bottom line is that we really need your help, and would really appreciate the opportunity to speak with you. If interested, please send me an email at obar@msu.edu (to maintain anonymity) and I will add your name to my offline contact list. If you feel comfortable doing so, you can post your name
HERE instead.
If you have questions or concerns at any time, feel free to email me at obar@msu.edu. I will be more than happy to speak with you.
Thanks in advance for your help. We have a lot to learn from you.
Sincerely,
Jonathan Obar -- Jaobar ( talk) 02:39, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
Hello, my name is Howard Terry User:Terryhow. I seen you were going to be one of the few I will be interviewing. If you may, can we set up a day and time that's free for you?
Sure. Why don't you send me an email (via the "E-mail this user" tab to the left), and let me know generally what times you are generally available, and whether you would like to do it by Skype or some other medium. COGDEN 22:15, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
Ok. I cant seem to figure out where the E-mail this user tab, and if you want I can email you the interview to make more convenient for you.
Live will be best, since that's what I have to do. For some reason "E-mail this user" is not under my toolbar. If you would, can you email me instead at terryhow@msu.edu. I would really appreciate it.
There's an AfD discussion here that I thought you might be interested in. ~ Adjwilley ( talk) 22:15, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
the link to "edit summary" appears down. Rogerdpack ( talk) 03:40, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
~ Adjwilley ( talk) 19:57, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
Could you take a look at the current state of Quorum of the Twelve Apostles (LDS Church)? One of the things I'm interested to get your feedback on specifically is the references that have been recently added to the article to deal with the issues recently discussed at Talk:Quorum of the Twelve Apostles (LDS Church). It now seems to have a good representation of the academic work available on the topic, but given your expertise in LDS Church history & Mormon Studies, I'd like to see what you think. -- 208.81.184.4 ( talk) 15:38, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
Decemmber 8 - Wikipedia Loves Libraries Seattle - You're invited | |
---|---|
Yours, Maximilianklein ( talk) 03:31, 1 December 2012 (UTC) |
Editor 208.81.184.4 has suggested you may be a good person, because this user was taught about internal linking by you, to weigh in at Talk:The_Well-Tuned_Piano#Kolob (presumably this user also thinks you may agree with them). The IP made up a guideline and when pressed has supported it with generic examples that may or may not be a stretch. We would appreciate your opinion, and if you agree with the IP, I would appreciate the creation of this guideline. Hyacinth ( talk) 01:05, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors make better use of the image, and it will be more informative to readers.
If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.
If you have any questions, please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Theo's Little Bot ( error?) 01:29, 14 April 2013 (UTC)Hello COGDEN,
I have put the article on Joseph Smith up as a nominee for Featured Article Status! I think the article has come a long way, and has a very good chance of being featured this time around. I would personally appreciate it if you took a moment to review the article and vote for it (or against it, I suppose) at it's FAC.
Thanks! -- Trevdna ( talk) 19:53, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
Template:Infobox Mormons has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. eh bien mon prince ( talk) 23:12, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
Template:Infobox LDS Church has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. — Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 19:24, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
Hello there, a proposal regarding pre-adminship review has been raised at Village pump by Anna Frodesiak. Your comments here is very much appreciated. Many thanks. Jim Carter through MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 06:46, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
I need some help. User:Beyond My Ken has just reverted 30 insistence where pages have incorrectly used the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints when "THE" is per MOS:LDS, "The" is part of the Name and capitalized. I could uses some help convincing him he is wrong. ARTEST4ECHO ( talk)
Hello; because you commented in this discussion, I thought you might be interested in participating in this discussion. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:12, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
Talk:Mountain Meadows massacre/References, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Talk:Mountain Meadows massacre/References and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Talk:Mountain Meadows massacre/References during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. DexDor ( talk) 20:02, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
I have nominated Early life of Joseph Smith for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. DrKiernan ( talk) 16:32, 6 July 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) 08:54, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in more than one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next month. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, and that you have not been inactive for a three-year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three-year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at WP:RFA. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. MadmanBot ( talk) 00:30, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello, COGDEN. This message is intended to notify administrators of important changes to the protection policy.
Extended confirmed protection (also known as "30/500 protection") is a new level of page protection that only allows edits from accounts at least 30 days old and with 500 edits. The automatically assigned "extended confirmed" user right was created for this purpose. The protection level was created following this community discussion with the primary intention of enforcing various arbitration remedies that prohibited editors under the "30 days/500 edits" threshold to edit certain topic areas.
In July and August 2016, a request for comment established consensus for community use of the new protection level. Administrators are authorized to apply extended confirmed protection to combat any form of disruption (e.g. vandalism, sock puppetry, edit warring, etc.) on any topic, subject to the following conditions:
Please review
the protection policy carefully before using this new level of protection on pages. Thank you.
This message was sent to the administrators'
mass message list. To opt-out of future messages, please remove yourself from the list. 17:48, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Elizabeth Ann Whitney 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/Elizabeth Ann Whitney 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 notice from the top of the article. DGG ( talk ) 20:52, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
Category:Portrayals of Mormons in popular media, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle ( talk) 15:53, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello,
Please note that TOTP based two-factor authentication is now available for all administrators. In light of the recent compromised accounts, you are encouraged to add this additional layer of security to your account. It may be enabled on your preferences page in the "User profile" tab under the "Basic information" section. For basic instructions on how to enable two-factor authentication, please see the developing help page for additional information. Important: Be sure to record the two-factor authentication key and the single use keys. If you lose your two factor authentication and do not have the keys, it's possible that your account will not be recoverable. Furthermore, you are encouraged to utilize a unique password and two-factor authentication for the email account associated with your Wikimedia account. This measure will assist in safeguarding your account from malicious password resets. Comments, questions, and concerns may be directed to the thread on the administrators' noticeboard. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 20:32, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
Hi COGDEN.
A new user group, New Page Reviewer, has been created in a move to greatly improve the standard of new page patrolling. The user right can be granted by any admin at PERM. It is highly recommended that admins look beyond the simple numerical threshold and satisfy themselves that the candidates have the required skills of communication and an advanced knowledge of notability and deletion. Admins are automatically included in this user right.
It is anticipated that this user right will significantly reduce the work load of admins who patrol the performance of the patrollers. However,due to the complexity of the rollout, some rights may have been accorded that may later need to be withdrawn, so some help will still be needed to some extent when discovering wrongly applied deletion tags or inappropriate pages that escape the attention of less experienced reviewers, and above all, hasty and bitey tagging for maintenance. User warnings are available here but very often a friendly custom message works best.
If you have any questions about this user right, don't hesitate to join us at WT:NPR. (Sent to all admins). MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 13:47, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello, COGDEN. 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. Mdann52 ( talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2017). This first issue is being sent out to all administrators, if you wish to keep receiving it please subscribe. Your feedback is welcomed.
13:37, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
Template:Citation/core/testing has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 16:17, 25 March 2017 (UTC)
Hello, COGDEN. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
A distant hello -- WikiCite is real and getting close to capturing a data-page for every cited [scholarly] article; a start at the original Wikicat/Wikicite idea. Just thought you should know. Warmly, – SJ + 21:04, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
Hello, COGDEN. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Administrators
must secure their accounts
The Arbitration Committee may require a new RfA if your account is compromised.
|
This message was sent to all administrators following a recent motion. Thank you for your attention. For the Arbitration Committee, Cameron11598 02:17, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
ArbCom would like to apologise and correct our previous mass message in light of the response from the community.
Since November 2018, six administrator accounts have been compromised and temporarily desysopped. In an effort to help improve account security, our intention was to remind administrators of existing policies on account security — that they are required to "have strong passwords and follow appropriate personal security practices." We have updated our procedures to ensure that we enforce these policies more strictly in the future. The policies themselves have not changed. In particular, two-factor authentication remains an optional means of adding extra security to your account. The choice not to enable 2FA will not be considered when deciding to restore sysop privileges to administrator accounts that were compromised.
We are sorry for the wording of our previous message, which did not accurately convey this, and deeply regret the tone in which it was delivered.
For the Arbitration Committee, - Cameron11598 21:03, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
US Banknote Contest | ||
---|---|---|
November-December 2019 | ||
There are an estimated 30,000 different varieties of United States banknotes, yet only a fraction of these are represented on Wikimedia Commons in the form of 2D scans. Additionally, Colonial America, the Confederate States, the Republic of Texas, multiple states and territories, communities, and private companies have issued banknotes that are in the public domain today but are absent from Commons. In the months of November and December, WikiProject Numismatics will be running a cross-wiki upload-a-thon, the 2019 US Banknote Contest. The goal of the contest is to increase the number of US banknote images available to content creators on all Wikimedia projects. Participants will claim points for uploading and importing 2D scans of US banknotes, and at the end of the contest all will receive awards. Whether you want to claim the Gold Wiki or you just want to have fun, all are invited to participate. If you do not want to receive invitations to future US Banknote Contests, follow the instructions here |
Sent by ZLEA at 23:30, 19 October 2019 (UTC) via MediaWiki message delivery ( talk)
Category:Latter Day Saint doctrines, beliefs, and practices has been nominated for splitting. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle ( talk) 19:52, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
Established policy provides for removal of the administrative permissions of users who have not made any edits or logged actions in the preceding twelve months. Because you have been inactive, your administrative permissions will be removed if you do not return to activity within the next month.
Inactive administrators are encouraged to rejoin the project in earnest rather than to make token edits to avoid loss of administrative permissions. Resources and support for reengaging with the project are available at Wikipedia:WikiProject Editor Retention/administrators. If you do not intend to rejoin the project in the foreseeable future, please consider voluntarily resigning your administrative permissions by making a request at the bureaucrats' noticeboard.
Thank you for your past contributions to the project. — JJMC89 bot 00:04, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
I've been working on restoring the church of Jesus Christ in Zion page and saw a lot of your work on it previously. I also saw you had personal connections and I was wanting to discuss the church in more detail in private, as almost any source of it has been completely removed. Fishmr ( talk) 03:52, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
Would you be willing to email me? I have many questions about your previous contacts and I promise to keep any sensetive information confidential. I am wanting to know more about the church mainly due to academic reasons and as I grew up in Gallatin, near where Roger has done a lot of stuff for the church. Fishmr ( talk) 05:36, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
The article Latter Day Saint movement has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Persistent and continuing vandalism
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
Editor2020 (
talk) 20:58, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
A recently closed Request for Comment (RFC) reached consensus to remove Autopatrolled from the administrator user group. You may, similarly as with Edit Filter Manager, choose to self-assign this permission to yourself. This will be implemented the week of December 13th, but if you wish to self-assign you may do so now. To find out when the change has gone live or if you have any questions please visit the Administrator's Noticeboard. 20:05, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
Template:Citation/testing has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Q28 ( talk) 00:27, 15 December 2021 (UTC)
Hi!
You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.
When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.
Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an admin will still be able to access the IP. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working on better tools to help.
If you have not seen it before, you can read more on Meta. If you want to make sure you don’t miss technical changes on the Wikimedia wikis, you can subscribe to the weekly technical newsletter.
We have two suggested ways this identity could work. We would appreciate your feedback on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You can let us know on the talk page. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.
Thank you. / Johan (WMF)
18:12, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
The administrator policy has been updated with new activity requirements following a successful Request for Comment.
Beginning January 1, 2023, administrators who meet one or both of the following criteria may be desysopped for inactivity if they have:
Administrators at risk for being desysopped under these criteria will continue to be notified ahead of time. Thank you for your continued work.
22:52, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
Established policy provides for the removal of the administrative permissions of users who have made fewer than 100 edits over a 60-month period. Your administrative permissions will be removed if you do not return to the required activity level before the beginning of January 2023.
Inactive administrators are encouraged to engage with the project in earnest rather than to make token edits to avoid loss of administrative permissions. Resources and support for re-engaging with the project are available at Wikipedia:WikiProject Editor Retention/administrators. If you do not intend to re-engage with the project in the foreseeable future, please consider voluntarily resigning your administrative permissions by making a request at the bureaucrats' noticeboard.
Thank you for your past contributions to the project. — JJMC89 bot 08:45, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. 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 1 | ← | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
I was looking for arguments in my efforts to ensure that we devote any kind of substantial thought to the effects, facts and implications before the current furious purge of fiction articles is brought to its conclusion, and found that you here made a routine message using longhand instead of masses of acronyms, thereby ensuring with a bit of extra work that the message would be easily legible and that little experience was necessary to follow it. So thanks for your courtesy. -- Kiz o r 20:23, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
Please weigh in on the merger proposal between History of the Latter Day Saint movement and Mormonism and history. I saw that you were a recent contributor of one of the pages in question, and thought you would be interested.-- Descartes1979 ( talk) 21:23, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
I hope you have been well lately. I am looking copyright situation similar to what we discussed previously (in fact re-reading that discussion reminds me some of the questions I asked elsewhere were things I had already known!). This one is a s:Russian POW suicide note related to the Betrayal of the Cossacks. I have most of the issues clarified, but I was wondering what you thought about the last sentance ('Let the Americans and the whole world know that our death is the commencement of the struggle against the dictatorship of Stalin.) being consent to publication. Do you think such a remark should qualify as consent from the author(s)?-- BirgitteSB 18:40, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
Golden plates has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. Serpent's Choice ( talk) 19:08, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
Please weigh in on the merger proposal between Angel Moroni and Moroni (prophet). You are receiving this notice since you were identified as a recent editor on one of those pages. Thanks! -- Descartes1979 ( talk) 07:12, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
I see you are an admin that is involved in religion articles. Can I request some advice/help from you concerning a "dispute" with User:Fullstop? I feel that s/he has been uncivil in comments to me and s/he has been blanking and manually emptying some categories I recently created. See a discussion on my talk page here. The catgories are Category:Zoroastrians by nationality and its subcategories if you'd like to look at them. Without getting into the technicalities of the issue of nationality/status as a Zoroastrian, my position is simply that the editor should nominate the categories for WP:CFD if s/he has a problem with the existence of the categories or the way they are being applied. Is this not correct? I don't understand why the editor can't use the provided-for procedure. S/he sounds quite frustrated and it may be that most of that frustration results from past similar disputes the editor has been in, but I don't really appreciate him/her taking it out on me either. Do you have any advice for what I should do? Thank you very much. Good Ol’factory (talk) 07:09, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
I've just stumbled across the "no original research" RFC, and I want to tell you that your statement may be the most lucid scholarly writing I have ever seen on wikipedia. Normally, when confronted by a wall of diffs and dates (usually on an arbcom subpage), I reach for my mouse wheel almost immediately, but you were able to hold my attention. I hope that, in the future, that proceeding results in fewer people being dragged through the mud while discussing policy improvements. Xeriphas1994 ( talk) 20:56, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
The Barnstar of Diligence | ||
Awarded for your conscientious work on Golden Plates |
All the best, John Foxe ( talk) 23:17, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
Once again I must express appreciation for your work, in this case the careful comparison of the Golden Plates with Noah's Ark.-- John Foxe ( talk) 11:38, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
I have nominated Mormonism and violence, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mormonism and violence. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Otolemur crassicaudatus ( talk) 20:47, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
Someone is suggesting that one of the references you added to this article (Buerger, David John (2002), The Mysteries of Godliness: A History of Mormon Temple Worship) is unreliable and extremist. He doesn't seem to have actually read this source so perhaps you can clear up the issue easily with a simple explanation of what you know about the source.-- BirgitteSB 00:52, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Template:Citation/authors/testing requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.
If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{transclusionless}}</noinclude>).
Thanks. -- MZMcBride ( talk) 22:16, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Template:Citation/patent/testing requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.
If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{transclusionless}}</noinclude>).
Thanks. -- MZMcBride ( talk) 22:17, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
A
proposed deletion template has been added to the article
Shit happens, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's
criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "
What Wikipedia is not" and
Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{
dated prod}}
notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on
its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the
proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the
speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to
Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if
consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{
db-author}}
to the top of
Shit happens.
Neitherday (
talk) 17:19, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
I have nominated Shit happens, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shit happens (2nd nomination). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Neitherday ( talk) 19:37, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Shit happens, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the page appears to have no meaningful content or history, and the text is unsalvageably incoherent.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add {{
hangon}}
on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) and leave a note on the page's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself.
If the page you created was a test, please use the sandbox for any other experiments you would like to do. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Mschilz20 ( talk) 01:29, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi, COGDEN, I want to ask you a favor which you should feel free to do in your own time or not do if you are uncomfortable with it.
I had a small dispute with User:Storm Rider, who I assume you are familiar with somewhat b/c you both seem to have been active in editing LDS pages. You may not be familiar with me, but I am relatively new on WP and have been involved in editing some LDS pages as well. If you could, would you review the interaction here and let me know if/how I am off base. I hold no animus towards Storm Rider but for some reason he seemed to really take offence at my comments, and I wondered: am I being a dick, or is he like this with a lot of users? If I'm being a dick, can you tell me so I won't be a dick anymore? I would appreciate it. Feel free to comment on my page or e-mail me; I don't see any need to prolong the dispute at Talk:Master Mahan unless you feel it's necessary to comment there. Thanks very much, Good Ol’factory (talk) 21:51, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
I notice you commented on this one after I closed it. I appreciate that you did try to work. The section you added is an improvement in terms of POV. But the entire article needs to be audited in the same way. It's hard to come up with an analogy, and the best I have is this: if Golden plates were a movie, our article would be a plot summary and little else. I would rewrite as much as possible, compressing the story and adding as much scholarship as you can. The bulk of it is not in any way critical. It is, literally, "Smith said..." for far too much of it.
As for "said" more generally, I realize it can be used as a qualifying term and things in this article require qualification. But it's used far too much. As a basic prose consideration, it should be reduced as much as possible. Marskell ( talk) 20:32, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
I would like to invite you to consider taking part in the AGF Challenge which has been proposed for use in the RfA process [1] by User: Kim Bruning. You can answer in multiple choice format, or using essay answers, or anonymously. You can of course skip any parts of the Challenge you find objectionable or inadvisable.-- Filll ( talk) 14:51, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
Citations requests for details on the legal/social/organizational structure of the Church, found in the background section, are becoming an issue. I suspect your library on the topic is larger than mine. Could you take a look when you get an extra minute? Best wishes. WBardwin ( talk) 00:57, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
Please see the new section at Talk:Joseph_Smith, Jr.. Écrasez l'infâme ( talk) 19:02, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
Sir: in my efforts to improve Wiki coverage of US Western explorers, I came across John Williams Gunnison. I removed inflamatory language and POV from the article, also noting that sources are needed. As you have been involved in the work on the Utah War and Mountain Meadows massacre, perhaps you or other associated editors have material which might improve this article. Thank you. Just me! ( talk) 02:49, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
I turned my attention to this page a little while back and ran into the "thou shalt not edit here" wall created by the page owners, Taivo and wanderer57, with a few smaller players too. If you want we can collaborate on this page...I am willing to stand up to these guys and I think they may have gotten the point that I won't be held from editing there, but maybe not. I tried to splice parts of your revision back into the lede...some of it stuck, but I also tried to add a few things I thought were missing but was severely blocked from adding a "13 milion follower" comment about the scope and reach of the book. My idea is that there should be a greater "BOM influence" section talking about the renaissance the BOM created and it's wide reaching effects connecting to the history of the LDS movements pages etc. Just let me know if there is anything I can help with...we've fought over worse on the Golden Plates page, so let's kick another bee's nest and try to reach at least GA status with this article again. Twunchy ( talk) 22:10, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
Since you have been actively involved in past discussions regarding PSTS, please review, contribute, or comment on this proposed PSTS Policy & Guidelines.-- SaraNoon ( talk) 18:41, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Logo of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (1995).gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice?
Anyways, the image has been replaced by an SVG version: Image:LDS Logo.svg. Just thought I'd give you a heads up. — SuperRad ! ☎ 18:49, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
Based purely on the fact that you are the earliest person listed on the Revision history of Template:Citation/patent, I assume that you are the author of the Citation/patent template. If so, I greatly appreciate the work that you have done and apologize for punishing competency by asking questions. However, I am trying to learn template scripting in general and selected the Citation/patent template due to some initial use. I asked a question at the template's talk page, but have not received any response. (I also have further analysis of the template's code on my home page.) Accordingly, I am leaving this message at your home page in case you might be able to assist.-- Rpclod ( talk) 14:57, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
A concern was raised that the clause, "a primary source may be used only to make descriptive claims, the accuracy of which is verifiable by any reasonable, educated person without specialist knowledge" conflicts with WP:NPOV by placing a higher duty of care with primary sourced claims than secondary or tertiary sourced claims. An RFC has been initiated to stimulate wider input on the issue. Professor marginalia ( talk) 18:38, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
On the BOM page I have run into a great question...that you might know about or have an idea of where to find the info. The question is "Who titled the Book of Mormon?" I have no clue! And I'm pretty sure I'm not the first person to ask such a question...hopefully. If you know, just head here here to put your 2 cents in. Twunchy ( talk) 19:42, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
I'd love your input again for a new policy for Wikipedia regarding religious articles. Take a look at what I've started and lend me any input you wish. It's at Wikipedia:Religion. Thanks, Twunchy ( talk) 22:40, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
Hello. I noticed you've made edits to articles related to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and thought you might be interested in participating in the LDS Church work group, part of the Latter Day Saint movement WikiProject. The group aims to serve as a hub for collaboration on Church-related articles. You don't have to be a member of the Church to participate, and the only requirement for active membership is that you edit at least one Church-related article per month. Best wishes! — Eustress talk 02:01, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
I had to laugh when I read this. I was not aware that you were perceived as an orthodox Latter-day Saint. As many disagreements as we have had over the years over your divergence from orthodoxy, it is comical to see those who are completely ignorant of LDS theology and teachings attempt to put you in an orthodox box. It really makes me laugh out loud.
Please understand that I do not wish to insult you. You have always appeared, IMHO, to edit from a historical standpoint and LDS Church teaching be damned. I honestly trust your knowledge of LDS history; you are by far the most knowledgeable editor on LDS history working on Wikipedia. Our disagreements in the past always revolve around your desire to actually cast off orthodoxy for the minutiae of history. Regardless, you have now joined the ranks of the orthodox. Be welcome! -- Storm Rider 17:03, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
this. http://www.juvenileinstructor.org/transcript-of-the-mountain-meadows-massacre-panel-at-uvu-turley-and-bagley-and-cuch-oh-my/ Right? :^) ↜Just me, here, now … 01:48, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
As you are known as someone with both an interest in Mormon history and a familiarity with of published academic research in that area, I'd like to invite you to the discussion at Talk:Mormon Corridor#Guidelines for inclusion. -- 208.81.184.4 ( talk) 23:58, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
I noticed your name amongst those contributing at Talk:Primary source.
Will you take a look at what I've pulled together at Primary source -- see here?
What do you think? I wonder if you'd be willing to suggest how this analysis might be improved?
Perhaps you may want to argue that using Nihon Ōdai Ichiran is not helpful as a strategy for illustrating the differences among primary, secondary and tertiary sources? -- Tenmei ( talk) 00:10, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
Hi COGDEN,
I just barely know "of" you from your Latter Day Saint-related editing. I know you're an administrator and am wondering if you would be willing to review an administrative action I recently took. If you don't have time I understand, but if you could it would be helpful to me.
I blocked an editor who is on an arbcom-imposed editing restriction. Links to pretty much everything relevant can be found here, where I left some reasons on his talk page. My main concern is that the editor has stated that I have a clear conflict of interest in blocking him. The reason for that would be that I have participated in the deletion review discussion where his comments in question were made, and my opinions conflicted with his. The comments he was blocked for were directed at another editor, and at the time of blocking, I didn't consider myself the target of his attack.
Anyway, I'd appreciate it if you could simply review what I have done. If what I did was inappropriate, you could unblock the user, and then either re-block him or leave him unblocked as you see fit. Thanks for your help, if you can give it. Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:31, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for your effort in this regard. I know how pesky these types of requests can be, but they do serve a valuable purpose, I think. Good Ol’factory (talk) 22:01, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
See my inquiry here. Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:18, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
COgden, I know you have recently edited the Holy Spirit article. I have a degree of discomfort with Carlude's edits; though I have left with with little editing. The Holy Ghost is a spirit son of God the Father is stated. The problem is the the Holy Spirit is eternal, without beginning or end, just as it is with Jesus. When LDS speak of the Son of God in Jesus or discuss the Holy Spirit (the few times we ever discuss where did he come from), we do say they are sons of God the Father, but we do not mean that they are not eternal without beginning or end. Do you have any ideas how the article could concisely be edited and still retain the information that Carlude wants in the article?-- Storm Rider 23:10, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
See this rename proposal that I made to match the category name to the article you recently renamed. I didn't tell you about it earlier because I didn't want to risk being accused of canvassing. But now that it looks like the rename won't go forward (thanks to some entertaining insight from some users who are obviously not too familiar with the Latter Day Saint movement), I thought I'd let you know about it. Maybe you can at least make a comment that could demonstrate that I'm not completely loopy. Ultimately, I suppose either name works. Good Ol’factory (talk) 10:45, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
There is a proposed merge that I think would interest you at Talk:Limited geography model#Several merge proposals - my take. I am posting this notice because I saw that you were a recent editor at one of the pages listed below:
-- Descartes1979 ( talk) 17:59, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
You may be interested in some recent additions at Mormonism_and_violence#Violence_against_LGBT_people. I've tried to clean up the section a bit but I don't know enough about the topic to do it justice. I'm not sure that most of the information there is appropriate, as it doesn't really qualify as "violence" as such. Good Ol’factory (talk) 22:57, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.
If you have any questions please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 13:54, 14 July 2009 (UTC)Hi. Could you please #redirect the deprecated
Template:Harvard reference to
Template:Citation? As you know, :) the parameters of the former are recognized by the latter, so a simple redirect (rather than calling Citation/xxxx) would work fine. (ps: {Harvard reference} is actually calling the sandbox. Ouch.) --
Fullstop (
talk) 13:11, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
pps: I'm very glad to see that you are still active, and that the silly games haven't driven you away. Be well.
In this edit of 12 February 2007 you deprecated {{ Harvard reference}}. Nevertheless this template is still very much in use. Are you sure the template should be tagged as deprecated? Debresser ( talk) 08:27, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
Hello COGDEN. There is currently a discussion to get a title change in the "Criticism of the Latter Day Saint movement" article. Stormrider mentioned that you had an excellent understanding of church history, and I would very much appreciate your input on the talk page, especially under the section "Title", which discusses the current proposal. It is a somewhat long discussion, and I apologize if reading it is tedious, but your opinion would be valuable, especially with the level of controversy surrounding the topic. Thanks for your time. Sharpsr1990 ( talk) 13:18, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
I thoroughly read your changes to the Criticism article. How about instead of deleting information that's critical of your church, you discuss it first. I don't see how you can attempt to cover up the argued illigitimacy of Joseph Smith because it's a very widely discussed topic. GnarlyLikeWhoa ( talk) 17:28, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
The Diplomacy Barnstar | ||
For level-headedness, tact, patience, wisdom, and excellence in editing. -- Noleander ( talk) 16:38, 17 October 2009 (UTC) |
An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Pentecostal Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and " What Wikipedia is not").
Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pentecostal Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).
You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.
Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. -- Erwin85Bot ( talk) 01:21, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi; I've nominated a LDS movement category for deletion here. I really don't expect that it's going to get much input at CFD given its obscure nature, and you're the only user I could think of who I thought may even have a clue what this topic is about. Would you consider taking a look and seeing what you think? I don't want this to be seen as a canvass, so let me just be clear that I'd be just as happy if you told me my rationale for deletion is off base than if you agreed that it should be deleted. It just seems like a weird category to me, and want it deleted if it's just a made up thing. Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:10, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
Re [2]; is the internet version referred to here the official 2006 version of the handbook? I've seen several internet copies but they are all old 1998 versions. Good Ol’factory (talk) 05:56, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
POV on the Joseph Smith, Jr. article seems to me to have swung a little to the left of center -- promoting a 'denigration' viewpoint -- in the last few months. Quotes, even from more neutral sources, have been selectively used and many of Smith's accomplishments downplayed and/or eliminated. Would you agree? Should some effort be made to restore a better balance? The LDS project page is noticably inactive, but I can help at intervals over the next couple of weeks. WBardwin ( talk) 03:54, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
Template:Harvard reference has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. — Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 05:53, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for addressing the issues on the lead paragraph, considering I was having difficulty in agreeing with the changes to the other editors. I think I am satisfied with that area of the article now, later I'll post some points about the "early life" section of the article on the talkpage, regards. Routerone ( talk) 21:17, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
Hi Cogden. When you move text in an article, please try not to cut it in one edit, then paste it in the next. (like this: cut, paste) Instead, just edit the whole article.
With disputed articles, it makes it more difficult to gauge the intent, and makes the edits appear more controversial than they need to be in watchlists. Thanks, tedder ( talk) 06:22, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
I’m a newer editor on Wikipedia and I’ve seen many of your posts on the article discussion pages. As such, where can I connect with other LDS members (either on Wikipedia or off-site) and discuss various points of inquiry? Or can I create my own forum on my personal talk page? I would like to intelligently engage many academic / theological questions but most can’t be relevantly addressed on the talk pages – the discussion always leads to off-article conversation. Please let me know. Thanks HBCALI ( talk) 17:05, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
Hello, this is a friendly notification.
In the past, you supported promoting wp:quote into protocol. Currently, there is a discussion in an attempt to gather consensus to this ratification.
If you are interested, you can show your support there.
Thank you. 174.3.110.108 ( talk) 02:22, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Oliver Cowdery photograph, c. 1848.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. FASTILYsock (TALK) 03:32, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
I like the work you are doing in List of sects in the Latter Day Saint movement. However, I do have one a very friendly suggestion that you are welcome to ignore is you choose. I was born into the LDS church so to me the words "Mainstream Mormonism" are natural and make since. However, there are a number of editors of this page that are ether part of another sect (like Community of Christ) or not LDS at all. In my opinion, they go to great lengths, using NPOV, against the Church being the "Mainstream" chruch. Especally since you listed the LDS church, I know they are going to argue that ALL sects claim to be “Mainstream”, or that your changes make the church out to be more important, etc. I would suspect that one or more of them is going to revert all your edits just to get ride of that one word "Mainstream" instead of trying to improve it and I would hate for that to happen.-- ARTEST4ECHO talk 19:56, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
The Barnstar of Integrity | ||
Awared for being so receptive to suggestions and his willingness to incorporate others ideas and inputs, without being personally offended. -- ARTEST4ECHO talk 12:47, 8 April 2010 (UTC) |
The Categorisation Barnstar | ||
Awarded to COGDEN for your outstanding work on the List of sects in the Latter Day Saint movement article. Your work in categorizing the Rocky Mountain Saint churches has taken this article to a whole new level of usability. Thanks for all your hard work! - Ecjmartin ( talk) 00:11, 9 April 2010 (UTC) |
Just wanted to say "thanks so much" for your hard work, and that of your fellow editors, on this article. You guys have definitely taken it to a whole new level of usability, and this barnstar is well-deserved. Thanks again for all your hard work! -
Ecjmartin (
talk) 22:43, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
I would appreciate your insight here. I've cleaned up the edit in question a bit but have let it stand for now. Good Ol’factory (talk) 01:25, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
Hello, I saw that you wrote School of the Prophets
A two-day conference 22-23 Jan, 1833. [3]
22 Speaking and praying in tounges. [4]
23 Foundingday of the School of Prophets. [5]
24 The School of Prophets begins. [6] Zebedee Coltrin, qtd. in Journal History, Jan. 24, 1833. 90.231.11.211 ( talk) 21:52, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for your interest in Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#MediaWiki extension that supports "Harvard" references. X-romix ( talk) 09:51, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I am currently involved in a proposal for a guideline on primary, secondary and tertiary sources. I have just discovered that you were once involved in a similar proposal a while ago - either in contributing to it directly or in discussing it on its talk page. You may wish to get involved in the current proposal and I would encourage you to do so - even if you just want to point out where we have gone wrong! Yaris678 ( talk) 23:54, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
Are you Jeff Lindsay? You're both LDS and Chemical Engineers. Hope you are him... -- Loofus5 ( talk) 20:42, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
In reading past discussions, I came across the following proposal you made for the first paragraph of the LDS Church article:
"The LDS Church teaches that it is a restoration of the original Christianity of Jesus. While sharing many common elements of Christian doctrine and practice, it is distinct from traditional Christianity because of its additional authority other than the Old and New Testaments."
It seemed to be well received by others in the discussion. It seems clearer and more balanced to me than the current wording: "is a restorationist Christian church" in that Mormons and non-Mormons would probably agree with your wording.
At this point I realize this general issue has been discussed to death, but I was curious to ask if you ever actually posted your wording. What became of this good (IMHO) solution? Scoopczar ( talk) 18:36, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
The article Church of Jesus Christ in Zion has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{
dated prod}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{
dated prod}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. The
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion. --
ARTEST4ECHO
talk 01:59, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
Hi cogden, I just created this account on wikipedia so I could ask you and a few other people some questions about Mormons. 1' Is the book of Abraham translation from the book of breathings? 2' Did John taylor try to hide polygamy? 3' Has reformed egyptian writing been found yet? 4' Were the cows and horses just other creatures in the book of Mormon? 5' Do you believe Smith was a prophet? Thanks and have a good day. Steve -- Stevemccardell ( talk) 16:18, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
Hey I have a question. Is this article - Secret combination (Latter Day Saints) correct? Is this a valid entry for Wikipedia? LoveMonkey ( talk) 15:18, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
Would it be acceptable to replace the phrase "traditional Christianity" with the phrase "orthodox Christianity"? Laurel Lodged ( talk) 21:16, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and the page that you created has been or soon will be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}}
to the top of
the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on
the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact
one of these administrators to request that the administrator
userfy the page or email a copy to you.
Mhiji 02:01, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
The article Archaeology and the Book of Mormon is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Archaeology and the Book of Mormon 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 good 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. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ( Otters want attention) 01:19, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
The Press Barnstar | ||
Thank you for lending your experience at Joseph Smith, Jr.-- John Foxe ( talk) 19:43, 1 February 2011 (UTC) |
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Latter Day Saint movement#Template:LDSproject. This invitation is being extended because you have previously edited this template, which indicates you may have some level of interest in it. 208.81.184.4 ( talk) 17:07, 9 February 2011 (UTC) (Using {{ pls}})
Hey there - I ran across this on the Internet the other day - did you know that FAIR is tracking your wikipedia edits? I was a little perturbed on your behalf when I saw this. http://en.fairmormon.org/Mormonism_and_Wikipedia/Editors -- Descartes1979 ( talk) 22:25, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
I guess I am being 'arbitrated' [7] again; this is getting to be routine, so I don't know when I will get back to you on that other. The last kangaroo court went 'their' way, so I guess it was time to ramp up the action; watch editors come out of the woodwork for some old fashioned swarming. Duke53 | Talk 08:07, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
I post this completely unsolicited by Duke53. Though Duke53 has already been blocked the following needs to be stated for the record. Duke53 is merely being attacked by a group of Wikipedia Mormon apologist, who have targeted him and others linked here [8]. The only statement in this link [9] to provide any examples is BFizz. Without examples, those above are merely saying soap boxing about Duke53. Not being their friend is not a reason to block him. Furthermore, the examples provided by BFizz are rather weak. They are merely examples of it takes two to tango. Further still yet, Analyst has engaged in the same behavior in the examples provided by BFizz. Take for example ridicule of a user name linked here [10] As for a mistreating a new user, Alanyst and Stormrider team up against User:Thewayandthelight [11] and successfully ran this insightful editor off. Alanyst and Stormrider have a record of using wikipedia manipulation techniques to supress and censor facts from wikipedia, instead of incorporating them. Editors such as Duke53 have repeated frustrated them in this. Now they are merely manipulating wikipedia to censor the editor himself. All statements against Duke53 were from Mormon apologist wikipedians. Without a state from a even a centrist editor such as John Foxe, the block of Duke53 comes off as manipulation. Mormography ( talk) 06:43, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
I'd like you to review my response to the 'cooling off period'. Thank you. -- Avanu ( talk) 03:37, 5 April 2011 (UTC) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:The_Church_of_Jesus_Christ_of_Latter-day_Saints#.22Are_Mormons_Christian.3F.22_question_closed_for_a_7_day_cooling-off_period
I'm am through attempting to reason with User:Entropy's 1 at Talk:Mormonism. The user is now repeatedly re-adding in the material they originally added about how JSJ was criticised by the Palmyra Reflector, etc. The user seems to have simply ignored what everyone said in the discussion. Yes, I violated 3RR in trying to work this out, and now Entropy is accusing me as being a person who sees no value in Mormonism, so I'm through trying. Perhaps you could do something there to help the situation .... Good Ol’factory (talk) 13:04, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
Hi! Hey, I believe Latter Day Saint is most properly is a disambiguation page. COgden, If you believe consensus still supports its remaining a redirect, do you think it advisable to file an AfD? Btw, curiously, it's never had one.-- Hodgson-Burnett's Secret Garden ( talk) 01:11, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
The media file you uploaded as File:Nauvoo, Illinois daguerreotype (1846).jpg appears to be missing information as to its authorship (and or source), or if you did provide such information, it is confusing for others trying to make use of the image.
It would be appreciated if you would consider updating the file description page, to make the authorship of the media clearer.
Although some images may not need author information in obvious cases, (such where an applicable source is provided),authorship information aids users of the image, and helps ensure that appropriate credit is given (a requirement of some licenses).
If you created this media yourself, please consider explicitly including your user name, for which:{{subst:usernameexpand|COGDEN/Archive 5}} will produce an appropriate expansion,
or the {{ own}} template..
If you have any questions please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 14:32, 18 May 2011 (UTC)Hey, COgden. I'm not getting a response at Joseph Smith Jr. Perhaps I could ask the question here as to whether you are indeed an active LDS member. I mean no disrespect if you are not, but it would help me understand better some of your positions which seem to contradict the current teachings of the leaders of the Church.-- Canadiandy talk 14:54, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
I just wanted to ask. . . it seems like you favor using terms like Mormon and Mormonism in your editing over terms and links like LDS, Latter-day Saint, LDS Church, Latter Day Saint Movement, and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. I was wondering if there are reasons behind that and what they are. Was there a discussion on this a while back that I missed? Adjwilley ( talk) 03:21, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
Hey there COgden. I don't want to bog down the discussion pages with this one, sorry if it bogs down yours. First, thanks for your input as it relates to the discussion on the term 'nontrinitarian.' I just stumbled across a link to past complaints which suggests in fact that 'nontrinitarian' might be a term initiated at Wikipedia. Either way I'd be interested in your research into whether the term 'nontrinitarian' as it relates to the Church is not WP original research that has gone on for so long it has formed some sort of erroneous WP precedence that will take a fair bit of work to fix. To paraphrase that great Latin sage Inigo Montoya, "[Wikipedia] keep[s] using that word. I don't think it means what [they] think it means."-- Canadiandy talk 05:47, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
I would appreciate your input here if you have a few minutes. -- Adjwilley ( talk) 01:08, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
Sorry to continue bugging you on your talk page. There is a discussion going on at the redirect Talk:Mormon where I think your input would be most helpful. -- Adjwilley ( talk) 03:39, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
After many years, some people are getting around to a practical wikicite implementation. If you are still interested, please take a look as the pages develop on meta. – SJ + 04:03, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
Hi. Do you think White Horse Prophecy could realistically become a Good Article? What are your thoughts on this idea? Richwales ( talk · contribs) 04:44, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
Your input would be welcome at Talk:Homosexuality and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints#References. -- 208.81.184.4 ( talk) 16:35, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
Category:Restorationism, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. — Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 18:23, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
Template:Policycontroversy has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 15:14, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
The December 2011 issue of the WikiProject United States newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
--
Kumioko (
talk) 04:16, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
The January 2012 issue of the WikiProject United States newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
--
Kumi-Taskbot (
talk) 18:51, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
Category:Persian religions, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. — Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 19:40, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
Template:Harvard citation has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. -- Alan Liefting ( talk) - 23:08, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
The Mormon article is undergoing a GA review, and has been put on hold to deal with concerns. More details at Talk:Mormons/GA1. Your input would be valued. SilkTork ✔Tea time 14:49, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
I was hoping that I could get a specific opinion from you on the paragraph. If you'd prefer not to offer an opinion, that's ok, I just wanted to ask. ~ Adjwilley ( talk) 00:17, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
Dear COGDEN,
My name is Jonathan Obar
user:Jaobar, I'm a professor in the College of Communication Arts and Sciences at Michigan State University and a Teaching Fellow with the Wikimedia Foundation's Education Program. This semester I've been running a little experiment at MSU, a class where we teach students about becoming Wikipedia administrators. Not a lot is known about your community, and our students (who are fascinated by wiki-culture by the way!) want to learn how you do what you do, and why you do it. A while back I proposed this idea (the class) to the community
HERE, were it was met mainly with positive feedback. Anyhow, I'd like my students to speak with a few administrators to get a sense of admin experiences, training, motivations, likes, dislikes, etc. We were wondering if you'd be interested in speaking with one of our students.
So a few things about the interviews:
Bottom line is that we really need your help, and would really appreciate the opportunity to speak with you. If interested, please send me an email at obar@msu.edu (to maintain anonymity) and I will add your name to my offline contact list. If you feel comfortable doing so, you can post your name
HERE instead.
If you have questions or concerns at any time, feel free to email me at obar@msu.edu. I will be more than happy to speak with you.
Thanks in advance for your help. We have a lot to learn from you.
Sincerely,
Jonathan Obar -- Jaobar ( talk) 02:39, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
Hello, my name is Howard Terry User:Terryhow. I seen you were going to be one of the few I will be interviewing. If you may, can we set up a day and time that's free for you?
Sure. Why don't you send me an email (via the "E-mail this user" tab to the left), and let me know generally what times you are generally available, and whether you would like to do it by Skype or some other medium. COGDEN 22:15, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
Ok. I cant seem to figure out where the E-mail this user tab, and if you want I can email you the interview to make more convenient for you.
Live will be best, since that's what I have to do. For some reason "E-mail this user" is not under my toolbar. If you would, can you email me instead at terryhow@msu.edu. I would really appreciate it.
There's an AfD discussion here that I thought you might be interested in. ~ Adjwilley ( talk) 22:15, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
the link to "edit summary" appears down. Rogerdpack ( talk) 03:40, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
~ Adjwilley ( talk) 19:57, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
Could you take a look at the current state of Quorum of the Twelve Apostles (LDS Church)? One of the things I'm interested to get your feedback on specifically is the references that have been recently added to the article to deal with the issues recently discussed at Talk:Quorum of the Twelve Apostles (LDS Church). It now seems to have a good representation of the academic work available on the topic, but given your expertise in LDS Church history & Mormon Studies, I'd like to see what you think. -- 208.81.184.4 ( talk) 15:38, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
Decemmber 8 - Wikipedia Loves Libraries Seattle - You're invited | |
---|---|
Yours, Maximilianklein ( talk) 03:31, 1 December 2012 (UTC) |
Editor 208.81.184.4 has suggested you may be a good person, because this user was taught about internal linking by you, to weigh in at Talk:The_Well-Tuned_Piano#Kolob (presumably this user also thinks you may agree with them). The IP made up a guideline and when pressed has supported it with generic examples that may or may not be a stretch. We would appreciate your opinion, and if you agree with the IP, I would appreciate the creation of this guideline. Hyacinth ( talk) 01:05, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors make better use of the image, and it will be more informative to readers.
If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.
If you have any questions, please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Theo's Little Bot ( error?) 01:29, 14 April 2013 (UTC)Hello COGDEN,
I have put the article on Joseph Smith up as a nominee for Featured Article Status! I think the article has come a long way, and has a very good chance of being featured this time around. I would personally appreciate it if you took a moment to review the article and vote for it (or against it, I suppose) at it's FAC.
Thanks! -- Trevdna ( talk) 19:53, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
Template:Infobox Mormons has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. eh bien mon prince ( talk) 23:12, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
Template:Infobox LDS Church has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. — Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 19:24, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
Hello there, a proposal regarding pre-adminship review has been raised at Village pump by Anna Frodesiak. Your comments here is very much appreciated. Many thanks. Jim Carter through MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 06:46, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
I need some help. User:Beyond My Ken has just reverted 30 insistence where pages have incorrectly used the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints when "THE" is per MOS:LDS, "The" is part of the Name and capitalized. I could uses some help convincing him he is wrong. ARTEST4ECHO ( talk)
Hello; because you commented in this discussion, I thought you might be interested in participating in this discussion. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:12, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
Talk:Mountain Meadows massacre/References, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Talk:Mountain Meadows massacre/References and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Talk:Mountain Meadows massacre/References during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. DexDor ( talk) 20:02, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
I have nominated Early life of Joseph Smith for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. DrKiernan ( talk) 16:32, 6 July 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) 08:54, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in more than one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next month. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, and that you have not been inactive for a three-year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three-year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at WP:RFA. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. MadmanBot ( talk) 00:30, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello, COGDEN. This message is intended to notify administrators of important changes to the protection policy.
Extended confirmed protection (also known as "30/500 protection") is a new level of page protection that only allows edits from accounts at least 30 days old and with 500 edits. The automatically assigned "extended confirmed" user right was created for this purpose. The protection level was created following this community discussion with the primary intention of enforcing various arbitration remedies that prohibited editors under the "30 days/500 edits" threshold to edit certain topic areas.
In July and August 2016, a request for comment established consensus for community use of the new protection level. Administrators are authorized to apply extended confirmed protection to combat any form of disruption (e.g. vandalism, sock puppetry, edit warring, etc.) on any topic, subject to the following conditions:
Please review
the protection policy carefully before using this new level of protection on pages. Thank you.
This message was sent to the administrators'
mass message list. To opt-out of future messages, please remove yourself from the list. 17:48, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Elizabeth Ann Whitney 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/Elizabeth Ann Whitney 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 notice from the top of the article. DGG ( talk ) 20:52, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
Category:Portrayals of Mormons in popular media, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle ( talk) 15:53, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello,
Please note that TOTP based two-factor authentication is now available for all administrators. In light of the recent compromised accounts, you are encouraged to add this additional layer of security to your account. It may be enabled on your preferences page in the "User profile" tab under the "Basic information" section. For basic instructions on how to enable two-factor authentication, please see the developing help page for additional information. Important: Be sure to record the two-factor authentication key and the single use keys. If you lose your two factor authentication and do not have the keys, it's possible that your account will not be recoverable. Furthermore, you are encouraged to utilize a unique password and two-factor authentication for the email account associated with your Wikimedia account. This measure will assist in safeguarding your account from malicious password resets. Comments, questions, and concerns may be directed to the thread on the administrators' noticeboard. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 20:32, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
Hi COGDEN.
A new user group, New Page Reviewer, has been created in a move to greatly improve the standard of new page patrolling. The user right can be granted by any admin at PERM. It is highly recommended that admins look beyond the simple numerical threshold and satisfy themselves that the candidates have the required skills of communication and an advanced knowledge of notability and deletion. Admins are automatically included in this user right.
It is anticipated that this user right will significantly reduce the work load of admins who patrol the performance of the patrollers. However,due to the complexity of the rollout, some rights may have been accorded that may later need to be withdrawn, so some help will still be needed to some extent when discovering wrongly applied deletion tags or inappropriate pages that escape the attention of less experienced reviewers, and above all, hasty and bitey tagging for maintenance. User warnings are available here but very often a friendly custom message works best.
If you have any questions about this user right, don't hesitate to join us at WT:NPR. (Sent to all admins). MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 13:47, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello, COGDEN. 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. Mdann52 ( talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2017). This first issue is being sent out to all administrators, if you wish to keep receiving it please subscribe. Your feedback is welcomed.
13:37, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
Template:Citation/core/testing has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 16:17, 25 March 2017 (UTC)
Hello, COGDEN. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
A distant hello -- WikiCite is real and getting close to capturing a data-page for every cited [scholarly] article; a start at the original Wikicat/Wikicite idea. Just thought you should know. Warmly, – SJ + 21:04, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
Hello, COGDEN. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Administrators
must secure their accounts
The Arbitration Committee may require a new RfA if your account is compromised.
|
This message was sent to all administrators following a recent motion. Thank you for your attention. For the Arbitration Committee, Cameron11598 02:17, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
ArbCom would like to apologise and correct our previous mass message in light of the response from the community.
Since November 2018, six administrator accounts have been compromised and temporarily desysopped. In an effort to help improve account security, our intention was to remind administrators of existing policies on account security — that they are required to "have strong passwords and follow appropriate personal security practices." We have updated our procedures to ensure that we enforce these policies more strictly in the future. The policies themselves have not changed. In particular, two-factor authentication remains an optional means of adding extra security to your account. The choice not to enable 2FA will not be considered when deciding to restore sysop privileges to administrator accounts that were compromised.
We are sorry for the wording of our previous message, which did not accurately convey this, and deeply regret the tone in which it was delivered.
For the Arbitration Committee, - Cameron11598 21:03, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
US Banknote Contest | ||
---|---|---|
November-December 2019 | ||
There are an estimated 30,000 different varieties of United States banknotes, yet only a fraction of these are represented on Wikimedia Commons in the form of 2D scans. Additionally, Colonial America, the Confederate States, the Republic of Texas, multiple states and territories, communities, and private companies have issued banknotes that are in the public domain today but are absent from Commons. In the months of November and December, WikiProject Numismatics will be running a cross-wiki upload-a-thon, the 2019 US Banknote Contest. The goal of the contest is to increase the number of US banknote images available to content creators on all Wikimedia projects. Participants will claim points for uploading and importing 2D scans of US banknotes, and at the end of the contest all will receive awards. Whether you want to claim the Gold Wiki or you just want to have fun, all are invited to participate. If you do not want to receive invitations to future US Banknote Contests, follow the instructions here |
Sent by ZLEA at 23:30, 19 October 2019 (UTC) via MediaWiki message delivery ( talk)
Category:Latter Day Saint doctrines, beliefs, and practices has been nominated for splitting. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle ( talk) 19:52, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
Established policy provides for removal of the administrative permissions of users who have not made any edits or logged actions in the preceding twelve months. Because you have been inactive, your administrative permissions will be removed if you do not return to activity within the next month.
Inactive administrators are encouraged to rejoin the project in earnest rather than to make token edits to avoid loss of administrative permissions. Resources and support for reengaging with the project are available at Wikipedia:WikiProject Editor Retention/administrators. If you do not intend to rejoin the project in the foreseeable future, please consider voluntarily resigning your administrative permissions by making a request at the bureaucrats' noticeboard.
Thank you for your past contributions to the project. — JJMC89 bot 00:04, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
I've been working on restoring the church of Jesus Christ in Zion page and saw a lot of your work on it previously. I also saw you had personal connections and I was wanting to discuss the church in more detail in private, as almost any source of it has been completely removed. Fishmr ( talk) 03:52, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
Would you be willing to email me? I have many questions about your previous contacts and I promise to keep any sensetive information confidential. I am wanting to know more about the church mainly due to academic reasons and as I grew up in Gallatin, near where Roger has done a lot of stuff for the church. Fishmr ( talk) 05:36, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
The article Latter Day Saint movement has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Persistent and continuing vandalism
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
Editor2020 (
talk) 20:58, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
A recently closed Request for Comment (RFC) reached consensus to remove Autopatrolled from the administrator user group. You may, similarly as with Edit Filter Manager, choose to self-assign this permission to yourself. This will be implemented the week of December 13th, but if you wish to self-assign you may do so now. To find out when the change has gone live or if you have any questions please visit the Administrator's Noticeboard. 20:05, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
Template:Citation/testing has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Q28 ( talk) 00:27, 15 December 2021 (UTC)
Hi!
You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.
When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.
Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an admin will still be able to access the IP. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working on better tools to help.
If you have not seen it before, you can read more on Meta. If you want to make sure you don’t miss technical changes on the Wikimedia wikis, you can subscribe to the weekly technical newsletter.
We have two suggested ways this identity could work. We would appreciate your feedback on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You can let us know on the talk page. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.
Thank you. / Johan (WMF)
18:12, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
The administrator policy has been updated with new activity requirements following a successful Request for Comment.
Beginning January 1, 2023, administrators who meet one or both of the following criteria may be desysopped for inactivity if they have:
Administrators at risk for being desysopped under these criteria will continue to be notified ahead of time. Thank you for your continued work.
22:52, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
Established policy provides for the removal of the administrative permissions of users who have made fewer than 100 edits over a 60-month period. Your administrative permissions will be removed if you do not return to the required activity level before the beginning of January 2023.
Inactive administrators are encouraged to engage with the project in earnest rather than to make token edits to avoid loss of administrative permissions. Resources and support for re-engaging with the project are available at Wikipedia:WikiProject Editor Retention/administrators. If you do not intend to re-engage with the project in the foreseeable future, please consider voluntarily resigning your administrative permissions by making a request at the bureaucrats' noticeboard.
Thank you for your past contributions to the project. — JJMC89 bot 08:45, 1 October 2022 (UTC)