![]() | 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 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
Thank you for
your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from one or more pages into
Women in the Bible. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere,
Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an
edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and
linking to the copied page, e.g.,
copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution
. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{
copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. The attribution has been provided for this situation, but if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at
Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. If you are the sole author of the prose that was copied, attribution is not required. —
Diannaa 🍁 (
talk)
12:23, 2 May 2018 (UTC)
Hello! After the successful pilot program by Wikimedia India in 2015, Wiki Loves Food (WLF) is happening again in 2018 and this year, it's going International. To make this event a grand success, your direction is key. Please sign up here as a volunteer to bring all the world's food to Wikimedia. Danidamiobi ( talk) 07:23, 7 May 2018 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Women in the Bible, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Frank Stagg ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 10:20, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
Is it of interest that many of the women in the Bible (Judith etc) are main characters in opera and oratorio? -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 13:56, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
![]()
| ||
(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) |
-- Megalibrarygirl ( talk) 17:15, 29 May 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Biblical criticism, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Vincent Taylor ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 09:18, 2 June 2018 (UTC)
You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.
Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!
Jjjjjjdddddd ( talk) 16:12, 7 June 2018 (UTC)![]() |
ICHTHUS |
June 2018 |
Project news
By
Lionelt
Here are discussions relevant to the Project:
The following articles need reviewers for GA-class: Type of Constans nom. by Gog the Mild, Tian Feng (magazine) nom. by Finnusertop. Your assistance is greatly appreciated.
Stay up-to-date on the latest happenings at the Project
Did You Know
Nominated by
Gonzonoir
... that in 1636, Phineas Hodson, Chancellor of York Minster, lost his 38-year-old wife Jane during the birth of the couple's 24th child?
Featured article
Nominated by
Cliftonian
The Mortara case was a controversy precipitated by the Papal States' seizure of Edgardo Mortara, a six-year-old Jewish child, from his family in Bologna, Italy, in 1858. The city's inquisitor, Father Pier Feletti, heard from a servant that she had administered emergency baptism to the boy when he fell sick as an infant, and the Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Roman and Universal Inquisition held that this made the child irrevocably a Catholic. Because the Papal States had forbidden the raising of Christians by members of other faiths, it was ordered that he be taken from his family and brought up by the Church. After visits from the child's father, international protests mounted, but Pope Pius IX would not be moved. The boy grew up as a Catholic with the Pope as a substitute father, trained for the priesthood in Rome until 1870, and was ordained in France three years later. In 1870 the Kingdom of Italy captured Rome during the unification of Italy, ending the pontifical state; opposition across Italy, Europe and the United States over Mortara's treatment may have contributed to its downfall. ( Full article...)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Biblical criticism you nominated for
GA-status according to the
criteria.
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Farang Rak Tham --
Farang Rak Tham (
talk)
09:20, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Biblical criticism, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Annales ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 09:09, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
Hi, and I'm glad I was able to help at the help desk, but now I'm embarrassed. I should have known that someone had already simplified this the {{ bibleverse}} template and its variants may simplify life for you, and the template has the advantage that a change to the template will fix any problem globally in the highly unlikely event that the folks over at Wikisource make a format change.
If you do not like the template's resulting format, you can still use the approach I outlined. I suspect you already figured this out, but I'm putting it here for completeness. My note made two assumptions that you may wish to change:
You are clearly much more of a biblical scholar than I am, so you may have other ideas about versions and/or format. For other versions, look at s:bible, you can easily use any of them.
The displayed text is simply whatever is after the "|" in the link. In my example, [[s:Bible (King James)/Psalms#Psalm 23|Psalms:23]], which will display as Psalms:23. But you can use whatever format you want as the display text: Just replace the "Psalms:23".
- Arch dude ( talk) 18:02, 22 June 2018 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Biblical criticism, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Friedrich Wolf ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 09:20, 23 June 2018 (UTC)
Today the Swede feast on sill and snaps. Where I'm going there'll be no maypole or little frogs, though. [3] Gråbergs Gråa Sång ( talk) 12:01, 22 June 2018 (UTC)
The article
Biblical criticism you nominated as a
good article has been placed on hold
. The article is close to meeting the
good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See
Talk:Biblical criticism for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Farang Rak Tham --
Farang Rak Tham (
talk)
22:40, 23 June 2018 (UTC)
The article
Biblical criticism you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Biblical criticism for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can
nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Farang Rak Tham --
Farang Rak Tham (
talk)
20:41, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
Thank you! Jenhawk777 ( talk) 14:31, 27 June 2018 (UTC)
![]()
| ||
(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) -- Rosiestep ( talk) 14:04, 28 June 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging |
![]() |
ICHTHUS |
July 2018 |
The Top 7 report
By
Lionelt
The big news was the marriage of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle. The Top 7 most popular articles in WikiProject Christianity were:
Did you know
Nominated by
The C of E
... that the little-known 1758 Methodist hymn " Sun of Unclouded Righteousness" asks God to send the doctrine of the "Unitarian fiend ... back to hell", referring to both Islam and Unitarianism?
Our newest Featured list
Nominated by
Freikorp
List of dates predicted for apocalyptic events. Predictions of apocalyptic events that would result in the extinction of humanity, a collapse of civilization, or the destruction of the planet have been made since at least the beginning of the Christian Era. Most predictions are related to Abrahamic religions, often standing for or similar to the eschatological events described in their scriptures. Christian predictions typically refer to events like the Rapture, Great Tribulation, Last Judgment, and the Second Coming of Christ.
Polls conducted in 2012 across 20 countries found over 14% of people believe the world will end in their lifetime, with percentages raging from 6% of people in France to 22% in the US and Turkey. In the UK in 2015, the general public believed the likeliest cause would be nuclear war, while experts thought it would be artificial intelligence. Between one and three percent of people from both countries thought the apocalypse would be caused by zombies or alien invasion. ( more...)
Help wanted
We're looking for writers to contribute to Ichthus. Do you have a project that you'd like to highlight? An issue that you'd like to bring to light? Post your inquiries or submission here.
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Biblical criticism, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Genesis ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 09:03, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
Please get consensus to make the article about "Issues in contempoary ministry interpreted through depictions of women in the Bible".
Your recent editing history at Women in the Bible shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Jytdog ( talk) 15:43, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
everything written about the Bible (has) to be ancient history only. I've said consistently that there should be sections on things like cultural interpretations over time, theological interpretations over time, etc. Jytdog ( talk) 15:10, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
@ Jytdog:
Well--let's do our best to be real and straight here--you have spent plenty of time characterizing my edits, and even some time characterizing me personally. That's okay, I don't hold it against you--newcomers are annoying, I get it. We stumble around like the proverbial bull in a china shop and are difficult to help. I'm still a newcomer in many ways, I do see that, but hopefully not quite as green--or as annoying--as at first. Having my first experience on Wikipedia be you meant my initial learning curve had to be pretty steep. But I survived and have made it this far and plan on sticking around.
I also understand it is easy to see other people's blind spots and not our own. I'm sure I have some since everyone does. What say you, to the claim you made that I have "predominantly evangelical resources" and the information --from you on the talk page--that indicates otherwise? Have you considered this could evidence a blind-spot toward me? Not saying--just asking--being real and straightforward here, that's all. Chances are humans being human, you might have a blindspot or two just like the rest of us. I could be one.
And yes, you're right--you never said in so many words that everything about the Bible had to be limited to when it was written--I surmised and paraphrased and apparently misunderstood. You want culture and theology and all things contemporary in separate sections--if I am understanding you correctly--so my conclusion was, what is left to put in the body of the article, then, if not ancient history only? Since you indicate I got that wrong, perhaps you could clarify it for me.
On the talkpage, it's clear my 53 references are not predominantly evangelical. That's just numbers--no blind spots involved. That there are some references that are and some that could be improved--okay. No problem. That is probably true of every article not FA. But the claim they are predominantly evangelical is clearly false.
I have indeed included some contemporary content--but you have now said you agree that should be done. I don't know how to reconcile you saying one of the two reasons we "bump heads" is because I include contemporary views and next you say you agree with including contemporary views. It looks like you don't object to that content after all--as long as it is presented separately in sections. If there are sections for culture, and theology, and differing views over time, including contemporary ones, and you agree such content should be in the article, in their own sections, that is basically the same content I have here already--it's just all mixed together. To my way of thinking, that means what you are saying is what we disagree over is not content after all. It's structure.
Your claim--complaint--was this "contemporary content" (you now agree to), and my references, (which it turns out are not predominantly evangelical after all), were the two things referred to in "as long as you keep doing these two things we will keep bumping heads". And they are not real at all. It is structure after all. And that puts us back to having to be alike.
But you also said you did not require that we be alike. So, then, why does the content have to be separated? Where is that a requirement? As long as the division of content is logical and followable and so on? So what if there is theology and culture and contemporary views mixed up together--if as you say it is actually important to have it all in there somewhere--what is the advantage of separating it into separate sections?
How does separating the content--instead of mixing the content--render it into a more neutral pov? That is really the critical question isn't it? Because I really want to follow npov, and if structuring in sections genuinely changes perception of pov, I'd really like to know.
I don't structure articles the same way you do, but as far as I can tell, that is about your habit, your preference, and is not a Wikipedia requirement. And you know what? I would still be willing to cooperate with you and do it your way if you would--could--make a case for why your approach is the best one instead of using the art of misdirection and making this about an "evangelical" pov that I don't have.
I ask questions like these and rarely get clear, direct answers. Can you see why I find--why anyone might find--figuring out what you want confusing? Jenhawk777 ( talk) 19:57, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
(this is not what you are doing, btw) Jytdog ( talk) 20:37, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
impossible to weave all of them throughout? Why can't that be a valid approach? As long as each pov is presented where it actually occurs and it's done in a neutral manner? I arrange things topically. Then I discuss each topic including its history, theology, sociology, etc. from whatever points of view anyone has or has ever had on it, without judgment, or taking any position, or advocating for or against any of it--just describing what they are. I think that actually does a really thorough job of each. You arrange things differently; your sections are more categories--sociology, theology, etc.--where you do, then, evaluate and tend to present a limited selection of pov. Yours is more general, mine more specific. Yours is more umbrella, mine more focused. Why is one more neutral than the other?
It is impossible to weave all of them throughout. I don't think it is impossible. But the bottom line is, the real nub of our disagreement has nothing to do with neutrality after all, does it? It's about structure. I am trying not to mischaracterize anything or anyone. I genuinely want to understand and meet you part way. If you could justify your assumption--and not just repeat it--it would help. Jenhawk777 ( talk) 21:45, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
Referencing is very complicated. I have been correcting broken references since 2012 and I still run into things I haven't seen before. I usually write references in a text editor first, or use a tool like Wikipedia citation tool for Google Books which lets you enter the url from the book and creates at reference with a citation template and reference name.
About the references at Biblical criticism. I do see a problem with your references to McKim's Historical Handbook of Major Biblical Interpreters, etc. Citing a book like that without the title of the entry is like citing an article in the Encyclopedia Britannica without giving the name of the article. Each of these entries has its own author who needs to be included. So they need to be separate references, not cited by the same reference name. I can convert them for you, or at least those I can see at Google Books. Do you have access to the text if needed? StarryGrandma ( talk) 21:03, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
It included scholars such as Hermann Gunkel (1862–1932), one of the founders of form criticism,[12]:426 and Ernst Troeltsch (1865–1923), who established principles of historical study and sociology.[12]:395The reference for Gunkel isn't to the Gunkel entry on pages 487-491 by M. J. Buss, but to the entry on page 426 for James Barr, written by D. Penchansky. That page just mentions Gunkel in passing as "one of the giants of theological modernism" and says nothing about form criticism. The entry for Gunkel himself doesn't use the term form criticism either. You need a more specific reference. The Wikipedia article Hermann Gunkel says "In these works he created the new critical methodology of form criticism (Formgeschichte)". [1] Use that reference.
References
Music for your way. I am sure that it's bad enough to loose the friends who die, but go in peace if you have to. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 10:44, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
![]()
![]() January events:
|
Thank you for your help last year, including with the TFA! Miss you. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 17:01, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for thinking of me. Happy New Year to you and yours. I sincerely hope you are well and enjoying music and life and writing. I am happy and well and doing a lot of writing--just not here. Thank you Gerda. Ich Ihnen von Herzen danken möchte. God bless you dear heart. Jenhawk777 ( talk) 08:31, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
![]()
![]() February events:
|
Hello, Jenhawk777. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, Draft:Post-critical biblical interpretation.
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it. — JJMC89 ( T· C) 05:22, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
References
![]()
![]() ![]() ![]() Please join us for these virtual events:
| ||
|
![]()
|
-- Megalibrarygirl ( talk) 16:00, 25 March 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging
(Please excuse this post if it is a duplicate!)
![]()
|
-- Megalibrarygirl ( talk) 16:17, 27 April 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging
![]()
|
-- Megalibrarygirl ( talk) 17:42, 22 May 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging
![]() |
ICHTHUS |
June 2019 |
The sad news was the 2019 Sri Lanka Easter bombings. The Top 6 most popular articles about People in WikiProject Christianity were:
... that the first attempt to build the Holy Trinity Cathedral of the Alexander Nevsky Lavra resulted in the demolition of the nearly completed structure?
Saint Fin Barre's Cathedral is a
Gothic Revival three-spire cathedral in the city of
Cork,
Ireland. It belongs to the Church of Ireland and was completed in 1879. The cathedral is located on the south side of the River Lee, on ground that has been a place of worship since the 7th century, and is dedicated to
Finbarr of Cork, patron saint of the city. It was once in the Diocese of Cork; it is now one of the three cathedrals in the
Church of Ireland Diocese of Cork, Cloyne and Ross, in the ecclesiastical province of
Dublin. Christian use of the site dates back to a 7th-century AD monastery, which according to legend was founded by Finbarr of Cork. The entrances contain the figures of over a dozen biblical figures, capped by a tympanum showing a Resurrection scene.
(
more...)
![]()
|
-- Megalibrarygirl ( talk) 16:40, 25 June 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging
![]() |
ICHTHUS |
July 2019 |
A suicide attack on July 11th claimed by Islamic State (IS) near a church in the Syrian city of Qamishli shows that Christians remain a major target of the terror group. The Top 6 most popular articles about People in WikiProject Christianity were:
When God Writes Your Love Story: The Ultimate Approach to Guy/Girl Relationships is a 1999 book by Eric and Leslie Ludy, an American married couple. After becoming a bestseller on the Christian book market, the book was republished in 2004 and then revised and expanded in 2009. It tells the story of the authors' first meeting, courtship, and marriage. The authors advise single people not to be physically or emotionally intimate with others, but to wait for the spouse that God has planned for them.
The book is divided into five sections and sixteen chapters. Each chapter is written from the perspective of one of the two authors; nine are by Eric, while Leslie wrote seven, as well as the introduction. The Ludys argue that one's love life should be both guided by and subordinate to one's
relationship with God. Leslie writes that God offers new beginnings to formerly
unchaste or
sexually abused individuals.
(
more...)
![]()
|
-- Rosiestep ( talk) 06:44, 29 July 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging
![]()
|
-- Rosiestep ( talk) 16:24, 27 August 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging
![]()
|
-- Megalibrarygirl ( talk) 17:35, 23 September 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging
![]()
|
-- Rosiestep ( talk) 22:58, 29 October 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging
![]()
|
-- Megalibrarygirl ( talk) 18:43, 25 November 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging
![]() |
ICHTHUS |
![]() December 2019
|
The Top 3 most popular articles about People in WikiProject Christianity were:
Being a Ghost Story of Christmas, commonly known as A Christmas Carol, is a
novella by
Charles Dickens, first published in London by
Chapman & Hall in 1843 and illustrated by
John Leech. The book is divided into five chapters, which Dickens titled "
staves". A Christmas Carol recounts the story of
Ebenezer Scrooge, an elderly
miser who is visited by the ghost of his former business partner
Jacob Marley and the spirits of
Christmas Past,
Present and
Yet to Come. After their visits, Scrooge is transformed into a kinder, gentler man. (
more...)
“ | Be kindly affectionate to one another with brotherly love, in honor giving preference to one another. | ” |
Romans 12:10 New King James Version (NKJV)
We're looking for writers to contribute to Ichthus. Do you have a project or an issue that you'd like to highlight? Post your inquiries or submission here.
User:Gråbergs Gråa Sång is wishing you
the season's greetings.
Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's
solstice or
Christmas,
Diwali,
Hogmanay,
Hanukkah,
Lenaia,
Festivus,
or the
Saturnalia,
this is a special time of year for (almost) everyone.
Please enjoy these messages from our readers! I bet you still take a WP-peek now and then, you WP:PUPPY ;-) Gråbergs Gråa Sång ( talk) 11:27, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
![]() |
ICHTHUS |
![]() January 2020
|
The Top 3 most-popular articles about People in WikiProject Christianity were:
A Song for Simeon, is a 37-line poem written in 1928 by American-English poet
T. S. Eliot (1888–1965). It is
one of five poems that Eliot contributed to the
Ariel poems series of 38 pamphlets by several authors published by
Faber and Gwyer. "A Song for Simeon" was the sixteenth in the series and included an illustration by
avant garde artist
Edward McKnight Kauffer. The poem's narrative echoes the text of the
Nunc dimittis, a liturgical prayer for
Compline from the Gospel passage. Eliot introduces literary allusions to earlier writers
Lancelot Andrewes,
Dante Alighieri and
St. John of the Cross. Critics have debated whether Eliot's depiction of Simeon is a negative portrayal of a Jewish figure and evidence of
anti-Semitism on Eliot's part.
(
more...)
“ | May He grant you according to your heart’s desire, And fulfill all your purpose. | ” |
Psalm 20:4 New King James Version (NKJV)
We're looking for writers to contribute to Ichthus. Do you have a project or an issue that you'd like to highlight? Post your inquiries or submission here.
![]() |
|
![]()
![]()
|
-- Megalibrarygirl ( talk) 19:31, 28 January 2020 (UTC) via MassMessaging
![]()
![]() ![]() ![]() Online events:
|
-- Rosiestep ( talk) 19:32, 23 February 2020 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Hello, Jenhawk777,
The Arbitration Committee has asked that evidence presentations be kept to around 500 words and 50 diffs. Your presentation is 1065 words. Please edit your section to focus on the most relevant evidence. Also, instead of reposting entire comments that were made by editors, I suggest you post a link to the edits/remarks. This can help you reduce the word count of your presentation.
If you wish to submit over-length evidence, you must first obtain the agreement of the arbitrators by posting a request on the /Evidence talk page.
For the Arbitration Committee, Liz Read! Talk! 15:57, 13 March 2020 (UTC)
![]()
Online events:
|
-- Rosiestep ( talk) 14:59, 23 March 2020 (UTC) via MassMessaging
![]() |
The Barnstar of Diligence |
For your bravery and willingness to speak your truth (even when your voice shakes, as they say), whether it was on behalf of Wikipedia, or your own personal catharsis, you are most appreciated. Your commentary played a crucial role at ArbCom. The behaviour you outlined is not the norm here, and thanks to your efforts, we may see less and less of it. petrarchan47 คุ ก 22:32, 3 April 2020 (UTC) |
Please do not add or change content, as you did at
History of Christian thought on persecution and tolerance, without citing a
reliable source. Please review the guidelines at
Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Wikipedia is not a
reliable source. You can't cite it inside articles.
Elizium23 (
talk)
04:53, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
Welcome back, I hope that you could eventually edit more than only in relation to that case. There are less difficult areas to edit on (than the previous topics you put efforts in), where much help is needed. Also, although we didn't always agree, I think that I have noticed your capacity to learn and improve and everyone starts somewhere. After the case (where it is indeed the right place to express your hardship), no matter its results, I would like to encourage you to move forward. Wikipedia shouldn't be about who can or cannot edit because of who, of course... — Paleo Neonate – 21:28, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
@ Jenhawk777: I fully understand if you have other priorities than editing Wikipedia, but I am excited to see you back again, even if only for a while. I want to let you know that not helping you more in your conflicts with Jytdog over Christianity and violence is one of my greatest regrets on Wikipedia. I was, and still am, intimidated by the workload and controversy involved in significant edits to large articles like that one. However, I greatly appreciated your desire to improve the quality and accuracy of Wikipedia's articles, and I wished I could have helped you navigate Wikipedia's policies and find agreement with other editors. I continue to believe that your contributions could improve Wikipedia. Feel free to {{ ping}} me any time. Daask ( talk) 19:00, 27 April 2020 (UTC) (formerly editing as User:Sondra.kinsey)
![]()
Online events:
|
-- Rosiestep ( talk) 20:58, 29 April 2020 (UTC) via MassMessaging
{{ User wikipedia/FormerWikiPuppy}}
Content you added to the above article appears to have been copied from several online sources that are not released under a compatible license. Please see the page history for what I found. Copying text directly from a source is a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policy. Unfortunately, for copyright reasons, some content had to be removed. Please leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions. — Diannaa ( talk) 22:42, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited History of Christian thought on persecution and tolerance, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Philip IV ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 12:45, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
Dear User: Jenhawk777, thank you for saying that you would be interested in my proposal for a "WikiProject Mysticism". If you would like to join, you can go to Wikipedia: WikiProject Council and add your name under the section "Proposals for new WikiProjects". Vorbee ( talk) 07:43, 18 May 2020 (UTC)
![]() |
Hi Jenhawk777! The thread you created at the
Wikipedia:Teahouse,
|
![]() June 2020, Volume 6, Issue 6, Numbers 150, 151, 167, 168, 169
Online events:
|
-- Rosiestep ( talk) 17:11, 25 May 2020 (UTC) via MassMessaging
![]() |
Thank you for article improvements in May! - DYK my list of people for whose life I'm thankful enough to improve their articles? - I have a FAC open, one of Monteverdi's exceptional works, in memory of Brian who passed me his collected sources. - Will turn next to the list of things I want to do, such as look at your article. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 20:57, 17 May 2020 (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 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
Thank you for
your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from one or more pages into
Women in the Bible. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere,
Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an
edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and
linking to the copied page, e.g.,
copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution
. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{
copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. The attribution has been provided for this situation, but if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at
Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. If you are the sole author of the prose that was copied, attribution is not required. —
Diannaa 🍁 (
talk)
12:23, 2 May 2018 (UTC)
Hello! After the successful pilot program by Wikimedia India in 2015, Wiki Loves Food (WLF) is happening again in 2018 and this year, it's going International. To make this event a grand success, your direction is key. Please sign up here as a volunteer to bring all the world's food to Wikimedia. Danidamiobi ( talk) 07:23, 7 May 2018 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Women in the Bible, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Frank Stagg ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 10:20, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
Is it of interest that many of the women in the Bible (Judith etc) are main characters in opera and oratorio? -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 13:56, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
![]()
| ||
(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) |
-- Megalibrarygirl ( talk) 17:15, 29 May 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Biblical criticism, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Vincent Taylor ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 09:18, 2 June 2018 (UTC)
You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.
Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!
Jjjjjjdddddd ( talk) 16:12, 7 June 2018 (UTC)![]() |
ICHTHUS |
June 2018 |
Project news
By
Lionelt
Here are discussions relevant to the Project:
The following articles need reviewers for GA-class: Type of Constans nom. by Gog the Mild, Tian Feng (magazine) nom. by Finnusertop. Your assistance is greatly appreciated.
Stay up-to-date on the latest happenings at the Project
Did You Know
Nominated by
Gonzonoir
... that in 1636, Phineas Hodson, Chancellor of York Minster, lost his 38-year-old wife Jane during the birth of the couple's 24th child?
Featured article
Nominated by
Cliftonian
The Mortara case was a controversy precipitated by the Papal States' seizure of Edgardo Mortara, a six-year-old Jewish child, from his family in Bologna, Italy, in 1858. The city's inquisitor, Father Pier Feletti, heard from a servant that she had administered emergency baptism to the boy when he fell sick as an infant, and the Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Roman and Universal Inquisition held that this made the child irrevocably a Catholic. Because the Papal States had forbidden the raising of Christians by members of other faiths, it was ordered that he be taken from his family and brought up by the Church. After visits from the child's father, international protests mounted, but Pope Pius IX would not be moved. The boy grew up as a Catholic with the Pope as a substitute father, trained for the priesthood in Rome until 1870, and was ordained in France three years later. In 1870 the Kingdom of Italy captured Rome during the unification of Italy, ending the pontifical state; opposition across Italy, Europe and the United States over Mortara's treatment may have contributed to its downfall. ( Full article...)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Biblical criticism you nominated for
GA-status according to the
criteria.
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Farang Rak Tham --
Farang Rak Tham (
talk)
09:20, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Biblical criticism, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Annales ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 09:09, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
Hi, and I'm glad I was able to help at the help desk, but now I'm embarrassed. I should have known that someone had already simplified this the {{ bibleverse}} template and its variants may simplify life for you, and the template has the advantage that a change to the template will fix any problem globally in the highly unlikely event that the folks over at Wikisource make a format change.
If you do not like the template's resulting format, you can still use the approach I outlined. I suspect you already figured this out, but I'm putting it here for completeness. My note made two assumptions that you may wish to change:
You are clearly much more of a biblical scholar than I am, so you may have other ideas about versions and/or format. For other versions, look at s:bible, you can easily use any of them.
The displayed text is simply whatever is after the "|" in the link. In my example, [[s:Bible (King James)/Psalms#Psalm 23|Psalms:23]], which will display as Psalms:23. But you can use whatever format you want as the display text: Just replace the "Psalms:23".
- Arch dude ( talk) 18:02, 22 June 2018 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Biblical criticism, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Friedrich Wolf ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 09:20, 23 June 2018 (UTC)
Today the Swede feast on sill and snaps. Where I'm going there'll be no maypole or little frogs, though. [3] Gråbergs Gråa Sång ( talk) 12:01, 22 June 2018 (UTC)
The article
Biblical criticism you nominated as a
good article has been placed on hold
. The article is close to meeting the
good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See
Talk:Biblical criticism for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Farang Rak Tham --
Farang Rak Tham (
talk)
22:40, 23 June 2018 (UTC)
The article
Biblical criticism you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Biblical criticism for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can
nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Farang Rak Tham --
Farang Rak Tham (
talk)
20:41, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
Thank you! Jenhawk777 ( talk) 14:31, 27 June 2018 (UTC)
![]()
| ||
(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) -- Rosiestep ( talk) 14:04, 28 June 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging |
![]() |
ICHTHUS |
July 2018 |
The Top 7 report
By
Lionelt
The big news was the marriage of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle. The Top 7 most popular articles in WikiProject Christianity were:
Did you know
Nominated by
The C of E
... that the little-known 1758 Methodist hymn " Sun of Unclouded Righteousness" asks God to send the doctrine of the "Unitarian fiend ... back to hell", referring to both Islam and Unitarianism?
Our newest Featured list
Nominated by
Freikorp
List of dates predicted for apocalyptic events. Predictions of apocalyptic events that would result in the extinction of humanity, a collapse of civilization, or the destruction of the planet have been made since at least the beginning of the Christian Era. Most predictions are related to Abrahamic religions, often standing for or similar to the eschatological events described in their scriptures. Christian predictions typically refer to events like the Rapture, Great Tribulation, Last Judgment, and the Second Coming of Christ.
Polls conducted in 2012 across 20 countries found over 14% of people believe the world will end in their lifetime, with percentages raging from 6% of people in France to 22% in the US and Turkey. In the UK in 2015, the general public believed the likeliest cause would be nuclear war, while experts thought it would be artificial intelligence. Between one and three percent of people from both countries thought the apocalypse would be caused by zombies or alien invasion. ( more...)
Help wanted
We're looking for writers to contribute to Ichthus. Do you have a project that you'd like to highlight? An issue that you'd like to bring to light? Post your inquiries or submission here.
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Biblical criticism, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Genesis ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 09:03, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
Please get consensus to make the article about "Issues in contempoary ministry interpreted through depictions of women in the Bible".
Your recent editing history at Women in the Bible shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Jytdog ( talk) 15:43, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
everything written about the Bible (has) to be ancient history only. I've said consistently that there should be sections on things like cultural interpretations over time, theological interpretations over time, etc. Jytdog ( talk) 15:10, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
@ Jytdog:
Well--let's do our best to be real and straight here--you have spent plenty of time characterizing my edits, and even some time characterizing me personally. That's okay, I don't hold it against you--newcomers are annoying, I get it. We stumble around like the proverbial bull in a china shop and are difficult to help. I'm still a newcomer in many ways, I do see that, but hopefully not quite as green--or as annoying--as at first. Having my first experience on Wikipedia be you meant my initial learning curve had to be pretty steep. But I survived and have made it this far and plan on sticking around.
I also understand it is easy to see other people's blind spots and not our own. I'm sure I have some since everyone does. What say you, to the claim you made that I have "predominantly evangelical resources" and the information --from you on the talk page--that indicates otherwise? Have you considered this could evidence a blind-spot toward me? Not saying--just asking--being real and straightforward here, that's all. Chances are humans being human, you might have a blindspot or two just like the rest of us. I could be one.
And yes, you're right--you never said in so many words that everything about the Bible had to be limited to when it was written--I surmised and paraphrased and apparently misunderstood. You want culture and theology and all things contemporary in separate sections--if I am understanding you correctly--so my conclusion was, what is left to put in the body of the article, then, if not ancient history only? Since you indicate I got that wrong, perhaps you could clarify it for me.
On the talkpage, it's clear my 53 references are not predominantly evangelical. That's just numbers--no blind spots involved. That there are some references that are and some that could be improved--okay. No problem. That is probably true of every article not FA. But the claim they are predominantly evangelical is clearly false.
I have indeed included some contemporary content--but you have now said you agree that should be done. I don't know how to reconcile you saying one of the two reasons we "bump heads" is because I include contemporary views and next you say you agree with including contemporary views. It looks like you don't object to that content after all--as long as it is presented separately in sections. If there are sections for culture, and theology, and differing views over time, including contemporary ones, and you agree such content should be in the article, in their own sections, that is basically the same content I have here already--it's just all mixed together. To my way of thinking, that means what you are saying is what we disagree over is not content after all. It's structure.
Your claim--complaint--was this "contemporary content" (you now agree to), and my references, (which it turns out are not predominantly evangelical after all), were the two things referred to in "as long as you keep doing these two things we will keep bumping heads". And they are not real at all. It is structure after all. And that puts us back to having to be alike.
But you also said you did not require that we be alike. So, then, why does the content have to be separated? Where is that a requirement? As long as the division of content is logical and followable and so on? So what if there is theology and culture and contemporary views mixed up together--if as you say it is actually important to have it all in there somewhere--what is the advantage of separating it into separate sections?
How does separating the content--instead of mixing the content--render it into a more neutral pov? That is really the critical question isn't it? Because I really want to follow npov, and if structuring in sections genuinely changes perception of pov, I'd really like to know.
I don't structure articles the same way you do, but as far as I can tell, that is about your habit, your preference, and is not a Wikipedia requirement. And you know what? I would still be willing to cooperate with you and do it your way if you would--could--make a case for why your approach is the best one instead of using the art of misdirection and making this about an "evangelical" pov that I don't have.
I ask questions like these and rarely get clear, direct answers. Can you see why I find--why anyone might find--figuring out what you want confusing? Jenhawk777 ( talk) 19:57, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
(this is not what you are doing, btw) Jytdog ( talk) 20:37, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
impossible to weave all of them throughout? Why can't that be a valid approach? As long as each pov is presented where it actually occurs and it's done in a neutral manner? I arrange things topically. Then I discuss each topic including its history, theology, sociology, etc. from whatever points of view anyone has or has ever had on it, without judgment, or taking any position, or advocating for or against any of it--just describing what they are. I think that actually does a really thorough job of each. You arrange things differently; your sections are more categories--sociology, theology, etc.--where you do, then, evaluate and tend to present a limited selection of pov. Yours is more general, mine more specific. Yours is more umbrella, mine more focused. Why is one more neutral than the other?
It is impossible to weave all of them throughout. I don't think it is impossible. But the bottom line is, the real nub of our disagreement has nothing to do with neutrality after all, does it? It's about structure. I am trying not to mischaracterize anything or anyone. I genuinely want to understand and meet you part way. If you could justify your assumption--and not just repeat it--it would help. Jenhawk777 ( talk) 21:45, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
Referencing is very complicated. I have been correcting broken references since 2012 and I still run into things I haven't seen before. I usually write references in a text editor first, or use a tool like Wikipedia citation tool for Google Books which lets you enter the url from the book and creates at reference with a citation template and reference name.
About the references at Biblical criticism. I do see a problem with your references to McKim's Historical Handbook of Major Biblical Interpreters, etc. Citing a book like that without the title of the entry is like citing an article in the Encyclopedia Britannica without giving the name of the article. Each of these entries has its own author who needs to be included. So they need to be separate references, not cited by the same reference name. I can convert them for you, or at least those I can see at Google Books. Do you have access to the text if needed? StarryGrandma ( talk) 21:03, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
It included scholars such as Hermann Gunkel (1862–1932), one of the founders of form criticism,[12]:426 and Ernst Troeltsch (1865–1923), who established principles of historical study and sociology.[12]:395The reference for Gunkel isn't to the Gunkel entry on pages 487-491 by M. J. Buss, but to the entry on page 426 for James Barr, written by D. Penchansky. That page just mentions Gunkel in passing as "one of the giants of theological modernism" and says nothing about form criticism. The entry for Gunkel himself doesn't use the term form criticism either. You need a more specific reference. The Wikipedia article Hermann Gunkel says "In these works he created the new critical methodology of form criticism (Formgeschichte)". [1] Use that reference.
References
Music for your way. I am sure that it's bad enough to loose the friends who die, but go in peace if you have to. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 10:44, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
![]()
![]() January events:
|
Thank you for your help last year, including with the TFA! Miss you. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 17:01, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for thinking of me. Happy New Year to you and yours. I sincerely hope you are well and enjoying music and life and writing. I am happy and well and doing a lot of writing--just not here. Thank you Gerda. Ich Ihnen von Herzen danken möchte. God bless you dear heart. Jenhawk777 ( talk) 08:31, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
![]()
![]() February events:
|
Hello, Jenhawk777. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, Draft:Post-critical biblical interpretation.
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it. — JJMC89 ( T· C) 05:22, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
References
![]()
![]() ![]() ![]() Please join us for these virtual events:
| ||
|
![]()
|
-- Megalibrarygirl ( talk) 16:00, 25 March 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging
(Please excuse this post if it is a duplicate!)
![]()
|
-- Megalibrarygirl ( talk) 16:17, 27 April 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging
![]()
|
-- Megalibrarygirl ( talk) 17:42, 22 May 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging
![]() |
ICHTHUS |
June 2019 |
The sad news was the 2019 Sri Lanka Easter bombings. The Top 6 most popular articles about People in WikiProject Christianity were:
... that the first attempt to build the Holy Trinity Cathedral of the Alexander Nevsky Lavra resulted in the demolition of the nearly completed structure?
Saint Fin Barre's Cathedral is a
Gothic Revival three-spire cathedral in the city of
Cork,
Ireland. It belongs to the Church of Ireland and was completed in 1879. The cathedral is located on the south side of the River Lee, on ground that has been a place of worship since the 7th century, and is dedicated to
Finbarr of Cork, patron saint of the city. It was once in the Diocese of Cork; it is now one of the three cathedrals in the
Church of Ireland Diocese of Cork, Cloyne and Ross, in the ecclesiastical province of
Dublin. Christian use of the site dates back to a 7th-century AD monastery, which according to legend was founded by Finbarr of Cork. The entrances contain the figures of over a dozen biblical figures, capped by a tympanum showing a Resurrection scene.
(
more...)
![]()
|
-- Megalibrarygirl ( talk) 16:40, 25 June 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging
![]() |
ICHTHUS |
July 2019 |
A suicide attack on July 11th claimed by Islamic State (IS) near a church in the Syrian city of Qamishli shows that Christians remain a major target of the terror group. The Top 6 most popular articles about People in WikiProject Christianity were:
When God Writes Your Love Story: The Ultimate Approach to Guy/Girl Relationships is a 1999 book by Eric and Leslie Ludy, an American married couple. After becoming a bestseller on the Christian book market, the book was republished in 2004 and then revised and expanded in 2009. It tells the story of the authors' first meeting, courtship, and marriage. The authors advise single people not to be physically or emotionally intimate with others, but to wait for the spouse that God has planned for them.
The book is divided into five sections and sixteen chapters. Each chapter is written from the perspective of one of the two authors; nine are by Eric, while Leslie wrote seven, as well as the introduction. The Ludys argue that one's love life should be both guided by and subordinate to one's
relationship with God. Leslie writes that God offers new beginnings to formerly
unchaste or
sexually abused individuals.
(
more...)
![]()
|
-- Rosiestep ( talk) 06:44, 29 July 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging
![]()
|
-- Rosiestep ( talk) 16:24, 27 August 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging
![]()
|
-- Megalibrarygirl ( talk) 17:35, 23 September 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging
![]()
|
-- Rosiestep ( talk) 22:58, 29 October 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging
![]()
|
-- Megalibrarygirl ( talk) 18:43, 25 November 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging
![]() |
ICHTHUS |
![]() December 2019
|
The Top 3 most popular articles about People in WikiProject Christianity were:
Being a Ghost Story of Christmas, commonly known as A Christmas Carol, is a
novella by
Charles Dickens, first published in London by
Chapman & Hall in 1843 and illustrated by
John Leech. The book is divided into five chapters, which Dickens titled "
staves". A Christmas Carol recounts the story of
Ebenezer Scrooge, an elderly
miser who is visited by the ghost of his former business partner
Jacob Marley and the spirits of
Christmas Past,
Present and
Yet to Come. After their visits, Scrooge is transformed into a kinder, gentler man. (
more...)
“ | Be kindly affectionate to one another with brotherly love, in honor giving preference to one another. | ” |
Romans 12:10 New King James Version (NKJV)
We're looking for writers to contribute to Ichthus. Do you have a project or an issue that you'd like to highlight? Post your inquiries or submission here.
![]() |
|
User:Gråbergs Gråa Sång is wishing you
the season's greetings.
Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's
solstice or
Christmas,
Diwali,
Hogmanay,
Hanukkah,
Lenaia,
Festivus,
or the
Saturnalia,
this is a special time of year for (almost) everyone.
Please enjoy these messages from our readers! I bet you still take a WP-peek now and then, you WP:PUPPY ;-) Gråbergs Gråa Sång ( talk) 11:27, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
![]() |
ICHTHUS |
![]() January 2020
|
The Top 3 most-popular articles about People in WikiProject Christianity were:
A Song for Simeon, is a 37-line poem written in 1928 by American-English poet
T. S. Eliot (1888–1965). It is
one of five poems that Eliot contributed to the
Ariel poems series of 38 pamphlets by several authors published by
Faber and Gwyer. "A Song for Simeon" was the sixteenth in the series and included an illustration by
avant garde artist
Edward McKnight Kauffer. The poem's narrative echoes the text of the
Nunc dimittis, a liturgical prayer for
Compline from the Gospel passage. Eliot introduces literary allusions to earlier writers
Lancelot Andrewes,
Dante Alighieri and
St. John of the Cross. Critics have debated whether Eliot's depiction of Simeon is a negative portrayal of a Jewish figure and evidence of
anti-Semitism on Eliot's part.
(
more...)
“ | May He grant you according to your heart’s desire, And fulfill all your purpose. | ” |
Psalm 20:4 New King James Version (NKJV)
We're looking for writers to contribute to Ichthus. Do you have a project or an issue that you'd like to highlight? Post your inquiries or submission here.
![]() |
|
![]()
![]()
|
-- Megalibrarygirl ( talk) 19:31, 28 January 2020 (UTC) via MassMessaging
![]()
![]() ![]() ![]() Online events:
|
-- Rosiestep ( talk) 19:32, 23 February 2020 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Hello, Jenhawk777,
The Arbitration Committee has asked that evidence presentations be kept to around 500 words and 50 diffs. Your presentation is 1065 words. Please edit your section to focus on the most relevant evidence. Also, instead of reposting entire comments that were made by editors, I suggest you post a link to the edits/remarks. This can help you reduce the word count of your presentation.
If you wish to submit over-length evidence, you must first obtain the agreement of the arbitrators by posting a request on the /Evidence talk page.
For the Arbitration Committee, Liz Read! Talk! 15:57, 13 March 2020 (UTC)
![]()
Online events:
|
-- Rosiestep ( talk) 14:59, 23 March 2020 (UTC) via MassMessaging
![]() |
The Barnstar of Diligence |
For your bravery and willingness to speak your truth (even when your voice shakes, as they say), whether it was on behalf of Wikipedia, or your own personal catharsis, you are most appreciated. Your commentary played a crucial role at ArbCom. The behaviour you outlined is not the norm here, and thanks to your efforts, we may see less and less of it. petrarchan47 คุ ก 22:32, 3 April 2020 (UTC) |
Please do not add or change content, as you did at
History of Christian thought on persecution and tolerance, without citing a
reliable source. Please review the guidelines at
Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Wikipedia is not a
reliable source. You can't cite it inside articles.
Elizium23 (
talk)
04:53, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
Welcome back, I hope that you could eventually edit more than only in relation to that case. There are less difficult areas to edit on (than the previous topics you put efforts in), where much help is needed. Also, although we didn't always agree, I think that I have noticed your capacity to learn and improve and everyone starts somewhere. After the case (where it is indeed the right place to express your hardship), no matter its results, I would like to encourage you to move forward. Wikipedia shouldn't be about who can or cannot edit because of who, of course... — Paleo Neonate – 21:28, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
@ Jenhawk777: I fully understand if you have other priorities than editing Wikipedia, but I am excited to see you back again, even if only for a while. I want to let you know that not helping you more in your conflicts with Jytdog over Christianity and violence is one of my greatest regrets on Wikipedia. I was, and still am, intimidated by the workload and controversy involved in significant edits to large articles like that one. However, I greatly appreciated your desire to improve the quality and accuracy of Wikipedia's articles, and I wished I could have helped you navigate Wikipedia's policies and find agreement with other editors. I continue to believe that your contributions could improve Wikipedia. Feel free to {{ ping}} me any time. Daask ( talk) 19:00, 27 April 2020 (UTC) (formerly editing as User:Sondra.kinsey)
![]()
Online events:
|
-- Rosiestep ( talk) 20:58, 29 April 2020 (UTC) via MassMessaging
{{ User wikipedia/FormerWikiPuppy}}
Content you added to the above article appears to have been copied from several online sources that are not released under a compatible license. Please see the page history for what I found. Copying text directly from a source is a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policy. Unfortunately, for copyright reasons, some content had to be removed. Please leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions. — Diannaa ( talk) 22:42, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited History of Christian thought on persecution and tolerance, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Philip IV ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 12:45, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
Dear User: Jenhawk777, thank you for saying that you would be interested in my proposal for a "WikiProject Mysticism". If you would like to join, you can go to Wikipedia: WikiProject Council and add your name under the section "Proposals for new WikiProjects". Vorbee ( talk) 07:43, 18 May 2020 (UTC)
![]() |
Hi Jenhawk777! The thread you created at the
Wikipedia:Teahouse,
|
![]() June 2020, Volume 6, Issue 6, Numbers 150, 151, 167, 168, 169
Online events:
|
-- Rosiestep ( talk) 17:11, 25 May 2020 (UTC) via MassMessaging
![]() |
Thank you for article improvements in May! - DYK my list of people for whose life I'm thankful enough to improve their articles? - I have a FAC open, one of Monteverdi's exceptional works, in memory of Brian who passed me his collected sources. - Will turn next to the list of things I want to do, such as look at your article. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 20:57, 17 May 2020 (UTC)