| This is John Carter's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments. |
|
| Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 2011 |
Have you taken a look at Portal:Scientology/Wikimedia?
The logo's for each image are extremely expanded. I saw that you were the first one to edit it; but it's been messed up since that time. I think you should take a look at it. Lighthead þ 0:21, March 25 2008 (UTC)
Time Times (2008-04)
|
Time Times |
|
| Issue Two • April 2008 • About the Newsletter Written by FrankP and Template Designed by Diligent Terrier | ||
|
News
| ||
| Archives • Newsroom | ||
| If you no longer wish to longer receive this newsletter, please add your name here. Newsletter delivered by {{{Delivered by}}}. | ||
thank spam
|
Thank you for voting in my RfA, which passed with 194 supporting, 9 opposing, and 4 neutral. Your kindness and constructive criticism is very much appreciated. I look forward to using the tools you have granted me to aid the project. I would like to give special thanks to Tim Vickers, Anthony and Acalamari for their nominations. Thank you again, VanTucky |
Time Times (2008-05)
|
|
Time Times |
|
| Issue Three • May 2008 • About the Newsletter Written by FrankP and Template Designed by Diligent Terrier | ||
|
News
| ||
| Archives • Newsroom | ||
| If you no longer wish to longer receive this newsletter, please add your name here. Newsletter delivered by {{{Delivered by}}}. | ||
WP:X Elections
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Time Times (2008-06)
|
|
Time Times |
|
| Issue four • June 2008 • About the Newsletter Written by FrankP and Template Designed by Diligent Terrier | ||
|
News
| ||
| Archives • Newsroom | ||
| If you no longer wish to longer receive this newsletter, please add your name here. Newsletter delivered by {{{Delivered by}}}. | ||
Article about Khomeini
This article has been written by an agent of mullahs! There is not even one sentence on mass execution of political prisoners by Khomeini! There is nothing on violation of women's rights e.g. compulsory hijab. Female judges were forced to give up their jobs such as Shirin Ebadi...in islamic court, mullahs consider 2 women equal to one man! women can't even have an operation without the permission of their father/husband!
mullah even banned western music!
mullahs hang homosexuals & stone those who commit adultery!
those who convert from islam to any other religion will be executed!
Khomeini was behind the Cinema Rex fire, which led to the death (burning alive!) of approx. 500 people! most of your references are biased, they are taken from the islamic regime's sources e.g. poetry!! Khomeini couldn't even speak properly, let alone writing a poem!
I rename this article and I will add references. I have some questionst about it: 1. does references on Serbian language are good as references on English. I ask it because there is much more literature on Serbian church on Serbian than on any other language. 2. how many references are best for lists (one reference for every line or something different)?
AfD nomination of Garrison Courtney
Garrison Courtney, an article that you contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. The nominator does not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Garrison Courtney. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns.
Comment on WikiProject organization
Rather than post on the WikiProject I thought I would bring my comment directly to you. I have found that the better functioning projects have strong editors/administrators who actively work at organizing and maintaining the project. Military is a great example to use because they have coordinators assigned not just to the Project, but to each of its Task Forces/Work Groups. I think you may find yourself frustrated trying to set up a similar structure in the Christianity project with so many different opinions and personalities. I wish you all the best because it is long over due; I just hope you don't get frustrated in the effort. -- Absolon S. Kent (chat), 08:02, Saturday, January 4, 2025 (UTC)
lowercase people
Alright, I wont mess with it anymore. I just got a little upset that people categorized lowercase people as a "Christian" organization, which it primarily isn't.
Christianity banner
Regarding this project banner, you might save yourself a lot of work by using the meta template {{WPBannerMeta}}. Let me know if you'd like any help with it. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:34, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
- I'm building a new version in Template:ChristianityWikiProject/sandbox. It's nowhere near ready yet though. That's a monster template you've got there. It might take a little while to finish, but it should be more up-to-date and robust in the end. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 16:14, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
+1
Re [1]: for hitting the nail squarely on the head, +1. Knepflerle (talk) 23:48, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
re our fave
thanks [2]. I owe you a good deed in return. •Jim62sch•dissera! 00:51, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
Big losers that need help...
You might not remember me, but you were the editor who assessed the Old Time Missionary Baptist page for me. Well, I need help with it. I can't seem to figure out how to reference two different sources. Every time I try, it gives me a cite error message (apparently I can't put it on your page, else everything written after that stops, so I linked it) I understand what it means, but I can't figure out how to fix it. Can you help me? And if not, can you direct me to a person/place where I can get it? Joshua Ingram (talk) 06:30, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the help. Luckily, I had it mostly right. The thing I got wrong was, when I referenced my first and second references, I forgot to put quotation marks in it. (ref name=something without quotations>blah blah blah<ref/) I got it after a few minutes. Do they let you know when they do an assessment? I requested one almost a month ago, but nothing ever changed. I now realize I didn't make the correct references, but nothing was ever said. Is there some way, other than going through a month full of logs, to find out if they did one? Joshua Ingram (talk) 23:00, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
Okay, I Wikified the living crap out of it. Do I talk to you, or do I request another assessment? Joshua Ingram (talk) 00:47, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
|
The Guidance Barnstar | |
| I wanted to thank you for taking the time to help me. After accidentally clicking on your contribs link, I realized just how incredibly nice you are for helping me with my relatively small problems. Thank you. Joshua Ingram (talk) 06:37, 24 April 2009 (UTC) |
Thanks for the compliment on the page, but it's mostly do to your guidance. And you more than deserve the award. Joshua Ingram 16:13, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
Are you still adopting? Joshua Ingram 19:32, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
It's not like you haven't already unofficially adopted me. I would really like it if you would, though. Joshua Ingram 19:49, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
Yeah, you're right. I was just tired of them attacking me, and I slid a little. I took tit for tat a little too far. Joshua Ingram 00:20, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
- I meant to ask you, (assuming you have seen the most current update to the OTMB page, as of now) do you think that the article has been Wikified enough to take the thingamajig at the top down? Joshua Ingram 12:45, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
Do you spend much time on the Jesus Christ article? And if you do, can you tell me why Mary Magdalene and their "relationship" isn't mentioned? Joshua Ingram 02:02, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
Good Lord, what did you do to the idiot that keeps cursing you out on your userpage? Joshua Ingram 03:09, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
Macedonia survey
The ArbCom has voted to freeze all Macedonia-related renaming until after the case is concluded and then to permit it only as prescribed in the final decision (see WP:RFAR#Motion). This obviously makes the ongoing survey on Talk:Macedonia moot, as any conclusions can't be implemented, since ArbCom's decision will override anything that the survey decides (not that there seems to be a consensus anyway). Could I ask you to close the survey in the meantime? I'm sure you and others will be taking the opportunity to put forward arguments when the case opens on April 22nd. -- ChrisO (talk) 07:43, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
- Not too sure, actually – personally, I find ongoing collection of further opinions might still be useful there, so why not leave it open? Especially since it's actually been garnering some non-trivial input from people other than the "usual suspects", so it's actually enriching the picture somewhat. Of course I'm just as sick as the next guy of the predictable votes from the Greek camp, but I'm quite happy to listen to new outside opinion regarding the relative weight of, say, the "Ancient Macedonia" reading compared with the modern country reading. Just my 5c. Fut.Perf. ☼ 08:06, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
- OK, fair point. It's up to John really, it's his survey. -- ChrisO (talk) 08:48, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
- I can see no advantages to closing the survey, as the input might be useful to the ArbCom. Therefore, I think it makes sense for the survey to stay open. Also, frankly, given the recent behavior on the article, I am forced to question the motivation of the person making the request. John Carter (talk) 15:42, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for advice on de-orphaning the article on Kitamori
Many thanks for your suggestion that List of Kyoto University people would be a good additional link to the article on Kazoh Kitamori. I have now done this, so there will be at least five links from the page. Providing that lists, unlike categories, count as links which can de-orphan articles, I think that the article can now lose its orphan tag (it should cerainly do so if it receives more than five incoming links from other articles in Wikipedia). Many thanks again for the advice, ACEOREVIVED (talk) 18:42, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
Hello you self-proclaimed "arrogant-bastard-with-a-morbid-sense-of-humour"! I notice that you just gave the Romanesque article a B-Class rating. Is that because of your sense of humour, or is it the other matter?
I'm on the architecture project, and I say that it isn't a B-Class anything! Only I'm not as sufficiently arrogant a bastard as to put an A on an article which I wrote 95% of. But you could. .... and whatismore, you ought to, since it is at your discretion to do it, and both of us have reviewed it. You could confer with Johnbob who is very cluey about this period...
I am very hesitant about putting up articles for GAs and VGAs. The process is revolting.
Cheers!
Amandajm (talk) 01:10, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
- Hi John! are you grading for Christianity specifically? I thought it was for Architecture. Never mind! Amandajm (talk) 01:21, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
- I'm feeling rather depressed. I don't usually have anything to do with the Castle article, but I decided to check it, because it wsn't linked to Gothic. Anyway, a vandal had been at it, some 8 days ago and had made a lot of changes, many of which passed as bonafide edits. The watchers of the page discussed the matter, reverted two obvious errors and simply left all the rest, including the change from Romans to Goths in the introduction, and the deletion of a list of important architects. The particualr vandal is really insidious. One of the things that he does is introduce wads of highly specific info that might be accurate but disrupt the flow of the text. (While this is a frequent problem with good-faith edits, this person is sufficiently subtle to do it deliberately). While I can understand how a silly kid might delete a page or write a rude word, or "Josh was here!", I find it quite distressing that a person can take such pleasure in subtly undermining what others are seeking to create, and are prepared to put considerable time, effort and intellect into doing it.
- Hi John! are you grading for Christianity specifically? I thought it was for Architecture. Never mind! Amandajm (talk) 01:21, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
I notice that this category you created is unpopulated (empty). In other words, no Wikipedia pages belong to it. If it remains unpopulated for four days, it may be deleted without discussion, in accordance with Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#C1. I'm notifying you in case you wish to (re-)populate it by adding [[Category:Christian theology work group]] to pages that belong in it.
I tagged the category. This will not, in itself, cause the category to be deleted. It serves to document (in the page history) that the category was empty at the time of tagging and also to alert other watchers that the category is in jeopardy. You are welcome to remove the tag if you wish. However, removing the tag will not prevent deletion of the category if it remains empty.
If you created the category in error, or it is no longer needed, you can speed up the deletion process by tagging it with {{db-author}}.
I am a human being, not a bot, so you can contact me if you have questions about this. Best regards, --Stepheng3 (talk) 00:30, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
An Arbitration case involving you has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Macedonia 2/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Macedonia 2/Workshop.
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, —— nixeagleemail me 03:43, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
Mentorship
Dear Mr. Carter: I was not aware that I still needed a mentor, although I thank you for your kind offer. All of my edits since returning have been in good-faith to help improve Wikipedia, and I am proud of them. I have received praise from other editors on my talk page, even being called an "Awesome Wikipedian".
I am very grateful to Wikipedia for giving me a second chance. If you have an issue with any particular edits I make please give me the benefit of your opinion. I will always listen to a positive voice. Yours, Rms125a@hotmail.com (talk) 16:22, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for reminding me. I updated my userpage, which I had not touched since writing it in February. Yours, Rms125a@hotmail.com (talk) 16:36, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
Fuel TV/TomCat4680
TomCat4680 already has been blocked once for 24 hours, but it was lifted after he apologized and said he would stay away from the Fuel Tv page. User:MrRadioGuy What's that?/What I Do/Feed My Box 16:17, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
The Admin's Barnstar
|
The Admin's Barnstar | |
| I appreciate your effort and help to maintain the integrity of Wikipedia! Caspian blue 19:58, 22 April 2009 (UTC) |
It was me guv!
I see you were accused of saying that the ethnic list on the Macedonia arbitration page should be deleted, when it was me all along! I wasn't hiding (honest) when it was going on. If I was logged on I would have owned up, seeing as I'm that kind of guy. Cheers. Jack forbes (talk) 22:49, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
I'm curious about your user name. I was thinking it could be from a character called John Carter in some old science fiction books about a guy living on Mars. Of course, I could be way off the mark, just curious though. Jack forbes (talk) 23:02, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
I hope they make a good job of it. I haven't read those books for years but I do know that they don't often get it right when translating books to the movies. Fingers crossed though. Jack forbes (talk) 23:13, 22 April 2009 (UTC)Ps, the one I remember them getting right was Dune. It wasn't a financial success but I thought they got it spot on. Jack forbes (talk) 23:15, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
- Jack, I don't think I saw you state this on the workshop of the arbitration. ChrisO recently said "all that oppose are Greeks" more or less. Please restate that there if you want to. John, I guess the involvement in certain wikipedia articles to support obvious ethics can label someone as Greek. See here[3]. Maybe change the nick to John Carter the Greek? :) Thank God none said you are actually from Mars. Regards Shadowmorph (talk) 12:58, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
Regarding... me actually!
I want to thank you again for taking the time to add me to list. I've noticed that some may not be aware of the correct sequence of events leading to several blog/forum posts bearing my nickname. I'll keep it short. A few days ago, after I came back from holidays, I saw a message in my mailbox about the current issue regarding Macedonia's Wikipedia entry. Although I contributed to many Wikipedia entries before, this was the perfect time to register an account in order to keep track of the case. I also posted in grk.forthnet.users a message, in case anyone else was interested in voicing his opinions. This newsgroup is also indexed by Google; someone took it from there and posted in several blogs/fora. Others also took it and repeated the same procedure, sometimes leaving the message intact, sometimes not. Some Wikipedians found this message in a certain blog and their poor command of the greek language led them to believe that a) this is my blog and b) I'm calling for waves of nationalists to flood Wikipedia. How odd is that! I do not claim to represent anyone, but since the english version of Wikipedia isn't very popular within the greek-speaking community, I believe that my voice would be a useful addition to the ongoing dialogue. This is the translation of the original newsgroup message. SQRT5P1D2 (talk) 00:34, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
WPAGS importance rating
Alright, I got a third and a fourth opinion on this from other editors just to be sure about the rough consensus. Seems we do not want any importance rating in this case. –Holt (T•C) 23:41, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
request for formal consensus
In regard of ISKCON article I would need some of your help. Can you please formally organize a consensus vote on what sources should be allowed on the article of ISKCON and if schismatic groups should be represented in a separate section of the article. I appreciate your help. Wikidas 07:44, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
Imhotep
I wonder if you might want to comment at Talk:Imhotep. Some issues have come up there that touch on your area of expertise. LadyofShalott 17:12, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
Editing Barnstar
|
100,000 Edits | |
| I, Bugboy52.4, award you for reaching 100,000 edits according to the List of Wikipedians by number of edits generated 11:45 pm, 24 February 2009. Keep up the good work!________________________________________________________________ |
Hi can you kindly explain to the speedy tagger Library of Congress Country Studies material is public domain. It is explained on both his talk page and article page but he just aint getting it.Thanks. Dr. Blofeld White cat 21:05, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
Better now?
I really don't want to bother you, but is it better now? Is this suitable for the Workshop? Also in the process of gathering diffs, although others already used some and I'm not sure if repeating them is allowed or encouraged. SQRT5P1D2 (talk) 03:31, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
Talkback
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Talkback
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Talkback
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Talkback
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Thanks John
Thanks, but I will never seek adminship. I'm too flawed to do it :) man with one red shoe 18:30, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
- Believe me, sir, I said the same thing several times, and didn't see myself as being at all a very strong candidate. The voting on my RfA, which ended 146 for, 0 against, 1 abstain, kind of told me I might be wrong. Actually, I'm still more than a bit stunned by that. But based on what I've seen you do have the level-headedness and neutrality which I find in the best candidates. Anyway, I can understand your not wanting the post. Like I said, I said the same thing myself several times. You might find the idea mentioned again by various others in the future, though. I hope so anyway. John Carter (talk) 18:41, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
- I read a bit your RfA, I would not qualify for sure, I have no contributions that I can speak of and I don't know even half of the rules/procedures that you know about Wikipedia, and of course I would still be not interested in getting an admin position. But thanks anyway for thinking of me, besides I'm just one inch away from being accused of ethnic profiling... let's see how this case goes. I wish the arbitrators actually read between the lines and see what a specific block of editors did under the shield of "Assume Good Faith", basically trying to impose their POV talking advantage of Wikipedia's policies -- at least that's my view. I don't see a clear solution though, you can't ban people that didn't infringe clear policies, you can't "ethnic profile", I wish there was a way to test the POV and have other people than Greeks or Macedonians express their ideas about the name that Wikipedia should use and debate based on policies not on feelings or political orientation. man with one red shoe 19:34, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
- Well, there is one way to do that. It's the one that I proposed based on how the ArbCom decided in January to handle Irish names. They took three uninvolved admins and had them make the decision. I'm thinking something like that will probably happen here as well. I imagine the rest of us will be allowed to contribute to the discussion, but the final decision will probably be in their hands. In the Irish case, their decision is listed as being non-negotiable for two years therefater. I have an unfortunate feeling that might be the only workable solution in a lot of these cases. John Carter (talk) 19:40, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
- That's acceptable to me, having uninvolved admins judge the case is way better than having 20 involved party "vote", war edit and filibuster endlessly in the talk page. man with one red shoe 19:50, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
- Well, there is one way to do that. It's the one that I proposed based on how the ArbCom decided in January to handle Irish names. They took three uninvolved admins and had them make the decision. I'm thinking something like that will probably happen here as well. I imagine the rest of us will be allowed to contribute to the discussion, but the final decision will probably be in their hands. In the Irish case, their decision is listed as being non-negotiable for two years therefater. I have an unfortunate feeling that might be the only workable solution in a lot of these cases. John Carter (talk) 19:40, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
- I read a bit your RfA, I would not qualify for sure, I have no contributions that I can speak of and I don't know even half of the rules/procedures that you know about Wikipedia, and of course I would still be not interested in getting an admin position. But thanks anyway for thinking of me, besides I'm just one inch away from being accused of ethnic profiling... let's see how this case goes. I wish the arbitrators actually read between the lines and see what a specific block of editors did under the shield of "Assume Good Faith", basically trying to impose their POV talking advantage of Wikipedia's policies -- at least that's my view. I don't see a clear solution though, you can't ban people that didn't infringe clear policies, you can't "ethnic profile", I wish there was a way to test the POV and have other people than Greeks or Macedonians express their ideas about the name that Wikipedia should use and debate based on policies not on feelings or political orientation. man with one red shoe 19:34, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
- Hmmm, I was profiled as a nationalist after I voted on the straw poll at the Greek talk page. I happen to be a Scottish Nationalist which has nothing whatsoever to do with Greek Nationalism or anything Greek for that matter. I have actually taken the talk pages of the disputes off my watch list as I believe it is all getting far too heated and frankly my opinions on the matter are not strong enough to continue my involvement with it. Jack forbes (talk) 19:43, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
- And as an American of German and Norwegian ancestry I was branded a Macedonian-nationalist as well as someobne devoid of any knowledge of the issue. ROFL.
- Red Shoe -- why not give it a shot? •Jim62sch•dissera! 20:25, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
- No, I'm honored that two people thought of this, I really am, but no chance. Thanks. man with one red shoe 20:34, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
- Hmmm, I was profiled as a nationalist after I voted on the straw poll at the Greek talk page. I happen to be a Scottish Nationalist which has nothing whatsoever to do with Greek Nationalism or anything Greek for that matter. I have actually taken the talk pages of the disputes off my watch list as I believe it is all getting far too heated and frankly my opinions on the matter are not strong enough to continue my involvement with it. Jack forbes (talk) 19:43, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
Talkback
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Barnstar
Well, it goes up every digit, so the next one is 1,000,000, so far the highest is about 311722. Bugboy52.4 (talk) 21:02, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
Your proposals on Macedonia
They were right on the money. Just one important addition that you should include. Before all other procedures, the name of the main article should be reverted back to where it was. That would be the only neural starting point. Shadowmorph (talk) 13:33, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
FoF
Hi John, even though I think I know what an FoF is, what does FoF stand for? Dr.K. logos 16:16, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
You're BACK!!!!
I'm so so happy. Was just going through the history of Preity Zinta and noticed an edit of someone very familiar. I couldn't believe, and I'm so happy you're back with us. So first, welcome back. And secondly, how do you feel? Shahid • Talk2me 18:09, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
- Thank you. I guess you saw the reversion I did on the 21st on the article. There doesn't seem to have been any real long-term damage as a result of the mugging, so generally OK. There's still a lot of work to do with the various Christian articles, particularly tagging, and that is taking up a lot of time. And ArbCom is always a thrill. So I guess things could be better, but it would probably be a lot less interesting if they were. John Carter (talk) 18:16, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
Could you look
at this: Quicumque vult? Thanks. Athanasius1 (talk) 20:51, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
templates (the adding and removing of them)
User:Jakezing has undone some of my edits that added the WP christianity template and removed the WP LDS movement template. His reason is that he does not believe that the mormon religion is christian, and that the WP LDS movement template would be better suited for the articles. I have referred him to you. I will accept any decision you make. Thanks. LDS-SPA1000 (talk) 22:00, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
Occupation of the Baltic States assistance
Thanks for your help, and outside view. I'm not certain I count as an outside view in the article any longer, despite my efforts to drive things in an NPOV direction. I particularly appreciate the suggestions for how to break the article down. I'll take things down the mediation route now, as it is clear none of the interested parties intend to let me make any changes to the article. Once again, fine effort on your part, and greatly appreciated by me. Hiberniantears (talk) 22:36, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
- With the agreement arrived at from opposite poles that further ArbCom pursuit would not be fruitful, and with the "keep" closure for content split off, I thank you for your thoughtful and considered dialog. I'll be "unwatching" your talk page, as always, please feel free to contact me on mine. Best regards, PetersV TALK 01:58, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
Sigh
Never assume shit about me man, it only pisses me off. Second i didnt read all of that because of rule one of my talk page, and secondly, i also used the fact removing the LDS project tags would take them AWAY from the LDS projects ability despite the fact the LDS is awhat those articles are about. Therefor removing them from a specefic wikiproject and putting them on a mother wiki rpoject for the topic in general is a mistake.--Jakezing (Your King (talk) 22:51, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
Would you be able to keep an eye on this user; as per this thread, he seems to have misunderstood the instructions you gave him and is replacing all instances of {{LDSproject}} with {{WikiProject Christianity}} without either the latter-day-saint-movement=yes qualifier or a separate banner – consequently this is going to dump all the LDS articles into the "generic" pot, which will be of little use to anyone. I'll go through his contributions to date and fix them, but won't be round to keep an eye on him if he continues – and I don't want to block if I can avoid it. – iridescent 22:57, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
Since this section is about me, I guess this is the best place to comment. Concerning the comment you made at WP Panama, what do I do with all of the temples in the U.S.? I am also adding the LDS Work group (part of WP LDS movement) to all temples. However, when I added an importance to the LDS Work group section, it would not show. Could you please look at the Salt Lake temple for an example? Thanks (and sorry for any trouble I have caused you) LDS-SPA1000 (talk) 20:03, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
Do I also add a template for the city that the temple is located in (i.e. Seattle Washington temple, WP seattle). LDS-SPA1000 (talk) 20:12, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
Concern troll
No it doesn't. A personal attack predisposes a person being attacked. My general comment does not refer to any person in particular; it belongs to a summary of the long-term situation.
It can be viewed in another way. Wikipedia has an article on trolls. Does the existence of this article violate the policy of WP:NPA? Most certainly not -- and this holds even though it is, theoretically speaking, possible that some people might uncomfortably recognise themselves when reading this article. ΔιγουρενΕμπρος! 23:42, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
|
The Barnstar of Good Humor | |
| This edit is brilliant! It's unexpected, it's witty, it's recursive -- everything one might seek in a good metajoke. ΔιγουρενΕμπρος! 23:59, 29 April 2009 (UTC) |
Mediation
I've responded to yours on mine. PetersV TALK 00:12, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
The discussion at Talk:Occupation of the Baltic states was bound to go off the rails, considering Hiberniantears' attitude expressed before coming to that page, where he claims "problem is going to be centered on a group of editors who are either nationalist, or just anti-Soviet or anti-Russian, and that these editors are creating the illusion of consensus by way of stonewalling against any other points of view". The problem with this, putting the fallacious stereotyping to one side, is that he refuses to provide any reliable sources to back these other view points that he speaks of. Wikipedia isn't an venue for publishing original research, and as I pointed out to Hiberniantears here, there is a lack off any source material on which to base discussion on the "multiple viewpoints" that Hiberniantears wishes to discuss. Sure, there is the political view of the Russian government (they have yet to release any kind of analysis to support this view), but how much weight do we attach to it? It is already covered in the article. Iran denies the scope of the Holocaust, should we now give equal weight to their viewpoint and claim the Holocaust is the unbalanced work of "a group of editors who are either zionist, or just anti-Palestinian or anti-Iranian"? Martintg (talk) 00:29, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
Joseph and Imhotep
Sorry about that.
I was disturbed about the comments of other editors that the bible is not a reliable source to clarify historical issues even on Biblical Characters.
Some of the Books of the Bible represent the historical records of Israel for that period (eg first and Second Kings, Chronicals). In fact most books of the Bible contain historical information that can often be varified in non biblical literature. There are not many other books of that vintage that have been preserved so well. The bible is primarily a record of God's dealings with man, in particular, Israel in the Old Testament and the Gospels and the Gentiles in Acts and the Epistles. It contains reliable historical information and discusses places, people and events that are mentioned in non biblical manuscripts and heiroglypics.
Obviously, it is necessary to quote the Bible when discussing biblical characters, sites and events. (should it be a note or a reference?)
I understand that a reliable source is required to support any correlation of Biblical Characters with other Historical material.
When editing, can I make changes to the comments of others in articles. Otherwise, how can an article be improved or tidied up?
I suppose it is not fair to do this in a discussion page. But people did it to me first!
Articles are not meant to be discussions and it is not considered good form to put your name in article anyway.
When is a change considered vandalism and when is it not.
For example, my edits of the article on premillennialism were removed and called vandalism.--Drnhawkins (talk) 02:29, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
My article on Joseph and Imhotep was not original research. It has been suggested by many others, most notably Ronn Wyatt who has conducted considerable research on this topic. Wikipedia does not regard him as a reliable source even though his works are being increasingly recognised (Mt Sinai, red sea crossing at Nuweiba, Gulf Aqaba). Now some Israeli Rabbis claimed to have recovered the ark from tunnels under the temple mount and the Israeli government has allowed the Wyatt team to reopen his excavation of calvary. The red material that was analysed and found to be living cellular material with 24 chomosomes turned out to be Chiton of snail origin - so he did not fabricate his findings - he just concluded wrongly as to what it was. This therefore does not invalidated any of his other work.--Drnhawkins (talk) 02:29, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
Can I resubmit the article on Joseph and Imhotep once I have sorted out my references?
--Drnhawkins (talk) 02:29, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia currently does not offer any candidate for the Personage of Joseph in Egyptian history and does not offer any explanation for why he did not make it into Egyptian history. It is therefore unfair to call this article a fringe theory. fringe theories. What is more, this article is not original research original research. I am able to quote original sources of quite some depth. In particular, Ronn Wyatt who conducted a lot of research in Egypt on this very issue. Wikipedia has disallowed them because Wikipedia dose not consider Ron Wyatt to be a reliablereliable source. His discoveries are, however, being increasingly recognised, in particular the site of the red sea crossing and the true Mount Sinai in Arabia. His also claimed to have discovered the Ark of the Covenant in 1982. He was accused of fraud because he could not prove it. His reputation suffered as a result. Now the Israelies claim to have it in there possession and the Israel government has allowed the Wyatt team to reopen Ronn Wyatts explanations of the Calvary escarpment. The brown/red material that Ron Wyatt had analysed and was said to be living cellular material with 23 chromosomes turned out to be chiton - most likely of snail origin. He was not fraudulent, he was just wrong about it being blood. Given the nature of archaeology and science, we all make these type of errors. We propose a hypothesis, we test it and if it is reproducible then we keep the hypothesis until it is disproven and replaced with a better one.--Drnhawkins (talk) 01:52, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
Merci
|
The Original Barnstar | |
| Thanks very much for removing that vandalism from my userpage. I've been having a lot of trouble with that IP range recently. MelicansMatkin (talk) 04:36, 30 April 2009 (UTC) |
Motion request
As I'm not yet a party, I have a request. Since Future Perfect at Sunrise admitted that he communicated off-wiki with ChrisO, their correspondence could provide instrumental evidence for the case. Here I asked him if he would agree - provided that ChrisO agrees also - to post these messages for parties to examine. I understand concerns about privacy, though this is about a Wikipedia entry and not a personal matter. If we don't review the contents of these mails, someone might accuse them of something that they didn't do; even for collaborating with others too. If we do, we could still not be sure if they are forged, but in the spitit of good faith they are acceptable. I believe that this could be a valid request, if everyone involved agrees. SQRT5P1D2 (talk) 12:59, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
Maltzew
Hi John, would Probst Maltzew (see Abda and Sabas), Probst Mayhew (see Menologium der Orthodox-Katholischen Kirche des Morgenlandes) and Provost Alexios Maltzew (see Euchologion#Publication) be the same person? If so would it be helpful to use a consistent spelling, or perhaps create redirects to the latter article? - Fayenatic (talk) 13:05, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
Autograph
Thanks, normally when people sign my Auatograph book, I sign theirs, but leaving you message will do. Thanks, it is nice to be appreciated every once and a while, and if you ever need anything (Mostly about Insects and Jehovah's Witnesses) you know were to find me... well here! Bugboy52.4 (talk) 19:49, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
John, Bugboy has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
- Damërung gave me this, and it says to pass it on to a good friend, so pass it on! Bugboy52.4 (talk) 20:12, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
Talkback
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Reading list on the Baltic states
Hi John, I note you are reading up on the Baltic states, that's commendable. I've added a list here: User_talk:Hiberniantears#Real_world_required_reading_on_the_Baltics. I also have an reasonable collection of books at home, and access to my university library, so if you need assistance tracking material down, give me a yell. Martintg (talk) 05:00, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
You may be interested in this book published just last year which reviews the Baltic question during the Cold War, called, um, "The Baltic question during the Cold War". I've not read the book beyond skimming the preview, but it seems it could be the definitive study of the various viewpoints (including the Russian viewpoint) regarding the Soviet occupation of the Baltics. Martintg (talk) 12:02, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
- Hiden's work on the Baltics is very highly regarded, I'm not familiar with this work, but having read others, I can vouch for their quality and scholarship. His publisher had asked me to review one of his books, here. PetersV TALK 18:10, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Occupation_of_the_Baltic_states
Mentioned you at this ANI thread I opened on myself. Feel free to stay out of it, if you want to, but wanted you to know I had brought up your name. Hiberniantears (talk)
Thanks for thoughtful response
I am not sure about the move, the page might end up at Macedonia (country) or back to the old name, but I think ChrisO explained his reasons and nobody seemed to attack the reasons, most of the people attacked the technicality of the move and, sorry for the word, they bullshit around about the "consensus". As I said before his move is "BOLD" only if you take in consideration the strong POV against the name... But I don't care deeply about the name that it will end up being used for that page, I do care about FYROM name pushing on Greece page which I think is unacceptable because of the NPOV principles. And yes I agree with Fut. Perf. that this move was uninspired especially at the moment. man with one red shoe 17:41, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
RE: Christian films work group
Sure! I'd be happy to grow something together. What should I write about? And how long? Thanks. TheAE talk/sign 18:16, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
- Okay, I'll write something up. TheAE talk/sign 18:45, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
- Here is what I came up with:
| “ | Hello fellow WikiProject Film members! I was recently apart of founding a task force, so this is the story. For several months, I would not only contribute to Christian films, groups, etc., but I'd also see other users working on similar articles. I really wanted to create a project for us to work from. Filmcom contacted me about trying to get a task force going, so we began working together on it. When it appeared the idea was dying, we continued to fight, and several other users joined!
Thanks to the efforts of many users, I'd like to introduce you to the Christian films task force! We are currently having a bot tag all Christian film-related articles, and we are working to define our project scope. We now have our own icon and shortcut (WP:CFTF), with ten users signed out thus far - these are just some of the things that have been happening in the last few days. If you have any interest in joining such a project, we welcome everyone to join and get involved. TheAE talk/sign |
” |
If it's completed opposite of what you were wanting, feel free to discard it or I am willing to redo it. You may also change it, or whatever else goes into writing a newsletter. Tell me what you're thinking. Thanks. :) TheAE talk/sign 19:33, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
- Ahh, good catch. I haven't written "WikiProject Christianity" for awhile, so I didn't have that mindset in writing it. :) Thanks! I've removed the last part of my signature ("sign", etc.), as it wasn't needed. Everything looks good to me! TheAE talk/sign 19:52, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
R Request on arb page
John, This looks like the use of wiki for publicity, since NAMIRI is an 'anonymous' Moroccan company dealing in direct or indirect participation in (financial) operations or enterprises by means of the creation of companies, participation in their set up by in raising capital for existing companies, taking orders to effect such things, like buying stocks, voting rights etc. . .It publicizes itself as virtually ready to engages in any type of economic activity, management, agricultural, commercial, maritime or mining business. It's just an advertisement gives its social capital (a pittance) and its account number in a Moroccan bank. etc. If you want I could translate the lot, but you'd better check with Fayssaf(sp.) who's Moroccan, just to confirm. Best Nishidani (talk) 21:51, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
Project Namespace
Yes. I just want to know how to create a page for the project.Tobit2 (talk) 23:19, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
John. I answered my own question. Thanks for taking an interest.Tobit2 (talk) 23:23, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
Barnstar
|
The Surreal Barnstar | |
| It's for being a cat. Really Username (talk) 21:21, 2 May 2009 (UTC) |
P.S. Please give me a barnstar! Here you will find a well-written essay which will convince you. Do you know how many barnstars I've given out already! If there was a "Barnstar of Barnstar Giving Barnstars" I would have like a million of them. Sorry for using this as an opportunity to beg. --Username (talk) 21:21, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
Thank-you so much! :):):):)--Username (talk) 11:21, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
User page spam
Your user page has come under quite a lot of vandalism lately. I have done my best to revert and report the users involved in it, however, I think semi-protection or full protection of your userpage may be a smart idea. I just wanted to let you know, have a great day. talk ProSpider 23:58, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
- It is semiprotected now, actually. It's one repeated vandal based on User talk:129.2.175.70 who seems to have serious problems. John Carter (talk) 00:00, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
- You may wish to consider filing a checkuser request as well to possibly reveal who the real sockpuppeteer is. There was a CU case once where someone reported a bunch of IP's and were able to reveal the real person responsible. See This sockpuppet case as an example. Momo san Gespräch 00:40, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
Abuse report
Hi, I didn't take any action on the most recent report that you made since they have only been blocked twice, and perhaps the longer block will cause them to reform. If they still keep it up after the block, drop me a note, though I have yet to find Verizon receptive to reports of abuse unfortunately.--Terrillja talk 00:41, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
I created a sockpuppet/checkuser case for you. Your input is needed for the case. Thanks. Momo san Gespräch 00:55, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
New sock User:NedScottPN3142339291
Just added him to the suspected socks list. Looking at the log, this one was a sleeper account. Momo san Gespräch 01:32, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
WikiProject Ghana
WikiProject Ghana is listed as inactive and you are one of its members. Just wanted to let you know. LDS-SPA1000 (talk) 06:13, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
Hi John. Is there any way I can get you to add the rest of the suspected socks that were listed on the ips talk? Synergy 09:55, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
question at User:Warlordjohncarter
Someone left you a message 3 months ago at the above page. Thought you might want to know. LDS-SPA1000 (talk) 17:17, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
- I saw it, thanks. I believe the project was about the Serbian Orthodox Church, and it didn't seem to have enough interested parties to justify it's creation at the time. But thanks for having noticed it. John Carter (talk) 17:21, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
Talkback
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Talkback
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
After the wailing and gnashing of teeth is done
I see that where paths have crossed we hold the similar editors in high esteem. I do hope that after Occupation of the Baltic States settles down our paths will next cross more constructively. PetersV TALK 18:00, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
Request for mediation not accepted
|
A Request for Mediation to which you were are a party was not accepted and has been delisted. You can find more information on the case subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Occupation of the Baltic states.
|
If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.
Talkback
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Talkback
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
WP Polynesia/American Samoa
A vote 16 months ago concerning the merge of WP American Samoa into WP Polynesia was supported by you. Only 2 people voted, both in support. The merge has not yet happened. Just wanted to let you know (because you don't have the time to keep track of everything). LDS-SPA1000 (talk) 23:54, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah, it was merged; it had earlier been Wikipedia:WikiProject American Samoa, it "merged" in as a subproject. But thanks for the reminder. John Carter (talk) 00:00, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
- Sorry, the merge tag was still in place so I assumed that the merge had not happened yet. I have now removed the merge tag. LDS-SPA1000 (talk) 01:35, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
You have mail! Hiberniantears (talk) 14:47, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
Hello
Hey thanks! Dr. Blofeld White cat 09:16, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
I wonder if The Misadventure of a French Gentleman Without Pants at the Zandvoort Beach qualifies for that quirky list you once told me about? Dr. Blofeld White cat 17:23, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
The greatest composition ever made? Dr. Blofeld White cat 18:58, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
Nope. She never blinks either LOL. Dr. Blofeld White cat 20:37, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
Welles
Sorry for trespassing, but you noted that your are from the US, therefore perhaps you would like to comment on this. M.K. (talk) 16:59, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
- Feel free to correct those mistakes. Cheers, M.K. (talk) 17:21, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
Note to self
When you're finished with the portals, work on the Welles declaration. John Carter (talk) 17:23, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks for yours on mine, glad to continue dialog. Historically my talk page has been a spot for working on reconciling editorial differences, all editors welcome. PetersV TALK 18:15, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
- I hope that from my latest post regarding the title you can appreciate that my position is not so much that I'm a recalcitrant nationalist insisting that it's an occupation dammit, but that where portrayal of historical events is concerned, I'm caught between the proverbial rock and a hard place as removing "occupation" from the title opens far more implications and possibilities for inappropriate interpretation than leaving "occupation" in and dealing with the consequences of being perceived as/accused of being a POV-ish title. This has all been going on for years, feel free to respond at your leisure, I'm in no rush. PetersV TALK 19:29, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
- On a related note, seeing who has commented in on the "keep" of the split-off article (I hadn't paid much attention), editors long away from the fray who have pushed the pro-Soviet view in the past have weighed in. I regret being the one to say it, but if "occupation" is removed from this title it will create an onslaught against every article which indicates that after the moment of invasion ("liberation") the Soviets ruthlessly occupied Eastern Europe. (And let's not forget that while Hitler invaded Poland to start WWII, with the Soviets radioing the Luftwaffe to assist, Stalin somehow managed to wind up with 51% of Poland while not being at war.) PetersV TALK 14:38, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
Neutrality of article names
John, I have read your discussion with Vecrumba. I think we are getting to the nub of the matter, the neutrality of article name. The real bone of contention is the duration of the Soviet occupation, not the term "occupation" itself. Nobody disputes the Soviet Union occupied the Baltic states in 1940, but there are differing views in the duration. There is a body of post-Cold War academic work and numerous Western government declarations that supports the view occupation lasted 50 years, while the Russian government declarations supports the view that occupation ended at the conclusion of WW2, both of these view points are covered in the article itself according to weight.
The original name Occupation of the Baltic states makes no claim either way, whereas the current name Occupation of the Baltic states during World War II implies a particular POV that occupation was restricted to WW2, which is clearly more controversial given the yards of prose written about this on the various talkpages. Certainly the title "Occupation of the Baltic states" is the neutral middle ground between "Occupation of the Baltic states during World War II" and "Occupation of the Baltic states (1940-1991)". Martintg (talk) 01:27, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
Re:Project newsletter
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Walter A. Maier Biography rating
John,
Several weeks ago I completed a biography article for Walter Maier, an article which had been rated 'stub' by Wiki Biography, Wiki Christianity, and Wiki Lutheranism. At that time, I requested a reassessment from each of these different Wiki groups, in order to gain an impartial review of what else needed to be done. After all, the article was clearly no longer a stub. You were kind enough to review the article for me, and suggested that I expand the Introductory Section, (I was unaware of the preferred format for this Section,) and that I add additional sources, (I was quite aware that I had depended too much upon a single biographical source, although that source is very well documented.) You rated the article 'B' for Biography and Christianity, but gave no rating for Lutheranism.
I am currently in the process of acquiring and digesting additional information, with the intention of improving the article per your suggestions. (I am finishing Dr. Maier's Book of Nahum, I have acquired the biography of Dr. Maier's mother, etc.) But in the interim, some confusion has apparently arisen; partially due to my unfamiliarity with Wiki protocol, I am certain. Another user came in from Wiki Biography and re-rated the article 'C' in both Biography and Christianity. He offers no suggestions for improvement, and annotates that he is reassessing per my request (a request which had already been satisfied by you.) The new reviewer is 23 years old, has no apparent affiliation with Wiki Christianity, and offers no constructive criticism.
Based upon this sequence of events, my questions to you are: 1. Can a Wiki Biography 'user' overturn a Wiki Christianity 'admin' rating? 2. Would you be comfortable 'reverting' his changes? Or am I opening a 'can of worms' that I would later regret?
I spent over two months researching and writing this 39,000 byte article, and it is complete and accurate, excepting the constructive criticism which you have correctly provided. Please do not make a 'Federal' case out of this, but if you are comfortable reverting, I think your assessment was both fair and accurate.
In either case, thank you for taking the time and effort to perform a helpful evaluation.
Mortalresurrection (talk) 01:47, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
Thanks! I will try to contribute in a fashion adds to the Wikipedia. Mortalresurrection (talk) 01:24, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
More weirdness
You know that wikipedia is developing into something extraordinary when you can write a full and well referenced article about Oliver Cromwell's head. LOL. I've added it to the unusual list. Dr. Blofeld White cat 17:16, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
Cromwell's head. oh you may want to check out AFD for May 8. People have voted unaminously to delete Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Belgium–Ukraine relations ,. I've actually nomated the article for a DYK too.. Dr. Blofeld White cat 15:11, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
You Are So Great
Greetings, oh Great and Brilliant One, I have been sent by Spongefrog to praise and worship you for giving him the Barnstar he so deserved. I have also come to grovel and plead for my own Barnstar (though I probably don’t deserve it) – failing that I wouldn’t mind a little bit of friendly chat about why I don’t deserve a Barnstar. Let me know (also bear in mind I will soon be starting a List of Shame for people who don’t give me Barnstars, and a List of Not-Shame for those who do.)
Thanks,
--ScribbleStick (talk) 21:04, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
The lists were my idea, you know. But I don't mind. It'll make his day if he gets another barnstar. Or at least a message telling him why s/he can't get one.
P.S. Just one more thing... If you don't give him one we'll be forced to move your name from the Non-Shame List to the soon to be created, half-shame list. --Spongefrog (talk) 14:59, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
- Fine. Please perhaps read WP:ISNOT, which indicates that this is primarily about building the encyclopedia, not some form of social networking site. And, for what it's worth, if not bowing to demands for awards is "shameful", I welcome being called that. John Carter (talk) 15:12, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
Redirects to Michael (archangel)
I saw your name on this editor's page, any idea what is going on here? [4]. Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 07:02, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
And this redirect Mary Free. Dougweller (talk) 07:04, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
I am sorry
I am sorry I swear I will never, ever do it ever again. Sorry. Sorry. Please forgive me. I am ashamed of myself. I have learned my lesson. I will become a more constuctive editor and at least 70% of my edits will be articles. Sorry. Thankyou for making me realise my grevious errors (although I will have to move your name).--Spongefrog (talk) 15:10, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
once again i am sorry. --Spongefrog (talk) 15:11, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
i am so sorry i am going to look for a bad article and make it fa class. i am so desperate to say sorry i dont care about capitals or puntuation (by the way, I added your name to the john carter disambig but I'm not sure this is appropriate. remove it if it is necessary).
- [[File:Olive branch.svg|thumb|left|As an apology, I offer you this award, an Olive Branch of Peace. --Spongefrog (talk) 15:33, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
Well it didn't work, but you know what it is.
Please forgive me! I can't leave wikipedia until i know i've been forgiven. I would give you the guidance barnstar but i'm not sure if i should (im not trying to be smart here) :(
I am so sorry I'm considering apologising to Jimbo himself for misuse of his encyclopedia. --Spongefrog (talk) 15:39, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
Smile :)
John Carter, Spongefrog has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing! Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
heres a smile i got from gaia octavia agrippa. I think you are supposed to give them to someone else when you get them so I gave it to you. Spongefrog (talk) 15:29, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
LOOK HERE! (please)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
--ScribbleStick (talk) 22:39, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
List of Created Articles
Hey, me again, I was just looking at the list article you've created and was wondering if there is an easy way to create a list like thi, or do you have to do it all manually.
Thanks,
A Question
Your the only admin I know so I have to ask you. You know how you can change your preferences to know your gender? How does anybody know that you have it set? I know I've not worded it very well, but you get my meaning. By the way, I didn't exactly tell scribblestick to ask for a barnstar, I just indirectly told him to give you lots of praise and fan mail from this page. But I know what you mean. I set a bad example to a new user. --Spongefrog (talk) 12:13, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
Oh, I almost forgot. Thankyou for your merciful forgivveness [sic].
Thanks
Hello. I notice you removed that fake block template from my talk page. Its a little late but thanks. Whats his deal anyway? Hahaha!--Riotrocket8676 You gotta problem with that? 20:15, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
An Arbitration case involving you has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Mattisse/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Mattisse/Workshop.
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, [[Sam Korn]] (smoddy) 08:16, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
- I can answer questions about Ekajati and FAR (I close them nowadays) as required. YellowMonkey (cricket calendar poll!) 01:41, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
WikiProject Christianity Newsletter - May 2009
| The Christianity WikiProject Newsletter | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||||||||
Mattisse
The evidence page said that you would be advocating for Mattisse. If that is so, I thank you for doing that. Ottava Rima (talk) 14:27, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
- By the way, I would like to craft some proposed final decisions with you on this case. We can discuss it here, through email, or whatever other means you suggest. Ottava Rima (talk) 17:13, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
- I'd also like to thank you for agreeing to help Mattisse. I hope your assistance will help her to feel more comfortable and be able to participate more fully. It is important that her concerns are also investigated, so that other editors can either know what to improve on, or be vindicated. Karanacs (talk) 19:54, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
I don't know what to call this
I know I didn't word it well, but what I was asking is how other users can tell what gender you have set. Not that it matters that much, I was just wondering. --Spongefrog (talk) 14:54, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
Bilateral relations
Hello. I was wondering what you think we should do about the continuing problem of people listing the bilateral articles for AFD. Bulgaria–Uzbekistan relations for sintance the same nominator every time claims "no sources exist" yet check the article out now and it has over 30 sources. I just think it is coming to the point that it is getting disruptive having to save them everytime. Can't we come to a formal consensus on whether they ar enotable or not and decide whether all these afds are appropriate?Dr. Blofeld (talk) 15:27, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
Re: Proposed merger of WikiProject Eastern Orthodoxy and WikiProject Oriental Orthodoxy
Hi John Carter. Thanks for letting me know. I have replied in the section that you specified. Cheers, ~ Troy (talk) 21:45, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
Two questions
Hey John, two quick ones - 1) I left a message on my userpage for you somewhere on this page. You didn't answer, were you unable to find it? 2) I left a question on you user page somewhere on this page. You didn't answer, are you still annoyed with me becuase I'm the reason you were removed from the Non-Shame list?
(If you don't answer I'll assume the answer is yes to both)
Evidence
Can you do me a favor and reword this. Comments such as "accompanied with the abusive language that seemingly even the arbitrators have come to expect of him, including repetition of that abusive behavior when he didn't get the almost instantaneous response he seemingly thought was his due, for whatever reason." And "shows once again how Future Perfect has extremely serious problems adhering to even basic civility standards. And, yes, repeated exposure to the ill-tempered demands of this party, both on these pages and my own user page, has caused me to basically want nothing further to do with that party if at all possible...," do nothing other than inflame the situation. Also, they may in fact harm your case in the eyes of the arbitrators. Thanks! KnightLago (talk) 15:07, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
- Also, please try to avoid Future Perfect at Sunrise's talk page for the duration of this case. At this point your commenting there also serves to inflame the situation. Thanks! KnightLago (talk) 15:14, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
- Like I said, I want nothing to do with that person if at all possible ever again. John Carter (talk) 15:17, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
suggestion
This is regarding Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Macedonia_2/Workshop#Future_perfect_be_made_subject_to_civility_restrictions.
Without making a comment on the suitability of the proposed remedy, may I suggest the following reword?
Currently, the proposal reads:
- 5) Future Perfect be made subject to civility probation for a year. During that time, any uninvolved administrator can block him for uncivil conduct, for increasing periods each time, should it come to that. He will also be subject to being banned from content or other pages should he engage in sanctionable activity on that topic twice during that time, with the ban to last for the duration of the original set year.
Here is my suggested rewrite:
- 5) Future Perfect at Sunrise will be subject to civility probation for a period of one year. During that time, any uninvolved administrator may block him for uncivil conduct, escalating the duration if necessary. Future Perfect may also be banned from content or other pages should he engage in uncivil activity on a particular topic twice during the period of his probation. Any such topic ban will last for the balance of the civility probation.
Just a suggestion - the grammar nazi inside of me is having a fit... J.delanoygabsadds 15:36, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
EJC AfD
John, I think you intended for the Articles for Deletion/Ebionite Jewish Community discussion to be posted on WikiProject Christianity, but it is not there. Cheers. --Ovadyah (talk) 19:06, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
Me again, again
Just thought you might like this userbox. Or not. Sorry about all the messages I've posted. --Spongefrog (talk) 20:18, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
Chill please
There's enough going on in ARBMAC2 already. We don't need admins making statements like If Taivo ever managed to get that through his skull...; almost fawning admiration and dedication to ChrisO, your dear friend ChrisO. — Rlevse • Talk • 22:04, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
- So noted. Withdrawing myself completely from it with the exception of one additional change to an existing comment. John Carter (talk) 14:23, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
Hey there!
Hey John,
Let me start off by saying that I’m sorry about how you feel towards the Shame List – it seems to me from how you talk about it that you are annoyed, but whatever you’re feelings they seem strong, so sorry. It really isn’t meant to be that serious. However, I know that no matter how much we discuss it neither of us will get what we want, so I won’t bother you with it again. I am slightly curious though as to whether you would ban people for doing something like this (which isn’t really causing anyone harm), even though we are doing serious work to help Wikipedia. The question you previously answered wasn’t quite what I asked (though close, so the answer is probably the same), but when creating a page of articles that you specifically started, can this be done automatically (does that make more sense?) Also you never answered my question about whether you genuinely believe you have deserved all of your Barnstars, or do you think some of them were given as a bit of fun? I hope we can set aside our differences and work together amicably, --ScribbleStick (talk) 03:20, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
Poetry collaboration
I think you should know
because you're the subject of the posting--Caspian blue 16:02, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
- I'll be the first to agree that Taivo should have posted that email but you sending it didn't help matters either. I implore you to be more careful. — Rlevse • Talk • 21:09, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
- Like I said earlier I can't imagine wanting anything further to do with the case, and actually removed several pages from the watchlist. For what it's worth, I saw this e-mail as basically a follow-up to the first one I sent him a few weeks ago, which I saw appear on the screen when I pulled up some older messages from someone else. His response was the first e-mail I have ever seen which, so far as I remember, basically included his resume in the signature, which very much caught my attention. I have had quite a bit of contact with several academics over the years, including several e-mails, and never seen anything even remotely like that. It did very much strike me at the time as being more than a little strange. And, well, it would be possible for someone to claim having credentials they don't. John Carter (talk) 21:15, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
ArbCom
Really? Three cases at once? Are you a glutton for punishment or just a magnet for drama? In all seriousness, drop me a note if I can help in any way. Athanasius • Quicumque vult 16:29, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah, three cases at once. Trying to actually avoid drama, believe it or not, although in at least one case I have lost any degree of objectivity regarding one of the other parties. Anyway, one is almost over, one is in the final stages, and the other is beginning, so it isn't that much involvement. Not saying I wouldn't rather be doing something else, almost anything else, actually, but, well, sometimes it seems that things just pile up all at once. John Carter (talk) 16:44, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
Hello?
Hi JC,
I know you're busy, but you didn't answer my question yet again (third time now). I want to assume good faith, but its getting slightly suspicious. Oh well. Please read the post headed "Hey There" (about 3-4 above this one). Or just ignore it and I'll get the message eventually...
--ScribbleStick (talk) 18:54, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
- Partially they haven't been responded to because I thought they were, well, not that important. (1) No one, to my knowledge, bans for such possible misuse of user space. (2) If your talking about a list, not page, of articles you've started, no, it can't be done automatically that I know of. I don't have a page of such articles, which was what was confusing me. (3) No, I clearly indicated that I didn't think I earned them all. But there is a serious difference between getting one from someone else unsolicited and trying to solicit for one, whether one deserved it or not. I had never in any way solicited for any of them, so while I don't think I do deserve them all, neither did I go out to try to acquire them just to have them. John Carter (talk) 19:10, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
Taivo on North Cyprus
I’m engaged in a debate with Taivo and ChrisO concerning the use of the terms ‘North Cyprus’ and ‘Northern Cyprus’. They both seem to be ignoring the evidence when it comes to common usage of the term ‘North Cyprus’. A google News search result [5] shows roughly equal usage between the two terms and I simply want the article to reflect that by saying : The Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC)..., commonly called Northern Cyprus or North Cyprus... So, I simply want to add ‘or North Cyprus’. 45,200 news articles [6] use the expression ‘North Cyprus’ but it is being ignored. Some of the sources that use the expression ‘North Cyprus’ are the New York times, The Independent and so on . Just take a quick scan of the google news results [36]. This is supposed to show that the term 'North Cyprus' is commonly used in the mass media. Nothing else. The debate here is about ‘common usage’ not any substantial facts concerning the TRNC. Facts about the TRNC need to be supported by published reliable sources, but the common usage of the term ‘North Cyprus’ is supported by its use in the mass media. The google news results are being ignored by Taivo and ChrisO even though the insistence is about common usage. Here is the article Northern_Cyprus WillMall (talk) 19:18, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
Request for clarification
I was reading back over the comments on the evidence in Mattisse's case and I would like some clarification on what you were referring to when you stated in reference to me, "refusing to directly respond to comments addressed toward her", what, specifically, are the comments I refused to respond to? لennavecia 20:14, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for amending that, and I'm sorry to hear about the news with your family. لennavecia 18:29, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
Laying it on the line
John, the WP:AMA was dismantled quite some time ago. I've been accused of being something of a revival of that process (in a different situation by someone who ought to know better). You resemble it far more closely. Does that advocacy serve Mattisse's best interests? The bottom line is I'm proposing nothing more restrictive than I had already proposed at ANI, which had majority support and which probably would have achieved community consensus if the proposal hadn't been disrupted. If you don't rate that satisfactory, then my honest opinion is someone else will come along with a more restrictive solution which will be adopted. It may or may not happen during this arbitration, but it probably will happen and if so it'll be considerably more stressful. You may continue to debate or not, as you wish. Bear in mind that when one belittles the moderates, extremists may step forward. DurovaCharge! 23:14, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
GA Sweeps invitation
Hello, I hope you are doing well. I am sending you this message since you are listed as a GA reviewer. I would like to invite you to consider helping with the GA sweeps process. Sweeps helps to ensure that the oldest GAs still meet the criteria, and improve the quality of GAs overall. Unfortunately, last month only two articles were reviewed. This is definitely a low point after our peak at the beginning of the process when 163 articles were reviewed in September 2007. After nearly two years, the running total has just passed the 50% mark. In order to expediate the reviewing, several changes have been made to the process. A new worklist has been created, detailing which articles are left to review. All exempt and previously reviewed articles have already been removed from the list. Instead of reviewing by topic, you can consider picking and choosing whichever articles interest you.
We are always looking for new members to assist with the remaining articles, so if you are interested or know of anybody that can assist, please visit the GA sweeps page. In addition, for every member that reviews 100 articles or has a significant impact on the process, s/he will get an award when they reach that threshold. If only 14 editors achieve this feat starting now, we would be done with Sweeps! Of course, having more people reviewing less articles would be better for all involved, so please consider asking others to help out. Feel free to stop by and only review a few articles, something's better than nothing! Take a look at the list, and see what articles interest you. Let's work to complete Sweeps so that efforts can be fully focused on the backlog at GAN. If you have any questions about the process, reviewing, or need help with a particular article, please contact me or OhanaUnited and we'll be happy to help. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 07:38, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
Note
Hey john, I heard through the grapevine about your loss. Please know that your famiy is in my prayers. Requiem in pacem. The souls of the righteous are in the hands of God ... they are at peace. Athanasius • Quicumque vult 20:09, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
- I heard this too from different discussions in the wiki. Dear John, please accept my condolences. Everything (including Wikipedia) is by far secondary compared to this. I will leave you in peace and never bother you again for insignificant matters.--Avg (talk) 02:00, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
The Full Armor of God Broadcast
Please help save this article, John. I realize that The Full Armor of God Broadcast is not a mainstream Christian Music Industry marketed show and as such has not achieved as much of a high profile level of notability as other corporately funded entities, but that is exactly what makes this show so unique. The show truly has acheived a commendable level of notability in that it has gotten as popular as it has with absolutely NO COPORATE BACKING! That is what makes it truly a cinderella story. You can be the final say on any and all future changes to this article. Please help save this article. You can contact The Full Armor of God Ministry 740.205.6117 173.88.28.69 (talk) 23:34, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
Full Armor of God Broadcast
- Comment Full Armor of God Broadcast is facing deletion. Any advice, assistance or help would be much appreciated! Help represent NON-SELLOUT Christian Metal!! Help The Full Armor of God Broadcast keep giving the devil a blackeye on Wikipedia!Ivanhoe610fa (talk) 03:39, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
Malay Theory
John, someone deleted the Malay Theory article that we have been discussing. I didn't get a copy of the Malay Theory work so far. Is there a way to get a copy so I can add the info to the other locations you mention? Reds0xfan (talk) 17:19, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
Happy John Carter's Day!
 |
John Carter has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian, Cheers, If you'd like to show off your awesomeness, you can use this userbox. |