Talk:Jesuit vocation

This looks as if it has been copied directly from a Jesuit publication Ulysses54 10:38, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

The content for this page comes directly from the head of Jesuit vocations in Australia. So it may well be that some of it comes from a Jesuit publication, given that he is a jesuit. does that mean it is not valid content? I don't think so. It means it is accurate.Jamesmassola 10:38, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Once the copyright violations and obviously non-neutral material have been removed there's almost nothing left in this article. What little there is, is much better covered in Society of Jesus so I'm redirecting it there. andy 08:26, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

What I was trying to say above is that there have been NO copyrright violations as this material has come directly FROM the society of Jesus. All of the information is correct. All of it. And how is the material non-neutral? What evidence of this is there? Furthermore, the material is not better covered in Society of Jesus, as this page does not provide any detailed information at all on whhat a jesuit vocation is. Why deplete the depth of wikipedia by removing useful content? This is discrimination against the Society of Jesus!Jamesmassola 10:38, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Please do not delete other people's talk page comments. I have restored the page to its previous state. andy 13:02, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Andy, I'm not sure if this is the right way to message you, so apologoies if im putting this in the wrong spot. '''First of all, I did not delete some else's comments, I deleted a NAME from one of my own comments, for reasons of privacy, at the request of the person in question. PLEASE DO NOT PUT THIS NAME BACK IN.''' Please at least show this much respect.

Secondly, you deleted an entire article in a gung ho fashion, and you totally ignored my comments on why it should not be deleted. You seem to have a history of doing this. Please re-consider your position, and please READ MY COMMENTS. I work as a professional writer and editor. Changes such as yours make me think I am wasting my time contributing to wikipedia. Jamesmassola 13:30, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Please see my reply on your talk page. andy 14:12, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I agree with Andy on this one, it's a copyright violation and a how-to, both of which are frowned upon. --AW 15:25, 2 October 2007 (UTC)