User talk:AQ-q7z8DGvEpyYKe

can you help me
can you help me with this page. I am disagreeing with Fides Viva about the neutrality of Willow Creek Community Church article, and I saw that you did some work on it, I was hoping you could be another voice in this discussion. check it out on the talk page. thanks --Mshuflin 21:32, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
 * I don't really want to take sides, but I stand by the NPOV tag. Perhaps it should have been a "This article is a battlefield" tag. I myself have introduced very little content, but rather have been trying to tone down content introduced by people on either side of the argument. I can feel the sparks, and I feel like a moderator. I don't really want this role, as it can be quite emotionally taxing. However, the Willow Creek article is the only one on my watchlist, precisely because it seems to need constant moderation. Rather than hacking away strong viewpoints, try to bring the two sides into balance with each other.


 * In reference to the "Quality" tag, I think that the article is largely a set of disparate parts. It needs rewriting to tie the parts together, extensive restructuring and editing to unify the voice. Also, strong POV along the lines of a polemic rant, though fortunately confined mostly to the talk page, is a problem from BOTH SIDES. Please please PLEASE be civil; I don't want to see blood on this article. --John Hupp 22:54, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Modify content
Greetings Mr. Hupp. Please be careful when changing content from Wikipedia pages. That is considered a violation of Wikiquette. Steven McCrary 23:18, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
 * I am sorry about causing offense with the Willow Creek talk page. I did not mean to "remove" your entry, but rather to tie it to the thread to which it belonged. I find it disorienting when people create new headings for statements which are part of an existing talk page conversation. The mediation request by User:Mshuflin dealt specifically with the conflict between him and User:Fides_Viva, not with the article as a whole. Therefore, your reference did not belong under its own heading, but rather under a subheading of that conversation. I know that modification of content by other users in a talk page is poor etiquette, but I did not think that modifying structure, at least when done subtlely, was cause for offense, as no other user has yet complained about my introduction of conventional threading indentation into the Willow Creek talk page. Do not accuse me of "changing content", as content is distinct and separate from structure. However, I will carefully review the Wikipedia Etiquette guide to inform my future edits.--John Hupp 00:21, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Gray Powell article nominated for deletion
Nominated for deletion at Articles for deletion/Gray Powell AkankshaG (talk) 00:40, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

"NeoCon" listed at Redirects for discussion
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect NeoCon. The discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 May 9 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. p b  p  21:24, 9 May 2020 (UTC)