User talk:Batman1973

June 2009
I have reverted your tag as it is not appropriate, nor have the instructions been followed. But before you continue an edit war, please stop for a moment - why, in your opinion, is the article POV? It clearly states that most Latter Day Saint groups use the original JSJr. text. That would include everyone from the Restoration Branches in Missouri to small Utah splinter groups. The only reason the Mormons are specifically mentioned is due to the fact that they appear to be the only group that canonized it, but readers need to be aware that they edited it from the Smith original. If your edits were able to stand, then every group associated with JSJr. would want to be included in the article. I certainly am aware that the branches use what the RLDS used to refer to as the EofF, but surely this fact needs to be in an article about that group, not this article. In either case, please discuss the issues at the article's talk page before continuing to insert the tag with no explanation. Best, A Sniper (talk) 04:29, 3 June 2009 (UTC) That Shouldn't matter. The origianl edits I made listed several groups. Therefore, the neutrality of the article needs to be disputed until fairness is acheived, and not just a Mormon only stance. I'm guessing that appealing this to Wikipedia will be the way to resolve this, since you seem bound and determined to keep this article Mormon only.
 * Do as you feel is necessary. However, not only were your edits unnecessary, but they didn't follow the format of the page either. In addition, your tag states that discussion needs to take place at the Talk Page, which you haven't initiated. By the way, the article isn't Mormon only - it clearly adheres to Wikipedia NPOV by stating, on the one hand, that many Latter Day Saint denominations use JSJr.'s original statement on faith, but on the other the Mormons have canonized an edited version. It even compares the original with Cowdery's version. So demonstrate via the Talk Page how you think excluding one small group, or a link (to the centerplace site, which happens to be a favorite of mine personally, by the way), pushes the article into POV. THAT is what the folks at the Administrators message board would investigate. Best, A Sniper (talk) 06:03, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
 * By the way: I removed one reference to the Mormon church to further the NPOV. Best, A Sniper (talk) 06:05, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

After Careful consideration, and prayer, I've decided to cease contention on the matter, as The LORD told the Nephites in 3rd Nephi:And there shall be no disputations among you, as there hath hitherto been; neither shall there be disputations among you concerning the points of my doctrine, as there hath hitherto been; For verily, verily I say unto you, He that hath the spirit of contention, is not of me, but is of the devil, who is the father of contention, and he stirreth up the hearts of men to contend with anger one with another; Behold, this is not my doctrine, to stir up the hearts of men with anger one against another; but this is my doctrine, that such things should be done away. (3Nephi 5:29-31 RLDS)I aplogize if I seemed out of line, as a Restoration RLDS, I feel things that are common to both LDS and RLDS should not be dominated by one faith, but open to all.-Batman1973
 * I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you, which is why I took away an unneeded reference to the LDS. I know it is difficult sometimes because we're all writing an encyclopedia and not something faith-based - I have to remember this myself when editing the JSJr.. page or any of the various pages on polygamy - I sometimes get very frustrated but in the end have to go with the NPOV. All the best, A Sniper (talk) 23:36, 5 June 2009 (UTC)