User talk:Brennen

= general stuff =

I don't edit much these days.

I'll generally reply to posts on the original page so as to keep discussion all in one place - let me know if you'd prefer something else.


 * User_talk:Brennen/Bill Ritter - Some archived argument/discussion stemming from Bill Ritter (politician).

Lutherans Leaving...
I can provide a lot of documentation to the effect that Lutheranism has historically seen itself as never having left the church. After all, I am a Lutheran pastor and work at a Lutheran seminary. I do not want to get into a very big debate over the subject. The paragraph was deeply biased and I do not see where the information is at all new, in light of the lead of the article.

Frankly, its been a long time since I've looked at this article. It is now a very big mess. Rather than microedit it, I'd prefer to punt the whole article and start over using, say, Encarta's Lutheranism article as a model as to what detail to include. We also should consider the summary style recommended by the Feature Article folk. There already is a beginning to an article on the Five Hundred year history of Lutheranism. --CTS Wyneken (talk) 22:02, 8 December 2006 (UTC)


 * If you want to try a new version of the paragraph, that's fine. I grant that you mean no disrespect. Please take into account that I'm a bit irritated that someone doesn't wish the article to say Lutherans believe in infant baptism. Please also take into account that one person's too close is another's expertise. So, for example, I do not know of a single text from a Lutheran of the sixteenth century that maintains Luther left the Church. If you know of one, kindly provide the reference. I'm not doubting that you have a Lutheran background, but simply because you've belonged to a Lutheran Church does not mean that you are correct on a historical point. For instance, most Lutherans think that the 95 Theses were a document of Luther's mature theology... --CTS Wyneken (talk) 08:36, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I suspect as much. If the person wants to put in something about (Ana)baptist objections to the Lutheran view and can write it neutrally with citation, I do not have a problem with it, although it fits better in the Infant Baptism article. --CTS Wyneken (talk) 19:49, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

New Year
Hey. It's a new year, and I felt a little bad for going off like I did in the debate we had over at Ritter. I wanted to drop by and offer peace in the new year, hoping maybe we could burry the hatchet. I'm not saying that what you or I said in the heat of the moment was OK, but I want to clear things up for a better working environment. What'ya say? Even? Editor19841 (talk) 01:43, 4 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Fair enough. I'm willing to try for a more civil conversation in future, whatever the issue. Brennen 21:29, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Lutheranism Project
The Project page is up and running (bare bones at least). Come on by and sign up if you are still interested. -- Pastordavid 19:55, 21 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the invite. I've added my name - don't have a lot of time for Wikipedia stuff right now, but I'll chip in where I can. Brennen 22:13, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Lutheranism
The WikiProject Lutheranism Collaboration Project is under way. Please help improve this month's article, or make a suggestion for next month's article. To add the collaboration banner to your userpage or talk page, use Lutheran COTM. -- Pastordavid 19:32, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Barnstars
Please stop by and give your opinion on the two proposed barnstars for WikiProject Lutheranism. Pastor David † (Review) 18:29, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

You maybe interested in the Article Rescue Squadron


I notice that you are part of Category:Inclusionist_Wikipedians. I would like you to consider joining the Article Rescue Squadron. Rescue Squadron members are focused on rescuing articles for deletion, that might otherwise be lost forever. I think you will find our project matches your vision of Wikipedia.

Ikip (talk) 00:48, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Martin Bucer up for Featured Article Review
I just wanted to let you know that you can cast your vote of "support" or "oppose" to the Martin Bucer article as a potential featured article at Featured_article_candidates/Martin_Bucer. Thanks! --Epiphyllumlover--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 21:44, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Notification: changes to "Mark my edits as minor by default" preference
Hello there. This is an automated message to tell you about the gradual phasing out of the preference entitled "Mark all edits minor by default", which you currently have (or very recently had) enabled.

On 13 March 2011, this preference was hidden from the user preferences screen as part of efforts to prevent its accidental misuse (consensus discussion). This had the effect of locking users in to their existing preference, which, in your case, was. To complete the process, your preference will automatically be changed to  in the next few days. This does not require any intervention on your part and you will still be able to manually mark your edits as being 'minor'. The only thing that's changed is that you will no longer have them marked as minor by default.

For established users such as yourself there is a workaround available involving custom JavaScript. If you are familiar with the contents of WP:MINOR, and believe that it is still beneficial to the encyclopedia to have all your edits marked as such by default, then this discussion will give you the details you need to continue with this functionality indefinitely. If you have any problems, feel free to drop me a note.

Thank you for your understanding and happy editing :) Editing on behalf of User:Jarry1250, LivingBot (talk) 20:24, 14 March 2011 (UTC)