User talk:Drboisclair/Archive07/

Lutheranism
Thank you for your edits to Lutheranism. When I originally change the word "are" to "become" was to avoid the assumption that this is the case at the time they are placed on the alter. Your edit "the consecrated elements of bread and wine are the true body and blood of Christ "in, with, and under the form" of bread and wine for all those who eat and drink it" is much better. Thank you. Dbiel (Talk) 20:00, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
 * You are welcome. It seems like much hinges on one word, a word that is heavily attested in ancient eucharistic liturgy ("that they may become for us the body and blood of Christ"), but for Lutherans "become" is Transubstantiation language.--Drboisclair 20:13, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

The Novels WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XIV - July 2007
The July 2007 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 17:04, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Shakespeare Collaboration
The Shakespeare Wikiproject is starting another collaboration to bring Romeo and Juliet to GA status. Our last collaboration on William Shakespeare is still in progress, but in the copyedit stage. If you have strong copyedit skills, you may wish to continue the work on that article. Members with skills in other areas are now moving on. Improving Romeo and Juliet article will set a standard for all other Shakespeare plays, so we look forward to seeing everyone there. Thanks for all your help with the project. Wrad 20:42, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Image:Brother_Martin.gif listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Brother_Martin.gif, has been listed at Images and media for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Nv8200p talk 13:04, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Image:Bull_against_Luther.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Bull_against_Luther.jpg, has been listed at Images and media for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Nv8200p talk 13:04, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

The Novels WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XV - August 2007
The August 2007 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 14:04, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Constructive
I, of course, welcome constructive commentary and criticism about my essay. However, your comment was not particularly helpful and has been removed. If you'd like to say something more substantive, please feel free to do so. --Eyrian 18:05, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Removing comments from talk pages is bad form here. It squelches the free interchange of ideas here in a place where it should be kept.--Drboisclair 18:11, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Harry Potter roll-call
Hi there. Your username is listed on the WikiProject Harry Potter participants list, but we are unsure as to which editors are still active on the project. Your name has therefore been moved to a "potentially inactive" list. If you still consider yourself an active WikiProject Harry Potter editor, please move your name from the Potentially inactive list to the Active Contributors list. You may also wish to add  to your userpage, if you haven't done so already. Conversely, if you do not wish to be considered a member of the WikiProject, leave your name where it is and it will be moved to the Inactive Contributors section. If you wish to make a clean break with the Project you may move your name to the Known to have left section. Many thanks.

Shakespeare project - New collaboration debate
The Shakespeare project's first collaboration has ended in success, with William Shakespeare reaching FA status! Congrats to all who chipped in! We also had success in our second collaboration Romeo and Juliet, which is now a GA. Our next step is deciding which article to collaborate on next. Please join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Shakespeare to help us choose. Thanks. Wrad 04:03, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Hamlet
The Shakespeare Project's new collaboration is now to bring Hamlet to GA status. Wrad 00:35, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

NOR
There has been a big debate over this policy. I think you have valuable experience that makes you an important interlocutor on this matter. I suggest you forst go here for a very concise account, and then depending on how much time you have read over the WP:NOR policy and the edit conflicts that led to its being protected, or the last talk to be archived ... or just go straight to the talk page. Slrubenstein  |  Talk 16:00, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you for alerting me to these matters: I appreciate your valuing my input on this website, cordially, --Drboisclair 17:21, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

You are welcome - whatever your input, I know it will be thoughtful. I think the discussion could benefit from editors who have worked on controversial articles and who also understand the range of sources one might rely on in research, and the challenges different kinds present. Slrubenstein  |  Talk 17:24, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

The Novels WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XVI - September 2007
The September 2007 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 09:26, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

The Novels WikiProject Newsletter - Issue XVII - October 2007
The October 2007 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot -- 09:32, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Hey there
Hey there. I miss you. What have you been up to lately? Arch O. La  Grigory Deepdelver  18:10, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Polytonic template
For me the problem of polytonic characters in Wikipedia has been solved today. Though I appealed to two people, at least one of whom has the rank of Administrator, to do something about the display problem, the change may have nothing to do with them. I think it is more likely that it came about because of my updating today to Internet Explorer version 7. (I should have done so months ago.) For me, polytonic text now displays perfectly on Wikipedia. It does so even without adding "". (This will spare me a lot of labour.) The characters displayed are no longer in Palatino Linotype, as before, but appear just like Greek letters not placed within the polytonic template. I am curious to know whether you still have a problem with viewing Greek polytonic characters on Wikipedia. Try looking up Nicene Creed. Lima 15:02, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for confirming that the change that I have found is related with the change of (free) Internet browser. As for the Apostles' Creed in Greek, I simply do not know.  I think you are better placed than I am to find out whether the Greek text is only a translation of the Latin text.  I think the present Latin text is said to be the relatively late result of a long development; well then, if the Greek text is exactly the same as the present Latin text - as I remember it, it is exactly the same - then I suspect it is in fact just a translation, and no more significant than a translation into English.  But, as I said, I am leaving the study of it to you.  Lima 19:59, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
 * On my Talk page you will find Csernica's explanation of why the polytonic template was not working for us since last December, and how to remedy the problem that since then has affected the IE6 browser. Lima 09:33, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:The Deerslayer.png
Thanks for uploading Image:The Deerslayer.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 20:45, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:The Pioneers.png
Thanks for uploading Image:The Pioneers.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 23:46, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:The Prairie book cover.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:The Prairie book cover.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 23:54, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

I hope I have addressed these concerns.--Drboisclair 02:43, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Happy Halloween!
As Halloween is my favorite holiday, I just wanted to wish my twenty favorite fellow Wikipedians a Happy Halloween! Sincerely, -- Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles Tally-ho! 04:05, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

The Novels WikiProject Newsletter - Issue XVIII - November 2007
The November 2007 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot -- 15:28, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Happy Thanksgiving!
I just wanted to wish my fellow Wikipedians a Happy Thanksgiving! Sincerely, -- Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles Tally-ho! 16:53, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

The Brotherhod of the Bell
Greetings. Super job on the plot and expanding the intro section. I had run out of resources and I believe the film is difficult to locate. I'm glad I found a screenshot of the film. Warm regards, Luigibob (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 00:57, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

The Novels WikiProject Newsletter - Issue XIX - December 2007
The December 2007 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by KevinalewisBot -- 11:06, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Joyeux Noël
I just want to wish my fellow Wikipedians a Merry Christmas! Sincerely, -- Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles Tally-ho! 21:45, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Happy Holiday season from Luigibob
Sorry that it has taken so long to get back to you. As they say, "My bad."

Thank you VERY MUCH for the gesture re Brotherhood of the Bell. It is very thoughtful of you. Yes, I accept your kind offer. I will send you my addy via email. I've been busy adding film noir and cinematographer articles, including a foreign film here and there. Have a super New Year!!!

new article
Would you consider contributing to this? Slrubenstein  |  Talk 01:31, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Great! AAnd it is good to hear from you - Happy New Year! Slrubenstein  |  Talk 16:31, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Can you comment on this discussion? Slrubenstein  |  Talk 20:16, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

The Novels WikiProject Newsletter - Issue XX - January 2008
The January 2008 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by KevinalewisBot -- 13:17, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Image:Michael Burns PhD.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Michael Burns PhD.jpg, has been listed at Images and media for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted.  JGHowes talk  -  06:36, 13 January 2008 (UTC)


 * $\color{Red} \oplus$You should add your explanation at the image deletion discussion here; although, generally speaking, images from an unknown website are also likely to be deleted due to uncertain copyright status.  JGHowes talk  -  20:10, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Introduction to The Last of the Mohicans
I've asked you a question here, about your Wikisource contribution. John Vandenberg (talk) 06:54, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

The Novels WikiProject Newsletter - Issue XXI - February 2008
The February 2008 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by KevinalewisBot --10:51, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Re Brotherhood
Just got your DVD. You are such a nice person  Thank you..... Since I have your mail, I'll send you something as well.... my best --- Luigibob (talk) 01:19, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Image:Cranach_portrait_of_Luther.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Cranach_portrait_of_Luther.jpg, has been listed at Images and media for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Nv8200p talk 03:52, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * If you have to delete it, delete it.--Drboisclair (talk) 21:47, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:Crucifixion.gif
Thanks for uploading Image:Crucifixion.gif. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Fair use, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following [ this link]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 11:55, 5 March 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Nv8200p talk 11:55, 5 March 2008 (UTC)


 * If you have to delete it, delete it.--Drboisclair (talk) 21:47, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

The Novels WikiProject Newsletter - Issue XXII - March 2008
The March 2008 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This is an automated delivery by KevinalewisBot --16:21, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Long term relationship
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Long term relationship, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add  to the top of Long term relationship. Golgofrinchian (talk) 16:55, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:Early_Martin_Luther_woodcut.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Early_Martin_Luther_woodcut.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Fair use, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following [ this link]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 02:18, 12 March 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Nv8200p talk 02:18, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Novels - 1st Coordinators Election
An election has been proposed and has been set up for this project. Description of the roles etc., can be found at WikiProject Novels/Coordinators. If you wish to stand, enter your candidacy before the end of March and ask your questions of anyone already standing at WikiProject Novels/Coordinators/May 2008. Voting will start on the 1st April and close at the end of April. The intention is for the appointments to last from May - November 2008. For other details check out the pages or ask. KevinalewisBot (talk) 12:37, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

wikisource needs you
We have two candidates for CU on Wikisource, and we need to accumulate 25 votes in favour in order to be approved. While I am one of the candidates, I dont mind whether you vote for or against me; this note is just to ensure that you know that as you are a serious contributor to Wikisource, and we dont have many, your input is desirable at this stage. John Vandenberg (talk) 06:56, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:Father_Hans_Luther.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Father_Hans_Luther.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Fair use, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following [ this link]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 14:10, 23 March 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Nv8200p talk 14:10, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Book of Concord edits
No problem! I like to help. This is an encyclopedia, not an outline. Keep up the good work! --Rekleov (talk) 00:34, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

The Novels WikiProject Newsletter - Issue XXIII - April 2008
John Carter (talk) 19:01, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Image:Golem of It!.jpg
The image Golem of It!.jpg of which you downloaded is under the wrong license, it should be under TV screenshots not Own work, as you only took a picture of the TV, not made the film. – ThatWikiGuy (talk) 10:59, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
 * It's now under the correct license. – ThatWikiGuy (talk) 11:07, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Christianity
Hello !

You are receiving this invitation because you are a member of one of the related Christianity Projects and I thought that you might be interested in this project also - Tinucherian (talk) 06:51, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

HELP US MAKING THE PROJECT OF ANCIENT GREEK WIKIPEDIA
We are the promoters of the Wikipedia in Ancient Greek. we need your help, specially for write NEW ARTICLES and the TRANSLATION OF THE MEDIAWIKI INTERFACE FOR ANCIENT GREEK, for demonstrating, to the language subcommittee, the value of our project.

Thanks a lot for your help. Ἡ Οὐικιπαιδεία needs you! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.40.197.5 (talk) 19:55, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for all that work on The Snow Queen!
I had added cleanup of the article to my to-do list, and then you did most of the work for me. Thanks, I feel that it's a much better article now. Aylad ['ɑɪlæd] 00:55, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you! I think that you have done a good service in looking over the article and refining the ore into sterling.--Drboisclair (talk) 13:09, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

The Novels WikiProject Newsletter - Issue XXIV - May 2008
The May 2008 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. SteveCrossinBot (talk) 07:56, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Christianity Newsletter
Thanks for the nice note on my talk page!! --Npnunda (talk) 23:40, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Book of Concord
Regarding this, don't bother filing a report. I went ahead and semi-protected it for one month. Good to hear from you. Pastordavid (talk) 01:42, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Image:WA 53 475.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:WA 53 475.jpg, has been listed at Images and media for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. SkierRMH ( talk ) 05:48, 21 May 2008 (UTC) ... as well as the other images in this series SkierRMH ( talk ) 05:48, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Please delete them all since they are from a project that was discontinued long ago. Thank you for letting me know.--Drboisclair (talk) 15:40, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Image:Golem of It!.jpg looks OK, I added the 2nd article. SkierRMH  ( talk ) 05:27, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Formal and material principles of theology
This is not a topic that I am deeply informed about, so I will have to do some reading to catch myself up before I dive into editing. That said, the reliance on one source always worries me, and I would strive to bring in a wider range of sources (not for their own sake, but for the wider perspective). And, at the outset, the merge seems intuitive - unless someone can right quality articles for them seperately (a bridge we can cross later). Well done, as always. Oh, and by the way, since there are far too few of these around, and you definately deserve it ...


 * I hate to say, but I agree with your friends profs. The fact is, our coverage of church history and Christian theology are shoddy at best.  There are some great exceptions to this trend out there, but they are too few and far behind.  May I offer this work-in-progress collaboration/work group as something that may help.  We could sure use your input on it. Pastordavid (talk) 17:01, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Image:WA 53 426.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:WA 53 426.jpg, has been listed at Images and media for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. BJBot (talk) 01:50, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, please delete it without delay because the project for which it was downloaded is defunct.--Drboisclair (talk) 11:30, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

The Novels WikiProject Newsletter - Issue XXV - June 2008
The June 2008 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. SteveBot (owner) 00:26, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Ptmccain sockpuppet case
Thought you may find this interesting and want to comment. . --Npnunda (talk) 04:58, 22 June 2008 (UTC)


 * An Admin has protected Book of Concord again. Regards. --Npnunda (talk) 23:15, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Martin Luther's views on Mary
You might want to lend your expertise to Martin Luther's views on Mary and Protestant views of Mary. --Fl e x (talk/contribs) 14:08, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Martin Luther's views on Mary
Hi, we seem to collaborate on Luther’s views. I created this and other articles on Calvin – Zwingli is in the making – as a part of a series on Marian views of Protestant reformers. Related articles forthcoming are Calvinist views on Mary, which incorporates a number of lesser known writers, and, much later, Lutheran views on Mary, equally including less known authors and documents. All this is an ongoing process, as you see from my most recent additions to Luther and Calvin, who by now exceeds in size and content the page, some like to merge him to. -:))

I really appreciate your improvement in the Luther page. The page reads much better thanks to your considerable work. This is a nice subject, if you have any suggestions to me regarding content on any of these topics, kindly let me know. Thank’s--Ambrosius007 (talk) 09:28, 3 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Thank you, Drboisclair, I appreciated your reply. What do you think about adding your information on these results as a new section ? It would lift the article from the past to the present.  I am presently working on several "smaller fish", but very interesting ones, contemporaries of ML or later ones within this timeframe. Do you know Jacob Böhme? -:)) A little unusual but fascinating. All these fellows together make up the Reformation and together give a much better insight to me, than looking at ML or JC alone. Impressive is each strenght of conviction. Pope Pius IV said of them: "If I had such servants, my dominion would extend from sea to sea".  --Ambrosius007 (talk) 18:07, 3 July 2008 (UTC)


 * In my own defense, I nominated the pages for merger based on their earlier form. I have seen that many edits have gone into them since then, but I've not had a chance to revisit them. They may indeed not be merge-worthy any more. --Fl e x (talk/contribs) 17:38, 3 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Another book that you both might find useful is Reforming Mary: Reforming Mary: Changing Images of the Virgin Mary in Lutheran Sermons of the Sixteenth Century. See the relevant quotations I gave at Talk:Protestant_views_of_Mary, but the author covers plenty more in the book. (Apparently, Ambrosius007 no longer acknowledges my talk since I have received no reply there or in the subsequent section despite his regular edits and discussion with others.) --Fl e x (talk/contribs) 21:20, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Happy Independence Day!
As you are a nice Wikipedian, I just wanted to wish you a happy Independence Day! And if you are not an American, then have a happy day and a wonderful weekend anyway! :) Your friend and colleague, --Happy Independence Day!   Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles  Tally-ho! 21:36, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Christianity WikiProject Newsletter - July 2008
This Newsletter was automatically delivered by TinucherianBot (talk) 08:12, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Why did you remove?
I didn't remove the "Christianity Portal" templates from Apostles' Creed and Athanasian Creed. Acording to the Manual of Style, Portal boxes are belong to go under "See also." --Carlaude (talk) 21:37, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I should have looked at it more closely.--Drboisclair (talk) 21:40, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Romeo and Juliet collaboration
Greetings! The current Shakespeare Project Collaboration is Romeo and Juliet. This project is currently going a thorough peer review and copyedit before moving on to FAC. The link to the peer review is Peer review/Romeo and Juliet/archive1. Have a look! «  Diligent Terrier  Bot    (talk)   20:45, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Romeo and Juliet collaboration
Greetings! The current Shakespeare Project Collaboration is Romeo and Juliet. This project is currently going a thorough peer review and copyedit before moving on to FAC. The link to the peer review is Peer review/Romeo and Juliet/archive1. Have a look! «  Diligent Terrier  Bot    (talk)   20:46, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Martin Luther
Please tell me how it messes up the sources by removing that "source" and what is it sourcing?Theology10101 (talk) 13:50, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
 * You removed the formula (ref=?), which is used later in the references for other times that this source is used. You also seem to be saying that it is not a valid source for what Luther says.--Drboisclair (talk) 19:26, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
 * What I said is, "That citation had nothing to do with the titles of Luther." Which is very very accurate and glad to see you removed it. The only thing I'm trying to do is to make these articles clean, accurate, and professional. In addition what I removed, as you can look in the changes, was a perfect modification and it didn't effect any other sources. Please look closer to these edits and any comments before you start reverting people's modifications. Plus there's hundreds of other sources for the title "Father of Protestantism" and is not in any way inaccurate. Theology10101 (talk) 21:12, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Ptmccain
I think you did the right thing by requesting citations on the Luther Bible article. He more just changed it then deleting info. I did another sockpuppet case and the admin's did a six month block on Book of Concord this time. Looks like they are about as sick of the vandalism as we are. Thanks for your help!! --Npnunda (talk) 00:12, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your thorough attention to this matter: I think it is only fair to the editors this banned editor abused.--Drboisclair (talk) 00:36, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

The Great Divorce
Please state where "purgatory" is used in the novella and where you discovered that Lewis believed in purgatory. Lewis was a protestant, I am not. Please do not assume such things, it makes an ASS of U and ME. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Waynercook (talk • contribs) 05:11, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Just because the word is not used does not mean that elements of the concept are not used. He may not have believed in Purgatory, but some of the concepts are in the novella.--Drboisclair (talk) 14:01, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Calling all active WP:NOVELS members
 WikiProject Novels Roll Call WikiProject Novels is currently holding a roll call, which we hope to have annually. Your username is listed on the members list, but we are unsure as to which editors are still active within the project. If you still consider yourself an active WP:Novels editor, please add your name back to the Active Members list. Also feel free to join any of our task forces and take a look at the project's Job Centre to get involved!

Next month we will begin the coordinator election selection process. We hope to have more involvement and input this time around! More news will be forthcoming. Thanks, everyone! María ( habla con migo ) 15:19, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Novels Newsletter - September 2008
This newsletter was automatically delivered by TinucherianBot (talk) 14:40, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

CfD nomination of Category:Films titled "It"
Category:Films titled "It", which you created, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. – Good Ol’factory (talk) 04:55, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Original blessing
I have nominated Original blessing, an article you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/Original blessing. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. ScienceApologist (talk) 21:15, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * How is an expert on Science also an expert on theology?--Drboisclair (talk) 21:33, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

AfD issues
There is a consolidation that I am attempting with a sprawling walled garden associated with the New Thought movement. It came to my attention because of the New Thought movement's association with alternative medicine. I figure that if we sweep original blessing up with Matthew Fox, we can begin to stem the tide and keep the problems contained. ScienceApologist (talk) 23:05, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you! I appreciate what you are doing! We do need to keep Wikipedia up to snuff because I too would like to see it be more respected in the academic world, and editors like you are taking the time to do this.--Drboisclair (talk) 15:58, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

The WikiProject Novels Newsletter - October 2008

 * Newsletter delivery by xenobot  13:11, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

The WikiProject Novels Newsletter - November 2008
This newsletter was automatically delivered by TinucherianBot (talk) 05:16, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

RFC against me
[If you have time will you look over this? Did I do wrong? I care what you think. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/SlrubensteinII#Response] Slrubenstein  |  Talk 03:58, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the comment on my talk page. I know sometimes we have not agreed - but for me this makes you a valuabel colleague, the hope of Wikipedia is that people who so not always agree can nevertheless work together and while we have not interacted in some time I always appreciated and valued the seriousness you bring to the project. If you have any further comments I hope you will feel comfortable making them on the RfC page, whatever they may be. Slrubenstein  |  Talk 15:23, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Shakespeare notice
There is currently a discussion going on regarding the project's policy on how information on characters should be represented in articles on Shakespeare's plays. Please take part by clicking Talk:Romeo and Juliet. Further context, if needed, can be found by scanning the two previous talk sections on the page as well. Sent by §hepBot  ( Disable )  at 04:18, 11 November 2008 (UTC) per request of Wrad (talk)

Archola's lung problems
I have been diagnosed with Stage 4 lung cancer&mdash;and I NEVER SMOKED! Go figure. Arch O. La  Grigory Deepdelver  05:41, 2 December 2008 (UTC)Archola

Lutheranism and the Deuterocanonical Books
Does Lutheranism have a view, or even a majority view, on the Deuterocanonical Books and the canon?

I know Lutheranism's view is not alaways the same as Luther's view and changes to Template:Books of the Bible‎ make it seem that all Lutheranism follow the Deuterocanonical Books as part of the cannon. -- Carlaude (talk) 19:36, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Lutheranism follows Luther in saying that the Deuterocanonical Books are not part of the canon; however, by "Deuterocanonical Books" I take it that you mean the Apocrypha of the Old Testament (1-2 Macabees, Judith, Wisdom, Sirach [Ecclesiasticus], inter alia). I think that you mean the "Antilegomena" of the New Testament--as opposed to the "Homologoumena". Lutheranism is united in accepting the Antilegomena (Hebrews, James, 2nd Peter, 2nd & 3rd John, Jude, and Revelation) as part of the canon. Luther himself in his later years was more reverent toward these books. Note that in his translation of the Bible the Antilegomena appeared in their proper places in the canon. Does this answer your question? Lutheranism is rather solidly behind the Antilegomena being in the canon; however, Lutheranism is tolerant of those who might not accept the canonicity of these books.--Drboisclair (talk) 08:01, 12 December 2008 (UTC)


 * I am asking about the "Apocrypha of the Old Testament" (called Deuterocanonical depending on your view). Can you cite a soure for saying "Lutheranism follows Luther in saying that the Deuterocanonical Books are not part of the canon" -- so that I have a basic to correct Template:Books of the Bible‎.
 * Baring that, maybe posting your view to Template talk:Books of the Bible‎ will do. -- Carlaude (talk) 15:10, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Luther was the one most free and easy about the canon; however, that was only his personal opinion that he did not use as a criterion in his including books into his translation of the Bible. You find in his translation all 66 books of the Protestant canon. The Apocrypha is also in this edition, but it is not put with the books of the Old Testament as the Roman Catholics have in their Bibles. He made a distinction between the sacred canonical books and the apocryhal books of the Old Testament. Luther was inclined to exclude books from the 66 books, so he was not likely to include the Apocrypha at all. He questioned the canonicity of Ecclesiastes and Esther because the former appeared to teach skepticism and the latter did not contain the name of God. What I am saying here is that Luther was more inclined to omit things rather than to include things, so he wouldn't have included the Apocrypha in his list of the canonical books of the Old Testament.


 * This is found in footnote 1, page 337 of Luther's Works, vol. 35: "Apocrypha: these books are not held equal to the Scriptures but are useful and good to read." (Weimar Ausgabe Deutsche Bible 2:547).


 * This is from Erwin L. Leuker, The Christian Cyclopedia, CPH, 2000 under the entry "Canon-Bible": "Luther’s dictum on the Apocrypha expressed in his tr. of the Bible 1534, 'These are books which are not held equal to the sacred Scriptures and yet are useful and good for reading,' influenced subsequent generations; we find the Apocrypha excluded from the sacred canon in the translations gen. used in Luth., Angl., and Ref. churches (though the KJV originally included them)."
 * Heinrich Schmid compiled the doctrine of what are known as the 16-17th century Lutheran dogmaticians in a book known as The Docrinal Theology of the Evangelical Lutheran Church. This work points out that second generation Lutherans like Martin Chemnitz (1522-1586) and Matthias Flacius (1520-1575) made a distinction between the Homolegoumena and Antilegomena of the New Testament, but this distinction was ignored by the later Lutheran dogmaticians (1577-1714). This is from Schmid's book: "§ 12. Of the Canon and the Apocryphal Books.": The written Word of God consists of the Word of God of the Old and the Word of God of the New Testament. In the collection, however, that contains both of these, we find also other writings, which we do not call the Word of God in the same sense. We distinguish these two kinds of writings in the following manner, viz.: we call the first class canonical books, i.e., such as, because they are inspired by God, are the rule and guide of our faith; the others, apocryphal books, i.e., such whose divine origin is either doubtful or has been disproved. Although both kinds are found in the Bible, only those of the first class are admitted as a rule of faith, whence they are called the Canon (catalogue, or number, of the canonical books), while those of the other class may contribute their share to the edification of believers, but are not to be regarded as the Word of God, and from them, therefore, no proof for any doctrine of the faith is to be drawn. Whether a book is canonical or not, we are then to ascertain by the signs whereby we recognize the Word of God in general as such, as of the divine origin, as inspired. The testimony of the Holy Spirit is more conclusive evidence than anything else of the divine character of the contents of a book; next to this come all the other kinds of evidence which we have enumerated under the head of the Authority of Holy Scripture (§ 8, Note 10) as the external and internal criteria. Among the latter, the testimony of the Church in the earliest ages in regard to the canonical character of a book is of special importance, for it is assuredly a matter of the highest moment if we know that a book was acknowledged as canonical already at a day when its origin could be most accurately ascertained. More particularly do we need the testimony of the earliest ages of the Church in deciding historical questions, as to the name of the author of a book, as to the language in which it was originally composed; for by the testimony of the Holy Spirit we may indeed become assured of the divinity of a book, experiencing its power in our own hearts, but He bears no testimony as to questions of this kind. As canonical books of the Old Testament we acknowledge: (1) Genesis; (2) Exodus; (3) Leviticus; (4) Numbers; (5) Deuteronomy; (6) Joshua; (7) Judges; (8) Ruth; (9) I and II Samuel;(10) I and II Kings; (11) I and II Chronicles; (12) Ezra and Nehemiah (or second Ezra); (13) Esther; (14) Job; (15) Psalms; (16) Proverbs; (17)Ecclesiastes; (18) Song of Solomon; (19) Isaiah; (20) Jeremiah; (21) Lamentations; (22) Ezekiel; (23) Daniel; (24) twelve minor prophets, Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zachariah, Malachi. As apocryphal: Tobias, Judith, Baruch, I, II, and III Maccabees, III and IV Ezra, Wisdom of Solomon, Ecclesiasticus or Syracides. As appendices: Epistle of Jeremiah, annexed to Baruch, Appendix to Daniel, Supplement to Esther, Prayer of Manasseh." This is on pages 80 and 81 of Heinrich Schmid, The Doctrinal Theology of the Evangelical Lutheran Church, Charles A. Hay and Henry E. Jacobs, trans., (Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1961), 80-81. Instead of getting more liberal the Lutherans are more conservative in adopting the generic Protestant canon of the 66 books of the Bible: 39 in the Old Testament, 27 in the New Testament. I hope that this is helpful.--Drboisclair (talk) 08:40, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

I might write something like this: "Lutherans following Martin Luther himself never included any of the Old Testament Apocrypha in their Old Testament canon. They followed the traditional Protestant canon of the books of the Bible." I would then have this to back up that statement in a footnote: "Jaroslav Pelikan and Helmut Lehmann, gen. eds., Luther's Works, The American Edition, 55 vols., (St. Louis and Philadelphia: CPH and Fortress Press, 1955-1986), 35:337; Erwin Lueker, Christian Cyclopedia, (St. Louis: CPH, 2000), sub "canon-Bible"; Heinrich Schmid, The Doctrinal Theology of the Evangelical Lutheran Church, Charles A. Hay and Henry E. Jacobs, trans., (Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1961), 80-81."--Drboisclair (talk) 09:00, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Martin Bucer
Hello. Just to let you know that I am in the midst of working on Bucer. Right now I am working on the Zwingli and Luther section (I still have to cover the Marburg Colloquy). Everything previous to that section is content that I added. The remaining sections contain text from the original version of the article which was a hodge-podge mess. I intend to expand and rewrite them. The illustrations will most likely be moved around as I add more material. Thanks anyway for helping to clean things up. By the way, I have an article on peer review, John Calvin and if you can comment/criticise it, I would appreciate it. --RelHistBuff (talk) 18:18, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you! I think that what you are doing is a helpful improvement. I guess that once you get done with it it should be much better. The paragraph on his works should be rewritten.--Drboisclair (talk) 18:21, 16 December 2008 (UTC)--drb (talk) 14:42, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

IMDb
Thanks for the kind words. As you note, it's not just me who's against using the IMDb in place of scholarly sources. My problem with it is that it's not compiled by the scholars of the field, and that it's a tertiary source. I do not object to using it along with secondary sources written by the scholars of the field, or with linking to it on film pages so the user can glean the info they cover which we do not. But it should never be used in place of real scholarly sources. The fact that the IMDb is harder to edit than Wikipedia doesn't matter, as Wikipedia does not use Wikipedia articles as sources. The bottom line is, in my opinion good tertiary sources, from Britannica to JSTOR, do not rely on other tertiary sources. And I also quite like your quote from Merlin. While it did not come from Geoffrey or Malory or Tenyson, it did originate with one of the great masters, T. H. White ;) .--Cúchullain t/ c 02:06, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the explanation. I would guess that the implimentation of a rigorous policy of providing good sourcing is in the wake of the accusation in past years that Wikipedia is a joke in the academic world. Scholars like you are working to make it the resource it should be in this respect. My fear, though, is this new rigor in imposing "notability" to the point of being inclusive of all there is to know in the world. In my first years in Wikipedia, which correspond to yours, the big rigor was in making Wikipedia NPOV, which is definitely a good goal; however, now the rigor is NOT, notability. Certainly one should exclude vanity pages of some of us, but one should not be so ready to condense everything down to the point that it does not contain every possible human thought. It is the inclusiveness of Wikipedia that causes it to popup on google searches in the first place. That is how I first discovered Wikipedia. Wikipedia should be the encyclopedia of the 21st century that contains everything. In that way it could be considered the Aristotle of the modern world. That is my desire; however, with proper primary, secondary, and tertiary sources ;)--drb (talk) 16:10, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Synthesis
Can you explain why the content is appropriate even after reading WP:SYN? — Erik (talk • contrib) 16:47, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, the material is not synthesis in that it deals with the content of the film. That section on "synthesis" is irrelevant in that the content of the film is compared with history, which informs the viewer of the film who might want information on this subject. The film is not a complete work of fiction like Alice in Wonderland; it is an historical drama, which uses actual historical personages and actual historical events. It is helpful to the person seeking information to know how this content compares with history. If I were to compare Alice in Wonderland to historical sources, that would be OR and synthesis, not the work of editors in this instance.--drb (talk) 16:55, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
 * No, the material does not deal with the film at all. Look at these sources used:
 * Boatwright et al. The Romans: From Village to Empire. pp. 402-4 ISBN 9780195118766
 * Historia Augusta, Loeb Classical Library, 3 vols., (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1921), 1:265-313
 * Boatwright et al. The Romans: From Village to Empire. pp. 406 ISBN 9780195118766
 * Historia Augusta, Loeb Classical Library, 3 vols., (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1921), 1:273, footnote 28
 * Historia Augusta, Loeb Classical Library, 3 vols., (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1921), 1:323-324
 * These sources are completely appropriate for historical articles. The comparisons are being made are comparisons that did not exist before someone picked up these history books, thus it is synthesis.  There are reliable sources that study the film and its historical roots, and these are what can be used.  What's above is a connection made that starts with the editor him or herself, not with a secondary source.  As editors, we write information as reported elsewhere.  We don't come up with these connections on our own.  That's why most of the section is synthesis. — Erik  (talk • contrib) 17:01, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
 * You are making policy here by restricting what reliable sources one can use in any article. This is an historical drama, so it is not original research or "synthesis" to compare its content with history. It did not originate with the editors but with the film itself by its own content.--drb (talk) 17:14, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Please focus on the content, not the contributor... if you disagree with the wording found at WP:SYN, we can discuss that. Let's take an example: "Synthesis occurs when an editor puts together multiple sources to reach a novel conclusion that is not in any of the sources."  In the article, the film is used to describe the fictional Commodus, and a history book is used to describe the actual Commodus.  The comparison is being put forth explicitly despite neither source making that comparison.  How is that not synthesis?  It is not original research in the sense of people making stuff up; it is in the sense that connections are made when they didn't exist before.  It's not our job to put forth connections like that; we put forth connections as reported by reliable sources.  If readers want to make connections on their own, they can watch the film and study history and thus draw their own conclusions.  The content is really akin to a thesis paper... if one was assigned to analyze the historical accuracies and inaccuracies of the film using history books, then that would be the editor's own product. — Erik  (talk • contrib) 17:20, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I still maintain that that is your opinion and your interpretation of this "synthesis" policy. Everything on this website could be described as a thesis paper. You are a strict constructionist in looking at this policy while I feel that more latitude should be given. As an editor that works on films it is surprizing that editors doing that type of work encourage analysis and not only summarization in summaries of films, whereas, I would strictly summarize the film content when I write these articles. I think that latitude should be afforded editors who compare apparent content of historical dramas with history itself. The comparison is not original with them but in the content of the film. This section of policy "synthesis" is irrelevant in this case for those reasons, and I believe that any reliable source may be used in any article. I guess that I will have to find a source that specifically compares the historical content of this film with history to suit you, the strict constructionist.--drb (talk) 17:39, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I was never at all comfortable with the section, but respected it because it was sourced and it is hard to dispute with history. But in dealing with writing articles on film, I believe sources relating to the movie that mention facts not only verify them, but make them notable. If these sources do not mention the film, then is it important? What stops one from getting trivial and creating a poorly formatted povfork? Also, one can read articles about the real people. And to quote James Cameron, history is just what the people who saw it happen remember. Alientraveller (talk) 19:42, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your response. Perhaps you may want to delete the section since everyone wants it deleted except me.--drb (talk) 19:58, 14 January 2009 (UTC)--Drboisclair (talk) 14:10, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I was never at all comfortable with the section, but respected it because it was sourced and it is hard to dispute with history. But in dealing with writing articles on film, I believe sources relating to the movie that mention facts not only verify them, but make them notable. If these sources do not mention the film, then is it important? What stops one from getting trivial and creating a poorly formatted povfork? Also, one can read articles about the real people. And to quote James Cameron, history is just what the people who saw it happen remember. Alientraveller (talk) 19:42, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your response. Perhaps you may want to delete the section since everyone wants it deleted except me.--drb (talk) 19:58, 14 January 2009 (UTC)--Drboisclair (talk) 14:10, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

WP:FILMS Welcome
 Welcome! Hey, welcome to WikiProject Films! We're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of films, awards, festivals, filmmaking, and film characters. If you haven't already, please add User WikiProject Films to your user page.

A few features that you might find helpful:
 * Most of our important discussions about the project itself and its related articles take place on the project's main discussion page; it is highly recommended that you [ watchlist it].


 * The project has a monthly newsletter. The newsletter for December has been published.  January's issue is currently in production; it will be delivered as a link, but several other formats are available.

There is a variety of interesting things to do within the project; you're free to participate however much—or little—you like:


 * Want to jump right into editing? The style guidelines show things you should include.
 * Want to assist in some current backlogs within the project? Visit the Announcements template to see how you can help.
 * Want to know how good our articles are? Our assessment department has rated the quality of every film article in Wikipedia.  Check it out!

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask another fellow member, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We look forward to seeing you around! Nehrams2020 (talk) 23:34, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Jesus
As always I welcome your comments. I am glad you don't take my last edit concerning dates personally - it was certainly not directed at you. We just have this kind of discussion regularly (we had it a month ago, if you look at the talk page you will see another section that has been "compressed" in the same manner in December) and the same thing always happens - an anonymous user sucks serious editors into a useless (in that it will not lead to any change in the article) discussion that really wastes the valuable time of valued editors like yourself.

I am glad you are commenting on the recent edits to the lead, obviously the Christian POV must be represented accurately. My concern is that the lead must also be concise and clear. I fear that it is now too wordy. Also, I have no idea what a "confession" is in the context currently used.

Now, I agree that as a reader iof Wikipedia it is my responsibility to click on the links and learn more. My point is simply this: such details perhaps belong in the body and not the lead. If you can see a better way to edit the article so that the Christian POV is represented accurately and adequately in the lead, but as concisely and simply and clearly as possible, with any other details in an appropriate section in the body, I would welcome that. Best, 15:27, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't see a problem with removing the addition. I changed it because as it was it was wrong. I was simply trying to make better something that was flawed and problematic.--Drboisclair (talk) 01:36, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Films January 2009 Newsletter
The January 2009 issue of the WikiProject Films newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you and happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk) 20:34, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Jesus
I just made a proposal here - your support is necessary, or could you propose an alternative? Slrubenstein  |  Talk 16:35, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Films February 2009 Newsletter
The February 2009 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk) 00:05, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

The WikiProject Novels Newsletter - March 2009
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 16:59, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Happy Saint Patrick’s Day!
On behalf of the Kindness Campaign, we just want to spread WikiLove by wishing you a Happy Saint Patrick’s Day! Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 16:00, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Martin Luther
I left a message on Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Lutheranism and I would like to ask if you or User:Qp10qp are interested. I would help with whatever sources that I have in my university library. --RelHistBuff (talk) 11:14, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Films March 2009 Newsletter
The March 2009 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk) 00:02, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Irresistible grace
Please lend your thoughts to Talk:Irresistible grace. Cheers! --Fl e x (talk/contribs) 14:06, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Happy Easter!
On behalf of the Kindness campaign, I just wanted to wish my fellow Wikipedians a Happy Easter! Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 07:50, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Martin Bucer up for Featured Article Review
I just wanted to let you know that you can vote for or against Martin Bucer being the featured article at Featured_article_candidates/Martin_Bucer. Thanks! --Epiphyllumlover (talk) 21:17, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Martin Bucer
Hello, the Martin Bucer FAC was archived. In my opinion, this was closed too early. I have renominated it; would you please vote or leave a comment on the new FAC? See Talk:Martin Bucer and click on "leave comments". Thanks. --RelHistBuff (talk) 21:31, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Films April 2009 Newsletter
The April 2009 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 07:41, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:The Pioneers.png)
Thanks for uploading File:The Pioneers.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:52, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

fair use images
I hate to be a pain about this, but I really do feel that fair-use images, where free-use ones clearly do exist, only serve to prevent free-use images from being sought out. (As for myself: I've probably provided far more free-use images than the number of fair-use images I've ever suggested for removal: I'm currently working my way through a complete works of Sir Walter Scott from 1886-7.) I'm happy to try and search out replacements for the ones I've asked to be deleted - just shove a list on my talk page of those, and any others that need illustrated and I'll search them out. Shoemaker&#39;s Holiday (talk) 10:22, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
 * You are right, but I think that you will find with this novel, i.e., The Prairie that you will only find dark, plain covers that could be the cover of any book. Perhaps one could use the title page of the first edition, which one might get from Google books or something.--Drboisclair (talk) 00:26, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Black Arrow 2007 ed from Penguin Books.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:Black Arrow 2007 ed from Penguin Books.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:10, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

The Prairie
Don't neglect frontispieces. Any decent edition published before 1900 or so will probably have a scene from the novel engraved just inside the front cover. (I'm going to search some used bookstores for such from Black Arrow today or tomorrow) Shoemaker&#39;s Holiday (talk) 07:03, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

The Black Arrow
This one? What possible scene can this illustrate? Isn't it just kind of, weird symbolism for the Wars of the Roses? Shoemaker&#39;s Holiday (talk) 07:07, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:The Black Shield of Falworth.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:The Black Shield of Falworth.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:49, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Films May 2009 Newsletter
The May 2009 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 23:21, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Novels - Coordinator Election
Hello. To begin, every member of WikiProject Novels will be getting this message (the joy of macros) so if you wish to get in touch with me, please post a message on my talk page. I would encourage anyone who so wishes, to stand in the Coordinator Elections. If you wish to stand, please do so by 23:59pm, June 27. Voting will the continue to 23:59pm, July 21. Can everyone please check-out the Coordinator Elections page. Also, the collaboration of the month is The Tin Drum, so if you have any spare time, please check it out. And I apologise to the seven of you for whom this will be a repeat message. Regards, Alan16 (talk).

WikiProject Novels - Coordinator Election
Hello. To begin, every member of WikiProject Novels will be getting this message (the joy of macros) so if you wish to get in touch with me, please post a message on my talk page. I would encourage anyone who so wishes, to stand in the Coordinator Elections. If you wish to stand, please do so by 23:59pm, June 27. Voting will the continue to 23:59pm, July 21. Can everyone please check-out the Coordinator Elections page. Also, the collaboration of the month is The Tin Drum, so if you have any spare time, please check it out. And I apologise to the seven of you for whom this will be a repeat message. Regards, Alan16 (talk).

Coordinator Election
Hello. The Coordiantor Election has begun. All members are encouraged to vote by the deadline, July 28. To vote simply add support to the comments and questions for.. section of the member of your choice.

3 users are standing:

Regards, Alan16 (talk) 19:45, 29 June 2009 (UTC).

WikiProject Films June 2009 Newsletter
The June 2009 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 08:25, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

The WikiProject Novels Newsletter - July 2009
The July 2009 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. Alan16(talk)

WikiProject Films July 2009 Newsletter
The July 2009 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 00:49, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Novels - Narnia Task Force
Hi! You would be glad to know that a new wikipedia ad has been created by Srinivas to encourage users to join Chronicles of Narnia Task Force. You can display that ad on your user/talk page too using the following code:

-- Alan16 (talk) 10:31, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Novels - August 2009 Newsletter
The August 2009 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. Alan16 (talk) 17:26, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Films August 2009 Newsletter
The August 2009 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 03:42, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Happy Labor Day!
Dear colleague, I just want to wish you a happy, hopefully, extended holiday weekend and nice end to summer! Your friend, --A NobodyMy talk 05:48, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

WP:FILM September Election Voting
The September 2009 project coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting seven coordinators from a pool of candidates to serve for the next six months; members can still nominate themselves if interested. Please vote here by September 28! This message has been sent as you are registered as an active member of the project. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 01:38, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Films September 2009 Newsletter
The September 2009 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 06:28, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Happy Halloween!


As Halloween is my favorite holiday, I just wanted to wish those Wikipedians who have been nice enough to give me a barnstar or smile at me, supportive enough to agree with me, etc., a Happy Halloween! Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 18:31, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

WP:FILMS October Newsletter
The October 2009 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. The newsletter includes details on the current membership roll call to readd your name from the inactive list to the active list. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 05:57, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

News from Germany - Lutherfilms
Lieber David, on this weekend I am sitting in a symposium a meeting to the topic Rainer Wolffhardt, which is the director of the Lutherfilm BRD 1983. I know we talked about it and you have the film. If you will send me until saturday evening questions, possible I can asked him something from America. I suppose a good question would be why dosn't exist an English subtitle. etc. Oh, look again on my site I suppose that soon I will have finished the articles to the Lutherfilms. Ok here and there I will expand the articles. Please answer me on my site or via email. with friendly greetings Sönke--Soenke Rahn (talk) 20:19, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Hi again, the symposium was very interesting I got an autograph. And I asked him some things. And this was very interesting, too. with friendly greetings, Sönke --Soenke Rahn (talk) 20:21, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Happy Thanksgiving!


I just wanted to wish those Wikipedians who have been nice enough to give me a barnstar or smile at me, supportive enough to agree with me, etc., a Happy Thanksgiving! Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 06:43, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Merry Christmas


A NobodyMy talk is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Don't eat yellow snow!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding to their talk page with a friendly message. To those who make Good Arguments, who are appreciative, or supportive. Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 21:07, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs
Hello Drboisclair! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created  is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current Category:All_unreferenced_BLPs article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the unreferencedBLP tag. Here is the article:

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 21:58, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Martin Brecht -

translation dispute
There is a discussion going on whether the name of that German church body can be translated or not (it appears like this on the english pages of this church's homepage). One user changed the name of this Church (actually a federation of several Lutheran, United and Reformed churches) and it's regional member churches to the German form because he says their names can't get translated. so the article on the Evangelical Lutheran Church in Bavaria now appears under its German name because he says the "concept" can't be translated into English. Please go to the discusson page of the Evangelical Church in Germany and have your say --93.130.249.56 (talk) 02:06, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for taking part in this discussion. You should nevertheless be aware of the fact that the discussion takes place under "recent move" und read the reasoning for both sides there first. The last paragraph "new title" was added by someone who was not aware of the fact that this is still an ongoing discussion, --77.181.10.178 (talk) 21:10, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Luther Bible Article
Hallo David,

1. can you look on the english Luther Bible article, please look on the talk page first. 2. To the question "evanglic, evangelical or protestant". Evangelisch is a word which used Luther for his sheeps, instead Lutherans, because he never want that Christians will named after him. The classical translation to German "Evangelisch" is "evangelical" but today there exists sometimes differences between the German word "Evangelikal" (which is an American reimport) und "Evangelisch". But you can mail me. ... 3. Yes, I did not forgot it. 50 Percent is complete, but I need a little bit time, because a lot of university-stress in the moment. I hope all is well, with friendly greetings, Sönke --Soenke Rahn (talk) 03:20, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
 * So I suppose 100 percent is complete, I wrote you a mail today. This is more important, than wikipedia. (-: —Preceding unsigned comment added by Soenke Rahn (talk • contribs) 23:04, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Lieber David, I will see that I will go to town and so on ... To this topic we should discuss via e-mail, again. Because these things are very complicated. The discussion in general is complicated, beside what we thing - Nobody is perfect. I live in Germany and I can say you how the people will tic toc realy. But there is no hurry. No - but "I" can't influence the time and change the time. But I will write you next week, again, because I am in hurry. Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Sönke --Soenke Rahn (talk) 11:03, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

If you are still active, Dave, please help develop the new Matthew C. Harrison article. I'm back to do this one, but not much longer. Too busy.

Thanks!

user:CTSWyneken

Controversial Guideline of "Notability"
Hi. I noticed you removed the tag I added here. Can you give some kind of rationale for that please? Normally one wouldn't remove a tag unless one believed it had been added in error or one intended to improve the article. Best wishes, --John (talk) 17:05, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I believed that this entry had "notability," and I believe that such a tag was a subjective judgment on the article.--Drboisclair (talk) 05:36, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Maybe it will help if you take a look at WP:NSONGS? After having read that, would you really contend that this song is notable? --John (talk) 06:59, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
 * If an entry has verification and is presented NPOV it should be allowed to stand without the subjective opinion of some that it is not "notable." This "notability guideline" should not be allowed to censor what a majority thinks is not "notable." This whole modus operandi works against the extension of knowledge. I am opposed to deleting something because someone thinks that it is not "notable," whatever that means. This "notability" fad is a pretext to simply delete what an editor does not like.--Drboisclair (talk) 14:08, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
 * So you disagree with the principle "A topic is deemed appropriate for inclusion if it complies with WP:NOT and has received significant coverage in reliable secondary sources."? --John (talk) 21:00, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Like many I am bitterly opposed to such a subjective stalking horse for an elite group of editors to simply delete what they do not like. What is "significant coverage"? What is "reliable secondary sources"? WP:NOT is a GUIDELINE NOT a policy, and deleting material merely because they violate this contorversial guideline is unjust, bigoted, POV, and elitist. So to answer your question simply: YES. However, just go ahead and use your guideline to delete what you jolly well please to delete: I won't edit war you. Let's let the fad play out.--Drboisclair (talk) 06:14, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Notability
Hi. I noticed you removed the tag I added here. Can you give some kind of rationale for that please? Normally one wouldn't remove a tag unless one believed it had been added in error or one intended to improve the article. Best wishes, --John (talk) 17:05, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I believed that this entry had "notability," and I believe that such a tag was a subjective judgment on the article.--Drboisclair (talk) 05:36, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Maybe it will help if you take a look at WP:NSONGS? After having read that, would you really contend that this song is notable? --John (talk) 06:59, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
 * If an entry has verification and is presented NPOV it should be allowed to stand without the subjective opinion of some that it is not "notable." This "notability guideline" should not be allowed to censor what a majority thinks is not "notable." This whole modus operandi works against the extension of knowledge. I am opposed to deleting something because someone thinks that it is not "notable," whatever that means. This "notability" fad is a pretext to simply delete what an editor does not like.--Drboisclair (talk) 14:08, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
 * So you disagree with the principle "A topic is deemed appropriate for inclusion if it complies with WP:NOT and has received significant coverage in reliable secondary sources."? --John (talk) 21:00, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
 * To give you the short answer, YES, I do disagree with it as I disagree with the whole bloody concept of "notability": 5 years ago the rage was POV/NPOV, now it is "notability." I guess that Wikipedia must be running out of webspace, so a new pretext for the deletionists has to be pushed. Not that I am opposed to the concept of NPOV, but those who push "notability" are not following that POLICY. I am thankful that this fad of "Notability" is not a policy yet. What is "significant coverage" and "reliable secondary sources."? Just go ahead and put your "notability" tag back, and delete the article. Maybe since the webspace is at a premium more should be deleted. I simply am disgusted with using this nebulous concept of "notability" BY ITSELF to simply delete something.--Drboisclair (talk) 06:29, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I took another look at the article with the thought in mind of reversing my action, but I stand by my first statement. Since I am bitterly opposed to "notability" as a guideline or anything else on Wikipedia, I really have no business making a judgment on "notability." Perhaps the tag could be reimposed without the threat of deletion, then those who have composed the article can see if they can come up with appropriate material to satisfy this nebulous concept to your satisfaction. If you reipose your tag, I will not touch it anymore.--Drboisclair (talk) 06:47, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you, that is reasonable. The concept of notability is not mine alone but has been reached as a consensus across the project. The project consensus is that songs do not necessarily need a stand-alone article. There is no likelihood of deletion; what will happen if the notability concerns cannot be addressed in a reasonable timescale is that the article would be redirected to the parent album. Best wishes, --John (talk) 15:09, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Dear John, Thanks for your friendly conversation on my talk page. I appreciate all of the volunteer work you devote to Wikipedia. I know you have all the best intentions as a fellow editor and administrator.--Drboisclair (talk) 17:14, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Christian in Pilgrim's Progress.jpg
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Christian in Pilgrim's Progress.jpg, has been listed at Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. --ARTEST4ECHO (talk 15:32, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
 * This image is from a book printed in 1913, so it is in the public domain. What proof do you need other than that?--Drboisclair (talk) 04:47, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

de:Lutherfilm
Hallo, I have the article enlarged again. I suppose that I will finish the article de:Lutherfilm to the Reformation Day - (so that the article will be to 98% Complete). Gaps in the moment: 1. an english Luthermovie 2. A German Documentation to the 2003 Luthermovie 3. One or Some english Documentations to Martin Luther. -- Know I can say that I counted 19 Luthermovies - One Film is unfinished (de:Martin Luther (Helga Schütz)). --- In the moment raindrops knocking on the window with friendly greetings, Sönke --Soenke Rahn (talk) 19:46, 21 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Luther film a first version in simple English
 * Happy Reformation Day and Halloween Night. (-: Sönke --Soenke Rahn (talk) 20:47, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you, Soenke, und zu dir auch!--Drboisclair (talk) 04:58, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
 * It snows and it seems to be that there will no end with it. The grass is almost not to see. (-: with friendly greetings Sönke --Soenke Rahn (talk) 07:44, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Best to you, mein Freund.--Drboisclair (talk) 14:39, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Hideous Strength
You can always add that source as a second reference right after the first one. Since I haven't read it, I think it would be disingenuous for me to do so.

I understand that the provenance of The Dark Tower has been definitely established now as really being by Lewis in spite of Kathryn Lindskoog's cavils to the contrary.

I have prior to this done quite a bit of editing on the main parent "Narnia" article, but haven't really looked at the other WP articles on two books of the space trilogy. Re Narnia I in particular did a lot with Reception: influence of religious viewpoints and a bit on Chronicles_of_Narnia, Race, and Paganism--WickerGuy (talk) 13:57, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

New WikiProject Novels initiative
We have begun a new initiative at the WikiProject Novels: an improvement drive. As a member listed here, you are being notified. Please see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Novels and WikiProject Novels/Collaboration for more details. Also I would like to remind you to keep an eye on the project talk page at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Novels. Thanks, Sadads (talk) 02:23, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

WikiProject Novels Collaboration for February
Thank you everyone who participated in the January Collaboration, it was quite a success with 5 new C class articles, 3 stub kills and several articles were removed from our backlogs. In support of the Great Backlog Drive, the WikiProject Novels Collaboration for February is going to help remove backlog candidates in the backlogs related to WikiProject Novels. Please join us, and help us wikify, reference, clean up plot sections and generally improve Novels content, Sadads (talk) 22:10, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

You are recieving this message because you are a member of WikiProject Novels according to WikiProject Novels/Members

[Johann Michael Reu]] page could use some attention
If you drop by Wikipedia and would like something interesting to do, the Reu page needs help. I don't have much editing time these days. ;-) CTSWyneken (talk) 16:54, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

File:The Worms Luther Statue.jpg listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:The Worms Luther Statue.jpg, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Calliopejen1 (talk) 01:51, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

Martin Luther page superflous links
I recently removed several links from the Martin Luther page, which you then reverted. I am sorry if I overstepped my bounds. I am new to this. What is a good way to tell if a link is valuable or not? I have read WP:LINKS, but I am still a bit unsure. After looking over my changes, I agree that I went too far. However, I still feel that there are too many links. For example, there are multiple links to the page "Outlaw", but that, to me, seems not to be related at all. Also, there seem to be far too many links to the page about Johann Tetzel. Or does the length of the article merit more links to the same page simply for convenience? As I said, I am not sure on particulars, so any advice you could give me so I don't repeat my mistakes in the future would be appreciated. Thanks! DopplerRadioShow (talk) 07:00, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Martin Luther Good article review
Hi. I don't know whether you realise but Martin Luther has been brought up at WP:GAR. The only concern is the citation needed tags in the "Start of the reform" section. As you are obviously familiar with the article you may be able to fix those tags. If that is done so I am sure it will be kept. If not it is likely to be delisted. Cheers AIR corn (talk) 03:02, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I think you have misunderstood my intentions. If you read this page Good article reassessment/Martin Luther/1 you will see these concerns have been raised by another editor. If you look at the "Start of the reform" section you will see some [citation needed] tags. I was hoping you might be able to find references for them. As you have a graduate masters degree in Luther studies it should be a lot easier for you to do so than me. I have no intention of reverting or changing the article at all, it is just that for an article to be classed Good it must be well referenced. My only other action in relation to this article will be to recommend removing or keeping the Good article status (basically the green dot in the top right corner), and that will be determined by how the citation needed tags are resolved. Feel free to leave a comment at the Martin Luther Good article reassessment page. AIR corn (talk) 08:14, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Sorry I misunderstood, although what you were aiming at is plain in your message aboveDrboisclair (talk) 15:06, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
 * No problem. If you can help out at the reassessment it would be appreciated. It would be a shame to delist this article because of a few missing cites. AIR corn (talk) 00:53, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Ichthus: January 2012
 In this issue...

- Ichthus is the newsletter of Christianity on Wikipedia &bull; It is published by WikiProject Christianity For submissions contact the Newsroom &bull; To unsubscribe add yourself to the list here
 * From the Editor
 * What are You doing For Lent?
 * Fun and Exciting Contest Launched
 * Spotlight on WikiProject Catholicism

Ichthus: May 2012


From the Editor
This month marks the observation of Pentecost, one of the most important feast of the Christian liturgical year. It is our hope here that all of you, regardless of your religious affiliation (if any), find that the holiday, and its accompanying activities, an enjoyable and beneficial experience. We also hope that this "Birthday of the Church" is one which gives you the same joy as the birthday of yourself or your loved ones.

Ichthus is the successor to the long running WikiProject Christianity newsletter, run under the WikiProject Christianity’s Outreach department. As such, you will continue to see information about our latest featured and good articles, DYKs, as well as new members who have joined our project. You might also see links to Christianity related news from the mainstream media! With that, I wish you all happy reading!

John Carter, Asst. Editor

P.S. Please [ click here] to add the new Christianity-related topics Noticeboard to your watchlist to follow the latest discussions relevant to WikiProject Christianity and subprojects.

Help Bring Wikipe-tan "into the fold"
As many of you may know, our unofficial mascot, dear Wikipe-tan, hasn't yet indicated any particular beliefs. However, yes, as we all know, ahem, some people might object to our beloved mascot running around in a French maid outfit. People do talk, you know. ;) If anyone might be able to develop an image of the dear lady in a image more, well, "Christian," I would like to see perhaps a vote for next month as to which, if any, image of the dear girl we might make our own unofficial mascot. Please post your images here.

By John Carter

Christianity in other wikis
As many of you might now, there are a large number of other Wikimedia Foundation projects, including WikiSource, Wiktionary, Wikibooks, WikiQuote, and others. I certainly believe that Wikibooks and Wikiquote might be among the more directly relevant sister projects. If any of you can think of any particular efforts in these other projects which you think would benefit from more input, please let us know here, so we can help spread the word around.

By John Carter

Spotlight on the Outreach department
Ichthus will spotlight a different subproject or workgroup of WikiProject Christianity. This edition will spotlight on our vital Outreach department. This comparatively small, but vital, project unit is dedicated to welcoming new editors to Wikipedia and the Christianity related content, and to providing information to the various project members, in forms like this newsletter.

The scope of articles with which this group deals is truly enormous, and, given the wide variety of material with which we deal, we would very much welcome the input of more individuals, particularly individuals who are particularly knowledgeable of the less well-known and less frequently monitored articles related to Christianity.

Speaking personally, I would be very, very gratified if we were to have this become a very, very large and active unit, with members from the broad spectrum of Christian beliefs, practices, and groups. The broader the spectrum and areas of expertise of members we have, the better we will be able to help manage the content. Please consider whether you believe you might be able to contribute in this vital area.

By John Carter

- Ichthus is the newsletter of Christianity on Wikipedia &bull; It is published by WikiProject Christianity For submissions contact the Newsroom &bull; To unsubscribe add yourself to the list here EdwardsBot (talk) 20:25, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

your ranting at me...
...is unjustified. In what election or other type of meeting do expect to vote twice? Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 02:47, 4 May 2012 (UTC) You vote by deleting votes that you oppose-Drboisclair (talk) 02:52, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I removed my inflammatory comments. Chooyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 was justified in doing what he did. I am glad that the matter was resolved on the ANI.-Drboisclair (talk) 03:51, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

ANI
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 03:14, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I have defended myself ably there. There should also be a complaint against you removing my only vote.-Drboisclair (talk) 03:27, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Your !vote is still there. You voted twice. Check carefully. Dominus Vobisdu (talk) 03:28, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
 * It's the last one before the heading "Section Break". From what I gather on ANI, you intended to delete it and move it elsewhere, but you didn't delete it. Dominus Vobisdu (talk) 03:35, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

No problem. Nobody's perfect. :) Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 03:40, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your kindness!:)-Drboisclair (talk) 03:41, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Notice
There is a discussion regarding a complaint regarding bullying from this editor User:Seb az86556 at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents 99.251.114.120 (talk) 02:03, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Ichthus: June 2012


Membership report
The parent Christianity WikiProject currently has 331 active members. We would like to welcome User:Sanju87, User:Psalm84, User:Zegron, User:Jargon777, User:Calu2000, User:Gilderien, User:Ronallenus, Thank you all for your interest in this effort. If any members, new or not, wish any assistance, they should feel free to leave a message at the Christianity noticeboard or with me or other individual editors to request it.

From the Editor
Ichthus is one of the ways that the WikiProject Christianity’s Outreach department helps update our members. We have recently added some new sections to the newsletter. Please let us know what you think of the new departments, and if there are any other suggestions for departments you would like to see. And if you have anything you would personally like to add, by all means let us know. The talk page of the current issue is probably the best place to post such comments. With that, I wish you all happy reading!

P.S. Please [ click here] to add the new Christianity noticeboard to your watchlist to follow the latest discussions relevant to WikiProject Christianity and subprojects.

Church of the month
by Berthold Werner Saint Catherine's Monastery, Mount Sinai

Vote for the project mascot
We had last month asked our members to help "bring into the fold" Wikipe-tan as the project's mascot. Voting will take place this month for which image we should adopt at WikiProject Christianity/Outreach/Wikipe-tan. Please take a moment to review the images and vote for whichever is your favorite, or, if you so prefer, suggest an additional one.

By John Carter

DYK

 * ...that Anna of Kashin, a Russian medieval princess, was twice canonized as a holy protectress of women who suffer the loss of relatives?

Calendar
Thie coming month includes days dedicated to the honor of Beheading of John the Baptist, Saints Peter and Paul, the Nativity of John the Baptist, and Saint Barnabas.

Featured content and GA report
Alec Douglas-Home recently achieved FA status. This picture, in the Church of the Month section, was recently promoted to Featured Picture status. Our thanks and congratulations to all those involved.

Wikimedia Foundation report
Wikisource currently has many old texts available, most of them in the public domain. This is a potentially very valuable source for several things, including for instance links to Biblical verses, because we know that it will, basically, be around as long as we are.

By user:John Carter with inspiration from History2007

Christian art
This section would include a rather large image of a specific work of art, with a link to the most directly relevant article. Suggestion: Resurrection of Christ, an English 15th century Nottingham alabaster. Groups of painted relief panels were sold via dealers to churches on a budget, who had wood frameworks made to hold them locally. From a huge new donation of images from the Walters Art Museum to Commons, see By Johnbod

Spotlight
A new WikiProject relating directly to Christian history is being developed at WikiProject Christian history. Also, a group specifically devoted to the Mennonites and other Anabaptists is now up and running at WikiProject Christianity/Anabaptist work group. Anyone interested in assisting with the development of these groups and topics is more than welcome to do so.

By John Carter

I believe
... in the statements contained in the Nicene Creed. I believe that the Bible is one of the two defining bases for belief. The other is the Sacred tradition, which provides us with means of interpreting the Scriptures, as well as some teachings which have been handed on by God outside of the scriptures. I believe that the Magisterium has been empowered to fill this interpretative function. I believe that clerical celibacy is a rule that should generally be followed. I am a member of the Catholic Church.

By John Carter

Help requests
Please let us know if there are any particular areas, either individual articles or topics, which you believe would benefit from outside help from a variety of other editors. We will try to include such requests in future issues.

- Ichthus is the newsletter of Christianity on Wikipedia &bull; It is published by WikiProject Christianity For submissions contact the Newsroom &bull; To unsubscribe add yourself to the list here EdwardsBot (talk) 02:43, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Ichthus: July 2012
 Membership report The parent Christianity WikiProject currently has 336 active members. We would like to welcome User:Emilymadcat, User:Toa Nidhiki05, User:DonutGuy, and User:RCNesland, Thank you all for your interest in this effort. If any members, new or not, wish any assistance, they should feel free to leave a message at the Christianity noticeboard or with me or other individual editors to request it.

From the Editor Ichthus is one of the ways that the WikiProject Christianity’s Outreach department helps update our members. We have recently added some new sections to the newsletter. Please let us know what you think of the new departments, and if there are any other suggestions for departments you would like to see. And if you have anything you would personally like to add, by all means let us know. The talk page of the current issue is probably the best place to post such comments. With that, I wish you all happy reading!

P.S. Please [ click here] to add the new Christianity noticeboard to your watchlist to follow the latest discussions relevant to WikiProject Christianity and subprojects.

Church of the month by User:JaGa Mission Santa Clara de Asis

Vote for the project mascot We had last month asked our members to help "bring into the fold" Wikipe-tan as the project's mascot. Voting will take place this month for which image we should adopt at WikiProject Christianity/Outreach/Wikipe-tan. Please take a moment to review the images and vote for whichever is your favorite, or, if you so prefer, suggest an additional one.

By John Carter

Calendar Thie coming month (mid-July through mid-September) includes days dedicated to the honor of Mary Magdalene, James, son of Zebedee, Ignatius Loyola, Saint Dominic, Joseph of Arimathea, and the Transfiguration of Jesus.

Featured content and GA report Grade I listed churches in Cheshire was recently promoted to Featured List status. This picture was recently promoted to Featured Picture status. Bartolome de las Casas and Edmund the Martyr were promoted to GA level this past month. Our thanks and congratulations to all those involved.

Wikimedia Foundation report Wikibooks welcomes the development of textbooks of all kinds, children's books, recipes, and other material. It currently has just under 2500 books, including several Wikijunior books for the 12 and under population. There is, at present, not even a book on Christianity. Anyone interested in helping develop such a textbook is more than welcome to do so.

By John Carter

Christian art

The portrait of Sir Thomas More by Hans Holbein the Younger. By John Carter

Spotlight A new WikiProject relating directly to Christian history is being developed at WikiProject Christian history. Anyone interested in assisting with the development of these groups and topics is more than welcome to do so.

By John Carter

I believe ... in the tradition of Thomas the Apostle, Mar Addai, and Saint Bartholomew. I believe that Jesus had two essences (or natures), human and divine, unmingled, that are everlastingly united in one personality. I am a member of the Assyrian Church of the East.

By John Carter

- Help requests Please let us know if there are any particular areas, either individual articles or topics, which you believe would benefit from outside help from a variety of other editors. We will try to include such requests in future issues.

Ichthus is the newsletter of Christianity on Wikipedia &bull; It is published by WikiProject Christianity For submissions contact the Newsroom &bull; To unsubscribe add yourself to the list here EdwardsBot (talk) 15:37, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
HELLO. You have new messages at Talk:Golem. -- -- -- 09:50, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Christianity newsletter: New format, new focus
Hello, I notice that you aren't currently subscribed to Ichthus, the WikiProject Christianity newsletter. Witha new format, we would be delighted to offer you a trial three-month, money-back guarantee, subscription to our newsletter. If you are interested then please add your name tothis list, and you will receive your first issue shortly. From June 2013 we are starting a new "in focus" section that tells our readers about an interesting and important groups of articles. The first set is about Jesus, of course. We have also started a new book review section and our own "did you know" section. In the near future I hope to start a section where a new user briefly discusses their interests.-- Gilderien Chat&#124;List of good deeds 20:55, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Jesus Moses Elijah.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:Jesus Moses Elijah.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a [ list of your uploads]. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Calliopejen1 (talk) 21:40, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Jesus Moses Elijah.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:Jesus Moses Elijah.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a [ list of your uploads]. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Calliopejen1 (talk) 21:40, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Martin Chemnitz 1.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:Martin Chemnitz 1.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a [ list of your uploads]. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Calliopejen1 (talk) 21:41, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Martin Chemnitz 3.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:Martin Chemnitz 3.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a [ list of your uploads]. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Calliopejen1 (talk) 21:42, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:It (1966 film) DVD cover.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:It (1966 film) DVD cover.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 15:10, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Reverted Edits of It! (1966 film)
Since you reverted my edits to the 1966 film It! just add the inscription to the plot.--Paleface Jack (talk) 20:40, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

OK, done--Drboisclair (talk) 07:32, 9 September 2015 (UTC) Needs to be better written then just adding that the inscription is used to heighten suspense which is more personal opinion.--Paleface Jack (talk) 02:08, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

A Hallo from Flensburg
I hope all is well. Maybe xou could enlarge the Angeln and Flensburg area in the english Wikipedia. (https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProjekt_Flensburg). Especially this article should be checked and enlarged: Mürwik. Friendly Greetings, Soenke --Soenke Rahn (talk) 14:11, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the kind message! I trust you and yours are well! Vielen Dank für die freundlichen Nachricht! Ich vertraue Ihnen und verkaufen sind gut! Will look into this when possible!Drboisclair (talk) 15:00, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Hallo David, verkaufen = buy. I suppose that was the babel fish. ;-) Good that you answer so swiftly. Last week I was in the Nikolai Church in Flensburg. There performed an actress Katharina von Bora. It was nice. 2017 will come soon. I hope I will find the time to write in the Luther Wikipediaarea again, also die Lutherfilm section. Last Friday I have ordered the Weimarer Ausgabe Volume 30. I hope this old print will come in a good condition. In the moment I have only copies. How ever, in the moment the things I do in the Wikipedia are round about Mürwik, a part of Flensburg, where Nazi Germany ends. Friendly Greetings --Soenke Rahn (talk) 15:18, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:06, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:32, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Golem of It!.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Golem of It!.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:31, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

This image should not be "non free"Drboisclair (talk) 11:21, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

A free image has been uploaded to Wikicommons: File:Golem.png|thumb|a depiction of a golem

Orphaned non-free image File:Fall of the Roman Empire book cover.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Fall of the Roman Empire book cover.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:35, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

This image complies with "fair use" Drboisclair (talk) 00:39, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Black Arrow 2007 ed from Penguin Books r.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Black Arrow 2007 ed from Penguin Books r.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:40, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

This image complies with "fair use." There is no possibility of garnering a free version. Drboisclair (talk) 00:40, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

File:Black Arrow 2007 ed from Penguin Books r.jpg listed for discussion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Black Arrow 2007 ed from Penguin Books r.jpg, has been listed at Files for discussion. Please see the to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Aspects (talk) 02:03, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your desire to improve Wikipedia. I am hoping to rehabilitate the inclusion of these items to comply with requirements.--Drboisclair (talk) 14:36, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
 * The actions taken to delete this fully appropriate image were completely biased and unfair. It makes Wikipedia less than what it should be.Drboisclair (talk) 11:05, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

File:Fall of the Roman Empire book cover.jpg listed for discussion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Fall of the Roman Empire book cover.jpg, has been listed at Files for discussion. Please see the to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Aspects (talk) 02:13, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
 * I thank you for your courtesy in allowing me to defend my work--Drboisclair (talk) 14:36, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:It (1966 film) DVD cover.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:It (1966 film) DVD cover.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:45, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:The Time Machine Classics Illustrated 133.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:The Time Machine Classics Illustrated 133.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:13, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Precious
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:30, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much! Your compliment makes me feel that my work on Wikipedia has been worthwhile.Drboisclair (talk) 03:26, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you, enjoy! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:16, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:It (1966 film) DVD cover.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:It (1966 film) DVD cover.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:13, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:Dr Martin Luther.jpg


The file File:Dr Martin Luther.jpg has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Unused, unclear use/purpose"

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Zinclithium (talk) 01:32, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

Precious anniversary
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:12, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

Two years now! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:22, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:Martin Chemnitz 3.jpg


The file File:Martin Chemnitz 3.jpg has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "unused, low-res, no obvious use"

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Robert Joel


The article Robert Joel has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the prod blp/dated tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can when you are ready to add one. <b style="color:#FF0000">Jay</b><b style="color:#0000FF">Jay</b><sup style="color:black">What did I do? 20:55, 15 January 2021 (UTC)