User talk:EBY3221/Archive 2

Removal of content
EBY, I have respect for all people, but please know the unilateral removal of relevant encyclopedia content on this page is vandalism. As you know from the community, we all contribute and it is not okay to simply wipe away hours of work from another person. This won't stand in any situation here. It's a community with many of us giving our time freely. Please know the content will be reviewed and restored in kind. I will review your notes but I will not accept having you simply erase hard work and relevant news from the wiki. I am always eager to learn and educate myself on the way to best help this community. As yours is one of many opinions, I will review this with other authors and take appropriate action. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Borntodeal (talk • contribs) 23:45, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Kathy Ireland
As you can ascertain from my writings and focus, I am really into Kathy Ireland and a few other people. You have removed many hours of research and work I have done on this page. Please stop this rampant removal, it is not respectful. I took great lengths to ensure I cited appropriate content. I am perhaps not the A-writer you are, but I am an author, researcher and someone who loves to contribute to authentic content about many subjects. I am a teacher and public speaker and this is a passion. Your removal of huge chunks of content were not okay. If you have a disagreement on my style, we can discuss it. I will not accept removal of content that is properly cited and in good journalistic style. Please know this is not okay in the future and if you have a dispute, we can resolve it with a third party here on the community and come to some middle ground. Thanks.

Borntodeal (talk) 16:51, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Continued [Todd Bentley] edits
EBY, thanks for helping out. And yes please continue to take whatever valid information is presented and clean it up to be appropriately encyclopedic. The article is looking professional becuse of you. --Oi!oi!oi!010101 (talk) 20:23, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Todd Bentley
Hello! Thanks for your answer to my question about YouTube videos and transcripts on Todd Bentley. I do understand better after reading those links. I'm an idiot for not looking first.

I wonder, could you have a quick look at James R. Flynn (songwriter)? I'm thinking about putting it up for AfD due to lack of notability. Sure he has a tely interview, and some news clippings, but people more notable then him have been removed!

CindyAbout /T/P/C/ 06:34, 13 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks - I have no time for people trying to slant BLP articles - but I do find it ironic as an atheist, I'm in the position of trying to prevent one group of Christians slander another Christian. Oh and that link was a piece of shit - his next one was just as bad, a blog using another blog as a source - yeah right... --Allemandtando (talk) 19:39, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

About "Jim Flynn"
I noticed you questioned Jim Flynn (songwriter)'s notability. Thats understandable considering many of the sources on him do not archive online. He has had TV interviews on major stations, but the interviews are "lost" [even though they are semi-recent] because they do not archive TV interviews. Transcripts of the interviews COULD be "ordered" but its not really going to work. I personally was not looking foward to defending his notability. CindyAbout /T/P/C/ 03:02, 20 July 2008 (UTC)


 * To be honest, I see how it reads as a 'fan' article, but I really am not a 'fan' at all. I just took the information given to me, and built on it. CindyAbout /T/P/C/ 04:37, 20 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I don't mean "challenge" you, so don't think that I am =). Don't worry, I'm just asking... should not his biography page include his performances in the Berlin Opera House, and for Konrad Adenauer, if they can be sourced? CindyAbout /T/P/C/ 19:02, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

July 2008
Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to Kathy Ireland has been reverted, as it appears to have removed content from the page without explanation. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thanks. DougsTech (talk) 23:34, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Sorry bout that!
Sorry if I reverted your revert. I guess I was looking at the original version, and when I reverted, you reverted at the same time causing me to revert yours. DougsTech (talk) 23:45, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

James Lafferty
I'm not so sure that we should not include the denial from reps about his dating Sophia Bush and the fact that they were spotted together, which seemed to be as an official couple, before his romance with Bush was confirmed. I mean, all that stuff leads up to the confirmation quite nicely. Simply stating that Chad Michael Murray confirmed a romance between them seems a little off; it is like why did it need to be confirmed?

The exact same information about Lafferty's romance with Bush that you removed from Lafferty's article is in Bush's article. If you feel that that information should be removed from Bush's article as well, I would rather you discuss that on the talk page of Bush's article first before removing it. I mean, would you mind if I were to restore that information to Lafferty's article? Flyer22 (talk) 20:29, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
 * No one is really going to reply on the James Lafferty talk page for input on this mater between us, at least not any time soon. I will let the information you removed stay gone for now. But it is staying in Sophia Bush's article unless agreed upon by editors to be removed. Flyer22 (talk) 02:25, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Todd Bentley
I beg to differ. He has "Joel's Army" tattooed on his chest. Hyper3 (talk) 14:52, 15 March 2009 (UTC)


 * "Joel's Army" is not a radical association. Bentley would be fine with it. I think it needs representing even-handedly. Much of the "spiritual warfare talk" sounds militant and can easily be misconstrued.
 * I'm not sure how to take the "bully pulpit" comment. You seem to know the wikipedia rules well; yet perhaps you should reread WP:NPA and WP:CIV. I prefer to work within WP:AGF where possible.
 * I don't see how this article can be a good one unless the various significant factors, ideas and symbols are understandable by someone outside the community that he comes from. Much of the press coverage shows little understanding of it, yet we must of course use reliable sources. Far from using the page as a "bully pulpit" a believe that Bentley should be covered fairly.
 * It sounds like you have greater experience with biography than I do, so why not help me to see your point of view by explaining your edits, so I can give way to your better understanding. Much of the wording that you have cut has been worked out over a long time. I understand that it is OK to "be bold" - and so it is OK to ask for dialogue too.
 * Back to the point. If you think it would be better to talk about Bentley's Joel's Army references (theology, tattoo, school of ministry, etc) in a separate section and refer to it in the appearance section more obliquely, I can live with that. And you are right, a new page does need doing on the subject, as its only covered within the Latter Rain article at the moment. Hyper3 (talk) 18:52, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

One Tree Hill (TV series)
I know that you are a decent editor here at Wikipedia, so do not take offense to this: The way you formatted the Series overview section in the One Tree Hill (TV series) article is not really how Wikipedia articles should be formatted. If you want certain minor characters linked through Characters of One Tree Hill, then you need to link to those characters through Wikilinks in pipe link style, not in external link reference style.

Also, some of the headings for characters you linked to in Characters of One Tree Hill do not have articles anymore and actually redirect to Characters of One Tree Hill, which is why I unlined them. Flyer22 (talk) 03:44, 28 May 2009 (UTC) ‎
 * Okay, I see that I made a mistake regarding you and the Series overview section. I was looking at your edits to it before you changed your external link type of edits to it. I will now restore your clean edits there (but will make them cleaner). Flyer22 (talk) 03:49, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Dembski
Regarding this edit, I was wondering if you might expand on this a little on the talk page. I think I see what you're talking about, but I'm not 100% certain. Thanks. Guettarda (talk) 16:22, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Will do - am currently reading the talk page to try and understand what's gone before. EBY (talk) 16:30, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Don't worry too much about the talk page...I don't think there are any current debates. Guettarda (talk) 17:53, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Christian apologetics
Hello. You recently added a citation to a book by Alphascript Publishing to this article. Unfortunately, this is not a reliable source as the text derives entirely from Wikipedia; this is a circular reference. See WP:ALPHASCRIPT. I've only removed the reference, not the text it was referencing.

Another source to be wary of is the "Webster's Quotations, Facts and Phrases" series published by Icon Group International as their books are computer-generated, with most of the text copied from Wikipedia (most entries have [WP] by them to indicate this, see e.g. ). Fences &amp;  Windows  13:47, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Apostasy in Christianity
Greeting EBY,

I left a reply on the discussion page at Apostasy in Christianity for you to read. I think the concerns you have regarding the POV have been addressed. Please let me know what you think about the new changes. Thanks,ClassArm (talk) 03:03, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Sōka Gakkai
Thanks for your advice already contacted the Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. Its a fringe subject but still feel it needs some attention. --Catflap08 (talk) 18:52, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Talk pages
Thanks for replying to the new user who asked a question at Talk:Jimmy Wales. However, the question was completely off-topic for that page, and I have moved it (and your answer) to the user's talk at User talk:Student10. Johnuniq (talk) 01:56, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

14th Dalai Lama on women's rights
I just want to thank you for the revision you made on my recent edit on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/14th_Dalai_Lama. I think your edit was made in good judgment and still keeps the essence of what I added. Thanks.Scifilover386 (talk) 23:58, 23 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks. I left my reasoning on the article's talk page for future edit wars :) Best, EBY

Your request for rollback
Hi EBY3221. After reviewing your request for rollback, I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback: If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see New admin school/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! Beeblebrox (talk) 21:45, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
 * Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
 * Rollback should never be used to edit war.
 * If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
 * Use common sense.


 * Thanks! Having a sugar cookie to celebrate. EBY (talk) 21:50, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 22
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Pitbull (entertainer), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Give Me Everything (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:15, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

✅

Please comment on Talk:Rob Ford
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Rob Ford. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 06:15, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

✅

Disambiguation link notification for May 29
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Theatre Royal, Hobart, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Thomas Morton (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:14, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

✅

Kathy Ireland
EBY3221, I read your comments, candidly appeared that the changes you're making, although apparently permitted, are because you believe I am biased or allegedly have a conflict of interest; yet all of the work that I do as an author in life is based upon a passion for research and writing. My titles, and many of them, reflect that passion and my agent and publishers encourage and inspire me to write on Wikipedia about my passions. Kathy Ireland is a seriously notable woman in business and this Wikipedia page is quite light in terms of content that represents a Wikipedia that clearly reflects who she is today. Everything I write on here is based upon heavy research online and written in editorial style as that's what's called for on the Wikipedia. Respectfully I don't know about your past bouts with marketing folks, but I am a proud author and write about my interests and I'd ask that you take care to reflect on my work with the same respect I take of yours.

Please comment on Talk:Hans-Hermann Hoppe
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Hans-Hermann Hoppe. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service. — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 18:15, 3 June 2013 (UTC)