User talk:Elizium23/Archive 5

I just received
a rather spirited message from you regarding Talk:Cristero War. I suspect that if you go back to my edit you will discover that I cut that block of text out of the article and moved it to the talk page to discus because it made me nervous. If that is what gets one blocked from editing wikipedia these days then I can only assume that I've missed a fairly important policy change. Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 02:22, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Have a look at the edit history of the article. We have already reverted that addition twice and provided the URL it is copied from. I know you did not originate the offense but it is good to be aware when adding material anywhere whether it is infringing. Personally, I Google-search all large additions (over about 1k) because quite frequently they are just copy-pastes off the web. Elizium23 (talk) 03:15, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I was at work at the time I discovered the section. I did not want to take a lot of time on it, but wanted it out of the article, so put it in the talk page where at least it seemed more likely to get the sort of attention you provided. Carptrash (talk) 14:38, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Albertus_Magnus&diff=533564855&oldid=533539541
Hi Elizium23, thanks, that was indeed unintenional!Lotje (talk) 05:36, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Marriage template
Please see: WP:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2013_January_7 -- and according to the person infobox template, both ways are acceptable. --Musdan77 (talk) 05:31, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Michael Archangel - I am the copyright [a nonsense idea] holder. Restore please to article in "Talk" Michael Archangel.
Michael Archangel - I am the copyright [a nonsense idea, for holy men speak/write by the Holy Spirit, not myself] holder [pseudonym - 3 Angels Messages, and many others]. Restore please to article in "Talk" Michael Archangel. If no, will you restore the first section on the Historical Protestant section with linked quotations? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.42.70.30 (talk) 06:57, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
 * First, such a claim here is without evidence. You would need to provide permission according to the instructions in Donating copyrighted materials. Secondly, I do not believe that material was appropriate for the talk page. It appeared to be more along the lines of polemic than suggestion to improve the article. Talk pages are not for general discussion of the subject. It is preferable to keep your comments brief and to the point, making suggestions for how to change the article and seeking consensus from other involved editors. Thank you. Elizium23 (talk) 14:01, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Edit war at Indian rupee sign
This is regarding the edit war warning you gave me and another editor sometime back regarding reverts at Indian rupee sign. Subsequent to your warning I stopped all further reverts even though the other editor continued to do so. Recently I came to know the edits that he was making to the page had nothing to do with the article. The court case he repeatedly mentioned regarding Indian rupee sign, I have subsequently found out was regarding selection of logos via competitions. I mentioned this one the talk page and reverted the edits. However the editor today and reverted the edits back. I require advice from you to handle this problem.-- PremKudva    Talk   05:55, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
 * You have attempted to engage this editor on talk pages and this is a good first step. Try reading Dispute resolution for an outline of ways to try and resolve this. I think that the next logical step for you would be to create an RfC. There is information about this at Requests for comment. Another thing to try at this point would be posting here: Wikipedia talk:Noticeboard for India-related topics. In your proposals, please try to use neutral wording and appeal to Wikipedia policy and consensus-building. Remember to assume good faith about the other editor(s) and focus on the content at hand. Elizium23 (talk) 13:32, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks-- PremKudva    Talk   03:49, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Interest in CVUA training
Hi. Although my own history of edits may appear to be somewhat random, I am very interested in CVU training. A mere cursory glance on my part indicates that all of which combined, I believe, makes you a good enough "match" for my own needs and interests that I'm leaving this note on your talk page. I therefore hope and trust it will not be considered out of place.
 * you're listed as an "Available trainer" on WP:CVUA,
 * you're located in my own timezone, and
 * you have specific editing interests involving the fields of both
 * language and
 * religion,

I have a great deal of interest in countering what I personally perceive to be vandalism but am reticent to simply go in and start handing out warnings, willy-nilly, to folks about whom, frankly, I know practically nothing, and least of all for reasons of my own which may (in total honestly) at times be woefully misguided. While normally I bristle at the merest suggestion or thought of going through any sort of step-by-step training program, I do believe the highly sensitive nature of determining what actually does constitute "vandalism" in the first place (let alone of taking measures to counter its effects) necessitates it in my case.

Would you by any chance consider training me, or else, perhaps, be willing and able to direct me to somebody who would? Regardless how you may answer, you have my thanks for all your contributions here.

Be well, ༺།།ༀ་ཨཱཿ་ཧཱུྃ།།འཚེར།།xeltifon།།སར་ཝ་མང་ག་ལམ།།༻ &#123;say it&#125; &#123;did it&#125; &#123; ζ &#125; 06:21, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Hello, and thank you for your interest. Unfortunately, I will not be active here in the near future, as my real life has become quite busy. I hope you can find another helpful instructor that will suit your needs. Elizium23 (talk) 17:22, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

"Broadway Hoaxer"
Do you think we're giving this person too much credit, and perhaps, in a subtle way, encouraging him or her, by using "Broadway Hoaxer" as a name? Perhaps it should be changed to "Broadway Vandal"? (I'm putting talkback pointers to this on Flami72 and MarnetteD's talk pages.) Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:51, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
 * While I would not object to the name change I am not sure that using the term "Hoaxer" is encouraging this person. IMO long term abusers of WikiP get (see Pé de Chinelo for one of the worst) off on it and will return no matter what we call them. Thanks for raising the question BMK the idea does have merit. Also many many thanks for your vigilance against this person. Cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 00:24, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I suppose we could consider it. My only objection here is that "Hoaxer" is a hyponym more descriptive than "Vandal" - there are many vandals at Wikipedia but only a small subset are hoaxers. It helps us identify the specific type of activity at a glance, any editor given a link or an edit summary mentioning the "Broadway Hoaxer" will immediately know just the kind of disruption we are dealing with. Since this vandal is extremely uncommunicative - has never used a talk page or edit summary or notice board - we cannot know if s/he has even noticed that we call him/her something. I would not be able to deduce such things just from the behavior presented to us. Is there some heuristic that would help us know? Elizium23 (talk) 03:26, 9 March 2013 (UTC)


 * I like the use of "Hoaxer", because it lets other editors know just what the situation is. I also doubt that the use of that term (or indeed, this conversation or the notices on her talk page(s)) encourages her. I suspect that this very long-term vandal/hoaxer has "issues" of which I cannot guess and that we are not responsible for -- or encouraging -- her vandalism/hoaxing by calling attention to it. Of course, I will agree with whatever the consensus is. (Many thanks to all who are in this, I have very limited time and energies right now and cannot edit much on Wikipedia.)Flami72 (talk) 14:27, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
 * OK, folks, thanks for considering my thought, we'll keep it "Broadway Hoaxer". Beyond My Ken (talk) 16:59, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

WP:ENGVAR
Thanks for that Elizium. I wasn't aware of that policy, but now that I am I will be careful to respect it in future.

Rosa Lichtenstein (talk) 09:42, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Courtesy notice
This is a courtesy notice. A conversation is happening at WikiProject Military history regarding disruptive edits to Audie Murphy. You are receiving this notice because your name has been listed in the article's history as having reverted some of the troublesome edits. — Maile (talk) 18:02, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Catalan language
The edit you undid was actually correct. "indiferent" is the right spelling. CodeCat (talk) 02:35, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh, my bad, thanks. Elizium23 (talk) 02:36, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Not enough context in these diffs. I should have noticed it was an article on a foreign language... Elizium23 (talk) 02:36, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Sobieski
Hey, I had provided the info that i'm her brother. I actually am. The whole 82/83 thing started when she was an early teen and adding the extra year allowed her to go out for more roles. It is actually 83 and not 82. And that's a sure fact. Robyso1 (talk) 09:16, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
 * We have no proof that you are her brother, and we have already documented that her actual birth year is 1983, but we are required to leave in the information that reports 1982 as well, because it is documented in reliable secondary sources, and Wikipedia simply reports what is found in them. Read about verifiability for more information. Thank you. Elizium23 (talk) 21:18, 2 April 2013 (UTC)


 * If I can provide proof of being her brother would that fix things? I don't think it's a conflict of interest as I'm not writing praise about her or advertising her, I'm just giving her the correct birth year? Robyso1 (talk) 09:23, 2 April 2013 (UTC)


 * No, it wouldn't help any, and it would make things worse for you, because you would confirm your conflict of interest in regards to this page. We are not permitted to use public records in order to establish facts about people we write about on Wikipedia, so I do not know what proof you could provide for her birth year, when we are already quoting interviews she gave in which she says herself that her birth year is 1983. I don't know how the proof could be any clearer. What you are trying to do now is not prove her 1983 birth year, but trying to suppress the 1982 birth year information, which needs to stay. Elizium23 (talk) 21:27, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

BLP Reversions
On Benedict's talkpage that you removed an entire discussion, I have reverted it. There is nothing in violation of the BLP policy. It does have a possible synthesis issue but that never made the article, the only remotely negative thing I see is that it mentioned that he was in Hitler Youth, he was and this is sourced in the article number 25. Anywho I completely disagreed with your assessment that the entire thread should have been modified. if you disagree and still think it's a BLP issue please open a BLP thread on the noticeboard and we can get a few other opinions to weigh in. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 05:27, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Mario Poli
I was only going by what's on his Italian wiki page. Thismightbezach (talk) 14:13, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is not a reliable source. Elizium23 (talk) 14:14, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Please note that the seat for the Diocese of Santa Roas is vacant, so it is proper to state that Poli "wsa" the bishop of that diocese. Furthermore, stating that we will be installed as archbishop is not WP:CRYSTAL as the future event is planned and well documented by reliable sources. Therefore, per Wkharrisjr (talk) 14:20, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Pope Pius IX's infobox heading
Howdy. Before you revert again, I recommend you check the infobox headings of the other 'Blessed' papal bios. GoodDay (talk) 15:10, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Salvation Army
How is a list of names a copyriright violation? You are being overly zealous. Feel free to rewrite the intro but the names of those honoured is valuable and with further wiki linking would be very informative. I would appreciate it if you undid your edit. Castlemate (talk) 13:07, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
 * The list of names was not the violation, but the intro was, and that is why I deleted it and left the names. Do not do it again on Wikipedia, we need to be very careful and observe copyright laws here. Elizium23 (talk) 18:58, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
 * And in the process have removed the reference which is a cardinal sin! Castlemate (talk) 23:54, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Where did I do that? Here is the diff of my revert - go on, show me where I committed such a sin? Elizium23 (talk) 00:10, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Here is the diff and it shows no reference. Unreferenced material must be removed. Castlemate (talk) 00:25, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Kevin Smith
In what realm is that link spam? Kevin Smith is the director and stars in the trailer for the game. Please explain. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DenofGeekdotUS (talk • contribs) 23:37, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Vandalism
Thank you for your comments on vandalism. However, to say Wikipedia has a stricter definition of the word "vandalism" than common usage is a nonsense. Wikipedia does not determine the definition of a word. This sort of behaviour will discourage newer editors and anybody that has a dictionary. Thank you. Castlemate (talk) 00:56, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Peter Bush (businessman)
I will always assume good faith in another editor and so can only assume that your call for deletion of the article on Peter Bush (an article I have been involved in) within minutes of you saying I attacked you, is a matter of devine intervention or just coincidence. With kind regards Castlemate (talk) 00:56, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Fr. Diego Lorenzi
Hi-I notice there is an article about Fr. Diego Lorenzi in the Italian Wikipedia. Fr. Lorenzi is a Don Orione Father and served as secretary to Pope John Paul I. He was never named a bishop and spent several years in the Philippines as a missionary. Do you know anyone at Wikipedia that knows Italian who can translate the article into English? I am a member of WikiProject Catholicism. Thanks again-RFD (talk) 17:55, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

unwarranted and unexplained revert...
hi. Not sure what your issue is. But what you did was against WP policy. Because A) you're NOT to revert any editor unless it's for either real vandalism or if it's something genuinely inaccurate, or unsourced and because B) you reverted with ZERO explanation or comment. Why was that? Please don't do that. This is a wiki. You don't own any one article. What's the problem though? You don't like the more precise and correct "Roman Catholic" and "Eastern Orthodox" for some reason? Too bad... "I don't like reasons" are not valid reasons to undo valid work and modifications or edits. Please refrain, or you yourself will be reverted again. Thank you. Gabby Merger (talk) 03:14, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

This is what I wrote back to you on my talk page to the thing you wrote there:

....There was NO "incorrect edit" on my part. And it's not "nebulous" that you should always leave a comment or explanation when reverting someone. Also, NOT to revert at all if it's not vandalism or incorrect. You failed to explain just how my edits were "incorrect". But just rudely reverted. Not cool...and NOT something I would tolerate. Explain at least why you felt the need to disrespect my edits. Thanks. Gabby Merger (talk) 03:17, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

If in the context more than just "Eastern Orthodox" was being referred to, then maybe I can understand... But then again, why not have "Eastern and Oriental Orthodox"? Saying "Orthodox" can sound a bit incomplete. Gabby Merger (talk) 03:23, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Spanish/ Catalan
I would like to remind you, that it is you, who is completely removing the Spanish identity of those biographies. If you think that catalan is the only identity, or an identity opposed to the spanish identity, i would suggest you to create a vote asking if every biography of people born in Barcelona or any other catalan village should have the catalan origin leaving out the spanish origin. I will wait for your vote request. Gavanzo (talk) 07:25, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Nothing has been left out. Spain is still prominently mentioned in the infoboxes and in most of the lead paragraphs of the biographies. I would not object to adding a mention of Spain to Joan Miro as well. And you say that I am removing things, yet I am merely reverting to stable article versions that have been the status quo for months or years. I personally took Antoni Gaudí to good article status in 2011 and that was agreed upon at that point. Elizium23 (talk) 07:29, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Now that you have made several reverts which have made your true purpose very clear, let me remind you what you said on Talk:Antoni Gaudí (here is the diff): "I agree using a formula like Spanish born in Catalonia. It is appropiate to emphasyze the catalan origin of Gaudí." Now, why are you removing the term entirely from the lead paragraphs instead of using this, your own suggestion? Elizium23 (talk) 07:40, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Of course i agree in improving information and in specifying terms, and going from global to local, but i completely disagree in the omit of terms or substitution by any others. And don't blame me about deleting terms, it was you who did not want to add some the spanish information in Gaudi. But anyway, i agree to specify information in every article about the born place. But i don't understand the sense of trying to give to some biographies the Catalan definition and many others don't (Pau Gasol, Joan Manuel Serrat...). Why is it? Gavanzo (talk) 20:58, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Rumor
Just ignore what i said, i read something on the internet but i think it's a roumor, i'm sorry if i caused any problems. :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.97.250.73 (talk) 05:40, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Dali again
Hello, I am the main writer of the French article on Dali. I think its is (much) more improved than the English one which has several issues in my opinion. My English is not good enough to translate it, but if you want, I can help you to do so. (The fun point is : I toke as starting point the German and the Spanish articles. This last is an enhanced translation of English one. That's a wheel!) v_atekor (talk) 06:23, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the offer. Unfortunately, I am more of a vandalism fighter and reverter than a content creator. Also, I have a part-time job now, and between that and volunteering, too much of my time is taken up to concentrate on larger projects such as this. I'm afraid I am not your man. I appreciate the thought. Elizium23 (talk) 13:36, 17 May 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)

Closing the Papal consistency RFC
Hello, Elizium23. Were you planning to close your Papal consistency RFC discussion at some point? There is no clear consensus on point 1, no one opposed the new wording for point 2 ("head of the Catholic Church"), and there is agreement on point 3. Bede735 (talk) 17:08, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

STOP!!!!!!!!!!
Michael Owen Jackels was installed as archbishop of Dubuque last Thursday. He IS the archbishop. From now on do some research rather that your informed, self-righteous reverts. Farragutful (talk) 15:33, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, that's why I self-reverted and retracted the warning from your talk page. Elizium23 (talk) 15:34, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Farragutful (talk) 15:37, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

WP:CLUE
Here is a small clue, when an IP is continually restoring material without discussion, the answer is not to template the regulars, WP:TEMPLARIRWolfie- (talk) 08:55, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
 * WP:TR Elizium23 (talk) 13:39, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Great, your answer to misreading a situation and templating someone who already knows the guidelines is to point at an essay which is so in the minority it can't even make it to wikipedia space. You did a drive by template without even reading the situation correctly, knock it off, IRWolfie- (talk) 16:51, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
 * WP:AGF Elizium23 (talk) 00:29, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

soy sauce
Please read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability,_not_truth Yosri (talk) 10:56, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
 * http://mobile.newsnow.co.uk/h/?JavaScript=1&searchheadlines=&search=soy+sauce Yosri (talk) 12:00, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I have responded at Talk:Soy sauce. Elizium23 (talk) 18:36, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Re: User:True Article
Between the similarities between a banned editor named User:Emico and the seemingly throwaway sounding name of this user, I assume he's Emico and have indefinitely blocked him -- w L &lt;speak&middot;check&gt; 11:32, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Wow, that is a blast from the past. I always suspected that True Article was up to something nefarious, active editors don't often swoop in and start producing like that. Thanks for the heads-up. Elizium23 (talk) 17:45, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Hey, what's your opinion of, True Article picked up exactly where he left off on April 10. Another sock? Elizium23 (talk) 17:48, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Actually, looking at his unblock requests show it might not be a sockpuppet, (English is bad) but he's still done nothing constructive, and Emico never did unblock requests, only load sleeper accounts or resort to proxy IPs. -- w L &lt;speak&middot;check&gt; 07:45, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Chick tracts
Hi, I've been trying to add a testimonies page to the "Chick tract" page, and Czolgolz keeps deleting it because of "copyright" infringement. I sourced the testimonies, and if others can talk about movies and disney without copyright infringement then I see no reason for this not to be the case with the "Chick tract" page. I feel that Czolgolz and HMSSolent really have some bent against Jack Chick. They allow criticisms, but I source testimonies from Chick's website and I'm in the wrong? They source chick.com many times throughout the page, but when I do it it's wrong and I'm stealing? I don't get it. Double standard? I'm being neutral, as I saw that I was in the wrong before, but I'm still getting deleted. This is just really frustrating me, as it seems that a newbie comes along and is wrong no matter what they do but if a senior-editor does something wrong it's ok. Hjurgelis (talk) 15:35, 14 June 2013 (UTC)Hjurgelis
 * It is wrong and stealing because you have directly copy-pasted data from http://www.chick.com/testimonies.asp to the Wikipedia page. This text is copyrighted by the website. The reason that chick.com can be sourced in the article is because other editors have written their own original copy to go in the article, and used chick.com as a reference for the original text that they did not copy. Close paraphrases are likewise not allowed. Please read Copy-paste for more information. Further attempts to edit-war and violate copyright will result in you being blocked from further editing here. Elizium23 (talk) 17:49, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Apology
With regard to the message you sent of which the following is a part:


 * "Deleting or editing legitimate comments, as you did at Talk:Liturgy of the Hours, is considered bad practice, even if you meant well. Even making spelling and grammatical corrections in others' comments is generally frowned upon .."

Thank you for your helpful comment. I wish to apologize, it was not my intent to delete or alter anyone's words. I have tried to understand what happened and I think I know what my mistake was, and will not repeat it. Once again thanks for the guidance. 72.79.149.237 (talk) 04:07, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
 * It's ok, everyone makes mistakes, and it seems yours was an honest one. Cheers. Elizium23 (talk) 04:08, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Clerical celibacy (Catholic Church)
OK I added a source - but arguments from silence are never straightforward so doubt is inevitable and I simply wanted to indicate that the matter is not 100% It would help if Paul had been a little more specific in 1 Cor 9:3-6! Friendly regards, Springnuts (talk) 09:23, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Looks good now! Elizium23 (talk) 19:38, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Image
Her people just gave me permission to upload all the images in her press kit. There are more new ones at commons if you would like to choose another. If not then we may be able to get her to pose for a better one.--Canoe1967 (talk) 03:59, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
 * The only one possibly usable for the infobox must be commons:File:Audrey Assad 2013a.jpg. Elizium23 (talk) 04:09, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I thought so as well. I was going to crop it tighter first. I want to wait for the photographer OTRS before I do any cropping though. The image in the article now is fine for now.--Canoe1967 (talk) 04:13, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

In re Michael (archangel)
Hello,

Please tell me specifically how you wish the references to the archangel Michael in Katherine Kurtz's fiction to be cited. Direct quotes from the texts? With or without page numbers? Every work specifically listed? Any specific edition preferred (hardback versus paperback)?

Also, if TV Tropes isn't up to snuff as a source, I understand the author herself participates in an online chat with fans on a frequent basis, with transcripts posted online afterwards. If the summary of her Michaeline order as "a cross between the jesuits and the Templars" is put to her and she agrees with it, would citing the chat log of the conversation be sufficiently well sourced?

Thank you, 69BookWorM69 (talk) 02:32, 28 June 2013 (UTC)


 * You will need citations from reliable secondary sources such as news articles, magazines, scholarly books. An online chat is not a reliable secondary source. Citing the work itself as a primary source is acceptable in certain narrow circumstances, see: WP:PRIMARY, but you can't base any analysis on it. Elizium23 (talk) 02:37, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Mr. T
It wasn't defamation... ... plus, I'm a huge fan of Mr. T. :P RingtailedFox • Talk • Contribs 02:39, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
 * You will need to provide reliable secondary sources to prove your assertion. And until then, don't repeat it anywhere, because I will remove it according to WP:BLP! Elizium23 (talk) 02:51, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

The Hunger Games
The reason i added that to Jennifer Lawrence's wiki is because it was already on Josh Hutchersons wiki, and unless you live under a rock you would know that these movie are coming out! instead of thinking i made them up — Preceding unsigned comment added by Koruptional (talk • contribs) 18:03, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
 * According to consensus and policy, we do not add films not yet "in production" to filmographies. You can add them to the article if you have a reliable secondary source to cite, but as you can see, they are already mentioned in the article. Thanks. Elizium23 (talk) 18:06, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Speaking of movies, that flick they named for you appears to be pretty exciting. Drmies (talk) 18:28, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I am honored. Elizium23 (talk) 18:29, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Confiteor
Synthesis is an editorial judgment or interpretation that is created from two works that neither work says explicitly. Original research is providing a theory of your own, typically unsupported, in the article. Interpretation should be supported. However, this is not an interpretation of facts. This is establishing a translation equivalency from one text in its Latin original to English for reader's ease. Providing a translation of a few lines that can be confirmed by anyone with a Latin-English dictionary is not synth. Therefore, your removal of a basic verbatim translation on the grounds of WP:OR or WP:SYNTH is entirely baseless and wrongheaded. SEE: WP:SYNNOT WP:NOTOR. I'm reverting your removal of the translations per these two policies.--ColonelHenry (talk) 18:23, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, you are clearly right. My revert and warning were incorrect, and I am retracting them. Sorry for the inconvenience. Elizium23 (talk) 18:27, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

WikiProject Christianity Newsletter (July 2013)


From the Editor Welcome to the July 2013 issue of Ichthus. We focus on the chronology of Jesus, as well as looking back at the project content improved over the last month.

WP:X has gained another Featured Article, Gospel of the Ebionites, by Ignocrates. The Gospel of the Ebionites is the name scholars give to an apocryphal gospel that supposedly belonged to a sect known as the Ebionites. It consists of seven short quotations discovered in a heresiology known as the Panarion, written by Epiphanius of Salamis, and its original title remains unknown. The text is a gospel harmony composed in Greek, and is believed to have been written during the middle of the 2nd century.

St Mihangel's Church, Llanfihangel yn Nhowyn was promoted to Good Article status, as was two other welsh churches, St Enghenedl's Church, Llanynghenedl, and St Peter's Church, Llanbedrgoch.

The main page also featured several DYK hooks for articles in our project, namely Bob Fu, List of places of worship in Tandridge (district), Catholic Press, Garendon Abbey, St. John's Episcopal Church (Jersey City, New Jersey), Pargev Martirosyan, Praskvica Monastery, Heather Preceptory, St. Augustin, Coburg, Longleat Priory, St Mihangel's Church, Llanfihangel yn Nhowyn, St Enghenedl's Church, Llanynghenedl, Christianization of Moravia, Christianization of Bohemia, Repton Abbey, St Peter's Church, Llanbedrgoch, Medingen Abbey, Elmhurst Christian Reformed Church, St. James on-the-Lines, and Leopold Karl von Kollonitsch.

Church of the month St. Michael's Golden-Domed Monastery is part of Saint Sophia's Cathedral, Kiev in Ukraine. It is a functioning monastery that dates back to the Middle Ages.

Membership report The parent Christianity WikiProject currently has 367 active members. We would like to welcome our newest members, Newchildrenofthealmighty, Evenssteven, Kerna96, and FutureTrillionaire. 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.

Focus on... THE HISTORICAL JESUS

When did Jesus live? When did he die? How do we know? We do, in fact, have excellent information about the time intervals for the life and death of Jesus. As in other people who lived and died in the first century, this gives an approximate date range, but still, give or take 3-4 years and we have pretty good estimates confirmed by a number of really diverse sources, ranging from inscriptions in Delphi to Roman and Jewish sources. The Chronology of Jesus article discusses how a wide variety of Christian, Jewish and Roman sources are used to establish the time-frame for the life and death of Jesus.

And all of his data fits together. For instance, the chronology of Paul had been discussed based on the Book of Acts long ago, then the Delphi Inscription is found in the 20th century in the Temple of Apollo. And guess what.. it confirms it and totally dates his trial in Corinth, which helps reaffirm the date of the crucifixion of Jesus. The same date range is independently estimated from the writings of Josephus on the Baptist's death. And it fits Isaac Newton's astronomical models for the crucifixion date as well as the independent lunar calculations of Humphreys. As that article shows, all these dates just fit together.

From the bookshelf Chronos, kairos, Christos: nativity and chronological studies edited by J. Vardaman, E. M. Yamauchi 1989 ISBN 0-931464-50-1

This two volume book (with a very apt title) is gem-filled with scholarly research. Paul Maier's article in the first volume is a classic study on the chronology of Jesus and provides a useful summary of a number of issues.

Did you know...
 * ... that the Russian journalist Nicolas Notovitch who in 1894 originated the story that there was evidence at the Hemis monastery that an adult Jesus had traveled to India, later confessed to fabricating his evidence?

Calendar This month (July) contains the feast days of Mary Magdalene, and James, son of Zebedee.

- 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 published by WikiProject Christianity. For submissions contact the Newsroom &bull; To unsubscribe remove yourself from the list here EdwardsBot (talk)20:25, 30 June 2013 (UTC) This issue was distributed on behalf of Gilderien, current editor of the Ichthus, at 20:25, 30 June 2013 (UTC). Comments and other feedback are always welcome at his talk page.

Images ready
Hi again. The images are licensed now at: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Audrey_Assad. I cropped that one you liked. We can crop it in closer or out further if you wish. I will add it to the article first and see how it looks.--Canoe1967 (talk) 05:07, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, they look good! I look forward to seeing one in the article now. Elizium23 (talk) 05:09, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Re: July 2013 (User 121.219.90.44)
Hello, I will take that into consideration. To include a reliable citation - eg a news article - how do I do that? Do I just include the name of the website? 121.219.90.44 (talk) 02:05, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
 * WP:Citing sources should give you the information you need. Elizium23 (talk) 02:06, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

FYI
FYI: 70.235.86.12 (talk) 18:47, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

HP Task Force
Howdy, just wondering if there is discussion anywhere regarding the inclusion of non-novel and non-book articles into WP:NOVELS? It doesn't make much sense to me (since it would justify the inclusion of nearly every article into the project), but if there's consensus, it would lower my heckles. Olegkagan (talk) 06:12, 9 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Decision was made after discussion at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Novels/Harry_Potter_task_force Elizium23 (talk) 15:47, 9 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I went there, but there wasn't much (any, really) discussion about the nuts and bolts of, for example, assessing articles about actors within WP:NOVELS. I added something, but the decision has apparently already been made. Olegkagan (talk) 18:59, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Your recent changes to Pope John Paul II (Canonization to Canonisation)
Hi,

Thanks for the explanation on American vs. British English. I will leave your revisions alone for the sake of harmony but wanted to point out that, as you say in your explanation "For an international topic, use the form of English that the original author used." If you look, the original author of Pope John Paul II was an American (User:The Epopt) from Southern California, and used American English. FYI &#123;&#123;subst:User:Spool_26/signature&#125;&#125; (talk) 22:36, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I have replied at Talk:Pope John Paul II. Elizium23 (talk) 04:05, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Publication info in citations using ref name
It's simply logical to give the publication info when you first cite a given source. When an editor is reviewing, copyediting or fixing the formatting or something else about a citation, he/she needs to go to the full citation, and to do that, he/she presumably clicks on the first citation of it in the References section in order to find the full cite in the article. When the editor then clicks into the edit field, and sees that the info isn't there, that makes finding it a tad more difficult. What is the logic in placing it in the second citation of it? Nightscream (talk) 03:45, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
 * So there is no reason other than your personal opinion to do it that way? Elizium23 (talk) 03:47, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

What are you talking about?
Jennifer Connelly and Russell Crowe played husband and wife in A Beautiful Mind and now they are playing a husband and wife in Noah. This doesn't need an outside source, it's right there in the casting list for each of the films on their Wikipedia page. I already linked to A Beautiful Mind page and it's ridiculous to create a link to Noah since this information is already ON the Noah movie page.

As for importance, I frequently see mentions of when actors and directors work together often and I thought this was notable, especially since Jennifer Connelly won an Academy Award the last time she played Crowe's wife.

And I don't appreciate you making threats when all I did was add a well-intentioned piece of information that I thought would be useful for people curious about the movie.

Just for reference, how else would this fact be "sourced" since a) I linked to the Wikipedia page for A Beautiful Mind (where it is prominently mentioned that they portrayed a married couple) and b) I was referring to information that was already posted on the Noah page on the Cast list? What else is required? 69.125.134.86 (talk) 18:09, 17 July 2013 (UTC)


 * It is important for all assertions in articles to be verifiable. It is especially important for upcoming films that have not been released that we rely on reliable secondary sources (not Wikipedia articles) for our facts. It is probably original research to make the link to "A Beautiful Mind" unless a secondary source has already said that. It shouldn't be too difficult. Just use Google News. Elizium23 (talk) 18:20, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi. The IP has complained at the help desk. I agree the edit seemed a bit trivial but warning them and mentioning blocking seems a bit harsh. Was there a reason for using that template? --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 18:53, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
 * As you noticed and wrote later at the Help Desk, yes, I had reason because this editor has had two other warnings within a week of this incident. Per WP:AGF and continued discussion at the Help Desk, I have retracted the warning. Elizium23 (talk) 05:29, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Bewitched
Dear Ms. Elizium. On user talk page User_talk:69.117.133.237 you said that the *repeated* changes someone has been making to the tense on the Bewitched page is not considered vandalism. Okay, that is fine. However, is the following text considered harassment? "I am ONLY going to say this ONCE - so listen up. My CORRECTIONS are NOT "incorrect" NOR are they considered vandalism... you can reverse my edits for the next 25 YEARS. I (and now my friends) will reverse YOUR edits until the cows come home. STOP with your stupidness. We will NOT speak again. Ever."

I do not edit that much on WP, but would like to do whatever is necessary to prevent direct harassment from occurring. If I can't call the person a vandal, fine, but now he or she is making obtuse threats, which is another matter.69.117.133.237 (talk) 20:39, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

I have read the policies on disruptive editing and harassment. I am not requesting any additional actions at this time. As you are a steward of the Bewitched article, I wanted you to be aware of the intentions of the person in question, as is described by the text I quoted above. 69.117.133.237 (talk) 21:02, 22 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Yes, it was wrong for that editor to place such a warning on your talk page. You are both accusing each other of vandalism, and the other person has gone farther so as to threaten extreme disruption and terminate collegial discussions with you - about anything. I am aware that you have made corrections to the article in defense of the guidelines and that the other person is in the wrong. I suggest that you seek discussion on Talk:Bewitched if this should happen again, and do not continue to "edit war" with the other person, even though you are right about this. Edit-warring will not solve anything and is grounds for a block. I thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia and thanks for the heads-up about this issue. Elizium23 (talk) 01:15, 23 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your advice. If further incidents occur I will post to the Bewitched talk page. 69.117.133.237 (talk) 08:07, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

@ enders game
...id commented on talk, w an attributed quote.--Hodgdon&#39;s secret garden (talk) 22:45, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

ANI notification
Not a report about you, but you are related to it.

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Tb hotch .™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions.  07:33, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Dialogue with Steele re North
Elizium, I'm doing a little one-on-one with Steele regarding the section heading. We are not EW'ing. But rather than put this stuff on the talk page, where it tends to draw undue attention, I think my course of action with Steele will be more productive. St.A and others will be asked to comment if and when we reach an agreement. Thanks. – S. Rich (talk) 04:31, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Very well, I'll take your word for it. Elizium23 (talk) 04:35, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Re: Bogus Warning
I did not 'command' them (User talk:99.129.228.207) to make an account. On Wikipedia, after making multiple edits, you are encouraged but not REQUIRED to make an account. (Also said on his/her talk page). It's nice to keep track of a user's edits and be able to contact them. The user also had multiple final warnings. I don't take any type of vandalism to Wikipedia lightly. They've even deleted whole pages and added incorrect info to said pages. Two or three other users also made "bogus last warning" crap on his/her page so I suggest you tell them off too. MrScorch6200 (talk) 18:25, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

P.S. The "latter" is technically possible, but not imposed as a sanction, that's bad on my part.

August 2013 WikiProject Christianity Newsletter


From the Editor

Welcome to the August 2013 issue of the WikiProject Christianity newsletter. We focus on the historical Jesus and reflect on the last month.

The project has another featured picture, The ruins of Holyrood Chapel, a digitisation of an oil-on-canvas painting. Our top-importance article, Jesus, has been nominated for Featured Article status, the discussion can be seen here; Knights of Colombus has also been nominated as a FAC.

Ecgbert (bishop) and Church architecture in Scotland have both this month achieved Good Article status.

Our project had several of its articles featured in the main page DYK section, including Hinckley Priory, Little Chapel, St Peter's Church, Ropsley, Chip Ingram, St John the Evangelist's Church, Corby Glen, Great George Street Congregational Church, St Mary's Church, Walton-on-the-Hill and Bunge church.

Our thanks go to all of those who have worked to achieve these article milestones.

Church of the month This image, of Maillezais Cathedral and created by Selbymay was this month promoted to featured picture status.

Membership report We would like to welcome our newest members, Thechristophermorris, Psmidi and Jchthys. 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.

Focus on... THE HISTORICAL JESUS

What was Jesus like? What did he preach? Did he claim to be the Messiah? Did he predict an apocalypse? What can we know about him outside a religious context? The Historical Jesus article discusses what can be known about Jesus with various degrees of probability. While scholars agree on the over all flow and outline of Jesus' life (his baptism by John, debated Jewish authorities, healings, and his crucifixion by Pilate) they have built various and diverging portraits of the rest of his life. These range from minimalist portraits that accept very little of the gospel accounts to maximalists who accept most of the accounts as historical.

The portraits of Jesus have at times been unwitting reflections of the researchers themselves, and Crossan once quipped that some authors "do autobiography and call it biography". However, the study of historical Jesus has made one thing clear: there is so much to learn about Jesus that the more one looks, the more there is to discover.

From the bookshelf Jesus of Nazareth: An Independent Historian's Account of His Life and Teaching by Maurice Casey 2010 ISBN 0-567-64517-7

In this book Maurice Casey not only draws on his special expertise in the Aramaic traditions and the Q source, but provides a comprehensive review of the various approaches to the historical Jesus.

Did you know...
 * ... that in 1951 Christianity was the second largest religion in the world with 500 million followers, compared to 520 million Buddhists, but by 2013 it had gained the top spot with about 2.2 billion Christians?

Calendar This month we celebrate the feasts of St Lawrence, St Bernard, and St Augustine.

- 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 other editors. We will try to include such requests in future issues.

Ichthus is published by WikiProject Christianity. For submissions contact the Newsroom • To unsubscribe remove yourself from the list here EdwardsBot (talk)21:50, 31 July 2013 (UTC) -- Gilderien Chat&#124;What I've done 21:50, 31 July 2013 (UTC)