User talk:Gou kumori

Yes there are plenty reasons for this to warrant a separate article. Joshua is derived from Yahushua/Yahoshua and should be redirected from them. Try looking in a "credible" enyclopedia at the letter "J" and tell me how old this letter is and where it formed from? It's a 15th (circa) century letter that formed from the greek IOTA being capitalized with a tail. That being said, "Joshua" is certainly an incorrect rendering of the name. On the other side, Yahushua is hebrew, not greek, so a helenized name "Jesus" can not be correct either, for serveral reasons.

What I don't understand is why are these people saying this has no foundation, or saying it's nonsense? It can be easily proven to be more correct than anything starting with a "J" and the spelling of it is a "theological" debate and it does deserve it's own page to have it's own case in that debate.

As far as vandalism goes, the only vandalistic activity going on is the constant redirecting and removing. How is it vandalism to make a post on a higly debated issue from a different prespective(Messianic)? If I were to redirect "Joshua" and "Jesus" to "Yahushua" it would no doubt be considered vandalism, but for them to do the same is it not? That's very bad logic and reasoning imho.

You have three major prespectives on this article; Christianity refuses to accept the issue of "Jesus" being incorrect from the above stated reasons, Jews are trying to conceal this due to rabbinical/talmudic laws and are marking it off as nonsense to not give credit one way or another, and then you have the Messianic prespective that is only trying to promote what they beleive to be historically correct, based on as much (if not more) fact as the other two parties.

All due respect you can not delete and redirect the article because the majority doesn't agree with it. Put a disclaimer on it if you will but let the article stand. Only those who are looking for it will find it anyhow; it's not trying to take any other articles glory be redirecting them.

What is the real deal here? I have yet to see any solid accusations being made against it outside people's own opinions. It might not be able to be proven 100%, but if that's all that you need for grounds to delete articles then we should get started on it tomorrow, because there are a lot of them out there that fit that category.

This is a name (and spelling of) from a view point of a different belief and it does have enough evidence behind it to make it just as valid as the others.
 * Well, the only reason "original names" are not the main article is because the main article title tends to be what's most recognizable to English speakers (same reason Germany does not redirect to Deutschland and Beijing doesn't redirect either. See Naming conventions)  I don't delete anything, looking at the log User:Mike Rosoft deleted the article the first time and User:Danny the second time.  If you want to contest it (if indeed looking at any encyclopedia will produce the information, articles should be verifiable) then open up a Deletion review and argue for the inclusion there.  ColourBurst 03:34, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Yahushua
The outcome at the articles for deletion was to delete the article and redirect to Joshua. Do you any reason to believe that the subject is different enough to warrant a separate article? ColourBurst 23:23, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Please note that Wikipedia is not a place for original research or religious preaching. Your article was seen as inappropriate (and all the users who contributed to its deletion vote/discussion have agreed that it should be removed) for this reason and because it was dealing with several unrelated topics, duplicating already existing articles:
 * Joshua - the Old Testament leader (and yes, I know that the proper transliteration from Hebrew is Yehoshua, but per naming conventions, the most common English name is to be used)
 * Jesus - the central figure of Christianity
 * Both the articles give the origin of the English name
 * Yeshua - believed to be the original Aramaic name of Jesus
 * Yeshu - used as an acronym for the phrase "may his name and memory be obliterated" and to refer to a person guilty of apostasy
 * I have restored the redirect to Joshua and protected it to pevent re-posting of the contents. If there is anything encyclopedic to be said about "Yehoshua", "Yahoshua", "Yahushua" etc. that isn't already in other articles (except that it is a transliteration of the Hebrew name of Joshua), please tell me and I may reconsider. Otherwise, you may try your luck at Deletion review, but don't expect any success. - Mike Rosoft 08:44, 28 November 2006 (UTC)