User talk:Jamiejojesus

Your recent edits
Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 03:32, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia
I saw a couple of your recent edits, including the one on Slakr's talk page. Because they were a little odd, I went back and read through what your contributions have been so far.

I am not sure that you understand what Wikipedia is all about. This project is about creating and improving an online encyclopedia.

Please take a look at our five core pillars of what we're all about at Five pillars, then review our policies and guidelines in more detail.

We welcome anyone here who shares our core objective of making a free online encyclopedia. If that's not what you came here to do, please reconsider whether participating here is a good idea. You are not doing encyclopedia related ("encyclopedic") things right now, and are leaving comments which just poke users. That's not really constructive, and not why we're here.

Thank you. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 21:31, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Re. questions on IRC
Hi,

Further to your IRC enquiries, regarding the article, please read the following very carefully;

WP:OR (especially WP:SYNTH), and WP:RS.

You might get a lot of information by looking into the development of the article, God as the Devil - and perhaps speaking to the creator on user talk:WagePeace.

I would strongly recommend creating the article in your own area first, rather than making a 'live' article. You can create a user sub-page just by going to one that doesn't exist; for example, user:jamiejojesus/testpage. If you edit there, you can fiddle around with the article, and check what others think before putting it onto the mainspace of Wikipedia.

I would further recommend that you get involved in editing a little more before you write a full article. A good place to start is the community portal.

Good luck with everything; please ask for help whenever you need it. If you want to contact me, just leave a message on my own talk page.

Thanks! --  Chzz  ►  22:00, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Your message
Hi Jamie, Got your e-mail. Thank you. I'm glad you like my work. I've looked at yours before and I think you have some good and important ideas, along with a lot of justified anger that gets in the way. This dysfunctional world can be hard to take and I relate to your anger and frustration. I'd be happy to hear about the ideas you're working on. WagePeace (talk) 04:54, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

April 2009
Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to the page Jesus has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. Thrane (talk) 00:14, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to the page God. Such edits constitute vandalism and are reverted. Please do not continue to make unconstructive edits to pages; use the sandbox for testing. Thank you. Thrane (talk) 00:15, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Please do not vandalize pages, as you did with this edit to Jesus. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing. JCutter (talk) 00:16, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Love and Good Intentions
JamieJoJesus, here are some love and good intentions for you. You would benefit by learning what encyclopedias truly are, what Wikipedia is truly trying to become, and what censorship is really all about. Editing in your personal messages to people on article pages, such as your recent edit to God's page, will only accomplish getting your editing privileges suspended, perhaps even revoked. So in effect, by doing this, you are only censoring yourself. There are many, many better outlets you can use to bring God's ideas to people. In the time it takes for you to edit an article in this way and then get your edit reverted, you will "reach" few if any. So your efforts might be better spent by finding ways to reach more people. Just a humble thought. .`^) Painediss`cuss (^`.  00:41, 11 April 2009 (UTC)


 * hey you there...my humble thanks! ==


 * i just feel a increasing sense of urgency and time is fairly linear on this planet(i have not witnessed too many people transcending time and space) and time is running out. and when i go to start to write my own article...probably better that way...i would like to know why i have to reference (from an already existing source) a goddamn thing since from what i have read in articles regarding where god is concern the references most used...oooohh let's pick one at random why don't we...the bible are from a very fallible, inaccurate, falsly "edidted by men around the 4th century (if that is accurate...pope innocence or benedict or whoever) that were not only not very nice men but whose agenda was to oppress and reppress people, maipulate, control,and were sadistic, power, greedy warmongers. i see no valid reason why my work on a "god as a woman" or "god as love" can not come from the original quelle source...me. and of course i would use evey resource that was humanely possible...those people who have risked their lives and that of family and friends to get the truth out there...(including this encyclopedia,i hope)i do not know every goddamn thing but i do know alot, some that no one else knows possibly. and frankly, i for one am more than pissed of that people are still using religion and god to justify there every demonic (first time used that word) action. and the earth herself is at a critical point where all our discussions, praying, and whatever it is we all do these days without clean water, air, greenery, wildflowers, and the general diversity of just about everything but...destructive human beings, just very well be a mute point!
 * gee...thanks for letting me vent. and remember to tell them not shoot the messengers this time...that we are all they have left!
 * love,
 * jamie jo


 * p.s. and where is the damn spell check mr. spelling checker?
 * p.s.s. please delete the copy the computer at the library is going to cut me off.


 * You're very welcome, Jamie Jo! We can't change the past.  I believe that one of the greatest things we're here for is to learn the difference between right and wrong.  It's not always easy to tell them apart, but it usually is.  Then, when we have learned what sets right apart from wrong, we have to make a choice.  If we choose to do what's right, then I believe that sets us on a road to making the world a better place.  The bottom line is the same as your bottom line before your name above.  It's all about Love and about learning all we can about it.  People might pervert religions and God, they might preach kindness and understanding, and then they might kill the first person they come to who's not like them.  But the message of Love is eternal and unpervertable.  Spread that message and you can't go wrong.  Live by that message and people will follow you.  All who are sensitive to the world feel your growing sense of urgency.  It can feel frustrating at times.  It can also propel a person into doing wrong.  So don't let that feeling overcome you.  Stay calm and loving.  Let people surprise you with their love; they do that sometimes.  Ever yours,    .`^) Painediss`cuss (^`.   15:14, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

talkback
 Chzz  ►  22:15, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

May 2009
Please refrain from making test edits in Wikipedia pages, even if you intend to fix them later. Such edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment again, please use the sandbox. Michael Bednarek (talk) 06:19, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Off topic
Please do not add off topic items such as those you are adding to Holy Spirit. History2007 (talk) 07:59, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

RE: Your comment to me that:
 * holy spirit
 * i have looked at your "history" of postings and feel you are biased as most of your articles are exclusively based on a male god and am going to whoever it may be to file a formal complaint. what i posted was relevant to the the holy spirit. mary magdalena and urania are both associated with holy spirit. i would appreciate knowing where the appropriate place would be to insert this information in the artical as i am still a novice at this. i suppose i could start a whole new chapter but i will be including that pertinent information in there. i will be able to reference mary magdalene and the urania articles in wikipedia themselves.jamiejojesus 18:06, 8 June 2011 (UTC)jamiejojesusjamiejojesus 18:06, 8 June 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jamiejojesus (talk • contribs)

Please feel free to proceed through whatever channels you see appropriate. I stand by my edits. The natural place to start the discussion will be on the talk page for Holy Spirit given that it pertains to that. So you should post on that talk page and ask: Is the Holy Spirit female? And ask if the links you add pertain to the page. Then the discussion will proceed among multiple editors. But FYI your statements are not accurate in my view, and as one example position, see the Catechism of the Catholic Church #239 which specifically states that "God is neither man nor woman: he is God".See it here. I will leave it there until you discuss on the "article talk page". History2007 (talk) 18:44, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Your recent edits
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 18:28, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

June 2011
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! While we appreciate that you enjoy using Wikipedia, please note that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and not a social network. Wikipedia is not a place to socialize or do things that are not directly related to improving the encyclopedia, as you did at Talk:God. Off-topic material may be deleted at any time. This message is not meant to discourage you from editing Wikipedia but rather to remind you that the ultimate goal of this website is to build an encyclopedia. Thank you. Ian.thomson (talk) 19:52, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

January 2012
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Wikipedia:Protection policy with this edit, did not appear to be constructive, and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Dreadstar ☥   05:25, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Jan 2012
Clear and deliberate vandalism. Needs to be blocked. History2007 (talk) 05:28, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Blocked
I have reviewed your edits after a request on the vandalism noticeboard. Your edits consist entirely of superfluous commentary, vandalism and trolling. You have been advised and then warned not to continue with this pattern of editing at numerous occasions over nearly three years, as evidenced by comments above on this talk page, but you have continued. I have blocked your account indefinitely per WP:BP. You are of course welcome to appeal this block -- Samir 05:41, 27 January 2012 (UTC)