User talk:Jeffro77/Archive2009b

re: Jehovah's Witnesses publications for evangelizing
Regarding Actually, WP:BTW states, "Links should not be placed in the bold reiteration of the title in the article's lead sentence." Meaning the first words "Jehovah's Witnesses" shouldn't even be linked! It's supposed to be bolded only.. it's not supposed to be linked. -- &oelig; &trade; 06:55, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
 * "Jehovah's Witnesses" is not a reiteration of the article name. WP:LEAD states "If the title of a page is descriptive it does not need to appear verbatim in the main text, and even if it does it should not be in boldface."-- Jeffro 77 (talk) 11:05, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

RE
Thank you, point taken. Sorry about my spelling I try to type too fast at times. Johanneum (talk) 11:36, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Purpose of JW study
A recent edit of Organizational structure of Jehovah's Witnesses (see diff), inserted the following:
 * The purpose of the Bible study programme is for the student to become baptized as one of Jehovah's Witnesses.

That particular citation doesn't really support that assertion; it explicitly says of those who conduct such studies: "their main interest is to honor Jehovah". Here is that thought in context, on the page you cited: Since Kingdom publishers will not be conducting a home Bible study with the same student for many years, they can conduct studies with more people or increase their share in the house-to-house work and other forms of the ministry. (Acts 5:42; 20:20, 21) Aware of their accountability to God, they call attention to divine warnings. (Ezekiel 33:7-9) But their main interest is to honor Jehovah and help as many as possible to learn about the good news A better reference for the point is this one:
 * "Conduct Progressive Doorstep and Telephone Bible Studies", Our Kingdom Ministry, April 2006, page 3, "...let us [Jehovah's Witnesses] not lose sight of our purpose in starting and conducting Bible studies. Our aim is to help honesthearted ones become dedicated and baptized servants of Jehovah."

I've updated the paragraph body as well. --AuthorityTam (talk) 20:27, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Below copied from User_talk:AuthorityTam Here it is in context:
 * Actually the passage I had in mind was "the objective of helping Bible students to learn enough about God’s Word and purposes to make a dedication to Jehovah and get baptized," but the reference you've given makes the point just as well.-- Jeffro 77 (talk) 09:10, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually, the phrase quoted in the immediately previous paragraph refers to a particular book title.
 * "May Jehovah Credit Good to Your Account", The Watchtower, September 15, 1996, page 19
 * "This book was written with the objective of helping Bible students to learn enough about God’s Word and purposes to make a dedication to Jehovah and get baptized."
 * --AuthorityTam (talk) 12:29, 4 August 2009 (UTC) --AuthorityTam (talk) 12:33, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
 * You're splitting hairs, yet again. Or are you contending that JW's don't actually conduct bible studies with the objective of making converts?-- Jeffro 77 (talk) 13:10, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I began this thread with the goal of encouraging a more-elevated encyclopedic standard.
 * Not personal pettiness.
 * Perhaps the editor misunderstands...I confirmed the point in question, but with a reference that was unequivocal. See diff.
 * --AuthorityTam (talk) 15:16, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 21:54, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Cult
Hi Jeffro77. I wrte you here to request your help - you seem to have a good knowledge about and interest in less popular religious groups. Currently the article on Cults is written as a mixture between a dictionary entry and a Cult-Watch group website. The academic viewpoint as found in the literature on Sociology of Religion is hardly mentioned and brushed of as if it were a fringe viewpoint. I hope you might be interested in collaborating towards making the article conform better to NPOV and give a better presentation of this controversial topic.·Maunus· ƛ · 01:10, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Eek... on first glance, it looks like a disaster. I'll see what I can do as time permits.-- Jeffro 77 (talk) 03:39, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Governing Body redirects
Excellent work with your redirects. I had no idea so many miserable articles on people such as Lord Barry and David Splane existed. For God's sake, "Students at Gilead, as well as members of the Bethel family recalled that his talks and comments would highlight heartwarming stories about many who had served in the missionary work." Fetch me a bucket, monsieur! LTSally (talk) 08:52, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Bringing down the society
I assume your comment "It's a matter of principle, which sometimes people do not understand when they feel they have to 'bring down the Watch Tower' at all costs" was directed at me. A cheap shot and well wide of the mark if it was. I have never expressed an interest in bringing down the WTS at all costs. My edits have included complimentary and praiseworthy facts about them and their achievements. But as I explained on my user page, I am very keen to see Wikipedia containing documented facts, fairly and neutrally presented, that the WTS would rather hide, so while JW contributors have relied on their WT CD-Roms to present the party line, I have focused on those.

I found the audio link fascinating and I've gone to greath lengths to explain fully my reasons for wanting to see it linked. It's a secretive process and this audio allows outsiders a chance to see a demonstration of the judicial processes in action. I've been quite candid about this. If I wanted to bring down the WTS at all costs I'd be playing a lot dirtier than this and would have been kicked off Wikipedia long before this. My arguments -- a vain one, it's becoming clear, though I wish there were more who'd comment -- are all made in good faith and I'd prefer to be dealt with the same way. LTSally (talk) 12:00, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
 * It was not directed at any one particular person.-- Jeffro 77 (talk) 08:26, 9 September 2009 (UTC)