User talk:JohnChrysostom/ArXiv01

Inaccuracies in The Da Vinci Code
Hi. Welcome to Wikipedia. Regarding your edits to Inaccuracies in The Da Vinci Code, I need to ask, are they derived from the sources already cited in those passages? Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 18:59, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
 * When you say "original references", you mean the sources cited in the footnotes in those passages? Nightscream (talk) 19:23, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
 * The reason I wanted further clarification (and I forgot to include this above) was when you said, "I did not believe they needed to be referenced, based on the Wikipedia guideline, "If you think something is likely to be challenged, it must be cited, but if it is not likely to be challenged, it doesn't require citation". This is true, but when it comes to issues of controversy or criticism, it is important that the criticism be attributed to the critic, and not merely the underlying historical fact being asserted, since relying on historical material to argue the criticism, when no critic is being cited for that criticism, would constitute synthesis, which is a form of original research. R. Laird Harris, for example, could not have been criticizing the film, because the work by him that is cited was written in 1974.


 * Regarding the apocrypha, Reformation, etc., there is a significant amount of material after the Olson/Miesel citation in that passage, which does not have its own citation, which begins with "For example...." If this comes from their book, then it should be placed before the cite, since cites go at the end of passages that the support, per WP:PAIC. If I understand what you're saying about the apocrypha, the Reformation, etc., the criticism on those aspects of Brown's novel comes from Carl Olson and Sandra Miesel? Nightscream (talk) 23:54, 5 July 2011 (UTC)


 * So in other words, the observation/conclusion that Dan Brown got it wrong doesn't come from the author of the sources being cited, but from the editor or editors who added that material to the article? Sorry, but that's synthesis, which is not permitted. Nightscream (talk) 16:19, 6 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Sorry I misunderstood. If you want to restore the portions of that material that is in the Olsen/Miesel book, then feel free to restore it. But anything not mentioned by those authors cannot be added to the article. Nightscream (talk) 18:11, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

October 2011
Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Two-gospel hypothesis. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you.

If you wish to include legitimate criticisms of a hypothesis, please do so using credible sources. Sleddog116 (talk) 17:14, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

Question on your categories
This is just a quick question on something I noticed on your categorisation. I saw you were categorised as both a Theist Wikipedian and an Atheist Wikipedian. How can this be - this seems a contradiction to me? I can understand how one can be both an Atheist Wikpedian and a Christian Wikipedian, as there have been Christian Atheist theologians such as Thomas Altizer. You can leave any answers on my userpage. ACEOREVIVED (talk) 21:20, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Many thanks for getting back to me on this! ACEOREVIVED (talk) 09:43, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. For more information, see the FAQ or drop a line at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Epitome (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links to Summa Theologiae and Aristotelian


 * Books of the Bible (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link to Sophonias


 * Holy Orders (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link to Denominations


 * Term logic (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link to Aristotelian

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:29, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Move button
Hi, minor pint, but there is a move button (triangel) on the menu that moves pages and preserves talk pages, etc. I fixed it now, but generally a talk page discussion is needed for moves. Cheers. History2007 (talk) 03:07, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Page moves
Hi John. In response to your question on my talk page, the place to read about page moves is WP:MOVE. Basically, once your account has been around for a while, it will be autoconfirmed and you'll get an extra button that allows you to move pages to new titles. As with most things on Wikipedia, anything that may be controversial needs to be discussed beforehand. Some moves are more complicated. Copy-and-paste moves mess up the article history, which is necessary for attribution and copyright purposes, so they should be avoided. If your desired title already has an edit history, an administrator has to handle it, because it will require deletion. In the meantime, you can always start up discussions at the talk page and make requests at WP:RM. I hope that helps; don't hesitate to let me know if I can be of further help to you.Cúchullain t/ c 20:47, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. When you recently edited Council of Jamnia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tobit (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) 10:22, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.


 * Biblical canon (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Vocalization and Vowel pointing


 * Mohammedan (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Ali Sina and Robert Spencer


 * Eritrea (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Tewahedo


 * James Gibbons (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Genesis

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:54, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.


 * Nicene Creed (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Canon and Great Schism


 * Byzantine battle tactics (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Dar al-Islam


 * Gog and Magog (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Yusuf Ali


 * Universalism (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Dar al-Islam

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:48, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.


 * Yahweh (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Dominus and NJPS


 * Revelation (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Cardinal

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:41, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.


 * Universalism (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Naskh, Yusuf Ali and Dar al-Islam


 * Messiah (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Nabi and Maryam


 * Whore of Babylon (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to The Great Controversy and Watchtower Bible and Tract Society


 * Antique (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Rolls-Royce


 * Independent Catholic Churches (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to FSSP


 * Pious fiction (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to RLDS

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:20, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

test
St John Chrysostom view / my bias 07:02, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks!
Dear User:JohnChrysostom, thank you for the barnstar! I really appreciate it! It means a lot to know that I am making a difference here. I hope you have a nice evening. With regards, AnupamTalk 02:37, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Notice of discussion at the Administrators' Noticeboard
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. --206.217.205.96 (talk) 17:28, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I have removed the hate rhetoric from your user page per that discussion and WP:UP. Polemical statements unrelated to Wikipedia, or statements attacking or vilifying groups of editors, persons, or other entities are not appropriate content.  Please do not restore that or similar material as you may be blocked from editing.  Toddst1 (talk) 17:37, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I did not know that there was any regulation of Userspace beyond "no copyright infringement". I shall not revert it, as I had/have no intention of non-adherence to any policies: thank you for letting me know that there are policies for userspace, and that my content violated them. St John Chrysostom view / my bias 17:52, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your positive response/attitude. Toddst1 (talk) 16:43, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Listing of policies and guidelines
A while ago, you asked for a list of policies and guidelines. Maybe these pages will help: List of policies and guidelines and (subcategories of) Category:Wikipedia policies and guidelines. You also seemed to have some questions about namespaces, which are documented at Namespace (an information page, neither policy nor guideline). If you don't want to read a whole policy or guideline, look for the "This page in a nutshell" box near the top; it should provide a basic overview. Please keep in mind that you are not required to read all the rules; unlike a system of laws, Wikipedia considers ignorance of the law to be acceptable, as long as you comply with rules once you've been notified of them. You can even ignore them, if doing so would better the encyclopedia, but please remember that "bettering" is subjective, so you should be conservative in rule-breaking. Finally, the most important rules are really founding principles, but each one links to a more detailed policy. I hope this is helpful, and welcome to Wikipedia! -- N Y  Kevin  @199, i.e. 03:47, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Well put, Kevin. Even a seasoned admin like me with 70,000 edits occasionally runs across policies or guidelines I didn't know about and only find out by someone telling me (usually politely) that some policy had changed or what I've done violates WP:Obscure Guideline 573.  Toddst1 (talk) 16:47, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Studies in the Scriptures
I have removed the NPOV template you placed at Studies in the Scriptures. If you believe the article is not neutral, you need to start a discussion at article Talk regarding the the points you believe to be disputed. If/when there is a matter of neutrality to discuss, the template can be restored. Thanks.-- Jeffro 77 (talk) 23:52, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

WP Projects
Hi, you probably already know this but there are various project pages such as WP:WikiProject Christianity which you might wish to add to your watchlist as you seem to have an interest in the area (apart from the name!) Cheers. In ictu oculi (talk) 05:39, 28 January 2012 (UTC)