User talk:John Carter/Archives/2013/September

Please comment on Talk:La Luz del Mundo
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:La Luz del Mundo. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service.'' — RFC&#32;bot (talk) 07:18, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Arbitration
You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Arbitration/Requests and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the following resources may be of use—
 * Arbitration/Requests;
 * Arbitration guide.

Thanks, Ignocrates (talk) 23:47, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

"Ant-religious" user being discussed at AN/I
Could I ask you to review the additions to the thread over the last few days and reconsider your stated opposition to a topic ban to cover Christianity, broadly construed, for "Greeng". Thanks.Smeat75 (talk) 15:25, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

New proposal regarding Wer900 at AN/I
In an effort to resolve the discussion at AN/I regarding Wer900, I have offered a new proposal at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. Since you have weighed in on previous proposals regarding this user, I am notifying you of the new one in case you wish to opine. Regards, alanyst 19:02, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Talk:2 Mini Ikiru to Iu Chikara/Comments
Talk:2 Mini Ikiru to Iu Chikara/Comments, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Talk:2 Mini Ikiru to Iu Chikara/Comments and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of Talk:2 Mini Ikiru to Iu Chikara/Comments during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Kumioko (talk) 19:20, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Greengrounds using another IP
You recently took action to block user:Greengrounds for extensive disruptive edits. He appears to be at it again using an IP address at Religious views of Adolf Hitler, (IP ‎209.91.107.167). Could you put a protection on that page to prevent IP editors from changing content for time being? Many thanks. Ozhistory (talk) 23:13, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Abrahamic religions seems to be getting too close to an edit war
I've never implemented a 3 edit revert rule so I'm not sure of the details but it looks like three different editors have reverted him and I don't want this to degenerate any more than it is. --Smkolins (talk) 13:24, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
 * additionally he has taken the brief discussion there without consensus as justification for making change in other articles at least one of which was caught by another editor. --Smkolins (talk) 15:35, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I picked up you were away somewhat with a wikibreak - for followup see Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Edit_warringand User_talk:Wiki_hamze -Sorry to something like this on your brief moment's return. -Smkolins (talk) 18:01, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Alas the talk page continues to be protracted. Others are interpreting your views - I don't think their interpretation is that right but I'm not trying to put words in your mouth. You presence is nevertheless welcomed if you find the time and energy. --Smkolins (talk) 11:59, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

List of new religious movements
Hello! I am writing to you as you are an editor who has participated in the disccussion at List of new religious movements. There is a related discussion at the Reliable sources/Noticeboard which primarily consists of the same editors and many of the same discussion topics as the RFC. In an effort to forward the discussion to a resolution, I am inviting you to participate in the RSN thread as well. Thank you in advance for considering it. Cheers! --Tgeairn (talk) 18:54, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Greengrounds at Catholic Church and Nazi Germany
I suspect the blocked editor Greengrounds is at it again, now at Catholic Church and Nazi Germany, and on IP ‎209.91.107.184. At any rate the "anonymous user" ‎209.91.107.184 has twice reverted a recent edit by me under a false pretext (claiming that I have deleted material sourced to Baranowski, when I have in fact inserted material sourced to Baranowski). Ozhistory (talk) 01:07, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Inappropriate remark on NPOV Noticeboard
John, I am extremely disappointed that you saw fit to make this remark: " I add the note here because, unfortunately, I believe that there is and has been over the years at least occasional POV pushing for Landmark in the wiki, particularly as it relates to criticism of Landmark." You are of course entitled to your opinions on the conduct, viewpoints and motivations of other editors but to put this comment in a prominent discussion forum appears to me to be a gross violation of the policy to assume good faith. Especially since, as you will be well aware, the last time that contentious editing at Landmark Worldwide came before Arbcom it was anti-Landmark POV pushers who were censured, topic-banned and de-sysopped. DaveApter (talk) 07:41, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Personal attack?
John, I am surprised and dismayed that you should accuse me of making a personal attack. John, thank you for the prompt and gracious apology on my talk page, which I accept. I have no wish to be in an antagonistic relationship with you or any other Wikipedian. I have always been open about my own viewpoint, and I honestly do my best to be as objective as possible when editing on topics about which I have strong personal opinions, and I am committed to Wikipedia being a reliable source of objective balanced reliable information. I do not recall suggesting that "indicating numbers of opinions expressed as being the decider" in the discussion about the NRM list. I oppose its inclusion because my reading of the sources is that they do not justify it. 18:47, 15 September 2013 (UTC)
 * 1) I have no idea how you or any reasonable person could construe my remarks as a personal attack.
 * 2) I cannot see anything in my remarks that could possibly be interpreted as a threat, implicit or explicit.
 * 3) I have been open and candid in making my own "bias" in relation to Landmark quite clear on my user page, and also in my recent peer review request. DaveApter (talk) 17:23, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Derry
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Derry. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service.'' — Legobot (talk) 01:02, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

Arbitration case opened
You were recently listed as a party to a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Arbitration/Requests/Case/Ebionites 3. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Arbitration/Requests/Case/Ebionites 3/Evidence. Please add your evidence by October 1, 2013, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Arbitration/Requests/Case/Ebionites 3/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 08:29, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Footpaths of Gibraltar
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Footpaths of Gibraltar. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service.'' — Legobot (talk) 00:00, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Ransom theory of atonement
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Ransom theory of atonement. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service.'' — Legobot (talk) 00:01, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

Discussion about collapsing music track lists
There is a discussion about whether the track lists for Music of the SaGa series should be collapsed in the article at Talk:Music_of_the_SaGa_series. Please visit the talk page and take a few moments to share your feedback on this issue. --Jax 0677 (talk) 00:18, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Jewish Bolshevism
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Jewish Bolshevism. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service.'' — Legobot (talk) 00:02, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

Your advice from Reliable Sources Noticeboard is being reverted, what to do?
Hi John Carter, excuse me, you had advised that there was no reason to keep a statement in an article that wasn't supported by any reliable reference. I did as you said and removed it, but it was reverted. Here is the diff of the revert:. Much was explained previously on the talk page, and consensus reached between everyone except the user who made the revert. He made a rant on the talk page about it which is mostly ad-hominem, but he has no argument to why an exceptional controversial claim from a non-reliable, self-published source should be stated as a fact.

Any help in this issue would be much appreciated. Thank you. GreyWinterOwl (talk) 13:01, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Your involvement with DRN
Hi there, I noticed that you haven't been as active at DRN as you was before. DRN has been a bit backlogged lately and we could use some extra hands. We have updated our volunteer list to a new format, Dispute resolution noticeboard/Volunteers (your name is still there under the old format if you haven't updated it) and are looking into ways to make DRN more effective and more rewarding for volunteers (your input is appreciated!). If you don't have much time to volunteer at the moment, that's fine too, just move your name to the inactive list (you're free to add yourself back to active at any time). Hope to see you again soon :) Steven Zhang (talk) 13:19, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Nokia
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Nokia. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service.'' — Legobot (talk) 00:01, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 27
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Pseudo-Ambrose, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Pope Damasus (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) 11:52, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:International Churches of Christ
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:International Churches of Christ. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Feedback request service.'' — Legobot (talk) 00:01, 28 September 2013 (UTC)