User talk:Naturalpsychology

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 may 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. --SineBot (talk) 10:05, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

I am signing all of my posts now. Thank you. Naturalpsychology (talk) 09:23, 25 October 2009 (UTC)Naturalpsychology

Brevity
Please note the guidelines at WP:TALK, which include the excellent advice to be brief. In your comments at Talk:Jehovah's Witnesses you have not only repeated much of your lengthy comments about the "Satan's control" reference, but have copies screeds of material from the Watchtower Library that is quite unnecessary on this talk page. You have also inserted unsigned comments in the middle of mine, which renders the conversation pretty meaningnless to anyone else trying to read it. It is very hard to engage in a meaningful discussion when you are swamping the talk page with this material and failing to clearly identify the point you're trying to make. LTSally (talk) 10:48, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

LTSally: Thank you for your comments, Please remember the Wikipedia guidelines to be polite. Thank you. Naturalpsychology (talk) 09:08, 25 October 2009 (UTC)Naturalpsychology

In my comments in the future will, I will try to be more succinct. Naturalpsychology (talk) 09:19, 25 October 2009 (UTC)Naturalpsychology. Please follow the Wikipedia guidelines and try, please to be polite. Thank you. Naturalpsychology (talk) 09:19, 25 October 2009 (UTC)Naturalpsychology

Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

Welcome, and please...
Be brief and clear. Your lengthy opening statements on new topics at the Jehovah's Witnesses talk page are tiring to read. Amen to that which others have already mentioned here on your talk page. Rather than presenting a lecture, find the key point that you are detailing--a proposed change or other concern--and state it as clearly and briefly as possible. Then bring up supporting material as the need arises.

We appreciate having a diverse team of wiki-editors, and your comments and contributions are certainly welcome here. I hope you don't take our advice as hostile. Best wishes. ...but what do you think? ~B F izz (talk) 20:50, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. I will try to be more succinct in my comments.Naturalpsychology (talk) 09:20, 25 October 2009 (UTC)Naturalpsychology

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 may 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. --SineBot (talk) 09:23, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

This issue has been addressed, and would like to move forward, fresh. Natural (talk) 15:34, 1 November 2011 (UTC)Natural

Please check your user page
Check whether the recent (last?) edit by an IP user 165.130.136.206 was something you wanted. If so, was this perhaps you having forgotten to login? If not, well you have a feisty crew within the 165.130.136.* address space, and likely your school? You have my sympathies. Shenme (talk) 07:39, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Issue addressed of logging in. Natural (talk) 15:52, 1 November 2011 (UTC)Natural

Please advise editors when making a complaint about them
I have twice before raised with you the need to advise other editors if you are going to make complaints on Wikipedia administrator noticeboards. This is a common courtesy, allowing that editor to defend himself. Someone has pointed out to me that you have made another complaint about me on the COI noticeboard today. Once again you made no attempt to alert me, which suggests a level of deviousness on your part. You are also continuing to make unsigned edits and edits under anonymous IP addresses. Can you please try to familiarise yourself with some Wikipedia basics before you continue here? When making a comment, please sign in under your user name, and end your comment with four tildes. That's all -- just four tildes. Wikipedia will do the rest.

I appreciate you finally raising on the JW talk page a specific point you believe breaches the policy on neutrality. I have replied to this. Please try to be equally specific with any other objections, so each can be discussed, rather than making general complaints about books by apostates. This allows a reasoned discussion and will help to improve the article. LTSally (talk) 21:42, 7 January 2010 (UTC)


 * I have to agree with LT, it doesn't matter you said you might do this things....You still have to notify the involved parties when you take action. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 01:22, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

I'm still getting used to all the procedures, being somewhat new. In the future, if I have any formal complaint, I'll notify about the specific page. Thanks for the tips on procedures.Natural (talk) 00:06, 9 January 2010 (UTC)Natural
 * ON a side note. it's important to maintain NPOV, but it is a good thing to see someone here that is from a pro stance.Hell In A Bucket (talk) 00:52, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, I appreciate it. I hope it genuinely helps the article.--Natural (talk) 03:04, 9 January 2010 (UTC)


 * It appears you are possibly a JW. I hope that a balanced view attracts more people to the faith. I was raised a witness, I was a unbaptised publisher and was removed when I was a teen. I still believe although disagree with some procedures, but hey we're all human...Hell In A Bucket (talk) 05:19, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Procedure on nominating a page for deletion LTSally Page
This won't go anywhere as you haven't read the instructions and followed the process. And again, it was uncourteous of you not to notify LTSally as per the directions: '' Please consider notifying the author(s) by placing User:LTSally ~ on their talk page(s).  -- Neil N   talk to me '' 17:54, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I see that you have now. Thank you. But you still need to finish the MFD process. -- Neil N   talk to me  17:58, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

I placed the MFD tag on LTSally's Talk page. I think there is one more step involved. If you happen to know to guide me to the next step? Thanks. --Natural (talk) 18:15, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Yep, you're right. Go here and type -- Neil N    talk to me  18:20, 9 January 2010 (UTC)


 * I took the liberty of posting your ocmment on why it should be deleted to the MFD page. It still shows on LTSallys page too. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 18:22, 9 January 2010 (UTC)


 * So, then, I shouldn't do the instructions that are mentioned by Neil above? You did already? --Natural (talk) 18:46, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
 * You still need to do them. Hell In A Bucket took care of another step for you. -- Neil N   talk to me  18:49, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
 * And another editor took care of the last step. -- Neil N   talk to me  19:07, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Indeed, Hell In A Bucket and I helped with the procedure; you don't need to do much more besides wait to see what the community, and LTSally, decides. Just so you know, the steps to WP:MFD are detailed on that page, starting at MFD. ...but what do you think? ~B F izz 22:57, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Also, those of us involved in this particular mfd should also try to comment on other unrelated mfds, since we naturally hope that others will comment on this one. ...but what do you think? ~B F izz 23:05, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Policies
When you need help understanding policies swing by. I'll try to explain what's happening or why. There is a lot of policies here and it's easy to violate them, otherwise welcome to the pedia. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 15:25, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks very much.--Natural (talk) 22:27, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Protection
Anytime a page is vandalised severely we have the ability to ask for page protection. It is important to point out though, unless the vandalism is extreme articles aren't protected for long lengths of time. I personally agree that on some of the more disputable articles it should be autoconfirmed users, however Wiki has a core policy of open editing so entirely cutting that off is not likely. Review WP:PP it has the guidelines we use to determine which we can protect and how long. Also just a suggestion and in no way a criticism, read this too WP:TLDR, some of your comments have been pretty long and a lot of editors won't even read them. as far as Hiab, lots of people use that, or you can use Jake. whatever you're more comfortable with. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 22:47, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the tips--Natural (talk) 22:38, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
 * It's fine to ask another editor for advice regarding page protection, but you can also do it (the request, not the protection) yourself. To ask for protection on a specific page, please follow the instructions here. Regards, Tonywalton Talk 01:49, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the idea--Natural (talk) 22:38, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Didn't mean to be rude.
Sorry I missed your comments from the 15th. I work with At&t in Customer care. I do like art, I doodle and work abstract art at work, takes away some of the stress sometimes when people are screaming at me about their phone service. I will come back when I can post a poem here, hate accessing email from work. Hit me up with the book link. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 03:48, 21 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Sorry to take so long, preoccupied with the editing and a million other things of life. Trying to do some art this weekend, would like to break into portraits and have a friend staying with us who is pushing me onward.

This is the book, Drawing on the Right Side of the Brain by Betty Edwards. The old version is out there for a few pennies, this is the new version on Amazon: http://www.amazon.com/New-Drawing-Right-Side-Brain/dp/0874774195/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1264194841&sr=8-1 It's worth getting if you want to develop your skills. Great exercises.

Keep in touch. This is my email if you ever want to "chat" teacas@gmail.com Ciao.Natural (talk) 21:15, 22 January 2010 (UTC)Natural

Talkback
Hell In A Bucket (talk) 01:28, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Silent Lambs article AfD tag added
AfD tag = Article for Deletion

If you wish to copy your comments from here please do so. Andy5421 (talk) 09:01, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Haven't seen you in a minute.
How are you scott, haven't seen you editing in a while. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 00:20, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

J..... I haven't been editing the past few months. I was getting too irritated with the one other editor who was so firmly opposed, so I thought it best to take a break and get some perspective. Now I feel a little better and will try to do some balanced editing, if Jehovah wills. Natural (talk) 22:38, 16 May 2010 (UTC)Natural


 * Good to see you back Scott! Hell In A Bucket (talk) 00:00, 17 May 2010 (UTC)


 * took a long break from JW page, hopefully a more cooperative spirit will prevail.Natural (talk) 15:59, 1 November 2011 (UTC)Natural

Hi
I just came by the jehovah's witnesses talk page and read your comments - I agree with you completely in your assertions that the article needs to base itself of scholarly sources rather than the apostate or JW sources. In fact I argued the same point at some length six months ago Talk:Jehovah's_Witnesses/archive_42. In the end I was fairly disenchanted with the editing environment and decided to leave the discussion - but I am happy to see you taking it up again. Good luck!·Maunus· ƛ · 09:47, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the message. It's May now, am going to try to do some balanced and real editing that upgrades the quality of the Wikipedia main Jehovah's Witness article and cleans up some others if it is possible. Any positive support is encouraging. Thanks. Natural (talk) 22:39, 16 May 2010 (UTC)Natural

Editing marathon issue has been addressed. Natural (talk) 15:30, 1 November 2011 (UTC)Natural

New dayNatural (talk) 15:35, 1 November 2011 (UTC)Natural

Undo Edits.
Go to the history page. It should show each edit made and next toi it should be a blue link that says undo. make sure to leave a edit summary. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 00:48, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, will try to do that.Natural (talk) 17:10, 25 May 2010 (UTC)Natural

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 may 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) 01:58, 13 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Thank you, I had signed the bottom, but didn't realize that you should side those middle comments also. I wasn't sure about that, but now know. Natural (talk) 20:49, 13 July 2010 (UTC)Natural

Talkback
Look it, let's drop it alright. Everyone's got their choices, but you're not being balanced with Jehovah's Witnesses. You need to be more balanced. Even if you think that JW aren't 100%, nothing's all bad and nothing's 100% good. There is too much good in JW for someone who is balanced to take such a negative view. That's the point. There's a lot of good in JW, and you have to take a more objective look at things. Anyone can leave JW when they want, including me, but I make the choice to stay, and it's my own choice. But, why is someone going to go to such extremes to try to oppose JW. There is a 1000 religions out there. All of them have errors. It's not balanced. Organized religion is not the Devil. It gives a support to many people that's necessary and does a lot of good. It might not be your personal choice or suit your needs, but that's fine, but this determined opposition thing at all costs, that's too extreme, and that it meets a response when you attack people. You attack our religion, and then when I defend it you say shame on me as if I'm doing something wrong. So, that's the idea. Natural (talk) 13:06, 26 July 2010 (UTC)Natural


 * It's not good to fight too strong against anyone. Even me as a JW, shouldn't fight too hard against a clergyman, or evolutionist. You have to be balanced. Not all JW are that way, and the Watchtower only in the past 15 years or so has become more balanced in certain issues, even in the matter of evolution and science. So, anyone, that's the idea. In the past they were more dogmatic about things, the past 20 years or so, the emphasis has been more on balance and modesty, those type of things.Natural (talk) 13:55, 26 July 2010 (UTC)Natural

Hi Natural
I am a new comer in English wikipedia project and I went through some old talk pages in JW articles. I appreciate your good contributions to make JW article's bias free. I know Ex.Jw's here are doing so much discouragement. Never feel bad about it. Jehovah appreciates your good work. But be aware of talking too much to them because we cannot change them. As you know Satan(who is very intelligent) know Jehovah was right, but he won't change since his prestige won't allow. Its same for apostates, they will not change because their hearts are hardened like the the pharisees. We cannot change the world. Even Jehovah cannot. Like you I am also a logical thinker, who is 100% confident that Jw's are truth. Even if some mistakes appear in the organization due to imperfection, it is not a reason to dismiss all the truth we attained from it. Jesus disciples said, "Where will we go? Since the words of life is with you". Apostates never attain happiness in life,that's why they work here( At least they feel happy when they write negatively to witnesses). But we are having peace and security. May the undeserved kindness and peace of the Lord Jehovah and Jesus with you..--Logical Thinker: talk 21:38, 1 September 2010 (UTC)


 * There is a difference between someone who leaves Christianity or Jehovah's Witnesses, who no longer believes in the doctrines of the Bible or Jehovah's Witnesses, and an apostate. An apostate actively works against their former religion. This is not a term only in the Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament) and is not Jehovah's Witness jargon, but is used in modern times by sociologists to describe those who have left their former religious organization and now work actively against that. This can be in the Catholic religion, or any other religion, including some Buddhist sects, according to Bryan Wilson. The "apostate," to use the word he uses, is not a good source of information, and sociologists don't take them as a reliable source of information, according to Wilson, who was an imminent scholar and authority on sects.


 * 2 John 9 syas, "Anyone who runs ahead and does not continue in the teaching of Christ does not have God; whoever continues in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. 10If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not take him into your house or welcome him. 11Anyone who welcomes him shares in his wicked work."

Bryan R. Wilson - Emeritus Professor, Oxford - Cults & New Religious Movements: Apostates - Apostasy - Apostate Syndrome http://www.saisathyasai.com/baba/bryan-ronald-wilson-apostates-apostasy-cults.html


 * Religious Freedom Watch
 * Apostates and New Religious Movements
 * http://www.religiousfreedomwatch.org/religious-experts/credible-experts/apostates-and-new-religious-movements/


 * In Jehovah lead Israel if someone stops worship Jehovah or cut down his contact with its people he was considered as a person who purposefully leaving after knowing that it was lead by God. Similarly Jesus said if someone stops following him after knowing the truth(placing his hands on Plough) he is not qualified to be his disciple. There is only one way and only one belief according to bible. JW's had already confident they had found it. If someone leaves the organization them he can be considered as a dis fellow shipped person, because he did a sin against God's Organization(Hence holy spirit). Elders are trying to help them, but if he resigns then it is intentional Sin . Another reason is to save the flock from hazards from them. In first century also bible states people voluntarily resigned, and bible calls their actions because of their love to the World and loss of faith. But its notable that from the beginning if JW's intense persecution and pressures had tried to stop its growth. But nothing had succeeded. JW's those work here are not willing to make any favorable statement, but to make article bias free. They are satisfied with it. --Logical Thinker: talk  07:52, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Shunning for those who reject the teaching of Christ
Bible had foretold apostasy. 1 Tim. 4:1: “The inspired utterance says definitely that in later periods of time some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to misleading inspired utterances and teachings of demons.”

How can we identify them?

1.People who have different opinions are not apostates, but those who proselytize them are.

Acts 20:30: “From among you yourselves men will rise and speak twisted things to draw away the disciples after themselves.” 2 Pet. 2:1, 3: “There will also be false teachers among you. These very ones will quietly bring in destructive sects and will disown even the owner that bought them. . . Also, with covetousness they will exploit you with counterfeit words.”

2.Apostates stop preaching work and thus they abandon the important commandment given by Jesus.

Luke 6:46: “Why, then, do you call me ‘Lord! Lord!’ but do not do the things I say?” Matt. 28:19, 20: “Go therefore and make disciples of people of all the nations, baptizing them. . . teaching them to observe all the things I have commanded you.” Matt. 24:14: “This good news of the kingdom will be preached in all the inhabited earth for a witness to all the nations; and then the end will come.”

3.They may claim to serve God but reject his representatives, his visible organization. Bible condemns interfaith and ask to gather together in congregations.(Hebrew 10:24,25). If they do not believe their is a visible organization of God, they should keep it in their minds, but proselytizing them is having grounds of shunning.

Jude 8, 11: “These men, too, indulging in dreams, are defiling the flesh and disregarding lordship and speaking abusively of glorious ones. Too bad for them, because they. . . have perished in the rebellious talk of Korah!”

Num. 16:1-3, 11, 19-21: “Korah. . . proceeded to get up, together with. . . two hundred and fifty men of the sons of Israel, chieftains of the assembly. . . So they congregated themselves against Moses and Aaron and said to them: ‘That is enough of you, because the whole assembly are all of them holy and Jehovah is in their midst. Why, then, should you lift yourselves up above the congregation of Jehovah?’. . . [Moses said:] ‘You and all your assembly who are gathering together are against Jehovah. As for Aaron, what is he that you men should murmur against him?’ When Korah got all the assembly together against them at the entrance of the tent of meeting, then Jehovah’s glory appeared to all the assembly. Jehovah now spoke to Moses and Aaron, saying: ‘Separate yourselves from the midst of this assembly, that I may exterminate them in an instant.’” Not only

4.Not only do they abandon the true faith but they then “beat” their former associates, using public criticism and other methods to hinder their work; the efforts of such apostates are devoted to tearing down, not building up

2 Tim. 2:16-18: “Shun empty speeches that violate what is holy; for they will advance to more and more ungodliness, and their word will spread like gangrene. Hymenaeus and Philetus are of that number. These very men have deviated from the truth, saying that the resurrection has already occurred; and they are subverting the faith of some.”

Matt. 24:45-51: “Who really is the faithful and discreet slave whom his master appointed over his domestics, to give them their food at the proper time? . . . But if ever that evil slave should say in his heart, ‘My master is delaying,’ and should start to beat his fellow slaves and should eat and drink with the confirmed drunkards, the master of that slave will come on a day that he does not expect and in an hour that he does not know, and will punish him with the greatest severity and will assign him his part with the hypocrites.”

Would faithful Christians welcome apostates into their presence, either personally or by reading their literature?

2 John 9, 10: “Everyone that pushes ahead and does not remain in the teaching of the Christ does not have God. . . . If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, never receive him into your homes or say a greeting to him.” Rom. 16:17, 18: “I exhort you, brothers, to keep your eye on those who cause divisions and occasions for stumbling contrary to the teaching that you have learned, and avoid them. . . . By smooth talk and complimentary speech they seduce the hearts of guileless ones.”

How serious is apostasy? 2 Pet. 2:1: “These very ones will quietly bring in destructive sects and will disown even the owner that bought them, bringing speedy destruction upon themselves.” Job 13:16: “Before him [God] no apostate will come in.” Heb. 6:4-6: “It is impossible as regards those who have once for all been enlightened, and who have tasted the heavenly free gift, and who have become partakers of holy spirit, and who have tasted the fine word of God and powers of the coming system of things, but who have fallen away [“if they then commit apostasy,” RS], to revive them again to repentance, because they impale the Son of God afresh for themselves and expose him to public shame.”

All these scriptures are almost directly explains the reasons. But apostates think that they can destruct the organization and be happy. They are useful to congregation in one way,i.e they help to test the faith of members in Jehovah and his organization. But they could never make their dreams of destructing the organization come true.--Logical Thinker: talk 03:47, 28 September 2010 (UTC) I'd rather not have debates on this talk page, so deleted anything contentious, thanks. Natural (talk) 15:21, 1 November 2011 (UTC)Natural It would be better not to have long debates on this page, so I've deleted the majority. Thanks. Natural (talk) 15:27, 1 November 2011 (UTC)Natural

JWs
Regarding the Jehovah's Witnesses material in general, part of the problem is getting independent reliable sources. We really can't treat sources published by the JWs as equal to independent publishers. For this sort of thing, I think the best ways to proceed would be to file a request for comment as per WP:RFC, maybe contacting any editors dealing with religion or Christianity articles in general, possibly on the talk pages of the relevant projects, or maybe leaving a message on the ethnic and religious conflicts noticeboard at WP:ECCN. And, as a small point, saying "BlackCab, formerly LTSally", probably won't mean anything to anyone unless you indicate specifically why you consider that detail important. Otherwise, it might be more likely to raise questions as to why you think it important more than anything else. John Carter (talk) 23:20, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

RFC
I have moved the RFC section that you inappropriately added to the JW article (which was rightly removed) to the article's Talk page. I have not verified whether you have done anything else to properly complete the RFC request.-- Jeffro 77 (talk) 18:20, 10 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks, I'm still learning the system.Natural (talk) 19:15, 10 September 2010 (UTC)Natural

AN Notice
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. The discussion can be found at Administrators' noticeboard. LessHeard vanU (talk) 20:33, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
 * It has now been moved to Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. LessHeard vanU (talk) 21:13, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

Layout of comments
Can you please pay more attention to the layout of your comments. Add an extra colon to indent your comment, but maintain that indent through that comment. You tend to extend your indent with every paragrah, resulting in your comments sprawling wider across the page and making it more difficult to see where the next person's comment begins. See Talk:Jehovah's Witnesses. BlackCab (talk) 21:04, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Rather not have open debates on the talk page, can discuss things on the JW talk page. Natural (talk) 15:29, 1 November 2011 (UTC)Natural

Hi
Just wanted to say "hi" personally, Natural. I think you and I had a good, neutral, fair argument about the "tense wording" in the sexual accusations part of JW, and came to a rational agreement about it, so a good start. I asked Jeffro77 about some books he might know of that would give me some information outside of JW publications. I was raised a JW, but to be honest never believed, and haven't been to a meeting since I was 18 (I'm now 26). So I thought I'd ask if you knew of any newer JW publications that might be useful, as most of my books from JW are 10+ years old now. I'm going to attempt to be as neutral as possible, as I have no personal beef with JW's at all, most of the ones I know personally are good people. But I do not believe in God, or religion (ANY religion), at all, so I tend to lean towards my own reasoning and studies from all sources available to me, and most of that is very much anti-religion. However, I do try to be fair, so in that spirit any publications or books that you think would get me up to date on JW's beliefs would be a great help. Anywho, hope all is good with you and yours. Cya. Vyselink (talk) 22:18, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Naturalpsychology's Talk page is on my watchlist, so I noticed your query. List of Watch Tower Society publications is fairly up to date as a starting point for identifying newer JW publications.-- Jeffro 77 (talk) 11:51, 22 September 2010 (UTC)


 * New Publications in the past 10 years


 * The Origin of Life - Five Questions Worth Asking (2010)

Was Life Created? (2010) The Bible—What Is Its Message? (2009) Keep on the Watch! (2004)
 * ·	Jehovah's Witnesses—Who Are They? What Do They Believe? (2000) - Read online
 * ·	You Can Be God's Friend! (2000)
 * ·	The Guidance of God—Our Way to Paradise (1999) (for Muslims)
 * Books:


 * God's Word for Us Through Jeremiah (2010), commentary on Jeremiah
 * Sing to Jehovah (2009; 135 Kingdom songs; words and melodies composed by Jehovah's Witnesses)
 * "Keep Yourselves in God's Love" (2008),
 * Questions Young People Ask—Answers That Work, Volume 2 (2008)
 * "Come Be My Follower" (2007)
 * What Does the Bible Really Teach? (2005), primary text for initial Bible studies
 * Draw Close to Jehovah (2002)


 * There are also some videos - one recent on the history of JW. One is one God being the Creator.Natural (talk) 12:47, 25 September 2010 (UTC)Natural

Reply to query
Hi I have quoted the text you asked in my talk page. Apply it as you need. I am not sure where it actually fits.--Logical Thinker: talk 07:30, 22 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks, I wanted to use it on the Governing Body of Jehovah's Witnesses page, also on the main page. Thanks again.Natural (talk) 12:37, 25 September 2010 (UTC)Natural

Lawlessness
Please provide the original-language text from The Watchtower, February 15, 2011, page 31, paragraph 13 to which you referred here. Alternatively, please specify which language. Thanks.-- Jeffro 77 (talk) 00:10, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I'd rather not, please, because I don't want myself linked to a specific foreign language, people would be able to esaily know my congregation then. Natural (talk) 09:02, 6 April 2011 (UTC)Natural
 * Thus making impossible to verify your claim that the phrase in question did not appear in the version you read. The claim is unlikely anyway, since foreign editions of the journal are based on the English version. It also seems unlikely that you would not have access to the English version yourself, especially since it's available at jw.org.-- Jeffro 77 (talk) 10:32, 6 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Hey, Jeffro, we don't need a debate on it, I'm saying, in the language I was reading it didn't seem to say that. I have never used the jw.org pdf version of the Wa. before, I only had a vague idea that it was there. Until I followed the link you provided, I had never seen a pdf version of the Wa. that's all. I want to do things peaceful here with you and any other editors. In the past, I felt you were fair in editing and peaceful, a little bit more of a moderate edge, that's much better all the way around. Natural (talk) 16:22, 10 April 2011 (UTC)Natural

Issues addressed Natural (talk) 15:36, 1 November 2011 (UTC)Natural

Invitation to WikiProject
Hi Naturalpsychology,

As I know very well, you edit several JW-related articles, probably many years. Because of it, I was surprised, when I found you are not listed as WP:JW project member.

I suppose you don´t know about existence of the project.

We also prepared template/userbox for project members with code, which you could place in your user page.

There is also possibility to mark user page with category. (((but do not classify it with for example or  as well.)))

If you are interested about editing JW-related articles, I suggest to write your name to project member-list, which is required for project membership and easier communication between editors.

It is not obligatory for editing WP:JW articles. However, we will be glad if you would like to participate.

Have a nice day! --Sincerely ♥ FaktneviM (talk) 16:03, 24 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks, have written my Wikipedia name on the project member-list. Thanks again. Natural (talk) 15:16, 1 November 2011 (UTC)Natural

Joe Browder
So I've reviewed your article and removed the review tag. A few observation is that there are more sources needed to really prove the notability. It's enough to make it at least go through AFD instead of a speedy deletion. All in all though a good article. I made a few minor formatting switched but good job. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 17:57, 29 October 2011 (UTC) OK, thanks, I'll go over it later tonight. Hope you are well. Natural (talk) 23:20, 30 October 2011 (UTC)Natural

Your article has been moved to AfC space
Hi! I would like to inform you that the Articles for Creation submission which was previously located here: User:Naturalpsychology/Friends of the everglades has been moved to Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Friends of the everglades, this move was made automatically and doesn't affect your article, if you have any questions please ask on my talk page! Have a nice day. ArticlesForCreationBot (talk) 10:10, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation
 Friends of the everglades, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created. Thank you for helping Wikipedia!
 * The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see what needs to be done to bring it to the next level.
 * Please continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request.
 * If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider

Some additional references and information have been added to the article. Natural (talk) 15:15, 1 November 2011 (UTC)Natural


 * Have a problem with the syntax in the infobox on Friends of the Everglades page. If anyone might be able to correct the syntax, I can't figure it out. Thanks. Natural (talk) 09:27, 4 November 2011 (UTC)Natural

Edits on this talk page
Some of the comments from a while back have been deleted from the current talk page. It's a new day, hopefully, things will go forward cooperatively.Natural (talk) 15:38, 1 November 2011 (UTC)Natural

Do not edit comments by other users
Please familiarise yourself with WP:TPO. It is not acceptable behavior to edit or delete the comments of other editors without their permission. I have restored my comments which are civil and relevant to the discussion you initiated. BlackCab (talk) 01:03, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Friends of the Everglades
You can use the logo under 'Fair Use' justication. Go take a look at Upload File >> Non-Free Logo of Organization Upload for the exact Fair Use rules. You will have to look that up yourself, I am not familiar with the terms under which you can use logo's for articles. As for the rating, I have taken a look at it and I believe it is good enough for a B class; I have therefore marked it as such. I will also nominate it for an A class on the talk page of the article. I'm glad your working so hard on this article. Anjwalker  Talk 10:12, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the help and information
I was very busy since November w/projects and had to take a pause from the Wikipedia projects. But thanks for the help w/the Everglades info. I'll go back to that this week and see what more is needed. Natural (talk) 12:55, 13 August 2012 (UTC)Natural

Ichthus: January 2012
 In this issue...

- Ichthus is the newsletter of Christianity on Wikipedia &bull; It is published by WikiProject Christianity For submissions contact the Newsroom &bull; To unsubscribe add yourself to the list here
 * From the Editor
 * What are You doing For Lent?
 * Fun and Exciting Contest Launched
 * Spotlight on WikiProject Catholicism

Uploading Images
Hi Natural,

I'm not actually sure about Wikipedia policies on that - I think that the organisation would have to release their logo to the commons (not suggested), or otherwise Wikipedia doesn't accept it unless you can justify it under fair use.

As for the technical side of uploading, that is easy - go to the front page of Wikipedia, and find the 'toolbox' header on the sidebar. Click the little arrow to unfold that, and then click 'upload' under it. That will send you to a page to upload via.

Now, click the browse button and find your file. Then, give it a file name (something like " Friends of the Everglades Logo") and description in the next box. Next decide on a copyright status, and follow the prompts after that. I hope that helps. Anjwalker  Talk 02:06, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Nice to see you back.
Looked like you might have quit for a while, nice to see you back fighting the good fight! Hell In A Bucket (talk) 00:06, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Hey thanks. Good advice from you is always welcome.Natural (talk) 03:35, 19 December 2012 (UTC)Natural

Indents on talk page
Hi Scott, your rather random approach to indenting on talk pages makes those pages very hard to follow the sequence of comments. Your latest work at Talk:Jehovah's Witnesses is particularly problematic. It's now just a jumble that discourages editors from reading it. Perhaps you can read Help:Using talk pages and follow the recommendation there: that one extra level of indent is applied to each comment by a different editor. BlackCab (talk) 23:00, 12 March 2013 (UTC)


 * good suggestion
 * Natural (talk) 02:02, 13 March 2013 (UTC)Natural
 * I have also left a message at Talk:Jehovah's Witnesses regarding your machinegun approach to raising new sources. It's of value to find usable new sources that will help the article, but it is no help to spray them across the talk page, presenting snatches of contextless statements and your own breathless comment before then starting a new thread and doing the same again. What is your point? What was the value of the source material? What is it really saying? How do you think it should be used? Where are other editors meant to respond and engage in discussion? It seems like you are going a million miles an hour without getting any result at all. Your criticism of me for improving the Beckford 1975 date seemed to indicate you're not even looking at what is being done with the article. BlackCab (talk) 01:18, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I apologize if I went to quick w/it and will slow down, do it more deliberately in a way that other editors can respond. Point well made. Natural (talk) 02:17, 15 March 2013 (UTC)Natural

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:14, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject United States/The 50,000 Challenge
--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:37, 8 November 2016 (UTC)