User talk:Noogster

Hi, a question and a point. First, in regard to - the word "archaelogy" is a valid spelling and was internal to a quote. Therefore it should be left as is. Second, Are you User:Nogster? I ask since you edited that user's user page. If so, why did you construct another account?JoshuaZ 01:15, 6 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Hmm, getting passwords back is generally very difficult if one doesn't have one's email enabled. It generally requires a developer and they almost always have higher priority things to do. I would suggest just moving your userpage from there over to the now empty user page here and then putting a note on top that you used to be Nogster before you lost the password. JoshuaZ 01:28, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for the encouraging words. I really do need a break. I've about given up (not quite) on defending MJ on wiki because I feel so alone sometimes. Thanks for stepping up. inigmatus 01:13, 8 February 2007 (UTC) :)

User page looks good. Be sure to join Wikiproject Messianic Judaism and put the banner code to mark you as a Messianic Jewish editor. inigmatus 05:10, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Love it
Love how you're rocking HaMashiach's name on your page! Lookin good, Dude. HaShem's grace and peace upon you & yours Rivka 18:50, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Netzarim
The problem with listing modern movements on this page on Wikipedia is that we'd have to have some kind of third-party, verifiable information about them and their beliefs. This threshold would seem to be met by making reference to books published by other-than-vanity presses, or perhaps (at the least) newspaper articles. The reason this policy of verifiability (and concomitant notability) is necessary is to prevent Wikipedia from becoming a site for anyone with a website to self-promote. Wikipedia aspires, after all, to be an encyclopedia, albeit an open encyclopedia. I respect Wikipedia's vision.Wlmh65 20:01, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
 * As you can see, it's not my policy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability Wlmh65 20:01, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I also note that the Timecube article you referred to is backed with sources including newspaper and scholarly articles. It may only have a handful of followers but there is publically-available third-party information adduced to the article.Wlmh65 20:02, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

I find it hard to believe
That a Torah Observant Jew could go so far off the derech as to say that he is a Yiddishe Notzri (Hebrew/Yiddish for messianics.) My machshovos on the issue are to say things that I cant and wont say on wikipedia. --Shaul avrom 12:51, 11 February 2007 (UTC)


 * I forgot to respond last month. Something that you may want to know, in the Talmud, PEOPLE WHO KNEW YOSHKE, said that he was a KOHEN, not from the davidic line, therefore UNABLE TO BE MOSHIACH. Also, he was born of a rape, a greushoh, so therefore unable to act as a kohen. I hope this opens your eyes to lies of the notzri religion. --Shuli 02:42, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Re-creating deleted articles
Please don't re-created deleted articles, it is against policy, grounds for speedy deletion, and ultimately grounds for more serious action. Thanks. Jayjg (talk) 15:30, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Lists like this are a bad idea to begin with, and this one in particular has been deleted via an AfD. Why not try categories instead? Jayjg (talk) 21:49, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

To begin with, the notion that someone is an "Important Messianic Judaism figure" is almost inevitably POV and/or original research. That said, you could create a category Category:Messianic Judaism figure, or something similar, and add the category to the bottom of each article. Jayjg (talk) 22:00, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
 * See, for example, the bottom of Menachem Mendel Schneersohn, which includes a number of categories, including Category:Rebbes of Lubavitch, which would be a good example. As for the Bible translation you mention, Dovi has explained quite well why translations of the Bible by groups/individuals which consider Jesus to be the Messiah, and which include the New Testament, are Christian, not Jewish. Jayjg (talk) 22:22, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Reply
Hi, I replied to you at Talk:Jewish English Bible translations. Your edit was clearly well-meant, and there was never any suggestion that it was vandalism. For more, see my reply.Dovi 22:25, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

I'll do what I can

 * ) inigmatus 02:14, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Talk page comments
If you have comments regarding the content of specific articles, it's best to put them on the Talk: pages of the articles in question, rather than on User talk: pages. Jayjg (talk) 03:38, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Again, please make your comments on the Talk: pages of the articles in question, not on my Talk: page. Thanks. Jayjg (talk) 15:42, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

"Messianic Judaism"
I disagree.

1) NT is a corrupt document and is filled with non-Torah concepts and emendations done by Hellenistic groups to support their positions. See the work of scholars Bart Ehrman, Geza Vermes, Hyam Maccoby.

2) The historical Yehoshua taught and argued elements of the oral Torah. The written Torah implicates the oral Torah in many places--this has been argued for centuries so I will not bother rehashing it. The oral Torah is part of the Messorah. I suppose you may be a Karaite, but the fact is the historical Yehoshua would not have been in agreement with them, but was one of the Perushim who supported the oral Torah: see e.g. Harvey Falk, Geza Vermes, Hyam Maccoby, E.P. Sanders etc.

I see little point in arguing with you, but you may find those authors worthwhile to study to learn more.Wlmh65 05:34, 12 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Like I said, I'm not interested in an argument. I have my opinions about the NT, well-informed through academic research in works published through peer-reviewed presses, not blog postings. Wlmh65 09:51, 13 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Some other points: 1) In traditional Judaism, the Judaism of the historical Yehoshua, the key to salvation is non-selective assent to the right of God to guide us--non-selective Torah observance 2) whether someone in particular is or is not the Mashiach is secondary 3) I would, and believe the historical Yehoshua would have, sought to have Jews and non-Jews follow Torah non-selectively even if that meant not recognizing him as Mashiach 4) because a careful reading of the various accounts of his life shows that the historical Yehoshua was concerned with orthopraxis vis-a-vis the community and God, over orthodoxy. I have no need to "reconcile" myself to "Orthodox" Jewish thought because my thought is in essence "Orthodox" Jewish. I don't seek to have people believe that the historical Yehoshua was Mashiach because I believe it is irrelevant. What I do seek is to do justice to the memory of an observant Jew who has become maligned and impugned in the Jewish community because of his misappropriation and corruption by Hellenist Jews and non-Jews. Wlmh65 10:06, 13 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Another thing I would like to point out to you is that it's forbidden to speak of a Jew-by-conversion as a "goy" because once converted, the "goy" is a Jew. Yirmeyahu Ben-David was converted and he is now a Jew, not a "goy". Wlmh65 10:12, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Keep on trekkin'
Welcome to the Messianic Judaism editing community on Wikipedia. The MJ experience on Wiki is about as tough as it can get in the online world. Anti MJ Jewish editors abound on Wiki, to find out how many, just create a new MJ article. Feel free to restore the template, but realize there is an admin review process going on right now in the Wiki Deletions review page. The AntiMJ crowd may have deleted the template out of process, but we should attempt to restore it through process. We needn't lower ourselves and follow their example. If you have any Messianic friends that know a thing or two how to type and use the internet, bring 'em here. These Wiki MJ pages are the frontline for information on Messianic Judaism (just do a Google search); so our task is all the more important, and we should remain diligent. Thanks for stepping up. inigmatus 01:50, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

An Automated Message from HagermanBot
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 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! HagermanBot 02:06, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Talk page comments
Again, please make comments on the relevant Talk: page. I will not respond further to comments about article content which are placed on my User: page. We are not having a personal conversation, but a discussion about article content, which should be open and easily found by all editors interested in that page. Jayjg (talk) 16:00, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Template
Please accept consensus and do not re-create this template. The arguments for deletion were solid and not demonstrably based on religious bias. The fact that only messianic Jews !voted keep is not, I'm afraid, evidence of bias in anyone other than the messianics. Hard to accept when you have strong feelings, but them's the breaks. Guy (Help!) 20:32, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Sorry so late
Noogster, I replied to your comment on my talk page. I am not sure how to PM. Jamie Guinn 02:01, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Messianic Judaism
I spent something like six to eight hours over 2/13-2/15 cleaning this article, and you wiped that out in a few seconds flat, and you ask me about rude? At least I used the talk page, you did not. I have reverted, and am now adding in your additions, so that the tens of updated, verified, and checked citations do not disappear. -- Avi 16:55, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Please stop reverting the citations. I am adding back your additions, but you keep on removing the work and effort of others. If this continues, this will be a serious content dispute, and I the page will have to be locked until we work this out. Is that what you wish? Remember, you do not own the page any more than Inigmatus, Kendrick, JoshZ, or I do. -- Avi 16:59, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Noogster, MANY people, not just myself, have added work, and no one person "owns" the page. It is actually poor wiki-form to make such sweeping changes without a discussion. I am lookiing at your edits, and you have done a LOT of good work. Let us MERGE the two, instead of reverting back and forth. -- Avi 17:01, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

I think I was able to graft in the vast bulk of your edits. Please look it over and add in what I left out, but I'd request you add, as opposed to revert. Thanks. -- Avi 18:36, 19 February 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry if I missed the pictures. By all means, add them back in. And Kendrick has called for sources for that section. He has agreed to wait a few more days, but unsourced material needs to be removed, so if you would like to keep that, I'd suggest you find sources. If I find any, I'll add them too. -- Avi 23:18, 19 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Noogster, unfortunately, making such radical changes to an article usually cannot be done unilaterally. Your changes wiped out so much of what was there until now, practically re-writing the article. That usually requires a point-by-point discussion on the talk page; especially when it wipes out other authors' work. Wiki works on bettering existing articles; rarely is one given a total rewrite of that magnitude. -- Avi 06:33, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Yedioth Ahronoth
I noticed the comment you left on Avi's talk page. There is an article for Yedioth Ahronoth. The spelling of "Ahronoth" is a little unusual, although that's the they spell it at Ynetnews. According to Google, there are roughly the same number of hits (245,000) for Yedioth Ahronoth as there are for Yedioth Ahronot (266,000) and Yediot Achronot (214,000). There's a redirect page for Yediot Achronot, but you might want to set one up for Yedioth Ahronot or some other alternate spellings. — Malik Shabazz | Talk 23:24, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
 * No problem; I'm happy to help. As Avi can tell you, I'm a pretty good "Google monkey." :-) — Malik Shabazz | Talk 23:51, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Template
Regarding the template, check the talk. While no one says it is complete, inigmatus agreed as well that it is a good start, and isn't he the one who moved it back into template space? -- Avi 01:34, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

YbD
I am not going to opine on his notability; I will say I don't think this person would be a speedy, there are points that may be considered notable, so I would say go for it. Just make sure that everything has a source. For example, I would like to see the letter from the Ch.Rabbi that you refer to. Also, there is a spectrum in Orthodoxy. From a personal perspective, I'd like to know which Rabbi converted him, as it may well likely not be accepted. Conversion is a very tricky issue, especially as Orthodx Jews are NOT big into prosylatization, and the rules are complicated, so any, evem slight, deviation may invalidate the ceremony. As for teh website claiming Lashon Hara, of you read the Halachos, especially as brought in Chofetz Chaim, certain issues MUST be spoken and are not L"H. For example, if there IS a chashash on the Geirus, this must be exposed to inform possible suitors that the children of these people may not be Jewish, which, of course, affects yichus, and things like that. When there is no toeles, of course it is Lashon Hara, and even when there IS a toeles, it has to be handled in a dignified manner, but. like all Halachos of Yidishkeit, there usually is not a cut-and-dried Halacha. Except for the Gimel Y'harayg V'lo Yaavor, there are exceptions to every rule (almost always ONLY in cases of life-or-death, but you get the idea). -- Avi 14:54, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Avruhom Yehida Balser
A tag has been placed on Avruhom Yehida Balser, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be blatant advertising which only promotes a company, product, group or service and which would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 11, as well as the guidelines on spam.

If you can indicate why the subject of this article is not blatant advertising, you may contest the tagging. To do this, please add  on the top of the page and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would help make it encyclopedic, as well as adding any citations from reliable sources to ensure that the article will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Mhking


 * Independent, verifiable sources that provide empirical information about the site in something other than a sales-oriented context would be necessary. Please read Reliable sources to find out more information about what is needed in an article of this sort. --Mhking 01:04, 26 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Unless you've got it stashed someplace, most likely, yes. Make sure the article does not sound like a sales piece, and by all means, ask for help if you run into a roadblock. Good luck... --Mhking 01:08, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

3RR
Just so you're aware, WP:3RR is a strict policy on Wikipedia. You can be blocked if you revert an article more than 3 times in 24 hours. Please don't let that happen. Jayjg (talk) 22:47, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

MJ intro
Hi. Noogster, you may not think Messianics worship Jesus, but there is a reliable source that says that they do. Perhaps even some do and some don't. Regardless, we all have to be careful not to let our own personal understandings and beliefs get in the way of wikipedia policies and guidelines. Steiner is as a reliable source as any in that article, probably more reliable than the internet sites, since it is a scholarly book and not someone's website. There is no reason, nor excuse, for removing it, I am afraid; and removing it because it makes you uncomfortable would be like IZAK removing that Messianics believe that they are Jewish because it makes HIM uncomfortable. -- Avi 00:52, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
 * If I find a second, I'll add one, but all you need is one, which we have, to support the statement. -- Avi 03:56, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

I've responded on the Talk: page. Jayjg (talk) 02:26, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

User talk:David Spart/Chabad Messianism
Following a recent wheel-war over Controversies of Chabad-Lubavitch in which PinchasC did not let me write an article on Chabad Messianism even after an AfD implied consensus for such an article I was advised to write such an article in my user space. I have now done so and would be grateful for any feedback from you before I put it up. Happy Purim. David Spart 00:51, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Well yes he does. The reason is because he is a chabbad messianist himself, and like many other messianists he believes in keeping these views as private as possible and as far away from wikipedia as possible.  He watches all Chabad articles like a hawk and edit wars with anyone who makes even the smallest change.  Yechi only got through because it was nominated for deletion before he found it, and of course it was found to be notable. So he has kept various merge boxes at the top ever since.  If you notice the Controversies of Chabad-Lubavitch article only has one paragraph on messianism which is then followed by an endless an off topic attack on David Berger.  All the other "controversies" listed are so carefully distilled by official chabad POV that you cant even make out what the controversy was. And thanks for the praise, it is much appreciated. David Spart 01:24, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

MJ Template
Not tonight I won't revert, no. It's far too late here to get into this, and I have an early class in the morning. No doubt it'll make for some interesting and heated discussion tomorrow though. Have a good night. :) Daniel C/T+ 01:30, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

You have violated WP:3RR
On the Template:Messianic Judaism. Please revert yourself before you are blocked. Thanks. Jayjg (talk) 04:47, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

WP:3RR
You have been temporarily blocked for violation of the three-revert rule. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 04:52, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Re: Your edit to the Messianic Judaism template
Hello Noogster, please note that the only edits I have made to the template have been to remove the WikiProject link (this was my latest edit), so your comments on my talk page are misplaced, apart from the WikiProject link, which I have discussed previously at Template talk:Messianic Judaism/Exclusive MJ. Please do try to discuss the content of the template on the talk page rather than reverting, as edit warring doesn't achieve any productive results (it is also worse on templates as every time you edit it a change has to be made in every page using the template). You are much more likely to get your points across by discussing them with other editors and reaching a consensus. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, mattbr30 08:17, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Recent edits
Noogster, you need to be more careful with your editing. Firstly removing valid warnings by calling them vandalism is in and of itself disruptive and vandal-like. Secondly Wikipedia is NOT a place to prosyletize. Please respect EVERYONE's right to believe, or disbelieve, what they choose fit. We edit articles, we do not comment on others' religious preferences on wiki. Thank you. -- Avi 22:17, 6 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Your edit summary here shows that you are in rather serious danger of falling into the traps pf WP:OWN and WP:NPOV. You may wish to take a brief wikibreak and re-familiarize yourself with wiki's core policies and guidelines, so that you can constructively contribute to the encyclopedia. -- Avi 22:25, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

It is not good form to remove other people's comments from your talk page
Just to let you know. Thanks.-- Ķĩřβȳ ♥  Ťįɱé  Ø  23:05, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Your thoughts
Thanks for sharing them, I'll think about them. Jayjg (talk) 01:40, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Noogster - Please don't work on pages with Jewish content
I think you should voluntarily agree not to make changes of any kind in pages that have Jewish related content. You appear to be here to proselytize a Messianic Christian viewpoint, not to contribute to this encyclopedia of knowledge. I'm sick of answering you. Many of your changes to these articles are very subtle, and not immediately recognized for what they are. You don't have the background or education or knowledge that is required to be working on the articles you are trying to work on. --Metzenberg 05:27, 12 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm in agreement. You represent a POV that does not represent academic or religious training in various subjects.  I am specifically concerned about your edits to Judaism and evolution which I originally missed.  Metzenberg reverted your subtle, POV edits.  I would suggest that you read WP:NPOV, because you try to add undue weight to your non-mainstream theology.  You are a Christian, which does not by itself obviate your ability to edit any article on Judaism, but when you try to put in a Christian POV, then I have an issue.  Wikipedia is not a proselytizing website.  If you cannot bring forth verifiable, NPOV edits, then let's not waste other editor's time.  Orangemarlin 07:53, 12 March 2007 (UTC)


 * The vast majority of my edits to pages related to (traditional) Judaism have had a positive impact and went unchallenged. You're the only one getting your stockings in a bunch over it, Metzenberg. Let's not spread any lashon hara and keep our heads cool, and dedicate to not doing a total revert without discussion to any articles. Thanks. Noogster 01:28, 13 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Throwing in a token two words of Hebrew is insulting, demeaning and offensive. Disgusting.  Orangemarlin 21:00, 13 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry that I violated the nonexistent Wikipedia policy about not inserting Hebraisms in your speech as a non-patronizing gesture for lightening the mood. Gee, if it's any consultation to you I am getting to become fluent in Biblical and religious Hebrew within the past year. ;-/ I really am dealing with some sensitive people here... I apologize for being "disgusting". O_O Noogster 23:37, 13 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I can't believe I'm actually participating in this discussion. But here goes.  Sarcasm is fine when used as humor, otherwise it's a sure sign of Passive Aggressive behavior.  What's insulting and disgusting is that you use Hebrew to impress me and others that you are Jewish, when in fact you are a Christian.  I really don't care.  Lastly, I don't care if you're fluent in anything (except maybe English).  And yeah, using Hebrew like that is patronizing.  But go ahead and use whatever you want, I'm not a censor.  Just know that I know that you are a Christian.  Nothing wrong with that, but don't try to be what you aren't.  Orangemarlin 00:25, 14 March 2007 (UTC)


 * In case you didn't know, I am a Gentile that plans on someday progressing becoming a geir. I'm not trying to "impress" anyone or promoting myself as anything other than what I am. I have done my best to remain Noakhide my entire life now. Misrepresenting information is a clear breach of Torah. I doubt that Ha-Sheim would appreciate your simply wrong treatment of others and loves it when anyone, Jew or Gentile, attempts to draw nearer to Him and keep his Torah. Calling a follower of the historical 1st-century Pharisee Ribi Yehoshua a "Christian" is hardly honest when it is taken into account that I believe Christianity is diametrically opposed to the 1st century David-descended Torah Jew Ribi Yehoshua, reject all Christian doctrine (antinomianism (I.E. anti Torah/halakhah), antisemitism, trinity, today's NT, Displacement theology, et al.) and believe that and his 1st century Pharisaic (=Orthodox) followers, Netzarim Yehudim, functioned entirely under the system of the beit din and neither practiced, nor were the foundation of, any other religion. This is accorded to the definitive Judaic scholarship that has been done on the subject (Hyam Maccoby, Harvey Falk, Jerusalem Synoptic School, the Netzarim, in addition to Geza Vernes, James Parkes etc.) Please cease and desist from my talk page immediately if you have nothing else to contribute or are just here to generally talk down to me. Thank you. Noogster 00:53, 14 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Dear Noogster:


 * If you are going to edit and write in a public forum, you had better expect that people will examine the quality of your work. We search for emes (Yiddish, truth) on Wikipedia, and your contributions in areas where you are not qualified to contribute present a stumbling block for others. Sometimes a coach has to tell a Midwest League player that he isn't ready to hit in the Major Leagues yet.


 * You have been representing yourself here on Wikipedia as if you were someone who is very knowledgeable about Judaism. I think you’re possibly a minor, and probably either a high school or college student. While I feel it is necessary for me to rebuke you here, I feel sorry for hurting your feelings and I take no pleasure in what I have had to say to you.


 * Even though a lot of people here find you annoying, you don't seem to me like a troll. I think you genuinely felt you were making a contribution in your edits. But I can tell you're not ready to edit on Wikipedia. Please use Wikipedia as a place to learn, and refrain from trying to teach others.


 * I urge you to cease from editing Wikipedia until you have the education and experience to make positive contributions. It appears to me that others, as well as myself, have reverted all of your edits other than on talk pages. I think your continued presence and participation here only casts your case for Messianic Judaism in an unfavorable light to others.


 * Please stop using Wikipedia as a place to explore and define your personal and religious identity. It was not intended for that. You are obviously fascinated somehow with Judaism. I’d like to feel that your expression of an intention to learn more about Judaism is something positive.


 * If you intend to study Judaism as a way to explore your Christian roots, I wish you well. But I worry greatly about your statement that you want to become a ger (convert to Judaism). It's not that I think you are actually going to convince any Jews to follow Rebbe Yehoshua ben Yosef of Nazereth. I'm worried that, from what I have seen here, if you become Jewish, you will end up carrying a gun and living in a trailer on some hilltop in Samaria, doing your best to present a stumbling block to peace between Israel and the Palestinian people. Unfortunately, that's what has happened with too many fundamentalist Christian converts to Judaism, even though they are well meaning people.


 * Howard (real name) --Metzenberg 03:05, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Please report abuse
You claimed here that Kirbytime said to you "You don't own the fucking template." You can file an abuse report. This user should be blocked for abuse, as well as putting in the title WP:DICK as the header of the page. --Matt57 20:13, 13 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I won't be reporting Kirby or Metzenberg for their misconduct. Not this time, at least. I try to be forgiving and let a lot of things pass even when I'm wrongly done-for. Noogster 23:42, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Image:NehemiaGordon.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:NehemiaGordon.jpg, has been listed at. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. User:Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr) 14:26, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:QapakhYoseiph.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:QapakhYoseiph.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 08:42, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

A thumbs-up. :-)
Howdy. My compliments to you on the way in which you kept cool and friendly in your responses to some negative comments above. I don't have any barnstars lying around, but please accept a thumbs-up. :-) (Disclaimer: I don't know you or AFAIK the other posters you've responded to, and I don't think that you and I would agree about anything theological.) (Ethics, probably: theology, I don't think so. :-) ) Have a good one. -- Writtenonsand 15:59, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Happy Easter and Passover
Hi Noogster,

Just wanted to say thank you for being understanding, and I hope there is no animosity between us now. If you happen to be looking for an inexpensive, high quality university level introduction to Judaism, the Teaching Company (www.teach12.com) has Shai Cherry's 24-lecture introductory course on sale now for MP3/ACC download for only $34.95. Shai Cherry is the young Vanderbilt University professor who has become the leading modern expert on Judaism and evolution. I have not heard the course myself, but I am a big Teaching Company fan. --Metzenberg 06:40, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

input appreciated
Please comment at WP MJ/Categories when you have time. Thanks! &hArr; ChristTrekker 14:53, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

input appreciated
Please comment on T:MJ as well, thanks. &hArr; ChristTrekker 15:03, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Possibly unfree Image:Netzpottery.jpg
An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Netzpottery.jpg, has been listed at Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. Please go to its page for more information if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. ←Humus sapiens ну? 04:58, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:QapakhYoseiph.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:QapakhYoseiph.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self-no-disclaimers tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Fair use, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following [ this link]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 09:48, 11 May 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ←Humus sapiens ну? 09:48, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Should we delete this list
Some people are selective they would like to see only lists of their own domination, what do u think does this list warrant deletion or shoud we let it stay?--יודל 13:45, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Bethelnyc.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Bethelnyc.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 13:50, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Subbotniks.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Subbotniks.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 19:49, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Messianic Judaism
If it is possible please write your opinion on my topic on Messianic Judaism page about Daniel Zion. Thank you. Vladislav1968 (talk) 08:36, 29 March 2008 (UTC)Vladislav1968

Image permission problem with Image:Melech Ark.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Melech Ark.jpg I noticed that that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the image (or other media file) agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the GFDL or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to [mailto:permissions-en@wikimedia.org permissions-en@wikimedia.org], stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the image to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the image has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to [mailto:permissions-en@wikimedia.org permissions-en@wikimedia.org].

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the image's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Images lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. &mdash; neuro(talk) 22:54, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Mechitza MY.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Mechitza MY.jpg, which you've sourced to http://www.mikvehyisrael.com/mechitzeh.html. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to , stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to .

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk ) 07:04, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

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

Proposed deletion of Anshei Sfard (Louisville, Kentucky)


The article Anshei Sfard (Louisville, Kentucky) has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Run of the mill synagogue. Lacks multiple independent sources.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. TM 15:01, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of Anshei Sfard (Louisville, Kentucky) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Anshei Sfard (Louisville, Kentucky) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Anshei Sfard (Louisville, Kentucky) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. TM 15:55, 11 July 2014 (UTC)