User talk:Numealinesimpetar

Rosary article
Why would you delete the phrase that stating they were originated in the 15th century. I think it should have been left in there, it does not contradict anything else. freenaulij 21:43, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

num: It was because it gave the impression that the 15 decades were invented de novo in the 15th Century. In fact, there were many different sets of Mysteries in popular use, the "Dominican" amongst them. This set is attributed to S. Dominic (12 - 13th Centuries), although this is not beyond dispute. The development of the structured meditation on the mysteries is dealt with partially in the later part of the tradwiki article. For the concise tradwiki format, I thought the version I posted was more useful to a newcomer to the topic, especially one who might not read all the way down.

sounds good freenaulij 22:32, 13 November 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Freenaulij (talk • contribs)

Thanks.JMJ

John Battersby Crompton Lamburn
I am sorry to say that I cannot accept some of your edits to this article as they stand, in particular those concerning Darwinism. If points such as your apparent ideas concerning punctuationism were in an article on Darwinism I would deal with them on their own merits. However, this article is on the subject of Lamburn's writings, and except at the most superficial level, your views and explications on the subject (or FTM, mine, or those of anyone else dealing with concepts more recent than 1950 or so!) are the sheerest red herrings and must be moved to another article or deleted. If you feel strongly enough on the subject, please reply (preferably in the discussion page of John Battersby Crompton Lamburn) and we can discuss coming to some accommodation of our shared or respective views, and perhaps also discuss where the parts unacceptable in the article are to be presented instead. I hope you can respond quickly, but in case there are problems concerning the weekend, I shall wait till Monday evening (local to me) before acting without discussion to delete the parts I regard as unsuitable. In case you miss this note, I also am posting a copy in the discussion page of John Battersby Crompton Lamburn, where I hope you will respond. Cheers, JonRichfield (talk) 19:58, 18 November 2011 (UTC)