User talk:StAnselm/2011b

Trial of the Knights Templar
I added to the Introduction as your banner called for and would you please review with your comments either there or at my talk page, whichever is appropriate? I also changed the title because this article is only about their persecution in France. Thank you. Mugginsx (talk) 19:55, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Added more material. Trial of the Knights Templar
The introduction should now be completed according to the requirement at Manual of Style (lead section). Will you please read it, and either comment, or removed the banner? Thank you. Mugginsx (talk) 14:49, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Kate Bracks
Bracks's birthday came from an unpublished source. I will cut it back to 1974 until a reference emerges. WWGB (talk) 12:22, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

2011 ITM Cup
So editing back to your post when others had posted more up to date information is not vandalism?

Some people do have better things to do with there time and are just trying to keep the info about what has been an awesome competition up to date. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.104.178.43 (talk) 01:20, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for reaching out!
Hi StAnselm, I just saw your message on my talk page, and I wanted to say thanks for being kind and welcoming. I really appreciate the links (and the cookies!) Flutiki (talk) 21:49, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Reformers Bookshop
Hello, St Anselm. Thanks for the feedback about Reformers - it's very helpful to have a fresh set of eyes look over something I've done. I'll work on the article over the next few days to bring out the fact that they've grown from being just a bookstore to being the largest evangelical, reformed wholesale/distributor in Australasia (while still keeping their retail side open). Torquil Sorensen (talk) 01:13, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

2001:A Space Odyssey edit
Hi - Thanks for helping out with the article. Even though the DaB's you added were incorrect, they pointed out the need for the correct DaB's to be added, which were not there previously(unbeknownst to us). Now the article is in better shape than it was - thanks! Shirt waist &#9742;  00:38, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Talkback
 Acroterion   (talk)   02:25, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I've unprotected; I'll leave JBW a note.  Acroterion   (talk)   02:33, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Tom Hickey et al
You made a series of moves earlier to Tom Hickey related pages. Whilst I don't agree that the moves were necessary, or are even an improvement, I'm can see no benefit in arguing over them, so long as you fix the now misdirected links. Presumably it just slipped your mind? Fmph (talk) 11:54, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Desired Life Ministries
I just wanted to let you know that I saw the expired prod you had placed on Desired Life Ministries. At first i deleted the article, as it clearly appears to fail WP:ORG, but then I looked through the history, and noted that it had been prodded once in 2006. Technically this means it can't be prodded again, so I had to undelete it and send it to AfD. You may want to comment on there. Qwyrxian (talk) 12:15, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 17:31, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Thank You
Thanks for showing you are a bully. And thanks for the nasty messages left on my talk page. Kennethtamara (talk) 22:58, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

PBS
You have reverted edits to PBS twice within the past few hours. Please do not violate WP:3RR. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 00:07, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

OUTING
Okay. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1119E38 (talk • contribs) 04:14, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

3RR
I'm reporting you to the 3RR Notice Board due to your insistence on removing well source material from the Geoff Shaw (politician) page. 110.32.71.29 (talk) 09:44, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
 * You seem to have broken the WP:3RR rule, according to a complaint at WP:AN3. We do not generally consider well-sourced information from major newspapers to be defamatory, so your edits are unlikely to be covered by the BLP exception to 3RR. If we proceed to simply count the edits you are over the limit. Please join the discussion and offer to stop reverting in order to avoid sanctions.  EdJohnston (talk) 13:38, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Ashkenazi redirection
Dear Anselm, as a fluent speaker of Semitic languages i would like to emphasize that even though statistically people from Europe and US, who search "Ashkenazi" mean "Ashkenazi Jews", it is not the case for Hebrew speakers, and Bible experts. You would probably know that Ashkenazi stands for "descendant of Ashkenaz, son of biblical Gomer" or "a resident of Germany (Ashkenaz)" or even "Ashkenazi" surname, which can be found among both Ashkenasi and Sephardi Jews. With such incorrect logic we would need to change "Irene" page into a redirection to "Hurricane Irene", since vast majority of people today mean hurricane, when they say Irene, but that is clearly non-sense to change a wikipedia page "Irene" (a greek name) because of this event.Greyshark09 (talk) 17:02, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

vandalism revert?
Hi - you claimed this was vandalism - in what way was it WP:vandalism ? - Off2riorob (talk) 01:26, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the detailed answer. All seems completely correct now. Off2riorob (talk) 13:58, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Dutch names
I'm afraid this edit was a mistake. WP:COMMONNAME is the over-riding policy here, and this contraction is normally not expanded in English. Before moving any artist bio you should look at the Getty Union List which is highly authoritative. You will see the version of his name you have given Berchem is not among the 35 or so variants recorded, not one of which uses the full "zoon". A better move would have been to drop the middle name altogether, which I would do if an WP:RM were not needed. In general far too many Dutch artist title here have middle names that are not normally used in English. But some artists always have a contracted middle name. It is always best to open a discussion in this area, and see what Getty, the London & Washington National Galleries do etc. Johnbod (talk) 15:39, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Peter's vision of a sheet with animals
Hi StAnselm, I just saw Peter's vision of a sheet with animals in new pages. Any chance of some references other than simply the Bible verses? It's obviously notable, but it'd be quite useful for the readers if they could have some meat to chew on in the form of references/bibliography/see also. Thanks. —Tom Morris (talk) 07:21, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Peter's vision of a sheet with animals
Hello! Your submission of Peter's vision of a sheet with animals at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Dahn (talk) 11:25, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of JPH


A tag has been placed on JPH requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section R3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from an implausible typo or misnomer. Please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 23:46, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Lawrence Kennedy
Thank you for your comment on the article. I think the other users are just trolls. No matter what articles I find it is never notable. Just type in "Church on the Rock" and you can see how many hits there are. Anyways, please help me in this project. I will continue to improve the articles.Theseus1776 (talk) 01:05, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Saint
Are you really a saint? That must be so neat. Should I now be trembling on my knees before your presence? I have been very busy trembling on Wikipedia before the magnificence of our divine administrators (hallelujah). Now I am deeply worried. Have I got it right? I will divert my trembling to where you direct, immediately, if I have got it wrong! --Epipelagic (talk) 11:22, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Peter's vision of a sheet with animals
Materialscientist (talk) 16:02, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Peter
First sorry about the short lived debate about the film. Now, regarding the DYK on Peter's vision, nice DYK. I think it will eventually make sense to do some type of "Peter template" about these: Confession of Peter, Denial or Peter, Peter's vision, etc. E.g. if you look on any of teh Last Supper art you will see a template like that. What other Peter topics are there that have or could have articles? We need 5 or 6 at least to make a template. Thanks. History2007 (talk) 18:55, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Merger issue
Why are you working with this IP (so far using two addresses) to unmerge articles when there was an apparent consensus to merge? Why can't you go through the appropriate process? The IP is clearly a SPA giving no reasons for the unmerge, and obviously an experienced editor. Dougweller (talk) 09:32, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Mutual bank
Hello. Since you decided to change Mutual bank from a redirect to a disambiguation page, it would be helpful if you would also WP:FIXDABLINKS. There are several dozen other Wikipedia articles that contain links to "Mutual bank", which now need to be reviewed and edited to point to the correct article. Thank you. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 11:26, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Quick guideline that might give you some perspective on perceptions
Just wanted to let you know about WP:DTR. I take no offense, but its something to keep in mind when you are involved in a more heated disagreement. VanIsaacWS 08:29, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

COI Question
Thanks for looking at the article I worked on. I responded on my Discussion page AFA-NCF (talk) 23:46, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the Welcome
You may be interested to know that the ACCS has things in Australia

Saint Augustine's Classical Christian College Kalamunda, WA, Australia Email: Stephen Hurworth

Schuller Homeschool Melbourne, Australia Email: Wayne Schuller

I noticed when trying to add some international flavor to Classical education movement

Note the temporary alias CCeducator 01:52, 20 September 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by AFA-NCF (talk • contribs)

DYK for Daniel in the lions' den
Materialscientist (talk) 08:03, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the edits to Ad Fontes
I noticed some nice tweaks - thanks. I uploaded the official logo for AFA - requested from them and my upload privileges became active. I did not initially notice these until I was looking at the code and saw the added link for the motto - nice. That was after I uploaded the AFA logo and had assumed the logo was the one I put in, but could not figure out how it got there. Is there any easy way for me to track what is going on besides going to the page and looking at history?

Where did you get your version? (Download of image from their page?)

Starting to work on DCS. Any help appreciated. CCeducator 02:17, 22 September 2011 (UTC) CCeducator 02:52, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Ad Fontes Academy logo.png
 Thanks for uploading File:Ad Fontes Academy logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk ) 05:12, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

AfD
Dear User:StAnselm, I noticed that you were active at WikiProject Deletion sorting/Christianity. I am wondering if it is possible to include a relevant RfC in which deletion is on the table in the list for WikiProject Deletion sorting/Christianity, along with other WikiProjects such as Islam, Atheism, etc. I look forward to your response. With regards, AnupamTalk 16:20, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Dear User:StAnselm, thanks for your response! Yes, I personally voted to keep the article in its current form. However, at the current RfC, one proposal is to effectively delete the article on militant atheism and turn it into a disambiguation page. This is why I thought posting the discussion the the AfD lists might be helpful. With regards, AnupamTalk 02:08, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Anupam why did you single out this editor to ask them this very odd question? StAnselm does not appear particularly active at deletion sorting/Christianity at all. Anupam, please refrain from sneaky attempts to canvass or otherwise draw the attention of users you are guessing or you know are like minded to yourself to this RfC. Cheers.Griswaldo (talk) 02:36, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, I did have eleven edits in the history you linked to, and I've voted on three of the eight deletion debates currently on the page. Needless to say, however, I'm not going to get involved in this RfC. StAnselm (talk) 02:57, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Griswaldo, if you were paying attention, you would have realized that I openly informed the RfC that I placed a request on User:StAnselm's talk page, asking him if he could include the discussion in the AfD list of WP:Christianity, WP:Islam, and WP:Islam. Unlike you, who was the first user to canvass the entire WikiProject Atheism, conveniently not leaving a message at WikiProject Christianity, WikiProject Islam, or WikiProject Theology, which were listed as relevant projects there, I made my request for all of the relevant projects. Moreover, you never even informed the discussion you did so. In addition, I wanted to correct you for inaccurately stating that User:StAnslem is not involved at the WikiProject Christianity list for AfD. If you know how to use the "find" and "replace" function on your keyboard, you can see that his involvement three times in different AfD's there with another editor citing one of his comments. Also, the user in question does not share my religious views as he is a Calvinist. In fact, if you'd like to know the relationship between Catholicism and Calvinism, I urge you to read this article. I am warning you to stop creating a battlegound mentality here. Further attempts to do so will result in a block. Thanks for your cooperation, AnupamTalk 03:14, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Calling you out on your transparent attempts to canvas is not furthering the battleground nor is it a blockable offense. Try having me blocked for doing that. Regarding Calvinism vs. Catholicism you're throwing around red herrings. Clearly the only similarity that is relevant is how you both would view the topic of Militant atheism and not, for instance, how you both feel about predestination. Of course, I find it odd that you mention Catholicism since your user page says you are a "United Methodist" and merely interested in Catholicism. You are aware of the Protestant Reformation are you not? You are also aware of what side of the fence Methodists are on right? Cheers.Griswaldo (talk) 03:27, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

inre Articles for deletion/Dianne Burnett
Thank you for an excellent discussion. I agree that there is currently not enough available online to link Diane Burnett to the projects she (allegedly) co-created with ex-husband Mark Burnett, I suggest we redirect the article on Dianne to Mark Burnett and encourage that her earlier partnership with him be expanded and sourced over time and through regular editing.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 07:35, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Awesome
The Daniel chapter template is awesome!!!! Jasonasosa (talk) 12:35, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

List of Christian Universalists‎
12:20 . . (-535) . . StAnselm (talk | contribs) (removed more dubious entries per talk page) Thanks for fixing that. Was about time someone did. Cheers. In ictu oculi (talk) 12:31, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Question on protocol
So in my survey of Wikipedia I stumbled across Christian worldview. It has an old flag about not being neutral (2007). It has clearly been tweaked by people. I added some stuff. It would benefit from a good rewrite. But I don't think it is non-neutral anymore. I noted my changes on the discussion page and stated I would remove the statement block if no one commented.

Is that OK? How long should I wait.

This seems like an important article, but it seems to not be getting much attention.

Comments appreciated.

--CCeducator (talk) 03:11, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Getting a little strange - advice
I see you killed the block in Christian worldview.

What is strange is "User:Editor2020' (no talk page) deleted all my revisions. Further, he provided no comments as to why on the discussion page - he just reverted?  What is going on?  At a minimum he should have left the links to World view and I think the other changes should have been left.

How do I protest this? Why would someone do this without giving a reason or am I missing something.

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by CCeducator (talk • contribs) 03:43, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

I figured out his discussion page - left a question why. I will see what happens. --CCeducator (talk) 03:48, 6 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the help. I wrote a response but it did not get sent and your comment was much nicer.  This guy's page "looks" like he is a big shot - wonder if    that is true.  He apparently used "TW" to revert my work.  I see you replaced one,  I just replaced a clarifying one in the preface (and fixed the typo).


 * My guess is he did not like my revision of one section and that is what he is calling commentary.


 * I find it interesting that his fancy page discusses not blasting new users - that is what this felt like.


 * Again thanks for the help. Still trying to sort this technology out...--CCeducator (talk) 04:31, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Orthodox Presbyterian Church
There's a group called the "Orthodox Presbyterian Church"? Well I'll be. :) Editor2020 (talk) 16:29, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Pointy edits
Is it fair to classify these edits of yours as pointy based on Talk:Strict_Baptists & Talk:Strict_Baptists? What's the deal? Novaseminary (talk) 00:55, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Categorisation
Hi, I see you re-added the category of 'fantasy writer' to G.K.Chesterton. I removed it because Chesterton wrote just one book that could be included under the heading of fantasy. You say that's not how categories work, that they are a catch alls. The category guidelines say we add cats via defining characteristics. "A central concept used in categorisation is that of the defining characteristics of a subject... For example, here: "Caravaggio, an Italian artist of the Baroque movement", Italian, artist, and Baroque may all be considered to be defining characteristics of the subject Caravaggio." Fantasy is assuredly not a defining characteristic of Chesterton. That is why I removed the cat. Span (talk) 22:31, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

Lachlan Keefe
I have removed the protection on Lachlan Keefe, so that you can create an article. JamesBWatson (talk) 11:01, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

3RR
You just violated WP:3RR on Southern Baptist Convention. Care to self-revert or should I report it to the board? Novaseminary (talk) 01:45, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
 * You didn't revert so I posted at Administrators%27_noticeboard/Edit_warring. Novaseminary (talk) 02:05, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

October 2011
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for your disruption caused by edit warring by violation of the three-revert rule&#32;at Southern Baptist Convention. During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text below this notice, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Mkativerata (talk) 06:18, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Explanation here. --Mkativerata (talk) 06:20, 15 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Not that I'm declining the request -- I can't -- but asking for a 30 (and I note the 30 is yet to be given here; wasn't responding to the 30 request) doesn't give you the authority to (1) proclaim a consensus in a dispute in which you're involved; or (b) break the three-revert rule to enforce it. --Mkativerata (talk) 07:07, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, I appreciate that now. But actually - I had no idea that the 3O hadn't been given - I guess I had assumed User:Ltwin was giving it. I wasn't going to appeal, since I quite obviously made a third revert in a 24 hour period (though not a fourth as was claimed) but the block notice said I should have done exactly what I did do - seek resolution in order to establish a consensus. StAnselm (talk) 07:43, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
 * You actually made four: your first counts as a revert too. Regarding the templated block notice -- I should have given a customised one (sorry) -- the point is not only "seek dispute resolution" but "stop reverting while you do so". But I think you understand that so I won't labour the point. --Mkativerata (talk) 07:51, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 22:47, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

hi dear pal

is this sentence correct? "United States allegation of Iran plot to assassination of saudi arabia ambassador"

thanksAlborzagros (talk) 05:36, 19 October 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alborzagros (talk • contribs)

Academic journals invitation
Hi, I see that recently you have been creating/de-orphaning academic journal articles. Perhaps you'd like to join WikiProject Academic Journals? Happy editing! --Crusio (talk) 12:32, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

List of predicted dates of the end of the world or similar events
Did you have a problem with specific references, or is this new tag just about primary sources in general? I see a tag like that and I'm a bit confused as to where to start working. Freikorp (talk) 22:26, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

G-d of Israel does not necessarily equal Yahweh
Hi, You recently changed the "God" descriptor of Jeremiah's name to "Yahweh Exults" in the article referring to that prophet of the Hebrew Bible. The use of that descriptor "Yahweh" is not faithful to the original text. The last part of his name refers to the God of Israel, or God, in general, it does not refer to Yahweh. Yahweh is a modern scholarly approach to how to pronounce the tetragrammaton. The tetragrammaton is not referenced here, therefore, the use of Yahweh is not appropriate.

--Daniel E Romero (talk) 06:12, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for keeping an eye on this and other articles
Paraclete In ictu oculi (talk) 12:53, 29 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Hear hear! (I second the previous speaker). --Kanovski (talk) 14:03, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for note on Daniel article. I was browsing & found obvious vandalism. Glad you are thorough. --Ancheta Wis (talk) 07:32, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

unsc membership
What is unclear? Some people might not understand why West Germany is not included in the list: the note answers them. Kevin McE (talk) 00:24, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Edit warring at Southern Baptist Convention
Your recent editing history at Southern Baptist Convention shows that you are in danger of breaking the three-revert rule, or that you may have already broken it. An editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Breaking the three-revert rule often leads to a block. If you wish to avoid being blocked, instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to discuss the changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. You may still be blocked for edit warring even if you do not exceed the technical limit of the three-revert rule if your behavior indicates that you intend to continue to revert repeatedly. Novaseminary (talk) 02:01, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
 * There are already several photos there. And you were blocked recently for adding this photo to this article. Why go down that path again? Novaseminary (talk) 02:02, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
 * What's your problem? Why can't we just avoid each other rather than provoke each other? Novaseminary (talk) 02:47, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

John Hartnett (physicist)
If possible, pls. help with the article dedicated to John Hartnett (physicist) as it is nominated for deletion. Thanx--Stephfo (talk) 23:46, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added to the page New Wine into Old Wineskins do not comply with our guidelines for external links and have been removed. Wikipedia is not a collection of links; nor should it be used as a platform for advertising or promotion, and doing so is contrary to the goals of this project. Because Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you.

Glorification
Shouldn't Glorification and Glorification (theology) be merged into one article? I'll go with whatever you prefer. Editor2020 (talk) 18:11, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Wilhelm Busch AfD
Heh. I was just reading over the process for closing the AfD. Thanks for taking care of it anyway :)  &mdash; Jess &middot; &Delta;&hearts; 00:34, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Jaya Ho
Orlady (talk) 16:21, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Arbitration request
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,

Kusername (talk) 22:29, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation
Hello, StAnselm. I know you are already well aware of this, but in light of your recent edits to Rockefeller Institute and Conservative Christianity, I thought it might be helpful to you to provide a brief reminder about WP:FIXDABLINKS:
 * A code of honor for creating disambiguation pages is to fix all resulting mis-directed links.
 * Before moving an article to a qualified name (in order to create a disambiguation page at the base name, or to move an existing disambiguation page to that name), click on What links here to find all of the incoming links. Repair all of those incoming links to use the new article name.

Best wishes, R'n'B (call me Russ) 12:57, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Firstly, thank you for fixing links to Pelagius etc. on behalf of other editors who left loose ends. I tried to help with Conservative Christianity, but I'm not sure where the old content has gone.  If it's been deleted by consensus then we probably need an expert to fix each link - and who better than a Saint?  If any of the incoming redirects can point directly to one of the alternative meanings then that will speed things up, as links to that redirect may not need attention.  Toolserver has an alternative list of incoming missives which may be in a more useful format.  Meanwhile, I'll see how many of the Rockerfeller links I can fix.  That should need less subject knowledge, as they seem to be mainly from University alumni.  Certes (talk) 20:26, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

In ictu oculi
I'm making a last ditch attempt to reason with User:In ictu oculi before dispute resolution becomes necessary. Would you mind going to his talk page and contributing to the discussion? Thanks. - Lisa (talk - contribs) 00:53, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi StAnselm
 * I wasn't notified of this canvas, but don't have an enormous issue with it.


 * 01:00, 11 December 2011 (diff | hist) User talk:Zad68 ‎ (→In ictu oculi: new section) (top)
 * 00:55, 11 December 2011 (diff | hist) User talk:PiMaster3 ‎ (→In ictu oculi: new section) (top)
 * 00:54, 11 December 2011 (diff | hist) User talk:Kauffner ‎ (→In ictu oculi: new section) (top)
 * 00:53, 11 December 2011 (diff | hist) User talk:StAnselm ‎ (→In ictu oculi: new section) (top)
 * 00:53, 11 December 2011 (diff | hist) User talk:IZAK ‎ (→In ictu oculi: new section) (top)
 * 00:52, 11 December 2011 (diff | hist) User talk:Marecheth Ho'eElohuth ‎ (→In ictu oculi: new section) (top)
 * 00:52, 11 December 2011 (diff | hist) User talk:Debresser ‎ (→In ictu oculi: new section)
 * 00:52, 11 December 2011 (diff | hist) User talk:Jayjg ‎ (→In ictu oculi: new section)
 * 00:51, 11 December 2011 (diff | hist) User talk:Musashiaharon ‎ (→In ictu oculi: new section) (top)
 * 00:50, 11 December 2011 (diff | hist) User talk:Mzk1 ‎ (→In ictu oculi: new section) (top)
 * However like other editors I decide what goes on my Talk page, so with all respect I have moved it back to Lisa's. 03:42, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Nouthetic counseling
Hi StAnselm, I have noted your edits on the Nouthetic counseling article. They are appreciated. DonaldRichardSands (talk) 02:37, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Gaelic sports
I've got no problems with leaving the small text in the Draft table as 'gaelic football' instead of 'gaelic sports', but hypothetically I think we would be including hurlers under the GAA total rather than the 'other sports' total, should the Ó hAilpín situation ever again arise. Aspirex (talk) 09:23, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Vern Poythress
I tried editing the article that is about me, to bring it up-to-date about publications. Understandably, my edit resulted in a message to me as a user that there may be a conflict of interest! Well, yes. So, in fairness, some neutral editor needs to look at my additions. I am sorry that I don't know enough about wikipedia to do these additions properly. Vpoythress (talk) 01:24, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Christmas
History2007 (talk) 20:20, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

re: Cricketers who have taken five wickets on Test debut
No problem - and thanks for creating the category in the first place. I've started a couple of lists (this and this) - plan to do the rest over Christmas. Thanks again!  Lugnuts  (talk) 08:26, 20 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Also, should the first list be titled "List of Indian..." or "List of India..."?  Lugnuts  (talk) 08:29, 20 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks! I spotted the category of India Test cricketers, and thought it might be the latter.  Lugnuts  (talk) 08:51, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Devotional literature
Hello User:StAnselm, I noticed that you were the creator of the article on devotional literature. There is a discussion occurring there at the moment. I just thought I would inform you. God bless, AnupamTalk 09:09, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Why have you deleted it??
What are the negative things I've said in the User:EminamaDron/Venomfangx article?? If you believe so, message me describing why exactly, you deleted it and, list the statements (Direct copy and, paste) in which you deem to be negative! -(My profile) (talk) 02:16, 31 December 2011 (UTC)