Hi, this page is a guestbook and a place for messages that aren't completely related to Wikipedia business (WP is SRS Biznss). If you want to add something to my userpage (be it a barnstar or a message of hatred, which can be accomplished without personal attacks), feel free to add it to this instead. Ian.thomson (talk) 21:47, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
- Sign your posts with four tildes (~~~~), begin mucking about below this line:
You changed my update on the Waldensians erasing what I had added. Before undoing your changes, I am writing to ask on what grounds you are altering my edit? The brief paragraph is accurate. Should this not be included in the history, as the events are accurate and historical. A quick search of Mormon Waldensians provides dozens of scholarly papers that have been written on the Mormon Waldensians.
Thanks kindly Vayapues2 (talk) 22:20, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
thank you for the feedback. I am not sure I am replying correctly to your message, but I don't know how else to write you... There is a great deal of scholarly evidence, including actual journals from the original Waldensians who left Italy between 1850 nd 1853. The Utah Historical Society also has actual clothing articles, a bonnet of one of the little girls who traveled here, and so forth. In 2004 a representative from the Waldensian Churches in the Piedmont Valleys traveled to Utah, and met with a large group of us here. This event was hosted and funded by The University of Utah. We have census data, from the era and church records showing the 180 were converted, and the 70 who traveled to Utah. I have found a number of articles from the University of Utah, the Utah Historical Society, and as I said, actual journals from the Waldensians themselves. I myself am a Waldensian Mormon. Members of my family have traveled back to Italy, and visited the home where our family lived. They have located our family names in local records, and verified our family line as far back as the 1500s.
How best should this all be cited in the article? Vayapues2 (talk) 15:37, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
Please, stop editing my post. I am writing about the leader Marcus Vlahovic, who you can easily find all over the internet. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.71.58.71 (talk • contribs)
- Sorry, noone appears to care about Marcus except you, and he doesn't actually show up on a google search. Try bringing in a reliable source that demonstrates notability or go away. Ian.thomson (talk) 13:24, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
Hi Ian! I found you through your Macbeth edits; your discussion page is great. I looked for your presence online, but this is the only site I found, so I'm "friending" you here. :) If you're in Second Life, I am Deanya Zenfold there. I agree with you about too many things to name, and I thought you'd be a good person to know. :) Deanya Lattimore (talk) 13:36, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks. I hope you enjoy editting here. Sorry, but I'm not on Second Life. Aside from using the net to contact real life friends, Wikipedia is pretty much my main presence on the internet. Ian.thomson (talk) 14:28, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
Thats cool, you have a grafitti page! Thats awesome, great thinking, although some people don't care, but anyway, since I read the guidelines and everything, please delete my page Annihilation Technical Trampoline Wrestling, thanks. Forneverandafter3 (talk) 00:29, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
Appologies for Cthulhu edits, I can go and fix them if you wish. I have reasons but... I dont want to disclose them. Again im really really sorry. 99.122.114.140 (talk) 23:49, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
Hello. I added info on the 1st and 2nd chapter of the Book of Acts from the Bible to "Acts of the Apostles" - it was removed extremely fast. I just wanted to ask you: why?
- Because, as I said on your talk page, Wikipedia is not a place for sermons. Ian.thomson (talk) 02:52, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
I actually typed nearly verbatim what the Bible reads. That is quoting, not a sermon, similar to what the page "Acts of the Apostles" does. I just included the 2 chapters that are missing. I stuck to the contractual binding of citing written sources.
I actually was raised in a family with a similar background and have many friends from a similar background - so I'm very aware of why you felt a strong desire to remove it. On this platform, it would be considered religious bias/rivalry and discrimination considering I stuck solely to quotations of historical writings. I'm choosing to remain professional in my inquiries and attempts to benefit Wikipedia with more factual information on a subject - nothing more, and nothing less. I'll say again, I know the real reason why you removed it, and as such I challenge you to be courteous enough to let it stand as a factual addition being I added nothing to nor took anything away from the literature. It would be noble and honourable of you to do so, Ian. I thank you for your time. Blessings— Preceding unsigned comment added by Ryan_SA (talk • contribs)
- You wrote "The purpose of Acts is expounding on the salvation we have in JESUS, which name means God our Savior in Hebrew. He is One, not two or three and there is no other God beside Him, and no other Savior like Him." That's preaching. That's not encyclopedic at all. As I've explained on your user page, "Truth" is not the standard here, verifiability is. Consider how a non-Christian would feel reading what you added. Or imagine if someone wrote about Buddha or Krishna that way. Don't you see how it feels preachy?
- Also, you didn't cite any sources. If you meant to cite Acts, citing primary sources is discouraged as it leads to original research, which Wikipedia doesn't do. Ian.thomson (talk) 03:27, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
OK, I did not see that part. I apologize for making assumptions based on usual expectations. From what I read I thought for verification of evidence and fact that someone would want to cite primary sources, similar to an original dollar bill rather than a counterfeit. Those instructions were a little confusing for me. Nevertheless, as Acts 1:8 is quoted, but hardly getting to the core requirement of salvation - which is what the Acts of the Apostles is all about - would you not agree that it would be very beneficial to include more of Acts 1 and 2 in that post? I know Apostolic Pentecostals seem to be the only ones who want to read that part of the Bible, let alone discuss it, but we (as in humanity in general, not targeting anyone) shouldn't be picking and choosing what to share and what not to share when it comes to facts.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Ryan_SA (talk • contribs)
- Please sign your posts with four tildes (~~~~). And again, we don't push any ideology. The Bible (containing philosophical and spiritual truths) is not verifiable or empirical, so we don't write from the assumption that it is true any more than we allow Muslims to write from the assumption that the Quran is true, or Hindus to write from the assumption that the Vedas are true, etc, etc. For notable doctrinal interpretations of particular parts of the Bible, academic secondary sources discussing historical interpretations are cited.
- To draw on the dollar bill comparison, we only allow published works on numismatism, crime, and maybe art criticism (for very interesting currency) to be cited on discussions on dollar bill, and note whether governments accept the bill as legal tender, but we do not decide for for the readers whether or not the bill is authentic.
- If it's not something that most reasonable people would agree on, it doesn't get on here. There are adherents to various worldviews who are all quite reasonable, and so we don't write from the assumption that any particular religion (or lack thereof) is true. We let the reader decide. And if Christianity is true, we don't need to shove our light down people's throats any more than we need to hide it under a bushel. Ian.thomson (talk) 04:15, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
- Sorry, don't know if I'm writing this in the right place, but I reviewed your account thoroughly and I just wanted to say I understand why you removed what I said, it was my own fault for not putting the source in, and as an atheist, I can respect you in the way in which you are devoted to keeping an unbiased opinion on matters and editing said matters unbiasedly. ~~~~Graffels
|
The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar | |
| For incredibly fast response and anti-vandalism editing! - BMcCJ (talk) 00:27, 23 April 2010 (UTC) |
|
The VG Barnstar | |
| Awesome work! - BMcCJ (talk) 00:27, 23 April 2010 (UTC) |