User talk:StAnselm

Archives

2007 2008-2009 January-May 2010 June-December 2010 January-July 2011 August-December 2011 January-April 2012 May-September 2012 October-December 2012 January-June 2013 July-October 2013 November-December 2013 January-March 2014 April-September 2014 October-December 2014 January-July 2015 August-December 2015 January-May 2016 June-December 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021

Thanks for uploading File:Pilbara Minerals 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 section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:51, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello!
You seem to have access to many books about Christianity. Do you happen to have the first edition (2001) of George Chryssides' Historical Dictionary of New Religious Movements?
For context for my request, you can have a look a the thread I created at: Wikipedia:Help desk#Potential citogenesis incident - what to do? Veverve (talk) 00:20, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nevermind, someone has given me a way to consult the book. Veverve (talk) 18:50, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Due to your intervention at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/King's Family of Churches, I inform you I have opened an AfD for this article at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/King's Family of Churches (2nd nomination). Veverve (talk) 19:51, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect PRJ and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 January 14#PRJ until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Vitaium (talk) 05:17, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Warrane College logo.jpg. 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 section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 14:41, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Birthing person and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 February 1#Birthing person until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Elli (talk | contribs) 04:00, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:FWF Der Wissenschaftsfonds logo.jpg. 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 section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:39, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello StAnselm: Thanks for catching my error. Heartmusic678 (talk) 15:36, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Association for Biblical Higher Education logo.jpg. 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 section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:25, 18 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:IOOF company logo.jpg. 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 section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:33, 18 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I notice that you recently declined the WP:BLPPROD for Roger Copeland on the grounds that there is one reference. Does a dead link count, though? Nangaf (talk) 16:15, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it does: WP:BLPPROD is very strict that any source counts. After all, the dead link could be archived. But looking at Copeland on Google Scholar, it appears that he would be notable under WP:PROF anyway. StAnselm (talk) 16:20, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am not persuaded by his Google scholar profile, personally. An archived link would be fine. Nangaf (talk) 20:34, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

SL93 (talk) 22:29, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ten years ago, you were found precious. That's what you are, always. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:47, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Seabrook Christian School 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 section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:59, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

How do I fix that? If I did it wrong, I can't figure out what the correct method is. Argles Barkley (talk) 15:50, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I think you should have started a discussion via WP:RM. StAnselm (talk) 15:51, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Universidad de San Martín de Porres logo.jpg. 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 section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:40, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

	The Editor's Barnstar
	For your excellent work in finding sources and saving Andrew Staunton's article from AfD. Thank you! Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 04:27, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article The Hal Lindsey Report has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unsourced stub

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

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

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} 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. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 20:14, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 20:30, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

SanAnMan (talk) 18:52, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

SanAnMan (talk) 21:42, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I noticed that you used "passes NCRIC" as a reason to keep at several recent AfDs. Are you aware that meeting NCRIC is no longer sufficient to establish notability (it merely states that significant coverage is likely to exist) and NSPORTS requires at least one SIGCOV source in the article? Would you consider changing your !votes at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sarah Forbes (cricketer) (2nd nomination) and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shabana Kausar (2nd nomination) now that you know this? –dlthewave ☎ 04:59, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I noticed that my edit in the Wikipedia page: Miraculous catch of fish was removed. I would like to say that more than 70% of the world is believers in God, as am I. Contributors on Wikipedia are doing so because they are passionate about different subjects and they are passionate about spreading the truth and knowledge. Now that I am aware that there is such a non-profit organization that can scientifically decode the Bible, I feel that I have a moral obligation to do as much as I can as a Wikipedia editor to let the world know about it. I discussed  the matter with others and I also think that Wikipedia should not stop us to be passionate about subjects, because actually we are in a way volunteers for Wikipedia. Please reverse my edit or please advice how may I change the language and yet continue to help this non-profit organization in their research. I invested 15 hours this week to study their page and their researches. Rest assure that I am not an employee of this non-profit organization. Mr.Durnbey (talk) 20:28, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your post. Yes, you are now a Wikipedia volunteer! But we would need what we call a secondary source: a news article or book written by someone else explaining the approach. When I do a search for code2GOD or "Jesus 153 fish mystery" I don't get much: there is this Universe News Network article, but that is not a reliable source by Wikipedia standards. StAnselm (talk) 20:52, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your reply@StAnselm. I encountered this non-profit organization that is actually using the original Bible written in Hebrew to scientifically decode the Bible or in other words to give us a proof for the existence of God. I do believe in God, but I am not a fanatic, but when I encountered that organization it opened my eyes and as a volunteer in Wikipedia, I also want to help that non-profit, because they've been around for 3 years and they are not known on the web. I joined Wikipedia trying to help the world with more knowledge and to recognize the truth, because in the end we all fight for it. The fact is that the code2GOD non-profit organization actually decoded the original Bible. They have something more powerful than ever, they hold the truth! How can we rely on someone's translations, where actually they didn't even understand Hebrew? But in history we showed that we rely on a "thousand-times" repeated researches and after 2000 years we are not sure that they are true!? Right? I believe that the code2GOD has the answer for all of our questions and I am not just impressed by their work, but I really do believe that they hold the truth and they are focused on spreading it all over the world. They are a young organization and I think they should have their place on Wikipedia. As I stated before, 90% of the writings are from past researches and we can't really hold to their scientific approach. As in the Wikipedia page: Miraculous catch of fish, there is a paragraph that states: "The precision of the number of fish as 153 has long been considered, and various writers have argued that the number 153 has some deeper significance, with many conflicting theories having been offered (see the discussion on the number 153 in the Bible). For instance, Augustine of Hippo argued that the significance lay in the fact that 153 is the sum of the first 17 integers (i.e. 153 is the 17th triangular number), with 17 representing the combination of divine grace (the seven gifts of the Holy Spirit) and law (the Ten Commandments)."

As it is clearly stated that various writers have argued about the number 153 that has a deeper significance, but without any explanation. code2GOD gives a detailed explanation of what the actual 153 number means in the Bible. My point is, that readers want proof, and again we all want to discover the truth. We have this non-profit organization that can teach us about the real meaning of the Bible.

How can I improve the paragraph in order for you to accept it on Wikipedia? I think that you've understand my point of talking about real research and decoding that can help the Wikipedia community and every reader in this world to understand the real meaning of the Bible. Waiting for your kind reply! Thanks! Mr.Durnbey (talk) 16:41, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

So now we have (probably) another conflicting theory, which I have to say you don't explain very articulately. Being a non-profit gives no special status, & we would need to have references for widespread acceptance by specialist scholars independent of this organization. Johnbod (talk) 16:54, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management.gif. 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 section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:31, 10 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

MB 23:23, 13 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Subroto Das § Post playing career and spelling of first name. -- Marchjuly (talk) 20:16, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi StAnselm. Would you mind taking a look at this? It might a case like Mamata Kanojia where the individual was also know under a different name. FWIW, I asked about it at WT:IN#Subroto Das, but have yet to get a response. -- Marchjuly (talk) 20:20, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No independent sources at all. What the journal has to say about itself, as in the footnotes here, can never confer notability.

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

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

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} 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. Bishonen | tålk 16:30, 27 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hemiauchenia (talk) 16:45, 27 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that you're continuing to cite NSPORTS sport-specific criteria as a reason to keep an article, even when no significant coverage can be found such as here or citing seemingly random achievements unsupported by and guideline such as here. Please make sure that your !votes are compliant with our policies and guidelines and bear in mind that at least one SIGCOV source must be included in the article for sportspeople. –dlthewave ☎ 12:33, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No, per WP:NEXIST, sources do not need to be in the article. StAnselm (talk) 15:21, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

But they do need to exist. –dlthewave ☎ 15:38, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. –dlthewave ☎ 15:57, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think it had been more than eight years since I was reported at ANI. StAnselm (talk) 23:09, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again! I write you because I think it would be better to rename this article. I think Hispania (allegory) or Hispania (personification) would be better as all the articles about allegories don't use to be written as f.e. Allegory of Germania but as Germania (personification). Are you agree? Who could rename the article? Thank you Wyatt Abernathy (talk) 21:21, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Thanks for your hard work. StAnselm (talk) 21:32, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Reformed Church of Nepal 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 section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:23, 9 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that some of your AfD comments are still citing reasons that don't follow our policies and guidelines, particularly NSPORTS. Recently you've argued that only one SIGCOV source is required to meet NSPORTS [1] (not true, at least one source must be present in the article); that articles without SIGCOV should be kept to counter systemic bias [2]; that "The minimalist view is that for certain sportspeople one source with significant coverage in the article + routine, statistical coverage can be a proxy for GNG." [3] (I've never heard that one before, is it written down somewhere?); that a player should not be deleted because they had a "lengthy career" [4]; and that players who are just starting out should be kept because they're likely to receive more coverage in the future [5] (CRYSTALBALL violation). Given your promise at ANI to follow our guidelines, this really isn't acceptable. Please be sure that the subject truly meets our notability requirements before !voting to keep. –dlthewave ☎ 02:26, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

In fact, only one of those comments were part of a keep !vote, and !voting per IAR is always acceptable. StAnselm (talk) 02:34, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

And there was me just about to come here and thank you for continuing to contribute to AfD - it's so easy to give it up as a waste of time and effort. We don't always agree on them, but I appreciate that you take the time and effort to consider each one and to look for sources. In particular, the addition of the sources from CI at Mukesh Sahni was really helpful. Blue Square Thing (talk) 09:28, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Anglican Diocese of Lagos DBD 18:58, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Three days since you reverted calling for discussion, and you have made contributions during those days. Please would you come by the talk page above? DBD 09:30, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Sterling College logo.jpg. 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 section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:10, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:02, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank for your help with this article. I could use further help with this page as it is nominated for deletion. much appreciated. Blake Alma (numismatist) Coincollector4ever (talk) 21:18, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Casting your vote on the Articles for deletion page would go a long way. Thank you! Coincollector4ever (talk) 22:48, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Star Mississippi 14:48, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I was clearly off here. Have withdrawn my nomination. FYI in case you're not watching the AfD. Apologies Star Mississippi 17:01, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Well, there certainly wasn't much in the article, to be honest. But thanks anyway. StAnselm (talk) 17:08, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Demonetized (disambiguation) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G14 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a disambiguation page which either

• disambiguates only one extant Wikipedia page and whose title ends in "(disambiguation)" (i.e., there is a primary topic);
• disambiguates zero extant Wikipedia pages, regardless of its title; or
• is an orphaned redirect with a title ending in "(disambiguation)" that does not target a disambiguation page or page that has a disambiguation-like function.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time. Please see the disambiguation page guidelines for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 08:37, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You commented in the 2034 Winter Olympics AfD recently about HiltonCalifornia. I started a Sock investigation on them as the editing behaviour dead-on matched the sock master. Might not be the best to defend them until the sock investigation clears them, but from the look of it, it is the sock based on a few dead-on article-article and behaviour-behaviour giveaways. Elijahandskip (talk) 17:21, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

	The Original Barnstar
	Hi! This Barnstar is for you! This is for not accepting the Deletion nomination for the Apostolic Catholic Church article in the 2nd nomination for its deletion Ploreky (talk) 11:25, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:02, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Institutional Investor September 2005.jpg. 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 section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:08, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Bega Cheese 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 section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:07, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your self-rv at Crisis pregnancy center, which hopefully under the new DS awareness system would suffice, but currently I still have to give you this. ("Have to" as in I've done so for everyone else to rv at that page since I imposed the 1RR, if not already formally aware. As always, an alert carries no finding of wrongdoing.)

-- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she|they|xe) 03:03, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect BendGate and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 November 2#BendGate until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 00:47, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, thank you for your opposition to the deletion of my issue on The book of Daniel, I appreciate the issue you brought up, and if you would like to, I think voicing that issue on Talk:Book of Daniel would be very welcome. and I would love to have more positions introduced as it's currently basically me, tgeorgescu and one other individual. Thank you so much, have a great day. Billyball998 (talk) 18:38, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:02, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Paige Larson.jpg. 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 section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:29, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Paige Larson.jpg. 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 section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:47, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Good morning/afternoon/evening! (Choose the one that best fits your time zone.) Curious about why you reverted the redirect at this article. I merged what I thought was the pertinent information. You are welcome, of course, to add more of it to the target if you think I didn't transfer enough. Joyous! | Talk 17:26, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I would have thought at a minimum, the references would have been included. Interestingly, the target has an expand tag dating back to 2008. StAnselm (talk) 17:36, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Bible Presbyterian Church logo.jpg. 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 section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. — trlkly 22:17, 9 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Christian Century Dec 2010.jpg. 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 section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:05, 23 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

— Moops ^⋠T⋡ 02:27, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Did you really want to revert that? WP:TPO is a guideline, WP:NOTSOAPBOX is a policy. And I'm pretty sure "The bible is quite clear on the subject of homosexuality, and only those who wish to ignore the clearly stated truth of scripture would conclude otherwise" is violating the latter. Black Kite (talk) 23:08, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I'm not happy with User:tgeorgescu's behavior here: he has reverted talk page comments from several months ago, and somehow already ended up at WP:AE. Ronar~enwiki's comments did make some reference to NPOV and are probably no more soapboxy than tgeorgescu's. Continuing to remove them looks like goading to me. StAnselm (talk) 23:13, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that tgeorgescu could have went about it in a better manner. However if we’re going to argue from WP:TPO, Ronar~enwiki’s comments fall under the prohibited material criteria. I have not heard of any time limit, especially when it comes to removing prohibited material. Judging by the history of the article’s talk page, Ronar~enwiki was not in the middle of a discussion either. They simply barged in on discussions which were a few and even several years old. Judging by their conduct, they don’t appear to be here to build an encyclopedia. StephenMacky1 (talk) 01:13, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

And what's with "I have served you with WP:GOODBIAS upon your talk page"?

No idea. But I'm really not happy with stuff like "homosexuality as an act or tendency one indulges in is an abomination", so I am minded to remove it again. I think Ronar~enwiki is suffering from a WP:CIR problem, to be honest. Black Kite (talk) 23:34, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Obviously, any wikipedia editor is free to believe that homosexuality is an abomination, and here on WP we take no official position on that belief. It's somewhat relevant for Bible + homosexuality articles, but it's only the Old Testament that says this, not the New Testament. StAnselm (talk) 23:38, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, but he's presenting it as a fact, not an opinion ("Those who hate God will try any kind of nonsense to deny the truth"). Conflating "what the Bible says" and "what I believe God says" is simply WP:OR even before you get into the religious aspect. And yes, I was going to say that it's only Leviticus that says that, so it's irrelevant for this talkpage anyway. Black Kite (talk) 23:50, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Except that Wikipedia:No original research explicitly does not apply to talk pages. And if we removed every talk page comment that confused facts and opinions we'd have to do an awful lot of culling. StAnselm (talk) 01:40, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Black Kite: The problem is that the editor used Wikipedia as a pulpit. And I don't know all the rules, but quickly get the point when told. tgeorgescu (talk) 02:22, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Carsales 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 section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. echidnaLives - talk - edits 05:50, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Southern Episcopal Church logo.jpg. 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 section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:30, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Who's the second Jonathan in Samuel 2 then? The only other one on the disambiguation page is a Jonathan in the Book of Judges, Iskandar323 (talk) 17:24, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The son of Abiathar and companion of Ahimaaz in 2 Samuel 17.[6] I think he probably does deserve his own article. Note that Jonathan son of Saul dies at the end of 1 Samuel, so "1 Samuel" is a reasonable disambiguator, even though there is a song about him in 2 Samuel 1. StAnselm (talk) 17:32, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Jonathan (son of Abiathar). StAnselm (talk) 18:18, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I’m just asking you this because you’re the last person who edited the page Ordinary Girl (Hannah Montana song). I was wondering should we change the cover art to the more official, seemingly correct one? This artwork was actually released on an official cd single release and matches the artwork of the second single I'm Still Good, https://www.amazon.com/Hannah-Montana-Ordinary-Girl-2-Track-S/dp/B0043T50G8, https://www.amazon.de/-/en/dp/B004F78X76. It makes it seem like the regular artwork was just a placeholder or that the single release was a promo single? What do you think? Would this artwork represent the song better? 47.223.46.42 (talk) 05:11, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. I tried to fix it but it didn't seem to work... StAnselm (talk) 17:21, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I note you have done some oversight work at the Heiser article. I did a major edit today, restructuring and moving lead material into the main body, and otherwise seeking to make the article more encyclopedic (including noting the most material currently is from Heiser sources per se). Could you look in, and make any needed corrective edits, but also solidify the edit, before someone does a less than thoughtful twinkle-inspired reversion, just because I do not log? Merci. 2601:246:C700:F5:F1A0:5FAE:545B:F637 (talk) 21:20, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place to address a potential problem with the redirect Apostolic Church (1911 denomination) and it has been listed for discussion. Anyone, including you, is welcome to participate at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 February 8 § Apostolic Church (1911 denomination) until a consensus is reached. Veverve (talk) 13:29, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is the official art online and on cds, it’s for I'm Still Good by Hannah Montana, can you upload the cover artwork? here’s what the image generally looks like online https://open.spotify.com/album/1y9UosW8KsJgIddyJ1ujFt

 Done StAnselm (talk) 05:07, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]