User talk:Majoreditor/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Majoreditor. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Hierotheos

Wow, what a nice job you did with the Hierotheos article! I worked on it but didn't know enough about the subject to do it the justice that you did. Thank you for your hard work! --edi 23:41, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

FAC

Thank you for your support on the FAC for Maximus the Confessor. The discussion has closed, and the article has been promoted to Featured Article status. I think the article was greatly improved through the comments and suggestions offered in the nomination process, and was happy to see the process work so well. Again, thanks. -- Pastordavid 20:00, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Mother Teresa

Hi Majoreditor! To request protection, please ask at WP:RFPP, not at WP:AIV. Thank you, and happy editing! – riana_dzasta 04:06, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

WP Saints Update

Glad you like the sidebar. I have gone ahead and put it on the page, and made some other associated changes (including starting some sub-pages to spread out the content a little, and hopefully making things overall more easy to navigate). Have a look around and see what you think. -- Pastordavid 16:11, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Ronald Reagan Peer Review

Hey there. Thanks so much for your comments dealing with Ronald Reagan's Peer Review. I agree with you - the article is decent, but could be improved here and there. I don't know if you noticed, but I have been working on the "Legacy" section. If you get the time, could you give me what you think are the weakest pionts in the "Legacy" section? It would be much appreciated. Thanks, Happyme22 03:40, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom

Am I the only one who finds the sudden appearance of an article ex nihilo to be slightly dodgy? InfernoXV 02:28, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing this out. See my comments on your talk page. Majoreditor 13:07, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

John Chrysostom ...

has been nominated as a GA. -- Pastordavid 21:26, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

FYI, Article has passed as a GA. -- Pastordavid

		A Barnstar
		In the Wikipedia tradition, I award you "The Saints' Barnstar"; for tireless work on improving articles related to the Eastern Catholic Churches, and especially in bringing the article on John Chrysostom to Good Article status. --Grimhelm 18:07, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

This is my first time awarding a barnstar, but I feel it is certainly well deserved. --Grimhelm 18:07, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Mother Teresa

're welcome. I will see if the photographer has some more photos he wants to release under a free content license. I know for sure he has a replacement for the fair use Image:HomeForTheDying-Calcutta.jpg image. Garion96 (talk) 22:20, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Hello

Hello to you too! linaduliban

Thank You!

Shukran! InfernoXV 17:33, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

I'll second that! Thanks! --Grimhelm 16:16, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Don't leave me out ... Thanks! I've enjoyed working alongside you. -- Pastordavid 16:41, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

David Ogilvy

I agree that according to the letter of the law, I should have added a note to the talk page. However, to my mind it's perfectly clear what the issues are. This is a puff piece, a bit of PR, bordering on hero worship, not a proper encyclopaedia article. Colonies Chris 08:00, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

As I mentioned before, I agree with your assessment. However, you need to provide your rationale on the article's talk page before slapping on a NPOV tag. Hopefully someone will utilize your comments as constructive criticism and improve the piece. Majoreditor 12:44, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Anti-Catholicism category

Since you have contributed substantially to the anti-Catholicism article, I thought you might want to participate in the discussion on the category anti-Catholicism which is being considered for deletion here. Mamalujo 18:48, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Re: Content removal

That's a great idea. I'll start doing that. Thanks! (ESkog)^(Talk) 21:13, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Semi protect

Hi, sorry but one vandalism a day is not enough to warrant semi protection. See also Wikipedia:Protection_policy#Semi-protection, we like to protect articles not more than is needed. I will keep an eye on it and semi protect it if necessary though. Garion96 (talk) 15:16, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Gregory

My friend, flattery will get you everywhere with me. Of course I will be happy to pitch in on the article. Nazianzus is not a figure I know terribly much about, so it would be interesting to learn some more. Perhaps we could trade; Justification (theology) is the current WikiProject Lutheranism collaboration, and it could use a set of Eastern eyes to give it a look. And thanks for your kind words on my ER - or perhaps I should say what one of my profs used to say when so complimented: Thank you but the devil already told me how great I am. Just glancing at Gregory, I would say that there is enough there to get it up to GA pretty quickly - I will spend some time with it later this week. Thanks again. -- Pastordavid 15:37, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Your help is much appreciated. I have reviewed the Orthodox section in Justification (theology) and find it good. I've added another cite and put some additional material on the article's talk page. Other editors such as TCC and Inferno will know far more than I on the subject. Majoreditor 02:31, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your input. I am plugging away at little touch ups and additions to the Nazianzus article. I also created this to fill out wikipedia's coverage of the family. Feel free to jump in on it as well. -- Pastordavid 21:00, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Wonderful! I will work on Gregory Jr this weekend and have it ready for review by next weekend. I'll then circle back and contribute some to the new article on his father. Majoreditor 03:02, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Looks like it's almost there. I don't think I have much to add, as I can only proofread at this point. --Grimhelm 18:01, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

ME, you have done a fantastic job on this article. I keep coming back to the article, looking for something to critize or improve, and not really finding anything. I have no doubt that it will pass GA -- indeed, if we (or you) keep plugging away at it, it should get to FA before too long. Pastor David ^† 18:40, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Immaculate Conception

Hi :) would you be so kind as to weigh in on Talk:Mary (mother of Jesus) #Eastern Catholics and the Immaculate Conception? InfernoXV 05:10, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Your comments on my editor review

Thank you for taking the time to comment on my editor review. I appreciate the good words that you wrote.

You also wrote...

On (rare) occasion your posts on talk pages are harsher than they need be. You may try to moderate your tone.

I recognize that civility is occasionally a challenge for me and I do try to keep a lid on it. Could you point out specific instances where you think that I have crossed the line? If it is too difficult to dig up specific edits, just mentioning the page or general context would help. Thanx.

--Richard 17:53, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:3HolyHierarchs.jpg listed for deletion

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as Image:3HolyHierarchs.jpg has been listed for speedy deletion because you selected a copyright license type implying some type of restricted use, such as for non-commercial use only, or for educational use only or for use on Wikipedia by permission. While it might seem reasonable to assume that such files can be freely used on Wikipedia, this is in fact not the case[1][2]. Please do not upload any more files with these restrictions on them, because content on Wikipedia needs to be compatible with the GNU Free Documentation License, which allows anyone to use it for any purpose, commercial or non-commercial. See our non-free content guidelines for more more information.

If you created this media file and want to use it on Wikipedia, you may re-upload it (or amend the image description if it has not yet been deleted) and use the license {{GFDL-self-no-disclaimers}} to license it under the GFDL, or {{cc-by-sa-2.5}} to license it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license, or use {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain.

If you did not create this media file but want to use it on Wikipedia, there are two ways to proceed. First, you may choose one of the fair use tags from this list if you believe one of those fair use rationales applies to this file. Second, you may want to contact the copyright holder and request that they make the media available under a free license.

If you have any questions please ask at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you. TCC (talk) (contribs) 02:00, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, but I had to do it. This doesn't meet fair use criteria, and isn't a promotional image besides. Surely we can find a public domain icon of the Three Holy Hierarchs, though. TCC (talk) (contribs) 02:00, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm ripping the one off the OCA website. It's obviously an antique icon, and is PD by the standards Wikipedia uses. TCC (talk) (contribs) 02:15, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! Majoreditor 02:18, 4 May 2007 (UTC) -

DYK

On 10 May, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Elias Zoghby, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--ALoan (Talk) 11:57, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Primates (bishops)

Hi. I appreciated your comment on my user page about Primates. You seem to appreciate the usefulness of the Primate (religion) categories. These are now coming under "scrutiny" by other editors. I would appreciate, if you would see fit, your support in defending these in the "Categories for Discussion" discussions being held. Thank you! Pastorwayne 12:55, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Chicken (game)

Thanks for your work in reviewing Chicken (game). Cheers, Pete.Hurd 01:37, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Eastern Catholicism CfD

Per your comments at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 May 9#Eastern Rite Catholic primates, see nomination for Category:Eastern Rite Catholicism and sub-categories at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 May 14#Category:Eastern Rite Catholicism. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 05:21, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

ME, thank you for your very kind words and your support of my RfA, which successfully closed yesterday. And yes, of course I would love to help in getting Gregory to FA. As always, please feel free to drop my a note any time if there is anything I can do for you.

Religious page review

Hi Majoreditor, could you review the page of the Fellowship of Friends? It looks pretty clumsy at the moment. It is a religious page and I noticed that you have experience in that area. Thanks! Mario Fantoni 06:39, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, but I must decline. I'm not at all familiar with the subject matter. It appears that you need someone adept at mediation to facilitate the talk page. Try ArbCom. Good luck! Majoreditor 12:40, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

citations

Call me crazy, but I'm still having a hard time figuring out what you mean. From the Vanderbilt University talk page:

No, those are references, not notes. The 24 references aren't proper citations. A citation is a note referencing a specific page in a specific work which supports the assertion of a fact.

I'm trying to figure out how exactly we should go about "firming up" the cites (I don't mean that to sound snarky—I'm honestly looking for help). For example, the first "citation" in the article comes after these two sentences:

In the late 1950s, the Vanderbilt Divinity School became something of a hotbed of the emerging Civil Rights movement, and the university expelled one of its leaders, James Lawson. Much later, in 2005, he was made a Distinguished Alumnus for his achievements and re-hired as a Distinguished University Professor for the 2006-07 academic year.

What then follows is an embedded HTML link, which seems to follow the format listed here, i.e., there is a matching reference listed in the References section:

• Patterson, Jim (2006-01-30). "The Rev James Lawson to return as visiting professor". The Vanderbilt Register. Retrieved 2007-01-10. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)

In addition, with the exception of one book, all the references include links to the websites from which the material is retrieved. It'd be impossible to provide a page number for those (since there are no pages), so I don't know how to make them any more specific. Are you suggesting that the article itself needs more citations, or just that the existing ones are insufficient in their current format (or both)? Any help you can provide will be most welcome. Esrever 14:39, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for working so quickly to add the in-line citations, Esrever. That clears up my concern. The article should now pass GA review. Keep up the great work! Majoreditor 22:16, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations

Thanks for your note - I am glad to see that it passed. A quick look here shows that you had 133 edits to the page (compared to the next highest person with 8, and a total count of 296 over the life of the article). With that in mind, you certainly earned this:

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		It is my pleasure to award Majoreditor this Barnstar of Diligence in recognition of all his hard work in raising Gregory of Nazianzus to GA-status, his second successful GA. Pastordavid 14:59, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for your kind words regarding my edits to Mother Teresa. I would like to thank you, as well, for your vigilence in monitoring that, and other similar, articles. It appears we have some interests in common. It is always appreciated to get some positive feedback, especially when dealing with some of the more...shall we say...extreme contributors that tend to edit religious-based articles. I often feel a certain level of frustration, especially when dealing with editors who insist on throwing in rather bizarre and unfounded claims on these topics. They tend to be quite generous in throwing out accusations of bias, without acknowledging their own. Nice to know there are still other sane editors out there!

--Anietor 21:52, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Saints Collaboration

Majoreditor, an article which you nominated, Mother Teresa, has been chosen as the current Collaboration for WikiProject Saints. If you have a moment, you may want to make suggestions for improvement under the to-do list on the collaboration page. Congratualations, now lets get this up to GA! (As an aside, I hope you are enjoying your vacation). Pastordavid 15:15, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

{{Infobox Patriarch}}

Hi there! I've created an updated version of this template located at {{User:Kimon/Infobox Patriarch}}. Would you be agreeable to merging the two? --Kimon^talk 16:16, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Yours is excellent. Let's replace mine with the one you developed. Thanks. Majoreditor 23:38, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Thank you! I've gone ahead and done so. I've also updated the articles the existing articles with the updated infobox --Kimon^talk 01:06, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Welcome back

A little treat for when you return: Mother Teresa has passed GA. You certainly seem to be on a hot streak! Keep up the good work. Pastordavid 21:21, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

3RR violation

You have now violated Wikipeida's Three-Revert Rule in the article Persecution of Christians. Rather than imposing a block on you right away, I'll ask that you self-revert your last reinsertion of the text, and voluntarily refrain from editing the article for 24 hours. You are welcome to continue the discussion on the talk page in the mean time. If you decline, I will institute a block. I would strongly urge you to cease your method to get the material added. I've been through this too many times myself, and I know that method just doesn't work. Propose your text on the talk page. Discuss it in detail. Be willing to compromise. But don't add the material back in until there is consensus. AKRadecki 04:41, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Done. Sorry, I lost count. Majoreditor 04:45, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for cooperating. I didn't want to come down too hard. For what it's worth, I did the same thing as you once, and another admin showed me some grace, and I'm a big believer in grace! AKRadecki 04:48, 2 June 2007 (UTC)