Thank you for the references you gave in the talkpage of the article on Father Victor White. You have certainly done a good research there, and have been a busy bee! I see that some of these are articles which are copyright, but I am sure that reading them will be of assistance. Some of the references, I see come from Google books - I have a student who says that that is one of her favourite places! Thank you again for your help, and I think that sufficient merging and paraphrasing will help us to escape any infringements of copyrights,ACEOREVIVED (talk) 22:20, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The quotation marks are unsafe in Jung's words on religion and knowledge in God. Those webs are copy-protected! Was it y who put them in, not me?! MacOfJesus (talk) 21:21, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I've been looking at the "here" above; a copy of the book itself but only the first 18 pages! Is it possible to access the remaining pages, Marcusmax, and thanks.MacOfJesus (talk) 22:56, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Bernard_Mc_Nally"
I left this message for you in my talk page! However, I recognise how silly that was! The "Here" was the web-page you left for me on my talk page.
I am reading again The Book of Job and the Wisdom Literature and the Commentries on them and devising a response in my head! It is going to be difficult, for Jung concerned himself with an answer to Job's position only ignoring all the rest! Job's answers are in context!
Hi Marcusmax! This note is to inform you that your Aviation Contest submissions page has been archived from the previous round! You are now free to add submissions for this round! Note: This next round will run from January through February, so feel free to update your submission page with work from both months! Thanks, and happy editing! (Note: I will not be watching this space. If you have any questions, feel free to ask at the Contest discussion page. -SidewinderX (talk) 14:04, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Answer to Job
I now have this publication. However, attempting to write for the article page would indeed be very difficult. I have left an "appraisal" in the talk page.
I completely understand that Whitney performed well in the last election. However, to be consistent with all of the other elections, we shouldn't put him in unless if he is polling at least 5% and if he is included in the debates. The green party being a registered party in the state pretty much means that it's easier to get ballot access and stuff like that, but it doesn't guarantee that the green party nominee will become popular or perform signifcantly on election day. Until Whitney starts to get traction, he shouldn't really be in the infobox. Thanks for the question.--Jerzeykydd (talk) 23:39, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Answer to Job 2
I cannot see myself attempting to make any entrance on the article page here, as I've explained on the talk page. The Book of Job came approx. 300 BC to 400 BC, with a very different frame-work to the Christian World.
The Book of Job is quite a study in itself and having studied Scripture at length I have a good idea what was meant in the composition of this Drama/Book. However, Jung does not stay on the one "playing-field". So to write the page one would have to begin with The Book of Job, and then find Jung is "not playng ball". Hence, I can see why nobody attempted to write this article page.
What I've been hearing from the Jung world, indicates as much. And, to boot, I may be opening a can of worms, for Jung is viewed so differently in his world. I may find myself going down a channel of chasing shadows!
It is significant that I am the only one who has written on the talk page of Answer to Job. Reading the book it would be very hard to know where to begin.
On February 18, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Plains Garter Snake, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
On February 24, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Florida Black Bear, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Thanks! It is indeed. Some people just like adding deletion tags as quick as possible, like it's some sort of a race or something, crazy. Nick carson (talk) 05:23, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
On April 12, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Mount Graham Red Squirrel, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Your welcome - BTW in response to your question on the Project page, this is the broad definition i personally use when determining where a cyclone made landfall. A landfall is when the center of the system (eye) passes over an island. A direct hit is when the center comes very close to the island but its eye doesnt pass over the island.Jason Rees (talk) 03:19, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, will be commencing a two-month trial at approximately 23:00, 2010 June 15 (UTC).
Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under flagged protection. Flagged protection is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial.
When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.
"but are you looking for something other then the standard MODIS image" - Yeah kinda im trying to find some decent imagery of conson to chuck in the article that i am developing as i doubt i will be able to get impact photos.Jason Rees (talk) 02:14, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for looking - hopefully you can find the top 1/2 of that image as we should be able to use it within the article since it looks like it going to be a long one since PAGASA supposedly were really bad with their forecasting.Jason Rees (talk) 03:22, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Marcusmax. You've tagged the above article for Proposed deletion with Clearly an Advertisement masquerading as an article as the comment. Looking though it (and the links) I can't see how this is advertising as it isn't promoting any particular entity. It is more like a brief news report and also fails WP:SYNTHESIS as well as WP:INDISCRIMINATE. is it ok by you if I go ahead and replace your prod? BTW it is best to link to policy in the comments as many of these article writers won't have yet read them ;) All the best. Plutonium27 (talk) 06:13, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
On 10 October 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Taft Homes, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.