Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 06:44, 22 January 2008

Welcome to my talk page

• If you post a message on this page, I'll reply on this page.
• If I've left you a message on your talk page, I will watch it for your response, so please reply there. RESPONSES LEFT HERE WILL BE MOVED TO YOUR PAGE.
• Please sign and date your comments by inserting four tildes (~~~~) at the end.

_{Talk page box taken from User talk:Danelo, who got it from User talk:Adambro (and modified it a bit)}

Archives

/Archive 1

Welcome!

Hi Pairadox! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Misplaced Pages community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Misplaced Pages page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing!

		The Invisible Barnstar
		Thank you for your continued work and assistance on User:SQL/Reflist, referencing and generally cleaning up articles that have needed attention for a long time. Your good work will go unseen unless someone disagrees ;) Jeepday (talk) 15:06, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

		The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
		In recognition for your major edit of Patton Boggs LLP removing the self-promotional style of the article and for wikifying the article, as well as for having responded so kindly and constructively to my initital misplaced criticism Mschiffler (talk) 02:10, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

William M. Branham

If we omit the comments about "ChristBranham" from the EL section then I think the article will need another paragraph to explain what is considered "mainstream" and what is not. Is it the form of expression that concerns you or are you opposed to any brief explanatory notes in the EL section? Personally I think these can be a helpful guide to readers. My comment was not meant as a rebuttal but to inform readers that this particular link represents a very small minority view. My personal view about whether it is right or wrong was not implied. I can explain this more fully in the article with references but it hardly seems warranted imho. Rev107 (talk) 20:43, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Any comments beyond a simple, brief description of the link is inappropriate. If you wish to add another section of paragraph to the article, it would need to be properly sourced to reliable third party sources. Of course, the entire article needs a lot of work to bring it up to that standard - there's far too much reliance on primary sources, no section that shows he was in any way a controversial figure, and pretty much reads as an extension of the man's ministry instead of a NPOV Misplaced Pages article. Pairadox (talk) 21:19, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Your Help with Editing "Adult-child sex" is Appreciated

I noticed that, due to rising tensions surrounding the ACS article and its current AfD, and because of disregard for proper Misplaced Pages procedure and policies by a number of regular editors and admins, you have decided to withdraw either permanently or temporarily from editing associated with this article. VigilancePrime and TlatoSMD have chosen to take a similar course of action. This saddens me, because contributions by upstanding Wikipedians such as yourselves are very helpful in the improvement process of controversial articles such as this. Your assistance will be greatly missed, if you choose to leave or hold back on editing the ACS article. Considering prior repeated attempts by select editors to ignore and violate Misplaced Pages policies and to do whatever is possible to destroy this piece, your civil, well-balanced, and rational editing will definitely be needed, no matter the outcome of the AfD. Although I realize that it is difficult to contribute when so many violations and incivilities are taking place, I urge you to return to this article as soon as you can. I will personally be happy to see you return, and I'm sure the article will be the better for it as well. Best regards, ~ Homologeo (talk) 05:04, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Re Saddleback Church

You took out reference to the worldwide recognition of the church. It is a true statement but I guess I'd like to know how to support it correctly. The church has been written about in dozens of well-known magazines like Time, Newsweek, Der Spiegel, etc., its senior pastor, Rick Warren is the author of one of the world's highest volume selling books (Purpose Driven Life - over 26 million copies for a single book and this is just for English. It is published in over 70 languages.) Should one really go to the trouble of citing all of this just to make that statement of world recognition? Thanks for your help. CarverM (talk) 05:52, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

To clarify: I removed the unreferenced sentence "Saddleback is currently one of the most well-known and influential churches in the world."

This sentence has a lot of problems. First, and probably the most minor, is that "currently" has no meaning and no place in an encyclopedia; Misplaced Pages:Avoid statements that will date quickly. Secondly, and more critically, you are also drawing a conclusion from the available facts. You assume that because it's gotten lots of coverage that it is well known and influencial. In order for such a statement to be included, you would need to find a source that definitively states it is one of the most well known and influencial. A few reliable third party sources at that, because exceptional claims require exceptional sources. Also, if you attend this church, I would direct your attention to the conflicts of interest guidelines. Pairadox (talk) 06:07, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I do attend this church. I've read the conflict-of-interest section and understand what it is trying to do. However, can't one who knows the subject well still try and be objective and write a section that is encyclopedic in style? I'm not sure who wrote some of the stuff in this article but it needs quite a bit of work to be accurate and informative. So, couldn't I update it and then let the Wiki community ensure its NPOV? A corollary question: what does one do when an article contains criticism by someone obviously trying to denigrate? For example, I'm not clear on why the Obama issue needs to be in the article, it's not encyclopedic? Again, thanks for the clarifications; I'm new at this. --CarverM (talk) 06:26, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Since you are relatively new, I wanted to make sure you were aware of the COI guidelines; many newbies aren't. One way to ensure your additions are as NPOV as possible is to only add material that comes from reliable third party sources and cite it properly. You mention lots of potential sources above. For that same reason, removing properly sourced material is problematic - you're probably not going to have the necessary NPOV to see what is and what isn't POV. (In this case the source is a press release from Saddleback itself, so even they must have thought it worth addressing.) I'd suggest you bring your concerns to article talk page (and Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Christianity if you want a larger audience) and let other editors weigh in and make the changes. Pairadox (talk) 06:45, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Wonder Man

The claim you have reinserted falls down on faulty logic, as discussed on the Talk Page. Asgardian (talk) 08:37, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

The only "claim" is that a fictional character made a specific statement. That is backed by the citation. Faulty logic only appears when viewed from an in-universe perspective. Pairadox (talk) 08:49, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

It was established in the Avengers issue that Wonder Man is far superior to Ms. Marvel. I will tailor it to read Sentry only.

Asgardian (talk) 08:55, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: Trek

My apologies, friend. I had the wrong tab open and reverted the wrong one. I'll attempt to be more careful in future; my intention was to actually remove the whole description, rather than your one edit to it. All the best, Steve 08:40, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

No problem, these things happen. I agree with removing the whole description, just didn't feel like being that bold when it's likely to be added by fanboys again. Pairadox (talk) 08:53, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism revert

Thanks! 22:33, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

De nada. Pairadox (talk) 22:36, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

The mains street singers

It's a high school choir, and there were no sources other than the choir's own website. Plus, the article was a direct copyvio. The title's not protected if they want to take another shot at it and provide sources. Thanks, NawlinWiki (talk) 02:48, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Ah; the copyvio would indeed rule it out then. Thanks for the quick reply. Pairadox (talk) 02:50, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

I can talk again!

Pair, now that I am "allowed" to talk again, I just wanted to drop by and say "hi".

Hi.

If you have any thoughts or comment on anything over the last week, I'm really in desperate desire for some outside perspective on all the issues that have been following me around. You've been great for perspective before and I appreciate any insights you may have. Or just plain randomness. Whatever. (Should I watch this page or my own talk page for a reply? Oh wait, I seem to remember some blindingly obvious box on this page somewhere... if only I could remember what it said...!) VigilancePrime (talk) 06:37, 22 January 2008 (UTC) :-)

Once I realized what a train wreck it was becoming, I made the decision to get out of the path of harm and just watch with a morbid fascination from the sidelines. Pairadox (talk) 06:44, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Welcome to my talk page

• If you post a message on this page, I'll reply on this page.
• If I've left you a message on your talk page, I will watch it for your response, so please reply there. RESPONSES LEFT HERE WILL BE MOVED TO YOUR PAGE.
• Please sign and date your comments by inserting four tildes (~~~~) at the end.

_{Talk page box taken from User talk:Danelo, who got it from User talk:Adambro (and modified it a bit)}