Misplaced Pages

User talk:71.239.128.44

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by VanishedUserABC (talk | contribs) at 14:32, 25 April 2012 (→WP:3RR). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 14:32, 25 April 2012 by VanishedUserABC (talk | contribs) (→WP:3RR)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might like to see:

You are welcome to continue editing without logging in, but many editors recommend that you create an account. Doing so is free, requires no personal information, and provides several benefits such as the ability to create articles. For a full outline and explanation of the benefits that come with creating an account, please see this page. If you edit without a username, your IP address (71.239.128.44) is used to identify you instead.

In any case, I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your comments on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your IP address (or username if you're logged in) and the date. If you need help, check out Misplaced Pages:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on this page. Again, welcome! Betty Logan (talk) 06:30, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

April 2012

Welcome to Misplaced Pages. Everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, but when you add or change content, as you did to the article The Passion of the Christ , please cite a reliable source for your addition. This helps maintain our policy of verifiability. See Misplaced Pages:Citing sources for how to cite sources, and the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. -- Doniago (talk) 16:06, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Please do not add or change content without verifying it by citing reliable sources, as you did to The Passion of the Christ. Please review the guidelines at Misplaced Pages:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. -- Doniago (talk) 14:14, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at The Passion of the Christ shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Betty Logan (talk) 06:07, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

As Betty Logan stated, IP 71.239.128.44 seems to feel free to disregard policy, and do what it feels like. May need a block. History2007 (talk) 20:49, 21 April 2012 (UTC)


You have been blocked temporarily from editing for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

Kuru (talk) 21:41, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Misplaced Pages pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button or located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 06:01, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

April 2012 again

Please note that you have again been reverted and cautioned by another editor on the same page. Please follow policy, else you will get blocked again. History2007 (talk) 11:11, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

WP:3RR

Please read WP:3RR and stop reverting other editors, per talk discussions, else you will be blocked again. History2007 (talk) 11:51, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

It appears that you disregarded the above. You have now crossed WP:3RR and are subject to being blocked. You must stop now. History2007 (talk) 14:11, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Ok guys we've added more references/cites & even softened some points but our points are in the historic record for both changes & the point at the beginning about Catholics questionning where we added "some" is just modifying another opinion which by the way you said were irrelevant. Tell us what was wrong with using Reilly, Weigel and Nagle

Passion of the ChristWith regard to the section on the 'devotional writings' just putting a Jesuit's position from the Jesuit magazine 'America' leaves an incredible slant. First off his view of the movie was as a film critic not a theologian. Second every Catholic knows that 'America' and the Jesuits are so anti magesterium that a balanced article would conversly quote the other side which I did w/ a quote from the Cardinal Newman Soc. I assume the author of the magazine quote was taking advantage of laymen, non-Catholics & ignorant Catholics. Either way the deletion of a legit quote doesn't seem Wikipdiesh or can I also assume that my source isn't considered legit? If so please recommend a more palatable reference.

Regarding the section on ancient languages used under the 'Controversies' section, now this is totally in the relm of purely objective facts of history. As a phd in Roman history and the work I cited, it is well known that Latin was used, albeit in a limited manner which is what I changed the wording from "improbable" to 'limited'. And not only is it well established that some Latin was used in doing business w/ Rome but it's safely assumed Christ himself was semi conversant. To lable this as a controvery belies certain misleadings of the general laity to heap on so called issues w/ the movie from various academic and clerical fields that just don't exist in an effort that through shear weight the public can be brainwashed. Please tell that at least on this totally objective, well established fact on language this can't even be corrected. I'll contact the other administrator as well about this.

Regarding the use of "us", is there just one of you or several of you? History2007 (talk) 14:32, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
User infoThis is the discussion page for an IP user, identified by the user's IP address. Many IP addresses change periodically, and are often shared by several users. If you are an IP user, you may create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other IP users. Registering also hides your IP address.