User talk:Sophia

Welcome to my talk page - feedback on my editing is always appreciated - both good and bad!

• Archive 1 From 6th Jan 2006 to 6th March 2006
• Archive 2 From 6th March 2006 to 15th April 2006

• User talk:SOPHIA/Jesus-Myth my WIP page

Your Message on my talk page

Thanks again regarding your concerns on upholding wikipedia policies, you might wanna check out your husband's user page for the same violation.. "Uda Balagena Kela Gahuwoth, it falls on your face" ;-) its suprising that his page is not on your watch list..Mystic 09:39, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Your husbands user page carries a link to some website, if posting links on wiki is against policies.. you should remove that link.. Shouldn't you Mystic 10:39, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

OIC I didn't know that.. thanks.. "Umbe Ammata Hukanna" Mystic 16:13, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Community Justice

Welcome to Wikipedia:Community Justice.

Thanks ...

Thanks, Sophia, for standing up for what is right these last few days. IMHO you are one of the "people of good will" mentioned in the liturgy. I hope you have/had a nice Easter with your loved ones. (self-professed) Str1977 ^{(smile back)} 18:33, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

I was on Wikibreak for much of the recent fracas about personnal information, and I appreciate your work in removing it. Thanks, Tom Harrison ^Talk 21:41, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Community Justice/Elections

As Wikipedia:Community Justice has over 30 members, we are beginning the elections process.

If you are interested in becoming the chairman, the chief executive or councillor please add yourself, and a statement, to Wikipedia:Community Justice/Elections.

Voting shall begin on April 24th, and end on May 1st. To see if you are eligible for a vote, please see Wikipedia:Community Justice/Elections.

Thank you,

Computerjoe's talk 20:58, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

CJ election reminder

Hi SOPHIA

I noticed that you are not registered for voting or nomination in the CJ elections, and would like to remind everyone that all Candidates Must Submit Their Statement By April 23rd. Voting will begin April 24th, and end May 1st. More details on how to nominate yourself can be found HERE.

I hope to see you at the elections!

• The Giant Puffin • 20:32, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Tea/Cool head

A cup of tea would be nice, thank you. I try not to respond at all on the article on Homeopathy until I've digested for several days as it gets me too upset. Thanks for adding the tag to the Talk page Doc 16:17, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Many thanks. Something stronger is usually needed thoughGleng 21:35, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Double blue trouble

When you get a chance, check Talk:Jesus#No Criticism Allowed and Talk:Jesus-Myth#No Criticism Allowed. Grigory Deepdelver of Brockenboring^TalkTCF 11:21, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

I removed a link from Talk:Christianity for the same reason. Tom Harrison ^Talk 00:43, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

From Wikipediareview:

About the contacting employer incident. I don't believe it. I think its fake. The one with Gator, I think was real, as he gave details (a letter), etc., but with KMHO3, I think its a stunt. Why no evidence or details? I'm just wondering the details about who contacted whose work place and in what manner?

You might want to sign on there and tell them what you know. If I try, they probably would not listen to me. Grigory Deepdelver of Brockenboring^TalkTCF 08:22, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Jesus and Jesus-Myth

My only purpose was to make the pages editable again. I don't know what our policy is on deleting the link, so I won't do that; but I've left a note on the admin's noticeboard so that someone else may do so. -- Eugene van der Pijll 00:06, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Do me a favor.

Do me a favor: the Christian cabal (you know, the one that doesn't exist) is going to get me blocked for a while and I'm sure they'll be working extra hard to censor the relevant articles during my enforced absence, so please do your best to make sure WP:POV is enforced. Thanks Alienus 12:30, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Community Justice Voting has Begun!

I see you've registered to vote in the Community Justice elections, and I'm just telling you that now you can vote!

Please cast your vote(s) at Wikipedia:Community Justice/Elections/Voting; following instructions provided there.

Thank you,

Computerjoe's talk 12:58, 24 April 2006 (UTC) (current Chairman)

Jesus and Christianity

Well, I just walked from one firestorm to another by commenting on the Christianity page as well as the Jesus page. Not too healthy. I wish there was a way to cure ill tempers but frankly, I am at a loss. Jim62sch has requested protection for the Jesus page, and I wonder if he should look in on the Christianity page as well.

Ill tempers on the Martin Luther page as well, which I have decided not to get involved with despite my religious convictions. This is all getting to be far too much.

There's nothing wrong with a herd, as long as it doesn't stampede. Well, the cattle are spooked. Not a very healthy situationGrigory Deepdelver of Brockenboring^TalkTCF 13:35, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Just so you know...

request for full protection

Robsteadman account

Please check Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:Robsteadman and contributions from the Robsteadman account today: Robsteadman (talk · contribs). It appears Rob is trying to defend himself against the recent impersonation, and it's not going well. Also he's got into it with Deskana again. If this is not actually Rob, then something is very seriously wrong. Grigory Deepdelver^Talk 20:13, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

He's been temporarily blocked for trolling on my RfA. I try to not be suspicious but I do find it funny that there is a recent surge in activity from his account when someone he doesn't like nominates himself from adminship. --Darth Deskana (talk page) (my RfA!) 20:16, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Collateral damage. There have been odd things going on lately. Enough for me to flee the Jesus page in mortal terror. Grigory Deepdelver^Talk 20:49, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Mortal terror indeed. And the Sith Lords like me are supposed to be the ones doing the terrifying! (Attempting to restore sense of humour :-) ) --Darth Deskana (talk page) (my RfA!) 20:51, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

I haven't exactly gone yet.

"Don't go! You are a model wikipedian in difficult circumstances - we need more of your kind not less! Don't take this a suggestion to use sockpuppets! LOL"

I am flattered as usual. However, as someone who was harrassed out of Wartburg College, I just can't stand to see people harrass others, or treat others with suspicion. It's just become too much.

Besides I noticed on CTSWyneken's RfA that high edit count per article ratios are frowned upon. His was about 9, mine is about 12, so what does that mean? I think I need to diversify. Grigory Deepdelver^Talk 23:31, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

I've changed my mind. I'm taking a wikibreak. Thank you for explaining the situation to Doc Glasgow. Yes, I'm freaked out. Grigory Deepdelver^Talk 00:26, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

See response on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Archola Giovanni33 09:48, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Short break, but I became frustrated with people at Talk:Jesus either talking past one another, or not recognizing the problem. Anyway, since Gio's been blocked for 3RR, perhaps we could continue the think tank at his talk page? Grigory Deepdelver^Talk 18:04, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

WP:AN/I

Hi. I was unaware you had reported me at WP:AN/I. I only found out about it. Contrary to your assertions at the time, I never refused to delete the pages in question. In fact I asked the question "Do I have to delete them?" without getting an answer.

Anyway there is further discussion on the matter here if you are interested. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Frelke (talk • contribs) .

apologies for the lack of a sig Frelke 19:50, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the apologies. I have replied in depth here. Frelke 21:02, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Just because some moistened bink lobbed a scimitar at me..

It seems I have somehow managed to (almost) run out of topics to argue about. Care to join me at the ever popular and completely un-biased Global Warming Talk? My current POV is that the entire concept was cooked up by Al Gore in order to facilitate a presidential platform in 2008. Or perhaps that it is really an aspect of Global Cooling. ^_^ --Coldbourne 23:37, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Not the grail, the Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch!! I figured it would be much more persuasive in arguments. I did not realize you were a Pastafarian, but a penchant for Pirates is sure to be applauded in most circles. --Coldbourne 05:13, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

I am glad that you enjoyed the article. Upon reading it I was immediatly rendered tickled pink, and have remained so much to my chagrin, as black is much more my color. Still it is nothing compared to being able to claim that on your page death awaits you all with nasty, big, pointy teeth!!

Talk:Abortion/First_paragraph#Version_5.0

Feedback please. - RoyBoy ⁸⁰⁰ 04:11, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the support on my RfA!

File:Danavecpurpletiger.jpg

A belated thank you to you for Supporting my RFA! It passed 54/2/3, much better than I expected! I am still finding my feet as an Administrator, and so far I am enjoying the experience. I am honoured that you felt I was ready to take up this position, and wish to thank you formally! I hope I can live up to your expectations of me. I truly do admire you as a Wikipedian! Thanks ever so much! :-D --Darth Deskana (talk page) --Darth Deskana (talk page) 19:02, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Reverting the sock

Not only okay, but very helpful. Thank you. If you see more of that particular kind of editing in the future, feel free to let an admin know. Jkelly 21:21, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Circumcision advocacy

Could you please keep an eye on Circumcision advocacy? I'm having an odd problem with Jakew reverting over and over again in support of Jayjg, but without the least bit of explanation. I've sent him a polite message but I'm not sure if he'll respond productively. Since I've done my 3 reverts, I would hate to imagine that he would be allowed to succeed in removing text simply on the basis of a technicality. One more reason WP:IAR is a good idea! Anyhow, please take a look and do whatever you think is necessary. Al 19:23, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

While you're at it, take a peek at Mutilation. Al 19:26, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

On the contrary, Sophia, thank you for making the effort to ensure that the text describes the opinions of others, rather than endorsing a particular point of view. I still think that the article is better off without a detailed discussion of various opinions regarding circumcision, but if it must stay, I'm happy as long as it's presented in a neutral, factual, and verifiable manner.

Incidentally, I removed the mention in the second paragraph, as it's inclusion implied that circumcision is a form of (ritual) mutilation. Jakew 16:12, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Sophia, I would urge you to be very cautious about claims and counterclaims on any article connected to circumcision. Be very cautious about those who want to remove information. Consider the possibility that it may be an attempt at censorship. Michael Glass 02:02, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

I would also urge you to consider the fact that activists typically cry "censorship" the first time WP:NOR is enforced on their pet articles. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:33, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Urging others to assume bad faith seems inappropriate at best. Jakew 13:07, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Sophia, let's talk specifics rather than generalities. Take, for instance this discussion [1], or this [2] and especially these [3] [4]. Everyone has personal agendas; everyone has insights; everyone has blind spots. Urging someone to be cautious is not assuming bad faith; it is just a warning that people are human. Michael Glass 22:43, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Sophia, I have concluded that 'Circumcision Advocacy' should be merged with other articles on circumcision. Michael Glass 04:06, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Alienus block

It is already being discussed on his Talk: page, isn't it? Do you think it needs to be discussed somewhere else as well? Jayjg ^(talk) 02:47, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

I thought an admin is not supposed to block someone they are in content dispute with? Jayjg and Alienus are in edit disputes, where the comment was made. I thought that in this case Jayig would report it to get another admin. not involved in edit content coflicts to make a decision about puntivitve measures. This ensures objectivity and that the punitive action is not abused as a means to silence an oponent in an article. Also, this allows all other admins to see what is going on, and allows them to comment. On procedure grounds alone, I'd object to the way his one week block was carried out.Giovanni33 02:51, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm not involved in a conflict dispute with Alienus on the article in which he made the personal attack; in fact, I've never edited it. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:53, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Its really a distinction without a difference. Jakew and yourself have an edit conflict about the content of the politics of cirumcision, no? True most of it takes place on the article about the subject itself, and this incident occured on another article. However, it was about the same issue, subject: circumcision, and with this same person, Jakew, who mutually supports your stance in the circumcision article that is in dispute with Alienus. So, its the spirit of the rule that still applies to this situation. The fact that it happened on another article is not a big enough of a difference given all the important things that are the same, for this important rule to be overlooked.Giovanni33 05:00, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

In other words, we weren't involved in a content dispute. I'm also not involved with Alienus in a content dispute on the Circumcision article. Regarding Jakew, are you now claiming that because someone else is involved in a content dispute with Alienus, and Jakew has also at some point supported my position on something in a different article, that means that I am involved in a content dispute with Alienus? If so, you are stretching the meaning of "involved in a content dispute" beyond any rational bounds. Jayjg ^(talk) 15:05, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for your nice welcome... Man with two legs 15:35, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

• • • Same here Sophia for your nice welcome. I was impressed with your interests and your polite professionalism elswhere. I do have a log in name already, which I may use "skullnboner".

--68.146.186.180 05:43, 14 May 2006 (UTC)skullnboner

• Thanks for the welcome! Museumfreak 15:37, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Hi Sophia, thank you for the welcome and updates to help me learn the ropes. I'll try the 4 tildas thing and see if I can get it to work. I hope to stay around and am impressed by the creators of this site and their effort to give to the greater community. It was a novel idea. Hopefully I can add some constructive information myself. Cute dogs, I used to have a lab once, they're adorable. Is there any way to send a message other than editing your home page? Somehow I feel like I'm being horribly intrusive.

Thank you,

Bbagot 07:32, 18 May 2006 (UTC) bbagot

Welcome to Esperanza!

Welcome, SOPHIA, to Esperanza, the Wikipedia member association! As you might know, all the Esperanzians share one important goal: the success of this encyclopedia. Within that, we then attempt to strengthen the community bonds, and be the "approachable" side of the project. All of our ideals are held in the Charter, the governing document of the association.

Now that you are a member you should read the guide to what to do now or you may be interested in some of our programs. A quite important program is the StressUnit, which seeks to support editors who have encountered any stress from their Wikipedia events, and are seeking to leave the project. So far, Esperanza can be credited with the support and retention of several users. We will send you newsletters to keep you up to date. Also, we have a calendar of special events, member birthdays, and other holidays that you can add to and follow.

In addition to these projects, several more missions of Esperanza are in development, and are currently being created at Esperanza/Possibles.

I encourage you to take an active voice in the running of Esperanza. We have a small government system, headed by our Administrator general, Celestianpower, and guided by the Advisory Committee comprised of JoanneB, FireFox and Titoxd. The next set of elections will be in April, we will keep you updated about the results. Because you are a new member, you are not able to vote in these elections, but you will be more than welcome to take part in the elections in June.

If you have any other questions, concerns, comments, or general ideas, Esperanzian or otherwise, know that you can always contact Celestianpower by email or talk page or the Esperanza talk page. Alternatively, you could communicate with fellow users via our IRC channel, #wikipedia-esperanza (which is also good for a fun chat or two :). If you're new to IRC, you may find help at an IRC Tutorial. I thank you for joining Esperanza, and look forward to working with you in making Wikipedia a better place to work!

JoanneB 14:39, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Word association

Thank you for your contributions to the word association games. Please could you only add one word at a time to each game (except Sliding Doors which is a special case), even if more than one word has been added since your last turn. This keeps the game interesting for as many people as possible and allows a greater range of associations. I've removed the second of the two words you added to the Ultra Fixed Word Association: 'Khusaw' game for this reason. Thryduulf 09:52, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Community Justice Newsletter

Welcome Previously, various notices regarding Community Justice have gone out to our members; though this is the first actual newsletter. This issue will contain information regarding decisions made on the first meeting, our new council, and more...! If you wish to unsubscribe to future newsletters, please add your name to Wikipedia:Community Justice/Do Not Spam. New Council Following our first elections, a new council has been elected.Computerjoe and Ian13 remain as chairman and chief executive (respectively); while Eddieh, Wiki alf and Xchrisblackx are replaced as councillors by Ilyanep, Osbus and Covington. The Giant Puffin and Pureblade remain as councillors. Member Conduct In the last meeting, the conduct of 4 members was discussed. Ethnopunk will be put on probation, supervised by Ian13, if he/she is incivil during this probation, he/she will be expelled from WP:CJ; the same was decided for Misza13 (voluntarily), and his probation will be supervised by Computerjoe. No action will be taken against Computerjoe. Barnstar The Civility Barnstar which our members have designed has been sent to Barnstar and award proposals. We'd appreciate your feedback! Also, we are planning to make a Community Justice barnstar to give to hard-working CJ members. If you're a budding designer, consider trying to make it, then post your proposal to WT:CJ! Name and logo change There has been no consensus reached regarding changing our name and/or logo neither at WT:CJ nor at WT:CJ/M/1. While suggestions are still welcome, no action will be taken at this time. Programs We are going to try to create programs to more actively involve our members. If you have any ideas, please drop a line at WT:CJ. We will try to work with WP:ESP on one of these programs, at some point in the future. Thanks! Thank you for your time. If you need anything, feel free to comment at WT:CJ or come into our IRC channel [5]. Computerjoe wishes to extend his thanks to User:Robchurch, a non-member who assisted in making {{tracker}} redundant, as well as Misza13 for his continued support and to the whole of this and the previous council. This newsletter was delivered by CJBot, written by Computerjoe, with technical help from Misza13. Computerjoe's talk 19:30, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Your sig

I was wondering if you might please tone down your sig to follow the guidelines laid out at WP:SIG. Really, all a sig needs is to have a link back to your userpage. Large, unwieldy sigs have some pretty hefty drawbacks, the worst being that it tends to overwhelm other text on talk pages. Here is what one of your sig looks like in code form:

[[User:SOPHIA|<font color = "purple">'''Soph'''</font>]][[User:SOPHIA/Esperanza|
<font color = "green">'''i'''</font>]]<font color = "purple">'''a'''</font>
[[User talk:SOPHIA|<small><font color = "purple"><sup>''Gilraen ''</sup></font>
</small>]][[User:Archola/The_Centrist_Fellowship|<small><font color = "blue"><sup>
''of Dorthonion''</sup></font></small>]] 06:50, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

That takes up five lines worth of edit box on my screen. --Cyde Weys 08:21, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

And I didn't see this coming. Sophia^{Gilraen of Dorthonion} 08:26, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

It's uncivil and highly disruptive to other editors to have gigantic signatures. I'm glad you've endeavored to improve civility on Wikipedia—care to lead by example? — Phil Welch (t) (c) 10:01, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

It's WIP - honest. Sophia^{Gilraen of Dorthonion} 10:14, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Appreciated. I trust your discretion on this matter and will leave you to it then. — Phil Welch (t) (c) 10:28, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Actually tiz done - I've dropped everything as there seems to be no agreement as to what is generally ok and it's not worth the hassle. I would watch out if I were you as some won't like what you've done either. Sophia 10:34, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

I optimized my sig with some redirects and code optimization. We'll see if people tell me it's too long, the only complaint I received so far is when I left my username out of my visible sig. I had actually dropped the "Arch O. La" to keep my sig from getting too long.

BTW, I finally discovered why Ril was using "Victim of Signature Fascism": apparently he got in trouble for using ~~~~ as his sig.

WP:SIG itself seems to be a work in progress. Arch O. La ^{Grigory Deepdelver} 15:16, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

RFC for Phil?

Re: [6] This guy is out of control and needs to be reprimand or removed. If you are interested, we can start an RFC together.Travb 14:23, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

It's a wonderful idea, I can give at least 5-6 examples of (in my opinion) less-than-stellar conduct. — Nathan ^{(Got something to say? Say it.)} 01:57, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Personal attacks

If you need help with these personal attacks and there is no response at WP:PAIN, free free to email me. ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 00:05, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Old Home Week!

CTSWyneken has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Smile to others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk pages. Happy editing!

Hey, good to hear from you. I've been off and about and not hanging at the Jesus page lately. Drop by again anytime! --CTSWyneken 15:51, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

am I doing this correctly?

Is this the way to send messages to you, Sophia? All these tabs and windows are confusing! Is this where I should ask you specific questions about your wip or should I use regular email? ProfessorG 03:13, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Is it Rob?

You often have a good handle on the situation. Is this Rob, do you think? Frelke 06:42, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Oh yes, I meant to ask you about that yesterday. See here. AnnH ♫ 07:52, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Wow. Seeing that ANI report has got me confused. This user acts totally different to Robsteadman yet appears to edit similar articles. Perhaps I should try interacting with the user and seeing if they decide they inexplicably want to hate me? That was a hallmark of User:Yummy mummy at least, who after me being very nice to decided to hate me (A Robsteadman sock, of course). --Lord Deskana ^{Dark Lord of the Sith} 07:58, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

No Deskana - it's your aftershave that does it! To be honest I'm not sure as whoever it is seems to be on some sort of edit hype - lots of the edits are just wiki linking words but there are quite a few musical ones in there too. Could well be him - or certainly someone local to him. Is Rob actually banned from wikipedia or was it just the old username that he wanted permanently disabled? Sophia 13:12, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

He is banned. If I was a betting man, I would wager a small amount of money that it is him, trying to prove (to whom I am not sure) that he can behave himself. But I am pretty sure that the powers that be will not allow him back without a lot of rigmarole. Sincere apologies. Promises hat the behaviour will not be repeated. etc etc If it is him it just goes to show that when he stays away from controversial subjects everything is ticketyboo. Frelke 13:20, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Christianity and Zoroastrianism: Monotheisms?

Isn't there a double standard in describing Christianity as, at-best, self-defined monotheism, while making no such equivocation in the the Zoroastrianism article? Yes, nonchristians sometimes see the Father, Son and Holy Spirit as three separate gods, but it's also true that nonzoroastrians see Ahura Mazda and Angra Mainyu as separate gods. It seems to me to be a double standard to call Zoroastrianism a monothestic faith, and to call Christianity a self-defined monotheistic faith. Arch O. La ^{Grigory Deepdelver} 14:36, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Like so much else in religion, this is a matter of interpretation. Arguably, Ahura Mazda is a monotheistic diety, while Spenta Mainyu and Angra Mainyu are mere spirits. Arguably, Ahura Mazda is an essence that is too impersonal to worship while the Mainyu's are entities that demand worship. In the second case, the religion would therefore be polytheistic in general, but more relevantly, henotheistic. After all, a worshipper of one Spirit admits to the existence of the other, which they do not worship. Then again, a Christian can worship Jesus while admitting to the existence of Satan, so does this henotheistic aspect mean Christianity isn't monotheistic? It's a mess.

When presented with such a mess, it is not our job to disentangle all the threads. All we have to do is report what people say. If Christians say they're monotheistic, despite worshipping a tripartite deity, the mother of one of those parts, and countless saints and angels, who are we to disagree? And if Muslims say Christianity is not monotheistic, who are we to disagree? We let both parties speak and let the listener decide.

In short, I think that both Christianity and Zoroastrianism should mention monotheism, polytheism and henotheism. Al 17:32, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Well, Protestants certainly don't worship angels, Mary or the saints, neither do we pray to them. We sometimes accuse Catholics of going too far in their veneration, but Catholics would say that the saints and angels are intermediaries between them and God (and again, there is only one God). Orthodox (Eastern) Christians also venerate the saints, but I know less of them than I do of Catholics.

In fact, a Zoroastrian has come to Talk:Christianity and corrected some of my misunderstanding. Zoroastrians and Christians both profess (different forms of) monotheism, but Christians and Muslims have described Zorastrianism as ditheism, while Muslims have described Christianity as tritheism. Really, who is the more reliable source? It seems rather strange to say of any religion, that what an adherant believes is not what an adherent believes. That just doesn't make sense to me. Arch O. La ^{Grigory Deepdelver} 18:21, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

It sure does to me, but then again, I've read Dennett's Breaking the Spell and you haven't. :-)

I do understand the official Catholic explanation for how praying to saints and angels isn't polytheistic. I even understand the official explanation for how trinitarianism isn't polytheistic. However, understanding and agreeing are different matters. Both of these explanations split hairs rather finely, and not everyone is going to go along with that sort of thing. It is therefore entirely reasonable for a Muslim to say that, contrary to these explanations, Catholics are polytheists.

Consider that Christians are a reliable source on what Christians profess, not on the truth of their doctrine. Also, consider that there are different kinds of beliefs. If I say I believe in unicorns and act in a manner consistent with this stated belief, it is hard to deny my claim of belief. I can even tell you whether the unicorns I believe in are white, pink or invisible. However, nothing stops you from arguing with me over whether unicorns qualify as horses. That's a matter of how to categorize my belief, which is distinct from its content. You may well conclude that unicorns are only horse-like in appearance, not genuinely equine, and I may well disagree. It is not clear that either of our opinions is authoritative here. Al 18:11, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

I had no problems with saying "Christians profess" (in fact, I suggested it), but others objected. I do think MonkeeSage has a point about getting caught in a metaepistomological trap. It's true that I haven't read "Breaking the Spell," so I don't know how or if the author avoids such metaepistomological traps. Arch O. La ^{Grigory Deepdelver} 18:18, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Others objected, but they shouldn't have. The only trap here is in being forced to bias the article pro or con the Christian view, as opposed to neutrally reporting what Christians say.

As for that book, I'd rather not try to compress a few hundred pages down to a sentence, but I would recommend it if you are curious about an objective philosophical and scientific study of religion. If nothing else, Dennett is a clear and interesting writer. Al 06:36, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the Smile

I have every intention of passing it on, just have to find a person in need of WikiLove. - RoyBoy ⁸⁰⁰ 04:41, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

I think you were right...

...to be concerned over admin abuse of power. Shortly after I was blocked, AJA made 5 reverts in 30 hours and Charles did nothing. This despite warning he gave. Today Charles removed two "personal attacks", one made by AJA, and the other (which I don't think qualifies as a personal attack) made by el Lobo. [7] He then blocked El Lobo for a whole week for "implying bad faith"! And not a word was spoken about AJA's more egregious edit![8]

^^James^^ 17:59, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Kinda saw this coming. Al 18:02, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Watch this space - I'm about to assume "bad faith" on Charles Matthews talk page so I suspect this will be the only page I can edit for a while! Sophia 18:10, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

It would be unfortunate, but not entirely unexpected, if your honest inquiry were misinterpreted as a violation of WP:AGF. Al 18:14, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

I hope it won't but I am questioning his judgement so - as you have pointed out before - how do you get out of that catch 22? Sophia 18:19, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Generally, you don't. Al 18:30, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Apparently Charles has also blocked an anon User_talk:68.146.186.180 with no comment to anybody, even him. ^^James^^ 18:27, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

James, check out WP:ANI and search for "lobo". Al 18:30, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

-

Sophia, I apologize for having posted after being told I was blocked. I will not post again. As for getting an account, I have deliberately resisted because I see it as a means by which a measure of control can be exercised and used to influence how and what gets posted.... besides, I have absolutely no need for a user talk page. I always sign what I post same as those with an account, but am loath to have my identity found out on such a forum. I have had to deal with religious zealots in the past in the real world and am fully aware of how dangerous they can be to oneself and ones loved ones.

12.203.133.199 21:39, 22 May 2006 (UTC) -el Lobo 04:36 PM CST

-

I can understand wanting to keep real life separate but at least a username will hide your IP address and therefore would be more anonymous than you currently are. You don't need to give out any personal information at all if you do not wish so you could not be traced. As for controlling what you post - in the main I have found all the discussions and guideline/rules to be of value for creating a good stable article - anyway you can always invoke WP:IAR! Sophia 13:27, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

-

My IP changes with nearly every boot. In my current location, I can be on ant one of four different computers in four different locations and I am also mobile and completely wireless and can be in any one part of the country on any given day. IP's are beyond my control. Can I decline having an user talk page if I join the club? Do I have to give an email address?

The Acharya article has, from the very start, been fraught with chicanery, back door deals and hostility. From the very beginning, it bacame a debate and continues in that vein to this very day.

charles is dead wrong in his assessment that it is not a debate and his optimism that a fair and honest piece is even close to possible. Acharya has challenged belief and belief's response is the very poorly conceived and out of control article we see being posted by an involved admin who has blocked those who would counter his view of it. The deck is and always has been rigged. If you go back and see how many blocks have been imposed on the two sides of the issue, I think you will find that the overwhelming majority will be on the pro-Acharya side. That is not coincidence.

Thanks for your advice.

12.203.133.199 21:10, 23 May 2006 (UTC) -el Lobo 04:10 PM CST

-

Awarded

I hereby award you this Barnstar for your untiring efforts in diversifying the Wikipedia. Too long have you gone unrecognized! Coldbourne 22:36, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Pro-choice.

You might be interested by what's happening on Pro-choice, particularly on the Talk page. Al 04:21, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

RIP unmentionable site

I just noticed that the unmentionable site is down. All that's there now is a directory listing. Arch O. La ^{Grigory Deepdelver} 06:22, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Arch, it's resting, but I don't think that it's found peace. My professional opinion is that it's down temporarily. Al 06:33, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

It's also my opinion that the owner of the site is watching all this and will be taking note of the fact that some people are still keeping tabs on what's going on there giving the impression that the site is of some importance. I myself have put it down as the work of a crank and is therefore not worth bookmarking or taking any notice of at all. Sophia 07:31, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

I prefer to watch the Watcher, but I suppose it's possible that the Watcher is also watching those of us who watch the Watcher. Even though the Watcher is a crank, the Watcher has caused trouble, but no more on my watch if I can help it. If indeed the Watcher ressurects, I will be there to watch. I hope that isn't too confusing. Arch O. La ^{Grigory Deepdelver} 07:59, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

It's Monday morning here in the UK and the aabove is too taxing on the 'ol grey stuff for so early in the day (so you should be asleep!)! I do get your point however and I am always watching for any attempt to link back into wikipedia. Sophia 08:19, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Watching the Watcher gives me insomnia. Besides, I was asleep Sunday afternoon and most of the evening, woke up about 9PM (6 1/2 hours ago); my sleep schedule is seriously FUBAR. Arch O. La ^{Grigory Deepdelver} 08:31, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

ZOMG STALKING

Just some friendly stalking with a plate of cookies. — Nathan ^{(Got something to say? Say it.)} 02:00, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Smiling

Thanks for smiling at me, smiling right back at you! Str1977 ^{(smile back)} 10:50, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Christian views of Jesus

Since you earlier were involved in some discussion on possibly merging this article, would you come to the Talk page and give some feedback to my suggestion that this article be redirected to Christology? --MPerel ^{( talk | contrib)} 18:32, 23 May 2006 (UTC)