User talk:Davidbena

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


Welcome![edit]

Some cookies to welcome you! Face-smile.svg

Welcome to Wikipedia, Davidbena! I have been editing Wikipedia for quite some time. Thank you for your contributions. I just wanted to say hi and welcome you to Wikipedia! If you have any questions check out Wikipedia:Questions, or feel free to leave me a message on my talk page or type {{helpme}} at the bottom of this page. I love to help new users, so don't be afraid to leave a message! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post. Again, welcome! I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page. @ 02:33, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Davidbena, you are invited to the Teahouse[edit]

Teahouse logo

Hi Davidbena! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Ushau97 (I'm a Teahouse host)

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 01:15, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Yemenite Jewish Customs[edit]

Just so you know, your article was posted to "Davidbena:Yemenite Jewish Customs" which had it out in the regular article space. Since your article is nowhere near ready for the main encyclopedia, I've moved it to a sandbox under your user page. You can now find the article at User:Davidbena/Yemenite Jewish Customs. Please keep it there until it's ready for the main article space. Thanks and if you have any questions about the hows and whys of me doing this, you can message me at my talk page which you can find a link for in my signature. Dismas|(talk) 10:06, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. Yes, I was planning on editing the article and adding much more when time permits. As time goes on, the article will improve vastly. Davidbena (talk) 10:43, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Talkback: you've got messages![edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Davidbena. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Help desk.
Message added Dismas. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Your posting on my talk page[edit]

I don't know why you posted your entire article to my talk page but please don't do it again. Posting entire articles to someone else's talk page is not something we do around here. If you have a question about the article that you would like me to respond to, just provide a link to the article and ask the question. That said, is there something I can help you with? Dismas|(talk) 02:47, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Yes, since I am on a self-imposed temporary restriction (1RR) for two weeks, and can only publish one time in 24 hours, I would like to publish this article of mine on Wikipedia. I suppose it will need touching-up a little. Since you are involved in approving or disapproving of new Wikipedia articles, what do you think? Can I post it? Davidbena (talk) 03:59, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

No, that is not accurate. You are free to edit as much as you wish with the restriction that you can only revert one time in 24 hours on any given article. See the AN/I page for what I hope is a sufficiently clear example of a 1RR editing restriction. Ignocrates (talk) 04:06, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
It means returning to a previous edit on the same article, see the "Bob likes Bananas" example on AN/I. The WP:3RR page may also be helpful to explain reversions to previous edits. All editors have a maximum 3RR editing restriction in a 24 hour period on any given article. Ignocrates (talk) 05:06, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

One more thing: Since I have one pending article on my "Sandbox," I tried to open-up a second "Sandbox" page to write this new article, but I could not open it. What must I do the next time? Davidbena (talk) 04:01, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

You have only one sandbox per user, but you are free to make multiple subpages to your sandbox, e.g. User:Davidbena/sandbox/subpage01 where "subpage01" can be any name you wish. Ignocrates (talk) 04:10, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
I'm sorry if I gave the impression that I might be "involved in approving or disapproving of new Wikipedia articles". I do not hold any sort of official or unofficial position like that. What may have caused you to think that was the fact that I moved your article from the main article space to your user subpage here. I did that solely because the article was and is not ready to be posted to the main article space. The article, as far as I understand it, seems to be filled with original research. It also lacks a lead section explaining what is being written about and the formatting is not standard. You might get better feedback if you go through the articles for creation process. I'd like to help but I can't for a couple reasons, A) I know nothing of the subject that you write about, and B) I don't have the time between work, school, and home. Best of luck to you, Dismas|(talk) 04:37, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Dismas, I can assure you that I will add more references showing reliable, published "secondary sources" to the article currently in my Sandbox. It is still a rough-draft. With that said, I have tried to be faithful, as much as humanly possible, to the guideline in WP:OR which states: "Best practice is to research the most reliable sources on the topic and summarize what they say in your own words, with each statement in the article attributable to a source that makes that statement explicitly." What I have done so far (excluding my omission of additional reference notes) and what I shall do in the future meets these qualifications. I will still read more on how to improve an article. Davidbena (talk) 05:01, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

If I may add one more thing before I bug out of here, please read over the WP:Manual of Style. It has much of the information for what is required to make an acceptable article on Wikipedia. I recommend not going to WP:AFC until you have done your best to make sure your new article conforms to MoS guidelines and is properly sourced per WP:RS. Otherwise, they will just reject the article. Ignocrates (talk) 04:47, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, Ignocrates. I will read the suggested Manual of Style. Davidbena (talk) 05:01, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

A kitten for you![edit]

Kitten (06) by Ron.jpg

This kitten is for having a great attitude and being willing to learn about the sometimes-strange ways that Wikipedia works. I think you are going to be a fine editor who will bring a fresh point of view to Wikipedia.

Guy Macon (talk) 13:48, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Hooray! You created your Teahouse profile![edit]

Welcome to the Teahouse Badge Welcome to the Teahouse Badge
Awarded to editors who have introduced themselves at the Wikipedia Teahouse.

Guest editors with this badge show initiative and a great drive to learn how to edit Wikipedia.

Earn more badges at: Teahouse Badges
Thank you for introducing yourself and contributing to Wikipedia! If you have any questions feel free to drop me a line at my talk page. Happy Editing!
~ Anastasia (talk) 20:21, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Talkback[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Davidbena. You have new messages at Dismas's talk page.
Message added 11:48, 29 August 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Dismas|(talk) 11:48, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Copyright concerns[edit]

Your sandbox draft User:Davidbena/sandbox/Yemenite Ketubba gives an impression that it is copied from material already published elsewhere, such as http://www.scribd.com/doc/95809449/The-Yemenite-Ketubba-Abridged and http://www.globalyeshiva.com/profiles/blogs/the-yemenite-ketubbah-marriage. It is not clear that the copyright in that content has been released to Wikipedia, and Wikipedia has a very strict policy regarding copyright violation, even on user pages. In any case it is pointless to add to Wikipedia a direct copy of material which is already published. The wording of some of the footnotes in the draft is in the first person, and this is not appropriate for an encyclopedia. - You do need to understand how Wikipedia works before you try to post articles, even draft ones. - David Biddulph (talk) 12:08, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Yes, it is my article, which was published in the "Jubilee Edition" of Professor Yosef Tobi, Haifa University. I give my permission to have it published here, on Wikipedia. As for the wording in some of the footnotes, I will be willing to re-edit its content. Davidbena (talk) 12:23, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

The process for releasing copyright is given at WP:Donating copyrighted material; it is not sufficient just to mention it here on your user talk page. But see my previous comment; Wikipedia is not here to provide a repository for material previously published elsewhere. - David Biddulph (talk) 12:37, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Actually, the article has been revised. It is my article and there is room for it on Wikipedia (IMHO). As for the two URL links that you provided, one is a site for uploading PDF files to be seen by others internationally and downloaded. The other is a web-site of religious Orthodox Jews, of which I am a member. Members are free to upload material and discuss different issues. Anyway, I can make more revisions in the text if necessary to make it applicable for insertion in the Wikipedia online Encyclopedia. I will read the copyright link that you have given, and do whatever is required of me. Sincerely, Davidbena (talk) 12:45, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

David, I have just now added to my article on "globalyeshiva.com" the legal text: "The text of this page is available for modification and reuse under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike 3.0 Unported License and the GNU Free Documentation License (unversioned, with no invariant sections, front-cover texts, or back-cover texts)." As for the other website, "scribd.com," I have deleted my article from that venue (web-site). Is it still necessary to receive a written consent from the publishers of the "Jubilee Edition" of Professor emeritus Yosef Tobi from Haifa University (Israel) and to have them e-mail their consent to Wikipedia? Also, I will add {{OTRS pending}} to the Talk page of "Yemenite Ketubba." Davidbena (talk) 13:23, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

In accordance with your directives, I have duly changed the wording of footnotes # 7 and 9 so that they are no longer in the first person. Davidbena (talk) 13:44, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Talkback[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Davidbena. You have new messages at Andrewman327's talk page.
Message added 20:52, 29 August 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Andrew327 20:52, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Wrong address for AFC move[edit]

You tried to move your draft to User:Articles for creation/Yemenite Jewish customs of the Baladi-rite. That made it a user subpage for the user User:Articles for creation, who (of course) doesn't exist. I assume that you intended to make it a user subpage for your account, so that's where I've moved it. - David Biddulph (talk) 02:11, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, David. I'm still quite unfamiliar with the process. I received a notification saying that it could not stay where I had initially put it, and, so, without really knowing what to do, I moved it to "User." Thanks for assisting me here. I appreciate it! Davidbena (talk) 17:40, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Please only have one draft at a time[edit]

Hello, you currently have drafts at

Please do not have multiple copies of one article, simply do all your drafting for the topic on one page. If you need to look "back in time" at an earlier draft, use the History tab at the top of the page. So there is no need to "preserve" old drafts on multiple pages, since all old versions can be viewed by you.

Please choose one draft, and mark any extra pages by pasting at the top of the page the code {{db-author}}, meaning that you want the extra page deleted. MatthewVanitas (talk) 14:07, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

David Welcome to Wiki, Your Patience and attitude is great.[edit]

Sorry you have been bit so hard by some of the editors. Some have abused you and clearly violated wikis rule of conduct. It is unfortunate that many who do this know better. Below is a post by a self described New Age editor with a bias against you. I verbally censured him on his talk page and you could bring his intolerant comments to an administrator for guidance on how to address his behavior. I am somewhat new also but know his stereotype is not tolerated on Wiki.

For a Bible thumper it may be very difficult to understand that the Bible is not wholly and objectively true. But as long as he keeps his faith in the infallibility of the Bible completely separate from his Wikipedia activities, he could be a good editor. Some years ago I did not know that one has to use reliable sources in order to edit Wikipedia, but when asked to consider it, I understood this is required from everybody and I complied with this request. For me, the decision was between complying and continuing to edit and quitting in protest; I was not willing to create problems through my edits. This does not imply that I lost faith in the truth of my contributions, but I have understood that they are required to be encyclopedically verifiable. And verifiable means having reliable sources.

Re: Newbie[edit]

You have new message/s Hello. You have a new message at GorillaWarfare's talk page. Message added 18:12, 2 September 2013 (UTC).

You have new message/s Hello. You have a new message at GorillaWarfare's talk page. Message added 00:51, 3 September 2013 (UTC).

Welcome to the Teahouse![edit]

Welcome to the Teahouse Badge Welcome to the Teahouse Badge
Awarded to editors who have introduced themselves at the Wikipedia Teahouse.

Guest editors with this badge show initiative and a great drive to learn how to edit Wikipedia.

Earn more badges at: Teahouse Badges

from: PRFEDA —Preceding undated comment added 20:38, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Incense offering[edit]

Hi David, I had a look at your recent contributions and see User:Davidbena/draft article on Holy Incense. Please be aware that the Talmud's additional comments on holy incense in the Hebrew Bible are already part of a section at incense offering (just as there is an article at holy anointing oil). We don't have break-out WP:FORK articles for the Talmud's view on Hebrew Bible subjects. Also I would note that the draft article contains way to many WP:PRIMARYSOURCES. In ictu oculi (talk) 09:20, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, In ictu oculi. This, for me, is a scholarly exercise. If it is rejected on Wikipedia, I will publish it elsewhere. Besides, I hope to bring down many new references that are not part of the other two articles. Incense offering does not seem to be very exhaustive, and I felt that I could produce a better article, giving the best up-to-date Jewish viewpoint on this topic. Also, the title selected by me is more direct and to the point; easier to find on a search engine. In creating this article, rather than modifying an existing one, I can avoid being attacked by the author of the first. Of course, there is still room for improvement. Since I am fluent in Hebrew, I hope to utilize these skills and convey greater knowledge to our readers. Davidbena (talk) 23:15, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

One more thing: I will have no difficulty replacing most Primary Sources with a Secondary Source which mentions the Primary Source. Is it better to work that way, since these primary sources are generally known and agreed upon by all? Most people (at least, those that I know) prefer looking at the Primary Source in Jewish learning, followed by a Secondary Source? Your advice, please. Davidbena (talk) 23:38, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
Hello David, when writing Wikipedia articles, it is far better to use a secondary source than a primary source. Unlike in academic writing, any form of original research is prohibited on Wikipedia. Instead, Wikipedia combines the available information and restates it in an encyclopedic manner. Primary Sources can be used, but their contents must be written about directly, they cannot be explained. Any explanation should come from secondary sources. I haven't examined any of the articles in question, so this is just a general observation. On another note, you should probably move this discussion to your talk page, as it's currently on your user page. I replied to your message on my talk page as well. Ryan Vesey 01:44, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
Thanks, Ryan. I will try to do exactly what you say, as much as that is feasible, considering the difficult topic at hand. I will be going to the Hebrew University Library (Jerusalem) this coming Sunday, after Yom Kippur (the Day of Atonement), G-d willing. Davidbena (talk) 18:32, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Holy Incense[edit]

Dear Davidbena:

I see that you have been putting a lot of work into the above article. Another editor has left some review notes at the top of the article. I started to review the article, but had trouble figuring out at first what it was about. The suggestions about making the title more specific and adding a little general summary at the top should be easy to do. If you decide on a new specific title and need help moving the article, let me know. —Anne Delong (talk) 14:17, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, Anne. I have already suggested a new title, and I have also added a short introduction. You can look at the article again, User:Davidbena/draft article on Holy Incense Davidbena (talk) 21:48, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

Re. Message[edit]

You have new message/s Hello. You have a new message at Anupmehra's talk page.

Holy Incense[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Davidbena. You have new messages at Anne Delong's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Welcome Back[edit]

Your insight is important to Wikipedia. Cheers - Ret.Prof (talk) 00:51, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I think the timing was right. I have been so busy lately translating papers from Hebrew into English that I have had little time to engage on Wikipedia. The problem with some of the people is that they will say I am quoting primary sources, but when you quote secondary sources they claim that they are merely hypotheses. Then, they will try to discredit the contributor by hoping to find other faults with him, rather than stick to the issue at hand. These people do a GREAT DISSERVICE to Wikipedia, and stymie the truth. In my opinion, such people should be banned permanently for such attitudes. It is dogma that they're more interested in, rather than conveying the truth. Davidbena (talk) 02:34, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
Well said. - Ret.Prof (talk) 04:46, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
Also WP:SOURCES states "Unless restricted by another policy, primary sources that have been reliably published may be used in Wikipedia" - Ret.Prof (talk) 04:57, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Davidbena. You have new messages at Tgeorgescu's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Ramle as Gath[edit]

It is true that Haparchi recorded a tradition that Ramle was Gath, and some other medieval writers recorded it too. But I don't think it is true that any scholars today (i.e. relevant scholars such as archaeologists) take it seriously. I cannot find a single example, including amongst those authors who mention the tradition. I looked at about 20 recent archaeology books and papers regarding Gath, which overwhelmingly support identification with Tell es-Safi. Can you provide a source for what you are writing? Zerotalk 10:29, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply, User:Zero0000. While I am not an archaeologist, I do live in Israel and I have read many books on historical geography. I saw stated explicitly in the "Encyclopaedia of Eretz Yisrael (the Land of Israel)" that the ancient city of Gath is believed to be Ramla, before it was rebuilt in the 8th century CE. This view is repeated also in "Carta's Official Guide to Israel," all editions (to the best of my knowledge). Since I have access to many good books at the Hebrew University library in Jerusalem, I will further research this subject. Meanwhile, however, we cannot speculate here without sufficient proof based on epigraphic sources. Since some modern archaeologists are swift to claim by "conjecture" that a dig may have been the ancient Gath, it is only fair to mention the conflicting opinions. IMHO. One more thing, here (in Israel) Jews give utmost priority to traditions, seeing that often we cannot know about a certain thing or place without a tradition that has been preserved from generation to generation. Davidbena (talk) 13:35, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
Hi, I don't much trust the Carta guide, as its authorship is unclear and its purpose is partly propagandistic. I've also seen some bad cases of out of date information. However, the second English edition (1986) does not mention the tradition that Gath is Ramle. What it says is:
Gat: "Named after ancient city of Gath, one of 5 Philistine cities located in area, but whose exact site has not yet been identified."
G'ea: "Perhaps the site of biblical Gath(?)"
Kiryat Gat: "Named after ancient Philistine city of Gath, home of Goliath, which is believed to have been located in the area."
Tel 'Erani: "The tel was erroneously identified with Philistine Gath and was therefore known for a while as Tel Gath."
Tel Nagila: "Believed to be site of Gath, one of the 5 Philistine cities."
I absolutely agree that traditions should be mentioned. However they should be mentioned as traditions, not as facts, and popular traditions should not be confused with scholarly consensus based on physical evidence. It is quite clear that there is little or no scholarly support for the claim that Ramle is Gath. I have sources that state explicitly that the consensus (though not unanimous) is that Tell es-Safi is Gath. The Jewish tradition in the middle ages means very little regarding the facts, since there was no continuity of Jewish occupancy there even in the recent centuries, and certainly not since the foundation of the city in the 8th century, which itself was a millennium later than Gath. Scholars don't believe the tradition primarily since there is no evidence it was a significant population center at all during the period Gath existed. It isn't accepted by many traditional Jewish writers either; for example the famous geographical text of Rabbi Yosef Schwarz says: "Gath ... the usual assumption that it is the town of Ramleh, situated in the territory of Dan, I hold to be quite erroneous.." (and he gives reasons). Zerotalk 19:24, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
How does one distinguish between "popular tradition" and "tradition"? It was a Rabbi of the 13th-14th century who told us the prevalent tradition in his day concerning Ramla. As for a consensus, there is none - not even amongst archaeologists concerning Gath. There is, however, a lot of speculation. A tradition, in my mind, is stronger than mere "speculation." There are no epigraphic records to show that the archaeological dig at Tel Zafit, or elsewhere, is actually the ancient Philistine city of Gath. In fact, in the case of Tel Zafit, its names suggests the very opposite. It was Safitha. I will, however, at the first available opportunity, further research this subject. As for what you said about Ishtori Ha-Parchi's tradition being mentioned as such, namely, a tradition, I think I have done that. What I hope to do more is to show that this is not just a fringe view, and that a "tradition" where there is a doubtful case ought and should be taken into consideration. Look up the word "Ramla" in the Carta's Guide to sites in Israel. As for your comment: "...no continuity of Jewish occupancy there (i.e. Ramla) even in the recent centuries," presents no real problem, since the place known as Ramla is still the old Ramla and hasn't changed. What we're really interested in here are the FACTS. Let's lay all the facts out on the table, whether they be traditions or conjectures. By the way, I know personally a very good Israeli archaeologist named Boaz Zissu. Maybe I can also ask for his opinion and references. Be well.Davidbena (talk) 19:48, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
Carta's entry Ramla says it was founded in 717 and has nothing about an earlier existence or any mention of a tradition about it. Anyway, we are not supposed to make our own judgements about whether particular scholars are right in their opinions or not, and we aren't supposed to judge what is the consensus or not. What we have to do is report what reliable sources say about the subject, and the meaning of reliable in Wikipedia is heavily biased towards scientific scholarship with peer-reviewed academic writing as the most distinguished (see WP:RS). The Ramle=Gath tradition simply does not have any support in that literature as far as I can determine, so we can report it as a tradition but not as the opinion of scholars. I'd be interested in what Zissu says (I'm familiar with his work) but WP:NOR forbids us from reporting his words on Wikipedia unless he has published them. Zerotalk 21:04, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
OK, so you saw a different edition of Carta's Guide. In any case, the "Encyclopaedia of Eretz Yisrael" mentions the view that Ramla is the ancient Gath. When I go next time to the Hebrew Univ., I will cite both sources for you, and, hopefully, more. I have made no such judgments whatsoever about who is right and who is wrong, but only cited a source used by many scholars. There was/is a tradition that Ramla is Gath. This is worthy of noting. As for the other hypotheses they should be stated as well, as hypotheses. When scientific scholarship is divided, up and down the line, we must also fairly represent all views. For example, we also find outlined in WP policy what is called WP:UNDUE, according to which: "Neutrality requires that each article or other page in the main space fairly represents all significant viewpoints that have been published by reliable sources, in proportion to the prominence of each viewpoint in the published, reliable sources." A tradition doesn't necessarily have to be backed up with "proof," but must be reasonably accepted as a logical and likely possibility. When Israel has a tradition, as there are many, we are not always able to show by proof that the thing/event is as it is alleged. Tradition is just that - tradition. While speculation is just that - speculation. Boaz Zissu has written many articles, but if he hasn't dealt on the subject of ancient Gath, perhaps he can direct us to others who have.Davidbena (talk) 21:35, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
This might interest you, User:Zero0000. Michael Avi-Yonah, author of the book, The Madaba Mosaic Map, Jerusalem 1954, p. 63, wrote: "The name and localization (between Antipatris and Iamnia) are derived from On. 72, 2, but the identification with one of the Philistine cities has been added in disregard of the better identification ib. 68, 4. The Jewish tradition which located Gath at er-Ramleh has some foundation in archaeological facts, Ras Abu Hamid in the vicinity having been identified as Gittaim of Eusebius (B. Maisler in Sefer Assaf. Jerusalem, 1954, pp. 351-356 (Hebrew); id., Israel Expl. Journal, 4, 1954 (Reifenberg Memorial Number), pp.227ff.), which might be represented here. The additional phrase is taken verbally from Eusebius' description of Ekron (On., 22, 16), Ashdod (ib., 22,11) and Ascalon (ib., 22,15)."Davidbena (talk) 04:56, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

Talkback: you've got messages![edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Davidbena. You have new messages at Ryan Vesey's talk page.
Message added  Ryan Vesey 20:48, 1 April 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Your submission at AfC Handwashing in Judaism was accepted[edit]

AFC-Logo.svg
Handwashing in Judaism, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

 SAMI  talk 14:36, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

FYI[edit]

Please see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Christianity/Noticeboard#Userspace drafts. John Carter (talk) 15:39, 18 July 2014 (UTC)