User talk:R Bartholomew

Welcome!

Hello, R Bartholomew, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! --TimPope 12:06, 10 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Noahide Laws in Category:Jewish Christian topics ?[edit]

There is a dispute over whether Noahide Laws should be included in this category, anyone with an opinion is asked to express it here: Talk:Noahide_Laws#Jewish_Christian_topics

George Verwer[edit]

Hi! You added some stuff on George Verwer, do you know when he was born? or can you find this information somewhere? thanks -Sucrine ( ><> talk) 19:13, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bathory and witchcraft book articles, etc.[edit]

Before making any more cntributions to this project, please thorough read through our policies, especially on Wikipedia:Neutral point of view and Wikipedia:Reliable sources.

The information you added to the Elizabeth Bathory article was based upon an extrmely unreliable book, which makes false claims about her being an admitted witch that no scholarly source supports. You further went and gave the book it's own Wikipedia article and then repeated a number of claims mentioned in it as if they were all 100% true and did not mention the book's unreliability as a source.

Anything that is put into Wikipedia must meet certain standards, per our policies here. Please familiarize yourself with them. DreamGuy 11:01, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, I did not add any information to the Bathory article, as far as I can recall - I merely turned a reference to the Seabrook book that was already there into a link (By the way, I did not create the "Witchcraft: Its Power" article because of its mention in the Bathory article, as you appear to imply). If you think that the Seabrook book should not be included as a reference in that article I will not make any complaints.

As for the "Witchcraft: Its Power" article, I "repeated a number of claims" because I was providing a summary of the text, while trying to maining a NPOV. I included the material on his anaemic friend and on Bannister because they featured in the book, not because I actually believe them to be true. Extra information showing certain claims to have been false would, of course, improve the article. I thought I had included sufficient qualifiers along the lines of "he claims that" and "an alleged case of...", but if you feel the need for a few more, again, that's fine. I must add that although I'm open to criticism, you appear to have jumped to a rather unwarranted conclusion as to my motives in creating the article. R Bartholomew 20:36, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Derek Prince[edit]

Hello. You seem to be the person responsible for posting the information that Derek Prince wrote an MA dissertation on Plato at Cambridge. I'm not sure where this information came from, but it looks wrong to me, as I have said on the talk page for Derek Prince. I don't know where you come from or whether you are connected with Cambridge in any way, so don't think I'm patronising you by explaining the MA system we have at the oldest universities in England and Ireland (see also Master of Arts (Oxbridge and Dublin)). At Cambridge any BA of the university can graduate as an MA six years after the end of the first term that he or she was studying at Cambridge. This means that Derek Prince would not have written a dissertation for his MA, as it doesn't require any work on top of that which he had done for his BA - he would literally have just turned up for the graduation ceremony. So I can only think that (a) he did his MA at another university (i.e. not Cambridge, Oxford, or Dublin), (b) this refers to a dissertation he wrote for his BA (though I don't think they did dissertations for undergraduate degrees all that time ago), (c) it was the dissertation he did for a further degree of the university such as LittB, PhD, etc.

I'm also not sure whether it was particularly unusual to be elected to a Fellowship around the age of 24 in those days. There are a significant number of senior academics in British universities even today who did no further formal education beyond their BA and were elected to a Fellowship immediately on taking their final undergraduate examinations.--Oxonian2006 (talk) 17:45, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ichthus: January 2012[edit]

ICHTHUS

January 2012

In this issue...

Ichthus is the newsletter of Christianity on Wikipedia • It is published by WikiProject Christianity
For submissions contact the Newsroom • To unsubscribe add yourself to the list here

Notification of automated file description generation[edit]

Your upload of File:Andos Workshop.JPG or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 11:57, 25 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:10, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:33, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Paternoster Press for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Paternoster Press is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paternoster Press until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. SL93 (talk) 14:46, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Paternoster Press for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Paternoster Press is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paternoster Press (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. TheMagikCow (T) (C) 15:14, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]