User talk:John Carter

John: I received a rather terse note from you accusing me of vandalism. I have no idea whatsoever what it is you're talking about. You did not specify which entry material it was that you considered vandalous. I am trying my best to figure out how to add quality, scholarly and critical comnentary to Wikipedia Encyclopedia, and I find the process absolutely daunting. I welcome any procedure by Wikipedia to verify my identity, professional qualifications, etc, in order to qualify for contributing to the database. Perhaps you mistook me for someone else. Take care. Gverstraete (talk) 18:23, 29 October 2009 (UTC)Gerrit Verstraete AOCA, BFA

NOTE: This page is unfortunately frequently protected because of vandalism. If for whatever reason you are an IP editor or newcomer who finds that he cannot edit this page because of such protection, please feel free to make any reasonable comments at User talk:John Carter/IP. Thank you, and my apologies for the inconvenience.

Beware! This user's talk page is monitored by talk page watchers. Some of them even talk back.

Have you taken a look at Portal:Scientology/Wikimedia?

The logo's for each image are extremely expanded. I saw that you were the first one to edit it; but it's been messed up since that time. I think you should take a look at it. Lighthead ^þ 0:21, March 25 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I'm not even part of that project but I was just browsing... Lighthead ^þ 0:32, March 25 2008 (UTC)

Time Times (2008-04)

	Time Times
Issue Two • April 2008 • About the Newsletter Written by FrankP and Template Designed by Diligent Terrier
News Recent Project News Article count on at 961! We now have 961 articles but, will have many more soon as only a few are marked as in our project. At least 803 are unassessed though, plenty of work for us to do. Project member count reaches 12 members! Keep inviting all your WikiFriends. Award offered—Since 2008-01-05, Sharkface217 has offered a Barnstar to the editor who can expand the article Timeline. It certainly needs it, now that it has been disambiguated from Chronology: Go to the Timeline listing on the Awards page to find out Sharkface's minimum requirements! From the Time Portal An IP added this funny comment to Portal talk:Time "I never though I would see the day mankind succeeds in creating a time portal." Recent Time News From the leap second article: in April 2008: ITU Working Party 7A will submit to ITU Study Group 7 project recommendation on stopping leap second[s]. Calendars met on March 21. It was Good Friday (Western Christianity, 2008); Purim ends at sundown (Judaism, 2008); Naw-Rúz in the Bahá'í calendar, Benito Juárez Day in Mexico, World Poetry Day.
Archives • Newsroom
If you no longer wish to longer receive this newsletter, please add your name here. Newsletter delivered by {{{Delivered by}}}.

thank spam

Thank you for voting in my RfA, which passed with 194 supporting, 9 opposing, and 4 neutral. Your kindness and constructive criticism is very much appreciated. I look forward to using the tools you have granted me to aid the project. I would like to give special thanks to Tim Vickers, Anthony and Acalamari for their nominations. Thank you again, VanTucky

Time Times (2008-05)

	Time Times
Issue Three • May 2008 • About the Newsletter Written by FrankP and Template Designed by Diligent Terrier
News Recent Project News Article count at 1074! At least 911 are unassessed though, plenty of work for us to do. Award offered—Since 2008-01-05, Sharkface217 has offered a Barnstar to the editor who can expand the article Timeline. It certainly needs it, now that it has been disambiguated from Chronology: Go to the Timeline listing on the Awards page to find out Sharkface's minimum requirements! From the Time Portal History of timekeeping devices reaches Good Article Status —On April 7 the history of time keeping article became a GA. This is our only top importance article to reach this prestigious status. This was only possible with the dedication of the Tzatziki Squad. They are continuing to work on the article to reach Feature Article status. History of timekeeping devices in Egypt was a DYK —The article appeared on the Main Page on April 8. With this text: "...that despite Herodotus's claim that the sundial was invented in Babylon, the oldest known example is from Egypt?" This also was only possible thanks to the Tzatziki Squad. Recent Time News None that I know of.
Archives • Newsroom
If you no longer wish to longer receive this newsletter, please add your name here. Newsletter delivered by {{{Delivered by}}}.

WP:X Elections

Hello, John Carter. You have new messages at Tinucherian's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Time Times (2008-06)

	Time Times
Issue four • June 2008 • About the Newsletter Written by FrankP and Template Designed by Diligent Terrier
News Recent Project News Article count at 1091! 979 are unassessed though, plenty of work for us to do. Project member count reaches 16 members! Keep inviting all your WikiFriends. Award offered—Since 2008-01-05, Sharkface217 has offered a Barnstar to the editor who can expand the article Timeline. It certainly needs it, now that it has been disambiguated from Chronology: Go to the Timeline listing on the Awards page to find out Sharkface's minimum requirements! From the Time Portal History of timekeeping devices reaches A-Class Status—On May 22 the history of time keeping article was promoted by User:Zginder to A-Class. This is our only article to reach this prestigious status. This was only possible with the dedication of the Tzatziki Squad. They are continuing to work on the article to reach Feature Article status. Merkhet was a DYK—The article appeared on the Main Page on April 28. With this text: "... that merkhets were Ancient Egyptian timekeeping devices that tracked the movement of certain stars over the meridian in order to ascertain the time during the night, when sundials could not function?" This also was only possible thanks to the Tzatziki Squad. Recent Time News The June Solstice takes place on 2008-06-20T23:59.
Archives • Newsroom
If you no longer wish to longer receive this newsletter, please add your name here. Newsletter delivered by {{{Delivered by}}}.

Article about Khomeini

This article has been written by an agent of mullahs! There is not even one sentence on mass execution of political prisoners by Khomeini! There is nothing on violation of women's rights e.g. compulsory hijab. Female judges were forced to give up their jobs such as Shirin Ebadi...in islamic court, mullahs consider 2 women equal to one man! women can't even have an operation without the permission of their father/husband!

mullah even banned western music!

mullahs hang homosexuals & stone those who commit adultery!

those who convert from islam to any other religion will be executed!

Khomeini was behind the Cinema Rex fire, which led to the death (burning alive!) of approx. 500 people! most of your references are biased, they are taken from the islamic regime's sources e.g. poetry!! Khomeini couldn't even speak properly, let alone writing a poem!

List of heads of Serbian Orthodox Church

I rename this article and I will add references. I have some questionst about it: 1. does references on Serbian language are good as references on English. I ask it because there is much more literature on Serbian church on Serbian than on any other language. 2. how many references are best for lists (one reference for every line or something different)?

AfD nomination of Garrison Courtney

Garrison Courtney, an article that you contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. The nominator does not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Garrison Courtney. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns.

Comment on WikiProject organization

Rather than post on the WikiProject I thought I would bring my comment directly to you. I have found that the better functioning projects have strong editors/administrators who actively work at organizing and maintaining the project. Military is a great example to use because they have coordinators assigned not just to the Project, but to each of its Task Forces/Work Groups. I think you may find yourself frustrated trying to set up a similar structure in the Christianity project with so many different opinions and personalities. I wish you all the best because it is long over due; I just hope you don't get frustrated in the effort. -- Absolon S. Kent ^(chat), 00:11, Sunday, September 8, 2024 (UTC)

lowercase people

Alright, I wont mess with it anymore. I just got a little upset that people categorized lowercase people as a "Christian" organization, which it primarily isn't.

Editing Barnstar

		100,000 Edits
		I, Bugboy52.4, award you for reaching 100,000 edits according to the List of Wikipedians by number of edits generated 11:45 pm, 24 February 2009. Keep up the good work!________________________________________________________________

Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Occupation_of_the_Baltic_states

Mentioned you at this ANI thread I opened on myself. Feel free to stay out of it, if you want to, but wanted you to know I had brought up your name. Hiberniantears (talk)

Charles G. Koch

Thanks for weighing in. If you peruse Bonewah's talk page, you will note regular accusations of opinion oriented editing. My sense is Bonewah doesn't like character assassination but such is difficult when the subject has no character. Quoting Palast is quoting one of the more reliable sources available but there is also reference to the story when it was carried by CBS News which I included. Bonewah specifically doesn't like the word "giggle", s/he said so. S/he also thinks Truthout is a "fringe" news outlet. Certainly it doesn't have the charm of Fox News but, not influenced by corporate interests, it is one of the few major news outlets we have left. I have asked Greg Palast to provide me with an ironclad reference to the "giggle" comment. I also asked him for permission to use the quote. Whether he will answer or not, I do not know. I believe that this information is important as a more complete portrait of a person who has put his name on a number of things with some pocket change and, as someone said on the talk page "How can we talk this way about a great American businessman." Sigh. Having money still means morally correct to a large number of Americans. As I pile proof on this, Bonewah will come up with even further out comments, I believe. I understand that you are very busy and have much on your plate but, even so, I ask you to actually investigate what Bonewah's objections really are and the comments s/he has received from others with the same complaint that I have. Thank you. I have included my Koch material below.

Coordinator Election

Hi John: you probably have this in hand, but can we do anything to drum up some more interest in the coordinator election. AFAIK we currently have 2 candidates (one for lead, one for assistant) and a total of 2 votes cast. NBeale (talk) 20:14, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Let me get the newsletter out, and with any luck maybe we can get something done. I'm not really optimistic about additional candidates myself, but we can hope and pray for the best. John Carter (talk) 22:49, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Even if they don't want to be candidates it would be nice if people voted. It would give a warm feeling that people were supportive.NBeale (talk) 16:01, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Can I help in any way? NBeale (talk) 21:51, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Advice

Hi John, I'm a new editor here. I have been having some issues in my attempts to contribute to Wikipedia. I have been working with others to improve the Same-sex marriage article. Several editors there have accused me of biased POV edits (while Wikipedian User:David_Shankbone has said that I am "doing an admirable job of tempering [my hypothetical] bias"), which I would guess is not unheard of on controversial articles. I was recently blocked for breaking 3RR for reverting controversial edits that did not achive consensus before they were added (which I realise was a warranted admin action and next time I will be more carefull). More than one editor has made personal attacks on me, and I believe one is currently (borderline) Wikihounding me. Also, editors have attempted to block the inclusion of sources such as peer-reviewed academic journals because they disagree with the POV in the articles (I have seen blogs and Fox news used as sources here. In grad school peer-reviewed journals were great. Not here?). I'm not too familiar with the rules here yet. Any advice would be great. Thanks in advance.Ragazz (talk) 06:31, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

What are the policies regarding wp:agf on user talk pages? Also, are users allowed to collude to prevent another editor from contributing? Is there a line as far as which wild accusations can be made here?Ragazz (talk) 00:33, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

I am having trouble with constantly being signed-out accidentally, and my IP address showing after my edits and posts. Even when I still try to be careful, this sometimes happens. Is there anything I can do to avoid this? Also, is there some way to consolidate/transfer all prior posts/edits from my IP to my user profile? All of those posts/edits done after I created my account were intended to be done while I was signed in, but I keep getting bumped-off for some reason.Ragazz (talk) 21:31, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

There may be a sock puppet IP editor (24.6.46.170) at the pagesHistory of same-sex unions and Same-sex marriage. They are adding infammatory tags to their edits such as "Removed false statements by an apparently biased Christian."Ragazz (talk) 17:38, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

user:historyguy1965 has been consistently ignoring the consensus process. This has caused several edit wars apparently, at least one that I'm aware of. Here is a recent example where I attempted to point this out to him, with links to the example. Here are some comments he made that violated WP:CIVIL and WP:AGF. My problem is of course not with his edits per se, but the manor in which he is making them with total disregard to the consensus process. Please check out the situation. Thanks.Ragazz (talk) 01:53, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Do you have any advice as to how I could be handling things differently?Ragazz (talk) 00:01, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

user:historyguy1965 has accused me of harassment. Does this count as a personal attack?Ragazz (talk) 19:52, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Ownby's book

Could I ask you to please check the exact wording (p215) of his reading of 'Beyond the limits of Forbearance' which is cited in the 'self-immolation' article? I just want to make sure it is correct. Thanks, Ohconfucius (talk) 02:35, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

• John, An editor has commented on the review page that it's not clear who said what ("call to arms" quote). As I haven't read the book, could you please help to make the Ownby quote more precise in the article? Thanks, Ohconfucius (talk) 17:08, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Saint Augustine

Dear John Carter,

In the Saint Augustine article page, under the heading "Conversion", his conversion is defined as to "Catholic Christanity".

This is incorrect, as so many have referred to in its talk page.

I'v asked for comments. Request for Comments, on his talk page.

His conversion was from a bad life; desolate living, to a good life. His Confessions contain the famous phrase:

"Late have I lived you, O Beauty so ancient and so new; late have I loved you! For behold you were within me, and I outside; and I saught you outside and in my ugliness fell upon those lovely things that you have made....."

Confessions Bk 27.

May this be changed soon as, as it is, it is misleading.

Saint Augustine's page is a major entry.

MacOfJesus (talk) 17:57, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Dear John Carter,

I'v left a suggestion at the talk page of Saint Augustine. (In my work situation I meet people who quite proudly claim Saint Augustine as their ancient ancestor! From his desolate life!)

MacOfJesus (talk) 17:00, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Dear John Carter,

I'v left some pointers and suggestions on the talk page of Saint Austin. His conversion came in destinct stages. And unfortunately our predecessors deleated the "ugliness" phrase, for fear of insulting someone. So:

1. His conversion from a desolate life.

2. His acceptance of being "without the sweets of those toys!"

3. His finding the peace of an interior blessed life.

4. His becoming a priest and bishop.

I think there is great value in adding extra to the "Conversion" paragraph on the article page.

MacOfJesus (talk) 13:08, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Uganda

Guten Abend Herr Carter. I was wondering if you do kind of what you used to do with Uganda and assess and project tag articles. I've noticed a high number of Ugandan articles like Kitgum are not tagged or assessed and when there are editors like User:Fsmatovu writing them it is difficult to keep. I don't know if your health will permit you to do so but your help in assessing Ugandan articles would be greatly apprecated. Hope you are well Himalayan 21:52, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Sounds great, glad to hear you are better. I have been worried about you for a long time, same as SHahid has. Sarvagnya? LOL I'd forgotten he existed, low life nasty piece of work wasn't he! Yes the thing is though our coverage of Kuwait at present is a tiny percentage of what could or should be! I expanded an article on Al Jahra the other day, most of the other towns are one liners unfortunately. I've been managing to sort out svg maps though for places like this and Saudi.If you could put it on your todo list this would be awesome, it would probably surprise you more how many ugandan articles we now have! Himalayan 22:14, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Looks interesting... Himalayan 17:51, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Additions to List of new religious movements

At List of new religious movements, can we please keep the additions to the same formatting - and also not add additions simply to the book's title, but also include page numbers for each entry please? Cirt (talk) 16:18, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Sounds great! :) I explained a bit more at the talk page of why this is important, especially on a controversial topic like this one, to have individual cites, and page numbers. The current format allows for this. Cirt (talk) 16:33, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Occupation of the Baltic states

Hi!

Can you please restore the page of the rejected mediation cabal Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Occupation of the Baltic states so it would possible to present it as evidence in the ongoing ArbCom case about the EE mailing list [1]. Thank you.--Dojarca (talk) 20:37, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Moving discussion to your talk page, or mine if you wish

"

Ouch, sorry for misreading earlier. I guess the answer to that would be how much weight to give the various Chinese officials who have described it as a "cult". My guess is that, in the west, including academics, it is perceived primarily as a fringey new religion, but not necessarily as a cult. The question then becomes how much weight to give the allegations out of China regarding its effect there. One of the points in defining a cult is unquestioning regard for the words and actions of its leader, and certainly Falun Gong members seem to follow Li almost to the letter, according to what I read in Ownby, anyway. I think the defining characteristic of the term when it is used in a perjorative sense is whether being an adherent of the school is damaging to the individual. There are numerous allegations in China of such damage, generally put out by the government there. The devotion its adherents give it could be seen as being indicative of that as well. So, I guess, from what little I've seen, the people in the west apparently think it possesses some of the characteristics we associate with "cults", but not demonstrably to the degree that would justify use of that word. Most other religions fall in the same general grouping as well. I think the west also tends to discount the statements out of China in general, which I think throws out most of that data. So, probably, a group with uniformly highly devoted members, yes, a cult, no. John Carter (talk) 18:22, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

John I think you are not fair regarding "One of the points in defining a cult is unquestioning regard for the words and actions of its leader, and certainly Falun Gong members seem to follow Li almost to the letter, according to what I read in Ownby ... The devotion its adherents give it could be seen as being indicative of that as well." simply because if we were to generalize this broadly, we could just as well start to argue that we are cult members just because we spend over 2h almost daily on Wikipedia, and speculate that the editors must have an irregular family life, back problems, eye problems, etc...

Why would anyone in his right mind want to start speculation like that? For one we are not forced to edit Wikipedia, the same is true for the people who practice, we find it meaningful to edit here, so do they.

The Chinese governments label as a cult is not based on any science, cases of practitioners who died of illness is not correlated with the general illness factor in the country. This is something very normal when the label is used just as a propaganda tool. Based on that I would accord near zero academic value to what the PRC says. Of course, I might have a POV, but if you have better reasoning on why the PRC's label should be given more academic value, please state it. --HappyInGeneral (talk) 18:56, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Please read the cult page, where extreme devotion to the words or actions of a leader is in fact listed as being one of the characteristics of cults, in the "According to secular opposition" section. John Carter (talk) 19:03, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Please read it again. To be a cult is way more complex then that. To quote completely your source: "A cult is a group or movement exhibiting a great or excessive devotion or dedication to some person, idea or thing and employing unethically manipulative techniques of persuasion and control (e.g. isolation from former friends and family, debilitation, use of special methods to heighten suggestibility and subservience, powerful group pressures, information management, suspension of individuality or critical judgment, promotion of total dependency on the group and fear of [consequences of] leaving it, etc) designed to advance the goals of the group's leaders to the actual or possible detriment of members, their families, or the community." The point is that to be a cult it has to be coercive. Do you agree? --HappyInGeneral (talk) 19:35, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Also thank you for answering the question, now I guess this discussion is for the sake of broadening our understanding. --HappyInGeneral (talk) 19:36, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

You did see where I said at the end that it seems that it probably doesn't meet the definition of "cult", but that it possesses several of the characteristics of them, right? Most religions do possess several of those characteristics, but aren't cults. Personally, I think given the comparative newness of this group, and its circumstances, it is probably not unreasonable for an uninformed person to raise the question of whether it is or is not a cult, but that the evidence available doesn't support particularly well the contention that it is a cult. John Carter (talk) 19:55, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

" copy out from here [2].

Hi John, I think it is best to move the discussion, so we don't clutter that page. Basically what I don't understand is why do you insist on pointing to this cult like characteristics since that is such a broad generalization that even a chess club might satisfy it. As I see it the main characteristic, without which there is no point in comparing anything to a cult, is if it is or not coercive. Do you agree? --HappyInGeneral (talk) 21:17, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

LTNS!

Hey John, I gots a question. Do you know a quick way to find out if an article has been deleted? If so, let me know please. Joshua Ingram 22:19, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Mainstream Media. Could you look for me please? Joshua Ingram 22:34, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, man. Any reason you know of why there is someone reverting it after I've finished it? Look here when you get a chance. Thanks, bro. Joshua Ingram 00:17, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Nevermind, bro. It was my fault. Still, thanks for the help.Joshua Ingram 00:21, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

HELP

John, I'm in need of your admin services--I was searching for an article about the Roman Catholic Diocese of Ciudad Juárez, Mexico, without success, so I decided to create one. I found a fair amount of information and swatted one together, when(to my horror) I realised that I had misspelled the word Catholic in the title(Cathoic-I had input the wrong spelling in the search). I tried a move, but then discovered that there was a page titled Roman Catholic Diocese of Ciudad Juárez, all of about 4 lines worth. The one that I did( Roman Cathoic Diocese of Ciudad Juárez ) is infinitely better than the pre-existing article-Can you help? Muchas Graz,--Lyricmac (talk) 01:31, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

That would be best, since you had moved the narrative over to Roman Catholic Diocese of Ciudad Juárez. The mis-spelled article is rather superfluous now, I guess. Thanks a bunch.--Lyricmac (talk) 13:43, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Just ..

Thank you! ;) — Ched :  ?  23:37, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Yes. What he said. Lara 00:01, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Don't normally do this, but...

Hello John Carter, Unitanode has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Kazakhstan

I don't want to open up an old can of worms, but I'm not sure why you're suddenly toying with the WikiProject Central Asia template and adding material for a Kazakhstan WikiProject. Note that the WikiProject Kazakhstan you created has only three members (one of which is you), that no one has joined for over a year and a half, and that it is currently listed as inactive. Also, there was never a concensus reached that having a seperate WikiProject for Kazakhstan would be useful (as opposed to one for Central Asia in general, since so many articles/themes overlap with other countries in the region). If you feel the situation has changed, please start a new discussion at the talk page of WikiProject Central Asia, since, per the last discussion about this, such edits are you are doing now we deemed not necessarily helpful. Otebig (talk) 17:50, 6 October 2009 (UTC) +

WikiProject Zoroastrianism Notice!

You are receiving this notice because you are on the Participants list for WikiProject Zoroastrianism, or you are a strong contributor to Zoroastrianism related articles. If you wish not to receive anymore updates concerning this WikiProject, then please leave a message here. This message is related to the opening of the new IRC channel #wikipedia-en-zoro. We have registered this channel for help and information concerning Zoroastrianism and for help related to edits, content, sources etc. If you wish to enter this channel, there are 2 ways: For those with a IRC client, they can simply click the following link: #wikipedia-en-zoro connect For those who want to access IRC on their browser, they can go to the channel by clicking here. Recently, most of the participants were put to Inactive Participants to only maintain the active participants. If you are still active, please move your name back up to the Active Participants section right here.

Behavior Reply

First off, whether or not you believe this I do appreciate you taking the time to give me that advice on my page. I just have one problem, how do you deal with people who have such an obviously biased POV? The editor I'm usually at war with does things I have no idea how to handle. For example, when someone inserts a 'clarify' tag next to something like 'same-sex marriage' how else can you reply? What's worse is when they do this, say, 6 days earlier it may go unnoticed by other editors, however when I take notice and revert it to it's original wording all the sudden he'll revert it and say "take it to talk" - well excuse me, you MADE that change without going to talk first and now all the sudden I have to achieve a consensus on the previous consensus? I love wikipedia in so many ways, but I just hate the way that controversial articles are sometimes based on an editors POV rather than the facts at hand -- Historyguy1965 (talk) 03:38, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry to interupt here, but I can't resist.

1) I did consult the talk page. It's all there, although some of it's archived now. There is currently a careful discussion as to what the article should call "same-sex marriage" in ancient history. Were you unaware of this, or did you just feel that discussing the issue with others was a waste of your time becasue you're right?

2) A new anon IP editor came in and made all kinds of changes a few days ago without consulting talk. Because of how it was done with multiple edits, rebuilding the section was a headache. David and I had a dialogue going, that you didn't bother to check, evidently. There was a clear conflict between editors, so I inserted some temporary neutral wording, so as to not have to delete the entire passage. Your implication that I snuck in and made changes without consulting talk is 100% off base.

3) As for the citation tags, why do you constantly remove them without consulting talk? They should stay until there is a consensus to remove them. Once you removed a clarification tag, and replaced it with a reference to Webster's dictionary. Seriously? Was that sarcastic? You remove citation tags and give the reason "what are these doing here?" Why not take it to talk first? These actions are highly counterproductive.

4) The entire conflict is based on this change that you made without consulting the talk page. I have seen several editors call you on this behavior. Don't explain an edit in the tag on the history page (and obviously when it involves content, as it did here). Explain it on the talk page, before you make it. Especially on a highly controversial topic.

5) So you say I'm inserting biased POV everywhere. Then why is it that the serious editors on there (David, Nat, Yobmod, Tommy, etc.) have no problems working with me? Because I have learned to take it to the talk page and work towards a consensus.Ragazz (talk) 08:59, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks John, appreciate the reply. Apologies that he's brought the argument into your talk, he sort of has a tendency to follow me and simply disagree. I will not continue it here -- Historyguy1965 (talk) 18:39, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

RfC

[3] - it is now ready if you want to certify so it can be official. Ottava Rima (talk) 03:52, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

• Please don't certify this nonsense, John. It's little more than drama-mongering. UnitAnode 05:30, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Ottava's to be certified? Long overdue. --Joopercoopers (talk) 10:06, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

A bit confused, honestly. Users who certify a dispute are expected to have attempted to resolve the dispute ("at least two editors must have contacted the user on their talk page, or the talk pages involved in the dispute, and tried but failed to resolve the problem.") Could you define exactly what the "dispute" in question is, and what exactly you have done to resolve the problem, paying specific notice to the fact that the evidence section you have certified mentions the user in question but once, and only to show that they interacted with a sockpuppet. Hipocrite (talk) 17:28, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

I have contested your certification of the Bishonen RFC. As you may be aware, certifiers of an RFC are required to provide evidence that they tried and failed to resolve the dispute prior to the filing of the RFC. No diffs of your attempts to resolve the dispute were provided. If you cannot provide evidence of your attempts to resolve the dispute, I will strike your certification. Thanks. Hipocrite (talk) 18:00, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Please note that unless you or someone else can provide a diff of you (or them) attempting to resolve a dispute with Bishonen, the RFC will be deleted in 36 hours. Hipocrite (talk) 04:35, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Bad block

John, assuming good faith, it’s entirely possible that your recent display of incompetence and admin tool abuse was simply an oversight. Issuing a block so you could have the last word is a pretty shameful example of bullying. I hope you sure more maturity in the future.

Even though you refused to correct your action, egos are such fragile things, I’m willing to forgive and forget. To err is human.

Please keep an eye on Sarek and make sure he leaves Otter alone. Stalking and hounding from an admin involved in content disputes with a good faith editor when the same admin is engaging in enforcement actions towards the editor is totally unacceptable. That Sarek continued to flaunt common sense and decency immediately after the ANI report by pursuing Otter to a new venue is particularly outrageous.

If you’d like to help (instead of hurt) efforts to rein in the harassing trolling that goes on here, I encourage you to keep an eye on Tarc, Mathsci, and WMC. Take care. ChildofMidnight (talk) 17:21, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Xenu

Hi John, I would be grateful if you might be able to mediate between Cirt and myself at Talk:Xenu#Revert_regarding_what.2C_according_to_Hubbard.2C_is_designed_to_cause_pneumonia. For whatever reason, Cirt and I seem to be talking past each other a little. Cheers, --JN466 19:53, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

RfC shenanagins

The referral is to this which in turn refers to this and this. Fainites ^barleyscribs 21:38, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

• [4] Once you post there and ask, and you can ask why she defended Geogre when he was edit warring and the rest knowing that he had a sock puppet in the dispute, then there is beyond a doubt no more technical problems that they are using to justify their games. Ottava Rima (talk) 14:15, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Suggestion about the RfC

If you examine the requirements of certifying an RfC, you'll notice that you have to have been directly involved in trying to resolve the dispute. As you were not so-involved, you should probably remove your invalid certification. UnitAnode 20:07, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Which is 100% false, as John was involved in trying to settle the edit warring, which Bishonen contributed to. Ottava Rima (talk) 20:26, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

• Sorry about the "no email" thing, John. I can understand why you'd want to discuss it privately (see directly above me here), but I prefer to keep Wikipedia discussions on-Wiki. UnitAnode 20:29, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Why are you so rude?

Why do you keep on reverting me? Realist01 (talk) 10:56, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

I have just blocked "Realist01". -- Hoary (talk) 12:26, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Microstates wikiproject

Please think twice before adding the microstates wikiproject template to popes that predate Pius XI. Vatican City was only created in 1929. It's a bitch of a stretch to apply it to medieval popes, as you did here. Savidan 02:13, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

So are there any articles currently tagged with WikiProject Catholicism that you wouldn't tag with the microstates project? I'm fine with you tagging buildings and artworks within Vatican City, but tagging every pope, including some who probably reigned from the Lateran, not the Vatican, seems excessive. Savidan 14:01, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Canonical criticism

I saw that you made a comment a while suggesting that we have this article, which I've just started. StAnselm (talk) 03:26, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Xenu II

Hi, if you could look in again at the talk page of our favorite galactic overlord; I reworded the proposal following your comment. I think what we have at the moment is still a bit clunky, but I am open to suggestions. --JN466 12:35, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Edittools

What fixed your problem? ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 15:33, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Baasically, I copied the edittools page linked to into my own, blank, edittools page. And that seemed to have worked. I'm guessing the fact that the page was blank up until then might have had something to do with it, but I honestly don't know enough about this to be sure. John Carter (talk) 15:39, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

User:John Carter/edittools.js was not blank, it did not exist unit you created it. Even then, it is not called by User:John Carter/monobook.js, so it isn't doing anything. Did you try anything else? I'm thinking that we need a Help page on edittools, and I am in an information gathering phase. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 16:33, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

You may have a point. What I did was copy the name tha the monobook page was copied from, and, then pasted it onto the equivalent name for my page and purged the cache. The only other thing I did was create a similar page at MediaWiki, because that's where the copied page was. That's it basically. I suppose it's possible purging the cache had something to do with it, but I can't imagine how, as I'd done that before regarding other matters after trying to change the edittools, and got no results. I wish I knoew more, and having an instruction page would probably help, but that's all I know. Sorry. John Carter (talk) 16:46, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Please

As I posted to Malleus to ignore your comments, please just ignore him. There is no way for it to go but down, and the comments were not worth enough on either side to merit the strife. Ottava Rima (talk) 02:07, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Commenting on Giano

Your comments about Giano on Mattisse's talkpage go beyond unhelpful. It feeds her perceptions of persecution and doesn't assist her in moving past her problems in any way. She needs blunt honesty -- not attacks, just honesty -- not coddling. UnitAnode 16:28, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Seeing as how your earliest contribution is 21 March 2009 and you weren't around for the disputes or the history, you really have no understanding of what Mattisse needs. Unless, of course, you want to claim that you had a previous account. Ottava Rima (talk) 23:46, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Your input here was completely unnecessary. I was addressing John, not you. UnitAnode 23:58, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Your comment was about Mattisse, and it has been clear that you have crossed the line. Ottava Rima (talk) 02:03, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Note

Hi. Sorry to edit through the protection you've placed, but please see this thread involving you. Regards, –Juliancolton | ^Talk 02:49, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Per PPol, please don't protect user talk pages, unless absolutely necessary. Since talk pages are the primary means of communication, fully protecting your talk page leaves the vast majority of editors unable to contact you in the usual way, and semi protection leaves all new users - the ones who are most likely to need help - unable to contact you. Since only one editor was the reason for protection, blocking is a better course of action. If blocking isn't appropriate, neither would protection be. Prodego ^talk 03:08, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

You did see the note at the top of the page, right? It's been there since the "Yo to the Nympho!!!" repeated vandalism at the end of the last school year. John Carter (talk) 03:21, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Many thanks though for your handling of the situation after the fact. Many lesser administrators would have postured that they were within their rights to keep the page protected, effecting much unnecessary dramaz in the process. Instead, your conduct was becoming of an admin. Cheers, HiDrNick! 03:15, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

^What he said :) Equazcion (talk) 03:20, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

An official warning from me. [5]. Please don't call anyone dictatorial, unless they happen to be a dictator, in which case the adjective is likely apt. Thanks for your understanding -- Samir 03:57, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Hey

Was peeking at ANI and figured you could use a pleasant diversion. Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Tinucherian is ready for you when you get a chance. FWIW and not saying it's right, I've protected my talk page for far less (but then again, I'm also impulsive, shallow and not the brightest chicken in the sea). Kind regards -- Samir 03:12, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Cool down?

Hi John. I've watched the last few hours of comments between you and Unitanode on various talk pages. I really think that you misunderstood Unitanode's comments/motivations/etc and have overreacted, and you've both gotten upset enough to escalate this far beyond what it ought to have been. At the very least, I did not interpret his/her comments in the same way that you did, and I encourage you to assume good faith and let it go. The current situation is not reflecting well on either of you. Karanacs (talk) 03:37, 14 October 2009 (UTC) P.S. Like Unitanode, I also interpreted Mattisse's comments on the monitoring page as her encouraging others to move the thread to the talk page. I would have made the same edit he/she did if Unitanode hadn't gotten there first. Karanacs (talk) 03:37, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

That edit actually wasn't the problem. It was his explicit and implicit unquestioned assumptions regarding the actions of others, including me and you, his demand that I withdraw criticism of him because he wouldn't accept that, etc. And, no, there had been several questions in my mind regarding why this individual whose own ignorance of the situation didn't in any way affect his certainty that he was right, and his insistence that others observe rules he didn't have to, caused me to have substantial questions regarding his conduct and his motivations for some time. John Carter (talk) 13:02, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Please stop repeating your bad-faith assumptions about me, John. I've asserted over and over that I don't have any mysterious, hidden motivations regarding Mattisse. You keep implying that I do. How is this acceptable from anyone, more or less an administrator? I'm asking you once again to quit making such implications. UnitAnode 13:58, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Part of letting a situation cool down is letting someone talk about it freely, Unitanode. Just because John is describing his feelings on the situation doesn't mean he's making accusations. He's not recommending any action against you. Please allow him to discuss this unencumbered. Equazcion (talk) 15:49, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

my RFA

Hello, John Carter. You have new messages at Tinucherian's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

-- Tinu Cherian - 10:09, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

ArbCom clarification on Mattisse's Plan

Request opened by Moni3 here. --Moni3 (talk) 16:26, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Thank you

Hi John. When my wiki-spirit is flagging, I regularly return to posts others have made to try to revive my spirits. This [6] is a wonderful motivational speech, and it has made my mental list of posts to re-read when I'm down. Thanks! Karanacs (talk) 02:07, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, John Carter. You have new messages at Irbisgreif's talk page.
Message added 06:16, 15 October 2009 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

I apologize. Irbisgreif (talk) 06:16, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

hi!

Yeah I remember you too. Lots of changes since that project! I moved from Toluca to Mexico City. I now work at the language laboratory coordinator so I dont teach classes. Have to say I miss that but I am busy redesigning the facility. I continue to write in Wikipedia partly to keep reading in Spanish and partly to get me off my butt and see things here in Mexico. Sort of use it as my travel log. I research and write about places I have been or plan to go, with occasional forays into other topics that catch my fancy. Been thinking about doing an article relating to Mexican folklore and/or mythology. I remember the folklore article one of my students wrote kind of sucks (ok really sucks). But I was still pretty new at Wikipedia myself. Hard part sometimes is sources. Weird but true. Libraries here are not as good as the States. Digital sources arent quite yet here either, and Im in the capital.Thelmadatter (talk) 02:16, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Found the lousy article Folktales of MexicoThelmadatter (talk) 02:27, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Olive branch

I regret that things have degenerated as they have. As I've worked out a system with SilkTork, the circumstance that caused the degeneration has, I think, been dealt with, and I hope that we can move forward productively from here. UA wishes you peace!

Spread peace and goodwill by adding {{subst:WikiPeace}} to other's talk pages with a friendly message.

UA 20:43, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

'Persecution' AfD

John, it seems you typed one tilde too many. The signature's missing. Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 13:45, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, the keyboard on my laptop has been getting weird lately. Fixing. John Carter (talk) 13:51, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

A start on the ArbCom report

Here. SilkTork *^YES! 10:45, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

hogenakkal falls redirect .

hi ! saw u after a long time in hogenakkal falls topic on this redirect ... so nice to have you back ..... many thanks for your support ...good luck....kind regards .--Doctor muthu's muthu ^{wanna talk ?} 10:08, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Happy John Carter's Day!

User:John Carter has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian, and therefore, I've officially declared today as John Carter's day! For being such a beautiful person and great Wikipedian, enjoy being the Star of the day, dear John Carter! Peace, Rlevse 00:32, 20 October 2009 (UTC) A record of your Day will always be kept here.

For a userbox you can add to your userbox page, see User:Rlevse/Today/Happy Me Day! and my own userpage for a sample of how to use it. — Rlevse • Talk • 00:32, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Mattisse: report and layout

Hi, John. At User talk:SilkTork/Report: SilkTork's drafting a report for ArbCom: and we've discussed the layout for an incident report and seem close to consensus. Would you like to check in and add your comments. ArbCom wants the report of recent events and the procedure & layout for future by Friday, so we really need to finalise and go public on Thurs. --Philcha (talk) 10:23, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Grundle discussion on ANI

Sorry to bug you. Could you explicitly clarify if your support for the ban includes, or excludes, talk pages? Just want to cover that base in case of any appeals. :) Thanks, Ncmvocalist (talk) 15:25, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Governors of American Samoa

As you're former account was a member of the American Samoa Work Group, I was wondering if you had any interest in helping to create articles on the governors of American Samoa. We are lacking quite a few, and the project would go faster with more contributors. Do consider helping out with the governors listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/American politicians/Governors. Thank you and Cheers! Scapler (talk) 21:47, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Meher Baba Discussion Page

Dear John, like tremors that warn of an earthquake once again there are clear signs the discussion standards have slipped re the Glow article. please note the last comment by hoverfish. It is antagonostic and unhelpful. I will be reminding him that civility be used, but can you monitor please. --Jones.liam (talk) 09:20, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Vote Re CC origins and historians differing POV's

Hello John, sorry to bother you but we are having a vote on the Catholic Church page regarding whether or not to include the dispute among historians regarding the Church origins. Can you please come an give us your vote so we can come to consensus? Vote is taking place here [7] Thanks! NancyHeise ^talk 03:42, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

District of Columbia

Since your post on 17 October, aside from my reply, there have been no further posts regarding the scope discussion. Would it be a good idea to make a Request for Comment to get the opinion of the wider community? Thanks WhisperToMe (talk) 14:51, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Pakistani cinema

Since you already commented in Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Small Pakistan wikiprojects, you might want to comment also here. --Enric Naval (talk) 21:09, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Portal peer review request

Hello John, feel free to visit a review Wikipedia:Portal peer review/Gastropods/archive1 and have a nice reading. Thank you. --Snek01 (talk) 00:31, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Did I forget to thank you? ..

Thank you for participating in my RfA, which passed nearly unanimously with 174 in support, 2 in opposition and 1 neutral votes. Special thanks goes to RegentsPark, Samir and John Carter for their kind nomination and support. I am truly honored by the trust and confidence that the community has placed in me. I thank you for your kind inputs and I will be sincerely looking at the reasons that people opposed me so I can improve in those areas ( including my english ;) ). If you ever need anything please feel free to ask me and I would be happy to help you :). Have a great day ! -- Tinu Cherian - 10:00, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Template:AfricaProject

Hullo John. One of your edits to this template is being questioned on the talkpage; could I get you to review it and leave a comment? Thanks,  Skomorokh, barbarian  10:42, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Rollback

Hello John. Please could you grant me rollback rights? I am asking you because I notice you are on the list of admins willing to give rollback rights. Also because I have had some dealings with you previously and hopefully you would view me as someone essentially trustworthy. I have done occasional vandal reverts every now and again (and many non vandal reverts that I appreciate would not necessarily be rollback issues) but I am getting interested in working toward a bit of admin sometime in the future and I think that combating more vandalism with a bit of responsibility would be good for this. Polargeo (talk) 10:55, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. I am looking forward to being able to use this however I'll have a good review of the criteria first. Polargeo (talk) 13:53, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Re:Wikibooks and suchlike

I have been working on improving Wikipedia Poland-related coverage for years. I will admit I am not that active on Wikibooks. Are you talking about Wikipedia or Wikibooks project? Is it related to WP:MEA? One of my related projects is filling in the User:Piotrus/List of Poles. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 19:22, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the kind words. If you want to propose something on the Proposed Talk, you are more then welcome to do that. On the subjects of things that somebody may need to do if I am unable too, any suggestions who could help with this? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 05:21, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of American Evangelistic Association

The article American Evangelistic Association has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

This seems to be advertising or promotion and notability of the organization has not been shown through third party sources. It has been tagged for sources and wikifying since March 2009.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the Proposed Deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The Speedy Deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and Articles for Deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Novaseminary (talk) 15:32, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Member?

Are you still willing to be an active member of my mentor/adviser panel? If so, would you be willing to offer your advise on User talk:SilkTork/Report? (I hope you are still willing!) Regards, —mattisse (Talk) 16:07, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Would you be willing to comment on what "title" you prefer, eg "mentor", "adviser" or some other?[8] —mattisse (Talk) 22:01, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Greetings.

Hi.

Since you are one of the people who voted in favor of my recent topic ban, I invite you to participate in this discussion on my talk page. I am especially concerned that the people who supported my topic ban did not answer these particular questions that I repeatedly asked during the discussion of my proposed topic ban. I am very much interested in hearing your answers to these questions.

If you do not wish to participate in this discussion, you don't have to. If you wish to erase this comment from your talk page, you may do so. I will not post this message on your talk page a second time. This comment is meant as a request, and not a demand. Thank you.

Grundle2600 (talk) 13:07, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Meher Baba Silence Draft

John thanks for your continued interest and advice. Please see my draft on the MB talk page, and the comments following. I'd appreciate any input. --Nemonoman (talk) 15:59, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

RFA lessons

What's really amazing is that "acknowledgedly" actually returns 35,000 google results. I thought for sure you made it up. Equazcion (talk) 17:43, 1 Nov 2009 (UTC)

Have the time I do, actually. John Carter (talk) 17:53, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Mattisse report

Would you please read over User:SilkTork/Report#Draft_Final_Report and confirm (or otherwise) that you are content for this to be given as the requested report to ArbCom. SilkTork *^YES! 20:46, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Equatorial Guinea

Hi, I just signed up to collaborate on Wikipedia:WikiProject Equatorial Guinea and just wanted to say hello. Bab-a-lot (talk) 22:53, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Wikicup, now that's an intresting and good idea to increase productivity, I like it. Good to see we now have an active Equatorial Guinea member. Hope you are well! Himalayan 16:42, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Request

As you probably know more about this than I do, could you take a look at WP:RSN [9] and Talk:Rousas John Rushdoony? Should it be discussed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Christianity? I agree that the article needs to be NPOV, but I don't see the recent edits as moving it in that direction and at the moment I've just refrained from replying at RNS because I'm more than a bit annoyed at some of the comments aimed at me and need to reflect more before replying. Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 08:05, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Re: Wikipedia:WikiProject Intertranswiki

Hello, John Carter. You have new messages at Kirill Lokshin's talk page.
Message added 02:01, 6 November 2009 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Re:resignation

An important part of being an admin is having community's trust. I always expected that it was inevitable such trust would disappear, given my activity and topics I edit. While there is no serious evidence I have misued the mop and bucket (see here and my reply at the bottom of the section here)), my resignation (and in reality, this entire case) is not about evidence (FoF still have only one diff - linked above - on me...), but trust. I was always open to recall, and I consider three arbitrators asking for resignation enough to resign. Perhaps in the future the community will reevaluate the situation. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 16:14, 6 November 2009 (UTC)