User talk:Ian.thomson

If I'm not responding, that's probably because

It is approximately 9:12 AM where this user lives (South Carolina). []

and I may be asleep, in classes, or I totally may just not care enough to bother. If it's before 8 AM or after 11 pm, you will definitely want me to respond.

If you want to

accuse me of a Christian bias, go here.	accuse Wikipedia's policies or me of an anti-Christian bias, go here.	see what a biased editor really looks like, go here.
leave a conversational or non-serious message (wazzup, barnstar, hate mail), go here.	leave me a serious message (about article improvement), click here.	see my contributions, go here.

New stuff goes at the bottom, people. Also, please sign your posts in talk pages with four tildes (~~~~).

Clean up time, everything's in the history. Ian.thomson (talk) 14:41, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Lucipedia

Hi Ian, I was just wondering about your link removal. I agree at first glance most articles should not contain links to external sites, or one should be very critical about it. However, in the case of Luciferianism, the community (of Luciferians) are just now beginning to shed some more light on the subject through a collaborative project known as Lucipedia, a wiki dedicated to and for Lucifierianism. It is growing fast and is considered by the Luciferian community the first time a joint project to collect all information on Luciferianism for the first time clearly separating it from Satanism. We feel it is important that this distinction is realised and communicated as today most references are to Michael W. Ford, which paints a one-sided an inaccurate picture of what Luciferianism is all about. --LuciferianBlog (talk) 12:56, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

Do you have any third party publications discussing your site? That's what defines whether the site is notable or not. Until then, it is not notable. There is also the issue that it is an open wiki that does not yet have "a substantial history of stability and a substantial number of editors," or at least is not documented to have such.

Wikipedia is not concerned with "truth," it only summarizes what is found in our site's understanding of reliable sources. Wikipedia does not exist for advocacy. I recommend looking at WP:ADVOCACY and WP:NOTSOAPBOX.

But, looking into it further, there are some issues with the amount of weight Ford is receiving. I'll go through the proper channels to balance it off some. However, I will say that he has not been pushing his work on this site, other people have. This, combined with the fact that he's actually published and not just self-published, tend to make his work more acceptable. Ian.thomson (talk) 00:45, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for replying. Well, the wiki itself has been mentioned in social medias such as MySatan, SIN (satanicinternationalnetwork.com) and a few other places. But I see where you're coming from - having re-read WP:GNG. You have a point - I will let the matter rest a while until the Luciferian wiki gains more third party discussion and can be more easily verified as notable outside social media which may be too close for an objective evaluation in that most discussion so far have been responses to announcements from those directly involved in the project. If we are a success, we will have the neccessary requirements.

Good work on trying to balance Ford's work. As you may not know, Ford is not only over-represented in name, but also in the style of Luciferianism he supports, as there are some different interpretations of Luciferianism, primarily theism vs apotheosis. Ford seem to work in a theistic approach which seems like a blend of Theistic Satanism more than a non-deity and self-deification approach. --LuciferianBlog (talk) 20:47, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Hi Ian. I tried to re veil by deleting my entree in "talk book of revelations" called "book of the apocalypse". This goes against the Blasphemy laws of Islam and may put your life in jepordy for not cencoring it, which was not my intentions. I could not figure out how to clear it out. Can you please assist me? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Frederick Rhodes (talk • Frederick Rhodes (talk) 14:56, 22 April 2011 (UTC)contribs) 14:47, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Really? I'm from America, as are most Wikipedia editors. Muslim extremists are the last thing I'm worried about. As for completely removing your revisions, they're gonna stay there since they don't violate any American laws, nor are they completely disruptive. Ian.thomson (talk) 22:33, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Talk:Samuel

Regarding this comment you made at Talk:Samuel, it's not best practice to refer to an editor as "crazy." It may slide to refer to the positions he's advancing as crazy; it might be better to refer to them as fringe or even extreme. It's better in situations like these to focus on the edits made by an editor rather than the editor.

That said, there's no excuse for the harassment that 99.148.192.105 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) was directing your way this morning, so I've blocked anonymous editors from there for 31 hours. —C.Fred (talk) 05:40, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

I normally wouldn't have said that, but Sam Moser already has it out for me. I was kinda hoping he'd assume that the Satanic Illuminati had complete control here. Ian.thomson (talk) 14:02, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Don't be silly. The Cabal would never cede control to the Satanic Illuminati. :)

Seriously, though, thanks for pointing out that discussion thread. It makes it that much easier to deal with it if it pops back up, since it's bringing off-Wiki harassment back onto the Wiki. —C.Fred (talk) 16:18, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

In all seriousness... that guy doesn't know where you actually are in meatspace or anything right? Because if there's anyway for him to have that information maybe you should be careful about poking the crazy person who makes odd edits with a stick when he makes his little visits. Millahnna (talk) 16:37, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

To C.Fred: So, in the future, I should just be able to say "Sam's at it again," and he'll be sent away?

To Millahnna: The IP addresses he's used are in Dayton, Ohio; and from what I've been able to find he's old enough to be my father, maybe my grandfather. While he has apparently gotten into legal trouble in the past, and has stalked people before, I have no problem specifying that I live in Columbia, SC on my user page because

-I'm 6'2" and 190 lbs

-I've been taking karate/self-defense and weight training classes

-my family keeps a gun in the house (I'm fairly certain my neighbors do as well)

-most navigation systems miss my address (which I'm not giving out) by a good block

-my college has security that would just love to tackle a stalker

-my granddad knows many of the judges in my home and neighboring counties, and I have no record whatsoever (and several character witnesses, many of them ministers).

Moser stalking me would only mean lots of trouble for him. Ian.thomson (talk) 17:03, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

If by sent away, you mean his account/IP address blocked, yes. If it becomes particularly problematic, it could lead to a range of IP addresses being blocked—but I hope it doesn't come to that. —C.Fred (talk) 17:10, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

If you want to learn about Sam he has an open account on Facebook at http://www.facebook.com/help/?search=Stack+Overflow+error#!/profile.php?id=100002283868363 Dr CareBear (talk) 01:06, 28 April 2011 (UTC)