User talk:Basileias: Difference between revisions
m Archiving 1 discussion(s) to User talk:Basileias/Archive 2) (bot |
Toverton28 (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 66: | Line 66: | ||
|} |
|} |
||
|} |
|} |
||
==Gender-neutral Bible & NIV Bible== |
|||
Basileias, I am a bit confused about your recent editing of my work. You seem more interested in hiding documentation and driving an agenda rather than helping wiki readers learn about various subjects. For example, this is a quote from the NIV page. |
|||
However, the Southern Baptist Convention rejected the 2011 update because of gender-related issues. |
|||
This sentence has no sourcing. I bring in a source and you remove it. The source is the resolution that Southern Baptists passed against the 2011 NIV. Why would you not want this linked? It is obviously a good source for the sentence. Here is the link: http://www.sbc.net/resolutions/1218/on-the-genderneutral-2011-new-international-version . Please do not remove this source until you have worked through the NIV Bible discussion page. Your refusal to allow such common sense sources shows you to have an agenda beside informing wiki readers. Linking the gender-neutral Bible page under criticism is also helpful to wiki readers. CBMW is made up of many conservative theologian, including Wayne Grudem who is the editor of the ESV Bible. Please leave this these changes alone until other editors speak to the matter. |
|||
I have asked other editors to give their opinions on the NIV talk page. |
|||
My next problem with your edits involves removing my work from the [[gender-neutral Bible]] page. I added examples that readers will find very helpful. You required sources for this information. I sourced an article. It is important to note that the information I posted are verbatim examples of the 1984 NIV being compared to the 2011 NIV. I did not post the CBMW article to source critical opinions, but to source the NIV comparison quotes. The quotes are undisputable facts. I am disappointed that you will not allow a simple comparison between to NIV versions. Please do not remove these edits until others have had a chance to respond on the talk page. |
|||
== Rob Bell == |
== Rob Bell == |
||
Revision as of 21:53, 15 July 2015
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 31 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
Welcome to Wikipedia
|
Gender-neutral Bible & NIV Bible
Basileias, I am a bit confused about your recent editing of my work. You seem more interested in hiding documentation and driving an agenda rather than helping wiki readers learn about various subjects. For example, this is a quote from the NIV page.
However, the Southern Baptist Convention rejected the 2011 update because of gender-related issues.
This sentence has no sourcing. I bring in a source and you remove it. The source is the resolution that Southern Baptists passed against the 2011 NIV. Why would you not want this linked? It is obviously a good source for the sentence. Here is the link: http://www.sbc.net/resolutions/1218/on-the-genderneutral-2011-new-international-version . Please do not remove this source until you have worked through the NIV Bible discussion page. Your refusal to allow such common sense sources shows you to have an agenda beside informing wiki readers. Linking the gender-neutral Bible page under criticism is also helpful to wiki readers. CBMW is made up of many conservative theologian, including Wayne Grudem who is the editor of the ESV Bible. Please leave this these changes alone until other editors speak to the matter.
I have asked other editors to give their opinions on the NIV talk page.
My next problem with your edits involves removing my work from the gender-neutral Bible page. I added examples that readers will find very helpful. You required sources for this information. I sourced an article. It is important to note that the information I posted are verbatim examples of the 1984 NIV being compared to the 2011 NIV. I did not post the CBMW article to source critical opinions, but to source the NIV comparison quotes. The quotes are undisputable facts. I am disappointed that you will not allow a simple comparison between to NIV versions. Please do not remove these edits until others have had a chance to respond on the talk page.
Rob Bell
We need to take it to arbitration if he continues to persist.
Michael L. Brown
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Nomination of Real Marriage for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Real Marriage 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/Real Marriage 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 good 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 template from the top of the article.
Isaiah 7:14 & Almah
|
The Barnstar of Diligence | |
| For editing Isaiah 7:14 and Almah, and keeping cool under controversy. Well done! Bigbird6 (talk) 01:06, 18 June 2015 (UTC) |
- Thank you. Unexpected. Basileias (talk) 03:19, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
Reference errors on 4 July
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
- On the Reinhard Bonnke page, your edit caused a URL error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 01:07, 5 July 2015 (UTC)