User talk:John Carter

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.

Administrator Interview.

Hello there, my name is Mohammad Alshanabla (You can call me Mo). I am a student at Michigan State University, working on an exploration of the Wikipedia admin-ship process. I would firstly like to thank you for agreeing to be interviewed. I am working with Jonathan Obar, who is the principal investigator on this project, and also my Professor for this course. I am posting this note on your talk page to confirm that I am contacting you to set up a time for an interview that would be convenient for you. Please let me know if you would like to be interviewed via Skype, or by email. My email is alshanab@msu.edu, if you have any questions what so ever please don't hesitate to contact me at any time. Thank you very much and kind regards, -Mo.

Talkback

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

Email from User:Matt Heard

Hello, John Carter. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Version

John, can you explain why you prefer this version: [1] ? Pass a Method talk 20:31, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

He explained himself in his edit summary: "no consensus has been sought or received for these changes". If you disagree, take it up on the article talk page, and try to get consensus for your changes. ~Adjwilley (talk) 20:40, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Two editors have argued for a chronological version, myself and this editor, against adjwilley. Could two vs one be considered a consensus? Pass a Method talk 14:24, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

No, it is not. I am once again struck by the irresponsible rush to judgment which seems to be your calling card. It is indicative of extremely problematic behavior in general, and is rather reasonably sufficient cause for further consideration of sanctions against you. I am also struck by the remarkable inconsistency of your behavior. You were the one who said there should be no changes until the RfC was over earlier, and now, because something seems to be favoring your own position, you seemingly can't wait to get your way, even if doing so flies directly in the face of your own earlier arguments. I am becoming increasingly convinced that some sort of RfC/U or, more likely, request for administrative review on one of the noticeboards seems called for. John Carter (talk) 14:45, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:God

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:God. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 01:15, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

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

AFT5 newsletter

Hey again all :). So, some big news, some small news, some good news, some bad news!

On the "big news" front; we've now deployed AFT5 on to 10 percent of articles, This is pretty awesome :). On the "bad news", however, it looks like we're having to stop at 10 percent until around September - there are scaling issues that make it dangerous to deploy wider. Happily, our awesome features engineering team is looking into them as we speak, and I'm optimistic that the issues will be resolved.

For both "small" and "good" news; we've got another office hours session. This one is tomorrow, at 22:00 UTC in #wikimedia-office ^connect - I appreciate it's a bit late for Europeans, but I wanted to juggle it so US east coasters could attend if they wanted :). Hope to see you all there!

Your post on my talk page

Many many apologies, it was just rude of me not to respond sooner, although my avoidance of a response might be due to your post containing the phrase "Falun Gong". I've always avoided that topic area and as much as I understand the need to have Admins familiar with it, I've been spreading myself far too thinly and recently removed a number of articles from my watchlist. I'm also finding that the copyvio problem seems to be growing, or at least I run into more and that takes up an increasing amount of my time (this is stuff I find myself, not through working at CCI). I have the one year Highbeam account, but again, I want to stay out of Balkans related stuff. I'm involved already in SE Asia stuff for various reasons, and that's an area with precious little Admin input and I although I'd love to get out of it I don't think that would be right at the moment. So, sorry John, I'd love to if I had a 36 hour day, but I already have several editing projects (in archaeology and history related fields) that I never find time for and really don't want to venture into new fields. Dougweller (talk) 17:09, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

No problem whatsoever. I can understand the impulse to avoid that topic, believe me. The copyvio problem is probably as serious if not more so, and it is probably a good idea to have someone giving it all the attention it merits. And, honestly, given the amount of stuff that needs to be done around here, I doubt even a 36 hour day would help that much. We'd probably be talking more in the range of 60 or so. ;) John Carter (talk) 17:14, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Yep. It's been hard, but I've been making a point when I go on vacation to stay off Wikipedia. Otherwise I'd just go mad. Dougweller (talk) 13:26, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Country InfoBox help needed

Assistance is needed at Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Bulgaria_discussion to help decide which dates should be included in the InfoBox of Bulgaria. It is a complex situation, because there were political entities from 700-1300, then a gap of several hundred years without any entity, then 1878 saw a new state. Any input is appreciated. Please comment there, not here, to keep things co-located. [Note: You were randomly selected from WP:FRS list. ] --Noleander (talk) 17:34, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Flag of India

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Flag of India. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 02:15, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Inter-Services Intelligence

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Inter-Services Intelligence. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 07:16, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Iraqi people

Iraqi people has a pov dispute. The article tries to conflate "Iraqi people", a term I can find in Google books only going back to the 1980s, with "Mesopotamian people", a term that is obviously used normally to describe Sumerians, Babylonians, etc. but not used normally to describe modern Iraqis. I've tried to clean it up a bit, not that I think that will last, but I can't find the template, shows how much I don't know! What do you think? I know, a nerve asking you since I won't volunteer for the cesspool, but... Dougweller (talk) 13:15, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Found it, I shouldn't have been using {{'s. Changed it to, so we shall see. It should all be based on reliable sources, not povs. Dougweller (talk) 14:14, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Hm, one of the IPs (at least) is discussing and being discussed at WP:ANI and had restored the Mesopotamian claim shortly before I reverted it - I hadn't noticed that.[2] Dougweller (talk) 14:22, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

WikiCup 2012 July newsletter

We're approaching the beginning of 2012's final round. Pool A sees Cwmhiraeth (submissions) as the leader, with 300 points being awarded for the featured article Bivalvia, and Pool B sees Grapple X (submissions) in the lead, with 10 good articles, and over 35 articles eligible for good topic points. Pool A sees Muboshgu (submissions) in second place with a number of articles relating to baseball, while Pool B's Ruby2010 (submissions) follows Grapple X, with a variety of contributions including the high-scoring, high-importance featured article on the 2010 film Pride & Prejudice. Ruby2010, like Grapple X, also claimed a number of good topic points; despite this, not a single point has been claimed for featured topics in the contest so far. The same is true for featured portals.

Currently, the eighth-place competitor (and so the lowest scorer who would reach the final round right now) has scored 332, more than double the 150 needed to reach the final round last year. In 2010, however, 430 was the lowest qualifying score. In this competition, we have generally seen scores closer to those in 2010 than those in 2011. Let's see what kind of benchmark we can set for future competitions! As ever, if you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 22:26, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:International Olympic Committee

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:International Olympic Committee. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 08:15, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

User:Pass a Method

I know that you've complained about this editor, and have stated that he may need to be taken to WP:ANI. I've also commented on how ridiculous he is. I've very recently had to revert his ridiculousness here. My question is what will it take to finally report this user to ANI for disruptive editing? There's a lot of evidence showing how troubling his edits are. And he was blocked from this site before under a different user name because of the same type of troubling edits, especially for WP:OR and deceptive edit summaries. 176.67.167.252 (talk) 19:41, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for starting User:John Carter/Pass a Method.

For WP:OR issues and deceptive edit summaries, besides what you have witnessed of this editor's behavior, and besides what he has done under his Someone65 account and what he has done recently under his Pass a Method account, one example is the Virginity article, where he was reverted.[3] And besides the examples at Elvis Presley,[4][5][6] other examples, which also involve him being reverted, can be seen at Category:Erotic fiction,[7] at Child sexual abuse,[8] Human[9] (which was also discussed[10]), and the discussion of synthesis regarding his edits at Pedophilia.[11] There are obviously a lot more instances like this. His talk page shows some of that.

The following are some diffs showing how he interacts with users while in a content dispute with them -- accusing them of vandalism and then tagging their talk page with warning templates about vandalism, other disruptive editing or edit warring:

• [12] (April)

• [13] (June 16)

• [14] (still June 16; editor's response to his template)

• [15] (June 17)

• [16] (June 19)

• [17] (June 26 and 27)

• [18] (July 4) 176.67.167.252 (talk) 20:55, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

• And of course I could add some of the self-serving snarkiness I have received from this editor as well. I have very serious questions exactly where to go with this situation, but I very definitely think that it will have to go somewhere, probably sooner than later, unfortunately. John Carter (talk) 21:05, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

• John, it may appear that some editors are complaining about me but this is mainly because i enjoy editing controversial articles. In fact, sometimes i check out certain noticeboards just to check what controversies are going on. However dont mistake all the fuss for incompetence or "trolling" which is what your recent comment on my talk page suggests. I dont claim to be a fault-free editor. In fact i found myself corected numerous times, hence in my numerous disputes often make concessions or admissions half-way through a dialogue. Please keep that in mind in your future posts about me. Pass a Method talk 22:01, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

And the complaints also indicate that you edit in an arrogant, disruptive, condescending, and basically incompetent way. In fact, this is perhaps the first time I have seen any remotely resembling humility out of you. And, honestly, it is not my opinion which will really matter. Should the history of disruptive editing continue, I will definitely be more than willing to bring behavioral problems to either ANI or ArbCom for their independent decision. And, of course, on that basis, I will be collecting the information which might be required in that presentation. John Carter (talk) 22:12, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Has there ever been a RfC/U regarding PAM? If not, that might be the next logical step. LadyofShalott 00:18, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

John, sorry for any inconvenience this past week. I hope we can start from a new page as of today. Pass a Method talk 00:40, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

"the next logical step" Hell yeah!!! Ahem. I think that would be a prudent course of action suggested by the circumstances of the case at hand. Support. – Lionel ^(talk) 00:47, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Don't forget the mass religion/LGBT title changes. When was the last time someone pissed off half of WPLGBT and WPChristianity? In spite of the carnage he's caused, he should get a barnstar for improving inter-wikiproject relations, hahaha. – Lionel ^(talk) 00:53, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

YGM

Hello, John Carter. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

  — Jess· Δ♥ 16:27, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Regarding parshas

Thanks, John, for your kind note. I appreciate it. Be well. -- Dauster (talk) 19:49, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Gulf War

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Gulf War. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 08:15, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:List of fixed crossings of the Hudson River

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:List of fixed crossings of the Hudson River. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 08:15, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:List of castles in Belgium

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:List of castles in Belgium. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 09:15, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Refuest for Editor monitoring

Is it possible that Wikipedia Editor would monitor the Talk page on Nichiren article and assist in making the process of improving the article possible. I intend to make some changes to the article in the coming few days. It seems that a professional advise is needed to guide both editors engaged in the developing situation to make the outcome more productive (than what it is now on that Talk page).SafwanZabalawi (talk) 02:36, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

As far as WP:Dispute resolution goes, if two (and only two) editors are going at it, you may request a WP:Third opinion aka "3O" to help strike a balance or voice an opinion. There are many 3O req watchers; they are just editors like us, but they try extra hard to evaluate a situation, assuming good faith, based on policy and guideline. There's sometimes a backlog, so it can take time to get a response. --Lexein (talk) 04:28, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Proposed changes to WP:NOT

Hi John, regarding your comments at Wikipedia talk:What Wikipedia is not#Proposal: i.e.:

"I have requested input on this proposal at the geopolitical, ethnic, and religious diputes noticeboard and at the village pump for policy. With any luck, we might be seeing responses shortly. If there is not a clear consensus from such discussion, of course, it would always be possible to also file a request for comments as per WP:RFC. John Carter (talk) 15:59, 6 August 2012 (UTC)"

and then your posting requests at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Geopolitical, ethnic, and religious conflicts#Proposed changes to WP:NOT and Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Proposed changes to WP:NOT, i.e.

"There is currently discussion at Wikipedia talk:What Wikipedia is not#Is wikipedia a devotional compendium? regarding a proposed addition to that policy page. As topics of this nature tend to spawn some of the most heated and contested discussions we have, any and all informed, neutral opinions are more than welcome. John Carter (talk) 15:33, 6 August 2012 (UTC)"

Now that you are arbitrarily globalizing this debate when you don't get your way, first by taking the discussion from Talk:Chayei Sarah to the WP:NOT forum and now expanding and taking it even further by bringing it to WP:CCN and WP:VPP, threatening to go as far as WP:RFC to waste even more time in these discussions that have consistently NOT gone your way. Your moves are obvious violations of WP:POINT and WP:NOTBATTLEGROUND and one wonders how far you will go just to get your way... At any rate, now that you have done this, for the sake of fairness as you should have done, I have notified four major religion Wiki Projects (Christianity; Islam; Hindusim; Buddhism) and four major secular Wiki Projects (Atheism; Science; Philosophy; History) so that hopefully they can be treated equally and draw equal responses from concerned Wikipedians in a WP:NPOV fashion. Thanks again, IZAK (talk) 08:49, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

IZAK, I am actually very much surprised that you had made an effort to conduct anything other than Judaism, considering that is your almost sole interest, and always has been. I realize that you are possibly constitutionally incapable of behaving in an acceptable way. I had contacted the noticeboard because the editors there have had a history of dealing with controversial topics, and their input would be useful. I also note your own bias in the above. There seemingly was consensus among those who are not so blinded by their own POV that their input is not particularly useful, that is to say, among those other than you and Bus stop. It was only I think when you once again used one of your favorite tactics, which is adding dubiously relevant walls of text that rarely if ever address matters of substance, that others started saying that the discussion was too long to read. Also, clearly, this is a policy matter, so it made sense to contact policy pages as well. I also notice how once again you seem to be attempting to reformat reality to suit your own purposes, which seems to be a bit of a habit of yours. When I started the discussion, I was basically requesting clarification and amendment to policy, which does not necessarily require input from involved editors. Minor changes to policy, which is what the request seems to be according to the input of those editor who first took page, and are presumably those who most frequent the policy pages and know them best, do not necessarily require asking for input from people who do not deal with policy often. I am however very much surprised that you thought that any input from anyone other than yourself and Bus stop, who seems to follow you around on such matters. It is a welcome change on your part, and I sincerely hope that it indicates a welcome change in your own conduct for the better. John Carter (talk) 14:22, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:White people

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:White people. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 10:15, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

ANI comments

You'd have to go to the Help Desk. Whoever asked the question would be the one to answer. I was merely trying to make sure there was a helpful answer, which there was not before I got involved.— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 17:08, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

One more cleaned up

FYI, on my way out, I was touching up unfinished items, so cleaned up one more article in the Josephus/Tacitus genre, namely Historicity of Jesus. Now Ministry of Jesus, Chronology of Jesus and this make a trio which establishes the timelines, sources etc. and rely on the Josephus page. But in its own right, you may be interested in the Pauline section of Historicity of Jesus page - I came across a few interesting new things as I researched that... On a separate note, as I touched up Farewell Discourse, I eventually figured out what it was about...

Anyway if you manage to watch those historicity pages as I slow down that will be great. Thanks. History2007 (talk) 10:35, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:List of African-American firsts

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:List of African-American firsts. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 11:15, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Nichiren

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Nichiren. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 11:15, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Mongols and Russian encyclopaedists

We're having a little bit of a drive this week at User talk:Drmies#'sup. So far we have:

• Sagaan Ubgen
• Yellow shamanism  · Yellow shaman
• Dayan Deerh
• ongon
• Sergei Aleksandrovich Tokarev

See the talk page for more. Uncle G (talk) 09:20, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Eilat

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Eilat. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 12:15, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Finding some sources

Hello, I noticed that it says on Wikipedia:WikiProject Alaska#Resources you have access to many Alaskan magazines. So I was wondering if you could look for an article in one of them that has to do with Alaska Airlines ending flights to Russia in September 1998. You can use this as a guide for what to look for. Hope you can find something. Thanks, Compdude¹²³ 17:18, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Did you see my message? Would really appreciate your help with this. —Compdude¹²³ 22:13, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! —Compdude¹²³ 23:57, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Portal:New England

Hey there John! I've recently listed P:NEWENG at FPOC, and I noticed your name on [Template:PortalReviewVolunteers/List|this list]], and (as such) would like to kindly ask that, if your schedule permits, you could review Portal:New England at its FPOC. I'm not asking for a rubber-stamp of anything like that; as my first piece of potentially-audited work, I want to really do a job and get it right. Thank you. Achowat (talk) 19:06, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Doubt

Hello, John. I saw that you added the WikiProject African diaspora tag to Rui Barbosa and José Bonifácio de Andrada. According to this wikiproject, its goal "to improve all articles related to the cultural contributions of people of African descent all over the world. The African diaspora is the story of how Africans, though scattered and dispersed, managed to preserve cultural traditions while, at the same time, reinventing their identities in places outside Africa". Neither Barbosa nor Bonifácio had African ancestors. Then why did you add those tags? --Lecen (talk) 21:18, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Most of the tagging for that WikiProject I've been engaged in recently is based on the subjects having separate articles in the Africana encyclopedia by Appiah and Gates. According to the summary of the Barbosa article in that encyclopedia, he was a prominent abolitionist, who ultimately destroyed many of the government's records of the slave trade. Regarding de Andrada, he is listed in the summary of his article in the first edition as being an early advocate of the abolition of the slave trade and the gradual emancipation of slaves. Now, I acknowledge the first edition, which I'm using now, doesn't have separate article bibliographies, which is unfortunate. I haven't checked the second edition, which is at a more remote location. But at least the two articles in question, as opposed to some others, like on smaller African ethnic groups, are basically about as long as some of our own developed lead sections. I also more or less raised a question on the project's talk page about such tagging some time ago, and got no response that I could see, so I acted boldly. You are of course free to remove them, but eventually I hope to get together lists of substantial articles in relevant reference books for several projects, and doing tagging for them based on those articles. I've started doing much the same for WikiProject Religion recently as well. It may not be the best way to go, but for some of the bios of some Caribbean figures in that work, I have a feeling that maybe there might be more editors perhaps interested in developing content based on "African diaspora" status than on the nation or territory itself. The list of articles on the diaspora, FWIW, can be found at User:John Carter/Africa articles, in the African diaspora section. You're free to remove the tags, and I doubt honestly I would notice it, but I think, at least maybe, getting the involvement of editors from that project, and maybe from sources they would be most interested and likely to use, might help develop the content. John Carter (talk) 21:41, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

That was not what I asked. According to WikiProject African diaspora, its goal is to improve articles about people who have African blood in their veins, not on articles about slavery, abolitionists, abolitionism, etc, etc... Thus, it doesn't make sense to add Bonifácio nor Barbosa, unless the wikiproject changes its scope to encopass other subjects, such as abolitionism. --Lecen (talk) 21:55, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

I indicated why I added the tag. I'm sorry you apparently don't find the reasoning acceptable. I think we might have different understandings of the clause "all articles related to the cultural contributions of people of African descent all over the world", which would at least to my eyes relate to matters directly and significantly related to black slavery, which slavery related subjects might be. I actually don't see any clear indicator that on the page that it directly and necessarily relates only to articles about people with African blood in their veins, but I could be wrong. And, honestly, I would think that articles appearing in a reference book about the African diaspora, which this source basically is, would pretty much inherently relate to the African diaspora project. If you did not find a specific response to the specific question you asked, my apologies. However, I do note that the project has been rather inactive of late, and it might be reasonable to change the stated scope to rather clearly indicate the true scope of the project, which it currently lacks. Most projects have some sort of indicator as to what sorts of categories they deal with, which this project doesn't. I am therefore going to propose on the talk page now that there be some clearer definition of its scope. Rationally, I think it would probably be basically identical to the scope of directly related reference works, and will say as much. You are of course free to dispute that change on the project talk page, if you see fit. John Carter (talk) 22:10, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Shamanism

Hi John, thanks for your notes on my talk page. I responded, but it's in the middle of a long thread so I'll repeat it here: I could use a bit of help expanding Sagaan Ubgen, and Mongolian shamanism, which should be a larger overview article, could benefit from some professional help as well. Thanks for whatever you can do! Drmies (talk) 20:45, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

You have email from me related to this topic. :) LadyofShalott 02:40, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

WikiProject Christianity August 2012 newsletter

ICHTHUS

August 2012

Membership report
The parent Christianity WikiProject currently has 341 active members. We would like to welcome our newest members, User:David_FLXD, User:Alexsbecker, User:Penguin 236, User:Gugi001, User:John D. Rockerduck, and User:Margaret9mary. Thank you all for your interest in this effort. If any members, new or not, wish any assistance, they should feel free to leave a message at the Christianity noticeboard or with me or other individual editors to request it.

From the Editor
Ichthus is one of the ways that the WikiProject Christianity’s Outreach department helps update our members. We have recently added some new sections to the newsletter. Please let us know if there are changes you would like to see in the format, or if there are any particular things you would like to see included. And if you have anything you would personally like to add, by all means let us know. The talk page of the current issue is probably the best place to post such comments.

With that, I wish you all happy reading!

P.S. Please click here to add the new Christianity noticeboard to your watchlist to follow the latest discussions relevant to WikiProject Christianity and subprojects.

By John Carter

Church of the month

by User:Diliff Frauenkirche (Church of Our Blessed Lady) in Munich, taken from the tower of St. Peter's Church

Contest of the month
We currently have a remarkable lack of Wikipedia:Wikipedia-Books. Right now, Category:Wikipedia books on Christianity contains only 12 books. We certainly could have at least one book on each major grouping within Christianity. One of the challenges for this month, then, is working to put together books on relevant topics. For this month, one contest is for editors to assemble the basic Wikipedia books for each of the main topics of the extant related projects. When finished, they should their creation of the books at the main Christianity noticeboard, and at the end of the month the project will award barnstars to those who have made a significant efforts in developing this underdeveloped content.

Also this month, we are going to have have a challenge to create and improve some of our more important missing or low-quality articles. As biographies are often a bit easier, this month we are choosing two biographies: Karl Behm, which has yet to be started, and the currently Stub-class article Nerses IV the Gracious. A barnstar will be awarded to any editor who can get these articles up to DYK quality level and ultimately selected for the DYK section of the main page.

Calendar
Thie coming month (mid-August through mid-September) includes feasts dedicated to the honor of Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary, Bartholomew the Apostle, Nativity of Mary, and the Exaltation of the Cross.

Featured content and GA report
Since the last report, William de Chesney (sheriff), Knights of Columbus, and Angelus Silesius were promoted to GA level. Our thanks and congratulations to all those involved.

Wikimedia Foundation report

Wikinews is our sister site for developing news stories. Several events relating to Christianity, like the installation of bishops for instance, do not necessarily merit extensive coverage in wikipedia encyclopedic articles, but can and easily could be covered at greater length in a news article format. Given the number of significant news events that relate to religion, including claims of miracles, assignment of bishops and other religious leaders, church conferences, and other events, this site provides an excellent opportunity to provide in-depth coverage of current events at greater length than wikipedia.

Christian art

Christ Crucified by Diego Velazquez.

Spotlight

One of our newer editors, User:David_FLXD, has recently gone through much of our content related to Methodism and assessed it. We are very grateful for his efforts, and that of all the editors who have had a role in developing that content. We have every reason to believe that this will make it significantly easier for the Methodism work group to create and develop content relevant to Methodism. To help that along, we certainly encourage everyone to do what they can to help David and the other Methodism editors to bring the content relevant to their tradition to the highest possible level of quality.

I believe
... in the Holy Trinity, the sacraments of Baptism and Holy Communion, the Arminian conception of free will through God's prevenient grace, and the regular renewal of the individual's covenant with God. I am a Methodist.

---

Help requests
Please let us know if there are any particular areas, either individual articles or topics, which you believe would benefit from outside help from a variety of other editors. We will try to include such requests in future issues.

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
EdwardsBot (talk)

Please comment on Talk:Nichiren Buddhism

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Nichiren Buddhism. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 12:15, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Another DeknMike edit in topic-banned area

Hi John, please be aware of this. I'm going to be taking off soon but I thought you should be aware of it. Zad68 16:40, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

He self-reverted, so no problem I guess. Zad68 16:43, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Newsletter

I see you got it out OK--but feel free to keep me "on call" if you need me. – Sir Lionel, EG^(talk) 06:36, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Burma

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Burma. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 13:15, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, John Carter. You have new messages at Dougweller's talk page.
Message added 18:02, 20 August 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

and a 3rd one Dougweller (talk) 18:02, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, John Carter. You have new messages at Dougweller's talk page.
Message added 18:36, 20 August 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Dougweller (talk) 18:36, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Axis occupation of Vojvodina

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Axis occupation of Vojvodina. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 13:15, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

I find this wierd...

I don't know, maybe I'm straining my eyeballs...

But doesn't it seem weird how all of these users use the same term:

At, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Genesis 1:4

• Keep per IZAK. Philosophers and Theologians from both the Christian and Jewish traditions have commented extensively verse by verse on the Pentateuch. --Guerillero | My Talk 04:40, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
• Keep per IZAK.--Yoavd (talk) 11:30, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
• Keep per IZAK, Jclemens, et al. Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 17:55, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Genesis 1:5

• Keep per IZAK et al. This issue appears to have been dealt with in previous AfDs.75.150.187.201 (talk) 14:09, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
• Keep per IZAK --Yoavd (talk) 14:10, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

As if IZAK is some kind of authoritative voice for the Jewish wiki-community. It just seems strange... But maybe it's nothing and I'm just being overtly sensitive. Thanks,   — Jasonasosa 16:48, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

I just happened to catch this mention here and I agree with you. Something strange here. Added my delete to these articles. Iconoclast.Horizon (talk) 17:00, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

• To Jason, you are twisting hard to come up with stories because in any AfD or CfD it is very often standard practice, in fact it's highly advisable, when casting a vote at an AfD to state "per XYX" when "XYZ" cites more comprehensive reasons and policies for either "Keep" or "Delete" or whatever the case may be. Many Judaic editors keep track of AfDs and CfDs posted at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Judaism and sometimes at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Judaism. Your statement that "As if IZAK is some kind of authoritative voice for the Jewish wiki-community" is a slur if not an outright violation of WP:NPA against me, and WP:AGF for no good reason against those users who wish to vote using the long-standing "per XYZ" method. I do not speak for anyone on WP and I have never claimed to speak for anyone on WP, so stop it with coming up with uncalled for insults. I cannot make you or John or anyone like me, but by mocking me, you do yourself no favors either. IZAK (talk) 22:44, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

It is my observation, faulty at best. I'm not making any accusations and I apologize if I've offended you or your fellow wikians. Thanks,   — Jasonasosa 22:50, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

IZAK, I think it might be advisable if you were to read WP:STALK. Also, I find it extremely amusing that you seem to find someone statement that you seem to be an authoritative voice, which most people would find a compliment, to be some form of personal attack. In fact, it is virtually impossible for me to believe that anyone making such a statement would be adhering to WP:AGF themselves, as they are clearly taking words for being something other than they are. Such rather paranoic behavior certainly does you no favors either. Also, IZAK, I would very much request you make these rather remarkable rushes to judgment regarding others somewhere else? Thank you. John Carter (talk) 23:03, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Sure, however he wasn't complimenting me, that's for sure. This concerns me as he mentioned my name, and if he has a problem with me he can take it up with me directly, or at least let me know he has concerns about me that I can respond to. Calling me "paranoic" also doesn't help, if you know what I mean, it sets a bad example as others will try to mimic or one up you. IZAK (talk) 00:37, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

IZAK, I am sorry that you seem to have missed the very obvious hint to drop this conversation. I am sure that you can understand continuing to belabor a point on the talk page of an editor who had he thought clearly asked that you take the conversation elsewhere not only sets a bad example, but could also perhaps be taken as an indication of that editor's incapacity or unwillingness to act in accord with the wishes of others. I believe that closes this conversation. Thank you for adhering to my wishes to drop this subject. John Carter (talk) 00:54, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Credo Reference

I'm sorry to report that there were not enough accounts available for you to have one. I have you on our list though and if more become available we will notify you promptly.

We're continually working to bring resources like Credo to Wikipedia editors, and this will very hopefully not be your last opportunity to sign up for one. If you haven't already, please check out WP:HighBeam and WP:Questia, where accounts are still available. Cheers, Ocaasi 19:13, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Focus on the Family

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Focus on the Family. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 13:15, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Jakob Ammann article

Hi, not sure if this is the correct place to ask for some input about an edit war on Jakob Ammann page. Would appreciate some input there. Thanks!Mikeatnip (talk) 21:21, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the input. Whatever sources you have access to may be dropped to me by e-mail atnips at the famous gm ...com. We are actually in the early stages of writing a short biography on Ammann with the new research on him in the last 20 years. I have contact with Hanspeter Jecker in Switzerland who is heading up research there. I have wished to have access to JSTOR in the past, but dont qualify. You are not obligated to look for anything, but if you are not busy resolving any more edit wars, you are welcome to pass the time forwarding me pertinent information. :-) Mikeatnip (talk) 23:26, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Does...

this WP:UP#PROMO apply as a violation, if you post content on your wp:User pages that advocates a wikipage that was deleted by consensus?   — Jasonasosa 23:07, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Ah, I was kinda wondering what was going on regarding this topic, as I've seen some recent activity about it on my watchlist that I didn't look into. I am not entirely sure of what you are talking about, as you didn't specifically indicate it, of course, but I think I might be able to make a pretty good guess. The short answer is "probably not," although that depends on the specific nature of the material being posted in userspace. Users can and frequently do use userspace to develop articles, and one might reasonably say that an article which was deleted for lack of notability could be moved to userspace or reproduced there until and unless notability is clearly established. However, if the material is more specifically of a clearly promotional nature, that might be another matter entirely. WP:TE might apply to misusing other non-userspace wikipedia pages for promotion as well. If the disruption is clear and obvious, WP:DE also might apply. If it advocates in a clear way a subject then the place to go is probably [{WP:ANI]]. If one were to do that, looking over the longterm edit history of the editor involved might be useful too, particularly if it were to reveal a possible bias or POV. I'm working my way through a reference source today, and might not be able to get to it until tomorrow, but I will look some of what I think you're talking about then. If you see anything that you think merits posting at ANI before then, of course, you are free to do so. John Carter (talk) 23:35, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

(shrugs) :/ I don't know. I guess we will see how far it goes... It's like a Whac-A-Mole... it keeps popping up, it never dies and you can't win. lol.  — Jasonasosa 23:58, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

If...

you saw a message like this:

"Could you help improve the Genesis 1:3; Genesis 1:4 and Genesis 1:5 articles to the same level as the Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2 articles? Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Genesis 1:4 and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Genesis 1:5 for the discussions."

Would this be considered some kind of back-door canvasing, straight-up canvasing, or not all? Note that Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Genesis 1:5 has a warning message that heads the page for participants to not canvass. I'd be interested on your take of the above comment that I saw when passing around wiki. Thanks,   — Jasonasosa 12:24, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

I saw that myself. It probably has to be counted as acceptable, and it isn't really canvassing as per the definition. We have to assume good faith, and it is not unheard of for individuals to contact editors who have helped develop one article to help develop related articles, or articles on similar subjects. Given the phrasing, we are more or less obligated to assume that is what the editor was doing. Particularly for individuals who have a pronounced degree of experience with a subject and those who edit it, one could almost think it was expected. John Carter (talk) 14:28, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your insight.   — Jasonasosa 14:38, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

German language material at AE

Hello John. Regarding your comment about German language material. What in particular needs looking at? Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 16:48, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Skapperod includes a short quote in his "Re: Misrepresentation of sources" comment, in the "Comparison of VM's allegation..." box, in response to a longer italicized quote in VM's "Illustrative example of Skapperod's misrepresentations" section. They probably aren't that important, but both of them seem to consider it important enough, and I'm not myself sure my own German is such that I can be 100% sure regarding what the quotes translate to in English. John Carter (talk) 17:17, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Hey guys, if I may interject here. Misrepresentation of sources can happen by accident. You may also want to check the "Abuse of a source by Skapperod which prompted this exchange" section, I think it is quite informative. But the problem here is that the editors involved cannot talk to one another and resolve it. Both assume bad faith, neither is a paragon of virtue in their behavior. At the same time, they both contribute to the area, improving content, and they actually need one another. They represent different POVs, and banning one would make the content POVed; banning both would mean we (Wikipedia) gets no content. What we need to do is a solution that forces them to be civil and AGF towards one another. Now, how to arrive at that... I suggested a group 1RR at Ed's page, to deal with reverting and tag teaming. Alternatively or additionally, we could put the affected articles at general 1RR. This should minimize the damages, but civility... is difficult. Mentorship, perhaps? I can try to influence VM, but who would try to mentor Skapperod? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 17:28, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Beastiality and female genital mutilation as sexual assault?

Hi. Is it appropriate that these[19][20] be classified as sexual assault, in light of how reliable sources define sexual assault? I say no, except for the cases where female genital mutilation is carried out against a female's will. 109.123.115.21 (talk) 19:00, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

But thinking over female genital mutilation again, I can't see how it is sexual assault unless it is performed with sexual/psychological gratification in mind or is defined that way simply because it's the sex organs that are being mutilated. In other words: It is assualt, but the people performing the procedures are not getting sexual/psychological gratification from it; if some do at all, I wouldn't say that it's a usual case. 109.123.115.21 (talk) 19:15, 24 August 2012 (UTC)