User talk:Appropo

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Appropo, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially what you did for Witness Lee. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! HopeChrist (talk) 21:48, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also a Welcome; Please use the sandbox to prevent scores of 10-20 edits in a row. I happened upon an article that was halfway through your changes and I momentarily thought it was vandalism until I noticed your trend of edits appearing this way. The article in question looks fine now (Something related to a Witness Lee or whatnot, I forget).

Your edits

Hi! While I greatly appreciate you joining Wikipedia and your willingness to help, such as at Local churches (affiliation), I recommend reading Wikipedia's policies on neutral point of view and original research. Keep in mind that your experience with the Local Churches may not be the same as that of everyone else, and that you need to be able to back up your claims with reliable sources. Thanks and welcome! Khalfani Khaldun 02:52, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

POV

Third party documentation and reliable sources are very important factor to resolve POV issues. Your recent edits seems to be fueled by anger and your independent individual opinion. Opinions may or may not be true or facts. Regarding the past issues which you think are still continuing on; if there are third party references, let's work on it and put it with the local churches article. Witness Lee is a person and his article is more of a biography rather than a news stand.

Also, when you edit, I have noticed that you use phrases and words in your comments which makes you anti-Lee ot anti-local churches. Please remember dear, all these things counts and will be counted upon when evaluating your POVs and your stand. Be specific and neutral about it. Thanks for your work and valuable opinion though. HopeChrist (talk) 22:08, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your comment. I worked hard to prevent both sides and references from both sides. Yes, some of the words would seem POV from your perspective, but you must remember that you are an avid Local Church enthusiast. So, please take a more objective view and read the article based on its merits. I don't know what past issues have been brought into the article. It was based on current writings from both sides. With regard to "third party references", I would like you to stick to that in your writing about books. You appear to not even have 2nd party. You are just writing a book report. Please check the standards for books and tell me what 3rd party references you are using. A NPOV is not no POV, but one that presents both sides which I have done. Appropo (talk) 23:28, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Books and articles on Nee and Lee are two different categories. Please read Wikipedia:Deletion policy. I believe, the articles on books need expansion and more content writing rather than deletion. Also, it is not an over night project, you need to have patience. If you can, please offer your hands to improve the articles. As far as my editing and acceptance/tolerance go, I try my best to be neutral. I also believe in collaboration, third party opinion, and good-faith edit. I assume the same for you. Thank you. HopeChrist (talk) 01:09, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Let me get this straight; you are an avid Witness Lee and Local Church follower who tries to be neutral, but I use words in my comments (not article) that (according to you--an avid Witness Lee and Local Church follower) make me anti-Lee or anti-local churches. Hmmm! I think the criteria should be whether one has presented both sides fairly with words that are NPOV. If you have words that you think are non-NPOV please let me know. I have spent lots of time removing your POV words that are in your writing in the articles. Again, thanks for your help. I believe I am learning Wikepedia's philosophy, policies and procedures. Do you think I am doing better? Appropo (talk) 03:40, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lot of things in short

Hi Appropo,

You are very smart and a quick learner. It would have been wonderful if you could have known me or worked with me or I with you. You have so much energy and enthusiasm for local churches related articles on Wikipedia. You are too involved. I have limited amount of time to spend on Wiki until someone "truly neutral" comes to balance these articles. When I joined Wikipedia in 2007, these articles on Nee, Lee, and local churches were a mess, even you could have not agreed with it. Yes, you talk about me being an avid follower of something and someone. Let me tell you this real quick. I follow Jesus Christ and I Love God. I don't try to protect the scriptures or someone who by themselves and by their own virtues are clean, holy and upright. I am here as you can read on my User:Page to "guard" these articles from haters of local churches mostly from those who call themselves, ex! What is an ex-member? I don't understand that philosophy.

[I am glad that you follow JC and love God. You "don't try to protect the scriptures or someone", but you "guard" these articles (on Nee, Lee and the Local Churches). Hmmmm! An ex-member is one who quit meeting with those who follow Witness Lee usually because their conscience can no longer tolerate what is being said and done to the point that they must either speak out and be tortured by Local Church followers by being "quarantied" or labeled "One with Satan". If they haven't already left, that usually does the trick. Maybe one day you will experience that. It is quite a growth experience and tends to result in enlightenment although the process can be quit painful. Also, as other local church members you tend to see things as either black--you hate the church, or white--you love the church. I went from a good brother that they loved to listen to, to "one with Satan". But there are other shades and colors. I "hate" Hitler. I don't "hate" the local church or anyone else. Hate is a very strong word. You should learn when people disagree with your point of view, not to lash out and say, "You hate me". No I don't hate you, I disagree with you.]

You spend a lot of time on things which are not eternal and not even lasting. [Yes, don't we all. I wish everything had a big sign on it that said, "Don't waste your time here. This is not eternal and doesn't matter". Brother, I have learned that everything I do is eternal and has lasting impact. I hope that this writing will sink into your soul and spirit and turn you to the truth and reality that is in Christ. And why are you writing on Wikipedia if you believe that. I told you that Lee said not to go to "worldly" means to get your message across. So quit trying. I like it, it nourishes and feeds my spirit and fuels my passion for the truth.}

This is Wikipedia. The policies might change in 2010 and wiki will become very different. Wikipedia believes in facts and not in good vs. bad. That's the nature of any encyclopedia. You are way too focused on good and bad.

[You need to open your eyes, brother. I don't focus on good or bad. You see them as good (for WL and LC) and bad(against WL and LC). You see the world as black and white. I focus on Christ and his message of love.]

I know you and user "Localchurch" are from the same geographical area but don't paint everyone in the local churches with the same brush. People are different and saints are different. You may have become too smart in the worldly sense but you have lost your Christian flavor.

[My Christian flavor?! You have only tasted my Wiki flavor. I am a Christian holding to the faith once delivered to the saints, born by the Spirit and made eternally a member of Christ's body, tempered and blended together with the other members of his body probably before you were born. Then when the Lord was living richly in me bearing fruit and nurishing saints, the Local Church changed and morphed into something I couldn't recognize as of Christ.... So I prayed and felt led of the Lord to leave. I am not sad about it. It was difficult at the time, but I quietly left so as to disturb no one. They pleaded with me to come back. I had no idea of a "fermenting rebellion" nor did I have any contact with anyone. Yet I was "quarantined" before there was such a word, and I was called "one with Satan" publically, and today on the internet you and your friend Robert place me in the fermenting rebellion untruthfully and unrighteously. But thank you for the "smart" compliment. You are right, not all the local church members are the same. I think you are purple and Robert is pink. I am not responding to local church members, but local church description or lack thereof. I am not here as a "Christian", I am here editing articles to make them less POV.]

Sorry to say this brother however, you both are so reactive. I have also made mistakes in reacting to your reactions. Oh, we are not the perfect people here but only forgiven. It is hard for me to find you as a Christian brother in Christ.

[This is a serious problem that you have. You are so judgmental. Wow! Even Christ said let them grow until the harvest lest you root up the wheat. You say you want to receive all Christians, yet you doubt those who are Christians when they plainly tell you so. You rely insted on your sense. Wow! Doesn't that make it difficult if not impossible for you to stand on the ground of oneness accepting all Christians when you go by your sense. I suppose it is the same sense that made the BB quarantine TC. You are moving away from the simplicity in Christ. That is a serious problem, brother. Deal with it. Can you really believe that a born again Christian, 19 years in the LC, prayreading the Bible, leading young people and all of my family to Christ, nourishing and building up the Body could not be a brother? Just remember, we are not editing here based on our Christian background. I think as far as Wiki goes, that fact that you can't sense I am a brother is good. It shows my NPOV. But for you to write me personally and based on my Wiki writing respond as an avid local church member by saying that you don't think I am a Christian is, well, unbelievable.]

In humility, I may be wrong. If I am wrong, please become a "Christian" first and a "position" second.

[No, that is your POV. Here I prefer to be a NPOV.}

Also, I am not teaching here, all these words I always apply to myself as well. As I said earlier, I am learning. But rooted in Christ. [Good for you.]

Lot of my of earlier edits are inclined towards the more positive aspect of local churches because when I started editing these articles, these were was 100% negative. Even filled with lies that someone has four wives; ... people there make money and abuse; this and that story. Does that sound wikipedia to you?

[No, and you have never heard me say such lies.]

If you like, go see in history sections from 2005 - 2007. The articles as it stand now is mostly written by me and few other neutral non-local church editors. We have always tried to include facts whether positive or negative into the articles. If you can better balance my editing -- that would be awesome.

[That's what I have been doing, but you don't seem to care until I take your POV. By the way, a lot of what you write has really bad subject/verb agreement. You should have written, "The articles as they stand now are.... This is not meant as a personal attack, but to help with your public writing on Wiki.]

But if you are trying to destroy it and turn the article into a newspaper, other editors and I will always give our feedback and try to discuss with you.

[Please help yourself. Specifics are always appreciated rather than these general discussions spewing your accusations and POV. I am not trying to destroy. I read the Wiki rules on books and did not think your justification for writing a book report on Wiki was in accordance with Wiki standard for books and still don't. That's the only thing I have tried to delete. The rest of my edits have been 1)Corrections on your grammar, 2)Rearranging your discussions to make them flow better and be better organized, 3)Add important missing sections.]

I am here that proves a lot of things.

[Like what?]

There are thousands of educated and learned believers in this country meeting as a local churches. Do you see those people on Wiki? They are NOT here because they are spending their time at some other place with other priorities. I have my priorities too. These articles are lower in this regard. Sorry, I can't be too involved with you. But let me tell you, tomorrow one another smart person will come and will battle with you and these articles will never get better, neutral, and more factual.

[I am not sure what you are saying here, but thanks for trying.]

You need to learn. I know I need to learn as well. I am learning. So you do whatever you wish to do. If your works are good it will stand for a while on Wiki. If it is hateful it will not survive for long. Nothing stands for a long on wiki unless some real scholars get involved in the articles and then protect it from further editing.

[Ok]

Brother, do as you like but make sure the works you are doing are right and the things you are writing are neutral when read by an outsider and general audience. For example, I read your recent edits on controversy page, please read that again and see if that sounds neutral from a third person perspective.

[Thanks, I will try.]

Finally, Wiki guildlines strictly prohibits editors from taking names of living person in NEGATIVITY unless you have a neutral third party sources available to cite your edits. The paragraph on BB falls into this category.

[Is it negative?]

Best Regards, HopeChrist (talk) 19:30, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your time. May your future be bright. Appropo (talk) 04:11, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I enjoyed our conversation dear Appropo. I feel much better now. I was able to touch your heart. I am learning. Thank you, HopeChrist (talk) 07:02, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AfD, per your request

Hey, I nominated An Autobiography of a Person in the Spirit, because I believe that is the most appropriate way to have the article deleted. It doesn't meet any of the qualifications for speedy deletion, and it's deletion might be somewhat controversial so I don't think a proposed deletion would be appropriate either. Go to Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/An_Autobiography_of_a_Person_in_the_Spirit if you want to participate in the deletion discussion... but you can be a little more brief than I see you have been on the talk page. ;) Khalfani Khaldun 03:32, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Problems with upload of File:Headcovering.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Headcovering.jpg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from, who created it, or what the copyright status is. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

To add this information, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 08:06, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Recovery version

I ran a check on the organization background. It looks like it is their usual practice to use a lot of peacock terms in their propaganda, just like multi-level marketing. It looks like they have been mind-controlled. That person editing the recovery version article must be one of them. I am thinking how to make them understand the NPOV in Wikipedia. If it fails, we should submit the article for deletion. Ancos (talk) 07:16, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Appropo (talk) 15:54, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The guess about mind control is confirmed. The person resolves to hostility after a few attempts. Ancos (talk) 17:32, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:02, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:08, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]