User talk:Happ
Edits to Liturgical calendar (Lutheran)
[edit]Hello
In reviewing the recent edits you made to Liturgical calendar (Lutheran), I have decided it best to revert to the last prior edit, dated 13 April 2009. My reasons are as follows:
- 1. Most of the edits are superfluous or otherwise unnecessary. For example, it is felt unnecessary to add "Feasts" to "Festivals," particularly when both Evangelical Lutheran Worship and Lutheran Worship and their predecessors use "Festival" as a designated title. Thus, for English speaking Lutherans, "Festival" is proper, and not "Feast." Furthermore, it is felt unnecessary to specify "Blessed Virgin Mary" at every instance, in some cases adding the Virgin where she was not found in the earlier revisions. While piety may dictate mention and commemoration of the Virgin first before the other saints, it is hardly essential that she receive first mention in every instance ahead of the company of Apostles OR be identified with her honorary epitaphs. If there is a good reason to make this so, I'm willing to hear it, but I can think of none thus far. I am also unclear as to why minor items such as "individuals" must be changed to "saints."
- 2. Several of the edits changed the sense of the text to something else entirely. In some instances, these edits not only change the article as written, but change the content of the cited source. One example would be where
- "However, popular devotions such as the blessing of palms or the imposition of ashes were suppressed in most church orders..."
- was changed to
- "However, popular devotions such as the blessing of palms or the imposition of ashes were suppressed in some church orders..."
- the latter of which clearly changes the meaning of the former text. It is especially egregious since the original line was supported with a reference, thus the edits change not only the article but the supposed statement of the reference as well.
If you would like to discuss why his edits are essential and an objective improvement on the article, contributing to its readability and factuality, then I will be quite happy to see them reinstated; please see the article's talk page for discussion. However, as they are now, there is little reason for them and in some instances these edits falsify the article, so they have been reverted. -- jackturner3 (talk) 13:53, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
GA review of Eucharist_in_the_Lutheran_Church
[edit]See here. Please review the concerns I have raised about elevating this article to GA status. --Nemonoman (talk) 13:00, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
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) 13:51, 24 November 2015 (UTC)