User talk:BlackCab

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from User talk:LTSally)
Jump to: navigation, search

A barnstar for you![edit]

Surreal Barnstar Hires.png The Surreal Barnstar
This barnstar is given to You as my grateful appreciation for your tireless contributing in former times and by adding special flavor to WP:JW community, particularly with unique style of cooperation and behavior and solely by acting as sort of wildcard and doing acts toward better future and higher quality of articles in English Wikipedia. Sincerely ♥ FaktneviM (talk) 17:26, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Well Deserved Barnstar[edit]

Compass barnstar.png The Guidance Barnstar
Just wanted to give this to you for your efforts to improve my knowledge of JW's, especially the books you referenced. Vyselink (talk) 19:49, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

You're very welcome. I found the books very helpful in explaining a religion I'd joined decades earlier. Everyone should be entitled to make an informed decision, so I think it's important to share that information. I just wish I'd had it when I considered joining. BlackCab (talk) 21:11, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Resilient Barnstar Hires.png The Resilient Barnstar
I know we don't see eye to eye on a lot but I thought you comported yourself well at ANi and that this was well earned. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 06:18, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
Thank you. It all seemed to turn out good in the end. By coincidence, my Twitter feed today provided me with what is supposedly an ancient Chinese proverb: If you must bow, bow low. It seemed rather apt. BlackCab (TALK) 12:40, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Editor of the Week[edit]

Editor of the week barnstar.svg Editor of the Week
Your ongoing efforts to improve the encyclopedia have not gone unnoticed: You have been selected as Editor of the Week, for constant quest for neutrality in Jehovah's Witness articles. Thank you for the great contributions! (courtesy of the Wikipedia Editor Retention Project)

User:John Carter submitted the following nomination for Editor of the Week:

I nominate BlackCab. Along with Jeffro77, BlackCab he has been one of basically two people who have worked very hard to keep our content related to the Jehovah's Witnesses at a high quality level. As someone who has been watching that content for years now I know how hard it must be for both of them. He has 7 years of experience and some 9000 edits. He also contributes significantly in other areas. We haven't always agreed because I make mistakes myself but his endeavors in that area have been and I hope will continue to be among the most reliable informed and fair.

You can copy the following text to your user page to display a user box proclaiming your selection as Editor of the Week:

{{subst:Wikipedia:WikiProject Editor Retention/Editor of the Week/Recipient user box}}
Project editor retention.svg
Editor of the week.svg
Flag of New Zealand.svg
Flag of New Zealand
Editor of the Week
for the week beginning December 14, 2014
An informed and fair contributor
Recognized for
Notable work(s)
the Jehovah's Witnesses
Nomination page

Thanks again for your efforts! Go Phightins! 19:16, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

  • Well done. Congratulations! ```Buster Seven Talk 14:45, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Your amazing[edit]

Trophy.png Genius
You are a disgrace to writers and Wikipedia. As a former Jehovah's Witness you wrote a completely biased anti-Jehovah's Witness article which deliberately misleads readers. You quoted anti-Jehovah's Witness historians and writers throughout your article. Namuh007 (talk) 05:52, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
You seem to have an altered sense of reality in which you pretend that things you dislike don't exist. I feel a bit sorry for you—but only a bit. And it should be "you're" (you are) not "your". BlackCab (TALK) 06:00, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

Dear Wiki:

This article is edited by Wiki writer BlackCab who is an ex Jehovah's Witness. It also has many references by James Penton also an ex Jehovah's Witness. Noted Historian Detlef Garbe in his book 'Between Resistance and Martyrdom' said of James Penton "His work has not been taken into consideration... His statements, source selection, and interpretation reflect a deep-seated aversion against this religious association, of which he had once been a member." Thus it's accuracy is called into question." This seems the case with all Wiki articles on Jehovah's Witnesses. They reflect a deep seated aversion against this religious association of which Blackcab and Penton had once been a member. Similarly, you cannot make any edits in this article without BlackCab changing or stopping them. This article like all articles on Jehovah's Witnesses in Wiki should have been written by a writer who has had absolutely no affiliation past or present with Jehovah's witnesses and thus no bias. It calls into question the accuracy of all other information found in Wiki. Please keep the honesty and accuracy of Wiki intact by having all the articles on Jehovah's Witnesses rewritten by someone who has absolutely no affiliation past or present with Jehovah's Witnesses and thus no bias.

Bruce — Preceding unsigned comment added by Namuh007 (talkcontribs) 02:53, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

Sockpuppet reported at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Namuh007.--Jeffro77 (talk) 05:24, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

Sorry for the revert[edit]

Looking at it again that was definitely over-linking. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 00:51, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

The citations were vastly excessive. I removed them to make the article easier to read, while still retaining sources; you reinstated them. An idiotic move, but I'm sure you think it achieved something. BlackCab (TALK) 02:32, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
I simple hid them rather than removing them completely which results in the same outcome for the reader. Havn't finished yet but will. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 02:47, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:CD cover of Hands of Glory by Andrew Bird.jpg[edit]


Thanks for uploading File:CD cover of Hands of Glory by Andrew Bird.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:35, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

Image is a duplicate and is not required. BlackCab (TALK) 03:41, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

Editor of the Week : nominations needed![edit]

The Editor of the Week initiative has been recognizing editors since 2013 for their hard work and dedication. Editing Wikipedia can be disheartening and tedious at times; the weekly Editor of the Week award lets its recipients know that their positive behaviour and collaborative spirit is appreciated. The response from the honorees has been enthusiastic and thankful.

The list of nominees is running short, and so new nominations are needed for consideration. Have you come across someone in your editing circle who deserves a pat on the back for improving article prose regularly, making it easier to understand? Or perhaps someone has stepped in to mediate a contentious dispute, and did an excellent job. Do you know someone who hasn't received many accolades and is deserving of greater renown? Is there an editor who does lots of little tasks well, such as cleaning up citations?

Please help us thank editors who display sustained patterns of excellence, working tirelessly in the background out of the spotlight, by submitting your nomination for Editor of the Week today!

Sent on behalf of Buster Seven Talk for the Editor of the Week initiative by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:18, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

Modified comment[edit]

I would prefer not to include reference to my website in Wikipedia discussions. It isn't generally appropriate to refer to editors' other online identities, and whilst you haven't done so explicitly or with any bad intent, it is almost certainly going to be seen by some editors as inappropriate promotion at the Talk page. I have therefore redacted it from your comment. Thanks.--Jeffro77 (talk) 07:58, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

I'd be surprised if anyone took my comment to be promotion, and since both "identities" have the same name I was giving nothing away ... but your call. BlackCab (TALK) 10:27, 30 August 2016 (UTC)