User talk:VisionaryGuy

Welcome!

Hello, VisionaryGuy, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. 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 name on talk pages using four tildes ~~~~, which will automatically produce your name and the date.

If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome!

– Fayenatic London 13:05, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

January 2014[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. We welcome and appreciate your contributions, including your edits to E-Sword, but we cannot accept original research. Original research also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you.

Please note that personal blogs are not considered reliable sources. – Fayenatic London 13:06, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please note my source is the NASB Bible. — Preceding unsigned comment added by VisionaryGuy (talk • contribs) 21:23, 2 January 2014

These edits are not encyclopedic and have been reverted again. Please see WP:3RR. Rmhermen (talk) 22:00, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies, VisionaryGuy, I was thinking of Special:Contributions/Eyesonchrist when I referred to blogs. However, it is also considered original research to give your own doctrinal interpretations using scriptures as citations. In an article about doctrine, interpretations should be cited from recognised commentators, e.g. official denominational positions or commentators who are notable enough to have their own articles. However, in an article that is not about doctrine, it is not appropriate to set out the case for or against any position, except when quoting or summarising what WP:RS have said on the subject of the article.

It is noticeable that you have some common interest with the other editor that I just mentioned. If you are by any chance the same person, please own up and then desist from using this account at once. Wikipedia has a very strict policy against the use of multiple accounts except in specified exceptional cases. Abuse of this, especially after you have been made aware of the rule, can result in all contributions of both accounts being deleted. If you are a separate person, please do not take offence that I pointed out this policy. – Fayenatic London 00:02, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please see discussion at Talk:E-Sword. Christopher Rath (talk) 14:16, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you are the same editor and no longer wish to use Eyesonchrist (talk · contribs), please just say so here, and we will block the old account without penalty. – Fayenatic London 22:55, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I had to get rid of my old website for lack of money to keep it up, and I changed names along with that, so yes Eyesonchrist (talk · contribs) was my old name.

OK, thanks for being open about that. – Fayenatic London 07:30, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User account switch, June 2014[edit]

This is the page I asked you to change my account from Eyesonchrist Eyesonchrist (talk · contribs) to VisionaryGuy VisionaryGuy (talk · contribs), so I assume this is the page I can ask you to change it back to Eyesonchrist (talk · contribs) from.

I'd like to go back to Eyesonchrist Eyesonchrist (talk · contribs) as my username (I originally meant it to be eyesonChrist but it needed a capital first letter I think), but for Legal reasons I need it to go back to exactly what it was, Eyesonchrist (talk · contribs). Can you please make the switch for me and let me know when it's done. — Preceding unsigned comment added by VisionaryGuy (talk • contribs) 19:35, 8 June 2014‎

Done – Fayenatic London 09:23, 9 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]