User talk:Radath

AWAY ON VACATION

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. The following links will help you begin editing on Wikipedia:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Editing tutorial
• Picture tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Naming conventions
• Simplified Manual of Style

Please bear these points in mind while editing Wikipedia

• Respect copyrights – do not copy and paste text or images directly from other websites.
• Maintain a neutral point of view – this is one of Wikipedia's core policies.
• Take particular care while adding biographical material about a living person to any Wikipedia page and follow Wikipedia's Biography of Living Persons policy. Particularly, controversial and negative statements should be referenced with multiple reliable sources.
• No edit warring or sock puppetry.
• If you are testing, please use the Sandbox to do so.
• Do not add troublesome content to any article, such as: copyrighted text, libel, advertising or promotional messages, and text that is not related to an article's subject. Deliberately adding such content or otherwise editing articles maliciously is considered vandalism; doing so will result in your account or IP being blocked from editing.
• Do not use talk pages as discussion or forum pages as Wikipedia is not a forum.

The Wikipedia tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and discussion pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~ (the software will replace them with your signature and the date). Again, welcome! Dougweller (talk) 15:09, 6 February 2014 (UTC)Reply

Please read WP:EL. We should not be linking to bookstores, blogs (unless Kuhn has one), personal websites or YouTube channels, etc. And we can never link to copyright material except on the copyright owners official site unless it is absolutely clear that there is no copyright violation. We also do not use searches as sources. You probably should read WP:RS. And finally, see WP:Credential to understand why I removed 'Dr.' and 'PhD. Thanks. There's a steep learning curve and we all make mistakes, even after 100,000 edits. Dougweller (talk) 15:14, 6 February 2014 (UTC)Reply

The only way you could say how many books are on Amazon and Google, and I'm pretty dubious about even that, is if you could find a source that meets our criteria at WP:VERIFY and WP:RS, and I don't think you could. Even then you'd have to probably attribute it - Joe Smith said... - and probably date it. Searches like this are really very unreliable. It's not an uncommon question. You might wonder whether or not you should believe me, and so we have a noticeboard where people can ask questions about sourcing - it's at WP:RSN. I think you'd get the same answer there. Dougweller (talk) 16:22, 6 February 2014 (UTC)Reply

Much better, but 'freely available' sort of implies everyone can see it, and it's only available in some countries. Dougweller (talk) 17:16, 6 February 2014 (UTC)Reply

Very glad you asked. Since you will need the input of other editors (this is a long fought over article, and believe me you will need agreement - I don't get involvced), use the talk page. I'd try to make suggestions incrementally myself, but that's up to you. But you do need to understand that the article is contentious and there are some very experienced editors there. Dougweller (talk) 16:16, 9 February 2014 (UTC)Reply

Thanks again for the advice, Dougweller. After 4 days of compromises on the Talk page, I was finally able to post a new into which is both shorter and clearer. and I just see that the person who put up the dispute box at the top has removed it. Radath (talk) 14:46, 21 February 2014 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for uploading File:Photo of Tom Harpur by Hugh Wesley.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the file description page and add the text {{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
2. On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. SuperMarioMan 00:58, 22 February 2014 (UTC)Reply

I am trying to rectify the situation and am looking for advice on a proposed email for the photographer at WP:MCQ. Radath (talk) 17:23, 26 February 2014 (UTC)Reply

ww2censor (talk) 16:50, 25 February 2014 (UTC)Reply

And again. ww2censor (talk) 20:37, 26 February 2014 (UTC)Reply

• Thank you for your message. The text of the second email seems fine. The issue will probably be resolved more quickly if Mr Wesley emails [email protected] (note that this is different from [email protected]) directly; if you want, you could forward your correspondence to the same address just to get things moving. Once either or both of these actions has been taken, add the coding "{{OTRS pending}}" to the top of the file description page to postpone the image's deletion. A volunteer will then confirm receipt of permission through the OTRS system and remove the deletion tag. SuperMarioMan 21:09, 26 February 2014 (UTC)Reply

A Christian POV pusher keeps on inserting a large section of Christian nonsense at the Bart Ehrman page in clear violation of WP:BLP. Similarly on the Richard Carrier page, he makes all sorts of unfounded assertions in violation of WP:BLP. Please help at both of these pages. RosylynGrock (talk) 03:23, 12 March 2014 (UTC)Reply

Just to let you know that I follow the stuff from a distance, since I don't have time to dive in and study the matter seriously. But I wanted you to know that I am very interested in it and I follow the developments. I think you have done great work in the area since you started, and even though I myself do not have time at the moment to help, I wanted to encourage you to continue. All the work you have done I intend to study much more in depth some time... I hope you can keep it up! But thank you very much for all you have done so far. warshy ^(¥¥) 16:06, 15 March 2014 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, Warshy. It was nice of you to to write the note. I'm having fun with Wikipedia, but it sure takes up a lot of time and mental energy. Jump in the debate if you ever have time. Radath (talk) 23:58, 15 March 2014 (UTC)Reply

Yes, it does take quite a bit of time and mental energy as you say. I hope I can get to it sooner than later. In the meantime, I hope you can hang in there and keep up the great work. But I believe you have already accomplished something here so far with your hard and sincere work, and I congratulate you for that. warshy ^(¥¥) 01:44, 16 March 2014 (UTC)Reply

I must say that the Christ myth page has majorly improved so thanks for the effort. As someone who struggled with the page for a long time I can personally attest to how confusing the material can be as to just what the Christ Myth theory even is. I even through together a little FAQ on the whole mess if you are interested in the problems we had in the past and where they seem to be coming from.--BruceGrubb (talk) 11:07, 18 March 2014 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for your kind words and for sending me your interesting Christ myth FAQ, BruceGrubb. I have received a lot of positive feedback from both sides about the additional information and neutral tone of the current article compared to how it was on January 23 when I started making changes. I actually have to thank DougWelller for his excellent advice to seek consensus on the Talk page before I proposed the new lede and summary paragraphs. Early on, my edits were criticized by another contributor, but I quoted the model for consensus from his User page, and the tone has been much more pleasant ever since. I think the collaborative compromises and overall friendly tone we have recently achieved on the CMT Talk page are also making the article better. Radath (talk) 23:54, 19 March 2014 (UTC)Reply

Been watching the discussion on CMT and it looks like you are getting frustrated. You've done alot of good so please "let not your heart be troubled" (John 14:1). Presume you aren't a Christian, but still think it applies. Take care - Ckruschke (talk) 18:12, 20 March 2014 (UTC)CkruschkeReply

Thanks Ckruschke. I am a former Christian who has read the Gospels, so I appreciate your comment. Radath (talk) 18:15, 20 March 2014 (UTC)Reply

Can I ask you why you are a "former"? Ckruschke (talk) 18:20, 20 March 2014 (UTC)CkruschkeReply

I have a brief overview of my religious journey (or descent) on my user page. Radath (talk) 20:04, 20 March 2014 (UTC)Reply

Many former Christians have similar stories. I've heard many people (and several pastors) say that Christianity would be great if it wasn't for all the Christians - we are after all, all too human sometimes. Too often we put our faith in people, and let them fail us or lead us astray, and not enough of our faith in the thing that matters - Jesus Christ (not saying that this is what you did - just my observation from talking to many injured Christians and atheists). I was there too - the two people in my life who were "Christians" when I was growing up was a friend (who behaved worse than me) and my Grandparents (who treated my brother and I like strangers) so I had a very negative viewpoint of it until I went to college. I have a cartoon in my office that depicts that Garden of Eden with Adam and Eve with a voice from above that says "Remember this is all an allegory" - kind of clever juxtaposition. I'm a firm Creationist, but I don't hit people over the head with it as I feel that you can believe what you want (even if I think you are wrong). As you probably know, there is a good % of people in the church that believe in some form of evolution or another. I prefer to not "major in the minors" like picking fights in arbitrary sidelights of the Bible (stupid/unknowable stuff like how many angels will fit on the head of a pin or what body of water did Moses really cross) and instead try to focus on ultimately what counts - whether we have Jesus in our lives to wash away our sins. The rest is window dressing - although I still take time to argue about it on Wikipedia...  ;-)

Thanks for the opportunity to talk. Have a great weekend! Yours - Ckruschke (talk) 13:28, 21 March 2014 (UTC)CkruschkeReply

Hoping everyone will support the compromise I have proposed. Radath (talk) 18:14, 22 March 2014 (UTC)Reply

A content dispute resolution process has been started at [1]. Please participate and contribute to a resolution. Wdford (talk) 16:22, 24 March 2014 (UTC)Reply

The following message left on my talk page may be of interest to you too:

"This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help find a resolution. The thread is "Historicity of Jesus". Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! MrScorch6200 (talk | ctrb) 20:36, 3 August 2014 (UTC)"Reply

Martijn Meijering (talk) 00:44, 4 August 2014 (UTC)Reply

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) 17:06, 24 November 2015 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for uploading File:The Pagan Christ original cover 2004.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 section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 21:45, 23 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

The article K. L. Noll has been proposed for deletion. The proposed deletion notice added to the article should explain why.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion based on established criteria.

If the proposed deletion has already been carried out, you may request undeletion of the article at any time.

This is an automated notification. Please refer to the page's history for further information. DatBot (talk) 00:31, 31 March 2026 (UTC)Reply