Misplaced Pages

User talk:Seraphimblade

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by ShepBot (talk | contribs) at 23:53, 16 March 2009 (Delivering Signpost). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 23:53, 16 March 2009 by ShepBot (talk | contribs) (Delivering Signpost)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

This is a Misplaced Pages user talk page.
This is not an encyclopedia article or the talk page for an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Misplaced Pages, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user whom this page is about may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Misplaced Pages. The original talk page is located at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Seraphimblade.
This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.
Archive
Archives

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Please do be nice.

Regarding disputed sources

Hi there, I have a question about this page:

http://en.wikipedia.org/Jehovah%27s_Witnesses_and_blood_transfusions

This article is often edited by the same person, and many of the references that are cited are not public, verifiable sources. For example, references numbered as follows:

19, 36, 39, 42, 46, 47, 59, 60, 97, 98

Those above numbered references as cited in the above article are "letters" written from one party to another. While these may be "authoritative" to the parties involved, they do not constitute publicly verifiable third party facts, so I feel they should not be included. Thus, by extension, the information that these letters support should also be removed, as they would then be without citation and would by default become the opinion of the editor, and nothing more. Just as a reminder, the wikipedia guidelines state:

"Articles should rely on reliable, third-party, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy."

So, I find the reference to the "letters" inappropriate.

As a side point, the person involved in adding these references is known online as someone who is a former member of Jehovah's Witnesses and does not agree with Watchtower and Jehovah's Witness teachings, therefore I feel it is not appropriate for this person to be allowed to continue editing articles on JWs and the Watchtower. I personally made a few edits to some of the material in that article because it was distorted and biased compared to what was stated in the actual cited references. (As an even further side point, I have reason to believe that the person involved in making those edits is in actual fact the same person that the Watchtower wrote to in citation #46 -- but I realize that could be irrelevant.)

Thank you for your assistance and any further information you can provide on this issue and how we can ensure that this article is not being edited by biased, self-serving individuals.

Misplaced Pages Signpost — February 23, 2009

This week, the Misplaced Pages Signpost published volume 5, issue 8, which includes these articles:

The kinks are still being worked out in a new design for these Signpost deliveries, and we apologize for the plain format for this week.

Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 21:52, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Last warning

I've already consulted an admin so I hope for you your warning will not turn into a boomerang code.

This issue has always been debatable as you can see and it was heavily discussed on several talk pages, including the FAC and the article talk page (where it was perfectly proved that the images do NOT violate the criteria and they are NOT replaceable). You left the discussions with the last words being ours (of Blofeld and mine), you have to fight all those who supported the inclusion of these images at FAC, and the other discussions it had. Then you have to remove such images from such articles as Diane Keaton, Cillian Murphy etc.

You did not explain why these images violate WP:NFCC, while I did explain why they don't and how they make it fulfilled. The last word i not yours. You are literally nobody to take the decisions. And therefore I warn you here:

Please stop! If you continue to remove images against consensus and policies, without discussing it properly, you will be blocked from editing. Shahid • 06:18, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages Signpost — 2 March 2009

This week, the Misplaced Pages Signpost published volume 5, issue 9, which includes these articles:

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 08:41, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages Signpost — 9 March 2009

This week, the Misplaced Pages Signpost published volume 5, issue 10, which includes these articles:

Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 00:46, 10 March 2009 (UTC)


Misplaced Pages Signpost — 16 March 2009

Unsubscribe · Single-page · Full edition » The Misplaced Pages Signpost  — 16 March 2009

Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 23:53, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

User talk:Seraphimblade Add topic