Revision as of 21:37, 23 November 2007 editUserDoe (talk | contribs)3,068 edits →Re: New Covenant reversion: new section← Previous edit | Revision as of 16:22, 7 December 2007 edit undoSkyWriter (talk | contribs)Pending changes reviewers3,790 edits We need to find some agreement and not get into a reversion war.Next edit → | ||
Line 87: | Line 87: | ||
<b><i><font color="FF3300">]</font> <font color="#99FF33">]</font></i></b><sub> ]</sub><sup>]</sup> 21:37, 23 November 2007 (UTC) | <b><i><font color="FF3300">]</font> <font color="#99FF33">]</font></i></b><sub> ]</sub><sup>]</sup> 21:37, 23 November 2007 (UTC) | ||
==Not Views, Methodology== | |||
Lisa -- we're both observant, and we would both rather Messianics stop creating confusion. We just have different methodologies. To me, clarity is the solution. To you, silencing is the solution. One of the main sociological markers for a cult is term switching -- using one group's terms with radically different meanings. Mormons will say that they believe in the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. But they absolutely do NOT believe in the trinity. They are polytheistic and will say so internally. What's the solution? To brand them a cult? Of course not. To pretend they don't exist? No. To define all the terms side by side? Absolutely. You see it as advertisement and I see it as exposure. However, I DO think that the table with the Muslim column belongs in interfaith and the Messianic one should stay in the Messianic category. I didn't promote it to interfaith, and now that the Muslim one exists, it is a much better table for that arena.] (]) 16:22, 7 December 2007 (UTC) |
Revision as of 16:22, 7 December 2007
Editing concerns
- You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content which gains a consensus among editors. --Kukini 19:18, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
- My apologies. I didn't know how to report him, so I thought that taking care of his mess would be helpful. I'll stop, since his vandalism has been noticed by you and others. LisaLiel 19:21, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
Welcome to Misplaced Pages!!!
|
Re: New Covenant reversion
Hello,
when you are removing large parts of an article without explaining it in the edit summary, then it could happen that another editor might see this as vandalism. Especially Recent changes patrollers like me will always look for an explanation for the removal of content. If there is no explanation for the removal of content, another editor will most likely revert the edit. You did not explain the removal see diff so I reverted it to the previous revision. This is not vandalism. The removal of content is.
Next time, simply explain the removal of content in the edit summary.
Hope this helps.
Regards
User Doe ☻T 21:37, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
Not Views, Methodology
Lisa -- we're both observant, and we would both rather Messianics stop creating confusion. We just have different methodologies. To me, clarity is the solution. To you, silencing is the solution. One of the main sociological markers for a cult is term switching -- using one group's terms with radically different meanings. Mormons will say that they believe in the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. But they absolutely do NOT believe in the trinity. They are polytheistic and will say so internally. What's the solution? To brand them a cult? Of course not. To pretend they don't exist? No. To define all the terms side by side? Absolutely. You see it as advertisement and I see it as exposure. However, I DO think that the table with the Muslim column belongs in interfaith and the Messianic one should stay in the Messianic category. I didn't promote it to interfaith, and now that the Muslim one exists, it is a much better table for that arena.Tim (talk) 16:22, 7 December 2007 (UTC)