| Revision as of 00:40, 21 December 2010 editMattinbgn (talk | contribs)Administrators55,992 edits →sockpuppets: new section← Previous edit | Revision as of 18:31, 24 December 2010 edit undoScoobertjoo (talk | contribs)49 edits →BC, AD: new sectionNext edit → | ||
| Line 57: | Line 57: | ||
| Given your intervention at ], the discussion at ] might be of interest to you. -- ] (]) 00:40, 21 December 2010 (UTC) | Given your intervention at ], the discussion at ] might be of interest to you. -- ] (]) 00:40, 21 December 2010 (UTC) | ||
| == BC, AD == | |||
| The term "Common Era" (CE) is an anti-Christian attempt to conceal that Jesus is the historical basis for the primary calendar dating system. "Common Era" has no real meaning, and even the origin of this term is unclear. A later edition (11th) defines it as the Christian Era. The first recorded use of the phrase "common era" was in 1708. | |||
| The established calendar dating system, which uses the 'AD' notation, is based on the calculations of Dionysius Exiguus for the birthyear of Jesus relative to the foundation of Rome. At the time, dates used the 'AD' system instituted by pagan and murderer Emperor Diocletian, which used his own date of birth as year 0. Because Dionysius Exiguus in the year 525 wanted to end the memorialization of an evil man who persecuted Christians, he invented a new numbering system based on his calculations of the birth year of Jesus Christ. | |||
| While the use of the phrase "Common Era" has existed for hundreds of years, only recently have politically correct liberals attempted to replace all instances of 'AD' with 'CE.' The original use of 'CE' was to avoid the common practice of countries basing their dates on the birthdate of one of their rules, i.e. the "regal era" from the birthdate of Jesus Christ, which belonged to all men "the common era." While use of "Common Era" attempts to erase recognition for the Christian basis of the calendar, there are no similar attempts to erase non-Christian religious names from the calendar, such as the days of the week named after Norse gods. Numerous texts, particularly schoolbooks, have replaced "B.C./A.D." with "Common Era" symbols over the past decade. | |||
Revision as of 18:31, 24 December 2010
 Archives |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 31 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
Edmund Fitzgerald
I did not intend the information you deleted on the SS Edmund Fitzgerald as advertisement. I am not a member of the theatre company or the author. I saw the play this weekend and liked how they respectfully made this historical & tragic event personal in this play. I cite everything as a reference librarian so I inserted several links. Please reconsider its deletion or making a one line note to show this play as an example of history being woven into popular culture. --Stridster (talk) 01:21, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
- I'm sorry to have expressed myself so ungenerously. Unfortunately, there's no way to alter an edit summary once made. (All the more reason for me to have been more temperate in my remarks.) I still the think the play has not gained enough notice to be mentioned in the article, however. Misplaced Pages should really follow, not lead, the coverage of new events. --Steven J. Anderson (talk) 01:37, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
- Stridster, thanks for your contribution. Our concern is that we have to limit these somehow.....otherwise there are too many, and most with not enough notability and thus undue weight and borderline regarding being germane. We should noodle on your "one line" idea. Thanks again. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 02:01, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
Jew Watch
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
—Preceding unsigned comment added by Martin Hal-fead (talk • contribs) 00:06, 24 November 2010
Thanks
Thanks for correcting my edit on Talk:Henry Makow. I had a misunderstanding of the issue. Borock (talk) 17:30, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
Please reinsert link that you removed from Law of identity
You know apparently nothing about the subject, and you are only making biased religious judgements based on your faith. Please stop your vandalism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hofman stern (talk • contribs) 00:27, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
Talk:James Randi
Regarding the personal insults you expressed at Talk:James Randi, please do not attack other editors. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. If you continue this behavior, you may be blocked from editing. Thank you. Nightscream (talk) 02:00, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
- This is your second warning for violating WP:Civility, given your statements to User:Kazuba here and here. Please read WP:Civility carefully and adhere to it. If you continue to level personal insults at other editors who disagree with you, you risk being blocked from editing. Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 13:21, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
Template:Religious text primary
A TFD has been opened on Template:Religious text primary. The TfD was opened on 2 December; so is due to close in two days time. Notification being sent to all participants in the previous discussion Misplaced Pages:Templates_for_deletion/Log/2008_July_30#Template:BibleAsFact. Jheald (talk) 23:31, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
James Randi talk page
I know it's easy to get annoyed by users who don't seem to care about or understand policies here, but it's really not worth risking a block. There are (around, don't know how accurate that tool is) 255 editors watching the article, and I doubt many of them would agree with Kazuba, so certainly someone else will take over when you feel you can no longer assume good faith. Cheers, Six words (talk) 14:05, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
Book Of Exodus
You and another user noted that my contribution was fringe material. Where would this material go within Misplaced Pages? Does Wiki not allow for non-mainstream, alternative viewpoints within the Exodus section? I'm not saying I agree, but I don't see why deleting an afro-centric source is ok. --User:Hillis3000 —Preceding undated comment added 13:15, 15 December 2010 (UTC).
You may have missed
http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=List_of_places_named_after_Richard_Nixon&action=history - there seems to be no open evidence of the proof of poor david (as I tend think of york71) - is it obvious he is trying every trick to get back on - stay on - that sock investigation stuff is no longer in public domain? (ie visible to david and others?) SatuSuro 02:29, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
- I'm sure I missed a few, but I reverted everything I could easily without touching good edits by others. The page you linked to has been prodded for deletion. The record of the sockpuppet investigation is here. Does that answer your question? --Steven J. Anderson (talk) 08:05, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
- No - sorry there is no sign of anything to do with it (the current sock) on this page - unless I am missing something SatuSuro 08:31, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
- That one was discussed here --Steven J. Anderson (talk) 08:35, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
- OK - I think I understand - but it must be in the ether zone as in there ther eis nothing - I suppose they expect david to see what they are up to - and need to do some behind the scene stuff i suppose SatuSuro 08:39, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
- No - sorry there is no sign of anything to do with it (the current sock) on this page - unless I am missing something SatuSuro 08:31, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
sockpuppets
Given your intervention at Australia – New Zealand relations, the discussion at Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/DavidYork71 might be of interest to you. -- Mattinbgn (talk) 00:40, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
BC, AD
The term "Common Era" (CE) is an anti-Christian attempt to conceal that Jesus is the historical basis for the primary calendar dating system. "Common Era" has no real meaning, and even the origin of this term is unclear. A later edition (11th) defines it as the Christian Era. The first recorded use of the phrase "common era" was in 1708.
The established calendar dating system, which uses the 'AD' notation, is based on the calculations of Dionysius Exiguus for the birthyear of Jesus relative to the foundation of Rome. At the time, dates used the 'AD' system instituted by pagan and murderer Emperor Diocletian, which used his own date of birth as year 0. Because Dionysius Exiguus in the year 525 wanted to end the memorialization of an evil man who persecuted Christians, he invented a new numbering system based on his calculations of the birth year of Jesus Christ.
While the use of the phrase "Common Era" has existed for hundreds of years, only recently have politically correct liberals attempted to replace all instances of 'AD' with 'CE.' The original use of 'CE' was to avoid the common practice of countries basing their dates on the birthdate of one of their rules, i.e. the "regal era" from the birthdate of Jesus Christ, which belonged to all men "the common era." While use of "Common Era" attempts to erase recognition for the Christian basis of the calendar, there are no similar attempts to erase non-Christian religious names from the calendar, such as the days of the week named after Norse gods. Numerous texts, particularly schoolbooks, have replaced "B.C./A.D." with "Common Era" symbols over the past decade.