Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 07:02, 11 December 2010

Modes of baptism

I don't understand what you mean by "I don't know of any paedobaptist denominations that even suggest that immersion or submersion should be considered, even for adult baptism." Is this quotation of any help to you? - "Baptism is performed in the most expressive way by triple immersion in the baptismal water. However, from ancient times it has also been able to be conferred by pouring the water three times over the candidate's head" (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1239). The Eastern Orthodox Church baptizes babies by threefold total immersion - something the babies generally do not find pleasant. With adults or older children, I have seen partial immersion practised in Africa, with a Greek Orthodox bishop (who stood on the bank) pouring water on people standing only about knee-deep in the water of an irrigation canal, after which those baptized were told to hunker down in the water, which added little more than the wetting of their behinds. This confirmed for me what the Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church says, when it states that partial immersion is still practised in the Eastern Church. I don't have the same certainty that this form of baptism by partial immersion is also practised in the Russian tradition (as in the Greek) within the Eastern Orthodox Church. Esoglou (talk) 14:54, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

That is helpful. Again my exposure is primarily limited to the denominations I mentioned. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 15:05, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Since I wrote the above, I have seen that you already knew about the Greek Orthodox practice for baptizing adults. Esoglou (talk) 16:49, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Only via the film, yes. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:17, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Reviews

Yes, the reviews for albums should be placed into a "reception" section with the box included, but you're not supposed to remove them entirely from the article unless you're willing to place all those reviews from the infobox into a review box. • GunMetal Angel 05:35, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Wish I could find the other album where the reviews were removed and not included in the body of the article. Thanks for clarifying. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 06:05, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Act of Depression‎ and Cries of the Past

Exactly which valid source are you referring to? No one has provided the HM source (which even the origianl editor only ever claimed said the album contained "traces of black metal"... nowhere near enough for the genre box), and I'm yet to see anything else. The Encyclopedia of CCM link didn't actually lead to a source, so is clearly not reliable. I am further confused by your talk page comment that there are sources claiming the band are "black metal", when you appear to be adding "unblack" or "deathcore". Blackmetalbaz (talk) 19:52, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Not sure what you're talking about. First HM magazine is a source on metal and hard music. Second, which Misplaced Pages guideline are you referring to that requires that source have to be specific to a genre. And third, there's no link to the Encyclopaedia of Contemporary Christian Music because it's a book. It is a WP:RS desipie not being on the web. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:58, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

So what's the quote? What is the wording in the book? Blackmetalbaz (talk) 20:00, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

responded at Talk:Cries of the Past‎. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:18, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Re: Whitecaps

Thanks for the heads up! I just noticed it was in the Portland Timbers template, so it seemed it would be adequate. Twwalter (talk) 03:26, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Walter, don't be disruptive. I'm well aware of your sympathies with regard to a merged history, but this has nothing to do with it. The template heading clearly says "Major League Soccer", and refers to the seasons the team plays in the MLS. In Vancouver's case, there is only one such season. If you want to include the other seasons, I have no issue with that, but they must be in the correct place. Why not copy what the Portland template has, instead of insisting on what is now a misleading template that suggests the 'Caps have been playing in the MLS since 1974? --Ckatz_spy 06:20, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

And I know your position as well. Why not stop trying to change something you have very little exposure to instead of trying to push your agenda? It's not a misleading template when it's reflecting the franchise's history. I know you think you're right in your misleading position, but I can't do anything to change the Whitecaps history any more than you can change the Timbers'. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 06:33, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Walter, there is no POV involved here. It is not a dispute about how to attribute the history of the team, it is simply this: the template sub-heading says "Major League Soccer" and has a section title for "seasons". The Whitecaps have yet to play a season in MLS. Look at Portland's template, which also lists seasons back to the '70s. That template correctly separates MLS seasons from the other ones. THIS IS NOT POV, and I hardly think you're about to claim that the 'Caps inaugural season in the NASL should count as an MLS season. --Ckatz_spy 06:36, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

I see what you're saying, and I also see that rather than fix it, you removed the information. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 06:39, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

The information - a string of years, only one link at that - was removed because the template did not have an appropriate field for them and they were presenting misleading information. There's no rationale for your reverts, because they simply restored the incorrect data. I have now built the appropriate section, although some of the data may need revising (honours, leagues, etc.) --Ckatz_spy 06:55, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. It wasn't misleading information to anyone except you. I will be changing your changes when I'm not as angry as I am now and when I'm not as tired either. Putting all of the previous years of the franchise's history into a single block is no better than what was there. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 07:11, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

How is it not misleading? The heading says "Major League Soccer", the row heading says "Seasons". What is a reader going to think when they see the list starting at 1974? Look at the Portland template, which is where the remodelled version comes from, if you have issues with it. --Ckatz_spy 07:19, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Ouija Board Criticism

Hi, I noticed that at some point you edited and showed an interest in the Criticism section of the Ouija article. Unfortunately, there are people strongly trying to surpress this information for some reason. I felt that it was of interest, well sourced and an important topic and tried to make a seperate page out of it. The same day I did this, it was posted for deletion. Fast work. Here is the deletion page discussion if you are still interested in the subject. Misplaced Pages:Articles_for_deletion/Ouija_Board_Criticism. Dwain (talk) 21:31, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

List of GUI Testing Tools

Hi,

I don't particularly mind - or care - that you removed the addition I entered. I was just going by the noted request - "This list is incomplete; you can help by expanding it." I don't have any relationship with the vendor or software in question and don't feel I should create a page for the product as I have no experience of it. I just thought this might be a useful addition. Oh well. Seashorewiki (talk) 23:44, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

However lists on Misplaced Pages have to have follow the rules. In short, articles have to exists and RoutineBot doesn't have an article. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:50, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Indeed it doesn't. I guess you're going to have your plate full with removing other such references to non-existent articles on other pages. Might I first draw your attention to the Porsche page with similar egregious non-links? Seashorewiki (talk) 00:09, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

But I'm not interested in Porsches. I'm barely interested in VWs =). --Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:42, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Bummer. :-/ Seashorewiki (talk) 01:57, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Codendi

Hi Walter,

I noticed that the Codendi article has disappeared as well was its mention in the table "comparaison of issue tracking". I am very disapointed about that and really don't understdand why the article of this software is so controversial whereas there are many and many articles about other softwares even written by their editors. Could you please explain me why there is such a problem and how can I remdey about it. Thanks you very much for your response, Cheers - ManonM (talk) 12:26, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Hello !Could you give me an anwser on my message please ? I can not manage to have a clear explanation of the reason of the deletion of the article about Codendi and don't know how to make it better. Thanks for your feedback and advices.ManonM —Preceding undated comment added 08:45, 22 November 2010 (UTC).

I'm not sure how I can help. There are WP:NOTABILITY guidelines. Apparently, the article you wanted to have created didn't meet that criteria. I don't think I had anything to do with the removal of the article, I just removed the link to it in the list when there wasn't an article. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:59, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Blessthefall

Please actually give sources when you're claiming that there are sources. Because many internet goers have complained about the lack of Christian lyrics on Witness. Yet I see no one calling that particular album Christian. Also, instruments in the members section is for what they do live. If he does keys and synth for albums, then those should be listed in the album article. --ҚЯĀŽΨÇÉV13 12:37, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

• http://lmpmagazine.com/2010/05/04/blessthefall-interview/
• http://www.shotmonster.com/interviews/blessthefall.html
• http://heavymetal.about.com/od/b/fr/blessthefall-witness.htm
• http://itunes.apple.com/ca/artist/blessthefall/id202971163

So we don't exclusively label them as a Christian band, they are a Christian band, even if only for historical reasons.

This discussion should have been on the article's talk page. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:57, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

• Source 1: "we started off as a christian band and everything." Very past tense.
• Source 2: "So while all the members of the band are Christian, the guys don't want to be pigeonholed as a "Christian" band." Speaks for itself.
• Source 3: The word "Christian" isn't even in the review. Seeing similar articles does not count, at all.
• Source 4: That entire article was written in or before 2008.
• So yeah, they aren't a Christian band anymore, as very clearly stated in source 2. Please don't revert this again, or it will be considered vandalism. --ҚЯĀŽΨÇÉV13 12:59, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Source 3 "See More About: * blessthefall * metalcore * christian metal..."

Source 4 also indicates that they're a Christian metal band.

They're still Christians. They're still a Christian metal band. Show me one source that says "we are not a Christian metal band". --Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:45, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Dude, when a band specifically states that they "don't want to be pigeonholed as a Christian band." Source 3 is extremely weak, and you obviously completely ignored my point on source 4, seeing as that whole article was about His Last Walk, and is no longer accurate as it is not RECENT. The lyrics "I'm right here, bitch!" aren't exactly Christian, and there aren't references to Christianity. A source stating their genre under "see more" as Christian metal is completely unreliable, as it is most likely just a tag. If it was stated in the article itself, this would be a different conversation. I'm serious, you're going to start being considered a vandal unless you give a reliable RECENT source (meaning post-Witness). --ҚЯĀŽΨÇÉV13 23:04, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

So if Buddy Holly specifically stated that he didn't want to be pigeon-holed as a Rockabilly band, would it change the fact. Stop being so obtuse. You're already a vandal because you don't have a source to remove the genre. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:40, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Your Question at the Albums Project

It's too bad you haven't gotten more response to your question from a few weeks ago, but I have responded to the best of my ability. This was your question about The Way (album). Here's a quick link. Sincerely, --DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 20:21, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Moving Delirious?

Hi, as noted in the edit summary the naming convention is Misplaced Pages:Naming conventions (music)#Bands, albums and songs. Regards memphisto 17:13, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

There are multiple songs called "Deeper" - Deeper (Delirious? song) and Deeper (Boss song). This is also why I have made Deeper (song) a disambiguation page. memphisto 18:39, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Whitecaps

Walter, regardless of whether or not you agree with the 2011 team being in a stand-alone article, it is ridiculous to insist that we cannot even link to that article. Is there really a need to act that way? I've self-reverted back to the edit immediately prior to my initial change, and now deeply regret trying to improve it as it was certainly not worth the grief. You can add the page to your WP:OWN collection. --Ckatz_spy 08:39, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Whether you agree or not, the only reason that it has a stand-alone article is because you insist that it should exist. There is no reason to continue this charade. You are also showing ownership behaviour. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:53, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Please avoid assumptions; you could simply have asked instead of leaving the snarky comment. The date change was the result of copying the comment you deleted, and forgetting that the script I run to adjust UTC to local time was running. Nothing more, nothing less. --Ckatz_spy 22:18, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

Ozil

Can I bang that guy's head against the wall please? Is it *really* such a complicated issue? I don't understand how he is misinterpreting the guideline so wildly. --JonBroxton (talk) 22:45, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

he has a valid point though. That single article indicates that Özil‎ carried a Turkish passport until 2007. I don't know if it was his choice to have it in the first place. There's a long history of cooperation between Germany and Turkey. My great, great grandfather was a military advisor to the Ottomans. However, I'm opposed to nationalism and would rather remove nationality from the lede. Anyhow, all nationality is removed from the lede now, and I've asked WP:MOSBIO types to comment. Perhaps we can have someone else offer an opinion. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:55, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

December 2010

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

Walter Görlitz (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Thanks you for blocking both editors involved. I have removed that article from my watch list and will stop monitoring the changes to that article. I am active on a number of other articles and projects. I let my emotions get away from me. I stopped editing the article as soon as I realized I had violated WP:3RR. Regardless of the outcome, I would like to thank you for dealing even-handedly with both editors. Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:48, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Accept reason:

Fair enough. Nice to have a sincere unblock request once in a while. Consider it time served. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:56, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

I'll check with the blocking administrator regarding your appeal. Hersfold 21:46, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

North American Soccer League (2010)

Hi Walter - Regarding the table layout for the page North American Soccer League (2010), you have undone a couple of my attempts to add full table justification and to improve the aesthetic of the table on the page. I agree with you comments in the history that nothing is "wrong" with the table, however I have tried these adjustments in an attempt to bring the Team table listing in line with other related pages including Major League Soccer and USL Pro. The "Joined" column and the table title of "Proposed teams for 2011" are also no longer relevant as the league has been confirmed and all teams listed approved for the 2011 season. Thanks Fhurion (talk) 16:04, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

"dolts opine"

What does the mean you stupid fuck? Who do you think created that page? I know you are sad that no one agrees with you but shut up already. Cptnono (talk)