User talk:Bradeos Graphon/Archive 1

Originally from User talk:69.14.250.186:

I see you've been doing a lot of editing on Wikipedia - useful stuff. Why not register as a user? It's easy and then we can see your name rather than your IP address next to your contribution - much nicer. Cheers mahābāla 09:17, 10 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Well, thank you. I have done so, my new user name is "Fire Star."

Cheers, FS

Hello, welcome to Wikipedia. Here are some useful links in case you haven't already found them:

If you made any edits before you got an account, you might be interested in assigning those to your username. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!

Tip: you can sign your name with ~~~~

snoyes 04:48, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)

cheers, thanks.

Fire Star 04:55, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Purported Cults

Thanks for contributing, Fire Star. From what I could see, there is no Purported Cults page. I'm not sure it would pass NPOV in any case. I removed the associated link. Hawstom 22:24, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Radical Reformation

You'll find a lot of help for your articles in Anabaptist, Puritan, Congregationalist church, unitarianism (a particularly helpful article) etc. Have fun! Mkmcconn

to Fire Star

why aren't you taking any notice of the evidential facts? Wikipedia user

Why is a rabbinical legislation that was evidently never disputed according to the Jewish code of law, not valid? (Legislated buy the crown Heights Beth din)

Why are you in denial of all the other, non Lubavich, identifying prominent rabbinical authorities, and just to prove that, pleas look up the term "rabbinical legislation" in your "Wikipedia".

You might argue that prominent people, such as M.R. Berger have tried to dispute His messianic sovereignty, but then again what is an argument such as Bergers worth with out Halachicle( the Jewish code of law) ground to stand on.

THE FACT IS THAT NO ONE EVER MANAGED TO DISPUTE HIS MESSIANIC SOVEREIGNTY ACCORDING TO THE JEWISH CODE OF LAW, which in Judaism is the only thing that bares significance.

--68.237.36.204 18:53, 29 Feb 2004 (UTC)

to contact us you cen log on to chabad.net.

Schneerson

Thank you for your input on the Menachem Mendel Schneerson page. I have sent a request to an "Advocate" that was listed under the dispute resolution process for Wikipedia to investigate.

No problem. These guys have some POV issues. Maroux 20:31, 2004 Feb 29 (UTC)

Menachem Mendel Schneerson

This is an interesting case, and is not going to be easy. It would appear to me that everyone involved means well, and wants what is best for the wikipedia, and yet there are clearly differences of opinion. The article is not NPOV. Indeed, I am going to place a NPOV dispute header on the article (or does it have one?). Here are some links Wikipedia:Truce Wikipedia:Pages needing attention Wikipedia:Current disputes over articles Wikipedia:Conflict resolution Wikipedia:Peer review. Things would be alot easier if the problem were one of a mentally inbalanced vandal, or other intentionally negative editor. Then it would be more clear cut who is right and who is wrong. Instead, a great deal of care and attention to wikiquette is going to be necessary, particularly as this is a religious subject, and people feel so very strongly. Altho I only briefy reviewed the page, I will say that some of the "may he live forever" and so forth is not acceptable for an encyclopedia. Good luck, and I'll be keeping an eye on things. Keep in touch, and feel free to ask any questions you like. I am a Members' Advocate after all ;) Sam Spade 20:39, 29 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Hmm, maybe someone is an unbalanced vandal after all? If so Wikipedia:Vandalism in progress may be helpful... Sam Spade 20:54, 29 Feb 2004 (UTC)

No, if your right, they arn't a vandal, and its up to us to teach them how to use the wiki :(. Actually, what you describe sounds to me like perhaps one of the most difficult situations possible ;) I strongly reccomend caution, politeness, and a focus (perhaps even repitition) of policy. Good luck! Sam Spade 01:46, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Template:Cults

Hello Fire star, I hope you can vote to keep the Template:Cults on Vote for deletion of media wiki Cults Thanks in advance. The wikimedia cults will refer to all articles that are essential to understand cults. I think these are Cult of personality, Propaganda , Fundamentalism , Guru Shepherding, Communal reinforcement. It will be added as a footer to all the articles that deal primarily with cults i.e. Cult , Purported cults, Christian countercult movement , Anti-cult movement , Exit counseling , Thought reform , Deprogramming , Mind control & Brainwashing The difference between a See also list is that the wikimedia cults refers to essential articles. The See also list will also refer to side issues. It will not be placed as a footer under individual groups because of POV issues. Andries 18:58, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Firestar, speaking of cults, TCM, and magical thinking, perhaps you'll enjoy the little joke at the bottom of my user page. Click on my user name here: heidimo 03:26, 19 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Request for comment

Fire Star, please comment on the Talk: Traditional Chinese medicine page. Thanks! heidimo 03:20, 1 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

I did some serious editing to both acupuncture and medical acupuncture (formerly modern (western) acupuncture), and I would appreciate your thoughts. heidimo 16:58, 4 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Bible atrocities

FiveStar, please take a look at the discussion page for Bible atrocities article. Basically, the suggestion is to reverse/rephrase some of your recent edits of that article. Your thoughts and comments would be appreciated

Claimed therapeutic techniques

I have no real objection to your insertion of the word "claimed" in the Silva Mind Control article, and I'm certainly not going to remove it, but it seems to me that it's not actually necessary.

"Therapy" simply means "1. Treatment of illness or disability. 2. Psychotherapy..." I don't believe it carries any connotation that the treatment is successful, effective, proven or accepted.

For example, I think one could say, with perfect accuracy, "Leeches were used as a treatment for fever in the middle ages." Or, "homeopathic therapies use medicinal ingredients in dilutions that are so extreme that, statistically, the dosage is likely not to contain so much as a single molecule of the ingredient." Or, "as a teenager, my aunt was given radiation therapy for acne. Not only did it fail to cure her acne, it caused skin cancer."

That is, I think a therapy means anything that is done with the intention of being curative. Dpbsmith 23:16, 22 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Christian Views of Women

Hi Firestar, interesting comment on Song of Deborah! I've never really studied it. You seem to be fairly knowledgable about the Bible, do you think it's possible to do a rewrite of Christian views of women? - Ta bu shi da yu 05:51, 28 Jun 2004 (UTC)