User talk:Veverve/Archive 2
This is an archive of past discussions with User:Veverve. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 |
DYK nomination of Bible translations into Geʽez
Hello! Your submission of Bible translations into Geʽez at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! — Fourthords | =Λ= | 18:08, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
Vulgate
Hello:
The copy edit you requested from the Guild of Copy Editors of the article Vulgate has been completed.
Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.
I add a "Citation needed" tag in the Manuscripts and early editions section to a sentence at the end of the second paragraph which made no sense to me. Another editor has tagged the Contents section for having no citations. I'll just add that there are many, many other sections and even quotations that lack adequate citations. Much work remains to be done in this area.
Best of luck with the article moving forward.
Twofingered Typist (talk) 18:25, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
DYK nomination of Oxford Vulgate
Hello! Your submission of Oxford Vulgate at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! BlueMoonset (talk) 00:30, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
- Note that the same is true of your Benedictine Vulgate nomination: neither is eligible because of the large volume of material copied to each from the pre-existing Vulgate article.. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:30, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
DYK nomination of Bible translations into Geʽez
Hello! Your submission of Bible translations into Geʽez at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 16:47, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
Category:Vetus Latina has been nominated for merging
Category:Vetus Latina, which you created, has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:39, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
Theodore (Kazanov) & Tikhon (Zaitsev)
Hello Veverve, if you have free time feel free to edit Draft:Theodore (Kazanov) and Draft:Tikhon (Zaitsev), these are drafts I started back in November but unfortunately I've procrastinated on finishing them and moving them to the article main space. The former especially needs some work. The Russian language articles can be found at ru:Феодор (Казанов) and ru:Тихон (Зайцев) respectively. If you don't have free time don't worry, I'll try to get some work done on these two as well. Inter&anthro (talk) 01:35, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
- @Inter&anthro: Both have the exact same infos in their "Eastern Orthodox Church titles" templates, could you fix this? Veverve (talk) 09:26, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
- Sorry about that, I think when I started the draft on Theodore (Kazanov) I had just copied and pasted from Tikhon (Zaitsev) and forgot to change that aspect. I've just re-edited it and the information in Theodore (Kazanov) should now be correct. Inter&anthro (talk) 15:02, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
- @Veverve: I think the two drafts are ready to be moved to the main space now as articles, unless if you have any other major edits to make. Inter&anthro (talk) 03:02, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
- @Inter&anthro: Sorry, I did not take the time to review your articles and currently do not have the time to do so. Feel free to publish them. Veverve (talk) 13:16, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
- Sorry about that, thank you for your help. Feel free to edit and improve these articles in the future. Inter&anthro (talk) 18:54, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
- @Inter&anthro: Sorry, I did not take the time to review your articles and currently do not have the time to do so. Feel free to publish them. Veverve (talk) 13:16, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
- @Veverve: I think the two drafts are ready to be moved to the main space now as articles, unless if you have any other major edits to make. Inter&anthro (talk) 03:02, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
- Sorry about that, I think when I started the draft on Theodore (Kazanov) I had just copied and pasted from Tikhon (Zaitsev) and forgot to change that aspect. I've just re-edited it and the information in Theodore (Kazanov) should now be correct. Inter&anthro (talk) 15:02, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
DYK for Bible translations into Geʽez
On 28 April 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Bible translations into Geʽez, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Bible translations into Geʽez date back to at least the 6th century, making them among the oldest in the world? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Bible translations into Geʽez. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Bible translations into Geʽez), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
— Maile (talk) 12:01, 28 April 2020 (UTC)
There are two references (Fletcher III 1988; Symonds 1911) which don't have corresponding full citations. Could you add them please?
If you want to be aware of those missing refs in the future, you can install User:Svick/HarvErrors.js. If you don't know how, let me know I'll walk you through it. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 11:31, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
- @Headbomb: thanks for telling me! The references have been added. Veverve (talk) 11:39, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
Black Legend
Hi V. Just re the Black Legend article where you reverted my edit. The second part of text that I removed was the following:
Past Spanish ownership of about half of the United States is unknown by most Americans.[1] [page needed] Spanish foreign minister Josep Borrell said that he saw a re-emergence of the black legend in European coverage of the Catalan independence movement, particularly by the English-speaking press (which unquestioningly accepted unverified injury figures).[2]
This information is fully sourced, but is cited later on in the article, and is part of a rewrite that I am doing of that section. It will remain in the article, but hopefully as part of a more coherent paragraph. I will remove the part about Catalan injury figures, because it is OR, and not mentioned in the source. If there is another source which mentions Borrel saying it, I'm totally happy for it to remain in the text.
The first part is OR:
References to black-legend constructs are used in Argentina to argue in favor of protectionism against Spanish companies.[3]
It is the interpretation of the editor who first added this paragraph that Cecchini and Cicolillo are using "black-legend constructs" rather than the opinion given in the source (which is Cecchini and Cicolillo's article). If you know of a source which states explicitly that "References to black-legend constructs are used in Argentina", then that should definitely be in the article.
Anyway, like I said, I am in the process of streamlining that section to reduce repetition and remove OR, I'm going to add a new version tonight (probably) which will include all the info in the first quote except for the phrase "(which unquestioningly accepted unverified injury figures)", but will cut the second quote as OR (unless you know of a source which supports it, then I will add that).
I am a bit rubbish at editing in one go, and so I'd be really grateful if you could wait till I've completed the edits (I'll put a note in discussion), and look at the section yourself and make any improvements you feel might be needed to the final version as a whole.
All the best and hope you and yours are doing well in this difficult time.
Boynamedsue (talk) 12:20, 27 May 2020 (UTC)
- @Boynamedsue: Hello! I hope you are doing alright. Sorry for reverting your work, but I did not know you were working on the long run. Veverve (talk) 12:35, 27 May 2020 (UTC)
- No problem, it's my fault for forgetting to log-in, and not stating it was an on-going edit. I suspect you might have checked before reverting if you'd seen a username. In any case, I hadn't started the re-write proper yet.Boynamedsue (talk) 13:30, 27 May 2020 (UTC)
References
- ^ Powell, Philip Wayne, 1971, Tree of Hate (first edition).
- ^ Borrell, El Cip Y La Leyenda Negra Luis Oz – http://www.elmundo.es/television/2018/06/21/5b2bbdb7ca4741f77d8b461d.html
- ^ Daniel Cecchini y Jorge Cicolillo, Los Nuevos Conquistadores. Cómo las Empresas Españolas expoliaron Argentina.
WikiLoop Battlefield new name vote
Dear Veverve,
Thank you for your interest and contributions to WikiLoop Battlefield. We are holding a voting for proposed new name. We would like to invite you to this voting. The voting is held at m:WikiProject_WikiLoop/New_name_vote and ends on July 13th 00:00 UTC.
xinbenlv Talk, Remember to "ping" me 05:03, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
Mar Thoma Syrian Church
Hi. Please don't label edits as vandalism when they are not. This is not helpful to Wikipedia's aims. What is going on on Mar Thoma Syrian Church is a content dispute. It is disruptive, but not vandalism. Thanks. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 11:41, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
Announcing WikiLoop DoubleCheck
Dear Wikipedians and contributors, the open source Wikipedia review tool, previously "WikiLoop Battlefield" has completed its name vote and is announcing its new name: WikiLoop DoubleCheck. Read the full story on the program page on Meta-wiki, learn about ways to support this tool, and find out what future developments are coming for this tool.
Thank you to everyone who took part in the vote!
xinbenlv Talk, Remember to "ping" me 18:30, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
Category:Old Testament editions has been nominated for deletion
Category:Old Testament editions has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 09:04, 24 July 2020 (UTC)
expression "the quite similar"
Hi Veverve,
in this edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Millennium_Bible&diff=next&oldid=972159032 you use expression: "the quite similar". Are you sure? It's very strange to me.
MichalZim (talk) 06:59, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
- @MichalZim: I am no native speaker, but it seems correct. Veverve (talk) 10:59, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
Join the RfC to define trust levels for WikiLoop DoubleCheck
Hi Veverve/Archive 2,
you are receiving this message because you are an active user of WikiLoop DoubleCheck. We are currently holding a Request for Comments to define trust levels for users of this tool. If you can spare a few minutes, please consider leaving your feedback on the RfC page.
Thank you in advance for sharing your thoughts. Your opinion matters greatly!
María Cruz
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:59, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
If you would like to modify your subscription to these messages you can do so here.
Discretionary sanctions - abortion
This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.
You have shown interest in abortion. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.
For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.
Elizium23 (talk) 01:06, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
Scripturae sacrae affectus moved to draftspace
An article you recently created, Scripturae sacrae affectus, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:
" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. John B123 (talk) 15:26, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
- @John B123: I have added some sources. Is that enough? Veverve (talk) 16:09, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
- Hi Veverve, that's fine. I've moved the article back to mainspace. Regards --John B123 (talk) 16:15, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
Becciu Scandal
Please do not add unreferenced or poorly referenced information, especially if controversial... sure but Becciu scandal is real, and Pope Francis is victim like the whole Catholic church. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/25/world/europe/Cardinal-Becciu-Fired.html Please try to document yourself the section simply said that the Pope kicked Becciu out.--Peter39c (talk) 23:45, 15 October 2020 (UTC) It's certainly not gossip to steal 200 million euros.--Peter39c (talk) 23:46, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
DYK for Fratelli tutti
On 30 October 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Fratelli tutti, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Pope Francis's encyclical Fratelli tutti is the first to be signed outside Rome? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Fratelli tutti. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Fratelli tutti), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:02, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
- @Cwmhiraeth: is it normal that I do not see this fact in the 30 October DYK list? Veverve (talk) 05:17, 30 October 2020 (UTC) 05:17, 30 October 2020 (UTC)Veverve (talk)
- It's on the main page now, and will be there until 12.00 UTC. We have just started running two DYK sets a day because of an increasing backlog of hooks. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:10, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
Linking in infoboxes of popes
Howdy. We don't link the reign/term dates of heads of state or the rest of the popes. GoodDay (talk) 14:19, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
- @GoodDay: Thanks for your message. I believe it is useful to link those parameters. Is there a consensus or a policy which would forbid it? Veverve (talk) 14:20, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
- You'll note, at Richard Nixon (for example) that January 20, 1969 isn't linked to First inauguration of Richard Nixon & August 9, 1974 isn't linked to Resignation of Richard Nixon. It's the practice across Wikipedia, to not link the dates. GoodDay (talk) 14:22, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
- @GoodDay: If there is such a practice then I accept it. Veverve (talk) 14:25, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
- You'll note, at Richard Nixon (for example) that January 20, 1969 isn't linked to First inauguration of Richard Nixon & August 9, 1974 isn't linked to Resignation of Richard Nixon. It's the practice across Wikipedia, to not link the dates. GoodDay (talk) 14:22, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
Page moves
Thank you for your help with page moves. When you move a page per a Requested move discussion, as you did at Talk:Russian True Orthodox Church (Lazar Zhurbenko)#Requested move 10 November 2020, please close the request by following the instructions at WP:RMCI. Thanks again! P.I. Ellsworth ed. put'r there 06:39, 14 November 2020 (UTC)
Benjamin (Likhomanov)
Hi Veverve, it has been a while, but I am currently finishing up working on Draft:Benjamin (Likhomanov), and was contacting you to see if there were any improvements you wanted to make before it was moved to the mainspace. The Russian-language version of the article can be found here. If you are too busy don't worry, there is no rush. Thank you Inter&anthro (talk) 19:36, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
- @Inter&anthro: Ok, I will try to have a look. Veverve (talk) 08:18, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
- @Inter&anthro: done. Veverve (talk) 11:04, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
New, simpler RfC to define trust levels for WikiLoop DoubleCheck
HI Veverve/Archive 2,
I'm writing to let you know we have simplified the RfC on trust levels for the tool WikiLoop DoubleCheck. Please join and share your thoughts about this feature! We made this change after hearing users' comments on the first RfC being too complicated. I hope that you can participate this time around, giving your feedback on this new feature for WikiLoop DoubleCheck users.
Thanks and see you around online,
María Cruz
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:05, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
If you would like to update your settings to change the wiki where you receive these messages, please do so here.
Old Testament Vulgate manuscripts
Hello Veverve! I have been preparing a much expanded list of Vulgate OT manuscripts for a while now. Meanwhile, you have created a new (and much needed) page for Vulgate manuscripts. I think it'd obviously be a good idea for us to work together. Could you look over my project User:JaneStillman/Vulgate and tell me what you think? Cheers JaneStillman (talk) 15:07, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
- @JaneStillman: Thanks for the message. I have a few remarks.
- 1) why are some sigla and names in bold? Is it done on purpose?
- 2) please explain in the article how you used Mardsen's work to modify the table, and name said work.
- 3) You must convert the references which are on the "[1], [2]" formats (e.g. "Bible of Maurdramnus [1], [2], [3], [4], [5]") into proper refs (i.e. footnotes).
- 4) I have corrected the current table at Vulgate_manuscripts#Old Testament recently; did you include my corrections? I believe you did not, as the names of the rows in your version were still in bold, and the two tables do not have the same content for "Maurdramni"; if you have not done yet, please include my corrections.
- 5) EDIT: I just updated the Vulgate manuscripts article to separate manuscripts containing whole bibles from those which only contain the OT or part of it and only contain the NT or part of it.
- 6) EDIT: what is the "*" referring to?
- Veverve (talk) 15:23, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
- @JaneStillman: Oh et, si tu préfère, tu peux me parler en français (je viens de voir ton Babel). Veverve (talk) 15:28, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
- @JaneStillman: There is still a "*" at "Tegernsee*". Veverve (talk) 21:38, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
- @JaneStillman: any news? Veverve (talk) 13:21, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
- @JaneStillman: any news this time? Veverve (talk) 02:57, 10 January 2021 (UTC)
ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message
Reverting
I am at a complete loss why you revert, without any explanation, accusing me of vandalism, there where I only add a new article and make a link with its parent article. I would be more suspecting you of vandalism if you cannot give a reasonable explanation for your behaviour. --Andries Van den Abeele (talk) 13:13, 26 November 2020 (UTC)
- @Andries Van den Abeele: You changed the text to to say it is an archbishopric, while the curent text says it is a Matropolis, without sourcing your change. Veverve (talk) 13:17, 26 November 2020 (UTC)
- You are much too rapid in your reaction. My change was a and remains the first step in order to make an article devoted to the Benelux orthodox church and linked with the mother church of Constantinople. The article is now placed and tells it all. The Benelux orthodox church is both: an archbishopric and a metropolis. See: Orthodox Archdiocese of Belgium and exarchate of the Netherlands and Luxembourg. I hope that you next time will be more considerate and less hasty. Andries Van den Abeele (talk) 13:57, 26 November 2020 (UTC)
Visual editor
I think you're tripping a couple of bugs in the Visual Editor. I've had to repair places it's added "nowiki" and some garbage "div" in there. Check the tags after you edit, it should inform you what happened. Elizium23 (talk) 01:39, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
- @Elizium23: thanks for the warning. Could you tell me where those mistakes have appeared? I cannot look at all the tags after my edits, as it would take too much time for the task I am currently accomplishing. Veverve (talk) 01:49, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
- nowiki added, span added and actually the second one didn't recognize it in a tag, so even tougher to find! Well, you can just rely on the good will of people cleaning up after you... it's not so many after all. Elizium23 (talk) 01:57, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
Speedy deletion declined: Antiespaña
Hello Veverve. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Antiespaña, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: G6 and G8 are for technical maintenance or when the page doesn't exist. Use WP:RfD if you want to delete it. Thank you. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 19:09, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
Heads up
Re Special:Permalink/1004437962#Visual editor, our article on the Christian name Lucas was protected on Saturday for eight months. This was three days after a certain administrator !voted "delete" in an AfD discussion for lack of content and two days after he deleted content added subsequent to his !vote in a WP:INVOLVED act. He blocked the contributor in another WP:INVOLVED action. Anyone want to raise this at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents? @Andrew Davidson: @Bearian: @Mr248: @Peterkingiron: 95.149.135.141 (talk) 14:55, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
- I am not an admin and do not have the buttons to block, etc. Bearian (talk) 19:38, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
- I don't understand why you are pinging me. I know nothing about this issue and don't want to get involved in it. Mr248 (talk) 23:32, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
Subreption
Hello, Veverve. This is a courtesy notice that the copy edit you requested for Subreption at the Guild of Copy Editors requests page is now complete. All feedback welcome! Cheers, Baffle☿gab 23:02, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
Approbation (Catholic canon law)
Hello, Veverve. This is a courtesy notice that the copy edit you requested for Approbation (Catholic canon law) at the Guild of Copy Editors requests page is now complete. All feedback welcome! Cheers, Baffle☿gab 05:44, 8 February 2021 (UTC) |
Why did you restore a link to a Greek Orthodox cathedral in Birmingham in an article about a Russian Orthodox cathedral in London?
It's fairly obvious these are two different buildings. 89.240.113.241 (talk) 16:17, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
- I do not think they are different buildings, you would need to provide documentation for this. Veverve (talk) 16:20, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
- If you hover your mouse over the link you will see a picture of the building to which the link goes. If you compare the picture of the London building you will see it is a different building. I consider that to be sufficient documentation. 89.240.113.241 (talk) 16:51, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
Psalm 43 query
Hello, Veverve. I'm puzzled. Maybe you can explain to me how the Hebrew Bible is "not a source" — and how https://www.mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/pt2643.htm#1 doesn't satisfy pertinent sourcing requirements. As noted in my edit summary (diff), this fits the practice at Psalm_45#Hebrew_Bible_version. Noting that the edit was in response to an edit request from Gerda Arendt (diff). This isn't actually an area to which I ordinarily contribute, for whatever's that's worth. Thanks! El_C 11:25, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
- @El C: you did not state mechon-mamre was your source. Stating "the Hebrew bible" is not a valid source, much like "the Vulgate" or "Plato's Republic" are not sources: you have to state the name of the book, the edition and the page number or the website in a footnote.
- If you want to have the Hebrew version of psalm 43, I agree. Veverve (talk) 11:33, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
- (edit conflict, seems resolved, but now I typed it:) The text is the official Wikipedia source, and also the King James Version, and these two (but no others) are supposed to appear in all psalm articles. It's a slow process. Compare BWV 84. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:34, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
- I have no idea what's happening! Anyway, Gerda, the edit with my adjusted Hebrew formatting is there for future reference. Thanks for your patience, Veverve. El_C 11:38, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
- (edit conflict, seems resolved, but now I typed it:) The text is the official Wikipedia source, and also the King James Version, and these two (but no others) are supposed to appear in all psalm articles. It's a slow process. Compare BWV 84. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:34, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
Edit on Bartholomew I of Constantinople
Hi, I see you reverted my mobile edit (different IP but it's me) on Bartholomew I of Constantinople that fixes a broken link. I've reverted your revert and invite you to check that the link is indeed broken without my edit ([1] doesn't load for me, [2] does). No further action is needed if you do, this is just to prevent an unnecessary revert war. 82.95.254.249 (talk) 11:55, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
Your thread has been archived
Hi Veverve! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse,
|
WikiLoop 2020 Year in Review
Dear editors, developers and friends:
Thank you for supporting Project WikiLoop! The year 2020 was an unprecedented one. It was unusual for almost everyone. In spite of this, Project WikiLoop continued the hard work and made some progress that we are proud to share with you. We also wanted to extend a big thank you for your support, advice, contributions and love that make all this possible.
Head over to our project page on Meta Wikimedia to read a brief 2020 Year in Review for WikiLoop.
Thank you for taking the time to review Wikipedia using WikiLoop DoubleCheck. Your work is important and it matters to everyone. We look forward to continuing our collaboration through 2021!
María Cruz
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:35, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for April 10
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Juvenal of Jerusalem, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Patriarchate of Jerusalem.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:56, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
Two kingdoms doctrine
Hi, you have been reverted my edition. I don't agree. Please read the meaning of the whole paragraph. In Sermon on the Mountain an opposition to injustice is exhorted; otherwise there would be no contradiction mentioned in the paragraph... and then there would be no reason for two kingdoms doctrine. --Jmarchn (talk) 14:18, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
- @Jmarchn: Hello. I believe "repay evil with retribution" is opposed to "passivity in the face of oppression". Veverve (talk) 14:45, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
- It seems to me that you have not understood what the Sermon on the Mount does not propose passivity in the face of oppression!. You can read, for example, The Sermon on the Mount: A Theology of Resistance. --Jmarchn (talk) 19:57, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
- @Jmarchn: It is not up to me to decide what this semon is about. I am simply stating that your version of Luther's vision does not contain a contradiction, contradiction which is supposed to exist as it is mentioned in the beginning of the paragraph. Veverve (talk) 20:10, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
- It seems to me that you have not understood what the Sermon on the Mount does not propose passivity in the face of oppression!. You can read, for example, The Sermon on the Mount: A Theology of Resistance. --Jmarchn (talk) 19:57, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
Jerusalem Bible
Did you even look at the page? The section twice mentioned Tolkien's involvement in the translation of Jonah; there's no reason to do this, and absolutely no reason to revert blindly as if I were a vandal. 2600:1003:B84E:A0BF:F8C6:904:6CD4:B2DC (talk) 10:25, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
Hello. Do you happen to know what this might be called in English? The word is Romanian, but I assume such inscriptions exist in other Orthodox traditions as well. — Biruitorul Talk 21:13, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
- @Biruitorul: Hello. Sorry, I really do not know how those writings are called in other EO churches, or if they even exist in other EO churches. Veverve (talk) 21:25, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
- @Чръный человек: maybe you could help. Veverve (talk) 20:21, 14 April 2021 (UTC)