Read first! Welcome to my talk page! Questions, information, warnings? Say it here! Please post new topic at the bottom of this page, please sign your topic with ~~~~. And remember, Assume good faith! Click here to start a new topic.

If I left you a message: please answer on your talk page, as I am watching it. If you leave me a message: I will answer on my talk page, then place {{Talkback|OlEnglish}} on your talk. Please click here to leave me a new message.

Archives
June 2008 - February 2009 March 2009 - May 2009 June 2009 - July 2009 August 2009 - September 2009 October 2009 - November 2009

Contents 1 Answer to Job 2 Blonde article 3 How Could You? 4 Androgyny? 5 RfA thankspam 6 Re: 7 World's Greatest Magic 8 The Great Wikipedia Dramaout 9 Wikipedia:Editor review 10 Personal tutor / deleting and removing 11 review 12 Epistemology 13 Father Victor White

[edit] Answer to Job

After taking the Father Victor White Article page to a decent level now. It leaves Answer to Job, the much harder to work on page! Being versed on the Book of Job is not easy in itself and the correspondance that produced "Answer to Job" is not easily available!

Is it OK to try? It means seeking out the latest on "Answer to Job", i.e.: the most recent publication. And can you help?

MacOfJesus (talk) 19:23, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Of course it's ok to try. You don't need to ask my permission. Not sure how I could help though.. -- œ^™ 18:42, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

The correspondence between Father Victor White and Jung lead to this publication and getting hold of it is going to be the hard bit!

Thanks for getting back to me!

MacOfJesus (talk) 23:26, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

---

Dear OIEnglish, Marcusmax has dug out some very useful sources. This is by no means an easy study, and unfortunately the access to the correspondence that led up to the publication is not at hand!

MacOfJesus (talk) 23:09, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Blonde article

You reverted my edits and you don't like me. Do you think this picture is good for the article; if it isn't I don't know what is. Daniel Christensen (talk) 05:46, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Whaddaya think? Daniel Christensen (talk) 06:14, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

It's fine, I have no problem with it being used in the article. -- œ^™ 06:21, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Hahah how'd you make the TM sign in your name? Daniel Christensen (talk) 07:03, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

See Help:Advanced editing#Special characters -- œ^™ 07:08, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] How Could You?

My page on the Wikipedian Game was like a child to me. Like a child. You've essentially killed my only son. You murderer! How could you? How could you? Jonny4026 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 10:26, 7 December 2009 (UTC).

Enough trolling. You've had your fun, now please consider making productive contributions, else go play at Uncyclopedia. -- œ^™ 11:57, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Androgyny?

File:Blonde hair Daniel Christensen.JPG Maybe it could go there. Daniel Christensen (talk) 00:53, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] RfA thankspam

[edit] Re:

Yes, that was me. No, I have no clue who started it - I barely remember last month let alone four years ago! Rebecca (talk) 15:03, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Any idea why that person would name you as the originator? -- œ^™ 04:33, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] World's Greatest Magic

Thanks for your help! I was tired that night! Buddpaul (talk) 19:21, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] The Great Wikipedia Dramaout

Hi! As you have expressed an interest in the initial The Great Wikipedia Dramaout, you're being notified because we are currently planning another one in January! We hope to have an even greater level of participation this time around, and we need your help. If you're still interested please sign up now at Wikipedia:The Great Wikipedia Dramaout/2nd. Thanks, and Happy Holidays! JCbot (talk) 04:40, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Editor review

Are you still up for your offer for reviewing three editors at the Wikipedia:Editor review. I already did one and want to know if you are still willing to give me a barnstar if I review two more :). Btilm 03:38, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Yes of course, just link me to the 3 reviews once they're done and I will take a look. -- œ^™ 03:49, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Personal tutor / deleting and removing

In the talk page of ACEOREVIVED, a note was made to the deletion of this person's article page : Personal tutor, on the grounds that there was one already.

The qualifications of ACEOREVIVED on that person's page indicates their qualifications. If anyone is qualified to write on this subject it is surely them!

I ask again for a new policy on deleting and removing.

Help!

MacOfJesus (talk) 13:11, 17 December 2009 (UTC) {You can wish me a happy birthday, I've been on Wikipedia 1 year, and conributed 1,038 entrants!}

Well happy wiki-birthday! :) You needn't worry about Personal tutor, the speedy deletion was declined and the page was redirected to the existing article. And there is already a fully-formed deletion policy which covers everything, including this situation. -- œ^™ 09:30, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, OIEnglish,

And a Very Happy Christmas! Keep up the good work!

MacOfJesus (talk) 12:27, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] review

Okay. I reviewed three people. Krazycev13, Michaelkourlas, and Belinrahs. Btilm 03:05, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank you so much!!!!! I might even review some more if you are still willing to reward me will extra barnstars! Btilm 15:08, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Epistemology

Dear OIEnglish,

I have encountered another situation, that you may be able to help on.

I have been making comments on the Talk page of Epistemology. The page, the Article page, is out of date and does not cover the complete field. This point has been very well outlined by a very studied and clear comment in the talk page at point 15; "Epistemological Theories and Irrationalism". I have made comments to the same end but received only one comment that was dismissive.

A good page on this topic would be key to the status of Wikipedia.

Could something be done to attract top people of this field to correct/ or make a new page.

Again Thank You,

MacOfJesus (talk) 12:59, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Well, you can try to be bold and expand the article yourself to bring the article up to date. Or, to attract a subject matter expert you can try placing the tag {{Expert-subject}} with the related subject as a parameter, ie: {{Expert-subject|Philosophy}}. -- œ^™ 21:50, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, I don't feel qualified enough in modern thought on this, although I have studied Existencialism. I would love to speak to the originator of point 15: Epistemological Theories and Irrationalism, and invited them to speak. I will speak to ACEOREVIVED on this.

Once again Thank you.

MacOfJesus (talk) 22:29, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

The originator of the post was User:Brizimm, as can be seen with this edit. You can try contacting him at his talk page, but unfortunately this user has not edited since July 17, 2006 so you might not get a reply. -- œ^™ 22:55, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

However, see this edit where he provides his full name, title and several email addresses where you can reach him! How's that for helpful? ;) -- œ^™ 23:04, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

I was right to vote for you, and second your nomination, you deserve your position. Well done.MacOfJesus (talk) 23:39, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Andrew (Fader), said it was'nt him, and suggested me! I was'nt in Wikipedia then! However, he too, said he is'nt qualified. I'll speak to ACEOREVIVED. Thanks again. The one who asks the question is'nt necessary the one who can enter on the Article page!

MacOfJesus (talk) 16:26, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Huh? Andrew Fader? who's that? The guy's name was Brian Zimmerman. -- œ^™ 19:14, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

I left a message on both pages: Brizimm and Andrevan, it looks like they are the same person? You indicate they are one and the same! He leaves a message not to speak about his change of name! Pardon, if I've made a mistake!

MacOfJesus (talk) 22:17, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Oh! no no, User:Brizimm simply left a message on User:Andrevan's talk page explaining how he can be contacted, I was NOT indicating that User:Brizimm IS User:Andrevan. The person who wrote the study WAS User:Brizimm who WAS Brian Zimmerman. and in this message to Andrevan he explains he how can be contacted. -- œ^™ 22:33, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. Clear. OK. MacOfJesus (talk) 23:26, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

What about next point? From all angles I do think this is an error. MacOfJesus (talk) 23:36, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry I don't know what you're referring to. Please clarify 'next point' and what you think is an error. -- œ^™ 23:39, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Next point is; Father Victor White, the name of the Article page has been changed from "Father Victor White" to "Victor White (Dominican)". This is an error as I explained in the "next point", under heading "Father Victor White". (I'll explain under that heading).

[edit] Father Victor White

Dear OIEnglish,

Sorry to have another thing to sort out!

As you know I have written on the Article page of "Father Victor White" on his correspondence with Jung. Now the article page has been changed to : "Victor White (Dominican)". This is not correct as Jung corresponded with him as "Father" not as a Dominican. Father White studied Classical Theology and Classical Philosophy for his Priesthood, and it was in this capasity the correspondence originated. As you know in the Dominican Order has both Brothers and Priests and the training for each is utterly different. It is therefore essential to the Article page that the "Father" remains. Jung knew him as "Father" not necessarly as a Dominican.

As you know I have had to study to write on the Article page of Father Victor White. This is unlike, for instance, Paul of Tarsus, as he became Saint after his death, as in the case of all Saints. Father Victor White was in the letters and correspondence of Jung in this capasity from the beginning.

Hence, can it be reversed?

MacOfJesus (talk) 16:07, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Reading the Article page, one will see that the correspondence was with "Father" V. White was just that, not as he as a Dominican. As a writer of the article page together with ACEOREVIVED I can say that this change from "Father Victor White" to Victor White (Dominican) is incorrect.

Can it be reversed?

MacOfJesus (talk) 11:13, 21 December 2009 (UTC)