User talk:TJDay

Your username[edit]

Hi Daybot. Since I came across you helping out at WP:AIV, it feels bad to have to do this, but your username may be inappropriate under our username policy. We don't usually allow names that could make people think that the user is a bot account, e.g. names with "Bot", "Robot", "Daemon" etc. Do you think you could consider changing your username? I've raised the issue on Requests for comment/User names. Thanks. --Sam Blanning^(talk) 19:38, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comments. I've put a request at http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_permissions#Username_change and made a comment at Requests for comment/User names confirming this. Daybot 19:59, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I was about to leave a message seconding the above, I see you've beaten me to it by agreeing. I figured I'd take the opportunity to point out that many Wikipedians encourage others to use real names. You might want to consider doing this as long as you're changing your username anyway. I can certainly understand that you might be uncomfortable using your own real name online, but, if that's the case, I recommend that you choose an alias that resembles a real name. For instance, my name is Nat Krause, but I could just as well have a username such as "Eli Miller" or "Abe Sokolov". Let me know if you have any questions about this or anything else. - Nat Krause^(Talk!) 20:04, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hiya. "TJDay" is fine. However, you might wish to note that it's possible to use punctuation and spacing in Wikipedia usernames, so you might prefer "User:T. J. Day". Or, you could make it "User:TJDay" so as to be easier to type and set it to display as "T. J. Day" on talk pages; or any other such variation that you like. Cheers, Nat Krause^(Talk!) 20:18, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - I think I might do that. Username TJDay, displayed as T.J.Day. Thanks, Daybot 20:21, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for understanding. I moved your old talk page here - partly for the comments, partly so that if anyone comes across your old edits and tries to contact you via User talk:Daybot they'll be redirected here. --Sam Blanning^(talk) 11:35, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Sam - I was just wondering how to do that :D. T. J. Day 11:38, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You should get a 'move' button at the top of your screen (next to 'history') when your account's been around for a few days and the software assumes you're not going to put any pages on wheels. --Sam Blanning^(talk) 11:47, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bob Cornuke[edit]

If you remove links from a "dictionary of religious leaders" you must provide reasons on the talk. Arbusto 23:53, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted the article from the most recent change to the previous change; I did not explicitly remove any links. A quick Google search did not find any evidence on the Internet of this chap being labelled a "con artist" so I feel that your changes were not appropriately impartial. T. J. Day 00:05, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

1) They aren't my additions. I reverted the removal because there is no consensus on the talk to remove them. One person can't just up and decide to delete links when more disagree. 2) A "quick google search" of "cornuke con artist" brings up [1]. If you want to remove this discuss it on the talk. Don't remove it until people agree one way or the other. Arbusto 00:11, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I saw the page you linked, but it does not label the subject as a con artist. Further comment to follow. T. J. Day 00:18, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Are you kidding? The first word after his name. The full article:

Cornuke, Robert. Con artist. Robert Cornuke (also known as Bob Cornuke) is, like Ron Wyatt, a self-styled "Indiana Jones" of biblical archaeology. Although not directly associated with Ron Wyatt or Wyatt Archaeological Research, Bob Cornuke, like Ron Wyatt, makes false claims such as having discovered the real Mt Sinai*. Bob Cornuke also claims to have found the wreck of Paul's ship from Acts - and then got sued for breaking "all aspects" of an oral contract with a former US ambassador to Malta. (If Bob Cornuke is really a Christian, whatever happened to "Let your 'yes' be yes"?) The worst problem with these false and questionable claims is not that they are not entertaining (they are if you ignore the lies and half-truths) but that they are promoted as important evidence for believing the Bible. This is disappointing when even the best claims are highly questionable. From a promotional pamphlet - "What your children are taught at Sunday School or church may not suffice them in a world so oppositional to God's way of seeing things. Bob Cornuke offers a unique answer..." What happens to those Sunday School children when they find that the alleged evidence is quite bogus? They tend to start to disbelieve any evidence, including firm historical evidence and logical reasoning. People like Bob Cornuke and Ron Wyatt (now deceased) seem to be more interested in the money to be gained from their claims than in providing genuine evidence for anything. Sadly, Bob Cornuke was promoted on his June 2004 and March 2005 tours of New Zealand by Focus on the Family and Radio Rhema.[2]

Arbusto 00:23, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Er, I was looking at [3] - fair enough! T. J. Day 00:28, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I've reviewed the history. I saw that you are blacklisted, and I didn't like the textual changes to the article, considering its neutrality is already in question and the con artist assertion is not backed up with a citation in the article - looked like a sure revert to me. However, I did not notice that your edit itself was a revert and had I done so, I would have left the edit alone. Apologies. T. J. Day 00:28, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Arbusto 00:30, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Drake's[edit]

The guy must have had something against ducks, huh? -- RoySmith (talk) 01:55, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed :) T. J. Day 01:57, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you looked closer...[edit]

I didn't delete it. I merely moved it to the "hemophilia" page. Random the Scrambled 15:53, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This should be discussed on the discussion page for the article first, and when making an edit like that you should provide an edit summary so that we can see what you're doing. By the way, haemophilia is spelled like this in every English speaking country outside the US, and the article on haemophilia notes hemophilia as an alternative spelling, so the decision to stick with the UK spelling has already been established.

Ref:

T. J. Day 16:03, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly the proof I need. But it depends. Is it spelled "haemophilia" in Canada? Random the Scrambled 23:07, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I can see, it's a split decision in Canada. There is an "Association of Haemophilia Clinic Directors of Canada" :) T. J. Day 02:37, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Community Justice[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia:Community Justice. Please take part in our meeting. Computerjoe 's talk 18:30, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Press blackout[edit]

Thanks for asking for my input. I will reply ASAP. In the meantime, I need help regarding Nescio who has a punative RFC regarding Rationales to impeach George W. Bush, which I feel is unwarranted. Please go there right away and comment at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Merecat. Thanks. Merecat 18:34, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, as an active RCP, the debate has come to my attention before. I have studied the RFC and the various comments and have come to the conclusion that as a British citizen, I am insufficiently informed to comment. However, I will say that I feel the battle between yourself and User:Nescio seems to have spiralled out of control and seems to have got personal. I am currently neutral on the debate and while I am sympathetic to your situation I do not wish to get involved. I hope it all works out to the mutual agreement of both parties. T. J. Day 18:47, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Community Justice/Elections[edit]

As Wikipedia:Community Justice has over 30 members, we are beginning the elections process.

If you are interested in becoming the chairman, the chief executive or councillor please add yourself, and a statement, to Wikipedia:Community Justice/Elections.

Voting shall begin on April 24th, and end on May 1st. To see if you are eligible for a vote, please see Wikipedia:Community Justice/Elections.

Thank you,

Computerjoe 's talk 20:57, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sakina Bint Imam Hussain[edit]

Bro you just cannot revert a page you first got to discuss it on the talk page. It is not cool to just make some changes without first discussing it on the talk page. So please next time to revert or edit any page make sure to discuss the stuff on talk page first.

Your edit contravines Wikipedia policies on neutrality so I have reverted it. While you were leaving this message, I was leaving one on your user talk page!! I hope you can understand the point about neutrality. T. J. Day 15:45, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

And regarding this "Hi, thanks for your edit to Sakina bint Hussain. Wikipedia is an online encyclopedia and as such cannot cite religious opinion as fact, Christian or otherwise. For this reason, I have reverted your edit to Sakina bint Hussain - for the part "Allah blessed him with..." Feel free to put the edit back with a neutral stance." If you find out some tings that are not making the article neutral then just change that section or that sentence, and make it neutral. Don't revert the article, change the article and make it neutral. I will however try my best to check to make sure that the article neutral. I am shi’a and I always say SAW and AS after the names of prophet Muhammad and family members names. I am so used to it that when I am writing articles I type that in too. Thank You Salman

Followup: I made an entry in the discussion page and your edit has been reverted by another user. T. J. Day 18:39, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Commnity Justice Elections[edit]

Thanks for volunteering to perform as backup election staff! There has been recent controversy as to whether you will be allowed to vote. As active election staff, I have made a ruling here as to this issue. Please read it before voting. If you have any questions, please contact me via my talk page. Thanks, zappa.jak e (talk) 02:59, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for drawing my attention to this. I have posted a comment on the page you mentioned. T. J. Day 04:20, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your vote is requested immediately to tiebreak resulting in election of a fifth councillor. Other votes you may have had cast would not change results, but this one is needed. Please cast your vote here as soon as possible. Thank you, zappa.jak e (talk) 22:37, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Zappa.jake. I've made my choice, I hope everyone is happy with the outcome. T. J. Day 23:35, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Spelling on user page[edit]

Thank you, missed that! :p, feel free to let me know if there is anything else that needs fixing Masssiveego 04:32, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RE:Care in editing[edit]

Sorry TJ, but I wasn't really focusing on spelling errors, it seemed like a large battle between two users was going on, and I was attempting to return the article moon for sale to a semblance of order. However, moments later another user did the same thing, and I've sinced un-reverted my own topic.

Sorry for the mistakes to have offended you, but I did not write any of them.

Sincerely, Logical2u 21:37, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah OK - that explains it. You haven't offended me :) T. J. Day 21:38, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What you deserve...[edit]

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		From us admins and non-admins, welcome! Will (^E_@) T 20:53, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulation TJ, you really deserve this. Excellent work across wikipedia, and thanks in particular for helping to fight vandalism on my User Page! Sincerely, Logical2u 10:33, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
:D T. J. Day 16:09, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

well done[edit]

and thank you for your willingness, re: editing the spelling errors on my user page. Terryeo 01:59, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

vandalism comment[edit]

According to the administrator noticeboard, there is officially nothing wrong with editing out comments from other users from your personal talk page. Refer to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#User:Nlu for details. Please stop reverting others talk page. Thank you--Freestyle.king The discussion has recently been archived. Well my point was User:Nlu frequently delete comments and/or criticism from other users regarding his own conducts in order to cover up his lack up civility toward other users. I brought his conduct to the attention of the noticeboard and they said there is officially nothing I can do about it.--Freestyle.king

Thanks[edit]

Hi TJDay,

thanks for your kind words. Normally in essays type-articles it is customary to give references at the end in the form of listing or large annotated bibliography as is done in the britannica encyclopedia . However, with many vested interests and people intent on making business, now editing the wikipedia, it has become a necessity to cite references in the manner of a scientific article in a scientific journal. In this manner a new unique pattern is slowly but steadily emerging in the wikipedia inorder to counter pov and edit wars. This might emerge as a stark feature of wikipedia articles in the long run. thanks once again Robin klein 04:59, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks[edit]

Not good at writing encyclopedically, so it's probably a good thing you cleaned up the mess I made on the aperture page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sebbi (talk • contribs) 14:40, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:50, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]