Welcome!

Hello Indyguy, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!  EdwinHJ | Talk 04:50, 9 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Missvain has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. I hope you like cookies, because the Indianapolis museums template you created is AWESOME!! :) Thank you for making it and incorporating the public art list too! Missvain (talk) 03:08, 21 April 2011 (UTC)†[reply]

Thanks for the great Indianapolis Museum template! Exciting! HstryQT (talk) 11:55, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for fixing my mess; I was primarily trying to remove Mr. and Dr. and obviously didn't pay enough attention. Nyttend (talk) 19:49, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've responded to your edit at the talk page Talk:Midwestern United States. I've reworded the section to avoid the point you brought up altogether. There's a more extensive discussion there. Shadowjams (talk) 06:02, 1 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

IndyGuy:

I want you to know that I did not intend to step on your edits of Kokomo. I had been working on some revisions and when I went to sage, I saw the conflict with your posting. I tried to carefuly save all your edits when I saved mine, but it was just easier to save overtop of your paragraph that try to reconstruct my own edits. If in the process I deleted an edit of yours, it was not my intent. Feel free to put back if you like.

Cheers,

AnthroMimus (talk) 17:42, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Original Barnstar

Dear IndyGuy - I would like to edit a page you are working on - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indiana_World_War_Memorial_Figures - this is for a service learning project on civic engagement. Please let me know if you have any issues. I have contacted administration for the WWII Memorial and they have granted access and permission for pictures. I look forward to hearing from you. Thank you jlmugg14:08, 16 October 2013 (UTC)) Jlmugg (talk) 14:07, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for editing the material in the English translation section of this article. Good job--Drboisclair (talk) 23:36, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Indyguy,

The Editing team is asking for your help with VisualEditor. I am contacting you because you were one of the very first testers of VisualEditor, back in 2012 or early 2013. Please tell them what they need to change to make VisualEditor work better for you. The team has a list of top-priority problems, but they also want to hear about small problems. These problems may make editing less fun, take too much of your time, or be as annoying as a paper cut. The Editing team wants to hear about and try to fix these small things, too. 

You can share your thoughts by clicking this link. You may respond to this quick, simple, anonymous survey in your own language. If you take the survey, then you agree your responses may be used in accordance with these terms. This survey is powered by Qualtrics and their use of your information is governed by their privacy policy.

More information (including a translateable list of the questions) is posted on wiki at mw:VisualEditor/Survey 2015. If you have questions, or prefer to respond on-wiki, then please leave a message on the survey's talk page.

Unsubscribe from this list • Sign up for VisualEditor's multilingual newsletter • Translate the user guide

Thank you, Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 18:13, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for finding and fixing my error, which I further fixed. Hmains (talk) 04:44, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! About this edit, I don't know of enough all male primary and secondary schools in the State of Indiana.

If I know of at least five I'll make a template (like Template:Boys' schools in Illinois) for that particular state. But if there's too few I just do a see also. Right now I only know of two all boys' or former all boys' schools in the entire state. WhisperToMe (talk) 19:53, 26 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Usually Wikipedia quotes controversies and legal actions on all links ! My edit brings out the controversy which was missing from this page and has affected India. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eli_Lilly_and_Company . https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Eli_Lilly_and_Company&oldid=707937484 .

What is unreliable about these sources / links - they are fully open and legal ? https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2002/12/vacc-d10.html .

https://www.lillyindia.co.in/ .

www.naturalnews.com/011764_thimerosal_mercury.html ^{[unreliable fringe source?]} .

It is all here and should be cited, as the controversy led to signing of a homeland security bill by President, George W. Bush! With election fevers running high and developing countries voters forming a good number !

https://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/hr_5005_enr.pdf .

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_W._Bush . https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thiomersal .

Autism cases in vaccine court:

Sugarman SD (2007). "Cases in vaccine court—legal battles over vaccines and autism". N Engl J Med 357 (13): 1275–7. doi:10.1056/NEJMp078168. PMID 17898095. U.S. Court of Federal Claims (2007-09-28). "Vaccine Program/Office of Special Masters Omnibus Autism Proceeding". Archived from the original on 2007-10-23. Retrieved 2007-11-24. http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp078168

Mamta Jagdish Dhody (talk) 18:10, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I am seeing a pattern in which pregnant women or children are targeted ! If women are deterred from giving birth - the world will be a horrible place !

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zika_virus .

Mamta Jagdish Dhody (talk) 18:18, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It also refers to who should be appointed after Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, Antonin Scalia, by bringing security concerns and precedents to popular media like Wikipedia !

Mamta Jagdish Dhody (talk) 19:55, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi User:Indyguy, please check my stubs as I add to National Register of Historic Places listings in Marion County, Indiana. I've been working on Indiana NRHP stubs for some time and could use some review as I start to work on Indianapolis. Thanks.--Pubdog (talk) 22:05, 5 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Would you mind offering an opinion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 August 16 in the CFD for Category:Metropolitan school districts in Indiana? Four years living in Indiana (specifically, in a school corporation) wasn't enough to help me understand the differences between school corporations, school cities, school towns, and metropolitan school districts, so it would help to have an outside opinion on whether the MSDs ought to have their own category. Nyttend (talk) 17:45, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Someone continues to remove the sourced material. I appreciate that you reverted it. Would you be so kind as to do so, again. Ccox csc (talk) 00:51, 15 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

See here I did not know this and I also cannot find a citation immediately. Do you recall where you got this information? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 18:04, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Having been around when Unigov was enacted, I've always known the Beech Grove, Lawrence, Southport, and Speedway are the excluded cities, and all the other municipalities are included. The Unigov article has the information, and https://www.cgr.org/consensuscny/docs/CaseStudies_ec-unigov514.pdf and http://www.lwvindy.org/files/unigovhandbookweb_2011.pdf are a couple of links. Cumberland is unusual in that the portion of the town within Marion County is subject to Unigov as an included city/town, while the portion in Hancock County is independent of Unigov simply because it's outside the boundaries of Marion County. Indyguy (talk) 18:44, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Indyguy If you wished to revert the change and open discussion topic in the talk page that would have been more appropriate. The concept of historical Jesus is as old as Jesus the difference being solely one is based on provable fact and the other based on hearsay. You failed to address my summary in your own and violated the NPOV by marking my change as a vandalism. It is very likely that you are a non-Arain Cristian and my change offended you. Vandalism is a serious violation of the basic ideology in Wikipedia and is not a term that should be thrown around lightly. This will also be posted in the Talk:Arian controversy where this should have been addressed in the first place. Endercase (talk) 03:10, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I was mistaken about marking it a vandal edit. The UI just had vandal edit in red and I freaked. I'm so sorry Shall I remove this?Endercase (talk) 03:48, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. It was an honest mistake. Happy editing. Indyguy (talk) 04:03, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Indyguy, let me know if you have proof that the indulgence sellers actually said this. Tetzel in particular is often accused of all sorts of corruptions, but scholars exonerate him on most charges. Here's an excerpt from an old Catholic Encyclopedia article found online at http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14539a.htm:

For a critical scholarly study which shows [Tetzel] in a proper perspective, he had to wait the researches of our own time, mainly at the hands of Dr. Nicholas Paulus, who is closely followed in this article. In the first place, his teaching regarding the indulgences for the living was correct. The charge that the forgiveness of sins was sold for money regardless of contrition or that absolution for sins to be committed in the future could be purchased is baseless. An indulgence, he writes, can be applied only "to the pains of sin which are confessed and for which there is contrition". "No one", he furthermore adds, "secures an indulgence unless he have true contrition". The confessional letters (confessionalia) could of course be obtained for a mere pecuniary consideration without demanding contrition. But such document did not secure an indulgence. It was simply a permit to select a proper confessor, who only after a contrite confession would absolve from sin and reserved cases, and who possessed at the same time facilities to impart the plenary indulgence (Paulus, "Johann Tetzel", 103). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amosjohnlong (talk • contribs) 04:11, 8 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

When I added lines to RTD Denver to two different services (2 commuter rails and 7 light rails) my edit were reverted by SJ Morg because there were no citation. When I deleted all of other lines that don't have citation, my edit were reverted by you. I'm confused. 36.81.9.64 (talk) 15:45, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

See the response I left for you on my talk page earlier. – SJ Morg (talk) 15:51, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It's what we walk on. Whether we are referring planet Earth, the Earth that plants grow from, Earthenware creations, Earthquakes, Earthworms, etc, it deserves the trait of being capitalized. We capitalize Internet, Fahrenheit, all kinds of other inventions. It's very petty to revert capitalization of Earth in any of its forms. Donutcity (talk) 15:42, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Missed that, Indyguy. My apologies. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:46, 27 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I couldn't figure it out to save my life! Corky ^{Buzz by the Hornet's Nest} 00:56, 12 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Indyguy,

You recently re-added some references I had removed on the "Church of the Lutheran Confession" (CLC) site, indicating that the references I had removed appeared to be reliable. In our opinion these references are not reliable - these references point to another organization's website which reflects THAT organization's understanding and opinions concerning the issues between our organizations - not our opinions. Since this Wikipedia page represents The Church of the Lutheran Confession's history and beliefs, it should accurately indicate our opinions and beliefs - not our opinions and beliefs as presented by another organization. I am responding officially as the CLC Webmaster. Please email me if you have any questions. Thanks! Glenn Oster (goster@CLClutheran.com). Glenn (talk) 04:16, 13 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any place that Wikipedia rules out enlarging the name of a school on top of he infobox, especially if this doesn't require another line? Also, must the address of a school be spread out over more rather than fewer lines: some would regard the brevity more elegant. Jzsj (talk) 10:02, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Jzsj: Although there are very few things that the Wikipedia absolutely rules out, one of the concerns is to maintain a consistency from article to article. That's one of the things that infoboxes help to do. So the question becomes, why should this particular school's infobox look different from those of the other thousands of schools. As far as the size of the name is concerned, you say that making it larger does not require another line. Are you sure that's the case on every device and screen size currently in use and that might be used ten years from now? As far as the address is concerned, often an infobox produces microcode used by programs. I don't know if the address elements are affected in that way, but even if they aren't currently, they might be in the future if someone modifies the infobox coding. All in all, it's just better to use the standard setup rather than trying to be fancy in isolated cases. Indyguy (talk) 14:13, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• I see your perspective but I've also found a good deal of tolerance for different points of view, and not reverting others' work unless for obvious reasons. My changing the address format is because I find that some seem to follow the infobox possibilities slavishly, perhaps without seeing the other possibilities of making a more elegant and concise address section. I don't see this as fancy in isolated cases but as preferable in most cases, especially where there's little reason to fill out both the county and the zip code lines. As far as some future changes in codes, I've noted that Wiki tries to avoid such changes precisely not to upset the thousands of articles that are constructed according to the present conventions.
• As to the title, I find that if "110" doesn't require an extra line, neither will "100" or "125" which are the usual viewing sizes that people might use. There really is no great consistency in how schools choose to use the many options in infoboxes, so enlarging the name to fill the line doesn't seem to me to be out of order; after all, the titles on the top of infoboxes are quite diverse across the whole range of infoboxes, so no one style is being imposed. Respectfully submitted, Jzsj (talk) 23:48, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Why is my update on a wiki page keep reverting, it says I am copy and pasting information from a website, however this is information the organization has authorized me to publish. Does Wikipedia need to get in contact with the organization so they can authorize me to publish this information from their website?

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been reverted.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continual disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you.

I do have a source it’s in a book called captured it’s a true story about a boy in the civil war Named Johnny Ables if you don’t believe me go check out that book and the author has spent years researching RELIABLE SOURCES in order to find out its true Jh3324 (talk) 12:29, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Jh3324: The point I was making is that you need to include, in <ref>...</ref> tags, the particulars of the source, just like you would if you were writing a term paper in school. In other words, it's good that you found the information in a reliable source, but you also need to let whoever is reading the article know the source for the information. The Wikipedia:Citing sources article has instructions on entering references in an article. Indyguy (talk) 14:54, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

How do I put the references in the source Jh3324 (talk) 20:03, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Jh3324: The Wikipedia:Citing sources article has the details. Please refer to it. Indyguy (talk) 00:38, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid I don't understand your most recent edit to the WELS page. Why does the WELS category require a vertical bar and a space at the end, but only on this page? (It says "**Category:Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod| ]]".) Bnng (talk) 02:05, 23 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Bnng: It causes the article to appear as the first article in the category. Usually it is used for the article whose name is that same as the category. Indyguy (talk) 02:19, 23 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Indyguy: Thank you. I was unaware of that. Bnng (talk) 02:22, 23 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, you have twice reverted my edits on Corydon, Indiana. I do not intend to edit war with you, but I want to let you know I disagree with your edit summaries. The context of neither is clear without ambiguity. Seeing that I wrote the original sentences.... it is my own disambiguity I am correcting. :) —Charles Edward ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 16:59, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Charles Edward: - I didn't realize I had reverted the same editor twice. I think your most recent edit on Corydon is good. Maybe it would be even better just to just say "Corydon was the site of the Battle of Corydon, the only official pitched battle waged in Indiana during the American Civil War." and avoid having to mention "war" twice in the same sentence. Indyguy (talk) 02:41, 15 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Views/Day	Quality	Title	Tagged with…
27		Indianapolis Public Transportation Corporation (talk)	Add sources
542		Japanese invasions of Korea (1592–98) (talk)	Add sources
525		Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (talk)	Add sources
320		Colonial empire (talk)	Add sources
17		Monon Bell (talk)	Add sources
70		Criticism of Protestantism (talk)	Add sources
4		Junius Bibbs (talk)	Cleanup
95		Greencastle, Indiana (talk)	Cleanup
7		Edgar Young Mullins (talk)	Cleanup
2,790		Indiana (talk)	Expand
119		Legion of the United States (talk)	Expand
1,005		Southern Poverty Law Center (talk)	Expand
635		Economy of Nigeria (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
74		Paul Twitchell (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
155		Christian worship (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
478		Catholicity (talk)	Merge
1,004		Relational database (talk)	Merge
89		Holy Qurbana (talk)	Merge
16		Golden Cavalry of St George (talk)	Wikify
35		Wea (talk)	Wikify
27		Transportation in Georgia (U.S. state) (talk)	Wikify
3		Jackson Johonnet (talk)	Orphan
2		Chan Tzun Hei (talk)	Orphan
3		US Mobile Tolling Platforms (talk)	Orphan
174		SNAC (talk)	Stub
24		The Oaks (Thousand Oaks, California) (talk)	Stub
9		WVLF (talk)	Stub
9		Regions Tower (Indianapolis) (talk)	Stub
10		J. A. O. Preus II (talk)	Stub
67		Honda CBX750 (talk)	Stub

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 14:55, 31 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the edits on the Champ Car article. My intention wass to attract some attention and set out a new outline, what was there was just disjointed and strangely focused (I think Eddie Cheever was mentioned twice?!) I've got a few sources lined up and hope to add them in the next few days, if you'd like to collaborate, let me know. :-). Knoper (talk) 19:05, 5 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Knoper: I did some copy editing because having lived in Indianapolis for many years, I know a lot of general hstory of the 500. I don't have any sources myself, so I won't be able to add anything in that respect. From what I remember reading in the newspapers, the facts in the article seem to be accurate. Thanks for working on the article. Indyguy (talk) 19:17, 5 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, is there any chance you might be able to upload a good photo of this building. I ask only because I gather you have an interest in buildings and you are somewhere in the neighbourhood? Doesn't mean to say you have a suitable camera though does it. Only asking in case it suits you. Regards, Eddaido (talk) 04:05, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Mr. Indyguy, I'm new to Wikipedia, so I’m new to the editing process. My apologies if I'm not replying to you the usual way.

Here's your explanation for undoing my revision to the article about the small town of Clermont, Indiana: Undid revision 865439702 by ClermontMB (talk) Need reliable sources of notability for those people that do not have WP articles; the positions they have held are not particularly notable. For those who have WP articles, none of their articles mention Clermont at all, so reliable sources for their connection to the town are needed.

(1) I will work on providing the sources I used for all the people that I listed. I will take your comment "the positions they have held are not particularly notable" into consideration.

(2) I found the Wikipedia article Notability for determining people are "notable." I will follow those guidelines, including these below: A sportsperson is presumed to be notable if the person has actively participated in a major amateur or professional competition or won a significant honor and so is likely to have received significant coverage in reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject. The following are presumed to be notable: Politicians and judges who have held international, national or sub-national (statewide/provincewide) office, and members or former members of a national, state or provincial legislature.[12] This also applies to persons who have been elected to such offices but have not yet assumed them. Major local political figures who have received significant press coverage.[8] Just being an elected local official, or an unelected candidate for political office, does not guarantee notability, although such people can still be notable if they meet the primary notability criterion of "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject of the article". Many articles contain (or stand alone as) lists of people. Inclusion within stand-alone lists should be determined the normal criteria established for that page. Inclusion in lists contained within articles should be determined by WP:SOURCELIST, in that the entries must have the same importance to the subject as would be required for the entry to be included in the text of the article according to Wikipedia policies and guidelines (including Wikipedia:Trivia sections).

(3) In the future, it would be nice if you could reach out to an editor like me who is new and advise, rather than remove everything first. Some of the notable people in the list I created did have sourcing and were clearly notable, so it would have been better to advise rather than remove those, for example.

ClermontMB (talk) 19:57, 8 November 2018 (UTC) ClermontMB[reply]

My family has lived in the town for 60 years, so I'm fairly familiar with the issue. I70 is the main drag for getting anywhere that matters. The problem during winter is that I70 gets cleared, but how do you get to I70? By SR1. SR1 is in essence a country road, and won't be routinely cleared by Connersville-based plows because it's not a city or county road.

If you're planning on going somewhere, or receiving a package when the road is closed, you're going to have to wait until the snow melts on its own. The point is, unlike Richmond, which has US40, when it snows in Connersville, there's no passable road out of town. If you're considering opening a business which does a lot of shipping (like manufacturing cars), do you think that'd matter? Sbalfour (talk) 20:40, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Sbalfour:. If it really is that unusual, then it should be possible to find a reliable source that says so. The problem is that even though you are a long-time resident and know a lot about the town, you are not a reliable source as far a Wikipedia is concerned. Wouldn't INDOT be responsible for plowing a state road? If so, why would those particular state highways not get plowed? Perhaps a newspaper in Connersville or Richmond has done a story on it. Indyguy (talk) 21:12, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

INDOT is responsible, but state plows aren't based in Connersville but Indianapolis, and SR1 is a long way from Indianapolis. It gets ignored, or by the time INDOT salts it, it's already become passable by natural conditions. I don't know of any newspaper stories on it; closures are usually broadcast on TV and radio because they're strictly temporary conditions. No, I'm not a wiki source, but fact is, about 50% of text in wikipedia is unsourced or improperly sourced. We allow the text because by and large, we want people to write, and allow the text to remain if it's probably true, and probably sourceable if someone is industrious enough to do the research. We've got bigger fish to fry than this phrase, so I'm moving on. Cheers, Sbalfour (talk) 00:21, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Sbalfour:: According to the map for the Greenfield District of INDOT at https://www.in.gov/indot/2704.htm, Fayette County is in the Cambridge City subdistrict, and there are INDOT units (whatever that exactly entails) at Cambridge City and Liberty. I doubt the plows come all the way from Indy. Maybe you can complain to the Greenfield District at the email address they list. Indyguy (talk) 03:22, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Lutheranism articles in Draft: Currently

• Draft:Frederick William Stellhorn
• Draft:Institute of Lutheran Theology--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 22:55, 21 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The district convention doctrinal resolution is described in some detail in "Reasons male teachers of the Lutheran Church--Missouri Synod resign from the teaching ministry, Richard P. Lopez, unpublished Master's thesis, 1973." Lopez goes through a history of the doctrine of the ministry of teachers in the Missouri Synod. This incident is part of his synopsis.--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 23:16, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Epiphyllumlover: That leads to another of the questions I have. Where is this unpublished thesis by Lopez available? Indyguy (talk) 13:57, 31 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

here is the catalog--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 23:39, 31 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What treaty was that in 1785 that effected Indian removals in Indiana? The Treaty of Greenville in 1795 nullified all the older treaties. The Treaty of Greenville itself didn't effect Indian removals in Indiana, because "the gore" wasn't part of Indiana until AFTER the Indians were removed. There were no Indians in "the Gore" in 1803 when it was ceded, so it wasn't Indiana's problem. Whether you accept that or not, the date cannot be earlier than 1795. Sbalfour (talk)

@Sbalfour:: "1785" is a typo that should be "1795", which I will correct. While the Treaty of Greenville did not mandate removal, it did transfer ownership of the land to the United States, which then proceeded to sell or otherwise transfer it to settlers. The end result is that most of the Indians would not longer be living there, and is certainly part of the process that led to the official removals. And as far as the Gore being part of the Ohio Territory immediately prior to 1803, using that logic would mean that none of the treaties signed prior to 1816 should be in this article since the state of Indiana did not exist until then. The article is talking about the area that is currently the state of Indiana regardless of what jurisdiction it was under at various times. Also, the Greenville treaty is discussed in the body of the article, so mentioning it in the lede is acceptable. Indyguy (talk) 20:28, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ok - date is a typo, got it. But if we're generally referring to government action in removing Indians, whether territorial or state government, because it had jurisdiction over the area to remove them, that won't include the gore, because the state of Ohio or the government of the Northwest Territory removed the Indians before it got to Indiana (territory or state). Harrison never had to trot over on his horse to 'the gore'. Sbalfour (talk) 20:38, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Good job on the rewrite! :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:20, 8 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thought this would interest you: Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Arnold_zu_Windisch-Graetz#Arnold_zu_Windisch-Graetz--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 20:14, 25 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I am not exactly sure what the procedures are for creating a page, about a small town election. I'm not sure if it is important enough to have a page, but it will be the biggest election in a long time for Forest Park. Anthony Calderone(the mayor) is gonna be gone, and we might have a whole new set of commissioners. Calderone has been uncontested/little opposition for the past 20 years he was in office.

I also want to create a page for Anthony calderone because that apparently doesnt exist. I dont know if he is important enough. He is the CEO of an alarm company, and is a long time small town mayor. Wild1-2001 (talk) 05:34, 10 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I assume I am probably not able to create pages, as my account is young with few edits. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wild1-2001 (talk • contribs) 05:39, 10 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Wild1-2001: Generally small town elections and mayors are not considered notable enough to have pages of their own. Your best bet would be to add a paragraph to the town's article. Indyguy (talk) 12:39, 10 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect "Concordia Lutheran Junior College". Since you had some involvement with the "Concordia Lutheran Junior College" redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. UnitedStatesian (talk) 18:24, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Was wondering if you could help over at Criticism of the Catholic Church. An editor came in today and removed over 100,000 characters or whatever it is in one day, both well-referenced material and the more stub-like sections alike.--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 01:02, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Indyguy,

I added the following text to the section of differences between the reformed and Lutheran view on the Law. I quoted directly from the published works of Luther and Calvin back in the sixteenth century, I quoted directly from Calvin's Institutes_of_the_Christian_Religion and from Luther's commentary on Galatians. Both these Books are being published from the sixteenth century from various respectable publishers. I cited their books from https://www.ccel.org, but they published by respectable publishing houses.

Baker book house: https://bakerbookhouse.com/products/commentary-on-the-epistle-to-the-galatians-9781483701615

https://bakerbookhouse.com/products/the-institutes-of-christian-religion-9780801025242

There some many other publishing houses are publishing these books.

Please review and add my addition to the topic.

"To Calvin law won’t condemn a man in the conscience after he comes to faith in Christ but rather acts as a guide to the believer. He wrote, “Law does not now perform toward us the part of a hard taskmaster, who will not be satisfied without full payment.” “Law is not to believers what it formerly was; in other words, that law does not, by terrifying and confounding their consciences, condemn and kill.” But in Luther’s view the Law always terrifies, condemns and kills a believer in his conscience before God, he wrote “The Law requires perfect obedience. It condemns all do not accomplish the will of God. But show me a person who is able to render perfect obedience.” “To live unto the Law is to die unto God. Vice versa, to die unto the Law is to live unto God. If you want to live unto God, bury the Law, and find life through faith in Christ Jesus.” Luther says when a man is Christian, he is free and not under the obligation to keep the law. he believes that Law hss no authority over the conscience of the believer to accuse him or judge him. He wrote “You are above all laws as far as conscience is concerned. You are saved. Christ is your liberty and life.” “we will not give up the liberty of conscience which we have in Christ Jesus. We refuse to have our conscience bound by any work or law so that by doing this or that we should be righteous or leaving this or that undone we should be damned.” While Calvin thinks Law has not lost its authority over believers and they obliged to obey it. He wrote “it must ever remain an indubitable truth, that the law has lost none of its authority over believers, but they must always respect and obey the law.” " — Preceding unsigned comment added by Funof2019 (talk • contribs) 00:12, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Funof2019:: The problem is that you are quoting statements made by Calvin and Luther and saying that those quotes completely summarize their positions. This is original research because you are the one picking out the quotes. What you need to do is find a published work by a recognized scholar that makes the comparison and use that as the basis for what you add. Luther, especially, wrote a huge amount of material, so just because you find some quotes in one of his books that seem to answer the question, there may be other things he has written or said that have to be taken into account. This is probably less of a problem with Calvin since he was a systematic theologian (something Luther was not), and what he says in his Institutes is more likely to be very descriptive of his view. Even so, you need to rely on what a published source says rather than using your own interpretation. Indyguy (talk) 02:09, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for not noticing that you had already undone the anonymous edit of Apostles' Creed. I also wanted to replace the cited source that gave the older as well as the newer version and may have contributed to the confusion of the anonymous editor. Bealtainemí (talk) 20:19, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Bealtainemí:: No problem. Citing a source that has only the version in question is a good idea, but it probably won't stop people from making changes to what they think is the correct grammar without, apparently, actually looking at the cited sources. I know I've reverted quite a few in various sections of the article. Indyguy (talk) 20:31, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, your input is requested at Talk:Theology_of_Martin_Luther#Merger_proposal with respect to possibly merging the Marian article into this one.--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 05:35, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, the reason I feel there is a place for the addition in the beginning of the article on Jesus and wine is because the first paragraph already mentions how Jesus made wine and with the first sentence of the article emphasizing the article is about alcohol in the bible it leads one to believe that Jesus made alcoholic wine. Given this first paragraph, I feel it is proper for the next paragraph to provide context and clarify, as the article on alcohol also has a picture of Jesus making wine near the beginning of the article. Along with providing the context, I feel referencing the text of the source, which speaks to the ways in which non alcoholic wine was available during that time, is helpful, but am fine removing the link to bibleinfo if you feel it may not be reliable(?) and will instead will reference theologians Albert Barnes and Adam Clarke commentaries on the Bible, who are both noted as reliable theologians -- In his commentary on the Gospel of John (Albert Barnes, Notes on the whole Bible), Albert Barnes wrote, “The wine of Judea was the pure juice of the grape, without any mixture of alcohol. It was the common drink of the people and did not produce intoxication.” And Adam Clarke, commenting on Genesis 40:11, wrote, “From this we find that wine anciently was the mere expressed juice of the grape without fermentation. The saky, or cupbearer, took the bunch [of grapes], pressed the juice into the cup, and instantly delivered it into the hands of his master. This was anciently the yayin [wine] of the Hebrews, the oinos [wine] of the Greeks, and the mustum [wine] of the ancient Latins.”.

Thanks, Statescontributor (talk) 17:05, 2 September 2019 (UTC)Statescontributor — Preceding unsigned comment added by Statescontributor (talk • contribs) 15:40, 2 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, given the nature of alcohol and the evidence submitted of clergy urging Christians to abstain, I feel the opening summary of the page "Christian views on Alcohol" should include mention of this view happening during that time in history, given how the article currently opens in contradiction to that evidence. Without that mention, the article gives an impression that there was only one, differing view with alcohol for Christians, that abstaining generally didn't happen. The article already mentions in the early church section an example that contradicts this view from Clement of Alexandria (died c. 215) who wrote in a chapter about drinking that he admired the young and the old who "abstain wholly from drink," who adopt an austere life and "flee as far as possible from wine, shunning it as they would the danger of fire." He strongly warned youth to "flee as far as possible" from it so as not to inflame their "wild impulses." He said Christ did not teach affected by it. "...the soul itself is wisest and best when dry."

Because of this evidence (and further evidence I've submitted that contradicts the current opening assumption of the article) I believe the opening summary (and a few small tweaks to a couple other statements in the article that reference the view held in the opening summary) should be restated to include the view presented with the evidence submitted. I also feel there should be some mention of the evidence of abstinence that happened between the period of the early church and the 19th century as there were churches during that time who professed abstaining from alcohol. I've added an example with the Brethren Church who professed a statement of abstinence after the reformation, but before the 19th century movement towards abstaining.

Given this evidence, are you ok to revert?

Thanks, Statescontributor (talk) 17:05, 2 September 2019 (UTC)Statescontributor[reply]

I was trying to do the "right" thing here by using the spaces template to add a non-breaking space between the abbreviation and date for each pair. I didn't realize it would subst to that unreadable mess! Thanks for noticing and cleaning it up. (I don't really care for line breaks in infoboxes so I don't usually add bulleted lists; they make infoboxes that already too long even longer. But I won't lose any sleep over this one!) ElKevbo (talk) 02:07, 11 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the edit - found a better place to put the info Tradimus (talk) 13:21, 14 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"To whom the book was dedicated is not particularly significant." Yes it is. Tone and content matter. I suppose you were either incapable of finding proper sources: if it really mattered, it wouldn't just appear in that vanity publication. Or you just couldn't be bothered. Drmies (talk) 01:17, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I came across some data you might feel like using for Indiana counties.

• Social Capital Variables Spreadsheet for 2014, PennState College of Agricultural Sciences, Northeast Regional Center for Rural Development
• Social Capital Project: Social Capital Index Data spreadsheet accompanying the U.S. Congress, Joint Economic Committee, Social Capital Project. “The Geography of Social Capital in America.” Report prepared by the Vice Chairman’s staff, 115th Cong., 2nd Sess. (April 2018)
• Religious statistics by county
• PeakVisor, search for "X County"
• ebird, gives bird species lists for each county
• Midwest Herbaria, search to generate plant species lists for each county
• Mycoportal, search to generate fungus and bryophyte species lists
• NASS QuickStats database, gives agricultural figures by county for many data points
• bestplaces.net

That is all for now.--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 02:39, 31 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• 
• 
• 

Happy New Year!

• 
  MMXX Lunar Calendar

Indyguy,
Have a great 2020 and thanks for your continued contributions to Wikipedia.

---

   – 2020 is a leap year – news article.
   – Background color is Classic Blue (#0F4C81), Pantone's 2020 Color of the year

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year 2020}} to user talk pages.

– ~~~~

No apology needed. I was in the process of adding it to the footer at about the same time you made your edit. Thanks for keeping an eye on the page. Sundayclose (talk) 02:11, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As the Lutheran hymns template has gotten too big, there is a discussion about what to do, you can join if you like at Template_talk:Lutheran_hymns#Topics.--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 04:05, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your quick correction to my edit on Corydon, Indyguy. I looked around to see how to do it properly and, when I finally found out how, came back and saw you'd already fixed it. I am new to editing, as you can tell. Thanks again! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.147.217.151 (talk) 17:41, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, there, Indyguy: Thanks for pointing this out... it's a work in progress, and I will absolutely attempt to curtail the History section narrative and transform into an original synopsis. You can hold me accountable if I don't do this in a timely manner. Thanks for your work. Momoneymoproblemz (talk)

I wish you could see your way clear to using dmy date format - a line of text looks so much cleaner without the added comma, and the separated numbers (with the month separating the day and year) makes reading so much easier. You say the dmy format is the "American" way, but I choose to disagree. I am as "American" as anyone, and the other way makes more sense to me. Incidentally, the US military, as well as the rest of the whole world, agrees with me. So, I would encourage you to become a person with a Worldwide Outlook instead of holding onto your Indiana roots. What do you say? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.2.238.223 (talk) 18:24, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@67.2.238.223: I'd suggest that you learn to be more accepting of diversity. Besides, MOS:DATETIES is the controlling rule in this situation. Indyguy (talk) 18:41, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

thx for your reply. I realize you are free to chg WP pages as appears "correct" to you, but I would point out that MOS:DATETIES is NOT a RULE. It is a statement to the effect that strictly-US WP pages "should" use the common mdy format. There is a lot of room between "should" and "must". I will reiterate that writing the date without the comma and with the numbers separated by a word appears cleaner and clearer - it appeals to me, and I am saddened that it does not equally appeal to you. cheers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.2.238.223 (talk) 19:49, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Seems like you don’t want those quotes to get out... HamLyfe (talk) 18:23, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@HamLyfe: - Nope, it's that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and should be written as one. Instead of adding long block quotes, summarize what the author says in two or three sentences. As I pointed out in my edit summary, the Christian attitudes towards Freemasonry article already had a banner that it has too many long quotations in it. Indyguy (talk) 18:54, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have noticed that you recently reverted my clean-up of the "book" section from the L.S. Ayres article. My original deletion and your reversion can be considered "style" and does not really change content so I can go either way. So my question to you is: Should this section include only books, or ALL references, or just SELECTED references (which is what it is now). Books needs to be listed in this section or {{sfn}} would fail to work properly. Your suggestions and your reasoning behind your suggestions would be greatly appreciated, especially if the selection is just selected. Thanks. -- 68.50.32.85 (talk) 03:32, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@68.50.32.85: - You are correct, they aren't needed. I didn't see that you had created standard footnote entries for them in a previous edit. Indyguy (talk) 04:18, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Shorten FootNotes {{sfn}} is a really cool but underutilized editing tool for INLINE CITATIONS since it make life much easier for a person who needs to go to lookup a particular page of a book (especially when parts of the book is available directly online) to see if the given citation supports a particular paragraph or claim. General references are not really useful when compared with inline citation and I would suggest avoiding general reference sections when possible and only used them to hold books which Shorten FootNotes needs to generate an external link. The L.S. Ayres article now looks much cleaner with all citations being placed inline via SFNs, but it took awhile to convert properly. -- 68.50.32.85 (talk) 03:02, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@68.50.32.85: - Yes, I agree. I've used them myself for several years when citing different parts of the same book, magazine, journal, etc. in an article. If I'm only citing a book one time in an article that isn't already using that method, then I use the more common method. Indyguy (talk) 04:46, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse me but you may not remove my edit as i have sourced references with the proof and they are completely relavent to the prevalence of abortion among christians. Just because you dont like the proof doesnt make you the arbiter of truth.

Russia, where Orthodox and Protestant outnumber Catholics, has the highest abortion rate in the world while Mexico has the lowest.

• https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/abortion-rates-by-country
• https://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/23/world/europe/23iht-church.4.12274801.html

China and India, where Protestants outnumber Catholics, are the countries with the highest annual estimated abortions.

• https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CHRG-114hhrg98715/html/CHRG-114hhrg98715.htm
• https://www.guttmacher.org/news-release/2017/national-estimate-abortion-india-released#:~:text=Study%20Finds%2015.6%20Million%20Abortions,in%20the%20country%20in%202015.
• https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2020/09/15/protestant-christianity-is-booming-in-china
• https://www.worldatlas.com/amp/articles/countries-with-the-most-protestant-christians.html</ref>

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Danielbr11 (talk • contribs) 20:51, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I see that other editors have addressed your complaint on the talk page of the Christianity and abortion article. Those are also my reasons. I hope you have read the policies they directed you to and understand why your edits were not acceptable. Indyguy (talk) 04:53, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Concerning your recent edit...

• https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=St._John%27s_College_(Kansas)&curid=16752463&diff=1006311310&oldid=958416224&diffmode=source

Per WP:REFNAME,

• quote "Names should have semantic value, so that they can be more easily distinguished from each other by human editors who are looking at the wikitext. This means that ref names like "Nguyen 2010" are preferred to names like ":1"."

• ":0" and ":1" needs to be changed.

Please fix. Thanks in advance.

• Sbmeirow • Talk • 19:10, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Sbmeirow:: Interesting. I was not aware of that recommendation. The problem is that the Visual Editor, which I was using, automatically uses the ":0" and ":1" style of ref names, and that behavior cannot be altered. I'll go back and manually edit this article, but I doubt that I'll remember to do it every time I add a repeated ref with the Visual Editor. Perhaps fixing that behavior can be made a priority with the developer team. Indyguy (talk) 20:56, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your edits to my recent article creation on Henry Sieck! I'm more familiar with his son (whose article I started a couple of years ago), but the other day I realized Rev. H. Sieck met notability requirements when I saw he had been president of a college. I'm out of my depths in writing about the Lutheran church, but I've long felt Lutheranism and especially LCMS people and topics are underrepresented on Wikipedia, so I like to create brief articles on seminary presidents as a very small contribution. I appreciate your cleaning them up/expanding/making calls on what should be included!

I'd like to see more articles on the historic big-city churches, too, and I've been playing around with doing that for a few in St. Louis. I see you've created articles on churches and at least one school. Would you be willing to look at a couple of drafts and edit/contribute to them if and when I have them ready? I am always concerned that I'll do the work and an article will go to AfD because I struggle to communicate the notability of the churches to the non-Lutherans looking over pages and wondering where the notability is. Well, please let me know and I'll tag you when I have something. Thank you for reviewing my rambling message and have a great day! --DiamondRemley39 (talk) 13:56, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I nominated the article for DYK with you as co-creator. If you could please add citations to the material without them I would appreciate it, as that will prevent DYK approval. Thanks for your excellent work on this article. Also feel free to propose a different hook if you think of a better one.4meter4 (talk) 13:19, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

4meter4 - I think I've gotten all the refs in now. Let me know if I missed any. As far as the DYK blurb is concerned, I like both, although I might have put the pigeon one first. Thanks for nominating the article. Indyguy (talk) 15:09, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Great! If you have a hook preference between the two, just say so at the nomination page and the promoting admin will probably consider that in making a choice. I personally don't care which hook gets used.4meter4 (talk) 15:20, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

On 18 June 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Tomlinson Hall, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Indianapolis's Tomlinson Hall (pictured) was destroyed by fire on January 30, 1958, allegedly after a pigeon dropped a lit cigarette on the roof of the building? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Tomlinson Hall. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Tomlinson Hall), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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.

—valereee (talk) 00:02, 18 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! Thanks for pointing out the state website didn't say anything about a state fish. The strange thing is, basically every other website I'm seeing is saying Indiana's state fish is a bass of some sort. However I'm not going to add it back unless I can either figure out where they're getting this information or if I can find out where this info might be listed on Indiana's state website. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) (Stupidity by me) 13:11, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Indyguy - re this revert... then why is he in Category:Sportspeople from Gary, Indiana? It was that category which prompted my edit. User:Jweiss11, who seems to be an expert on American football articles, added the Gary connection more than a decade ago. Should that also be removed? Grutness...wha? 02:32, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Grutness: Yes, that should also be removed. I didn't notice it when I reverted your edits. It's interesting how incorrect stuff stays around for years, although I imagine most readers don't even look at the categories; I know I often don't. Indyguy (talk) 03:55, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

True. I'm hoping I haven't jumped to wrong conclusions with incorrect categories elsewhere in my current WP work! Grutness...wha? 04:24, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, there's a good chance someone watching the page would notice it like I did. There's probably not a large number that had the incorrect category to begin with. And if one slips through, at least it's consistent. Indyguy (talk) 06:10, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

So it appears there was some confusion over whether Tony Hinkle attended Calumet High School (Chicago) or Calumet New Tech High School in Gary, Indiana. When I added the Gary category back in 2011, the body of the article said that Hinkle graduated from the Gary school. The article now says he graduated from the Chicago school, which appears to be correct. Jweiss11 (talk) 17:35, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Hossier State was suspended for 4 years (1999-2003) when the Kentucky Cardinal was operating 217.196.140.95 (talk) 08:36, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi IndyGuy! Longtime-no see. Thanks for the correct reversion to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_Park_(Indianapolis) it appears that (according to this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1911_Butler_Christians_football_team ) a version of the Butler team played at the park for one year. Maybe the Washington Park entry should say that. I'll leave it to you because you're a more experience editor. It feels weird to have a bunch of football stats on a page about baseball. --Jaireeodell (talk) 18:57, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Jaireeodell: I've updated it. Indyguy (talk) 19:23, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Indyguy: Thanks! Take care. Nasty weather. --Jaireeodell (talk) 20:51, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

About your edit, which is this by the way: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Crossroads_League&diff=next&oldid=1077726187

Are you serious? jlog3000 (talk) 02:10, 18 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Johnluisocasio:: If I weren't serious, I wouldn't have done it. What part the edit do you find unserious — the grammar corrections, the improved reference format, the correcting of hyphens to en dashes in year ranges, the removal of a section heading that had no text under it, or the removal of unnecessary bolding in table items? Apparently it was the bolding, since you changed it back. I won't revert your change because MOS:BOLD doesn't explicitly address it, but in general bolding is not supposed to be used except in certain specified situations, and items in a table is not one of them. Indyguy (talk) 04:32, 18 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Clearly I only did the quotation parts to do the bolding, plus to match up others rows or columns who have bolding on the word and are the colored ones. If that makes sense, or if that clarifies things. P.S.: I don't mind you adjusting on some wordings of context on some of the chronological timelines (which I would eventually fix on those from other athletic conferences' articles at some point), the only issue was the un-bolding, which I momentarily corrected. jlog3000 (talk) 04:49, 18 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Johnluisocasio - It would have been better if you had actually stated what your complaint was rather than typing a snarky "Are you serious?" Indyguy (talk) 05:33, 18 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Does it really matter now? You did what you believed that what you thought was just or correct. It was what it was. jlog3000 (talk) 05:35, 18 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

	The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
	thanks for thanking me for my edit on the Indiana farmers coliseum Somewhereattheendofspace (talk) 02:13, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you remove Denise Paul Hatch the Center Township Constable Elect under Center Township Notable Persons? Marion County Election results have been certified and she won the contested primary as can be seen at Marion county election board results page and IS the Center Township Constable ELECT until Nov election and Jan 1 swearing in. She is running uncontested with no challenger in the Nov general election. I suspect slated establishment partisanship on your behalf is the real reason for the deletion. Sweeney Bell etc. 172.58.122.196 (talk) 15:20, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

My response is on the Talk:Center Township, Marion County, Indiana page. I copied the above message to that location so it's all in one place. Indyguy (talk) 15:59, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There was a long discussion about navboxes that are invisible to the majority of our users, the mobile users. The {{Monuments of Rome}} cannot be used by them. The next landmark under The image is taken from this navbox. Ruedi33a (talk) 15:48, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Ruedi33a: Can you supply a link to that discussion? I don't think the way you're implementing this solution is viable globally. Indyguy (talk) 16:01, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Ca' d'Oro#Rfc about navigation for mobile users contains the discussion. In Ca' d'Oro, the prototype is active.

Ruedi33a (talk) 16:16, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Ruedi33a: So, you had a discussion about using an image map to accomplish this which just about everybody opposed, so you removed the ones you had added to articles. Now you just start putting these "next landmark" comments in captions without any further discussion. This solution is just as bad because there is no context and does not work if there is more than one navbox in the article. It would be better if you obtained consensus before making mass edits like this to dozens of articles. Indyguy (talk) 16:34, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The prototype was active in 19 articles (every article mentioned in {{Venice landmarks}}) since 26 May 2022. I have waited for an undo to create an RFC. Nothing happened. Today I implemented the prototype for {{Monuments of Rome}}. I will create an RFC and I will remove all my changes if it is not accepted.OK?Ruedi33a (talk) 16:59, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Ruedi33a: That sounds good. Thank you. Indyguy (talk) 17:08, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

RFC posted in Talk:Sant'Agostino, Rome#Rfc about navigation for mobile users within caption Ruedi33a (talk) 18:10, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

	Upcoming Indianapolis event - July 28: Food Deserts & Food Policy
	You are invited to join us at Ruth Lilly Law Library for an edit-a-thon on Food Deserts & Food Policy hosted by Ruth Lilly Law Library and United States National Agricultural Library. Together, both experienced and new Wikipedia editors will collaboratively improve articles on food deserts, nutrition, and related local and federal food policy. Thursday, July 28th from 11am-4pm, in Room 235G, Inlow Hall, 530 West New York St. Indianapolis, IN 46202. Visit the Wikipedia/Meetup page or Eventbrite to sign up and learn more. We hope to see you there! Sincerely, Dominic, Jere, & Jamie

(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for Indiana-area events by removing your name from this list. Sent on 08:54, 18 July 2022 (UTC).)

Hello indyguy. You asked me why I want my mention of Queen Marie's relationship with the Baha'i Faith to be left even though there appears to be no connection with Frank Buchman. Her initial introduction to and long term involvement with the Baha'i Faith was a spiritual turning point in her life, and during the time she was connecting with Buchman the two were extremely important to her. Her commitment to the Baha'i Faith was life long whereas her connection with Buchman wasn't. Violadude63 (talk) 14:47, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Violadude63:: That's exactly the reason why it doesn't belong in Buchman's article. Her faith was important to her even after her contact with Buchman ended, and there's no indication that Buchman was instrumental in her decision. The article is about Buchman, not Marie. The material you want to add belongs in her article. Indyguy (talk) 15:01, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I felt that it was relevant but if you really wish it to stay out then so be it. Thank you for your patience. Violadude63 (talk) 15:04, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You recently edited an article and removed material using the edit summary "People in Notable people sections need to meet Wikipedia notability standards. In practice it generally means that they need to have articles of their own." Notability is only required for a subject to have its own article; the notability guideline explicitly says that it "does not determine the content of articles, but only whether the topic may have its own article." Wikipedia:Notability (people) makes this even more explicit: "Inclusion in lists contained within articles should be determined by WP:SOURCELIST, in that the entries must have the same importance to the subject as would be required for the entry to be included in the text of the article according to Wikipedia policies and guidelines (including Wikipedia:Trivia sections)."

The material you removed was not supported by any sources so you don't need to worry about restoring it; no worries. ElKevbo (talk) 00:23, 25 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for supporting the NPP initiative to improve WMF support of the Page Curation tools. Another way you can help is by voting in the Board of Trustees election. The next Board composition might be giving attention to software development. The election closes on 6 September at 23:59 UTC. View candidate statement videos and Vote Here. MB 03:29, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I just wanted to ask you. Is it true External Links need to go on the bottom of a page? I always thought that the See Also sections had to be at the bottom. Toad40 (talk) 16:29, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Toad40: just about every article I've read or worked on has the External links as the last section heading. See MOS:SO. Indyguy (talk) 16:42, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, alright! Just wanted to confirm. Thanks for showing me the Manual of Style page! Toad40 (talk) 16:46, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Bloomington	Upcoming events around Indiana - Nov. 1: Environmental Justice editathons 2 locations: Indianapolis & Bloomington (and virtual option)	IUPUI
	You are invited to join us for a multi-site editathon organized by Indiana Wikimedians at IUPUI University Library in downtown Indianapolis and the Herman B Wells Library at IU Bloomington (with virtual option). Together, both experienced and new Wikipedia editors, with faculty subject matter experts, will collaboratively improve articles on environmental justice in Indiana and globally. Join us at either location or virtually! Tuesday, November 1st from 11am-4pm, at... Indianapolis: IUPUI University Library, Ashby Browsing Room (2nd floor) Bloomington: Indiana University Bloomington, Wells Library, Hazelbaker Hall, room E159 (1st Floor, East Tower) [Visitor Information] Virtual: Via Zoom (please register on Eventbrite for link) Visit the meetup page or Eventbrite to sign up and learn more. We hope to see you there! Sincerely, Dominic & Jere

(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for Indiana-area events by removing your name from this list. Sent on 01:52, 10 October 2022 (UTC).)

	Nov. 11-13: WikiConference North American Meetup! IUPUI University Library (and around Indianapolis)
	Registration is now open for WikiConference North America 2022 (Nov. 11–13) held jointly with Mapping USA! If you would like to experience this virtual event in-person, you are welcome to join our meetup in Indianapolis! We will be meeting at IUPUI University Library for the weekend, with AV set up for conference streaming and presenting (for those who've submitted proposals). Anyone is welcome to join, we will have some light refreshments and are planning evening activities. Feel free to join us for an activity, a day, or the whole weekend. Please let us know you are coming via the meetup page and please register for the conference. We will share more about in-person activities on the meetup page as they are finalized. Visit the WikiConference North America site for the schedule and visit our meetup page to sign up and learn more. And don't forget to register for the conference! —From the Wikimedia Indiana team!

(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for Indiana-area events by removing your name from this list. Sent on 17:16, 4 November 2022 (UTC).)

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:22, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated Eli Lilly for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regards to the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:39, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Indyguy. I recall you have helped contribute to the Sylvia Likens article over the years. As you are from Indianapolis, I was wondering if, should you have the time, you could photograph the granite memorial erected in Willard Park in 2001 and upload it to the Commons? I cannot find a free use image on Flickr. Thanks. K. Kieronoldham (talk) 23:12, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for helping clean up my Lutheran-related articles over the past few years. I have an awareness and an appreciation for the history as well as a desire to share info that is not on the open internet, but I have no great knowledge of any one topic. I am winding down my Wikipedia work and plan to semi-retire, but I'd had sources for Alfred Fuerbringer for a few years, so I thought I'd live the sunk cost fallacy rather than toss the little research already done. But it's so incomplete. I didn't include much family info, dates of education institution attendance and presidencies, but may add those soon, if I can find good sources for all of it. If I knew more about Seminex, I'd look into his involvement and write something up, as but, alas... And the parallels of him and his brother are interesting. Makes me wish I could have been a fly on the wall in their childhood home. I've rambled here. Sorry! Thanks to your cleanup, adding it to WikiProject, etc., The article ready looks better; I'm less concerned about seeing improvement templates, etc. I appreciate what you've done for all of the articles. If I ever get to write about Fuerbringer's grandfather, you may find yourself with quite a bit more cleanup, as I will be far out of my depths. Have a nice day! DiamondRemley39 (talk) 18:58, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am new-ish to editing on Wikipedia, and appreciate your help with getting the references and links the way they should be, following my contributions of content on the List of Reformed Baptist Denominations page :) Chewybuoy (talk) 14:25, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In this edit, you state you've never seen Purdue University referred to as "PU"....I grew up there, and it was very frequently referred to as PU. I don't think the article is hurt by taking it out though. — Jacona (talk) 17:21, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Jacona Interesting. Was PU used in print media, which wouldn't be real surprising since it saves space, or was it used in TV/video also? Indyguy (talk) 19:32, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely in print (I just browsed through some Lafayette Journal and Courier issues to confirm), and definitely on radio WASK/WAZY. I don't know about TV and video; I either went to games or listened on radio, not TV. "Video" wasn't really a thing in those days. I believe the article reads fine without it, in any case, but couldn't resist replying to the edit caption. — Jacona (talk) 20:08, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

	Upcoming Indianapolis event March 17: Indiana Women in the Arts
	You are invited to join us at Newfields for an edit-a-thon on Indiana women in the arts, co-hosted by Wikimedians of Indiana and IUPUI University Library. Together, both experienced and new Wikipedia editors will collaboratively improve articles on women artists and artworks of Indiana. Friday, March 17th from 10am-3pm, in Stout Reference Library, Newfields (Indianapolis Museum of Art), 4000 North Michigan Rd, Indianapolis, IN 46208 Visit the Wikipedia Meetup page or Eventbrite to sign up and learn more. We hope to see you there! Sincerely, Dominic & Jere

(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for Indiana-area events by removing your name from this list. Sent on 21:02, 8 March 2023 (UTC).)

If the Britannica page says that, it's wrong. Research the passage. It doesn't say what I corrected, it says my correction. GregLGII (talk) 05:22, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@GregLGII: Then you should be able to supply reliable secondary sources for your contention. Furthermore, you would also need to show by those sources that the current rendering is considered incorrect by the most scholars. Indyguy (talk) 15:44, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The reference is already on the page. (Luke 22:19-22).

I quoted the New English translation (2017). If you research the passage, you will see the vast majority of English translations render the passage as I posted it. The real question is, what translation renders the passage the way it is on the page now? GregLGII (talk) 16:24, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@GregLGII: I suggest you look at the 1 Corinthians 11:23–25 passage. The New Testament uses variations in terminology in the different passages that talk about the Eucharist. So either way is correct. The cited Britannica article is probably referring to the Corinthians passage, perhaps because most New Testament scholars think that Paul wrote it before the Gospel accounts were written. The problem is that your change does not agree with the cited non-primary sources. Again, you first need to find a reliable secondary source and cite it. Indyguy (talk) 16:48, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Britannica is attempting to quote the Gospels. The Britannica article misquotes the passage.

Britannica says, “According to the Gospel accounts, Jesus established the practice at the Last Supper, a traditional Passover seder, when he blessed the bread, which he said was his body, and shared it with his disciples. He then shared a cup of wine with his disciples and told them that “this is the blood of 𝗺𝘆 𝗰𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗻𝗮𝗻𝘁, which is poured out for many.””

Subheading; "Origin in Scripture"

https://www.britannica.com/topic/Eucharist

The Gospels say, “Then he took a loaf of bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to them, saying, “This is my body, which is given for you. Do this in remembrance of me.” And he did the same with the cup after supper, saying, “This cup that is poured out for you is the 𝗻𝗲𝘄 𝗰𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗻𝗮𝗻𝘁 in my blood. But see, the one who betrays me is with me, and his hand is on the table. For the Son of Man is going as it has been determined, but woe to that one by whom he is betrayed!”” (Luke 22:19-22 NRSVCE 👈🏿New Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition)

I just read 1st Corinthians 11:23-26.

"“For I received from the Lord what I also handed on to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night when he was betrayed took a loaf of bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, “This is my body that is for you. Do this in remembrance of me.” In the same way he took the cup also, after supper, saying, “This cup is the 𝗻𝗲𝘄 𝗰𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗻𝗮𝗻𝘁 in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.” For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes.”" (1 Corinthians 11:23-26 NRSVCE)

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Corinthians%2011&version=NRSVCE

“Used broadly among biblical scholarship,[10][11] the NRSV was intended as a translation to serve the devotional, liturgical, and scholarly needs of the broadest possible range of Christian religious adherents.”

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Revised_Standard_Version GregLGII (talk) 17:51, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I was the person who gave the reference for the edit you made, I was NOT the person who wrote the original information that corrected a mistake on Wikipedia (check the IP's). A good editor before removing a very short true correction on an error without a reference would have made a quick Google search where there first thing that comes up works, instead of removing it, the same time you spent removing it could have been correcting it. You are correct he should have made the reference, and if I made the comment I likely would have done so. (you were the 3rd reckless editor to make undo their correct change and if not for the fact I was looking into the anti truth history of one of the earlier editors, I would not have discovered this and given the reference). That said I stand by what I said, if it takes less then 1 minute to find a clearly acceptable citation do not delete and if you do you are at fault even more than they are. They made the change more truthful but ignored the citation, you by removing the truthful statement (without a citation) actually (re)created a falsehood that was previously on Wikipedia. You are more anti good editing than the previous offender. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.21.243.42 (talk) 22:10, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not trying to give you a hard time, but some pics you have to make bigger than others so they are easier to see. I get you want things all to be standardized, but you also can't assume everyone has 20/20 vision either. Vjmlhds (talk) 03:21, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Vjmlhds: According to MOS:UPRIGHT, "Except with very good reason, a fixed width in pixels (e.g. 17px) should not be specified." Using a fixed width prevents the image from being displayed properly if a user uses a base width other than the default 220 pixels. On my browser, the first two images at the right are approximately the same width. Using the upright parameter with no value is the same as upright=0.75, which results in the image being displayed slightly narrower than the 175px one. The third image is with no upright parameter, which I think, because the image is a horizontal rectangle, allows sufficient detail to be seen. This is what was being used before you changed it to 175px. Are you using an unusual base width setting in your preferences? Indyguy (talk) 04:05, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not that I know of. My whole point is that not everyone's eyes are the same, and not everyone's computer is the same, so you just can't do a "one size fits all" approach. That's why you tweak and adjust and try to get it a good as you can. I'm not trying to reinvent the wheel or anything, but I just just want a nice clear picture. Remember back in the day when people had to fiddle around with their vertical hold on their TVs to get the picture just right? Kind of the same idea here. Vjmlhds (talk) 13:27, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Vjmlhds:: I think I understand what you're saying. The problem is that while hardcoding makes it better for you, it can make it worse for other readers. Do you see much difference in size between the first two pictures at the right? Is the third one a better size? Indyguy (talk) 14:10, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The top pic works better...it's clearer and the people don't look like dots. You're not gonna please everybody no matter what, but with pics, bigger is better, as the whole point of them is to actually see what they entail. Vjmlhds (talk) 14:15, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Vjmlhds:: You didn't exactly answer my question. Are the first two images approximately the same size? Indyguy (talk) 14:44, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, wasn't trying to avoid the question. The first pic is way bigger than the second pic, and the third pick is more or less in between. Vjmlhds (talk) 17:38, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Upcoming Indianapolis event - May 13: Indiana Politics & Government 2023
	It's been an eventful state legislative session in Indiana, and local elections took place this week, so we have lots to cover! You are invited to The AMP at 16 Tech in Indianapolis for a Politics & Government editathon to improve write articles about local political and government topics of interest and improve information about local officials, candidates, elections, and legislation. Come join us at this fun venue, with free parking and refreshments provided! Saturday, May 13: Indiana Politics & Government 2023 (RSVP), focusing on Indiana politics and government and the Indiana Spring 2023 session. 11am–4pm The AMP at 16 Tech in Indianapolis, IN. We hope to see you there! Sincerely, Wikimedians in Indiana User Group

(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for Indiana-area events by removing your name from this list. Sent on 01:27, 5 May 2023 (UTC).)

No source? How about the 1662 Book of Common Prayer itself? In the Order for the Last Supper, we find this:

ALMIGHTY God, whose kingdom is ever-lasting, and power infinite: Have mercy upon the whole Church; and so rule the heart of thy chosen servant CHARLES, our King and Governor, that he (knowing whose minister he is) may above all things seek thy honour and glory: and that we and all his subjects (duly considering whose authority he hath) may faithfully serve, honour, and humbly obey him, in thee, and for thee, according to thy blessed Word and ordinance; through Jesus Christ our Lord, who with thee and the Holy Ghost liveth and reigneth, ever one God, world without end.

The book acknowledges the British sovereign as King and Governor, and they promise to obey him. Such a promise is inconsistent with the duty of a citizen of the United States. Indeed, one of the reasons the Episcopal Church was established, and the Book of Common Prayer rewritten, in 1789, was to remove the requirement of professing allegiance to the British King.Alexander Springstea (talk) 21:08, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Alexander Springstea: The 1662 Book of Common Prayer is at most a source for the fact that those sentences are in that book. It does not state anything about the ACNA and whether the ACNA's adoption of the the 1662 BOCP extends to such historically conditioned provisions. It certainly does not say "Thus they are not loyal to the United States or the principles of the American Revolution", since the US did not exist then. In other words, you need a current reliable secondary source that says all that. Indyguy (talk) 21:52, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If the provision is as harmless as you say, why was the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of America formed, and why did they see a need to change the Prayer Book? And why does ACNA feel a need to regress backwards to the time when people in North America were subjects of the British King? Alexander Springstea (talk) 23:14, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Alexander Springstea: I'm not making any argument about whether the provision was harmless or not, and that doesn't matter. You are making an assertion that requires a reliable source to support, and haven't given any such source. Instead, you are taking a statement in a 17th century document and coming up with your own interpretation of the impact that has now on the ACNA. That's original research, which is not permitted on Wikipedia. I suggest you read the policies I have linked to so that you better understand what the rules here are. Indyguy (talk) 03:35, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Upcoming Indianapolis event - July 30, 2023: Indiana State Fair Wiknic
	We are partnering with the Indiana State Fair to offer FREE tickets to the fair for Wikipedians! We will be meeting on July 30th at 10am to pass out tickets and have a quick info session before we attend the fair (feel free to branch off and share your accomplishments on the Meetup page later!) Detailed instructions on how the day will go is available on the Meetup page! We hope you'll join us to edit about things related to fair (historic buildings, foods, animals, activities, and the fair itself). All levels of experience are welcome! Please RSVP so we know who is coming. We hope you'll join us! Sunday, June 30: Wikipedia:Meetup/Indianapolis/State Fair Wiknic (RSVP), focusing on topics related to the Indiana State Fair. 10 am to ? at the Indiana State Fairgrounds; meet at the Deaf School Gateway We hope to see you there! Sincerely, Wikimedians of Indiana User Group

(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for Indiana-area events by removing your name from this list. Sent on 13:53, 22 July 2023 (UTC).)

Hi there, I just wanted to make sure you saw this invitation! As I wrote on the event page, we've been gifted a bunch of free tickets by the State Fair to distribute to Wikipedians. Even if you can't make it at the time we scheduled for the event, since you don't need the Wikipedia tutorial, let me know if you'd still like to use a free ticket to use for any other time during fair season. You can just upload some photos or do other edits (or even a new article). I already have the tickets in my possession, so I'd be happy to find a way to get them to you! Dominic·t 13:30, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I see you removed my comment regarding Christian Justification. The popular belief that once a person is saved by faith alone with eternal life despite what good/bad works comes afterward is not mentioned anywhere in the article and it does not fall under Protestantism. As the page says, some who believe in saved by faith alone, believe one can lose it, or another believes good works will come as evidence. The description I provided was different from these and therefore needs to be re-added. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andiio (talk • contribs) 16:41, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Andiio: The main problem is that you did not supply a reliable source for what you want to add, and therefore it is original research, which is not allowed on Wikipedia. Indyguy (talk) 17:03, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@User:Indyguy: Thank you for your quick response, please can you see Wiki page Free grace theology as a reference. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andiio (talk • contribs) 17:11, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Andiio: No, another Wikipedia page cannot be used as a reliable source, and even if it could be, you need to add the citation to the text you are adding. It looks like you haven't done a lot of editing here, so I suggest you look at the linked articles at the top of your talk page, and in particular, read about citing sources. Indyguy (talk) 17:23, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Indyguy I should be able to use the King James Bible itself as a source:

John 6:47 KJV

Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life.

This shows that once a person believes, they have (present tense) eternal life. If God was to take that eternal life away for bad works, then this verse would be a lie. It would make God a liar and according to the below verse cannot happen:

Titus 1:2 KJV

2 In hope of eternal life, which God, that cannot lie, promised before the world began;

The following verse shows that good works won't automatically come after salvation by faith alone, rather, it shows an instruction that we should perform good works (rather than the word must) in order to be a good ambassador to Jesus Christ.

Ephesians 2:10 KJV

For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.

If good works automatically came post salvation, then The Apostle Paul would have no need to encourage believers to do them. It is possible for a person to get saved and to do no good works, but still be saved:

Romans 4:5 KJV

5 But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.

Thank you

Andiio Andiio 17:27, 24 July 2023 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andiio (talk • contribs)

@Andiio: No, using Bible verses directly is not acceptable. The Bible is considered to be a primary source. You need to find a reliable secondary source - one that has been published - that states what you are trying to add. Look at the various citations in the Salvation in Christianity article itself to see what sort of reference you need to supply. Indyguy (talk) 17:59, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Indyguy what about these website links: https://www.gotquestions.org/free-grace.html and also https://www.gracelife.org/resources/gracenotes/?lang=eng&id=67 I feel Free Grace Theology should be represented as millions believe it. Andiio 07:20, 25 July 2023 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andiio (talk • contribs)

@Andiio: Yes, I think those would be acceptable. Indyguy (talk) 14:51, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Indyguy Thank you for your help and guidance Indyguy, much appreciated Andiio 15:03, 25 July 2023 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andiio (talk • contribs) [reply]

Indyguy, You reverted the edits I recently made to the "Concordia Lutheran Conference" page. The reason for your reverts was that my claim of "CLC" as a protected trademark of the "Church of the Lutheran Confession" was false. Please view our USPTO page at https://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4801:aag6vh.2.30. You will note that the very first line indicates that the letters "CLC" are indeed a protected Word Mark. Please remove your reverts. Thanks! Glenn Oster Glenn (talk) 13:31, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Goster: I had to do a new search of the site because the query you referred to had expired. I found registration serial number 87209558, which I assume is the correct one, and it says "The mark consists of a stylized design of a cross and to the right of the cross are the letters "CLC", which indicates to me that it does not consist of merely the letters "CLC". Indyguy (talk) 15:24, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You are referring to the "Service Mark" (also known as the "Design Mark"). There is also the protected "Word Mark", which you will find indicated at the TOP of the listing. We have trademarked both the "Word Mark" and "Service Mark".

If you go to the USPTO document pages (https://tsdr.uspto.gov/documentviewer?caseId=sn87209558&docId=FTK20161024102131&linkId=13#docIndex=12&page=1), and if this link has not yet expired, you will see the following:

MARK: CLC (stylized and/or with design, see mark)

The literal element of the mark consists of CLC. Glenn (talk) 16:54, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Goster: Generally WIkipedia follows the common usage of words. I would suggest that until you can prevail upon the Concordia Lutheran Conference to stop using "CLC" on their website, there's no reason for Wikipedia to do so. Please understand that Wikipedia articles are not owned by their subjects, so the Concordia Lutheran Conference article is not speaking on behalf of that body, but rather is describing it, and in this case the "CLC" is just an abbreviation used internally in the article. Indyguy (talk) 17:22, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This mark is not being used 'internally', but PUBLICLY to refer to this organization. The use of this mark has already caused confusion (which is why I became involved). Despite what you say Wikipedia's stance is, I do not believe Wikipedia has an interest in defending trademark infringments.

As far as the use of this mark on their website, this is being handled on an official level between our synods.

- Glenn Glenn (talk) 17:43, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Slovak Zion Synod, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ULCA.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:23, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Upcoming Indianapolis event - October 11, 2023: Indiana Under-represented Artists Edit-a-thon
	You are invited to Herron Art Library in Herron School of Art & Design for an Under-represented Artists of Indiana Edit-a-thon—hosted by the Wikimedians of Indiana User Group with support from the Central Indiana Community Foundation. Together, new and experienced Wikipedia editors will collaboratively improve articles on under-represented Indiana based artists and art/artist organizations and groups in Indiana today, and historically. When: Wednesday October 11, 2023 11:30 am - 2:00 pm Eastern Where: Herron Art Library in Herron School of Art & Design 735 W. New York St. Indianapolis, IN 46202 Parking: Please park in lot 88 - the visitor parking area in the garage across the surface lot from Herron. We will have parking vouchers available. What to bring: Your preferred editing device and necessary charging cables, and any material you may want to reference. Lunch and refreshments will be provided. All levels of experience are welcome! Please RSVP so we know who is coming. We hope you'll join us! We hope to see you there! Sincerely, Wikimedians of Indiana User Group

(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for Indiana-area events by removing your name from this list. Sent on 00:49, 5 October 2023 (UTC).)"

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:23, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello.

We have been working hard on providing information about this school in Shanghai and trying to adhere to Wikipedia policies. It appears that you continue to delete the entire entry. We have been including historical facts and links to verify the data. I understand if we need to have fewer links directly to the school's website, but many links are external.

Can you please provide some constructive feedback so that we can complete this page?

Thank you.

LifeIsNow001 (talk) 18:23, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Indyguy, What do you think about adding a biography page for the 2024 Prohibition Party candidate Michael Wood? www.Prohibition2024.com has a bio and photo. 2003:F6:EF0B:3D94:7840:11A8:E876:4529 (talk) 11:56, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

He would have to meet the Wikipedia's standards for notability of people. I suspect that as the nominee of a very minor party who is will not even be on the ballot in most states, it would be difficult to meet that standard unless he is notable for a reason other than politics. The bio that you referred to is one paragraph long and says only that he is from California, was CEO of an unnamed company, and is retired. That could easily fit in the article on the party. Indyguy (talk) 14:47, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Indyguy,

You recently reverted an edit I made regarding the fact that Gregory Schulz has not been reinstated. He is still not back teaching classes; I don't know what exactly you're looking for as a source. I could reference the entire course catalogue for 2023-2024, but I feel like that's excessive.

Wikipedia says, "Wikipedia's verifiability policy requires inline citations for any material challenged or likely to be challenged, and for all quotations, anywhere in article space" (emphasis added). This isn't a piece of information that's challengeable, given that a reinstatement (and not a lack thereof) would have accompanying sources. In other words, it seems like you're demanding a source for a fact that's based on lack of information (e.g. I couldn't give you a source if I asserted that there are no purple people in America—it's a fact based on the fact that no one has documented a purple person). Would you prefer the sentence to read something like "There was no documented reinstatement of Schulz"? That seems unnecessary.

Thanks, Nathanael Hahn (talk) 19:36, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Nathanael Hahn: This article at the Federalist from last February is one of the few recent articles I could find about the case. According to it, the reason that it's dragging on as long as it has is that the synod's current dispute resolution process, which has not been used before, is cumbersome. The problem is that simply stating that "Schulz was not reinstated at CUW" implies that a decision has been made not to reinstate when his case is still in the dispute resolution process and (apparently) no decision has been made. I think if your addition were worded to include the whole matter of the dispute resolution process and that a resolution is pending as of February 2023 and included the Federalist article as a ref, it would be fine. By the way, it didn't take me more than a few minutes to find that article with a web search. Indyguy (talk) 05:32, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why was my edit reverted on Lutheranism. As far as I can understand I was just adding links to help integrate it into other pages, so if you didn't know or understand something you could simply click on the link to learn more. Beauzo2979 (talk) 16:13, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Beauzo2979. I reverted your edits for a variety of reasons:

1. Generally only the first instance of a term or its variants is linked. Catholic Church is already linked in the first paragraph, so no need to link to it again. Same thing for Martin Luther.
2. Linking "Scripture" to "Religious text" is not specific enough since the reference is clearly to the Christian Bible. In addition, the word "Scripture" is part of a quotation, and linking to terms in a quotation is discouraged.
3. Linking "evangelical" to "evangelicalism" is simply incorrect. Evangelicalism is a movement that arose in the 20th century. "Evangelical" is a term arising from the Reformation in Germany and refers to the Gospel message. It was used to distinguish Lutherans and other Protestants at that time from the Catholic church.
4. I have no problem with the link to Byzantine Rite, so go ahead and add it again.
5. I think "theologian" is a commonly used word that doesn't need a link.

Take a look at MOS:LINK for Wikipedia's Manual of Style regarding linking.

By the way, you don't need to actually make an edit to a page to watch it. Just click on the star on the top of the article's page. If the star is filled in, then it is on your watch list. Indyguy (talk) 17:03, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We never reached a consensus on Baker's birth place. I only found the one document that listed Weisburg. This was not filled out by Baker himself. If you feel better with moving it back to Dearborn County, I won't disagree. RegalZ8790 (talk) 23:26, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I CITED MY SOURCES JUST LIKE YOU ASKED AND YOU STILL REVERT THEM. CHAT GPT WROTE THEM SO I KNOW THEYRE RIGHT UR JUST MAD YOU DIDNT MAKE THOSE EDITS URSLEF 2601:803:47F:2780:1422:4F8F:4BEA:3147 (talk) 01:39, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted them because they are obviously untrue and Wikipedia is not a place for writing fiction. Also, ChatGPT is not a reliable source and can be manipulated to say just about whatever you want it to say. Indyguy (talk) 01:49, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever bro, you ain't even from muncie, You don't even know what your talking about I'll keep editing the page until yu realize truly how true it is 2601:803:47F:2780:1422:4F8F:4BEA:3147 (talk) 01:52, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I got all of my information from another Wikipedia article and you took them down twice. You are an absolutely unbelievable human being. My information was in fact true, but you took it down anyway with no reason why. Now because of you, I’ve got admins coming at me saying that I can’t rewrite edits previously taken down. You only did that because you are a troll. I think that you were jealous that you didn’t add the information first, so you took it upon yourself to destroy it. Editor1231967 (talk) 00:20, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Editor1231967: I reverted your edit because, as I said in the edit comments, you did not supply a reliable source for the information. That you found it in another Wikipedia article isn't good enough for two reasons: One, you didn't enter a citation indicating in what article you found it so that a reader can verify that the statement is accurately representing the source, and, two, Wikipedia is not itself a reliable source.

Now, as far as you having admins coming at you: If you talk to other editors in the same way that you talked to me just now, you'll find yourself banned pretty quickly. As a Wikipedia editor, you should be polite and assume good faith toward other editors. Indyguy (talk) 00:48, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you keep trolling, you’re going to get banned too. But, it doesn’t matter because I’m going to stop editing completely since everyone takes things too seriously. However, if Wikipedia is not a reliable source, then why are you taking things so seriously? I know my facts are correct, so there’s no argument. If viewers doubt my work even a little bit, then they should stop being lazy and search if it’s correct. It’s not that difficult. But, keep acting holier than God himself, keep being a phony believer in the Afterlife, and keep up taking things more serious than it needs to be. Congratulations, you’re the cause of why another editor has left Wikipedia. #IndianaPeople😂 Editor1231967 (talk) 01:11, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I have found translations come out better when you spell out words compared to using abbreviations. Something to consider. No need to respond. Semper Fi! FieldMarine (talk) 18:46, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to make it known that the original comment on the talk page was posted by me, the same person who made revision 1241981052, which deleted the aforementioned comment on the talk page. I deleted the comment because I felt as though the changes have been satisfactory, and no longer require any mentions on the talk page. If not deleting my own now-redundant comment, how would you rather me go about cleaning up the talk page from my already rectified topics? ZachT1234 (talk) 03:56, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@ZachT1234: I reverted my revert shortly after making it when I realized you were the original poster. I originally thought it had been done by a different editor. As far as cleaning up the talk page, generally archiving is used, which just moves the outdated discussion to a subpage of the talk page. Indyguy (talk) 05:45, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. ZachT1234 (talk) 06:02, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:06, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]