User talk:DougJoseph
RE: RFC on Talk:Oneness_Pentecostal[edit]
Does Wikipedia expect the "proposing editor" (the one proposing to include the source-cited quotes) to fly to the town of the antagonizing editor (the one demanding that the quotes be deleted), and drag him to a library to show him the quotes? According to such an interpretation of "reliable and verifiable", then all that would be necessary (in order for an antagonizing editor to have deleted any research that he doesn't like seeing the light of day) would be to "SAY" that another editor is "unreliable" (which is his way of saying, "I think you're a liar, and I don't think the quote even exists) or simply find some agenda-based scholar who has written that another agenda-based scholar is "unreliable" even when the quote had its source cited. Note: No one would ever be able to post any historical research (quotes with sources cited) in any controversial topic, under such an interpretation of "reliable and verifiable."
Ichthus: January 2012[edit]
 |
ICHTHUS |
| January 2012 |
In this issue...
For submissions and subscriptions contact the Newsroom
Charismatic Christianity WikiProject[edit]
Hi DougJoseph, I am reviving the Charismatic Christianity WikiProject and noticed you were active in the past so I am inviting you to come back and help me get it going again. Callsignpink (talk) 21:17, 8 August 2016 (UTC)