User talk:Tom Major
From Theopedia
 Archives | |
|---|---|
Deletions
Tom, why did you delete those articles? Jordan Barrett (talk) 09:02, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
- Figured they weren't of much use with only a link or two. But I wouldn't mind them being restored :-). I copied their content to the Bible study page. --Tom 13:56, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
- With only one or two links at each former page, I would suggest One page called Online Theological Resources and have sections for encyclopedias, dictionaries, commentaries, and glossaries. Jim Ellis 16:17, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
- Ah, I didn't see that they were copied to another page. Jim's idea is also a good one. Jordan Barrett (talk) 17:47, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
WikiChristian
Hi Tom. How are you doing? Great job by the way with what you are doing here at Theopedia. I suspect you may not be interested, but just in case you are, I've left a message on your WikiChristian user page (User:Ymmotrojam) about some changes and cleaning up that is going on at WikiChristian. Hopefully you get the time to read about it (much more is planned in the future as well). If you're finding that all your time is taken up at theopedia and in other aspects of life, let me know, and I'll remove you as an administrator of WikiChristian and that way you won't be bothered by me again with messages such as this one. But, if you do find you have time to come over and help out, we'd love to have your help. You can see that many of the technical ideas that you've had over the years have begun to be implemented at WikiChristian. Thanks. Graham Grove.
- I appreciate the offer, but most of my time will be spent here now, other than my school work :-). A sidenote, I'm not even responsible for most of the content here, you've got the other admins to thank for that. You can take me off your admin list there. --Tom 17:01, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
Template help
Tom, are you able to help me out with the templates used on the Corpus Reformatorum article? I copied the templates over from Wikipedia but may have accidentally left something out or included too much. Jordan Barrett (talk) 02:11, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
Presbyterian Users
Are you saying I'm not notable? No worries. It was actually a tongue-in-cheek joke - I didn't realise anyone would be that quick to notice. -Bernard S. Jansen 05:29, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
- Hah, are you notable? *goes and googles bernard's name...* I see you like wikis :-). --Tom 05:32, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
Quote template
Tom, please see this. Thanks, Jordan Barrett (talk) 05:30, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
Legal Issues with Materials from Wikipedia
Please see, http://www.theopedia.com/User_talk:Infinitelink#Copying_from_Wikipedia_.28refresh.29
Article on Propitiation
I reverted your elimination of the content on Propitiation. I realize some substantive chunks were lifted from Wikipedia. But some of it is not and some of it came from public domain sources (needing citations). I would like to revise what we had to "become legal" rather than merely omitting it all. Along those lines, when you find articles that are a mix, it would seem best to allow for potential revisions rather than whole content deletions. Thanks. Jim Ellis 13:02, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
- I've thought about that, but I'm not sure that the licensing of Wikipedia allows derivative works to be put under a different license. In other words, if we take from Wikipedia and edit it, it must be under the same license even if it's radically different from the original. Here's a quote from the GNU Free Documentation License:
- "You may copy and distribute a Modified Version of the Document under the conditions of sections 2 and 3 above, provided that you release the Modified Version under precisely this License, with the Modified Version filling the role of the Document, thus licensing distribution and modification of the Modified Version to whoever possesses a copy of it." (Section 4, Modifications)
- http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html
- I certainly don't like the idea of removing all this stuff, but at the same time we probably have to. Otherwise we must note on every article that from then on, that specific article will be licensed differently than all the other Theopedia articles. We could do it if everyone agrees on doing something like that, it would just take a little work on creating a template that could be place on all the affected pages. --Tom 20:05, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
I see what you are saying, Tom. And I agree. I can salvage this article on Propitiation. By the time I get finished, there will be no Wikipedia content rermaining. Thanks for all your work. Jim Ellis 11:55, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
My user page
Hey, I just created my account here.. why can't I create my userpage? It says I don't have permission to create new pages. Thanks. →xeno chat 23:49, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
- Oops, it should be fixed now :-). Thanks for letting me know. --Tom 23:52, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
- Splendid. Thanks, Tom. :) →xeno chat 23:54, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
Can New Users upload image files?
Tom, See discussion on my Talk page. New User, Bridget User:JackMeyers, does not see an "Upload file" link in her sidebar. Is that feature turned off for regular users? I don't remember us doing that. Let us know. Thanks, Jim Ellis 16:30, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
- Yes, they were turned off for new users in response to some inappropriate spam that we received a few months ago. The software now automatically grants upload rights to users who have been around for 30 days, and have made at least 30 edits. We can manually override that for individual users who desire to upload images, but that is probably a generally safe policy to have to protect the site. --Tom 17:36, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
Why is content from Wikipedia prohibited
Why is "Direct copying of content from Wikipedia... prohibited"? Their Creative Commons license allows for this. Carlaude 22:11, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
- Hello, and welcome to Theopedia! :-) we have that stated in our policies for a few reasons. Firstly, when we first made that policy, it was partly because our license did not match Wikipedia's license. They used to use the GNU Free Documentation License, and some articles on Wikipedia I believe are still under that license. Secondly, we do not attempt to hold a neutral point of view, and that is an overriding principle of the content of Wikipedia. We desire our content to conform to and support our statement of faith. Thirdly, what I have seen happen in the past as I have worked on other projects like Theopedia is that Wikipedia content gets copied and that's it. Editors lose interest or run out of time to edit the content, and then we are left simply or mostly with a copied article which took no effort to create, and the credit should go to the Wikipedia editors who were the real creators of that article. We intend to have original content (not the same as original research) on Theopedia. --Tom 03:17, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks.
- Re that "They used to use the GNU Free Documentation License..." read Compatibility_with_Creative_Commons_licensing_terms. It is compatible.
- Re #2 and #3 seems to be throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
- Just requier that and any content from Wikipedia be edited to comform to our statement of faith --and not just a neutral point of view-- before it is added.
- I would also propose that people be expicitly requiered to name the source as Wikipedia in the edit summary when such content is added. This will make it more clear it needs to be reveiwed with the above in mind. Carlaude 02:51, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
I attempted to answer this for User:Carlaude on the Writing Guide talk page. Jim Ellis 16:45, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
How and when can I move a page
How and when can I move a page re Talk:Parable of the four soils? Carlaude 03:05, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
Recent Image upload problem
Tom, Can you take a look at File:ATRobertson.jpeg and File:Engelsma.jpg and tell why I am getting error messages in the Thumbnail box?? Thanks, Jim Ellis 16:48, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
