Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

Godspeed

2009-07-08T00:02:57Z

TehBanhammer: Undo revision 681933 by MarkGall (Talk)

The fastest speed known to man. Andy's favorite phrase.

User talk:Daniel1212

2009-07-08T00:02:11Z

TehBanhammer: Undo revision 681934 by MarkGall (Talk)

{{Welcome}} [[User:DanH|DanH]] 23:16, 20 February 2008 (EST)

:A much belated welcome. I used your user page's link to start an article on [[Homosexual misinterpretation]]s of the Bible. Join in any time! --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 21:02, 5 December 2008 (EST)

*Would you be willing to donate the entire text of your website to this project? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 13:49, 8 December 2008 (EST)

== [[Mainstream Media]] ==

I reverted your additions for the simple reason you did not provide citations for the items. If you have them, please put them back, with the proper links. Thanks. --[[User:TK|'''₮K''']]/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 21:57, 14 February 2009 (EST)

* I understand. The hard evidence for the first is in my physical file cabinet, a photocopy. But here are two links to the story, though not from the Globe but the AP. http://www.mrc.org/cyberalerts/2001/cyb20011227.asp http://static.record-eagle.com/2000/jul/9letter.htm For the second, see http://www.nmsr.org/nmsr2002.htm A third example is linked.

*The title I put should not have been the Boston Globe, but "Notable Examples" but the page is really sparse and much needs more material. Which is easy to find, but i do not have the time now. The External link i placed to http://www.mediaresearch.org/biasbasics/biasbasics1.asp much substantiates the bias change in other ways - which of course, is not seen by those who provide it. I think I will just delete the section, and put the material on the talk page until someone provides more examples to warrant a section on examples. {{unsigned|Daniel1212}} -- 09:58, 15 February 2009

::Well, as I said, add the material back if you have something to cite, which you seem to have. Use the links and add whatever explanations you feel needed to give users confidence in the material. Thanks for responding and letting me know! --[[User:TK|'''₮K''']]/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 07:10, 16 February 2009 (EST)

Thanks for the encouragement. I had just run across the article and thought I would add to it. Some people from Free Republic might help there. But I am more preoccupied on working on the substantial and referenced page on [[Homosexual misinterpretation]] which you started me one (thanks!). I left a message on your page about my need for a Leviticus 18 page to link to it, with the reftagger script embedded. Thanks again and praise be to God.

== I linked to your bible interpretation and homosexuality article from the main conservapedia article. ==

I linked to your bible interpretation and homosexuality article from the main conservapedia homosexuality article. When I have more time, I can link to the article more prominently in the article. [[User:Conservative|conservative]] 18:48, 27 February 2009 (EST)
::::I looked at the article and found another place to link to your article and it is in a very prominent place. [[User:Conservative|conservative]] 18:54, 27 February 2009 (EST)

Thanks for taking an interest. Any honest critiques I can also appreciate. Pray and press. Ever revising.[[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 14:18, 28 February 2009 (EST)

== I believe I can get a lot more views to your homosexuality and biblical interpretation article plus the homosexuality article as a whole ==

I believe I can get a lot more views to your homosexuality and biblical interpretation article plus the homosexuality article as a whole. Please email me if you want to help cause this to happen. If you prefer just writing material that is fine to. Keep up the good work! :) [[User:Conservative|conservative]] 03:30, 10 April 2009 (EDT)

== [[Salvation]] ==

Open for you now, Daniel. --[[User:TK|'''₮K''']]/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 23:07, 11 April 2009 (EDT)

:Glad to see you are on top of things! Thanks be to God.

::Well, it appears you are not going to be getting to this now, so just let me know whenever, and I will unlock it for you. Today is Resurrection Sunday / Easter Sunday. Rejoice! --[[User:TK|'''₮K''']]/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 01:26, 12 April 2009 (EDT)

Ready when you are. Praise be to God[[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 15:40, 12 April 2009 (EDT)

BTW, is there an easy way i could convert this page to put it on CP? http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/BooksOfTheBible.html There is no such page now. Also when i placed a

*You were cut off......opened [[Salvation]] for you again. I just copy and paste from Word into the edit box here at CP, for the longer items. --[[User:TK|'''₮K''']]/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 21:13, 12 April 2009 (EDT)

:TK. The page i was referring to was highly formatted, with tables, and cut and past would not do it. So i edited my original (OpenOffice) this AM, and uploaded it to Firefox, selected it all and and copied the "view selection source" and pasted it in. With some minor deleting here it is, but do you think it is too colorful for CP? I could not do references the normal Wiki way, and it would be very hard for someone else to edit.

::Sorry I missed your post here completely! If still having trouble formatting for the wiki, I reccomend you check with [[user:Iduan|Iduan]]. --[[User:TK|'''₮K''']]/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 22:28, 25 April 2009 (EDT)

== Please be encyclopedic ==

Please be encyclopedic, and don't repeat absurdities simply to refute them. Thanks and Godspeed.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 21:01, 23 April 2009 (EDT)

*Daniel, maybe this will help you:

<blockquote>
'''encyclopedic''' : of, relating to, or suggestive of an encyclopedia or its methods of treating or covering a subject: ''comprehensive'' (an encyclopedic mind an encyclopedic collection of armor).

'''encyclopedic'''
Function: adjective

Text: also encyclopaedic
covering everything or all important points <a tour guide with an encyclopedic knowledge of New York City and its people>
'''Synonyms:''' compendious, complete, comprehensive, full, global, inclusive, in-depth, omnibus, panoramic, universal
Related Words: broad, catholic, extensive, far-reaching, general, overall, sweeping, vast, wide; blanket, indiscriminate, unrestricted.
</blockquote>

*''Words that are jargon speak, "homosex" and the like are not encyclopedic.'' Their use conjures up near-parody, as they are politically inspired buzzwords, and likely to have little meaning and cause confusion among the majority of the population not specializing in whatever topic. Hope this gives you some help. --[[User:TK|'''₮K''']]/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 15:12, 26 April 2009 (EDT)

:Thank you very much for helping me discover any errors. However, homosex did not seem to be what Andy objected to, as his edits only changed pro-homosex to prohomosex. I do think some of my division titles were too inventive however, and will change some, as well as do a review of this article and try to change like terms.

:The reason i use homosex is because it is the term of choice by the most prolific conservative writer on the issue, Dr. Robert A. J. Gagnon, who references it's use by some advocates of homosexual behavior See explanation for Why use the word "homosex"? @ http://www.robgagnon.net (2nd up from the bottom). The problem is that "homosexuality" is not precise enough, and while homoeroticism could be used, yet the Bible most specifically prohibits actual sex. Like in the realm of heterosexual sexual relations, the Biblical prohibitions on such also forbid all unmarried erotic activity, but i was trying to be precise, and "homosex" seemed to serve that purpose, and may become more used. Thus i placed a "Terms Defined" section. Maybe know i should change it to homoeroticism.

:But "absurdities" must have also related to my refutations of the prohomosexual attempts to read sex into Scripture, and not just the title. But that was part of being encyclopedic, as "covering everything... comprehensive, full, global, inclusive, in-depth,.."

:Thanks for your help.[[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 17:57, 26 April 2009 (EDT)

*:Oftentimes when we are refuting the things we feel strongly about, there is a tendency to go overboard, to really hammer the point home, when more restrained language would do the job just as well, in a subtler way. When we do that (hammer, or bludgeon) the point home, those who are not practicing Christians or even Christians who might not be evangelical are put-off by our language, not only the terms which are jargon, but the dire nature of what we write. When needed, Christ used a "velvet glove" to make his points, not a bare fist, and that might be best for an encyclopedia trying to win converts, and since CP attracts people of all stripes, more people are attracted to sugar than vinegar. --[[User:TK|'''₮K''']]/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 18:19, 26 April 2009 (EDT)

I appreciate your spirit, and counsel. I am addressing the "jargon" issue as i see it. But you are also addressing something i have struggled with. As an apologist i can easily slip into an overt polemical style. But on the other hand in a case like the Bible and homosex, when the obvious is smoke screened by specious if sometimes sophisticated sophistry, then presenting it as purely neutral manner comes across as conceding that they may be a case, which gets back to absurdities. I see the CP evolution article dealing with the theory as a refuted hypothesis, while i have represented the revisionist side on homosex, while manifesting with detail that the traditional position is what is warranted, which also fits with CP. But i do see myself sometimes going too overboard for this format, in tone, and in "jargon."

So i am working on improving it, and a review of the whole article by me was overdue. [[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 21:05, 26 April 2009 (EDT)

:TK, just what is going on here? I did not reinsert jingoistic phrases that Andy took out, but in fact was editing more of what i perceived were of that type. If the main problematic term is Gagnon's homosex, which is still in the page in many places, then consider that Andy had left them in. I could easily replace those, if i was not now locked out of the article i wrote. I was in the process of revising the article in seeking to comply with the objections, and could see places where i did use "jargon" that sounded fitting it me but it not encyclopedic, and changed some of them until i had to quite for the night. Rather than just locking someone out who had worked much to make an article(s) which would enhance CP, there ought to be some more specific dialog as to what changes are desired and were made. Thanks[[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 22:34, 28 April 2009 (EDT)

::I think in the class discussion I made myself clear, Daniel. Editing is a trust, not some right, and by your pedantic demeanor, you have (temporarily, I hope) lost my trust. What you are inserting is didactic, and I am using the word to mean inclined to lecture others too much. I am not saying you are wrong in my opinion, but how can one convey knowledge, which is the point, if one is going overboard too much, as you admit above? I am not locking you out of it, and will unlock it when I feel people have stopped retreating to their respective corners, and are ready to show some geniality. Try to remember people, as opposed to computers, have feelings, emotions, and arguing with others in the wrong way, same as conveying information in articles in a way that makes people not want to read it, is counterproductive. I am not indulgent like Andy, and will not engage you in a open-ended discourse here, which is a distraction to other editors, and quite frankly, to me as well. If you have something specific to ask, use the email. --[[User:TK|'''₮K''']]/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 23:21, 28 April 2009 (EDT)

Dear TK, I receive your correction, and i was hoping someone would do some necessary editing, and i myself was not finished with the page. But if you look at the exchange, what i was asking for was more specifics as to what was "jargon" and non-encyclopedic, so that i could fix it, and you were the only one who made some attempt to help. I pray that you can edit the wording of the content to make it better, as it was perhaps the most comprehensive referenced page on that subject available to read on the web. All i was going to basically add was the issue of Jesus and John, as well as the centurions servant, in the light of traditional [[exegesis]], as pro homosexual assertions of both are popular, as WP's page also shows. In the meantime, I will take Andy's advice. Thanks [[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 08:58, 29 April 2009 (EDT)

==Specifics requested==

What do you mean by "absurdities"? The whole article deals with what normally would be considered absurdities, but now are accepted are viable interpretations. You have deleted an entire section which deals with attempts to read homosex into passages, and which WP offers as viable, as i am sure most of today's universities would see as the same! Due to the foundational liberal revisionist grid most anything can now be considered reasonable.

Thanks for better formatting changes and any worthy corrections, but realize that it is hardly a full treatment of the issue if prohomosex contentions of approved homosex are not dealt with. BTW, Googling Homosexuality and biblical interpretation conservapedia did not show in the first 50 hits, which i used to see in similar searches, and i could only find it if i put it in quotes. However, it did have the mother page, homosexuality and the Bible. Thanks[[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 09:02, 25 April 2009 (EDT)

== a request ==

I know you had some conflict as far as the jargon you used in the homosexuality and biblical interpretation article. I do think that it would be a shame, however, for Conservapedia to lose a prolific editor who is sincere.

So I have a request, could you please expand the article on the [[History of homosexuality]] ? [[User:Conservative|conservative]] 18:52, 22 May 2009 (EDT)

:It was jargon, as well as being too polemical. But I have been posting occasionally, and am only locked out of my main work. I am quite busy now, but by God's grace i hope to improve the History of homosexuality soon. Thanks.[[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 21:25, 22 May 2009 (EDT)

== article request ==

Daniel,

When you are done with your [[History of homosexuality]] would you be interested in doing the following:

Create the following articles :

*[[Homosexuality and Christianity]]

*[[Dangers of homosexuality]] (individual and societal dangers)

*[[Religion and homosexuality]]

*[[Homosexuality and opposing viewpoints]]

*[[Homosexuality in America]]

*[[New Testament and homosexuality]]

*[[Presbyterian views on homosexuality]]

Expand these articles:

*[[Greek Homosexuality]]

*[[Roman Homosexuality]] (right now it has a dead link)

I will email you further about this matter. [[User:Conservative|conservative]] 01:06, 3 June 2009 (EDT)

The latter actually does work, though it is brief. I am busy now but will try to get to some these pages by the grace of God. Some may be a bit redundant, but maybe it makes CP more viable. Yet I think i should explains that my motive in doing the Homosexuality and biblical interpretation page (and it would good if TK lets me edit it again as it needs much), was not really that i have a driving animosity toward homosexuality, though i certain consider it to be sinful, but it was because of the extremes they went to in seeking to negate the Biblical injunctions against it, as well as to enlist it for their cause which actually kinds of how AIDS works. Had they simple been advocating it i would not have put much effort into showing that Biblically it is sin, but as they realize the authority of the Bible so their efforts supererogatory. So the history of it all does not interest me that much, though it confirms that the pagans did what the Bible charges them with, and uses their examples as what to avoid.[[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 23:02, 4 June 2009 (EDT)

*I strongly resent your false statement, inasmuch as you have never once contacted me asking to edit the article again. Anyone can read the history there, and what it shows is the site owner, Andy Schlafly reverting your contributions, and me merely complying with his wishes....expressed in his reversion of your edits. I made many attempts to dialog with you, arrive at some accommodation of your verbosity, your inflammatory language, which is what Mr. Schlafly was concerned with. You have two choices, as I see it; You can attempt to comply with the requests of an Administrator, or not edit that article, or any others where you insert jingoism. I also expect an apology, and an end to mean-spirited snipes inserted in your posts. Such conduct is decidedly not Christian, in word and deed, Daniel. I hope that upon reconsideration, you will realize it was beneath you. I have a great appreciation for your valuable contributions, and you have previously acknowledged my compliments, so I wonder where this hostility is coming from? --[[User:TK|'''ṬK''']]/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 23:25, 4 June 2009 (EDT)

:TK, I must ask, what false statement, and what hostility? What you had said on 28 April 2009 was "I am not locking you out of it, and will unlock it when I feel people have stopped retreating to their respective corners, and are ready to show some geniality." I therefore assumed that is what you would do, and that it did not require a request to get unlocked.

:As for the whole issue, and the idea of hostility, that also has an element of mystery. Andy did not revert all my contributions, but as the 23 April 2009 comparison shows, he did some editing which left most of the article intact, though he deleted the sections on pro homosexual attempts to read homosex into the Bible. But for some reason the edit history says "(Reverted edits by Daniel1212 (Talk) to last version by Ed Poor)", while in reality all Ed did was start the article for me to work on it, which the history shows i did for months. But bcz it mentioned Ed Poor, and i wanted to know what i was dong wrong, i also inquired about the edits on his page, which you reproved me for. Inquiring of Andy, who is likely quite busy, had given me little info on what he wanted changed. You in turn were helpful on that, and upon reviewing the article i understood my errors more clearly. Accordingly, I then did some editing to correct them, but in response you reverted my edits, with a note "Constant re-insertion of jingoistic words and phrasing." when in fact i did not reinsert any but instead was removing such, including the term homosex, with Andy had not edited.

:As for my tone, I did appreciate your being more specific on what needed to be changed, though some would have been obvious to me if had done a complete review first, but after reverting my attempts to comply it seems that your tone changed, perhaps due to the above misunderstandings. Seeing i was locked out, i began working on an edited version of the article on a personal wikia page, which i hoped would be acceptable in case i could edit the CP page again. As it is, this was the most extensive referenced treatment of homosexual apologetics, which issue they take very seriously, but in addition to the phrases at issue and digressing into an overt polemic style sometimes, it has other errors which need fixing. Thank you for corresponding. [[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 10:09, 5 June 2009 (EDT)

::You might want to check my user page, and the number of pages I am watching. While you have a narrow focus in this matter, it is really impossible for me to remember to check back with you. The edits were discussed on the articles talk pages, and on Andy's personal one as well, I remember. At no time did I receive feedback from you, after the decision was made, and Andy agreed with my comments...so if you want to link me to whatever you have added on some personal page, that would be great...but it isn't logical to assume that if someone makes a personal page and does editing, I will notice it.

::In the future, just email me, or post a message on my page, rather than including me in when discussing something with another Admin. You might want to argue the point, and claim you don't understand, but your comment was negative, was initially negative, up to and until Andy commented that your edit were too bombastic and narrowly focused. You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but that isn't necessarily the POV we want to present publicly, or perhaps more precisely, not exactly the style we wish to use. If you don't understand, or wish to continue this line, please use the email. --[[User:TK|'''ṬK''']]/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 19:41, 5 June 2009 (EDT)

:::Thanks for getting back to me on this, and i know these things are hard to track, and thus some more clarification is needed, and i will write to you in an email.[[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 10:58, 6 June 2009 (EDT)

== Mainstream media ==

I am wondering if your material added to MSM might be more appropriate in [[Liberal media]] ? --[[User:TK|'''ṬK''']]/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 19:19, 17 June 2009 (EDT)

:Hmm, i did not know there was such a page. Yes, it would go there, but people searching for "main stream media" would not get much on its real nature, as [[Liberal media]] is not even linked to on that page. I shall effect changes, by the grace of God.[[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 08:12, 18 June 2009 (EDT)

::Thanks, Daniel....I wasn't sure myself! --[[User:TK|'''ṬK''']]/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 12:37, 18 June 2009 (EDT)

::Yes, liberal media is now linked in MSM, and the stats added, etc., and an expose of Newsweek. Thank God.[[User:Daniel1212|Daniel1212]] 12:41, 18 June 2009 (EDT)

==Daniel==

You seem to have an unhealthy obsession with homosexuality. I hope that you seek help. [[User:CindyL|CindyL]] 10:01, 3 July 2009 (EDT)

:Dear Cindy,

the real obsession is on the part of homosexuals activists who make constant and inordinate efforts to misconstrue the Bible. Outside of atheism, which i also contend against, they are the foremost promoters of radical revisionism, and demand acceptance of homosexuality, which is a particular manifestation of rebellion against God, as seen in [[Romans 1]]. My response is in reaction to such, by objectively contending against it. As for the unhealthy part, it is sadly incontrovertible that pertains to the typical homosexual lifestyle. God's laws are good, and to our individual and collective benefit when obeyed, and to our hurt when we do not, as nations now in dust - and souls in Hell - testify to. Yet apparently some of the first Christians were former homosexuals, (1Cor. 6:11) and there is room at the cross for those who will repent and believe - to God be the glory!

== Danny Boy ==

You are the most bigoted scum to have graced this awful site's pages.

User talk:AddisonDM

2009-07-08T00:01:37Z

TehBanhammer: Undo revision 681935 by MarkGall (Talk)

{{Welcome}}
Hey!! Welcome to Conservapedia. [[User:BethanyS|~Beth]][[User talk:BethanyS|Talk2'''ME''']] 13:40, 15 October 2008 (EDT)

'''[[User talk:AddisonDM/archive1|Archive #1]]'''

== Idiots ==

Sorry, didn't see you had posted to the user, will unblock him, let you decide. --[[User:TK|'''ṬK''']]/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 21:53, 24 June 2009 (EDT)

:Thanks. [[User:AddisonDM|AddisonDM]] 22:17, 24 June 2009 (EDT)

== Galatians question ==
Sorry if this sounds sarcastic or something, but what about the accounts of "hermaphrodites" or "androgynous people"? Do those count towards "male" or "female"? Just wondering, since I'm not too well versed in the Bible anymore. [[User:JonathanG|JonG]] 12:54, 27 June 2009 (EDT)

:What verses is that in? Biologically, I really don't know how you would class those people. [[User:AddisonDM|AddisonDM]] 13:28, 27 June 2009 (EDT)
::It's the quote on your user page. [[User:JonathanG|JonG]] 13:57, 27 June 2009 (EDT)

:::Oh haha. I don't know. I guess it depends on how you define gender, which could be by appearance, by genetics (maybe) or something. The point of the verse though is just to illustrate that every kind of person can be united in Christ. [[User:AddisonDM|AddisonDM]] 13:59, 27 June 2009 (EDT)

==Moving==
Thanks for cleaning all that up, now to work on those German football pages again! Yay, more tedious copying and pasting! :) [[User:JY23|JY23]] 13:51, 27 June 2009 (EDT)

:Thanks. [[User:AddisonDM|AddisonDM]] 13:53, 27 June 2009 (EDT)
::Actually that was my assignment for me. Sorry for any offense caused or any misunderstanding that may have occurred. [[User:JY23|JY23]] 13:55, 27 June 2009 (EDT)

:::No I know that, I mean thanks for "cleaning all that up"! [[User:AddisonDM|AddisonDM]] 13:57, 27 June 2009 (EDT)

== Please block Dodger ==

Vandal/parodist. [[User:Jinxmchue|Jinx McHue]] 13:23, 1 July 2009 (EDT)

== Cough Syrup ==

You're too smart for Andy's crap, and you know it. Lose this dirtbag. And stop drinking Robitussin.

User talk:WashingtonIsBroke

2009-07-08T00:01:02Z

TehBanhammer: Undo revision 681926 by MarkGall (Talk)

{{welcome|sig=[[User:TK|'''ṬK''']]/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 18:59, 7 July 2009 (EDT)}}
:Please recreate your account with your first name and last initial. Thanks. [[User:TehBanhammer|TehBanhammer]] 19:44, 7 July 2009 (EDT)

User talk:AddisonDM

2009-07-07T23:56:24Z

TehBanhammer: /* Cough Syrup */ new section

User talk:Daniel1212

2009-07-07T23:54:54Z

TehBanhammer: /* Danny Boy */ new section

Godspeed

2009-07-07T23:53:51Z

TehBanhammer: Good gOD ban me already

The fastest speed known to man. Andy's favorite phrase.

User talk:RJJensen

2009-07-07T23:52:19Z

TehBanhammer: /* What are you doing here?!?! */ new section

[[User:Bugler|Bugler]] 17:49, 4 September 2008 (EDT)

Thanks for your fascinating addition to [[Barack Obama]] re: financing. Godspeed.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 18:26, 9 September 2008 (EDT)

== Welcome ==
Welcome indeed to CP! --[[User:Joaquín Martínez]], [[User talk:Joaquín Martínez|talk]] 19:18, 10 September 2008 (EDT)
::hey thanks! [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 19:25, 10 September 2008 (EDT)

==China==
Chinese history would appear not to be your forte. How describing the fluctuating state of authority in the warlord period counts as 'red propaganda', I am at a loss to understand. Please don't cause damage to other Chinese history articles. [[User:Bugler|Bugler]] 07:03, 20 September 2008 (EDT)
:: Ah but I am fairly familiar with 20c Chinese history. the article was full of Red propaganda (not that particular example)--which is bad for a conservative encyclopedia. for examples:
#the very title, and many of the pinyin terms, are the ones created in the 1950s by Communists in Beijing, and not used at the time or by the anti-communists in Taiwan.
#" However, Chiang was aided by the 'Guangxi Clique' of nationally-minded warlords; and the northern progress of the expedition was aided by carefully-timed popular uprisings planned by the CCP against local warlords."
#" Chiang again turned on the communists in the 'Shanghai Coup'. Aided by the police of the International Settlement and the French Concession in the city, and by gunmen of the influential 'Green Gang' criminal network, Chiang's troops and police rounded up and executed hundred of communists and trade unionists"
# "that to build a strong China it was necessary to defeat communism first, to an increasing number of Chinese his attitude appeared capitulationist and unpatriotic."
[[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 07:13, 20 September 2008 (EDT)

All those are established facts, however unpalatable some of them may be. At Conservapedia we deal in truth, not propaganda. [[User:Bugler|Bugler]] 07:16, 20 September 2008 (EDT)

In addition, it is a very bad idea to build up Chiang as a conservative ideal type. He was - to put it mildly - an unsavoury and unscrupulous thug, who was portrayed as a democratic leader in the west for the sake of wartime unity, and wwas later loyal to the US as he had no choice but to be so. He was the very opposite of loyal at other stages of his career: vide his flirtation with [[Nazism]], and his cavalier treatment of General Stilwell. In terms of opersonal morality, well.... suffice to say that his avowal of Christianity was purely opportunistic; he presided over a regime of brutality and corruption that alienated all potential allies; he was the sort of man who actually made Communism look like a desirable alternative. How bad do you have to be to do that? [[User:Bugler|Bugler]] 07:22, 20 September 2008 (EDT)

::- ::No, you have to read some of the history. I actually worked through the books in the bibliography. For example, who cliams " to an increasing number of Chinese his attitude appeared capitulationist and unpatriotic." (answer: the far left). The story of the Nanchang uprising ("carefully-timed popular uprisings planned" is from Communist folklore as told to Edgar Snow in "Red Star over China", a notorous far-left book. As for Chiang's character, it is NOT white washed here. He was a rough character and I do not call him democratic. As for Stillwell, I think Chiang and Chennault were mostly right and Stillwell mostly wrong. (My articles on Stillwell and Chennault are coming soon--they are now both at Citizensium--take a look also atmy CBI article there. I have read the major studies for China in the 1940s.). Corruption--alas that is the history of China for the last 150 years, continuously (for example, don't feed your baby on Chinese formula--or feed your cat with their stuff. That is 2008 corrpution.
:::I too know a bit about that period - the Americans backed a loser in Chiang; and the real blame for the fall of China to communism lies with him - not with Service or Lattimore or any of the other John Birch Society bugaboos. Chiang was a late era warlord who used the KMT as a personal vehicle, and whose corruption and nepotism ruined the infant republic. There were better warlords for the west to have dealt with - Yan Xishan at least would have kept his hands out of the till - or Li Zongren. [[User:Bugler|Bugler]] 07:42, 20 September 2008 (EDT)
::::well everyone to his own warlord. Fact is Chiang came to power in 1920s and remained so to 1940 with zero American help. I think we agree the US policy to support China in order to defeat Japan was a fiasco (this was Stillwell's idea.) --More on this in my WW2 articles to come. I did not drop the conspiracy interpretation of the late 1940s which was in the article for a months or years.[[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 07:46, 20 September 2008 (EDT)
:::::''well everyone to his own warlord'' hehe - I once attended a lecture by Jack Gray who was an ardent fan of Wu Peifu. I think his argument was that because he had no fixed territorial power base, this showed not that he had drawn the short straw geographically, but that it meant he was a truly 'national' leader rather than all those regionalist cliques, Zhang Zuolin in Manchuria, Feng in the north-west, etc. I thought it a dubious argument then and still do. But anyway... Chiang held power from the 20s to the 40s, but he certainly relied on Communist help both in 1925-27 (and he was plotted against as much as plotting, I have no doubt), and at the Xian incident. If the Young Marshal had had him put up against a wall, and seized power for himself, rather than bottling it.... [[User:Bugler|Bugler]] 07:56, 20 September 2008 (EDT)
:::the happy fact (not yet in the article) is that he created a regime on Taiwan with far less corruption and it historically led to a pro-US nation with capitalism and democracy. As for Christianity, the issue was active persecution of the missionaries. Chiang's highly public conversion helped change the status of Christians and reduced the persecution they sufferedin 1930s. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 08:54, 20 September 2008 (EDT)

== Latino ==

Could we please talk about it before reverting? --[[User:Joaquín Martínez]], [[User talk:Joaquín Martínez|talk]] 21:32, 21 September 2008 (EDT)
::Yes indeed--I have explained my edits. I fixed a several little grammar issues, enlarged the map to make it legible, expanded the caption. We don't want to illustrate a U.S. article with a Mexican coach in Spain. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 21:35, 21 September 2008 (EDT)

::: The image shows a latino, beening in the US or not he is a latino; it is illustrating the very first part of the article. It also shows that not all latinos are illegals or land workers. This is enough to have a place there. The map is much better where it was before according to the subject. --[[User:Joaquín Martínez]], [[User talk:Joaquín Martínez|talk]] 21:43, 21 September 2008 (EDT)
:::::get a better image. This person is a Mexican living in Spain. The map was to small to figure out. The article makes it very clear that only a minority of latinos are illegal[[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 21:45, 21 September 2008 (EDT)

We use to lock the articles while in the Main Page. If you need to edit it, please let me know. --[[User:Joaquín Martínez]], [[User talk:Joaquín Martínez|talk]] 07:00, 20 October 2008 (EDT)
::OK, no problem. I won't be working on it for a while. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 07:06, 20 October 2008 (EDT)

== Warning ==

Please be more accurate in your edit summaries of "minor" edits. -[[User:Foxtrot|Foxtrot]] 02:18, 22 October 2008 (EDT)
::sorry about that. I tried to change categories (Bryan was never a jurist) and the result was a bizarre edit I did not intend. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 09:40, 22 October 2008 (EDT)

== Newton ==

Hi, your calculus section in the [[Isaac Newton]] article had some conceptual errors in it -- I've rewritten the mathematics of this section appropriately. -[[User:Foxtrot|Foxtrot]] 04:17, 3 November 2008 (EST)
::very nice job--thanks! [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 08:25, 3 November 2008 (EST)

==National Socialist German Workers Party==

Just to let you know, I'm not interested in getting into an edit war here, but the listing of the Allies led by the US, Russia and Britain is inaccurate. The term Allies (for WWII) applies to all the countries that opposed the Axis powers, and that list included 21 countries or blocs before the US joined in 1941. Obviously the effort of the Allies had to be co-ordinated in the years between 1939-41 so the question of who led the Allies during WWII is, at best, not something that can be easily dispensed with a single sentence. Furthermore, saying that Russia was an member of the Allies is inaccurate, it was the USSR which was a member of the Allies, of which Russia was a part (an equivalent example would be if the sentence had read that .....by the Allies, led by Texas, Russia and Britain).

As a compromise I suggest: ......and was finally destroyed in [[World War II]] by the Allies, the major powers of which were the United States who led the Allied forces in Europe from 1941, the USSR (more commonly known as the Soviet Union) and Britain. [[User:Ieuan|Ieuan]] 22:03, 3/Nov/08 (GMT)
::the US joined the fighting in 1941 but had already been financing the war for both Britain and USSR, and was providing much of the munitions. Leadership also consists in setting strategy and policy which the US did--maybe 95% in the case of the war against Japan, 75% against Italy and say 40% in the case of Europe. As for the Soviets, they were Hitler's allies until June of 1941. You are right that USSR/Soviet is a better term than Russia. The debate should be on the article talk page, not here. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 17:42, 3 November 2008 (EST)

Copied the debate over to the talk page.

== ''Germania'' ==

I loved to read your article on the German Americans. Thanks for posting it! --[[User:BRichtigen|BRichtigen]] 15:49, 5 November 2008 (EST)
::hey thanks! [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 15:53, 5 November 2008 (EST)

== Roosevelt ==

Why are you deleting sourced material from this article? Remember that the removal of relevant, sourced material from Conservapedia is considered vandalism. Please do not try to insert your own [[opinion]] into articles by censoring [[facts]]. --[[User:Wikinterpreter|Wikinterpreter]] 14:05, 6 November 2008 (EST)
::the article is supposed to be about FDR and introducing red herrings hurts students. CZ rules clearly state: "Please note that all contributions to Conservapedia may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here." [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 15:18, 6 November 2008 (EST)

==[[Holocaust]] article==
The additions you placed in there now make that article repetative; things are said twice. It needs to be fixed so it runs smoothly. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 13:57, 10 November 2008 (EST)
::you're right and I will try to smooth it out. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 13:59, 10 November 2008 (EST)

== Category Military history ==

Thank you for your work on the project. When we create categories we use capitalization so the category should be Military History. I would also recommend that if you do feel that category is important, that it covers a specifically defined area. Perhaps it should probably deal with overlying changes in tactics or doctrine that has guided military functioning that has had a profound impact. I would not use it for things like Wars or Battles which already have their own categories.

Thanks [[User:Learn together|Learn together]] 17:32, 15 November 2008 (EST)
::thanks for the tip. I think the demand for article on military history is enormous--look at the very heavy emphasis at Borders and Barnes and Noble, for example. My college courses on military history attracted far more students than other history topics. Of course a specific topic may well overlap several categories. People will want to use our category pages as an index to what is available here. Discussions of tactics, strategy, technology and doctrine, for example, are often included in articles on specific wars. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 17:41, 15 November 2008 (EST)

== First Black President ==

Hello, please do not censor correct information in the [[First Black president]] article. -[[User:Foxtrot|Foxtrot]] 10:49, 19 November 2008 (EST)
::what information was correct? it did not check out. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 12:04, 19 November 2008 (EST)

I notice you are a controversial editor who has never geneflected before Mr. Schlafly, and neither have you praised his wisdom and judgement in his fascinating revelation that Barack Hussein Obama is a Muslim. Are you a Muslim sir? [[User:MarkBaley|MarkBaley]] 22:57, 20 November 2008 (EST)
::well actually more of a Catholic (a graduate of Notre Dame University class of 1962).[[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 23:01, 20 November 2008 (EST)

Are you more like Barack Obama, a [[Liberal]] who lies about his religion, and then subverts the office of the United States, and then deceives the American people and then institutes an Islamic Caliphate, giving control of our nuclear arsenal to Iran and Bin Laden? If this is what you are, then we are better off without you. [[User:MarkBaley|MarkBaley]] 23:05, 20 November 2008 (EST)
::well no--but I was hoping Biden would be president--as a Catholic he will bring the Pope over to straighten us all aout. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 23:12, 20 November 2008 (EST)

I would rather the pope as my slavemaster than Bin Laden! Obama will, any day now I'm sure, give the nuclear launch codes to all of our enemies - Bin Laden, Iran, Satan, Green Goblin, France - and introduce an Islamic Caliphate to our great and glorious nation! Heel before the almighty Schlafly, only his logic and truth can save the world from the dark precipice it has gotten itself under! Only the bright and free can be saved! [[User:MarkBaley|MarkBaley]] 23:16, 20 November 2008 (EST)

==English and UK categories==

Question for you at [[Talk:William the Conqueror]] --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 08:26, 21 November 2008 (EST)

*Thanks for meeting me there, and now a question on ...

==World War II fatalities==

Thank for [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Japan&curid=11154&diff=564889&oldid=555832&rcid=615850 this addition]. I had simply assumed that every Japanes soldier who died in WWII was directly killed by the US and its allies. Except maybe an insignificant number of accidents - oh, and the suicidal heroics of the [[Kamikaze]].

If a soldier dies from starvation, I'd lay that death at the feet of the man who sent him out. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 10:01, 21 November 2008 (EST)
::I was also surprised at the numbers. I knew about the starvation on the isolated Pacific islands but was surprised at China numbers. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 17:10, 21 November 2008 (EST)

== Shays' Rebellion ==

I wander why the ''Block quote'' was deleted? --[[User:Joaquín Martínez]], [[User talk:Joaquín Martínez|talk]] 19:19, 25 November 2008 (EST)
::it was too vague and did not add information to what was already covered regarding the impact of Shays' on the government. It took a left-wing approach that did not help any. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 19:28, 25 November 2008 (EST)

== The so-called Progressive Era? ==

*Sorry for removing a category you only created today, but CP likes to not make stand-alone narrow cats. Somehow we need an over-arching category to easily facilitate searches, and not just one per person. It might be easier to discuss adding categories somewhere, rather than just doing it.....or at least leaving a trail of bread crumbs for the less historically blessed to follow! :-D --[[User:TK|₮K]][[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 23:57, 30 November 2008 (EST)
::I agree. We need a page on CP where technical issues can be discussed and conventions established. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 07:14, 1 December 2008 (EST)

== Additional privileges ==

Congratulations, you've earned the additional privileges of 24-hour editing, uploading images, and blocking others. Well done!--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 09:53, 1 December 2008 (EST)
::hey thanks--I appreciate that! [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 10:55, 1 December 2008 (EST)
:::Congrats. --[[User:DinsdaleP|DinsdaleP]] 16:01, 1 December 2008 (EST)
::::Congratulations from me too. Well deserved! [[User:Bugler|Bugler]] 05:41, 2 December 2008 (EST)

==Oz pic==
Just uploaded it for the article: [http://www.conservapedia.com/Image:Woz_movie.jpg] [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 17:12, 4 December 2008 (EST)
::thanks--the visuals are great. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 03:21, 5 December 2008 (EST)

== [[Barry Goldwater]] ==

I see some recent stretching to include people like Goldwater as libertarians. You are too good a historian to muddle the waters with throw-away lines such as "many of his later views were libertarian". Yes? So? Many of his views would, today, be considered near leftist as well. ''Historians need to resist revisionism''. In his time, by his own definition, Goldwater rejected libertarianism, and self-branded himself a conservative. Goldwater did not believe in abortion as a substitute for abstaining or birth control, nor did he support "abortion on demand". Many views held by even Ted Kennedy could be considered "conservative", but that hardly gives license to brand him one, or make the statement "some of his views are conservative", that would be misleading, IMO. --[[User:TK|₮K]][[User_Talk:TK|/Talk!]] 16:55, 5 December 2008 (EST)
:well I knew Goldater personally since 1958 and followed his career very closely. After 1980 or so he was libertarian on most social issues, while remaining conservative on defense and spending issues. In his heyday as a conservative leader (1960-64) he rarely mentioned social issues and they were seldom on the agenda. Here is what Bill Buckley said of Goldwater:
<blockquote>
''Conspicuous here was his defense of Supreme Court decisions involving abortion, gay rights, and the separation of church and state. Most followers of the senator were surprised, and abashed, especially at his defense of abortion.''[http://www.nationalreview.com/buckley/wfb200412101327.asp from National RreviewDec10, 2004]</blockquote>
[[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 17:01, 5 December 2008 (EST)

::*Ditto for me. My family were neighbors at the Balboa Bay Club in Newport Beach, CA, for several decades. But this is straw snatching, trying to paint the man as a libertarian, by a few high-profile pronouncements later in life, to somehow add cred to the libertarian cause. Find your own hero's, but kindly do not snatch our conservative ones! I do not disagree with showing, with cites, his later libertarian views (many of which I agreed with), but putting him, and others, with the help of another libertarian editor, into the libertarian category, and implying some "conversion" isn't being honest. --[[User:TK|₮K]][[User_Talk:TK|/Talk!]] 17:19, 5 December 2008 (EST)
::Conversion? well, I think Barry was always a libertarian but only became outspoken about it in the 1980s when social issues got high on the political agenda. When he was a leader of the conservative movement (1958-64) he rarely mentioned social issues of any kind--he never mentioned abortion, for example. (he did mention gays in 1964 in the Walter Jenkins scandal--a top LBJ aide was arrested during the election campaign-- but did not condemn it.) His libertarianism after 1980 was not a "few" statements it was his high profile fight to get O'Connor on the Supreme Court. He was at that time a very powerful Senator and his views are quite important. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 17:42, 5 December 2008 (EST)

::*We mostly agree. Just please don't go adding him to the libertarian category, or make it seem he was not a conservative. We are obviously near-contemporary, and no doubt share the acquaintanceship/friendship of many, it seems. However to use your friendship and personal assumptions as to what he was, absent of his repudiating being a conservative, is wrong and purely anecdotal. That is my only objection. --[[User:TK|₮K]][[User_Talk:TK|/Talk!]] 17:48, 5 December 2008 (EST)
:::I'm glad we agree. I was not the one who added the libertarian category. But he publicly announced his positions and angered a lot of Arizona conservatives by so doing. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 17:52, 5 December 2008 (EST)

:::::I well remember! We should have a libation one day and swap old stories. --[[User:TK|₮K]][[User_Talk:TK|/Talk!]] 17:58, 5 December 2008 (EST)
::::::I'll drink to that. I left Arizona this summer and we moved to Montana, but there's a bar and a casino on every corner here. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 18:01, 5 December 2008 (EST)

== [[French Revolution]] ==
Hey, I noticed you're doing a bit of work around this area, and as you seem to be the resident historian, I thought I'd volunteer my services here, so you're free to do other area's that need some touching up or expanding. If there's any articles or stubs in the French Revolution section that need to be fixed, just let me know. Thanks [[User:Bolly|Bolly]] 21:54, 8 December 2008 (EST)
::GREAT! we can use short articles on the major players and events. Suggestion use the facts from the online Columbia Encyclopedia at [http://www.bartleby.com/cgi-bin/texis/webinator/sitesearch?FILTER=col65&query=French+Revolution&x=0&y=0 Columbia Enyc srticles on French Rev.] -- it's very good. Be sure to summarize & rewrite the facts, not quote exactly. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 22:02, 8 December 2008 (EST)

:::OK I'll get right onto it. Thanks for the suggestion! [[User:Bolly|Bolly]] 22:05, 8 December 2008 (EST)

==Medieval Cats==
As the person who has probably edited more articles on medieval history in the last few months than all other editors put together (including six pages in the last hour or two, if I had been told that there was a new category for "Medieval history" I could have saved you a heckova lotta work.:) [[User:AlanE|AlanE]] 16:56, 26 December 2008 (EST)
::you're doing a great job and I've been trying to clean up all sorts of categories. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 16:58, 26 December 2008 (EST)
:::But are there any others I should know about? You see, on the 22nd I changed the cats of about 2 dozen English/British history entries. This new one could have been done at the same time. (And - just to let ''you'' know: I am thinking of starting a cat (sub-cat, whatever) for the "Wars of the Roses"....)[[User:AlanE|AlanE]] 17:16, 26 December 2008 (EST)
::::what I did was go though all the articles in Category:European History and change the specific ones to specific countries, or eras. That cleans up European History and makes the other sub categories more useful. yes' War of Roses" car would be good idea [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 17:44, 26 December 2008 (EST)

== Invitation to join Wikiproject:News ==

RJJensen, since you have contributed a wanted page in the past, you are invited to [[Wikiproject:News#Members|sign up]] as a member of [[Wikiproject:News]]. <nowiki>[[Wikiproject:News/Guidelines|Review]]</nowiki> the Guidelines. Make your news suggestions <nowiki>[[Wikiproject:News/Suggestions|here]]</nowiki>. Add wanted pages [[Wikiproject:News/Wanted_page#Wanted_Pages_for_.22In_the_news.22_section_-_To_be_created|here]]. --[[User:DeanS|DeanStalk]] 10:04, 28 December 2008 (EST)
::thanks for the invite; i just signed up. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 17:07, 28 December 2008 (EST)

==Dutch History==
RJ (if I may call you that), I see that you have replaced the material on Dutch fascism in the 1930s. I'm pleased that this was done under a separate heading, but I am still concerned that this gives a misleading impression of Dutch politics at the time (an analogy might be an assessment of American politics in the 1930s which only mentioned Charles Coughlin and the German 'Bund'). Would it be possible for you to give an overview of mainstream Dutch politics at this time, as even the NSB was a fringe organisation. As it stands, the article presents the Netherlands as a quasi-fascist nation. As the grandson of a Dutch patriot active in the resistance in the war years, this is extremely hurtful. I also altered the reference to liberation by Canadian troops to one recognising the role of all the allied forces - including my father, in the British Army. Thank you. [[User:Bugler|Bugler]] 08:50, 31 December 2008 (EST)
::Thanks for the note. My intention all along is to emphasize the fascists were a fringe group. I'll rework it again to make that clear and give more emphasis to what the main parties were up to (following the Kossman book).[[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 09:48, 31 December 2008 (EST)
:::Thank you very much. [[User:Bugler|Bugler]] 12:37, 31 December 2008 (EST)

== Happy New Year! ==

{{cquote|'''Cheers to a new year and another chance for us to get it right!'''--Oprah Winfrey}}
--[[User:TK|'''₮K''']][[User_Talk:TK|/Talk!]] 23:24, 31 December 2008 (EST)

== Congratulations! ==

Congratulations on your promotion to Sysop (Admin) status! This gives you many new privileges. Well deserved!--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 23:42, 31 December 2008 (EST)

:Indeed! --[[User:TK|'''₮K''']][[User_Talk:TK|/Talk!]] 00:12, 1 January 2009 (EST)
Congrats RJJensen. I look forward to working with you this year. Now you can protect all the great images you upload. --[[User:DeanS|DeanStalk]] 01:31, 1 January 2009 (EST)
::hey THANKS EVERYBODY--I promise that 2009 will be better than 2008. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 04:10, 1 January 2009 (EST)
:::Well done RJJensen, you have been a prodigious contributor here and the promotion is deserved. [[User:BrianCo|BrianCo]] 05:47, 1 January 2009 (EST)
::::and many congratulations (and happy new year!) from me too. I look forward to working even closer with you this year. --[[User:JessicaT|KotomiT]][[User talk:JessicaT|''ohayougozaimasu'']] 06:23, 1 January 2009 (EST)

::::: Congratulations! --[[User:Joaquín Martínez]], [[User talk:Joaquín Martínez|talk]] 09:05, 1 January 2009 (EST)

Congrats and Happy New year! [[User:AddisonDM]]

::::: Happy New Year!

:::::: Congratulations on your promotion! --[[User:DinsdaleP|DinsdaleP]] 13:13, 4 January 2009 (EST)

==Tuskegee==
They were real. Can I suggest an undelete minus the parody?--Jpatt 20:41, 5 January 2009 (EST)
::they were indeed real. They did not fight the Japanese. Booker T Washington died many years before. The article has to be redone from start, since all the "facts" in this version are now suspect. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 21:57, 5 January 2009 (EST)
::: Following Jpatt's suggestion, I wrote a new article. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 22:49, 5 January 2009 (EST)
::::Looks fantastic--Jpatt 23:13, 5 January 2009 (EST)
:::::thanks :) [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 23:53, 5 January 2009 (EST)

==US Civil War==

Thanks for your massive additions (like [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=American_Civil_War_homefront&curid=84224&diff=603647&oldid=603640 this one]). How do you find the time to do so much writing? --
::hey THANKS. It's retirement --I used to spend all that good time in committees. Now I just write. :) [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 10:55, 6 January 2009 (EST)

== Protecting images ==

I protected a number of images you uploaded (Image:Sherman2.jpg, Image:Weyrich.jpg, Image:1900HA.jpg, Image:~HANNA96.jpg). Please remember our policy of protecting all images. Thanks for your contributions to Conservpedia. --[[User:DeanS|DeanStalk]] 11:42, 9 January 2009 (EST)
::thanks--I'll keep protecting them. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 03:19, 11 January 2009 (EST)

::: Thanks much for your insights. I've learned tremendously from them. However, as Dean says, it would be great if you could click "protect" at the bottom after you upload a new image, and then click on "Administrators Only" to give them the greatest protection. I just did that for your two most recent uploads. Thanks again.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 23:21, 12 January 2009 (EST)

== Third Party v Third Party System ==

Your opinion is sought! [http://www.conservapedia.com/Talk:Third_Party_System#Merge.3F] --[[User:TK|'''₮K''']]/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 23:01, 13 January 2009 (EST)

== Democratic Governors category ==
There is already a [[:Category:Democrat Governors]]. If you are planning a move from that category to the new one, then please disregard this message. Otherwise, I wanted to catch you before you got halfway through. [[User:WesleyS|WesleyS]][[User Talk:WesleyS|Hello!]] 20:15, 28 January 2009 (EST)
::OK --it was my mistake (I have been trying to repair lost edits from the last week). [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 00:56, 29 January 2009 (EST)
:::Yeah, me too. I lost about 300 edits, including the lists of governors you were kind enough to add bibliologs to. [[User:WesleyS|WesleyS]][[User Talk:WesleyS|Hello!]] 11:36, 29 January 2009 (EST)

== Blago ==

I understand what your thinking is, RJ, but in this case you are too idealogical, and giving the liberals far too much credit. --[[User:TK|'''₮K''']]/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 23:52, 29 January 2009 (EST)
::when we make serious allegations they have to be based on serious evidence or we are guilty of bearing false witness. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 00:50, 30 January 2009 (EST)

:::No,we are using plain old conservative common sense, RJ. The legislature didn't have evidence of anything, and until the United States Attorney presents his case in a Federal Court, and a jury convicts him, the will of the people should never be overturned by some legislature, based solely upon some contrived "disability" of being unpopular, having low poll numbers. If you don't want to cooperate, and accept the ruling of a senior administrator, so be it. But Mr. Schlafly has made his position crystal clear on this. --[[User:TK|'''₮K''']]/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 01:14, 30 January 2009 (EST)
::::The rule throughout American history is that the legislature can impeach the executive for any reason. Conviction for crime is not necessary. What is the "will of the people"? The Founding Fathers were pretty clear that the will of the people resided in the legislature. My discussion with Schlafly was on an different issue; it had to do with the powers of the state supreme court to intervene (that is a moot question since it did not intervene).

== Economic Recovery Advisory Board ==

Is this an article you want to tackle, or perhaps have research or ancillary information on? --[[User:TK|'''₮K''']]/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 03:51, 7 February 2009 (EST)

:good idea. I just wrote [[Economic Recovery Advisory Board]]. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 00:50, 13 February 2009 (EST)

::Super! And I was just being nice making sure you could log in, never thinking once about this article I knew was needed....;-) Glad it worked out. --[[User:TK|'''₮K''']]/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 01:27, 13 February 2009 (EST)

==Velikovsky==
Richard, I left a question for you on the [[Talk:Immanuel_Velikovsky|Velikovsky talk page]], regarding category tags. --[[User:Eric2009|Eric2009]] 08:36, 10 February 2009 (EST)

:I left another comment regarding yours, on the [[Talk:Immanuel_Velikovsky|Velikovsky talk page]], --[[User:Eric2009|Eric2009]] 12:25, 14 February 2009 (EST)

== Your edits to [[Scopes trial]] ==

Dr. Jensen, your recent edits to the [[Scopes trial]] delete important information and introduce unjustified statements, like calling the [[atheist]] and stridently anti-Christian [[H.L. Mencken]] a "cultural conservative." We can discuss further on [[Talk:Scopes trial]] if you like.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 08:40, 14 February 2009 (EST)
::Mencken is one of the most famous names in the history of American conservatism. He ignored the religious questions and ridiculed the backwoods types. That's true and important to know. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 08:42, 14 February 2009 (EST)

::: Mencken was one of worst anti-Christian bigots ever. It's indisputable and completely distorted his reporting on the Scopes trial. And it wasn't just Christians whom Mencken was bigoted against.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 10:01, 14 February 2009 (EST)
:::: all true enough but he was a cultural conservative and strongly influenced libertarian thinking against government--and many people's ridicule of the South. Bryan of course was the leading big government liberal of the 1890-1930 era, which made him Mencken's target.[[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 10:28, 14 February 2009 (EST)

This really should be discussed on the article's talk page, where I've just added my comments. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 02:15, 15 February 2009 (EST)

== Category: Naval Battles ==

I don't think that Horatio Nelson belongs in that category. He is an admiral, not a battle. [[User:DuncanB|Duncan]][[User talk:DuncanB|Channel 16]] 15:34, 16 February 2009 (EST)
::the article is what gets categorized, and the article talks about naval battles in an important way.[[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 15:35, 16 February 2009 (EST)

I am trying to figure out why Trafalgar didn't make it into [[:Category:Naval Battles]], at least not when I click on it.. [[User:AlanE|AlanE]] 16:36, 16 February 2009 (EST)
::well it certainly belongs! please add it. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 16:37, 16 February 2009 (EST)
:::What I was getting at was that although you had changed the cat to "Naval Battles", for some reason it wasn't showing up on the Cat. page. I deleted it on the Article then added it and it has now come up. A mystery. [[User:AlanE|AlanE]] 16:49, 16 February 2009 (EST)
:;::good job! [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 17:12, 16 February 2009 (EST)

==Vandalism patrol==

RJ, thanks for your recent efforts to block vandals and undo their damage. I don't know why some people enjoy messing up other people's work. Maybe they are intellectually lazy. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 18:16, 17 February 2009 (EST)
::well at least we attact a better class of vandals than Wikipedia! :) [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 18:28, 17 February 2009 (EST)

:::LOL, I think. ;-) --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 11:09, 18 February 2009 (EST)

==Criminals and folk heroes==

What about that [[Che Guevera]] guy? Why is it that people who say they care about the poor and the oppressed lionize (idolize, idealize) murderers like Che? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 11:14, 18 February 2009 (EST)

== Cartoon ==

That pork factory thingy is a nice cartoon, but I'm not sure about the "fair use". Wouldn't "fair use" be if we put the image in an article ''about the cartoon itself'', or in an article about a controversy caused by the image?

From the copyright office's website:

<blockquote>
“quotation of excerpts in a review or criticism for purposes of illustration or comment; quotation of short passages in a scholarly or technical work, for illustration or clarification of the author's observations; use in a parody of some of the content of the work parodied; summary of an address or article, with brief quotations, in a news report; reproduction by a library of a portion of a work to replace part of a damaged copy; reproduction by a teacher or student of a small part of a work to illustrate a lesson; reproduction of a work in legislative or judicial proceedings or reports; incidental and fortuitous reproduction, in a newsreel or broadcast, of a work located in the scene of an event being reported.”
</blockquote>

I'm worried this might get the site into hot water.

Sincerely,
[[User:EMaurice|EMaurice]] 11:24, 19 February 2009 (EST)
::no educational use has ever gotten into any legal hot water by using items like this that have been posted on the internet for free. CP uses the cartoon to comment upon a current news event, which is a legally protected form of fair use according to Congress. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 11:41, 19 February 2009 (EST)

:::I'm not sure that the fact that no-one has been prosecuted for it means it's legal. If we go down that road, we'll be just like the bums who get into debt and then ask the taxpayer to help them, claiming they didn't know what they were doing. And as for using the cartoon to comment, how is that under fair use? Fair use would be for commenting about the cartoon itself. Every big newspaper has a free online section. Would the Washington Post accept the Washington Times copying one of their cartoonists? Do you see what I mean? Thanks, [[User:EMaurice|EMaurice]] 11:46, 19 February 2009 (EST)
::::Congress says that fair use applies to nonprofit educational use, and the courts have always agreed. The Washington Times is a commercial operation and different rules apply to them. (The worst case scenario is that the copyright owner asks us to remove the cartoon, and we do so.) Conservatives need to uphold their legal and constutional rights or they lose them. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 12:37, 19 February 2009 (EST)

== Parodists ==
It would seem we have two users in need of a lengthy block, and you appear to be the only one present with block rights. See Ed Poor's talk page please! [[User:ETrundel|ETrundel]] 12:15, 21 February 2009 (EST)
::thanks for the heads-up. I'll be watching but so far I have not seen anthing more serious than a debate on chemistry. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 12:31, 21 February 2009 (EST)
:::The manganese edit was 100% wrong, so he's (KrisTree) a parodist. But everything which he's said about the other guy is actually pretty correct, and GFasten did indeed put up a stupid Bollywood video which was later reverted. [[User:ETrundel|ETrundel]] 12:34, 21 February 2009 (EST)
::::No the manganese edit was not 100% wrong (it is used in steel), and there is such a book as "Salters Chemistry". There may be errors but that is not the same as parody. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 12:37, 21 February 2009 (EST)

== The View From 1776...Tom Brewton ==

Presented for your inspection and consideration.....

* [http://www.thomasbrewton.com/index.php/weblog/the_limitations_of_econometric_computer_models/ The Limitations of Econometric Computer Models]

* [http://www.thomasbrewton.com/index.php/weblog/tooth_fairy_economics/ TOOTH FAIRY ECONOMICS]
--[[User:TK|'''₮K''']]/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 06:42, 22 February 2009 (EST)
::Thanks-- I enjoyed reading that! [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 08:51, 22 February 2009 (EST)

== Gibbs ==

Thank you, good Doctor! Whenever I read something where the basic, minimum essentials are missing, and people are already arguing over rather common political tricks, I see red. Thanks for jumping in, but let's not save the protagonists from having to do some due diligence as well, okay? --[[User:TK|'''₮K''']]/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 15:39, 3 March 2009 (EST)
::right! :) [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 19:13, 3 March 2009 (EST)

== CENTRISTS CONCERNED ==

[http://www.thomasbrewton.com/index.php/weblog/centrists_concerned/] It’s noteworthy that political moderates who supported President Obama in the election are worried that they may have been misled, that traditionalists’ forebodings may have been on the mark. Amazing! ;-) --[[User:TK|'''₮K''']]/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 23:31, 6 March 2009 (EST)
::thanks for the tip. I don't see a connection between Obama and the Social Gospel Movement myself, and the Socialists of 1910 (who included just ONE Social Gospeller, an obscure professor at Vassar) wanted to destroy the banks, not subsidize them. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 23:35, 6 March 2009 (EST)
:::Email Tom...he's a nice chap. --[[User:TK|'''₮K''']]/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 23:43, 6 March 2009 (EST)

==Pearl Harbor edit==
Had to revert your edit to Pearl Harbor. The Air Force did not exist until 1947; prior to that it was the U.S. Army Air Corps. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 21:02, 11 March 2009 (EDT)
::the name was changed in 1941 -- before Pearl Harbor--to US Army Air Forces. There was no longer an "Air Corps". [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 00:48, 12 March 2009 (EDT)

== Can you add Obama's ignorant, disgusting joke to the front page news? ==

Joke here: [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZXcgpZwsBPY]. Obama apologist Olbermann's desperate plea to comedian Craig Furgeson(sp?) to find an excuse - any excuse - to allow Obama to get away with the joke here: [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GD0EcujFSn8]. Note that Craig immediately recognizes the joke for what it is and doesn't give the kind of answer Olbermann was hoping for. [[User:Jinxmchue|Jinxmchue]] 12:15, 20 March 2009 (EDT)

:On the [[Jay Leno]] show, Obama quipped that his bowling score of 129 was "like the [[Special Olympics]] or something". My question was whether he was putting himself down (i.e., being humble) in an innocent, lighthearted way - or whether (as his detractors are eager to say) he was making a derogatory reference to handicapped people. [[Craig Ferguson]] grimaced and called the reference "a misstep". --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 12:43, 20 March 2009 (EDT)
:*I read later that he called up the Special Olympics and apologized - even before the show aired. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 23:22, 22 March 2009 (EDT)
:::That's called "damage control." [[User:Jinxmchue|Jinxmchue]] 14:38, 23 March 2009 (EDT)

::::Beating him up for a slip like that is called A "[[personal attack]]". I would rather we contributors focus on principles and facts than on personalities. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 14:55, 23 March 2009 (EDT)

==Stimulus bill==

Thank you for continuing to work with me. My text moves are not to be taken as Editorial Prerogative. Feel free to reverse my edits when they don't make sense. What I want to do is collaborate, to work together to improve the article. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 17:53, 20 March 2009 (EDT)
::Ed--thanks for your stimulus to my thinking! :) [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 17:54, 20 March 2009 (EDT)

:::LOL, there's a [[Volvo]] radio ad I've heard dozens of times which talks about "stimulating your stimulus". --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 17:58, 20 March 2009 (EDT)

==Featured article==
Congrats on getting a weekly featured article! The financial crisis.
[[User:AddisonDM|AddisonDM]] 11:22, 22 March 2009 (EDT)
::hey thanks! :) [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 21:13, 22 March 2009 (EDT)

==A Glitch?==
This edit [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=John_Gresham_Machen&diff=644407&oldid=644405] looks like a glitch. --[[User:RickD|RickD]] 12:07, 25 March 2009 (EDT)
::yes my "oops" (I was trying to move the reflist). Thanks for the good work--Machen has never looked so good in the last 70 years. :) [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 13:22, 25 March 2009 (EDT)

== World History Lectures ==

I really enjoy your contributions. In fact, reading them drove me to Conservapedia. Couldn't you do some fact-checking on the '''World History Lectures''' of Aschlafly? [[User:ClementB|Clement ♗]] 15:56, 26 March 2009 (EDT)
::thanks for the nice words. I'll keep my eyes open. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 16:03, 26 March 2009 (EDT)
:::Could you shed some light on [http://conservapedia.com/Talk:World_History_Lecture_Nine#Prussia_vs._Germany this discussion?] Thanks! [[User:ClementB|Clement ♗]] 12:13, 27 March 2009 (EDT)
:::I suggest the best approach is to propose an improved sentence for the text. think positive. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 12:21, 27 March 2009 (EDT)

==Thanks==
I see you've been doing some really good work this past week, and thanks! We need more editing like that. Great job. [[User:AddisonDM|AddisonDM]] 23:03, 5 April 2009 (EDT)
::HEY--thanks! :) [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 23:04, 5 April 2009 (EDT)

==Attribution==
Please endeavor to give proper attribution for the articles you are taking from Citizendium. A copy of our license is available on the front page of the site. Thank you. [[User:Citizendium|Citizendium]] 15:47, 6 April 2009 (EDT)

*'''He does, and was the original author of the items he has placed here.''' I was unaware, "Citizendium", you are a German encyclopedia, being that is where your ISP is located. Another fraud/troll bites the dust. Bye. --[[User:TK|'''₮K''']]/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 18:57, 7 April 2009 (EDT)

==Historian?==

Are you really Richard Jensen? I read your midwest book when I was younger (If indeed you are) [[User:JamesFerguson|JamesFerguson]] 16:32, 6 April 2009 (EDT)
::yes. I wrote it when I was 24 years old. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 16:33, 6 April 2009 (EDT)

==Democrats and casual sex==

Jensen, I noticed that you deleted [[Democrats and casual sex|this article]], citing "inappropriate content". While I certainly find the actions of the Democrats to be inappropriate, I don't find the content of the article to be inappropriate. It was written without going into the lewd details of the online solicitations, but with enough evidence to incriminate the Democrats. Hard data doesn't lie: the Democratic convention had that spike in postings, while the RNC, which happened ''after'' and thus was under more scrutiny, did not have the spike in postings. It's a black and white testament to who actually lives family values, and therefore who has the family values in mind. Democrats may talk all they want about upholding morals, but their actions, ''especially'' those done in secret, tell a completely different story, one replete with [[duplicity]].

Furthermore, I'd argue precedent: this content has been listed in the articles on the [[2008 Democratic National Convention]] for some time. When I created the standalone article, I was pleasantly surprised to find the content had already been dutifully reported on CP. If you would, could you please restore the article? -[[User:Foxtrot|Foxtrot]] 16:00, 7 April 2009 (EDT)

::tens of thousands of people attend major conventions, so they all generate huge amounts of business. Not encyclopedic. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 19:19, 7 April 2009 (EDT)

:::I agree with Jensen. Pot/Kettle? Given the sex scandals that have and continue to hit both parties, singling out one of them is not the best road to go down..... --[[User:TK|'''₮K''']]/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 19:31, 7 April 2009 (EDT)
:::tk is ok. We have lots of middle school kids and tehy shouldn't be wasting their time on this stuff when they can read about Henry VIII. :) [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 20:11, 7 April 2009 (EDT)

== Kingdom of the Netherlands ==

Could you move [[Kingdom of the Netherlands]] to the [[Netherlands]]? (See [[Talk:The_Kingdom_of_the_Netherlands#The_Kingdom_of_the_Netherlands_is_not_the_Netherlands.21|here]]) Thanks, [[User:ClementB|Clement ♗]] 13:24, 8 April 2009 (EDT)
::ok--good idea. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 14:04, 8 April 2009 (EDT)
:::Thanks again! [[User:ClementB|Clement ♗]] 14:30, 8 April 2009 (EDT)

== Arguing only.... ==

This: [http://www.conservapedia.com/World_History_Lecture_Nine] is exactly what I was talking about. --[[User:TK|'''₮K''']]/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 17:42, 8 April 2009 (EDT)

== Pilgrim's Progress ==

Hi - sorry to bother. When you edited [[Pilgrim's Progress]] earlier, did the images load ok? For some reason I am only seeing an empty frame, yet the code looks correct and I am about to pull my hair out figuring out what is wrong! --[[User:JessicaT|KotomiT]][[User talk:JessicaT|''nandeyanen?'']] 09:03, 18 April 2009 (EDT)
::the images did not load --probably because they are too big. I can resize them now if you want. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 09:12, 18 April 2009 (EDT)
:::I would really appreciate that! Thank you so much. (I know it is a physical impossibility, but it seems I too have blonde moments *grin*) --[[User:JessicaT|KotomiT]][[User talk:JessicaT|''nandeyanen?'']] 09:17, 18 April 2009 (EDT)
::::yes it works! (I made the map smaller) [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 09:37, 18 April 2009 (EDT)
:::::Thank you again! That is one I owe you. --[[User:JessicaT|KotomiT]][[User talk:JessicaT|''nandeyanen?'']] 09:49, 18 April 2009 (EDT)

== Fake Quotes ==
I will no longer use BrainyQuote.com, publishers of fake quotes. Thanks for the correction.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 11:05, 19 April 2009 (EDT)
::good idea. it's weird how so many quotes get faked these days. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 19:30, 19 April 2009 (EDT)

== Internet Vandals ==

Some of these anti-intellectual vandals and trolls were having some fun at your expense, Richard. If you've gotten wind of it, or hear of it at some point, pay it no mind. Mainly just a group of malcontented trolls who frequent several sites, and of course the usual gang of young teen vandals all too common to the Internet. --[[User:TK|'''₮K''']]/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 20:28, 19 April 2009 (EDT)
::thanks--yes they do get under my skin :) [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 21:30, 19 April 2009 (EDT)

:::Oh, BTW:
<blockquote>
Lending at the biggest U.S. banks has fallen more sharply than realized, despite government efforts to pump billions of dollars into the financial sector.

According to a Wall Street Journal analysis of Treasury Department data, the biggest recipients of taxpayer aid made or refinanced 23% less in new loans in February, the latest available data, than in October, the month the Treasury kicked off the Troubled Asset Relief Program.

The total dollar amount of new loans declined in three of the four months the government has reported this data." [http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124019360346233883.html#mod=rss_whats_news_us]
</blockquote>
--[[User:TK|'''₮K''']]/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 00:33, 20 April 2009 (EDT)
::thanks for the tip. I'll keep updating the article. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 00:42, 20 April 2009 (EDT)

== Great effort ==

Great effort cleaning up the vandalism this morning! You might observe that vandalism is almost perfectly correlated with products of the political left.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 11:51, 22 April 2009 (EDT)
::thanks. they are nettlesome gnats. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 11:54, 22 April 2009 (EDT)

== Redneck ==

Perhaps it would be more accurate to state it was historically a derogatory term, but that since the late 1950's it has been co-opted by the targets of the term, and in modern usage it isn't necessarily viewed as a negative? Think Jeff Foxworthy, etc. --[[User:TK|'''₮K''']]/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 16:03, 30 April 2009 (EDT)
::good point! [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 16:18, 30 April 2009 (EDT)

:::Thanks, Richard! I remember that cartoon, too! --[[User:TK|'''₮K''']]/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 16:45, 30 April 2009 (EDT)
::::It's one of my favorites. :) [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 16:51, 30 April 2009 (EDT)

== [[Socialism]] ==

RJ, when you get a moment, could you look at [http://www.conservapedia.com/Talk:Socialism#Grammatical_Edit_and_Rebuttal this?] The editor wants to add what he feels is a needed rebuttal to what he feels is something too pro-socialist...I don't see what he's getting at, but do want to accommodate him if possible. Since most of the work there is now yours, I am deferring to your judgment. --[[User:TK|'''₮K''']]/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 00:12, 1 May 2009 (EDT)
::OK I worked on it. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 11:09, 1 May 2009 (EDT)

== Lenin ==

Hey RJJensen, so, you're ''much'' better at history than I am, but I do feel compelled to ask about your moving of Vladimir Ilyich Lenin to Lenin (I put the full reasons on the talk page) - simply because I feel precedent would have us use his full name, but the reason I'm posting here is just to clarify that I in no way mean to question you and the request is in no way meant as an insult - I have a lot of respect for you and I just want to make sure there won't be a misunderstanding. Thanks!--[[User:Iduan|I]][[User_talk:Iduan|Duan]] 15:20, 2 May 2009 (EDT)
::thanks for the note--no offense taken and i'm glad you asked disguise his identity and so it should not be treated like ordinary names. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 15:42, 2 May 2009 (EDT)
:::Understood - thanks very much! --[[User:Iduan|I]][[User_talk:Iduan|Duan]] 15:47, 2 May 2009 (EDT)

Lol, sorry about the misspelled name! I can't believe I did that ... in all seriousness though it really is awesome to work with you - so if you ever need a template or anything done, lemme know.--[[User:Iduan|I]][[User_talk:Iduan|Duan]] 23:25, 3 May 2009 (EDT)
::hey thanks--I'm a klutz at progamming and appreciate the help. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 23:31, 3 May 2009 (EDT)

== Quotes ==
Trying to determine if a quote is a fake. I tried Google, it comes up everywhere with blogs only. I tried Google books, about 5 come up. I would think credible historical sites would list if true. Can you confirm Thomas Jefferson "When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty." --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 15:02, 6 May 2009 (EDT)
::I searched around and it appears to be a fake. All genuine Jefferson quotes are well represented in books.google.com [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 15:20, 6 May 2009 (EDT)

== "the best"? ==

What constitutes the best prose writer? I would imagine that it is impossible to say in a way that does not involve a whole lot of personal opinion, which as you know is not the kind of objective fact you would expect to find in an encyclopedia. From what I gather you yourself are not an Italian literature scholar, and even if you can read Italian extremely well and have read a good deal of Italian prose I really don't think you can say "he is the best", simply because, as I just said, its subjective. thanks --[[User:MrEmerson|MrEmerson]] 20:48, 7 May 2009 (EDT)
::objective fact---hmmm. what sort of facts are those? [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 21:13, 7 May 2009 (EDT)

:::I suspect liberal "facts", RJ. What is indisputeable is he wasn't a very good sockmaster! Brendanw, EmersonW, MrEmerson and several accounts that look like IP's were all his. Sorry to ruin your fun with this guy...I didn't see you had engaged him until after I had begun shutting him down. Next time I will let you have fun with them! --[[User:TK|'''₮K''']]/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 21:23, 7 May 2009 (EDT)
::::yeah--my goal is to drive them away redfaced and yours is to catch them red-handed (red moused?) :) [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 21:30, 7 May 2009 (EDT)

ROFL! Whatever happened to the apparently archaic practice of playing outside? Worries me these little kids no longer play outside.... --[[User:TK|'''₮K''']]/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 21:33, 7 May 2009 (EDT)
::on Wikipedia I once was so annoyed by vandals that I complained to the school's principal in New Jersey. since they weren't harrassing HIM, he ignored my complaint. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 21:46, 7 May 2009 (EDT)

:::Sherry Lansing, once in the motion picture business, has lived her business life by one rule: she never leaves the office without returning, or attempting to return ALL calls. No matter that she doesn't know the person, or they end up being someone complaining about a movie they saw. Once, at a charity deal, I asked her why. She winked and said several of those calls had made her millions in good ideas or a writer looking for someone to buy their script. She just hated the thought of being rude and not responding, saying her mother raised her better than that. Sounds like that principal is reaping what he sows. --[[User:TK|'''₮K''']]/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 00:47, 8 May 2009 (EDT)

==Revert==
Please revert User:ForTheWin's edits (I would myself, but I can't revert past one edit :(

==Thanks==
Thanks for the nice comments on my page! I am very excited for Princeton in the fall. I'll also definitely look up Liz Jensen - aerospace engineering, wow, that's great! I am considering engineering also, with mechanical/aerospace engineering near the top of my list. --[[User:PhyllisS|PhyllisS]] 21:56, 9 May 2009 (EDT)
::you might have Liz as your TA -- she loves to teach. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 22:04, 9 May 2009 (EDT)

== Upload ==

Can you give me upload picture rights?--  † [[User:FellowChristian16|Fellow]][[User talk:FellowChristian16|Christian]][[Special:Contributions/FellowChristian16|16]]  00:42, 13 May 2009 (EDT)
::I don't have the power; ask [[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]].--[[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 00:47, 13 May 2009 (EDT)
:::Just out of curiosity, would you give it to me if you could?--  † [[User:FellowChristian16|Fellow]][[User talk:FellowChristian16|Christian]][[Special:Contributions/FellowChristian16|16]]  01:01, 13 May 2009 (EDT)

== Austria ==

Hello RJJensen. Just wanted to let you know that you mistakenly moved the picture of Stephansdom in Passau over to the page on Austria. Living in Austria myself, I can attest that Passau is indeed in Germany, and Vienna's Stephansdom looks nothing like this picture! [[User:JDWpianist|JDWpianist]] 08:33, 18 May 2009 (EDT)
::thanks for that. my mistake. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 17:59, 18 May 2009 (EDT)

== Excuse me, sir! ==

Sir, you seem to be an in-charge-type around here. This being so, could you inform me how to upload images, as I can't find the button that I am so used to using on other wikis.--[[User:Woloct|Woloct]] 00:17, 19 May 2009 (EDT)

== Furthermore... ==

What's more, the page D.C.[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=D.C&redirect=no] is currently locked, and yet it's only a double-redirect. Could you, as an admin, fix this? Thank you.--[[User:Woloct|Woloct]] 00:23, 19 May 2009 (EDT)

And while we're on the topic, [[President Harry S. Truman]] [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=President_Harry_S._Truman&redirect=no] has the same problem. Poor Harry.
Thanks again.--[[User:Woloct|Woloct]] 00:26, 19 May 2009 (EDT)
:: technical pages (like the Truman and DC examples) should not be altered. To request a picture upload goto [[Conservapedia:Image upload requests]]. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 00:31, 19 May 2009 (EDT)
:::Thank you for the response! While we're on the topic, [http://www.conservapedia.com/Gary_glitter] is completely devoid of content. Could you unlock it or, preferably, destroy it?--[[User:Woloct|Woloct]] 00:35, 19 May 2009 (EDT)

::::I could partially fix a few. However, the Truman article is problematic inasmuch as it should be titled "Harry S. Truman" not "Harry Truman". Lots of links, however, so I will work on changing them and moving the main article. --[[User:TK|'''₮K''']]/Admin[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]] 00:38, 19 May 2009 (EDT)

==Silly stuff==

Could you check Gianni's contribs? [http://www.conservapedia.com/Special:Contributions/Gianni] I think a lot of it is just random silliness. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 18:09, 19 May 2009 (EDT)
::I was just looking at those. agreed. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 18:10, 19 May 2009 (EDT)

== Plymouth Brethren ==

This article wasn´t accepted by liberal wikipedia, why you refuse it in Conservapedia, please give reasons.

== Conservapedia:Featured articles ==

Any proposal for new articles? --[[User:Joaquín Martínez|Joaquín Martínez]] 19:45, 22 May 2009 (EDT)
::how about [[Atlanta]]. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 03:58, 23 May 2009 (EDT)

::: Done, now you may vote. --[[User:Joaquín Martínez|Joaquín Martínez]] 08:32, 24 May 2009 (EDT)

==Vandalism==

Please revert my bad joke (see [[Counter Reformation]]). --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 08:44, 27 May 2009 (EDT)
:Oh, so you '''are''' awake ;-) --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 09:00, 27 May 2009 (EDT)
::well I make too many typos when I write in my sleep, so I have a stiff cup of coffee right now. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 09:04, 27 May 2009 (EDT)

==new article==
Maybe you can add some historical background to my new article [[Melting pot]]. If so, thanks! [[User:AddisonDM|AddisonDM]] 22:24, 29 May 2009 (EDT)
::yes...it's a favorite topic of mine. Thanks for getting it started! [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 05:12, 30 May 2009 (EDT)

== Labour Pary ==

*Why do you keep vandalizing my correction on the "Labour Party" article. Stop it! The Labour Party IS a socialist party. The party officially describes itself as "democratic socialist." And by the way, Tony Blair has never officially renounced socialism. American conservatives need to get over this ridiculous idea that just because Blair supported the War on Terror that means he is a conservative. He's not! --- [[User:AmerICan|AmerICan]] 19:00, 11 June 2009 (EDT)
::take it to the talk page first or you will get banned for vandalism. Thanks. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 19:01, 11 June 2009 (EDT)

== Thanks! ==

Thanks for your helpful corrections to my new pages for the Obama czars! I'm new here, and looks like I went a bit overboard with the speculation into non-neutrality -- my summaries were written more as an anti-wikipedia than as truly neutral articles. I'll try to be more neutral in the future!
::and thank you for taking the initiative! [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 00:44, 12 June 2009 (EDT)

==Lusitania==
Whay are you insistant on hiding any information on the cargo of that ship, and why are you removing historical information? [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 12:05, 21 June 2009 (EDT)
::CP should condemn terrorism against helpless civilians, as all the world did at the time. The Germmans are the ones who tried to justify their actions, but they sank an unarmed undefended passenger ship deliberately in order to terrify the British. I added the German captain's own war diary account, which gives the German perspective. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 12:09, 21 June 2009 (EDT)
:::Yes, I agree, and I would have posted the sub's war diary as well if and when I found it, but the fact remains that you have removed needed material from the article. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 12:11, 21 June 2009 (EDT)
::::well what historical material do you think should be included? [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 12:22, 21 June 2009 (EDT)
:::::The past and present allegations pertaining to its munitions cargo and the current archaeological findings as reported in ''Archaeology'' Magazine and others; pertinent information regarding its passengers, sailing date, and final moments off Ireland; the German warnings in the New York Times, its declaration of the war zone around the British Isles, and its belief that ''Lusitania'' was carrying war cargo; current condition of the ship, the attempted destruction of the wreck by the British Government in the 1950's, and the case involving the owners of the wreck vs. the Irish Government...in short, just about everything. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 12:31, 21 June 2009 (EDT)
:::most of the info is in there. There should be a separate section on archaeology (which is ongoing--Wiki has some of the details). The "munitions" bit is a red herring that Germans used to justify killing innocent Americans. We need to keep an American perspective, not that of the discredited Kaiser's government that used terrorism and war crimes routinely. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 12:37, 21 June 2009 (EDT)
::::Read what I posted here [http://www.conservapedia.com/File:Lusitania_warnings.png][http://www.conservapedia.com/File:WashingtonpostMay8_1915.jpg]; period newspaper reports from the Washington Post which suggest that ''Lusitania's'' captain scoffed at the danger from Germany. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 13:04, 21 June 2009 (EDT)
:::::yes the ship shouild have been zig-zagging as ordered. not a good reason to kill americans. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 13:15, 21 June 2009 (EDT)
So, would a discussion of illegal arms shipments by the Wilson administration in contrast to the [[Iran contra affair]] be innappropriate? [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 20:02, 25 June 2009 (EDT)
::::::No, not true and not appropriate. and please if you insist on showing bias at least make it a pro-American bias, not anti-American. Better yet is no bias using the best scholarship. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 20:38, 25 June 2009 (EDT)
:::::::Is being critical of Iran contra anti-American bias? [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 20:41, 25 June 2009 (EDT)
::::::::left wing biases are unwelcome here.[[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 20:59, 25 June 2009 (EDT)
:::::::::Not necessarily so, solong as they are cited as such. Under those circumstances, they provide balance. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 21:02, 25 June 2009 (EDT)

==Let's cut to the chase==
Here's the biggest problem you have to deal with: the Founder of the Roosevelt Presidential Library, [[Trude Lash]], was a [[Stalinist]] [[KGB]] operative. How do you propose we deal with this? [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 00:34, 1 July 2009 (EDT)
::I was at the fdr Library last week and talked to the archivist personally. What's the problem? [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 07:35, 1 July 2009 (EDT)

:::I'm still working on the Trude Lash material, you'll have to give me at least a few days. Incidentally, did you ever see this one at Hyde Park:
::::5. Joseph A. Michela, Military Attache Moscow Report 1903, "N.K.V.D. of the U.S.S.R.," 14 April 1941, Franklin D. Roosevelt Library, Harry Hopkins Papers, "MID Reports--USSR--Volume V," box 190.
:::all six pages [https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/csi-publications/books-and-monographs/venona-soviet-espionage-and-the-american-response-1939-1957/part1.htm available here] [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 21:28, 1 July 2009 (EDT)
Excerpted p.5:
:''Any governmental organization that has a crying need for labor simply calls upobn the N.K.V.D to supply it. If the amount of labor is insufficient to supply the need, it is relatively an easy matter to institute a reign of terror on any pretext and fill up the labor colonies to meet requirements. There is little doubt that during the purges of the past, one eye was kept on the labor needs of government projects...."'' [https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/csi-publications/books-and-monographs/venona-soviet-espionage-and-the-american-response-1939-1957/5d.gif]
That's only a random selection, there's much more. And this is dated six months before Pearl Harbor. Many Americans had to wait till the 1970s and Solzhenitsyn's book to hear of this. All our reliable sources told us up til then was Harry and Uncle Joe got on like a "house of fire." [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 21:40, 1 July 2009 (EDT)

::I did not see that particular document but I did see others like it. FDR founded the FDR Library, not Trude Lash. The FDR Library received the FDR papers only after FDR died--there were no secret documents there during the war years.[[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 11:06, 2 July 2009 (EDT)

:::FDR founded the library? Where the papers his personal property when he did so? [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 14:59, 2 July 2009 (EDT)
::::The archivist told me that FDR raised $400,000 in 1940 to build the library on his property at Hyde park. He deeded it to the federal government. Since his death the government (National Archives) has owned and operated it; they moved his papers there in the late 1940s. Trude Lash her Joseph Lash husband years later set up a separate private FDR institute that runs academic programs. I'm not sure about Trude's politics but her husband Joseph Lash was the leading ANTI-Communist in student affairs in 1939 when he met Eleanor and they became close friends. Eleanor strongly encouraged Joe's marriage to Trude in 1944. Joe Lash and ER were key leaders of the anti-communist movement in the US in the late 1940s.[[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 15:07, 2 July 2009 (EDT)

:::::That structure, the government holding the deed to the FBI Library would then be different from other Presidential libraries under current law. So this is what you've been told.
:::::Two points. Let's clarify, (a) [[Joseph Lash]] was an anti-communist? even Wikipedia cites Joseph Lash heading a [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_front#Alleged_CPUSA_front_organizations.2C_circa_1944 Communist front organization]] on the [[Attorney General]]'s list in 1944 (Attorney General Francis Biddle, that is. M.Stanton Evens says the FDR administration established this list in 1941).
:::::(b) were the FDR papers, moved to his personal residence, considered FDR's personal property? This obviously relates to Nixon taking a tax deduction for the donation of his vice-presidential papers, seeing that by precedent, FDR & Lyndon Johnson's papers were regarded as thier personal property. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 15:39, 2 July 2009 (EDT)

::::::Lash had been a fellow traveler in the 1930s, broke with the Communists in 1939, and became the #1 anti-communist student leader. (he resigned from the Am. Youth Congress in 1940 when the reds took it over.) He later was a founder of the ADA, the leading anti-communist group in the late 1940s. FDR did not consider the presidential papers to be his personal property, but he did have many non-presidential papers. (For example, his widow sold off his stamp collection.) [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 16:11, 2 July 2009 (EDT)

::::::::Really? our sources say [[American_Youth_Congress#Dies_investigation| he defected from the Socialist Party]] to the Comintern in 1937 (the source being none other than himself <s>Trude Lash</s>). And that still doesn't explain how he ends up on the wartime [[Attorney General's list]] of [[subversive]] organizations. If memory serves me correct, there were only a dozen or so subversive organizations when the list began under FDR in 1941, of which Joe Lash's [[American Youth Congress]] is one. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 17:06, 2 July 2009 (EDT)

:::::::::ER Encylopedia says: ''"the Soviet Union signed a nonaggression pact with Germany in August 1939. Led by Joseph Lash, a founder and executive secretary of the ASU, a number of members condemned the Soviet action. Although communists were a minority of the ASU, by this time they held a majority of the leadership positions and exerted powerful control over the organization’s national board. Communist ASU officers condemned Lash for his views, organized a successful campaign to vote him out of office, and adopted a communist, anti–New Deal, isolationist position."'' (p 15) It notes that most members then quit the ASU and many joined the new anti-communist International Student Service (ISS) which Lash headed. Lash was not on the Attorney General's list because it only listed organizations--it named groups that Lash had quit or been expelled from years before. SEE [http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,763168,00.html TIME story Jan 8 1940] [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 17:36, 2 July 2009 (EDT)
::::::::::So the time has come to do a [[Joe Lash]] bio; this has been on my to-do list for many years.... [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 17:52, 2 July 2009 (EDT)
:::::::::::yes, he's interesting. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 17:59, 2 July 2009 (EDT)

== What are you doing here?!?! ==

You have a brain!!! They don't appreciate you.

User talk:WashingtonIsBroke

2009-07-07T23:44:38Z

TehBanhammer: