User talk:Thiebes

(Revision as of 16:24, 6 Jul 2005)

You have been invited to join the august Order of Udjat! See your main user page... Fr. Ash 11:24, 6 Jul 2005 (CDT)

I see you moved Religion article around and stuff without making any comment? I don't get that at all. After the amount of work and debate that went into it, how can you just arbitrarily move shit around without including any rationale in the talk page? --Thiebes 20:35, 11 Jun 2005 (CDT)

He's the "Executive Editor." Remember, all animals are equal, but some are more equal than others. Aleph 10:14, 12 Jun 2005 (CDT)

What I did, I did as an editor, which you can do yourself. If you think that changing the name of an article is a good idea, you have the ability to do that...same as me. Your brother did so on several occasions, BTW, and he didn't leave notes or make explanations for all of them. So, I asked once, I'll ask again...lose the arrogance meme...it's false and unconstructive. And just to make things crystal clear: all editors have the right to make changes to articles, including renaming them, as long as the changes are sincere and constructive. The The Zen of Wiki might be useful for you to read... —Fr. Ash— 11:53, 12 Jun 2005 (CDT)

Great! I've moved Non-religious Views of Thelema to Non-religious Thelemites and their views since that better describes the original sociological thrust of the article as describing a type of Thelemite and their beliefs and not simply describing "non-ecclesiatical views of Thelema" as you seem inclined to misinterpret its intent. Aleph 14:48, 12 Jun 2005 (CDT)

Actually, the Thelema & Religion article was originally created to serve the function it has now. On the home page, it was created to be a portal page, connecting to all the topics of religion. The work you reference still exists just as it did, it is just under the broader category of religion. It actually fits better there, if you look at the actual article...it discusses the nature of religion. Nothing has been erased...it's just organized into better compartments...and if anything, it's all easier to find than it was. If I was rewriting all that material, I would have put something in the talk page up front. As it is, I'm nearing the end of this little project (I'm tweaking the categories for religion), and haven't had time to bring it up. Were you under the impression that data had been removed? —Fr. Ash— 22:25, 11 Jun 2005 (CDT)

You wrote: Were you under the impression that data had been removed?

Not necessarily. I was under the impression that a lot of stuff had been moved around and changed, and I didn't have a chance to go through it in depth, and there was no documentation of what was changed or why. I was under the impression that when we make chances, we should include a little note about them so that editors can get a glimpse of what has been changed. Given the amount of effort I put into collating all that material for the religion page, I would have appreciated being able to understand at a glance what was being done.

That page by the way is much more than a simple overview of religion. It also includes substantial text relating Thelema to the concept of religion, and this is why I felt it should be so titled. Regardless, when I have time I'll examine all the changes you made and offer my thoughts after that. I won't just rearrange everything the way I like it with no notice or explanation.

Quick note: if you leave me messages, please put them in the discussion page so that I will get a notice of it.

That page by the way is much more than a simple overview of religion. ... Yes, it's an excellent overview of religion with necessary subtopics on Thelema. Also, by definition, on Thelemapedia all articles are "Topic and Thelema"...without the Thelema part in the title, because it is assumed. So, the Religion article is, by default, "Religion and Thelema". There was no entry for "Religion" before and that article was far better suited for it than to try to write a new one. This killed two birds with one stone: "Religion" got a perfect entry and the "Religion and Thelema" portal was allowed to be built.

Sorry if you are offended by the change, but my reasons were thoughtful and I believe an improvement. They weren't arbitrary, as you seem to suggest. You have the same authority, you know...if you see articles that could use more accurate names, then you can rename them. Naturally, this should be done conservatively and with good reason...I myself have made very few name changes.

If you insist that the article move back to being "Religion and Thelema", then I will rearrange. However, I hope you see that adding "and Thelema" to "Religion" is redundant on this site, and agree with the logic of the current naming system. —Fr. Ash— 12:32, 12 Jun 2005 (CDT)

Thiebes, I want a place to discuss Thelema outside the context of religion completely. Why can't you understand that? What precisely is wrong with that?

"We have a very different idea of what disgraces the name of wizard, Malfoy." --Arthur Weasley in Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets.

Aleph

I've already changed the name to Non-religious Views of Thelema. I didn't like "Alternative" either. Feel free to write all your want on Thelema & Religion. However, as the author of the material on non-relgious views of Thelema, I think it is for me to decide what does and what does not ghettoize my writing. That was my point in quoting H.P. Aleph

Copied from my talk page:

I see the name change now. Fine.

As for the content of your article, I'd point out that it's more than a little curious you've chosen to edit out all the other quotations of Crowley which do not go to support your case. Selective to be sure. Quite the opposite of what an encyclopedia is for, I think.

I didn't edit anything out. That was never in the Alternative Views of Thelema in the first place. You put that into Thelema & Religion. That's the right place for it.

As for your authorial whatever, look, get over your writing. This is open source. You don't own your writing here. We all get to discuss and decide together, and I think that excluding the "non-religious view" from the very article which discusses what is and is not religious could be used as a textbook example of ghettoizing an idea.

I disagree with you. It is not just me, Ash also supported separate articles.

As for Wiki etiquette and blanking -- as you had explicitly said that you would wait for me to implement my solution, which included eliminating the separate article. You clearly had some reservations, but you didn't let me finish what I was doing, or open it up for discussion before simply reverting my edit. THAT is definitely not wiki etiquette. My blanking of the other page, you had plenty of warning on, and you consented to wait and see. Now you're saying that I broke the rules? I think you'd like the rules to suit your fancy every time, but they don't this time.

I did not agree to wait for you to implement P.A.'s solution. I agreed to wait for P.A. to implement P.A.'s solution. I believe that he would have done Thelema & Religion very different. I also believe that you agree to wait for P.A. to implement his solution. So why are you the one doing it?

Thiebes, you are the MAN! You've added a ton of articles...thanks for doing such great work! —Fr. Ash

Hey, I see you are tackling the Zodiac articles. Thanks for helping! I've made an astrology template that should go on all the astro pages: {{astrology}} If you can see any improvements to be made to the astro template, by all means do so. Fr. Ash 22:13, 1 Mar 2005 (CST)

I noticed - excellent! :)

hi Thiebes do you know if we need any icons for anything, i just finished the planets and figured we could use more visual aide, if you can think of anything let me know.

Retrieved from "http://thelemapedia.org/index.php/User_talk:Thiebes"