User talk:Tgeorgescu/Archives/2018/January

Merry Christmas!

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2018!

Hello Tgeorgescu, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you a heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2018. Happy editing, JudeccaXIII (talk) 20:44, 24 December 2017 (UTC) Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

@JudeccaXIII: Happy New Year! Tgeorgescu (talk) 01:54, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

HNY

Happy New Year! Best wishes for 2018, —PaleoNeonate – 02:12, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

@PaleoNeonate: Happy New Year! Tgeorgescu (talk) 01:54, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Religious texts policies/guidelines

I thought VERIFY or RS said something about religious texts, but I can't find it. Doug Weller talk 11:49, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

@Doug Weller: I think you mean WP:RNPOV. And of course WP:PRIMARY. Tgeorgescu (talk) 12:01, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Them's the ones. Thanks. Doug Weller talk 12:11, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Reverted Edit on Dating the Bible page

In what way is Carrier not a reliable source? He's a scholar in the field, and the book is from an academic press and went through peer review. And in every case he's reporting the opinions of other scholars (as I take pains to point out by citing the relevant notes). --2602:306:CFEA:E360:987C:301:C455:C8EE (talk) 21:58, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

He is very low in the pecking order. Does he have a paid teaching position as full professor in Bible scholarship, classics, or such? I guess not. Tgeorgescu (talk) 22:04, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

What does that have to do with anything? It's a scholarly work from a scholarly press that passed peer review. Which is frankly more than can be said for a lot of the material cited on that page, some of which is popular literature that's never seen an academic review in its life. And it's more recent than the other citations as well, meaning its incorporating more recent scholarly research, which makes it more accurate. Just because you have some imagined pecking order in your head doesn't make it non-reliable. --2602:306:CFEA:E360:987C:301:C455:C8EE (talk) 22:06, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

There are good quality sources which should be cited, written by established scholars. He is simply a guy with a PhD, not a professor. See also WP:FRINGE. Tgeorgescu (talk) 22:09, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

That's not the definition of fringe... He's publishing through a mainstream and well-known scholarly press specializing in biblical studies. And he's citing primary literature exhaustively. And he's specifically reporting the most defensible scholarly consensus in light of other recent scholarly conclusions. --2602:306:CFEA:E360:987C:301:C455:C8EE (talk) 22:14, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

It's not about your definition of fringe: our house, our rules. Tgeorgescu (talk) 22:18, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

And Wikipedia's rules, from WP:Fringe: "Reliable sources on Wikipedia may include peer-reviewed journals; books published by university presses; university-level textbooks; magazines, journals, and books published by respected publishing houses; and mainstream newspapers. Academic and peer-reviewed publications are usually the most reliable sources in areas where they are available"

Peer-reviewed? Check. Respected academic press? check. In fact, "most reliable". Our rules.

QED --2602:306:CFEA:E360:987C:301:C455:C8EE (talk) 22:26, 13 January 2018 (UTC)22:25, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

You're cherrypicking. He is fringe by our book. Tgeorgescu (talk) 22:31, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

How am I cherry picking? That's the whole paragraph. And the only paragraph on that page which defines the qualities that a reliable source has.

Also, who is "our". Are you an administrator and empowered to speak for all of Wikipedia?

--2602:306:CFEA:E360:987C:301:C455:C8EE (talk) 22:34, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

No, I just speak as an editor accustomed to the house rules. Tgeorgescu (talk) 22:38, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

A Barnstar for You!

		The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
		This is for all your tireless and heroic efforts last night defending the article Yahweh from our perennial troll friend Wittgenstein123, even in the face of some seriously deranged (and somewhat incomprehensible) attacks on your personal character. I am sure he will probably return eventually, but, for now, I just wanted to let you to know how much I appreciate your work. Thank you so much! --Katolophyromai (talk) 02:28, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

Jesus

To Tgeorgescu, Sir I am new here so did not know I was violating Wikipedia rules i am so sorry. learning new this all the time. Decan.reporter — Preceding unsigned comment added by Decan.reporter (talk • contribs) 16:11, 30 January 2018 (UTC)