User talk:Lindert

You may be interested in this: Talk:Augustine of Hippo#Augustine, antipodes and science, about the Augustine quote that has been repeatedly added to the article Augustine of Hippo. Regards, Paul August ☎ 19:50, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your work on the David article. It makes a lot more sense now. Dizzizz (talk) 16:37, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lol... I'm surprised that passage even stuck... I put that tidbit there lastnight wondering if someone would come along and delete the whole thing out... Its pretty cool that so far, there is no objection to the ****sexuality passage being there. Thank you for your clarification of that edit. Jasonasosa (talk) 13:57, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Lindert, please take a look at your Commons talkpage. --Túrelio (talk) 16:33, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for informing me about this, I was informed about using these sign marks long ago in talk pages so, I thought they should be used everywhere, however I just like using them everywhere just to make things clear just in case but, once again thank you.Moodswingster (talk) 01:55, 8 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've had very limited success in getting responses from my postings on wikipedia's "discussion" pages...but your quick response and fix of my complaint on the Tacking(sailing) page was very refreshing! Kudos and a fair wind to you. Numuse37 (talk) 16:07, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That quote really has nothing to do with polyandry, but rather women who are captured/enslaved in war have their previously-existing marriage obligations unilaterally annulled (from the point of view of the captors). AnonMoos (talk) 10:15, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It would be more helpful if you added a bit of information about the difference in this respect between the OT and the Tanakh. After all, the lead (incorrectly) identifies the Tanakh with the Old Testament, which for Catholics (in the case of Judith) doesn't jive. Note also that there is significant discussion on the canonicity of Judith (The book of Judith: Greek text with an English translation, by Morton S. Enslin and Solomon Zeitlin), but most importantly, note how the article wavers between Old Testament and Hebrew scripture--citations and references are to the Christian bible. Consider expanding the article, not restricting it. The alternate option is to have a competing Women in the Old Testament, which would not be useful. Drmies (talk) 00:22, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for filling in the etymology at Llama. I can't believe we were missing such a basic fact. Steven Walling • talk 04:54, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You said to post on the talk page and discuss, then you deleted my request to discuss. Why?Tapirrider (talk) 03:57, 5 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It is exactly this text. Thanks for uploading, I will create article for this picture. With regards. Leszek Jańczuk (talk) 18:20, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it is P. Amherst 3a. Thanks for correcting me. Leszek Jańczuk (talk) 20:51, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your observation, "the Bible gives an incomplete picture of the Biblical world is obvious, but not really meaningful. It is not an encyclopedia, so of course it is not comprehensive. That's like saying that Anne Frank's diary gives an incomplete picture of WW2. Obviously true, but that tells us nothing about its usefulness or reliability." I am impressed! That is a brilliant observation IMO! Thanks. Student7 (talk) 01:23, 12 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dear

Noticed on your work page on list of etc that you've got this guy as a source. Xulon Press is self-published, so it can't be used as a source, and in any case Argubright[1] is a Creationist so not useful as a source for archaeology (or anything in fact, he doesn't seen significant enough).

That's just copied from the article a long time ago. I am aware that page is hopelessly outdated, and I'm hardly using it anymore. Feel free to blank it or something. - Lindert (talk) 08:55, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks.

talk) 05:08, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply

]

Jalevi — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nahk7 (talk • contribs) 23:31, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

		The Friendship Barnstar
		Nice to meet you. Buster Seven Talk 16:17, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know, I am specifically asking, if it were to happen in America how much of a tort would it be? (Disturbing the peace, screaming in your face). The deaths are easier I think - I would just like to see it on the same scale. Do you have a more specific reason you think it's not a genuine question? --91.120.48.242 (talk) 12:33, 21 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

At the top of the page it reads "if you need advice or opinions, it's better to ask elsewhere.". and "The reference desk does not answer requests for opinions or predictions about future events. Do not start a debate; please seek an internet forum instead.". There is no factual question in your post, and you only mentioned the US in passing. Everything in it is a matter of opinion, and the reference desk is not for speculation about hypothetical events (such as rockets fired into the US). - Lindert (talk) 12:42, 21 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:20, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ophir, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Chronicles (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 14:06, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry if I came across as a little short-tempered on the talk page - this kind of silly argument is the sort of thing that puts me right off wikipedia. There must be (and there are!) better ways to spend my time. PiCo (talk) 12:26, 16 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm ReformedArsenal. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to Paul the Apostle because it did not appear constructive. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! ReformedArsenal (talk) 10:53, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, just to let you know that we're in the third and final stage of the RM discussion at

Hi, I just wanted to apologize for some of my comments the other day on the ref desk. I did think your overall answer was good and helpful, but that one sentence just touched a nerve. I do still think that your post would have been better if you had clarified that you were stating views of the church, and included your later references in the original post. But it ultimately wasn't a big problem. I probably should have stopped responding after your response, because the issue was basically clarified by that point. SemanticMantis (talk) P.S. Why do you say that St. Augustine was not a Roman Catholic? All I know is that he lived in the Roman empire, he is a saint in the Roman Catholic Church (according to List_of_Catholic_saints), and his WP article mentions that "Augustine developed the concept of the Catholic Church as a spiritual City of God," and that he wrote "On the Holiness of the Catholic Church". So it seems at the least he was a Roman and a Catholic, but is there some technical reason why you said he wasn't a Roman Catholic? As you can tell I am no expert on Catholic history.

Thanks, apologies accepted, though not really necessary. I probably should have phrased that part of my response differently.

You're right, Augustine was a Roman and a catholic. The term "catholic" is however not something that uniquely denotes the Roman Catholic Church. See e.g.

apostles' creed), and some even have "Catholic" in their name. Augustine lived in the 4th and 5th centuries, before the East–West Schism, which divided the Christian Church into what became the Eastern Orthodox and the Roman Catholics. It is anachronistic to assign individuals who lived in ancient history to branches of Christianity that did not develop until centuries later. Of course Augustine was and is an inspiration to many Roman Catholics, as well as Eastern Orthodox and protestants, and he is considered a saint in many churches. It's just that historically, most of the characteristics which today distinguish the Roman Catholic Church from other branches of Christianity had not developed when Augustine lived. Augustine would not have understood the term "Roman Catholic". His use of the word "catholic" has very little to do with how the term is often used today. - Lindert (talk) 00:00, 17 October 2014 (UTC)[reply

]

I read your reply that mentions "the Hebrew alphabet consists of just consonants". I am not an expert in the Hebrew language, but I believe there are several letters that are used as vowels: Aleph, Ayin, and sometimes Waw (letter) and Yodh, although Niqqud are also used to indicate vowels. Please correct me if I misunderstand. --Thomprod (talk) 13:47, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You do have a point, but what I meant to say is that all Hebrew letters are fundamentally consonants. No single Hebrew letter unambiguously indicates a certain vowel, but some letters indeed have a role in indicating vowels. Wikipedia has an article on this: Mater_lectionis. Ayin is never used for vowels, aleph rarely (and can be used with any vowel); the most important are Yod and Waw. A Yod can indicate a i-vowel, but also a (long or short) e-vowel. A Waw represents o or u. In classical Hebrew spelling however, these vowel indicators are optional and can just as well be left out. For example, the name David (Hebrew "Dawid") can be written as "dwd" (דוד) or as "dwyd" (דויד). The waw in both cases serves as a consonant, and the yod (indicating an i-sound in this case) is optional. Furthermore, reading דויד as "Daved" or "Doyad" is consistent with these rules. Hence it is necessary to use context and vocabulary knowledge in order to "fill in" the vowels, and that's what makes it different from the way we use vowels in the Latin alphabet. The He is used only for vowels at the end of a word, and usually indicates an a-vowel, but sometimes other vowels as well. Otherwise, He is just a consonant equivalent to our h, just like yod is equivalent to y and waw to w (or v). - Lindert (talk) 14:49, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Augustine of Hippo page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a

211.30.17.74 has given you a kitten! Kittens promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Your kitten must be fed three times a day and will be your faithful companion forever! Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a kitten, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

Spread the goodness of kittens by adding {{subst:Kitten}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or kittynap their kitten with {{subst:Kittynap}}

Thanks for the websites you found for me, the Time for Kids one looks particularly relevant. 211.30.17.74 (talk) 06:13, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of biblical figures identified in extra-biblical sources, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Merodach-Baladan. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:23, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Future perfect deleted that probably because it's a banned editor from London who keeps changing IPs. Contact Basemetal here 19:15, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

So how do can "they" tell? Contact Basemetal here 21:19, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of biblical figures identified in extra-biblical sources, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tetrarch. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:10, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of biblical figures identified in extra-biblical sources, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Legate. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:59, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Lindert. Voting in the

2016 Arbitration Committee elections

is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The

topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

So you come to my aid again! I'm recently retired from the GFH museum archives, thus freer to contribute to WP. Lots more to learn - I appreciate your help! Cheers -- Deborahjay (talk) 19:05, 12 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Did you see my response to you, at the Language reference desk? 08:09, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Lindert. Voting in the

2017 Arbitration Committee elections

is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The

topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Lindert. Voting in the

2018 Arbitration Committee elections

is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The

topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the

2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users

are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The

topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review

NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:43, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply

]