User:Danny User:Tannin User:Notheruser
Stop deleting my text!!!
How can you be so rude and stupid?!
Stop your hostile stupid activity against me!
AlbertJacherHolyProphet 02:03 Mar 13, 2003 (UTC)
Stop your hostile activity against Holy Prophet Albert Jacher!
- Please blatherate against me, too. I'm feeling left out. 66.167.135.162 02:30 Mar 13, 2003 (UTC)
Hi Albert, whether you feel your edits have been changed fairly or unfairly you are going to make few friends or find much sympathy by vandalising pages. I suggest you stop this. Try to get along with people, discuss with them the reasons that they are deleting your work. Don't vandalise pages. Thanks - Ams80 03:01 Mar 13, 2003 (UTC)
Hello Ams!
I think you are wrong. I am just doing what other people do here.
I wrote new articles about me and my religion and they just deleted it!
There were no discussion, no questions, no answers...
They just deleted my work and treated me as an idiot and not as the creator of a new religion. I do not care whether they assume i am a new prophet from god.
But this is an ENCYCLOPEDIA, so a magazine for information. And those who keep deleting my work, spoil the whole ideal of free and open web encyclopedia.
I do not know how to delete a whole article, but if they can just delete someone else's work, you or i can open their articles and delete their work, just because it is about some other stupid religion that they believe in...
I came here with quite other hopes and intentions.
But experienced editors of this encyclopedia showed me just this way of behavior.
Thank you very much because you are the only person to react somehow positively. Thank you for editing my text, but now there is nothing to read, because the hostile editors deleted all of my articles including that edited by you...
I am very surprised by their arrogance and hate.
If no one helps me here agaist them, i will not edit more. There is no sense in writing just for deletion...
If you could, please help me find a way how to appeal to some supervisor of them .
I send you many good wishes!
AlbertJacherHolyProphet 03:33 Mar 13, 2003 (UTC)
- Hello again Albert, I think there probably is a place on Wikipedia for your religion, I don't really think that an article at Albertanism is unreasonable. However, here at Wikipedia we have a neutral point of view policy, generally information which people view as not being neutral will be deleted. Also, religion is a controversial topic, small new religions have a bad reputation and perhaps people act accordingly. Also I think a more friendly tone will help you, if you go and ask the people who deleted your entries why they did this in a friendly way then I am sure they will answer you. I don't think that your diatribe below is the way to get answers.
- Happy editing, Andrew - Ams80 03:56 Mar 13, 2003 (UTC)
Hello Andrew!
I understand your point of view and understand you well. For me Muhammad is not a prophet from God and Yahu'shuah is not a son of God as they 'self-proclaimed'... Does that mean that we should delete all information about those men from wikipedia?!
You suggest me to ask Danny why he deleted my all and whole articles. But he does not expect any explanation. He wrote that he did it because i am "self proclaimed prophet" and "wacko" and so on...
So who is to proclaim a new prophet from God? A parliament? United Nations Org? As i know the history prophets always proclaimed themselves! Only a prophet can know whether one were chosen by God. It is not a stupid arrogant evil internet service editor who decides about Gods intentions and deeds!
I came here with my name "Albert Jacher" and the proclamation: "I am the Speaker of God" and my word is now against words of nicknames: Danny, Tannin, Notheuser...
Now choose whom you prefer to trust and who will edit information for the rest of the planets population...
The world is so weird, that people prefer to trust anonymous evildoers than a sincere righteous man.
Good luck!
AlbertJacherHolyProphet 04:36 Mar 13, 2003 (UTC)
PS. By the way... What was not "neutral" in "Albert Jacher was born in..." or "Albertanism was anounced in year..."?
User:Danny User:Tannin User:Notheruser
Stop deleting my text!!!
How can you be so rude and stupid?!
Stop your hostile stupid activity against me!
Stop your stupid, hostile activity against Holy Prophet Albert Jacher!
Who are you to judge me whether i am the Chosen by God Holy Prophet or not?! ARE YOU GOD?!?!?!
I do not suppose i represent YOU!
So stop deleting my articles and my text modifications.
I assume that this encyclopedia is just for humans on planet Earth and not especially for Jews and Christians... If i am wrong about it tell me!
It is not my intention to edit jewish or christian or muslim texts.
But if this medium is intended to be a free medium and magazine of information, then leave me alone and let me inform humans on planet about wisdom unlike other religions did.
It this encylopedia is for arrogant Jews and Christians only then stop proclaiming this wikipedia as "free" because it is simply false statement.
I am not very much surprised that stupidity and evil rule the world, but i admit that meeting so much evil and stupidity right here in GNU wikipedia.org is a surprice for me.
I wish you much more good and wisdom! Xsalom Alejhem!
AlbertJacherHolyProphet 03:34 Mar 13, 2003 (UTC)
Albert Jacher, Speaker of God
- Wikipedia is free to read but not free to write. Additions and alterations must be approved by general consensus. This is the simply the nature of the medium. If you don't like it, publish your material in a forum which lacks a review process, such as usenet or a self-published website. -- Tim Starling 03:51 Mar 13, 2003 (UTC)
Tim!
Thank you for information. It is a weird habbit to "approve by general consensus" by deleting the text to be added...
Could you now discuss what was wrong in my texts about the Wisdom Religion that i published before? No, because they got deleted... How Wikipedia.org wants to approve deleted text?
And by the way... what is my role as a registered editor here in wikipedia? I know that i may not publish anything... so why was i registered here?! Only to read? Is that the wiki genereal idea?
I am still surprised, but i learned a bit more about intelligence of people...
I guess if i were jewish or christian there would be no problems with approving my religious beliefs and text.
- Yes, there would be. On a daily basis extreme beliefs are removed from a wide variety of articles on Christianity, Judaism and Islam. It is not racism or discrimination, we just have a neutral point of view policy. I think that if you put a perfectly neutral point of view article (NPOV) at Albertanism, detailing what the religion believes, what it's origins are and where more information can be found, then no-one will try and delete it. Statements such as Albert Jacher is the Holy Prophet of God are likely to be deleted as they are not NPOV. Ams80
- I strongly disagree. This opens the door for every made-up religion to start storming Wikipedia. We just go through the invasion from the Fifth World. -- Zoe
- OK, I can agree about "Holy Prophet", but is that a satisfactory reason to delete all other text and articles?
Understand, that no one assumes that i am a prophet, because people do not use the Wisdom Religion yet. For people i am just an idiot or swindler, that is all that they can imagine now. Does it influence in any way the truth in my ideas?
I conclude that no matter if God chose me to be the new prophet for you, you want to approve my words and decide whether i teach as God wishes... So who is in fact speaker of God, you or me?...
Good wishes!
AlbertJacherHolyProphet 04:12 Mar 13, 2003 (UTC) Hi Albert, A couple of questions:
- How adherents does your religion have?
- How many ordained ministers?
- In how many nations does it exist?
- What are its primary teachings, goals?
- Does it organise educational courses?
- Are these required for membership of its priesthood?
- What is the name of your website?
- Has your faith received tax clearance and so is taxed as a charity, not a business internationally?
- Is it a branch of the jewish faith? Islam? Christianity? If the latter, which branch of christianity does it most closely resemble?
- Is it duly registered for full legal purposes?
- Does it run any educational courses? What are their names? Where are held? What qualifications emerge?
Wikipedia is an encyclopædia and so we need to be careful about the information we carry. In the case of a small religion, verification of its authentity is a necessity, as I am sure you, as a founder of a faith will understand. We have to provide fair and balanced coverage of all validly existing faiths. We also have to be careful for 'vanity' religion, which like vanity publishing, is simply one person's do-it-your-own 'non-existent' religion, which you of course as someone interested in religion will understand and will be equally opposed to. Unfortunately unless we have independently verificable evidence to the existence and teachings of a faith we cannot carry it. So if you could give us details of the above, so we can verify the details with the appropriate authorities and sources.
Yours in faith, STÓD/ÉÍRE 04:31 Mar 13, 2003 (UTC)
- None of that matters with this User goes into articles, deletes them and allows only his own work to be included there. -- Zoe
- You make a good point. We could block him, or just revert everything he does, simply on the basis of his behaviour rather than content. The real risk behind the "made-up religion invasion" is not the creation of useless articles but the introduction of fanatical and badly behaved users. I would argue that an NPOV article on Albertanism is potentially useful (say, to sociologists), but that Albert Jacher and his kin have the potential to do serious damage to Wikipedia. -- Tim Starling 04:59 Mar 13, 2003 (UTC)
- Tim! And what is your opinion about the damages made regularly in wikipedia by the group: User:Danny User:Tannin User:Notheruser ? For several hours they kept deleting my articles and text thus bloking my work. Do you think they are fully entitled to be responsible Wikipedia editors? Please consider that! You are able to think before you act and what about them?
AlbertJacherHolyProphet 05:06 Mar 13, 2003 (UTC)
Dear STÓD/ÉÍRE !
Thank you for your kind interest...
Yesterday i found Wikipedia in internet and i was so glad to find it and hopeful for interestinf colaboration. I registered and wrote my first articles about me, religion that i create, calendar... Those were only short informations, just the beginning of more detailed description.
I hope you would find many answers to your questions there.
You would read that i was chosen by God and i teach people on all the planet about what God wants from people now.
But very soon in the first hour my articles got entirely removed from Wikipedia according to arbitrary decisions of "those who always know better"... The reason was given "wacko, self proclaimed prophet".
So now there is no chance to inform you about my ideas and my situation, because i was primarily assessed as a dangerous swindler or idiot.
God chose me to come to you as God's messenger... you closed the door and offended me...
If you prefer 'established religions', registered and approved by your authorities and your polititians... it is your free choice.
I cannot force anyone into wisdom!
May God bless you all!
AlbertJacherHolyProphet 05:01 Mar 13, 2003 (UTC)
- I understand your situation. I'm sure that you also understand Wikipedia's. Wikipedia requires two important conditions be filled.
- Independent verification of source material
- NPOV - in other words, a neutral point of view.
The pages that were deleted were only deleted because those who deleted could find no independent evidence of your faith's existence. We can 'prove' the existence of the Roman Catholic Church, of the jewish faith, islam, the Jehovas Witnesses, etc not just through themselves but also independently and from their legal status as registered. But if we cannot so prove your existence, then we cannot include a reference to your faith. It is a rule applied universally. If you have registered accounts for a number of tax years for your church, formal charitable designation, educational establishments registered in your church's name, formal covenants, etc and a separately verifiable website then we can at least begin the process of accepting the legitimacy of your existence. But without that, we regrettably cannot.
Many of the statements and pages added in were unverifiable and as such could not stand under wikipedia rules. The independent evidence is an absolute requirement.
Bless you, STÓD/ÉÍRE 05:12 Mar 13, 2003 (UTC)
=
Dear STÓD/ÉÍRE !
I also understand you and why you think this way. Unfortunately you are fully unaware that you write to a representative of God to you and your approach to me and my religion is much to beaurocratic. I am just a simple Holy Prophet, very poor man. I can hardly find money for bread and you want me to pay taxes?
Would you ask all those questions to God itself? To Muhammad? To Buddha? To Jesus? Would you let Jesus write to Wikipedia when he was 30 yo? Would you ask him: "Yahu'shuah! How many students do you have? Only 12?! Too little! And you are not approved by the Jewish nor Roman Authorities! You may not write any texts here then, regrettably..."
Think it all over in your soul...
AlbertJacherHolyProphet 05:27 Mar 13, 2003 (UTC)
PS. Albert Jacher is the only source of information about Albertanism and the recent God's revelation... so where else do you want to look for verification?
I understand, Albert, but wikipedia cannot endorse an prophet for divinity, diety, sainthood or martyrdom. All we can do is record their existence. We do have a lot of martyrs on here, one or two saints and one or two who think they are god. But we simply cannot accept unverifiable claims. If we did, we could have one hundred claimants an hour. We already have three people claiming to be pope and two Ian Paisleys. All that we require is that if a religion is accepted in law as a valid religion, then we can give it credence. While I have no doubt but that you are genuine, we do need independently veriafiable documentary evidence. I'm sure if you have the blessing of The Lord, he will offer evidence of your mission in due time. But it the time we cannot help an unverified revelation.
Go in Peace, STÓD/ÉÍRE 05:57 Mar 13, 2003 (UTC)
---
Dear STÓD/ÉÍRE !
I understand your concerns and i share them a little. But this does not change much. It simply does not depend on whether i am genuine or not. I can be also a false prophet and swindler, unauthorized by any political law. Encyclopedia should just register the information and not censor the information based on official approvement by political laws.
I am the Speaker of God to change the political laws because they are not in accordance with laws created by God. So i will never be approved by human, political laws. They are not compatible with laws of God.
My intention is not to make the recruitment campaign here in Wikipedia. My intention is NPOV type information about the new religion for the new era. Is that too much? Do you know that you are priviledged and you had the information about the Speaker of God and his new religion as the first encyclopedia on planet! And what? In return i got lots of stress and offence and accusation.
I am just very sorry.
If you want me to leave this place i will do this. Thank God there is a web server provider that hosts free of charge my website and i will publish there details of my philosophy. If you are an Important Person in Wikipedia and your conscious and determined wish is NOT to include any information about Albert Jacher in your service... what can i do?
I wish you all good luck in life and lots of Gods blessing!
AlbertJacherHolyProphet 06:26 Mar 13, 2003 (UTC)
First, get your facts straight, AlbertJacker. I haven't deleted any of the Holy Texts of Jacker. Which is a shame, really, as I like to do my little bit to keep Wikipedia factual and free from silly advertising. No matter: I was too busy with other tasks today, but many others have stepped in and taken care of the problem, so no harm done. Tannin 08:54 Mar 13, 2003 (UTC)
Tannin!
That is right. You was not that much harmful and hostile as Danny and Notheruser. You deleted only once my text in the morning i remember. But anyway you contributed to the whole hostile action to stop the prophet from publishing rather than to try understand "what and why" and correct errors in my texts.
Have you written ever any comment to me about any of uncertain matters or any of my errors? Did you choose the way to discuss or the way to fight? Did you choose to assume that you were wiser than the prophet?
Here comes a man and informs "I create a new religion". And your mental processes are limited to a chain: "Man + new religion > idiot > fight against > delete+ disturb > ban..."
I am glad that the times have changed and i hope Jews or Christians would not burn me or kill me otherwise as they used to do with other wiser humans. Thank God christianity is decreasing on planet.
Wisdom to you!
--
Albert Jacher, Speaker of God 18:46 Mar 13, 2003 (UTC)
Wikipedia is not a source text repository. That is, this is not an appropriate place for the holy books of any religion. Or for public-domain nineteenth century articles, for that matter.
Wikipedia is also not a place to assert one's dislike of other people's religions. Vicki Rosenzweig ---
- Vicki!
- Instead of writing what Wikipedia is NOT explain us all what Wikipedia IS.
- I also guess that Wikipedia is not a dog or car or newspaper or medical prescription. Am i right? So what is Wikipedia? What is the purpose of that internet service and the collaborative work of the Wikipedia editors?
- How do you think? Would it be in accordance with Wikipedia purposes to include information about a new religious activity of a man who proclaimed himself as the ChosenByGod, Speaker of God, Holy Prophet and wants to alter the religious behavior of bilions of humans on the planet?
- Is a man who will alter your life and the life of your descendants worth a notice in Wikipedia?
- With good wishes, -- Albert Jacher, Speaker of God 12:17 Mar 14, 2003 (UTC)