Wikipedia

Downstrike

Joined 6 July 2006
Latest comment: 5 years ago by MediaWiki message delivery in topic ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Welcome to Wikipedia

Hello, Downstrike, and welcome to Wikipedia! Wikipedia is one of the world's fastest growing internet sites. We aim to build the biggest and most comprehensive encyclopaedia in the world. To date we have over four million articles in a host of languages. The English language Wikipedia alone has over one million articles! But we still need more! Please feel free to contribute your knowledge and expertise to our site.

If you need help see:

Here are a few more good links for newcomers:

We hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using three tildes (~~~), or four (~~~~) if you want date stamp; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. {{{1}}} Again, welcome! Herostratus 04:37, 13 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

re Little Amber pic edit

Latest comment: 17 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Basically, pictures used on Wikipedia have to be in the public domain. This is a simplification and there are exceptions, but that's the general rule. Any and all pictures displayed on littleamber.com are under copyright and cannot be used. It is possible that they could be used under "fair use", see WP:FU. Herostratus 04:37, 13 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

Your recent edits edit

Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. On many keyboards, the tilde is entered by holding the Shift key, and pressing the key with the tilde pictured. You may also click on the signature button   located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot 02:06, 4 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

Re: Likely, California edit

Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

Hi, I have moved your recently created article Likely california to Likely, California as per place name conventions on Wikipedia. The article name as you created it will now redirect people to the new page name. --JoeTalkWork 01:33, 17 September 2008 (UTC)Reply

Essentially, the only error you made was not creating the page with a title that matched those for similar articles, for example Adin, California - Wikipedia won't do this for you so all you can do is check similar pages for an indication of how it should be done. If you want to move a page the proper way to do it is to click the 'Move' tab at the top of the article - for most pages this will immediately move the article page and talk page to the new page name and create a redirect from the old page name. When I started on Wikipedia I didn't know this to begin with and made a mistake when I simply copy/pasted the contents of a page to a page name which matched similar articles. Another user helpfully showed me how to do it properly and pointed out that using the 'Move' tab moves the whole article and talk page and creates a redirect from the old page name. You may also want to check Help:Moving_a_page and Wikipedia:Requested_moves. If you need a hand with anything else just leave a note on my talk page. Cheers, JoeTalkWork 17:17, 17 September 2008 (UTC)Reply
A belated thank you, for your help :^)

Accusations edit

Latest comment: 14 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

Do not make accusations or insinuations about me, as you did here. If this continues, you will be reported.--Jeffro77 (talk) 12:21, 24 February 2010 (UTC) The ambiguous restating of and speculation about another editor's unsubstantiated claims against me, as you did here, makes your intention unclear. Would you care to clarify?--Jeffro77 (talk) 12:33, 24 February 2010 (UTC)Reply

I observed that you have been victimized by the perception that you and LTSally think you own that article, and that your reaction to that perception is understandable.
If that seems like an accusation to you, I'm sorry that you perceive it that way, just as I'm sorry that others perceive you as thinking you own the article.
My point was that we need to take action to change that perception; not only for your sake, but particularly for the sake of the article. For this reason, I appreciated your question whether there is some other statement for which I would like to use the documentary. I have something in mind, but I've felt very ill. I hope to get to it shortly.
I initially misread what you'd said, but was still a little unclear about your intent, but I think it's all good. It is unfortunate that there are not more editors to regularly contribute to the JW articles, however the controversial nature of the articles tends to attract strongly anti- and pro- editors rather than neutral editors, because most neutral editors simply aren't interested in the subject; editors who desire to insert inappropriate or untrue information or to remove facts they consider unfavorable often become upset that their views do not remain in the article for long, and it is generally those editors who complain about perceived 'ownership' by other editors. The articles can (eventually and gradually) benefit from both pro- and anti- views, so long as those are tempered by some objectivity. If the regular editors sat back and did nothing when strong anti- and pro- edits were made, the article would very quickly decay. Short of that, I can only continue to request that editors discuss edits that do not find consensus.
Other than interaction within Wikipedia, I do not know, have no affiliation with, and cannot speak for LTSally.--Jeffro77 (talk) 07:52, 25 February 2010 (UTC)Reply
Unfortunately, I'm afraid that holds true for most any controversial topic. Only a person who feels strongly about it, is likely to contribute. Others are probably not knowledgeable, and will probably fear repercussions.


Memorialized Project edit

Latest comment: 12 years ago26 comments2 people in discussion

I used this space to work on a project that I abandoned in March 2010. I'm preserving the work done here, to memorialize the amount of work that can be wasted when WP editors try to make sense of sloppy work done by previous editors, presenting it as a lesson. In this case, the most relevant source citation on a particular topic was garbled to the point that I did not recognize its relevance. (See reference #2.)

User pages should not be used for keeping your preferred version of article content per WP:UP#COPIES. If you want to keep a record of your work, you should save it on alternative website or on your own computer. The non-Talk content below can be deleted at any time by any user.--Jeffro77 (talk) 05:22, 17 July 2011 (UTC)Reply
Even though I never achieved a preferred version, I suppose. I'll look for a more appropriate place for it. Downstrike (talk) 20:05, 17 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

Predictions for 1975 edit

Analyzing this section, found at History of Jehovah's Witnesses, I found that it contains at least:

  • 4 statements of POV (Point of View) not supported by the sources cited.
  • 3 second-hand citations.
  • 1 source citation containing irrelevant material.
  • 1 redundant citation.
  • 1 run-on citation of apparently 3 sources. (Oops! There were 4.)
  • 1 citation quote edited to give a false impression of support for a POV.
  • 3 instances of unexplained insider jargon.
  • Most citations are in obsolete formats.
  • The entire section is a single bloated paragraph, incoherently composed, and presented out of context.

The Current Section edit

From 1966, Witness publications heightened anticipation of Christ's thousand-year millennial reign beginning in late 1975.[1][2][3][4] In what became a replay of the 1925 cycle of excitement, anticipation and then disappointment, Witness publications and convention talks intensified focus on 1975 as the "appropriate" time for God to act,[5] with statements that "the immediate future is certain to be filled with climactic events ... within a few years at most the final parts of the Bible prophecy relative to these 'last days' will undergo fulfillment".[6] The May 1974 issue of the Watch Tower Society's newsletter, Kingdom Ministry, commended Witnesses who had sold homes and property to devote themselves to preaching in the "short time" remaining.[7] The number of baptisms soared from about 59,000 in 1966, to more than 297,000 in 1974, but membership declined after expectations for the year failed.[8] In 1976 The Watchtower advised those who had been "disappointed" by the failure of the predictions for 1975 to adjust their viewpoint because their understanding had been "based on wrong premises",[9], but four years later, after several proposals by Governing Body members to apologise to Witnesses were voted down,[10] the Watch Tower Society admitted its responsibility in building up hope regarding 1975.[11]

The Work Progress edit

Chronology

Beginning in 1966, Watch Tower Society publications and convention lectures heightened anticipation of the end of the first 6,000 years of mankind's existence from the time Adam was created, in late 1975.[12] Also beginning in that year, presentations of the chronological basis of that conclusion were consistently accompanied by disclaimers that the Watch Tower Society was not predicting that anything would occur then, frequently accompanied by a statement forbidding Jehovah's Witnesses to predict that any event would occur then.[13][14][15][16][17]

Prediction

Beginning in 1968, their publications and convention lectures predicted Christ's Millennial Reign would coincide with the sixth millennium of the seven-thousand-year-long seventh day of creation, and explained that the seventh day of creation did not begin until an unknown length of time after Adam was created.[Genesis 1:27-31, 2:7-22] Therefore, the seventh millennium of the seventh day would begin, the same unknown length of time after the end of the first 6,000 years of mankind's existence, rather than in the autumn of 1975.[18][19][20] The Watch Tower Society also told Jehovah's Witnesses that "Within a few years at most the final parts of Bible prophecy relative to these “last days” will undergo fulfillment, resulting in the liberation of surviving mankind into Christ’s glorious 1,000-year reign."[14]

Date Unknown

The Watch Tower Society presented their own headquarters expansion and building of new branch offices as an example of acting '"with a view to the continued expansion of the work this side of the “great tribulation”'.[21] They urged Jehovah's Witnesses to "Serve with Eternity in View" rather than "speculating about a certain date", so that "whenever the 'tribulation' breaks out, we will be found busy and zealously carrying out the assignment we have",[22][23] and explained that they did not need to know when Jesus would begin reigning.[24] A spokesman for Jehovah's Witnesses stated that only spiritually immature members believed that Armageddon was coming in 1975.[25]

The Watch Tower Society renounced the expectation that Jesus would begin reigning at the beginning of the seventh mellinium in the January 1, 1975 Watchtower, because even though Jesus "knew exactly when God’s seventh creative day, his great “rest” day began and when it would end ... when he was on earth he did not know the day and hour of his execution of judgment on this world".[26]

News Reports

In media publication, predictions that Armageddon would occur in 1975 were only attributed to Jehovah's Witnesses by news sources outside the control of the Watch Tower Society.[27][28][29] Beginning in February 1975, some news sources reported the Watch Tower Society's 1968 explanation that Christ's reign would not begin until the beginning of the seventh millennium, rather than in 1975. However, they reported it as a new development, rather than in its historical context.[25][30]

When prominent sources publish such sensational reports, other sources frequently pick up and reprinted their articles.[31] Some news sources used their attribution of the 1975 prophecy to Jehovah's Witnesses as a premise to ridicule them,[32][33] and some news sources continue to do so 35 years later.[34]

The Watch Tower Society regularly acknowledges the self-sacrifice of Jehovah's Witnesses who give up homes and other material advantages to serve full time,[35][36][37][38] and the May 1974 issue of the Watch Tower Society's newsletter, Kingdom Ministry, commended Witnesses who had sold homes and property to devote themselves to preaching in the "short time" remaining.[39] Some news sources quoted this statement in the context of the 1975 prediction they attributed to Jehovah's Witnesses.[25][30][31]

Growth and Decline

The number of baptisms increased from about 59,000 in 1966, to more than 297,000 in 1974, but membership declined after expectations for 1975 failed,[40] including a nine per cent drop in total publishers (door-to-door preachers) and a 38 per cent drop in pioneers (full-time preachers) in the Netherlands.[41] Stark and Iannoccone analyzed the impact on Witnesses in the United States.[42] Statistics showed a net increase of publishers worldwide from 1971–1981 of 737,241, while baptisms totaled 1.71 million for the same period.[43]

Responsibility

In 1976 The Watchtower advised that if "anyone has been disappointed" by the failure of their expectations for 1975, they should adjust their viewpoint, because their understanding had been "based on wrong premises"[44] According to Raymond Franz, proposals were brought to the Governing Body in 1976, 1977 and 1979 that a statement should be made acknowledging that the Watch Tower Society had made an error, but Milton Henschel and others recommended the wiser course would be to ignore the matter and hope Witnesses would eventually forget about it. [45] The March 15, 1980 Watchtower explained that those needing to adjust their viewpoint included any Jehovah's Witnesses "having to do with the publication of the information that contributed to the buildup of hopes centered on that date."[46]

Concerning responsibility for building up hope regarding 1975, the same 1980 Watchtower reminded Jehovah's Witnesses of the biblical warning to Thessalonians, "we request of you not to be quickly shaken from your reason nor to be excited either through an inspired expression or through a verbal message or through a letter as though from us, to the effect that the day of Jehovah is here." It explained that although the Watch Tower Society published cautionary statements, other statements implying that predicted events could be expected by 1975 "overshadowed the cautionary ones and contributed to a buildup of the expectation already initiated" by the chronology in "the book Life Everlasting—in Freedom of the Sons of God".[46]

Comments edit

Although I gathered sources for citations before writing new text, I haven't formatted them yet, so many citations are currently missing, or remain in obsolete formats, as found in the current article. Downstrike (talk) 16:34, 17 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

I'm concerned about the lone sentence in the last paragraph, stating that the WTS has not renounced the expectation. How does one document the fact that something has not happened? Can such a factual statement be included without citing a source, or does it simply not belong in Wikipedia? Downstrike (talk) 04:15, 21 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

I recently reread Wikipedia:Ignore_all_rules, and wonder if this would cover it?
I've removed that sentence, because further research has shown it to be incorrect. Downstrike (talk) 01:45, 26 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

The material produced by my research on this subject has far surpassed what I expected to write for a mere article section. It seems to me now, that there is enough here to produce a spin-off page. Downstrike (talk) 09:53, 22 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

I find this more and more disturbing, because not only should this information be more of a historical footnote, but the more I research it, the more apparent it becomes that the assertion that the Watch Tower Society predicted anything would happen in autumn of 1975 was a hoax! Downstrike (talk) 01:45, 26 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

I have finally found a quotation from a Watch Tower Society publication that fits the description, "implied that such realization of hopes by that year was more of a probability than a mere possibility". It's cited in the current wording of the article, but with no particular statement attributed. Its citation includes doi and author fields from an article about an entirely different subject from an entirely different source, and it's cited next to another citation that seemed to attribute an entirely different statement. The content of this source completely changes the background of the 1975 issue, so if it had been cited clearly, I probably never would undertaken this miserable project! Downstrike (talk) 21:05, 26 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

There seem to be some weaselish statements in your draft. This statement is quite weaselish:
In this context, some of these sources quoted a May 1974 issue of the Watch Tower Society's newsletter, Kingdom Ministry, commending Witnesses who had sold homes and property to devote themselves to preaching in the "short time" remaining.
This is not an attempt attribute the Kingdom Ministry's statement to the news sources, or to dig at them, but to show the context of how the public became aware of the Kingdom Ministry's statement. I will consider how I can word it to make that clear. Downstrike (talk) 17:45, 23 March 2010 (UTC)Reply
If the statement from the Kingdom Ministry is presented clearly, it doesn't really matter how the public became aware of what it said, and it is much more neutral to simply state what was stated in that source. The import of the commendation (of people selling their homes in the 'short time' remaining) is not altered by how other people might have learned of it.--Jeffro77 (talk) 08:18, 24 March 2010 (UTC)Reply
The importance of the context in which the statement was presented to the public was not apparent to you because the information presented was incomplete. This is a work in progress, and my work is frequently interrupted by downloads of Real Life. However, this information is what I was working on today, so the contextual information is now a little more complete. Downstrike (talk) 01:17, 25 March 2010 (UTC)Reply
I am well aware of the context. Indeed, the other quotes you've provided of commending JWs who spend a long time in full-time service do not make any statement similar to the 74 KM's reference to members who "finish out the rest of their days in ... the short time remaining..." The comparison you've presented attempts to water down the statement in the 74 KM with an invalid comparison.--Jeffro77 (talk) 08:34, 25 March 2010 (UTC)Reply
The significance of that wording, and of the other commendations as context, is a POV that will depend upon the reader's perception of what the Watchtower said about 1975. That's something we need to let readers evaluate, instead of leaving them uninformed. I hope that I've improved the neutrality of that paragraph's tone. Downstrike (talk) 18:52, 25 March 2010 (UTC)Reply
There is still an awful lot of POV pushing in your draft (implying news sources deliberately published misinformation, general apologetic wording on behalf of the Watch Tower Society, making invalid comparisons of commending long-time preachers with statements about short time left, drawing conclusions for readers, etc), but I'll leave you to it for a while, (subject to change without notice). As it stands, your preferred version would not last long in the live article space, but I haven't the time to consider every point just yet.--Jeffro77 (talk) 08:39, 26 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

This isn't a version that I prefer. It isn't even complete, and I already question the relevance of the amount of the material I have. That's why it's here on my own Talk page, instead of on the article's Talk page - much less the actual article - it's not ready to be presented. I appreciate you coming around and giving me feedback about it.

To be honest, I've already changed wording in an attempt not to push POV or to imply that the misinformation in the news sources was deliberate. (My first word for it was disinformation, and fortunately I researched the meaning of that word and changed it.) However, the more I learn about how inaccurate it was, the more I wonder whether their journalism could really have been that inept. Downstrike (talk) 17:15, 26 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

It would be more appropriate to state: The May 1974 issue of the Watch Tower Society's newsletter, Our Kingdom Ministry, commended Witnesses who had sold homes and property to devote themselves to preaching in the "short time" remaining. rather than making a sly dig at 'some news sources'. Also, in the statement, Although the context makes this seem unlikely, some critics have interpreted this statement as the Watch Tower Society admitting responsibility in building up hope regarding 1975., the expression Although the context makes this seem unlikely is drawing a conclusion for readers not supported in the text. The original article states:
This was an attempt to follow a WP editing guideline I read a while back. Naturally, I can't find the guideline page now, where I read it. I will continue to search for it, so I can make sure to follow the guideline. Downstrike (talk) 17:45, 23 March 2010 (UTC)Reply
The guideline I'm following is at Wikipedia:NPOV:
Some adherents of a religion might object to a critical historical treatment of their own faith because in their view such analysis discriminates against their religious beliefs. Their point of view must be mentioned if it can be documented by independent reliable sources, yet note that there is no contradiction. NPOV policy means that Wikipedia editors ought to try to write sentences like this: "Certain adherents of this faith (say which) believe X, and also believe that they have always believed X; however, due to the findings (say which) of modern historians and archaeologists (say which), other adherents (say which) of this faith now believe Z.
I have more research to do toward finding the source of the article's currently stated POV, but so far, my attempts to find that source have only produced statements on other web sites that were apparently based upon the POV currently stated in the article. (One of the hazards of placing an unsourced POV in a WP article is that it frequently seems to become impossible to find the original source afterward, among all the online statements that show the unsourced POV in WP as proof of the POV.) In the absence of that source's reasoning on the POV, and in light of the sources my research did find, the currently stated POV seems to be erroneous. However, rather than ignore it and leave all online statements that relied upon the currently stated POV dangling, I'm acknowledging that some critics believe that POV.
However, I see that the wording can be improved, so thank you for bringing it to my attention. Downstrike (talk) 19:07, 23 March 2010 (UTC)Reply
There were ... statements published that implied that such realization of hopes by that year was more of a probability than a mere possibility. It is to be regretted that these latter statements apparently overshadowed the cautionary ones and contributed to a buildup of the expectation already initiated. ... If anyone has been disappointed through not following this line of thought, he should now concentrate on adjusting his viewpoint... In saying “anyone,” The Watchtower included all disappointed ones of Jehovah’s Witnesses, hence including persons having to do with the publication of the information that contributed to the buildup of hopes centered on that date.
There is a clear admission that those JWs involved in producing the articles published by the Watch Tower Society were the cause of 'built up expectations', and this should not be relegated to an unsourced claim by 'critics'.--Jeffro77 (talk) 08:15, 23 March 2010 (UTC)Reply
That is what the current wording tells us about that statement, but that is not clear at all, and no source has been provided for that POV. (If it weren't for such blatant NPOV violations, I probably wouldn't be working on this.) The complete sentence states: "Unfortunately, however, along with such cautionary information, there were other statements published that implied that such realization of hopes by that year was more of a probability than a mere possibility."
The Watchtower does not say who made the other statements. Instead, it prefaced this statement with a biblical quotation warning about "a verbal message or through a letter as though from us".
My research finds that instead of the Watchtower stating that Christ would begin reigning in 1975, news sources made reports as though the Watchtower had stated that. Some Jehovah's Witnesses did have to with the publication of those reports, because they were based upon interviews with individuals who disobeyed the Watchtower by saying that Christ would begin reigning in 1975. (This seems to be what what the Watchtower calls Independent Thinking.) Downstrike (talk) 17:45, 23 March 2010 (UTC)Reply
Your interpretation (of saying it was just the other sources that were misleading) is incorrect. The article states The Watchtower included all disappointed ones of Jehovah’s Witnesses, hence including persons having to do with the publication of the information. So they didn't merely say it was non-Witness sources that were to blame for the buildup of expectations but specifically included Witnesses at the Watch Tower Society involved in publication of JW literature.--Jeffro77 (talk) 22:39, 23 March 2010 (UTC)Reply
That still doesn't specify which information, or who published it. Downstrike (talk) 00:43, 24 March 2010 (UTC)Reply
The Watchtower article in question makes absolutely no reference to any non-JW sources for any statements that built up expectations about 1975. The article states that the "other satements" were published "along with" the cautionary ones, not separately from some other source. The article also states that it was the eagerness of "Christians" (meaning only JWs) that led to those expectations. The quote from Thessalonians is used to illustrate a situation that might have existed in the time of first-century Christians, however, the article makes absolutely no exposition on those words in particular, let alone any reference to [non-Witness] news sources being the source of built up expectations regarding 1975.--Jeffro77 (talk) 05:37, 27 March 2010 (UTC)Reply
At any rate, after 2 weeks of hunting for it, I finally found a quotation from an Awake! article that fit the description. Naturally, its existence makes most of my research - and the POV based on it - irrelevant. Downstrike (talk) 19:42, 27 March 2010 (UTC)Reply
At best, concluding that the admittedly vague article only put the blame on those involved in publication of non-Witness material is POV speculation.--Jeffro77 (talk) 22:43, 23 March 2010 (UTC)Reply
I'm not trying to say that only other sources were implicated, because the cited source doesn't clearly support that. I think that my current wording reflects that. Downstrike (talk) 00:43, 24 March 2010 (UTC)Reply
Your statement, "However, the context of the biblical warning, combined with the fact that news sources published the predictions as though they were from Jehovah's Witnesses, despite the Watch Tower Society prohibiting Jehovah's Witnesses making such predictions, casts doubt on this." quite distinctly suggests that it is those other sources that were the cause of building up false hopes. That unsourced statement is speculative commentary.--Jeffro77 (talk) 08:11, 24 March 2010 (UTC)Reply
That isn't speculation. As previously described, the 1975 prediction is present in the news sources, and absent from the Watchtower sources. That does cast doubt on the assertion that the Watchtower would accept blame for the prediction. Should I cite those sources all over again, at this point? That seems like overkill to me.
However, I think I see what you're probably trying to get at; Watchtower published the chronology that pointed to 1975 as the 6000th anniversary of man's creation, and the prediction couldn't have occurred without that chronology, and publication of the chronology is mentioned in their statement. I'll consider what change to make to the wording.

References edit

  1. ^ Life Everlasting in Freedom of the Sons of God (PDF). Watch Tower Society. 1966. pp. 29–35. as cited by Raymond Franz, Crisis of Conscience, chapter 9.
  2. ^ Sniecinski, Roman M.; Chen, Edward P.; Levy, Jerrold H.; Szlam, Fania; Tanaka, Kenichi A. (1966). "How Much Longer Will It Be?". Awake!. 104: 17–20. doi:10.1213/01.ane.0000250913.45299.f3. {{cite journal}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |journal= (help); Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
  3. ^ See 1975: 'THE APPROPRIATE TIME FOR GOD TO ACT'. Page 14 of the October 8, 1968 Awake! demonstrates the disclaimer that was made at the time: "Does this mean that the above evidence positively points to 1975 as the complete end of this system of things? Since the Bible does not specifically state this, no man can say...If the 1970s should see intervention by Jehovah God to bring an end to a corrupt world drifting toward ultimate disintegration, that should surely not surprise us."
  4. ^ See "Witnessing the End" in the July 18, 1969 Time magazine. Scan available online at: http://www.dannyhaszard.com/time1975.jpg accessed February 14, 2006
  5. ^ Life Everlasting in Freedom of the Sons of God (PDF). Watch Tower Society. 1966. pp. 29–35..
  6. ^ Watchtower, May 1, 1968, as cited by Raymond Franz, Crisis of Conscience, chapter 9.
  7. ^ Kingdom Ministry, May 1974, page 3, "Reports are heard of brothers selling their homes and property and planning to finish out the rest of their days in this old system in the pioneer service. Certainly this is a fine way to spend the short time remaining before the wicked world’s end."
  8. ^ Raymond Franz. "1975—The Appropriate Time for God to Act". Crisis of Conscience (PDF). pp. 237–253. Retrieved 2006-07-27. This drop in membership has been variously analyzed. Richard Singelenberg ("The '1975'-prophecy and its impact among Dutch Jehovah's Witnesses") in Sociological Analysis 50(1)1989, pp 23–40 notes a nine per cent drop in total publishers (door-to-door preachers) and a 38 per cent drop in pioneers (full-time preachers) in the Netherlands. Stark and Iannoccone have analyzed the impact on US Witnesses. "The Journal of Contemporary Religion" (PDF). 1997: 142–143. {{cite journal}}: |article= ignored (help); Cite journal requires |journal= (help) The January 30, 1982 Los Angeles Times ("Defectors Feel 'Witness' Wrath: Critics say Baptism Rise Gives False Picture of Growth" by John Dart, p. B4) cited statistics showing a net increase of publishers worldwide from 1971–1981 of 737,241, while baptisms totaled 1.71 million for the same period.
  9. ^ "A Solid Basis for Confidence", Watchtower, July 15, 1976, page 441.
  10. ^ According to Raymond Franz, proposals were brought to the Governing Body in 1976, 1977 and 1979 that a statement should be made acknowledging the error, but Milton Henschel and others recommended the wiser course would be to ignore the matter and hope Witnesses would eventually forget about it. See Crisis of Conscience, page 250.
  11. ^ The Watchtower, March 15, 1980, p.17 "With the appearance of the book Life Everlasting—in Freedom of the Sons of God, ... considerable expectation was aroused regarding the year 1975. ... there were other statements published that implied that such realization of hopes by that year was more of a probability than a mere possibility. It is to be regretted that these latter statements apparently overshadowed the cautionary ones and contributed to a buildup of the expectation already initiated. ... persons having to do with the publication of the information ... contributed to the buildup of hopes centered on that date."
  12. ^ Life Everlasting in Freedom of the Sons of God (PDF). Watch Tower Society. 1966. pp. 29–35. as cited by Raymond Franz, Crisis of Conscience, chapter 9.
  13. ^ "Rejoicing over "God's Sons of Liberty" Spiritual Feast". Watchtower: 631. 1966-10-15. 'What about the year 1975? What is it going to mean, dear friends?' asked Brother Franz. 'Does it mean that Armageddon is going to be finished, with Satan bound, by 1975? It could! It could! All things are possible with God. Does it mean that Babylon the Great is going to go down by 1975? It could. Does it mean that the attack of Gog of Magog is going to be made on Jehovah's witnesses to wipe them out, then Gog himself will be put out of action? It could. But we are not saying. All things are possible with God. But we are not saying. And don't any of you be specific in saying anything that is going to happen between now and 1975. {{cite journal}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help); Unknown parameter |paragraph= ignored (help)
  14. ^ a b "Making Wise Use of the Remaining Time". The Watchtower: 272–273. 1968-05-01. 7 The immediate future is certain to be filled with climactic events, for this old system is nearing its complete end. Within a few years at most the final parts of Bible prophecy relative to these "last days" will undergo fulfillment, resulting in the liberation of surviving mankind into Christ's glorious 1,000-year reign. What difficult days, but, at the same time, what grand days are just ahead! 8 Does this mean that the year 1975 will bring the battle of Armageddon? No one can say with certainty what any particular year will bring. Jesus said: "Concerning that day or the hour nobody knows." (Mark 13:32) Sufficient is it for God's servants to know for a certainty that, for this system under Satan, time is running out rapidly. How foolish a person would be not to be awake and alert to the limited time remaining, to the earthshaking events soon to take place, and to the need to work out one's salvation! {{cite journal}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help); line feed character in |quote= at position 402 (help)
  15. ^ "When Do 6,000 Years End?". Awake!: 15. 1968/10/08. This would leave only seven more years from the autumn of 1968 to complete 6,000 full years of human history. That seven-year period will evidently finish in the autumn of the year 1975. Does this mean that the above evidence positively points to 1975 as the time for the complete end of this system of things? Since the Bible does not specifically state this, no man can say. However, of this we can be sure: The 1970's will certainly see the most critical times mankind has yet known. The deterioration in human relations — within families, communities, cities and nations, and between nations — will worsen, not improve. (2 Tim. 3:13) If the 1970's should see intervention by Jehovah God to bring an end to a corrupt world drifting toward ultimate disintegration, that should surely not surprise us. {{cite journal}}: Check date values in: |date= (help); Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help); line feed character in |quote= at position 40 (help)
  16. ^ "An Ingathering Affecting All Mankind". Watchtower: 273. 1970-05-01. How close we may exactly be to the end of the present divisive system of things cannot be predicted, as Jesus reported that even he did not know the day or the hour at the time of his earthly ministry. (Matt. 24:36) However, Bible chronology which indicates that Adam was created in the fall of the year 4026 B.C.E. would bring us down to the year 1975 C.E. as the date marking 6,000 years of human history with yet 1,000 years to come for Christ's Kingdom rule. So whatever the date for the end of this system, it is clear that the time left is reduced, with only approximately six years left until the end of 6,000 years of human history. {{cite journal}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help); Unknown parameter |paragraph= ignored (help)
  17. ^ 1975 Yearbook of Jehovah's Witnesses. Brooklyn, New York: Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania. 1974-12. p. 256. This certainly raised questions. Does this mean that Babylon the Great will go down by 1975? Will Armageddon be over, with Satan bound, by then? 'It could' acknowledged F. W. Franz, the Watch Tower Society's vice-president, after posing similar questions at the "God's Sons of Liberty" District Assembly in Baltimore, Maryland. However, he added, in essence: 'But we are not saying. All things are possible with God. But we are not saying. And don't any of you be specific in saying anything that is going to happen between now and 1975. {{cite book}}: Check date values in: |date= (help); Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)
  18. ^ "Why Are You Looking Forward to 1975?". Watchtower: 499. 1968-08-15. 'Are we to assume from this study that the battle of Armageddon will be all over by the autumn of 1975, and the long-looked-for thousand-year reign of Christ will begin by then? Possibly, but we wait to see how closely the seventh thousand-year period of man's existence coincides with the sabbathlike thousand-year reign of Christ. If these two periods run parallel with each other as to the calendar year, it will not be by mere chance or accident but will be according to Jehovah's loving and timely purposes. Our chronology, however, which is reasonably accurate (but admittedly not infallible), at the best only points to the autumn of 1975 as the end of 6,000 years of man's existence on earth. It does not necessarily mean that 1975 marks the end of the first 6,000 years of Jehovah's seventh creative "day." Why not? Because after his creation Adam lived some time during the "sixth day," which unknown amount of time would need to be subtracted from Adam's 930 years, to determine when the sixth seven-thousand-year period or "day" ended, and how long Adam lived into the "seventh day."' {{cite journal}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help); Unknown parameter |paragraph= ignored (help)
  19. ^ "The Approaching Peace of a Thousand Years". The Watchtower: 623. 1969/10/15. Would not, then, the end of six millenniums of mankind's laborious enslavement under Satan the Devil be the fitting time for Jehovah God to usher in a Sabbath millennium for all his human creatures? Yes, indeed! And his King Jesus Christ will be Lord of that Sabbath. {{cite journal}}: Check date values in: |date= (help); Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)
  20. ^ "Preparing for the Approaching Millenial Peace". The Watchtower: 539. 1970/09/01. Further, Bible chronology indicates that we are at the close of six thousand years of human history. For Jesus to be "Lord of the sabbath," his thousand-year reign would have to be the seventh in a series of thousand-year periods. Would not, then, the end of six millenniums of mankind's laborious enslavement under Satan the Devil be the fitting time for Jehovah God to usher in a sabbath millennium for all mankind? {{cite journal}}: Check date values in: |date= (help); Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)
  21. ^ "An Ingathering Affecting All Mankind". Watchtower: 273. 1970-05-01. With a view to the continued expansion of the work this side of the "great tribulation" the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society has just purchased a very large factory building in Brooklyn, and additional housing space for the headquarters' staff now totaling 1,300 dedicated persons. New branch homes have just been built in Cameroun, Cyprus, Fiji and Puerto Rico as well as in Barbados, Brazil and Dahomey. So even though we are living in the "time of the end" for this old system, Jehovah's organization is moving ahead rapidly as long as the way is open to do so. {{cite journal}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help); Unknown parameter |paragraph= ignored (help)
  22. ^ "Serve with Eternity in View". Watchtower: 378–379. 1974-06-15. 16 Whether we personally have the prospect of life in heaven with Jesus or in an earthly paradise, it is vital to remember that, not any set date, but eternity is our goal. We can, in this respect, imitate those who were Christians prior to the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 C.E. They rightly expected the end of the Jewish system of things to occur soon, during the "great tribulation" that Jesus said would come in that generation. (Matt. 24:3, 21, 22, 34) But had they decided, when they repented and became Christians, to serve only until some date or event? By no means. What they had learned and accepted, such as what Peter preached to Cornelius and his household, was not that they were to be Christians only until some approaching date arrived. Rather, God "granted repentance for the purpose of life," endless life as Christians.—Acts 10:34-43; 11:18. 17 Hence, when Jesus' half brother Jude wrote his inspired letter around 65 C.E., about one year before the Romans attacked Jerusalem for the first time, he did not mention some terminal date. Instead, he wrote: "Keep yourselves in God's love, while you are waiting for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ with everlasting life in view." (Jude 20, 21) He knew that the goal was to serve God forever. Whether the "tribulation" on the Jewish system came in two years, or three, or beyond that, would not affect the fact that they were going to keep right on serving God. 18 And it is the same today among true Christians who realize from the fulfillment of Bible prophecy that the end of this entire wicked system of things is near at hand. True, the most accurate Bible chronology available indicates that 6,000 years of human existence will end in the mid-1970's. So these Christians are intensely interested to see if that will coincide with the outbreak of the "great tribulation" of our day that will eliminate all wicked ones on earth. It could. But they are not even attempting to predict exactly when the destruction of Satan's wicked system of things will occur. They are content to wait and see, realizing that no human on earth knows the date.—Matt. 24:36. 19 Jehovah's Christian witnesses are confident that God is going to bring the end of this ungodly system in HIS due time. When the "great tribulation" begins, we will be able to recognize it. So instead of speculating about a certain date, as if serving with that date as a goal, we can concentrate on the important preaching work that Jesus said his disciples would do in this time period. (Mark 13:10) Thus, whenever the "tribulation" breaks out, we will be found busy and zealously carrying out the assignment we have. And our "sights" for the future will not be on some date, but we will be serving with eternity in view, just as Jude urged Christians to do. {{cite journal}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help); Unknown parameter |paragraphs= ignored (help); line feed character in |quote= at position 863 (help)
  23. ^ "Will You Live to See Christ's "Coming"?". The Watchtower: 9–11. 1975-01-01. That even the disciples of Jesus Christ, true Christians on earth, will be unaware beforehand of the precise time of Christ's "coming" in this executional sense is shown by what he said as recorded at Matthew 24:42-44. Note that these words were not directed to the world in general. They were addressed directly to Christ's disciples: "Keep on the watch, therefore, because you do not know on what day your Lord is coming. But know one thing, that if the householder had known in what watch the thief was coming, he would have kept awake and not allowed his house to be broken into. On this account you too prove yourselves ready, because at an hour that you do not think to be it, the Son of man is coming." {{cite journal}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)
  24. ^ "Why We Have Not Been Told "That Day and Hour"". The Watchtower: 276–277. 1975/05/01. 22 When will it be, then, that the Son of man comes with destructive power to cleanse this earth of all who love the way of unrighteousness? Jesus himself answers: "Truly I say to you that this generation will by no means pass away until all these things occur." (Matt. 24:34; Mark 13:30) Which "generation" is that? The one that has witnessed the events in fulfillment of prophecy since 1914 C.E. There is no doubt about the truthfulness of what Jesus said. Forcefully he added: "Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will by no means pass away."—Matt. 24:35; Mark 13:31; compare Matthew 5:18. 23 Did Jesus give more details than this, telling his disciples the precise time for this to happen? To the contrary, he told them that the "day and hour" was not known to any creature, and he emphasized the point by saying it again and again—yes, five times. "Concerning that day and hour nobody knows, neither the angels of the heavens nor the Son, but only the Father," he said.—Matt. 24:36–25:13. 24 Keep in mind that in the first-century fulfillment of Jesus' prophecy concerning the "great tribulation," they were given no date in advance as to the time when they were to flee from Jerusalem. Instead, it was a sign for which they were to keep on the watch—'the disgusting thing, as spoken of through Daniel the prophet, standing in a holy place.' (Matt. 24:15, 16) It appeared in the year 66 C.E. Obediently Jesus' followers got out of the city and, according to the records of history, took up residence on the other side of the Jordan River in the mountainous region of Pella. Thereafter, however, a number of years elapsed before the "great tribulation" came upon Jerusalem in the year 70 C.E. There is no indication that Jesus' followers were told in advance just when that tribulation would strike. They were already in a place of safety; there was really no reason why they needed to know. {{cite journal}}: Check date values in: |date= (help); Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help); line feed character in |quote= at position 603 (help)
  25. ^ a b c Dart, John (1975-03-9). "Witnesses unsure about end now". The. p. E11. Retrieved 2010-03-21. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help); Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)
  26. ^ "Will You Live to See Christ's "Coming"?". The Watchtower: 9–10. 1975-01-01. Now, we know that Jesus Christ had been in heaven with his Father at the time of earth's creation. (John 1:1-3; Col. 1:13-17) He knew the exact time of the creation of both Adam and Eve. (Gen. 1:26, 27) He knew precisely when 6,000 years of human history would be completed. He knew exactly when God's seventh creative day, his great "rest" day began and when it would end. (Gen. 2:1-3) Yet, with all his perfect knowledge of chronology, when he was on earth he did not know the day and hour of his execution of judgment on this world, prior to when his thousand-year reign begins. (Rev. 20:4-6) How, then, could any human today possibly figure it out? {{cite journal}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)
  27. ^ "Sects; Witnessing the End". Time. Time Inc. 1969-07-18. Retrieved 2010-03-21. {{cite news}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)
  28. ^ Walling, Marie H. (1969-08-24). "Witnesses give world five years at most" (pdf). Arizona Republic. p. 62. Retrieved 2010-03-21. {{cite news}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)
  29. ^ Kopp, Anita (1973-08-24). "Doomsday Guesses". Lawrence Journal-World -. p. 20. Retrieved 2010-03-20. {{cite news}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)
  30. ^ a b "Witnesses finding '75 end not certain". Tri City Herald. 1975-02-28. p. 10. Retrieved 2010-03-21. {{cite news}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)
  31. ^ a b Dart, John (1975-03-15). "Jehovah's Witnesses backing away from 1975 forecast". St. Petersburg Times. p. 12D. Retrieved 2010-03-20. {{cite news}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)
  32. ^ Hoppe, Arthur (1975-03-23). "first, the good news". The Spokesman-Review Sunday Magazine. p. 6. Retrieved 2010-03-20. {{cite news}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)
  33. ^ "The End is Near - Again". The Palm Beach Post. 1975-09-04. p. A12. Retrieved 2010-03-20. {{cite news}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)
  34. ^ Schweitzer, Jeff (2010-02-28). "The Chilean Earthquake and God's Wrath". The Huffington Post. Retrieved 2010-03-22. {{cite news}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)
  35. ^ "Sacrifices That Are Acceptable to God". The Watchtower: 436–437. 1969/07/15. It is the one that has spent his lifetime in God's service that has contentment. This is true of those who have spent twenty, thirty, forty or more years at Brooklyn Bethel. Has it all been easy? Not really. Here at the Watch Tower Society's headquarters you are tested as you become just one of about a thousand others, each one of them with an assignment that sometimes does not constitute the easiest nor the most pleasant work. But here is an opportunity to devote yourself unselfishly all of your waking hours for the highest good of others. {{cite journal}}: Check date values in: |date= (help); Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)
  36. ^ "Cultivating the Spirit of Self-Sacrifice". The Watchtower: 23. 1978/08/01. Is this to say that all servants of God today must give up homes and other material possessions as part of their sacrifices for God? No, that is not the point, although with the examples noted regarding Noah, Abraham, and the first-century Christians, there has been the willingness to do that if necessary. The main thing is one's willingness to put God's interests first in his life, making whatever sacrifices might be necessary to do that. {{cite journal}}: Check date values in: |date= (help); Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)
  37. ^ "Jehovah's Valiant Army of Full-Time Fighters". The Watchtower: 18–19. 1982/03/01. Hence, pioneering with the right motive—to praise God and to help other persons to escape from bondage to Satan's system—is surely a fine sacrifice. Yet pioneering involves sacrifice from another standpoint. Time that a Christian once used for more personal pursuits must, when he becomes a pioneer, be channeled into preaching and teaching. Time that was used to acquire and pay for material things may now have to be curtailed. {{cite journal}}: Check date values in: |date= (help); Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)
  38. ^ "Advance Kingdom Interests With a Self-Sacrificing Spirit". Our Kingdom Ministry: 1. 1985/10. Today, God's servants are no less self-sacrificing. Many of our brothers and sisters have left homes and possessions in order to work in the full-time service. {{cite journal}}: Check date values in: |date= (help); Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)
  39. ^ "How Are You Using Your Life?". Kingdom Ministry: 3. 1974-05. Reports are heard of brothers selling their homes and property and planning to finish out the rest of their days in this old system in the pioneer service. Certainly this is a fine way to spend the short time remaining before the wicked world's end.—1 John 2:17. {{cite journal}}: Check date values in: |date= (help); Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)
  40. ^ Raymond Franz. "1975—The Appropriate Time for God to Act". Crisis of Conscience (PDF). pp. 237–253. Retrieved 2006-07-27.
  41. ^ Singelenberg, Richard (1989-Spring). "'It Separated the Wheat from the Chaff': The '1975' Prophecy and Its Impact among Dutch Jehovah's Witnesses" (PDF). Sociology of Religion. 50 (1): 23–40. doi:10.2307/3710916. Retrieved 2010-03-25. {{cite journal}}: Check date values in: |date= (help); Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)
  42. ^ Stark, Rodney (1997-05). "Why the Jehovah's Witnesses Grow so Rapidly: A Theoretical Application" (PDF). Journal of Contemporary Religion. 12 (2): 142–143. Retrieved 2010-03-25. {{cite journal}}: Check date values in: |date= (help); Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)
  43. ^ Dart, John (1982-01-30). "Defectors Feel 'Witness' Wrath: Critics say Baptism Rise Gives False Picture of Growth". Los Angeles Times. p. B4. {{cite news}}: |access-date= requires |url= (help); Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)
  44. ^ "A Solid Basis for Confidence". The Watchtower: 441. 1976-07-15. {{cite journal}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)
  45. ^ See Crisis of Conscience, page 250.
  46. ^ a b "Choosing the Best Way of Life". The Watchtower: 17–18. 1980-03-15. 4 If we remain faithful, God will not let us make ruinous mistakes. But sometimes he permits us to be in error so that we may see our need to look always to him and his Word. This strengthens our relationship with him and our endurance while waiting. We learn from our mistakes that it is necessary to be more careful in the future. The desire for the new system of things to take complete charge of the earth has always been very strong in Christians down through the centuries. And because of their own short life-span, they doubtless longed for it to come in their particular lifetime. Those who have tried to keep God's judgment time "close in mind" have, on more than one occasion throughout history, become overly eager for that day's arrival, in their own minds trying to rush the arrival of the desired events. (2 Pet. 3:12) In the first century, for example, the apostle Paul found it necessary to write to Christians in Thessalonica in this fashion, as we read at 2 Thessalonians 2:1-3: "However, brothers, respecting the presence of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered together to him, we request of you not to be quickly shaken from your reason nor to be excited either through an inspired expression or through a verbal message or through a letter as though from us, to the effect that the day of Jehovah is here. Let no one seduce you in any manner, because it will not come unless the apostasy comes first and the man of lawlessness gets revealed, the son of destruction." 5 In modern times such eagerness, commendable in itself, has led to attempts at setting dates for the desired liberation from the suffering and troubles that are the lot of persons throughout the earth. With the appearance of the book Life Everlasting—in Freedom of the Sons of God, and its comments as to how appropriate it would be for the millennial reign of Christ to parallel the seventh millennium of man's existence, considerable expectation was aroused regarding the year 1975. There were statements made then, and thereafter, stressing that this was only a possibility. Unfortunately, however, along with such cautionary information, there were other statements published that implied that such realization of hopes by that year was more of a probability than a mere possibility. It is to be regretted that these latter statements apparently overshadowed the cautionary ones and contributed to a buildup of the expectation already initiated. 6 In its issue of July 15, 1976, The Watchtower, commenting on the inadvisability of setting our sights on a certain date, stated: "If anyone has been disappointed through not following this line of thought, he should now concentrate on adjusting his viewpoint, seeing that it was not the word of God that failed or deceived him and brought disappointment, but that his own understanding was based on wrong premises." In saying "anyone," The Watchtower included all disappointed ones of Jehovah's Witnesses, hence including persons having to do with the publication of the information that contributed to the buildup of hopes centered on that date. {{cite journal}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help); line feed character in |quote= at position 1497 (help)

Ichthus: January 2012 edit

 

ICHTHUS

January 2012
Ichthus is published by WikiProject Christianity
For submissions and subscriptions contact the Newsroom

Copyright violations edit

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hi Downstrike, Can you please do us all a favor and read WP:COPYPASTE and WP:COPYVIO. Dropping lengthy "excerpts" from the Awake! magazine into Wiki articles as you did here and here is not acceptable. BlackCab (talk) 06:06, 6 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

ArbCom elections are now open! edit

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:08, 23 November 2015 (UTC)Reply

ArbCom 2017 election voter message edit

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 

Hello, Downstrike. 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 Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, 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

ArbCom 2018 election voter message edit

Latest comment: 5 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 

Hello, Downstrike. 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 Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, 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

ArbCom 2018 election voter message edit

Latest comment: 5 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 

Hello, Downstrike. 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 Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, 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

Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Downstrike&oldid=891642652"