User Talk:CWatchman

CWatchman

This user has been on Wikipedia for 20 years, 10 months and 19 days.

PhD

This user has a Doctor of Philosophy degree in Theology.

M

This user has a Master's degree in Psychology.

This user has published peer-reviewed articles in academic journals.

This user has published a book.

Thoughts to Ponder

"The wisdom of the prudent is to understand his way: but the folly of fools is deceit."

Proverbs 14:8

"The bigotry of the nonbeliever is for me nearly as funny as the bigotry of the believer."

Albert Einstien

"When the only tool you have is a hammer, all problems begin to resemble nails."

Abraham Maslow

“The curious paradox is that when I accept myself just as I am, then I can change.”

Carl Rogers

"A human being is a part of a whole, called by us universe, a part limited in time and space. He experiences himself, his thoughts and feelings as something separated from the rest... a kind of optical delusion of his consciousness. This delusion is a kind of prison for us, restricting us to our personal desires and to affection for a few persons nearest to us. Our task must be to free ourselves from this prison by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature in its beauty."

- Albert Einstein

Welcome!

Hello, CWatchman, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! --Flex (talk/contribs) 15:02, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Moravian Documents

You referred to "manuscripts from the 1700s which have references to the Moravian Movement and the gifts of the Spirit" on the glossolalia talk page. I am very interested in these. Would you be willing to provide an image scan of one? I would be happy to provide a translation if I am able.

Brad Brad (talk) 02:50, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The easies way to go about this would be if you could scan an example page and email it to me. I could then determine if I can translate them. Brad Brad (talk) 02:18, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would be happy to email you a copy. You may leave your contact information at : CWatchman2@gmail.com CWatchman (talk) 16:30, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Semicha vs. Semikhah

I gave my reasons for the change on the discussion page of the Semikhah article. There are several: most of the references for the article use the spelling "semikhah"; the Wikipedia own article on the transliteration of Hebrew would suggest spelling as "semikha"; my own conviction, that when people come to read an article in the encyclopedia they come to learn something: the spelling "semikhah" makes a distinction between "khaf" and "het", which is a halakhic requirement in certain situations (halakhic considerations should be taken into account when discussing Jewish subjects). The spelling "semikhah" is in use, and therefore is acceptable according to Wikipedia rules for transliteration of foreign words.Romabers (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 18:44, 14 April 2010 (UTC).[reply]

Copyvio

Your addition to Biblical Mount Sinai has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text, or images borrowed from other websites, or printed material without a verifiable license; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Vsmith (talk) 12:51, 11 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I just "re"-added material yesterday which had been removed several weeks back, However I did reword it and added referenceses. I can see where you may think it was just a paraphrase and felt to remove it.

However ALL of the material prior to that was removed also. All the material prior to that was in my own words and was properly referenced.

Also If you are talking about copyright material from Dr. Ward's writings, I AM Dr. Ward.

Please explain, Thank you CWatchman (talk) 16:14, 11 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I see a copy/paste problem from this undated blog. Posting your writings on a blog is fine, posting the same content on a Wikipedia article is not fine. Such is a copyright violation and/or original research. Vsmith (talk) 22:27, 11 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I wrote the blog and I also added the section to Wikipedia (the blog form is biased and the Wiki form is unbiased & encyclopedic). Both the material on the blog and on Wikipedia is my own material. From what I understand in order to use my own material in a Wikipedia article I must add the following to my blog: "The text of this website [or this page, or this section] is available for modification and reuse under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike 3.0 Unported License and the GNU Free Documentation License (unversioned, with no invariant sections, front-cover texts, or back-cover text). CWatchman (talk) 20:57, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

When I first read the article I felt I was reading an article which was saying: "Mount Sinai cannot be in the southern Sinai Peninsula but it seems like it might be in these other locations." CWatchman (talk) 20:58, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

May 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Biblical Mount Sinai may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

its vast altitude but because of the sharpness of its precipices.”<ref>Ant., II, xii, 1; III, v, 1)</ref>. The traditional Mount Sinai, located in the Sinai Peninsula, is actually the name of a

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 18:14, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Shaolin Monastery

Hello again, CWatchman. To be blunt, all the Bodhidharma stuff you've been adding is just popular myth, much of it rather recently invented. The article about him on Wikipedia covers it pretty well. Read Meir Shahar's The Shaolin Monastery if you'd like to know more. And to reiterate Dougweller's point, the websites you're using as sources are not reliable. We're talking about history, so books by historians, from academic presses, are preferred. --Difference engine (talk) 01:02, 22 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I was trained by a traditional Shaolin Kung Fu expert so I find this position to be extraordinary, however I will study this more in depth. CWatchman (talk)

Kung fu experts are experts in kung fu, not history. No serious historian that I am aware of takes the Bodhidharma kung fu stories seriously. Much has been written on the subject both in English and in Chinese (see the Sources section in Bodhidharma). Also, please indent your replies, and sign your talk page posts, using four tildes (see the instructions in the edit window). --Difference engine (talk) 03:26, 22 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I will study this further and publish my findings. This will probably be within a period of months. Thank you for your input. CWatchman (talk) 15:30, 23 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

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) 13:50, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 20

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Stacte, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mastic. 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) 08:55, 20 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Just dropping a note

Hello, CWatchman. You have new messages at Debresser's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

And sorry for the delay. Debresser (talk) 17:08, 23 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, CWatchman. 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 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 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]

Copying within Wikipedia requires attribution

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Biblical Mount Sinai into Mount Sinai. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. The attribution has been provided for this situation, but if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. If you are the sole author of the prose that was copied, attribution is not required. — Ninja Diannaa (Talk) 20:23, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the information. I was author of the text which I had written on my webpage and then inserted in the first article. I then added the text from my webpage to the second article. I had forgotten about submitting the text in the first article. I will attempt to be more cautious in the future. CWatchman (talk)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, CWatchman. 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]

Acorus calamus

You said: I see that a large portion of sourced material was deleted from the Calamus article. Is it possible that we could first discuss any problems you may have concerning the submission? We could then correct it accordingly. Thank you.

The reversion here was done because you seemed to over-interpret the rat data and made assumptions about metabolism and toxicity that remain unproven, as stated in the EC document. This is WP:OR and discouraged. The detail of your edit is unencyclopedic per WP:NOTJOURNAL, #6-8, i.e., although this discussion might be appropriate for a thesis or journal article, it is not established as fact, and is therefore unencyclopedic for such detail. The EC conclusion - the most authoritative source used - was that a safe level could not be established. The previous paragraph, including an FDA source, already discusses that succinctly. This will be reverted again per WP:BRD and placed on the article talk page for review by other editors and consensus, WP:CON. --Zefr (talk) 15:35, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

.

I fail to understand how data can over-interpret itself, since data is what was posted. But thank you for taking the time to edit this article. It would be interesting to discuss with you further about this subject.

In my humble opinion, the deleted information was important, therefore I would like to give readers an opportunity to decide for themselves if it is relevant. The removed section is conveniently posted below for those who may wish to review the information:

"The original FDA ban was the result of lab studies that involved supplementing the diets of lab animals over a prolonged period of time with massive doses of isolated chemicals (β-asarone) from the Indian Jammu strain of calamus. The animals developed tumors, and the plant was labeled procarcinogenic.[1] Wichtl says "It is not clear whether the observed carcinogenic effects in rats are relevant to the human organism."[2] However, most sources advise caution in ingesting strains other than the diploid strain. Again, limits on consumption of any type of calamus in food or alcoholic beverages (115 micrograms per day) were recommended in a 2001 ruling by the European Commission, without defining degrees of safe exposure.[3]
The diploid strains of A. calamus in parts of Mongolia, in parts of the western Himalayas and C Siberia, and the Acorus americanus does not contain the procarcinogenic β-asarone.[4][5][6]
In reality β-asarone is neither hepatotoxic nor directly hepatocarcinogenic. It must first undergo metabolic l'-hydroxylation in the liver before achieving toxicity. Cytochrome P450 in the hepatocytes is responsible for secreting the hydrolyzing enzymes that convert β-asarone into genotoxic epoxide structure.[7] Even with the activation of these metabolites, the carcinogenic potency is very low because of the rapid breakdown of epoxide residues with hydrolase which leaves these compounds inert.[8] Additionally, the major metabolite of β-asarone is 2,4,5-trimethoxycinnamic acid, a derivative which is not a carcinogen.[9]

References
1. Natural carcinogenic products, EK Weisburger – Environmental Science & Technology, 1979 – ACS Publications
2. Wichtl, Max (2004). Herbal drugs and phytopharmaceuticals: a handbook.
3. Opinion of the Scientific Committee on Food on the presence of beta-asarone in flavourings and other food ingredients with flavouring properties" (PDF). European Commission, Scientific Committee on Food. 12 December 2001. Retrieved 28 January 2019.
4. Chemical composition of the essential oil and supercritical CO2 extract of Commiphora myrrha (Nees) Engl. and of Acorus calamus L.B Marongiu, A Piras, S Porcedda… - J. Agric., 2005 - ACS Publications
5. (Rost and Bos, 1979)
6. Antimicrobial activities of the crude methanol extract of Acorus calamus Linn., S Phongpaichit, N Pujenjob, J. Songklanakarin
7. McGuffin, Michael, ed. (1997). American Herbal Products Association's Botanical Safety Handbook. Boca Raton, Florida: CRC Press. p. 135. ISBN 978-0- 8493-1675-3.
8. Luo, G. A. N. G., MAZEN K. Qato, and THOMAS M. Guenthner. "Hydrolysis of the 2', 3'-allylic epoxides of allylbenzene, estragole, eugenol, and safrole by both microsomal and cytosolic epoxide hydrolases." Drug Metabolism and Disposition 20.3 (1992): 440-445.
9. Hasheminejad, G., and J. Caldwell. "Genotoxicity of the alkenylbenzenes α− and β-asarone, myristicin and elemicin as determined by the UDS assay in cultured rat hepatocytes." Food and chemical toxicology 32.3 (1994): 223-231."

CWatchman (talk) 16:50, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The first paragraph seems more-or-less ok to me, although "massive" is not encyclopedic and should be replaced with a more neutral word. The last paragraph is problematic, since it (implicitly) makes claims about the lack of toxicity and carcinogenicity in humans, and these need to be based on WP:MEDRS compliant sources. And starting with "In reality" is definitely not appropriate. We report neutrally what sources say. Peter coxhead (talk) 17:04, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you CWatchman (talk) 19:29, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed 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 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:10, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

dome of the spirits

Hello. Thank you for adding a reference to Dome of the Spirits, one thing surprises me is that reference says nothing about the location of the building, is it misplaced? --Io Herodotus (talk) 11:14, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This is the introduction to the article which contains the landmark research locating the northern section of the Temple Mount as the place where Solomon's temple stood and identifies the Dome of Tablets as the place where the Ark of the Covenant rested. In the rest of the article Dr. Kaufman explains his research in more detail. One must join the BAS library to read the rest of the article, but since this was the original defining paper on the subject, I thought it should be included for those with further interest.

I have been searching for a free PDF version but have not yet found one. If I do I will replace the present link with the PDF link.

Did this answer your question?

Many regards

CWatchman (talk) 20:53, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your answer. You said "One must join the BAS library to read the rest of the article", I don't know if this is acceptable as a reference, let's keep it that way, perhaps later someone could argue about that, I don't know. Best regards. --Io Herodotus (talk) 14:38, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I believe I have seen other articles linked to scholarly sources such as JSTOR which provide the first page only with the rest of the article restricted to members. Good point though. Thank you.

Hopefully, it won't have to be there long. I have contacted Dr. Kaufman in hopes that he can direct us to a free online version of the article.

CWatchman (talk) 21:17, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed 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 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:40, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]