User talk:Mikeatnip

Edits to Daniel Sidney Warner

Thanks for the edits to the Daniel Sidney Warner article. There has been a lot of confusion on this article between various editors and an individual claiming affiliation with the D.S. Warner Library. The person is constantly pushing the issue of Warner's influence on the development of the Church of God (Anderson). I have decided not to engage anymore on the issue and leave it to other editors to improve this article. Thanks for making it better. Absolon S. Kent (talk) 17:16, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

church of God Anderson

I think you have a good outline in the COG Anderson article. I would encourage you to write it. As it stands, the present article needs some help pretty bad. I am not qualified to rewrite it, unless I would do some research which at the moment I do not have time for. Mikeatnip (talk) 15:40, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I actually have my hands full trying to the the new Christian music WikiProject going, but as soon as I have that done I will look at rewriting the article. Thanks again. Absolon S. Kent (talk) 15:48, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

NIV Bible

Please visit the NIV Bible page and contribute to the section regarding the gender neutral changes currently being discussed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Toverton28 (talk • contribs) 05:02, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edits to Johann Leonhard Dober

Thanks for your edits to Johann Leonhard Dober, but please cite your sources on the information that you added. Thanks! Fortpinepitch (talk) 00:19, 1 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I believe that the little detail I added is in Hutton's History of the Moravian Church, thus no need to make another footnote. But maybe Hutton doesnt bring that out. It has been a year or more since I was reading much Moravian history, so maybe it is in another book. But I am wondering if we really need to footnote every little detail (would make oodles of footnotes)?? If you doubt what I added, I will look up the source to be sure. I added the little point about Nitschmann not staying on St. Thomas, as there is a big misconception concerning the whole story of the first missionaries selling themselves as slaves (I believe it was you that has added the correct story here on Wikipedia ... Thanks for your work on the Moravian Brethren people here in Wikipedia! I would like to do more, but dont have time.Mikeatnip (talk) 04:19, 1 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, thanks for your work, and I think you are right that the information was already in the same source I used. Happy editing! Fortpinepitch (talk) 15:30, 1 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edits to Jakob Ammann

I need to apologize for my harsh comments. I said some things about you that were unkind. I know that your trying to improve the article, but there are certain standards that need to be upheld. Whatever the case, I let my temper get the better of me and for that I'm sorry. I hope we can work together to improve the page and maintain the high standards that Wikipedia users expect. - ICarriere (talk) 22:09, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, let's be friends! :-) Mikeatnip (talk) 20:10, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I want to add that a friend and I are planning on writing a biography on Ammann so we have been collecting sources. We have some interesting materials, some of it never published before except in historical journals. For example, they have located the house that was very likely (although not proved yet from a title search on the property) the Ammann house in the village of Thal, above Erlenbach. It was torn down in 1956 and rebuilt, but a man over there doing research sent me a photo of the house before it was torn down. I have some photos of the area, and also some photos and video clips of Jakob's house in the Alsace. If you would like, I would be glad to share some of these things with you by email, if you take an interest in Ammann's life. Mikeatnip (talk) 20:24, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Love history & culture? Get involved in WikiProject World Digital Library!

World Digital Library Wikipedia Partnership - We need you!

Hi Mikeatnip! I'm the Wikipedian In Residence at the World Digital Library, a project of the Library of Congress and UNESCO. I'm recruiting Wikipedians who are passionate about history & culture to participate in improving Wikipedia using the WDL's vast free online resources. Participants can earn our awesome WDL barnstar and help to disseminate free knowledge from over 100 libraries in 7 different languages. Multilingual editing encouraged!!! But being multilingual is not a necessity to make this project a success. Please sign up to participate here. Thanks for editing Wikipedia and I look forward to working with you! EdwardsBot (talk) 19:45, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Waldensians edit

Oh dear. I meant to fix the reference and add Italian/French translations - then I saw that "Vaudois" was the French name and abandoned the edit. I must have accidentally saved the edit before previewing, so I'm glad you alerted me to it. I'm going to go ahead and fix the reference now. Thanks for asking. -- Hazhk ^{Talk to me} 00:07, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What improvements to the Church of God (Restoration) do you want to make

Hi Mike- I have been away for a while, but it seems like most of my contributions to the article have been reverted by you. What improvements do you think still need to be made? Elmmapleoakpine (talk) 22:14, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, it's been long enough that I forget what has happened on that page, but it looks like the latest revert was because your edit stated that the ministerial body was "located near Greenville, Ohio." That didn't quite fit reality since the ministers are scattered all over the world. Mikeatnip (talk) 22:20, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I did see your note thank you. I was wondering more about how to contribute going forward and wanted to see if you had any thoughts. Either way I started a thread on the talk page. :) Elmmapleoakpine (talk) 22:25, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Latin American 10,000 Challenge invite

Hi. The Wikipedia:WikiProject Latin America/The 10,000 Challenge ‎ has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge and Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The 10,000 Challenge. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like Brazil, Mexico, Peru and Argentina etc, much like Wikipedia:The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. At some stage we hope to run some contests to benefit Latin American content, a destubathon perhaps, aimed at reducing the stub count would be a good place to start, based on the current Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon. If you would like to see this happening for Latin America, and see potential in this attracting more interest and editors for the country/countries you work on please sign up and being contributing to the challenge! This is a way we can target every country of Latin America, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant!♦ --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 00:43, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please see my most recent edits to the Moravian Church article

The formal name of the Church is "Unitas Fratrum" and I have provided two sources, one is an official Church source, showing this is the case. The previous version of the lead was confusing and convoluted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.159.77.166 (talk) 00:05, 12 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It would be best if you could sign on for an account and discuss changes that way. Anonymous editors are harder to maintain discussions. "Unity of Brothers" is better than "United Brethren," although essentially they are the same. However, "Unity of Brothers" puts more emphasis on the "Unity" (the organization) while "United Brethren" puts more emphasis on "brethren." So there is a difference. I have seen "United Brethren" used a few times, but most writers use "Unity of Brothers." That started a long time ago, and today's American English would probably better translate to something like "Community of brothers." Thanks for your efforts to improve Wikipedia. Mikeatnip (talk) 00:17, 12 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Actually if you see my most recent edits I have restored "Unity of the Brethren". As you note, this emphasises the 'unity'. This translation is used in multiple sources, including official church websites. The Latin term is usually used first. --