User talk:Taiwan Girl

February 2008

Hello. Please don't forget to provide an edit summary, which wasn't included with your recent edit to Christadelphians. Thank you. NeilN ^{talk ♦ contribs} 01:04, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, my mistake. I will try to be more careful in future. Taiwan Girl (talk) 04:45, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

A friendly warning

Please think about what you write before writing, as a fair amount of the discussions and comments you have made can be seen as you being a Troll. If you continue to do this, I will start to give formal warnings to you. It's especially frustrating considering the subject of these heated discussions. --Samtheboy ^(t/c) 09:11, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

The whole of Taiwan boi's editing with respect to Berean Christadelphians is clearly in the category of 'trolling'. My comments have simply been to moderate his highly critical and unfair treatment of this Christadelphian subgroup. I hope you gave him the same warning. If not, your objectivity is questionable and your 'warnings' can therefore be ignored. Taiwan Girl (talk) 09:30, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

The very nature of your user name clearly indicates that you have been trying to rile Taiwan boi into heated discussions. I have suggested to Taiwan boi that he refrain from answering to your posts, as they clearly do cause friction and this benefits no-one. In all honesty, Taiwan boi was the person who wanted a separate article for Bereans, and so how this is him being highly critical and unfair, I am not entirely sure. I am not saying that you cease from having discussions at all, I'm suggesting that you think a bit more about how you word and how you back up your points. --Samtheboy ^(t/c) 10:06, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

In fact, Taiwan boi repeatedly posted information about the Berean schism in the article on Christadelphians until RJB moved it to a new article. Prior to RJB moving this material Taiwan boi's material made the Christadelphians article completely imbalanced, with a great deal of irrelevant material. Despite this being pointed out to him (although not by me) he insisted on keeping the material there. He clearly lacks objectivity and his material on the Berean Christadelphians is critical, imbalanced and lacks neutrality. Any attempt to 'moderate' the article by presenting material which creates some balance is attacked, often in personal terms. I have repeatedly and consistently provided references, have repeatedly edited my own material to accomodate his criticisms, and have courteously answered his criticisms. In return, he has attributed motives to me, accused me of 'bad faith', vandalism, misrepresentation, and used other ad hominem.

It appears that Taiwan boi only wants a sanitised version of Christadelphianism in the article which reflects his own opinions as to how the community is. This includes his deletion of any edits which may suggest that Christadelphianism may have changed. He repeatedly deletes any material which provides a more balanced view or a differing opinion. He doesn't even allow edits which show that there is another view. This is subjective and academically dishonest. It appears to me that he is trying to use the article for evangelism rather than to provide a balanced, neutral source of information which takes into account varying views. Taiwan Girl (talk) 10:30, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

You can read on the Christadelphian article talk page, that before any information was written about the Bereans, Taiwanboi twice expressed his preference that it be placed in a separate article. Personally I would prefer not to have any mention of the Bereans at all, but then I don't own wikipedia, and others feel strongly that there should be. RiJB (talk) 20:18, 3 February 2008 (UTC)