Changes

I keep a database <div id="shortcut" style="border: 1px solid #CC9; margin: 0em 1em 0em 1em; text-align: center; padding:5px; clear: both; background-color:#F1F1DE">''Welcome to my discussion page. Please post new messages to the bottom of Orthodox web pages, the page and use headings when starting new discussion topics.<br> Please also sign and publish them on my date your entries by inserting '''<nowiki>- ~~~~</nowiki>''' at the end. Thank you.<br>[http{{SERVER}}{{localurl:{{NAMESPACE}}:{{PAGENAME}}|action=edit&section=new}} Start a new discussion topic.]''----''[[/archived discussion 1]] (through 09-07-2005)''<br>''[[/archived discussion 2]] (through 11-20-2005)''<br>''[[/www.geocities.comarchived discussion 3]] (through 05-24-2006)''<br>''[[/archived discussion 4]] (through 04-13-2007)''<br>''[[/Athensarchived discussion 5]] (through 05-28-2008)''<br>''[[/7734archived discussion 6]] (through 11-25-2008)''<br>''[[/orthlink.htm Orthodox Links Pagearchived discussion 7]].(through 12-10-2014)''

I hope you don't mind, Father, but I passed the link to OrthodoxWiki along to some of my seminarian friends and a few others: Hi! Thanks for all your work. The wiki was long overdue for an upgrade (c. God willing, there will be a few more contributors soonf. [[UserOrthodoxWiki:ASDamickNews|Rdr. Andrewnews]] 15:48, 20 Dec 2004 (CST) That's great news. Thanks again for your contributions! .. I'm happy also to have someone onboard who has experience with WikiPediatried first running 1.27, and then 1. I hope you don't mind that I've bumped you up to sysop status26.[[User:FrJohn|FrJohn]] == Sysopishness == Thanks! Now I have to figure Turns out what to do with that. :) [hitcounters were [Userhttps:ASDamick|Rdr//phabricator.wikimedia. Andreworg/T120216 removed]] 21:59from core in MW 1.26, 21 Dec 2004 (CST) == Style Guide == Father, so I've started a tentative '''moved the site back to 1.25 and added the [[OrthodoxWikimw:Extension:Style GuideHitCounters|HitCounter extension]]''' to govern the writings of articles, especially naming conventionsso we should be ok moving forward. Let me see what I can do about recovering those edits. Perhaps it could somehow eventually be linked to the top (It was a question of reverting before many edits were made or losing the page when editing is being donehitcounter history, going back to 2004...  ) — [[User:ASDamickFrJohn|Rdr. Andrew<b>FrJohn</b>]] 10:42, 22 Dec 2004 (CST) RE[http: That's great//orthodoxwiki. I noticed you linked to the NPOV page on Wikipedia from your User page thereorg/index. I think we should also have an explicit statement about this here -- basically I mean that on issues where substantial disagreements exist within or among the Orthodox churches we should adopt a description tone here -- giving reasons for different positionsphp?title=User_talk:FrJohn&action=edit&section=new talk]) 18:10, citing notable figures on different sidesMay 11, etc. Do you have some idea about how this should be written up? Also, what do you think would be the most effective content for the front page? Thanks again for your work! I'm thrilled that things are moving and shaking here :-2016 (UTC). — [[User:FrJohn|<b>FrJohn</b>]] 14([http:42, 22 Dec 2004 (CST)  It's an interesting and somewhat difficult question//orthodoxwiki. On the one hand, we'd probably want to keep things as "neutral" as possible, especially regarding disputes within and involving the Churchorg/index. However, on the other hand, I think it may be wise to include something of what one might refer to as a "Mainstream Chalcedonian bias" in the project.  That is, especially WRT naming things, I'd prefer if we named an article '''Church of Alexandria''' to refer to that patriarchate in communion with your and my bishops, and '''Church of Alexandria (Copticphp?title=User_talk:FrJohn&action=edit&section=new talk])''' to refer to the Non-Chalcedonian one, rather than '''Church of Alexandria (Melkite)''' and '''Church of Alexandria'''18:10, respectively. FurtherMay 11, instead of '''Church of Greece 2016 (State ChurchUTC)''' (as it might be called by the "True Orthodox"), we'd just use '''Church of Greece'''. A lot of these adjectival distinctives are already in use by the groups in question, anyhow (e: .g., the Coptic Patriarchate refers to itself as "Coptic Orthodox.")  Additionally, when describing things, while not saying, "So-and-so's church is one of heretics and schismatics," we probably also would not say, "The majority Church of Greece has fallen away from the true faith, which subsists only in the Old Calendarist movementplease do let me know if you see any other issues."  Thus, at least as far as naming and some other things are concerned, there would be a certain bias in favor of the mainstream of Chalcedonian Orthodoxy. ::No problem! :) But why? I think the possibility for confusion is ''massive'' if we don't explicitly set m just kind of noticing the bias in some waydifferences. Additionally, without it, I think we run the risk got a whole bunch of drawing ourselves deeply into the controversies themselves. That is, server errors for a couple minutes there is going to be ''some'' bias, no matter what we do. As such, since the site is run by an OCA priest (yourself), and also because in terms of the rest of the world, the mainstream Chalcedonian position is what is most well-known (thus lending support to the bias in what might be called "definitional usage" terms), but I think it's probably wisest to put this sort of bias in place. That being said, making the bias explicit in the Style Guide would be a must, trying to explain it in as neutral terms as possible, mentioning the reasons and m sure that it is in no way meant as a judgment on dissenting groups or persons. That way, perhaps we could attract as contributors some of the more thoughtful participants in these debates while leaving behind their more shrill brethren. But all this is subject to your approval and revision. Regarding the front page, I think we should move was from the list of things in development elsewhere, perhaps just giving links to major categories of topics. Perhaps a photo or two, especially maybe an automatically rotating one upgrade (I have no idea how one would do thatdon't get them anymore either). I've noticed that websites with continually changing things am determined to get the counter on the front page tend to have more frequent visitors, and of course more frequent visitors mean more contributors. One thing I'd like to develop would be at least a bare-bones fixed-feast liturgical calendar, with entries titled things like '''[[November 1]]''' having links to the saints and feasts of the day. Then there also might be a calendar page with links to all the dates.  [[User:ASDamick|Rdr. Andrew]] 09:26, 23 Dec 2004 (CST) === In Reply ===Greetings again! I think those are good ideas. I agree about the "mainstream Chalcedonian bias" made 4900 (gently) explicit. It would be great if you could just revise what you said, add some general stuff about NPOV and stick it in an appropriately titled style page.  About images, I think hopefully beyond that's a good idea too -- easy to implement, providing we find some appropriate ones. The liturgical calendar shouldn't be impossible. At www.OrthodoxWeb.org and other places, there already exists php code to integrate a site in with the calendar on www.oca.org. The challenge would be rightly fitting it into the MediaWiki template (I don't think you can put PHP code right into an edited page, right?). I don't have much PHP experience, but I don't think it would be too hard for someone who does. Also, Huw Raphael (www.doxos.org!) sent me the code he uses for this purpose. Thanks!![[User:FrJohn|FrJohn]] 12:24, 23 Dec 2004 (CST) ====One more==== Father, I've further expanded the :How does [[OrthodoxWiki:Style ManualBulgarian_Eastern_Orthodox_Diocese_of_the_USA,_Canada_and_Australia|this]] if you'd care to take a look.?--[[User:ASDamick|Rdr. Andrew]] == Images == Fr. John, I tried to upload an image and use it in an article. :::Awesome! All worked just fine until I tried to use the "thumb" tag in the link. Thank you! At that point, the image failed to show, and there was difficult to make out error information near the top of the page. :) --[[User:ASDamickKatjuscha|Rdr. AndrewKatjuscha]] ---------Hi Rdr. Andrew, Thanks again for your contributions -- Great work! About the image, I have a few ideas about what could be screwy on the server-side. Let me check into them and get back to you. Also, what was the image called? I can see if it's been uploaded successfully.Wishing you a blessed New Year,([[Usertalk:FrJohnKatjuscha|FrJohntalk]] P.S. Hey) 20:26, actuallyMay 11, I see you've uploaded lots of images that have worked fine. Is it just one you're having a problem with?2016 (UTC)