20040302
Sorry
I do appologise, in my eagerness I saw only you blanking an entire page with no comment and misstook you as a vandel. I should have looked at page title first. Please accept my humble appologies--Jcw69 20:12, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
Religious Pluralism
Thank you for your contributions to the article on Religious_pluralism. I am working currently on the section on the definition/scope of religious pluralism. You have input suggestions for such things on the talk page, and I would like for you to elaborate on your thoughts on the subject. I am finding that this is a very difficult thing to nail down, and even after I do so, will probably find a "No Original Research" template slapped on it... Let me know what you have thought/researched, that I may use it to enhance my work. --Cormallen 02:05, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
Pluralism
Hi March, here we are again, in for another round of our editing discussions we have already practised on Religious_Pluralism. Hope we have learned to understand each other better in the meantime, so discussions won't be as tedious as last time... :-) --Robin.rueth 09:31, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
NPOV
Hiya, thanks for the message. I'll say something about it on the talk page right now. :) XYaAsehShalomX 16:38, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
There you go. :)XYaAsehShalomX 16:56, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
NKT Pabongkha
Hi 2nd March. Perhaps you have time to help to find out what "secterian view" means and what the difference of Pabongkhas approach and Tsongkhaps is or if Pabongkhas approach can be named as secterian or not? I can not write more on that topic. (I didn't want getting to much involved and lack also time.) But perhaps there is a need and a benefit to clarify this. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:New_Kadampa_Tradition#Phabonkhas_Sectarianism Thank you very much. I will make a new Pause on that stuff. Kt66 13:06, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
Dorje Shugden
Hi 2nd March, if you have time; I'd like to ask you to check about the changes at Shugden article. It looks like that the author (Geir) is more interested to put his person in that article than improving it. Also I lack the English knowledge and time to try to understand what he is saying. thanks, Kt66 20:55, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
Query
dear 20040302, please do not take this as sum kinda inquiry into your ancestry, but are you a cousin or a young'n of "texas constitution day"? the phase looks kinda familiar. many regards, 0* (zero-aster) p.s. Jon Awbrey helped me write this.
Note
oops, i mispoke, it shoulda been "texas independence day" 18360302. it seemed like i remembered calling it "constitution day" way back. either rote learning is not even as much as it b cracked down to b. or i can rack up yet another childhood memory corrupted by entropy. incidental musements: http://www.tsha.utexas.edu/handbook/online/articles/II/lki1.html http://www.tsl.state.tx.us/treasures/republic/ http://www.drtl.org/History/Alamo3.asp Jon Awbrey, on behalf of 0* (lone star xpatriot)
hi
I've replied to your message over at that article. If you want to email me, it's green_tulip1988 at hotmail dot com. XYaAsehShalomX 18:49, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
request
Hi second march could you please look at the Kelsang Gyatso article and the board - i's going about the expulsion section. I do not come to a desicion what the best way is and KP reverts my extensions always back (and I reverted his reverts back). What is reasonable for you on that. Plaese help by sharing the discussion or your thoghts on that. Thank you very much Kt66 22:49, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
NKT once more - you opinion is needed I think
Hi 2nd March, User:Nat Krause made some changes to condence the article on NKT. Normally we did now agree on it. Now a NKT member wishes to extend once more a setion and I do feel there are no really reasons/need for it. Could you please be so kind to check if Patrick K's changes will improve the article and leave your opinion at the discussionpage? Thank you very much, Kt66 19:31, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
- Thank you User Billion answered yet and there is no need anymore. Kt66 21:38, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
Don't worry, it's in the queue, along with about 10-15 others. -- ProveIt (talk) 23:53, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
NKT article changes are discussed
Dear 2nd March: I'd like to ask you for your help and moderation. user:Robert wishes to change two sections of the NKT article and I feel his suggestions blurr the facts or take the clarity of what is stated yet. But I do not say we have an optimum now. You're help is most welcome! Thank you very much. --Kt66 21:41, 21 May 2006 (UTC)