[WikiEN-l] Jesus edit ninjas (no subject)

[S]

I understand your concern. But your understanding of what happened is not
accurate. The edits in question today - the object of the reverts - was
never dealt with in substance on talk. SLR's response today dealt with the
issue I raised yesterday, namely the issue of Yeshua as Jesus' actual
Hebrew name in life. This issue is certainly debatable, and I give
thoughtful consideration to everything SLR has to say on that subject. But
it was not the subject of the edits I made today. 

The issue today had to do with how the lede paragraph dealt largely with
the concept of Jesus being an "incarnation of God". Not all Christians
agree with this, and in reality this needs qualification, as being a
Nicene Creed concept not a concept belonging to all of Christianity. I
simply clarified this issue. I also separated Islam from the lede to the
second paragraph. As Islam does not regard Jesus as the object of its
religion, it needs separate treatment. 

SLR responded to neither of these issues, and gave no explanation for his
reverts. I don't know why? Did he just assume that I was re-adding the
material we were dealing with yesterday? Reverting without explanation - I
think this kind of action to be ninja behavior, not wikipedian behavior.

Stevertigo



Oscar wrote:

Listen, I'm very sympathetic to your desire to be able to edit
Wikipedia freely, but this isn't just any article. This is the article
on *Jesus*. As in, half the world thinks he saved humanity. As in,
probably one of the articles that get the most attention from the most
committed users, who ruthlessly guards the article. Every single word,
sentence and comma probably have fifteen different sources and have
been hammered out to conform to some sort of consensus. You can't
expect to go in and change the lede of an article like this without
discussing it first. It's just not gonna happen!

I'm not familiar with the article in question, but from looking at the
talk page, the issue you raised had indeed been discussed at length
before (according to Slrubenstein, at least).

If you want to edit articles like [[Jesus]] (or [[George W. Bush]], or
whatever controversial subject you can think of), you have to expect
to be frequently reverted, especially if the issue has been dealt with
previously. Every single edit that makes some substantive change
should be discussed. Seriously, this is *Jesus* we're talking about,
you can't just go in and expect your edits to be accepted. Hash it out
on the talk-page, that's the right place for it, not the mailing-list.

--Oskar