"==Bruce Metzger== 
 I'm new to Wiki, so pls be patient. As a committed Christian, I am keen to see that the truth is conveyed to seekers - hence my additions to the Bruce Metzger article re his leaning to Westcott & Hort. Is this a personal point of view? I don't think so, but would appreciate feedback/discussion on how to best expand the content around well know commentators such as Metzger who clearly follow a certain biblical view. 

 BTW, I am working on the citations that have been requested. I will ensure these are added, or the the text will be edited accordingly. 

 Kindly, Andrew. Sydney.   

 :Hi and welcome again! I edited your new paragraph on W&H; because it did not seem to me to be in conformace with the policies and guidelines here, particularly WP:NPOV and WP:WEASEL. I think I kept the essentials while making it more neutral. If you disagree, let's talk about how we can improve it on Talk:Bruce Metzger.  |  

 ==Colin Tilsley== 
 I'd like a little more help with understanding why the new text for Colin Tilsley was removed, please. I've read through numerous policies around POV, and I appreciate that there will be some overlap especially coming from a family member. But being a family member doesn't preclude me from submitting factual commentary surely? If I had a different username would that have made a difference? Wiki would be the worse for it if so. 

 My family interest aside, C Tilsley was a significant individual in the growth of missionary/evangelical work throughout Europe and Asia, so I wish to add as much content as possible. 

 BTW, I could not find a specific policy on commenting on family.   

 :I responded at .  |  

 == Re: my talk page. == 

 When you are fighting vandalism, please do not target everything from the same IP address.  Yes, someone has made a few vandalisms from my IP, but in stopping them you also reverted my legitimate edits and gave me warnings which I don't deserve.    

 :See my response at .  |  

 ::In regards to your revert of 70.53.92.224's edit on Blood alcohol content, wouldn't it have been better to fix his/her code than revert to an inaccurate statement and accuse him/her of vandalism?    

 :If I had reason to believe that s/he was not vandalizing as s/he did to other articles, then I would have tried to fix it. As it was, on cursory inspection, I did not see what s/he was trying to refer to and the user had a history, so I just deleted it.  |  

 == Ex Cathedra statements are not new revelations == 

 According to the Catholic Church, Ex Cathedra statements are not new revelations but a more clear explanation of revelation. 
 Please see Catechism of the Catholic Church 66-67. (online at www.vatican.va) 

 66 ""The Christian economy, therefore, since it is the new and definitive Covenant, will never pass away; and no new public revelation is to be expected before the glorious manifestation of our Lord Jesus Christ.""28 Yet even if Revelation is already complete, it has not been made completely explicit; it remains for Christian faith gradually to grasp its full significance over the course of the centuries. 

 67 Throughout the ages, there have been so-called ""private"" revelations, some of which have been recognized by the authority of the Church. They do not belong, however, to the deposit of faith. It is not their role to improve or complete Christ's definitive Revelation, but to help live more fully by it in a certain period of history. Guided by the Magisterium of the Church, the sensus fidelium knows how to discern and welcome in these revelations whatever constitutes an authentic call of Christ or his saints to the Church. 

 Christian faith cannot accept ""revelations"" that claim to surpass or correct the Revelation of which Christ is the fulfilment, as