User talk:Pascal.Tesson/Archive 3

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
← Archive 2 |
Archive 3
| Archive 4 →


Archive
Archives
*Up to July 2006


Contents

Euler

Actually didn't really read it, simply copied the existing assessment placed there under another heading. From having reread it, it seems basically good, with the one qualification that the number of references could be better. It's hard to tell whether a cited source applies to simply the sentence directly before it, or all the factual data since the last note. Sorry I couldn't help more. Badbilltucker 21:15, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Hmm...yes this is a bit problematic. A lot of the notes refer to an entire paragraph, but sometimes contentious sentences are given their own ref. What do you think is the right way to do this Pascal? Borisblue 21:33, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Possible mis-type

Re: this edit. Is the button array img a mis-type? -- I@n 04:36, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

emulators unlimited

as a previous member of staff at emuunlim.com i thought it deserved a informative and history retrosepect inclusion to the old article, if any information needs verifying/removing please let me know.

The notability conflict: thanks

I think your recent comment on Wikipedia_talk:Notability#One_last_attempt_at_cooling_things_down is very wise, and I approve of it. arj 13:21, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Your edit to Information processing

Your recent edit to Information processing (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // AntiVandalBot 15:05, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

?? I was trying to revert the vandalism of 204.8.9.66 (talk • contribs • info • WHOIS). Firefox ate my page! Pascal.Tesson 15:09, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Battledome

i assure you battledome is real, and can be veryfied, the names of the founders where dramatised as to hide there identity. Also i kept a link to the neopets wiki for those looking for the neopets battledome, so imo it should not of been changed.

Battledome

I have pictures of this battledome i just havent uploaded them to the wiki yet. do pictures make somthing "verifiable"? I assure you as i said battledome IS real.

Socks at Logo

Thanks for pointing me to the sockpuppet case. Good job compiling all that evidence! I see the new "judge not" user has been blocked now too. I'll be keeping an eye on the article in case the sockpuppeteer returns. — Saxifrage ✎ 20:53, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

I agree with your comment at User talk:Jsmorse47 that it's time to drop the issue. I've been guilty of trying to rebut almost everything the socks say, but I'll try to focus on more productive uses of time from now on. You're completely right that the issue became too much of a personal dispute between me and Jsmorse47 rather than a discussion about the article. ―Wmahan. 00:28, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Bunching

It's linked in from the "suit (clothing)" page! It may be close to nonsense, but some poor people are now wondering what Muirhead's inequality has to do with unbottoning their jacket when sitting down... so could you possibly recondider the rediredct or get rid of the link?

categorization

Hi, thanks for your helpful advice, appreciate that. The categorization work you guys and others are doing have greatly benefited my other wikipedia projects, and this prompted me to contribute to the effort which I quite enjoy. Having one or two months of backlog is normal and alright; I'm quite optimistic that we will eventually "tame" the current flood of uncategorized articles. Thanks again. --Vsion 05:13, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

I just created my first article Alexander Solonik, and within seconds you added a source to it. I want to thank you as I wasn't really sure of teh format for adding sources to Wikipedia articles. I have had my account for a while, but I haven't really used it until now.

Thanks again for assisting,

--Loki Laufeyson 00:29, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

DL Media Deleted?

I was just makming a page for my web design company when I got a message saying it was deleted for spam.? How could it be spam. It is an actually company of mine and I was wondering why I cant put my company on here.

improper tag

you added the tag /move to gaming wiki/ to the article Melvos. This was inappropriate because it does not describe a video game or a computer game. Rather, it describes a character in a novel (albeit not sourced properly and probably should be deleted for other reasons).

PStrait 03:50, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism warnings

You probably didn't mean to, but unless the person is blocked, they shouldn't get a test5 warning...also make sure you use the {{subst:test}} and then the number as it's easier on the servers. Thanks for all the help, good work.--MONGO 13:30, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Don't want to discourage you...keep up the good work and thank you.--MONGO 13:33, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Preußische Akademie der Wissenschaften

I just did the translation you requested: Prussian Academy of Sciences. Feel very free to enhance it (you might have noticed that all my knowledge on the subject is from the German article). I hope it helps in some way with Leibniz and Euler. Greenb 15:45, 12 October 2006 (UTC)


Software testing: history + roles

Hello Pascal.Tesson. As you said, I added the info in software testing now. Please have a loook, if this is ok? CU, --Erkan Yilmaz 17:52, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Film notability

Remember that that's a proposed, not existing policy. It's not against policy to ignore things that are not yet (and hopefully never will be) policy. --Improv 00:02, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

  • I think it's noncontroversial. I'm not bothered by your removing the prod tag though if you disagree. I understand that you're concerned. That doesn't bother me. Take care. --Improv 00:13, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
    • I again remind you that what you refer to is a proposed, not an existing policy. I won't "admit" it's a mistake because I don't think it's a mistake, and "admitting" it to be so just to please you would be dishonest. I have no particular interest in making you worried, upset, or pissing you off, but I'm also not inclined to tiptoe around for fear of offending people. Laters.. --Improv 01:19, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
      • I simply disagree with you here. Nothing I've done is anything I'm ashamed of. --Improv 02:19, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Mephisto (novel)

I realize I cut a lot, but still: The translation you requested is done. --Greenb 15:06, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for your work on the article! I'm from the Stuttgart area.

Xenomorph (Achaean)

I just prodded this article, and I noticed that it looks like you prodded the same article, or a very similar one, in August. I'm a little confused about the mechanics here. Did this guy somehow remove your prod from the edit history? Or did the article you prodded get removed, and the guy's edits on it got removed from his history? --Brianyoumans 22:01, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

  • Thanks! I wasn't aware that contributions to deleted articles disappear from user histories, but now I know. --Brianyoumans 22:49, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Michael Hewitt-Gleeson

I have not even finished the article when you put your NPOV! I encountered an edit conflict when trying to save my improvements. This article is written after I found only one red link in my article yesterday, School of Thinking. Thought I might give it a shot, although I don't even know who the hell is Michael Hewitt-Gleeson!

Can you please review and tell me whether you still think the same? — PM Poon 03:22, 16 October 2006 (UTC) (Message expanded at 04:26, 16 October 2006 (UTC))

I am going to put in a pic and remove the NPOV in the interim. If you do not agreed with my removal of the NPOV, please put it back, or better still, improve on the article. Thanks. — PM Poon 03:45, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Template Sharing

Thanks for the information! There is another Wiki outside of Wikipedia that I help out with and wanted to use some of the spam templates and manybe others for this Wiki. I din not want to just take it without first asking. I will check out the license link that you put up on the spam site. Does this answer your question about template sharing? Also what is the policy of cleaning up old discussions, you discussion site is quite busy, do you plan on leaving all of this out there forever? Philosopher06 21:06, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Sassoon family(&associates)

Haha, you beat me to tagging it. The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 22:37, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Je peux y voir ;-) For being here for only 3 months, you are doing quite well. Cheers, The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 22:42, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Attack page warnings

Please use {{attack-n}} instead of blp1-n for attack pages. blp1-n is bit too tame for vandals. Thanks --  Netsnipe  ►  14:15, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Miwako Okuda

Tu es français, non? J'ai modifié la page sur Miwako Okuda en rajoutant les singles Shizuku, tsuki et Aozora no Hate.

Par contre, je n'ai pas réussi à faire deux tableaux avec ses singles pour bien séparer ses singles de 2000 et les autres. je pensais que ça pouvait être bien de distinguer en fonction du label. Quoi qu'il en soit, est ce possible de faire deux tableaux de singles?

Je ne sais pas si tu es fan de Miwako, mais si c'est le cas, n'hésite pas à aller voir mon site sur cette chanteuse "Mais qui es tu Miwako?" —Preceding unsigned comment added by Disarm1 (talk • contribs)

Your unnecessary cynicism is not appreciated

What "above" are you refering to? I mean Edison's "keep" opinion is a very very weak one (and I almost suspect he meant "weak delete") and Valeom's opinion is not at all representative of current stantdards applied around here. That leaves RockMFR which isn't particularly well-documented. Pascal.Tesson 01:19, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

This is from your Frederick Carr AfD.

Are you suggesting that I don't know what I'm talking about? Cause that sure is what it sounds like. I understand where you are coming from, because I didnt add a reason for my vote keep, but I have now I just didnt have time at the time to. Nonetheless, I consider what you did a form of trolling. Valoem talk 04:44, 19 October 2006 (UTC)


Merci pour votre accueil et vos conseils!

Voilà, le titre dit tout!


Oozes

I was expanding an ooze article that was already there. I added a few ooze monsters and expanded some already in Wikipedia. I will not make any more changes, or add more monsters, until the issue can be resolved.

Randy Richards article

Randy Richards may or not be a controversial figure. There are millions of people in the "game community" worldwide, and to say "most" people find him controversial is absurd. As to the Dreadmire issue, this is already referenced where it belongs, which is under the "Dreadmire" article.

The other source cited, the Coast Con link, is NOT a reliable source. The minutes I obtained during my research, from the meeting in question, sheds light on this subject. Randy Richards resigned when, he claims, he discovered illegal activities going on within the group. Hardly a controversial act if it is true. Point is, this is not verifiable, which is why I did not include it in the original article.


Michael Hewitt-Gleeson

Hi Pascal, I note that even after Mhewittg had expanded on the section, Fallout with Edward de Bono, you still put on the NPOV tag. Does this particular "contra" section that constitute some 50% of the article not "overwrite" Michael Hewitt-Gleeson's academic and professional achievement to give a more balanced NPOV?

How much then must we kill this guy before you are satisfied? Or are you merely insisting that you were right all along, even before I could finish my article? You were quick on the gun, a bit rash I must admit. I saved the article while still writing on 15th October because computers are sometimes so unpredictable and unreliable. When I tried to save the section on the Fallout with Edward de Bono about half an hour later, I encountered an edit conflict.

I do agree that the first draft was not NPOV, but it was just a fact-collecting draft that you based your judgement on. And even after so much changes have been made since your first tag, you still insist on your initial judgement. Does all those subsequent additions mean so little to you, or is it your ego that is blinding your judgement?

Maybe by deleting the section on Academic and professional background, and just highlighting all his negative points with Edward, it will please you! In any case, I have reduced the section on his achievements. The point is not whether it is taken from his website, but whether the statements are true. In fact, I have verified the qualifications with ICMI Speakers & Entertainers official website.

Can you please identify which statements are false, something more objective and concrete, rather than making sweeping unsupported statements yourself? You mentioned: "... all info is taken from websites that are owned or managed by the subject". Any proof that ICMI is owned or managed by Michael Hewitt-Gleeson? I really need this proof from you as my investigation indicates the contrary, otherwise I can only surmise that you are the one who is really biased in this particular judgement! (I am not referring to your other judgements, although I have read some responses from other users, lol).

If you can't, I hope you will VOLUNTARILY remove the NPOV tag that to me, merely reflects your non-NPOV attitude! — PM Poon 04:47, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Speedy deletions and copyvios

Hey! Thanks for your hard work in New Page Patrol. I've come across your tagging a few articles as copyviolations, and I wanted to let you know that a great way for you to help admins would be to copy and paste the "maintenance use only" message onto the creator's talk page. Admins can't delete the article until the creator has been warned about copyright. It's an extra step, and you're by no means required to do it, but I thought you might like to know. Keep up the good work!

On another note, it might be time to archive your talk page. Just a thought.  :) -- Merope 14:53, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I was in the same boat a couple of months ago. I might pop over to the template and change the wording. Thank you! -- Merope 14:56, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Sorry

will not happen againQuode 16:05, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Randy Richards/User:Cryogenesis/User:RJMalko

Thanks for your help in trying to stem the tide of RR vanity. You may wish to look at this as well. He created a new Dreadmire page just a short time ago. I redirected it to the deletion ruling for now.--Robbstrd 00:54, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

WIKI seems to be under attack. Looks like Randy did not like us removing Dreadmire. He is now attacking Grayhawk itself. This is insane but fits his MO. I am so sorry this arrived at your doorstep. Quode 04:24, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Some users may consider it odd that you objected to a no vandalism request

I agree that the request (see http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=New_Horizons&curid=390905&diff=82879006&oldid=82876082) did not belong, but I think the user deserved an explaination. Just a thought. Will (Talk - contribs) 04:56, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

I saw that, but even so, I like to attempt to explain why each time. Some people have thick skulls. Will (Talk - contribs) 05:03, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Ok. BTW: Someone added a comment to your User Box section that belonged here. Will (Talk - contribs) 05:24, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Notability_(books)#Derivative_articles

Wow, I don't know what that's all about, but it sure sucks that you have people abusing/vandalizing your user page. Hope everything works out. Yours, Smeelgova 06:06, 22 October 2006 (UTC).
No matter how many POV heated discussions I get in with other editors, that's something that I think we can all agree is unconscionable here on Wikipedia, especially with such foul language. At the most basic level we should all always try to "spread the wikilove" support each other, and be polite and respectful, even if we have drastically opposing POVs. Good luck. Yours, Smeelgova 06:13, 22 October 2006 (UTC).

Puzzled

Hi. I recently redirected your recent creation List of people by name: name Rob to List of people by name: Rob. But looking at your contributions you seem to be very active on lists of people, so I don't quite understand what it is you're trying to do. Also I don't understand why you would delete info such as "backstroke swimmer" to have only "swimmer" or why you would have Roseanne Barr as an actor rather than an actress. Thanks.
Pascal.Tesson 05:05, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

_ _ I'm a poor documenter at the best of times, and when i am disrupted in the midst of a confusing restructuring is far the the best of times. For the moment i hope it will help
  1. for you to examine addition of the Rdr you refer to, and consider where else the Rob Roy entry you trashed could go, without bad long-term consequences, and
  2. for me to point out that compliance with GFDL is impaired by placing Rdrs on top of anything other than a previous Rdr.
"Very active on lists of people" is certainly true, but more to the point, i've designed and executed about 98% of the structure of LoPbN for the last three years.
_ _ As to "actress" and "backstroke", their avoidance reflects the navigational function of the list (see the various AfDs listed on the Talk:List of people by name or an appropriate subpage), and an implication that flows from the combination of that function with the rate at which additions are made to the list by truly naive users: specifically, the need for an immediately visible stereotyped basic format, including what i refer to as the "low-resolution terminology". Neither the details of an athlete's specialization nor the sex of an actor contributes to navigation in more than .1% of the user consultations of LoPbN that would depend on the entries they're being stripped from, and even every excess adjective contributes not only to clutter but to fostering the gradual or sudden addition of entries like those by User:JASpencer that i spent over an hour this evening to set right (including avoiding loss of information).
--Jerzy•t 06:43, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Thank you

In real life I have never met Randy. I know him only on the net and for the things he has done there. I ordered Dreadmire from him on Amazon Market place and reviewed it and that was when he began to harass me. Look at the Spellbinder site http://p101.ezboard.com/fspellbindergamesfrm21.showMessage?topicID=18.topic, he imagines I am this person Terry, those attacks are directed at me. I am now his biggest detractor due to this issue. Like I said before, I stand up to bullies. You’re comments have been noted and I see the case winding down as it is. Before all this I never relised the size and scope of the Wiki project, will stick around.Quode 03:38, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Character Pages, Images and Moving

Hi. Sorry about the deletion of the automated message on my talk page. I wasn't sure what the page was really for at first being new here. Also, with my recent updates to and adding new pages through the Bloody Roar page, I'm not sure how to move it to the gaming side of wikipedia. And about the non-free images, I must have missed a part of the article on images to which weren't and were not and are unsure which are not free to use. If someone is able to remove them, I have no problem as I do want to follow policy on the site. Also I didn't realise that my writing for the fictional characters fell under the Original Research catagory, though I was trying to avoid copying information word for word from sources. Very sorry if I've caused problems. Ichi-o 23:57, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Atomic Squash

Why did you remove the Atomic Squash information from the Kobolds Ate My Baby page? I'm trying to justify the Atomic Squash wiki entry and provide a link to a KAMB LARP whose files I put online.

Here are links to sites that mention Atomic Squash games:

I can provide email addresses of 3rd parties. I'd prefer not to post them to a public forum.

I am new to this. Why can the existing KAMB article mention Midnight Massacre LARP at Origins and I cannot mention the KAMB LARP at Archon 30? I did not see how the Origins paragraph rises to the level of reliable sources you expect me to meet.

Thanks for the feedback to this newcomer. I am hugely disappointed that my work was reverted so quickly. I also have heard nothing from NawlinWiki. It is discouraging that she was so quick to delete my article but not respond to my questions. I feel angry and that I've wasted my time. gazpacho 21:24, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

"Defban" template

It seems to be fairly new, but I don't know when it was added. I was on self-imposed hiatus almost all year. Gotta tell ya...I really love it too. There's a {{defwarn}} template for a gentle warning; the one you saw is at {{defban}}. The idiot in question was flaming someone by full name and physical location. I have zero tolerance for that sort of idiocy, so now that we have a fresh new template, I'm putting it to good use against this sort of abuse. At least one user I blocked gave someone's address and phone number. In a way, I'm doing them a favor by keeping them from getting the whee sued out of them in a court of law.  :) - Lucky 6.9 16:02, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

That had occured to me as well. I'd been using the warning template with a block notice in my own words until another user pointed out the "big kahuna." I hate biting newbies and I'm always sorry for the times I do so without really meaning to. I just don't have a lot of sympathy for someone who'd try and belittle someone else on a public forum or put them in harm's way with their nonsense. I may leave word on the admin noticeboard re. that intermediate template. Good call. - Lucky 6.9 16:12, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Tagging carefulness

Howdy! When tagging articles for deletion, be careful not to recreate them if they were just deleted. That's what just happened, and I had to delete that article twice. Regards, CHAIRBOY (☎) 16:15, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Don't worry, I am careful not to recreate stuff accidentally. This one was me just hitting "Enter" one too many times unintentionally. Pascal.Tesson 16:17, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
No worries, just a helpful tip. Regards, and thanks for tagging! - CHAIRBOY (☎) 16:19, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Regarding the removal of links

Regarding your removal of links on Hanukkah [6] please see the discussion on Talk:Hanukkah#Removal_of_links and Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam#Chabad.org. --PinchasC | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 23:09, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Deletion basis

You mentioned deleting an article, Advameg on the basis of "A7 and G11". What are A7 and G11? Bejnar 05:16, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Barnstar!

The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
For your tireless contributions on the spam front, and for all the big and little edits I've seen you make on articles and discussions, I hereby award you this barnstar. Keep up the great work! --AbsolutDan (talk) 05:22, 25 October 2006 (UTC)


Am I missing something? Is this your first barnstar? To paraphrase an oft-used RfA quote, "What, he doesn't have a barnstar yet?!". --AbsolutDan (talk) 05:22, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Well that may be, but Wikipedia certainly benefits from it :)
P.S. In poking through your archives to check for other barnstars, I noticed your archives have a space/underscore separating Pascal Tesson instead of the dot. Just thought I'd mention it in case you weren't already aware. Cheers! --AbsolutDan (talk) 05:27, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
I would if I could... but I'm not an admin :) Sorry --AbsolutDan (talk) 05:36, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
Thanks :) I prefer being a normal editor though right now - less trouble overall me thinks! Here's the tag you're looking for, just so you don't have to dig it up: {{Db-userreq}} --AbsolutDan (talk) 05:40, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
AbsolutDan beat me to it. Well done and thankyou for your antispamming activities Mr Tesson. — Moondyne 06:44, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

comment on deletion

ya so anyways, just like i said before, why you delete and protect PIITB page, did you see the ORLY owl page? PIITB is way more used and way better known. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Omnipotenttitan (talk • contribs)


whats the answer dude?

Merde

Seien Sie nicht so hässlich, bitte. No need for all those personal attax man.Perfect T 18:39, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Babbello

Just thought I should alert you to the fact that your speedy nomination for Babbello has been contested. You may need to send it to AFD. Cnwb 03:57, 26 October 2006 (UTC)


Basic Physics of The Violin

In response to the question of the origin of this document


This is an article I wrote in Dec of 2005 and Jan of 2006. I am an experienced violinist who is very interested in physics. If there are any comments about this article please let me know. --PaulAsbestosKing 04:22, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Reverting faster than the eye can see?

That's not actually true. Earlier today, there was a vandal using multiple IPs to blank IBM. I was able to see 1 of his "revisions". Then I reverted. ;) --M1ss1ontomars2k4 (T | C | @) 01:08, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

My views on Canada

Make up your mind , English or French ???????????????? Thats the first step for a successful country

c'est merde!!!

Au revoir! Addmclean 08:53, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Upcoming template changes

Hi, I've just noticed that you recently left a templated userpage message. I'm just bringing to your attention that the format and context of these templates will be shortly changing. It is recommended that you visit WikiProject user warnings and harmonisation discussion pages to find out how these changes could affect the templates you use. We also would appreciate any insights or thoughts you may have on the subject. Thanks for your understanding. Best regards Khukri (talk . contribs) 11:40, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback, and I have to say looking back at it, it's a very fair point. This project has snowballed on me since I first started coming up with ideas a couple of weeks back. There is only one other editor who was part of the original project has come forward and said they are intested out of all the people listed on the page. So most of the ideas you see are little more than my original notes with very little explanation behind them. I have tidied the vote intro up, but would really appreciate, if you end up doing nothing else with this project, to keep a critical eye on it. It's very difficult when one is too close to the problem to see the overall effect. So thanks for taking the time and now you've started please don't stop now. I'm away most of the weekend unfortunately, but I'll try to get more work done it on sunday night. Regards Khukri (talk . contribs) 18:38, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

About My changes made to Hilmand districts

Mr Tesson,

I'm originally from Hilmand province so i know very good the province, the references that i removed are completley false, so it's completky rigt to correct it. You have to khnow that the south of Afghanistan is not like the north of Afghanistan, by that i mean: the south of Afghanistan is of course predominantly Pashtun and there are more then 10 provinces where the pasthun population is nearly 100%. So when I see districts of Pashtun provinces where i see minorities that never been there, it is very unjust and un-professionnel to mislead users by announcing there presence.

With respect

integer3000


Thanks

Thanks for correcting my mistakes on the Théâtre du Soleil article. Exiledone 14:43, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

PORNOGRAPHY

Dear sir-

What high school textbook in which country has pictures of erect male genetalia?

I reread your response and am appalled. It is slanderous to ask people to stop speaking to people inquiring about sex who identify themselves as young? This is your opinion?

Xchanter 03:30, 30 October 2006 (UTC)Xchanter

CANADA

Really? In CANADA they show what age girls pictures of erect genitals? What is the ISBN so I can look it up (if they don't use ISBN's in Canada, perhaps you could provide me with a link)? I am sure that I would feel a little odd about posting pictures of my own equipment to this site, and at the same time, if all our children are going to see one, why not mine? I am doing my best to see your point of view.

I clicked your link, and yes, you were able to provide me with one click images. You feel this is reasonable? While canadian, in america we feel that "I don't agree but I will defend to the death your right to say it". Unfortunately, this cuts both ways. To say that I am being unreasonable, while you reasonable, is ANTITHETICAL to the above. If you have some other formulation of free speech, I would be interested to hear it.

Xchanter 03:47, 30 October 2006 (UTC)Xchanter

I REST MY CASE

You had nothing to say, called me names ("slanderous"), did not respond, and expect somehow that your point was valid without you saying anything. In my country a person who speaks to a child unrelated to them about sex is not looked on as a good person. What exactly is your point? That children should be able to seek advice about sex from strangers? That the responsibility of being a parent does not in fact imply some set of rights? That you will be happy when some stranger tells your children how to have sex? I am doing my best to be civil, but you are making no attempt to make your actual position different from what I have just stated. If that IS your opinion, I wonder, do you have children?

Xchanter 03:55, 30 October 2006 (UTC)Xchanter

Dear Sir-

I did not see any pictures of the type I mentioned having problems with on the web site you provided. Instead I found some articles about homosexuality which I have no problems with -- I have known well four gay men as they DIED from AIDS, have known 15 others who have died without me being present, and have known many other homosexuals. Additionally, the site you provided was a university not a high school: you did not provide a reference to a high school textbook as I requested and you stated.

It appears to me that it is MY opinions that are being attacked, not the reverse.

I appreciate your cordiality, and assume that my own will be taken as such.

My best,

Xchanter 04:54, 30 October 2006 (UTC)Xchanter


Dear Sir-

You have provided an even less credible source, and I begin to disbelieve your own credibility. Again, I find no justification for your defense of the inclusion of erect male genatlia in this encyclopedia, and, frankly, having given you multiple opportunities to provide these proofs, and you having provided none, must only assign you to the category of hate mail. I will closely watch your next post to me, should you desire to make one, and, I hope, you have something reasonable to say at that time.

Xchanter 05:34, 30 October 2006 (UTC)Xchanter