User talk:Paulmoloney

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hello Paulmoloney, welcome to Wikipedia.

You might find these links helpful: How to edit a page, How to write a great article, Naming conventions, Manual of Style. You should read our policies at some point too.

If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump, or ask me on my talk page. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!

  • You can introduce yourself on the new user log.
  • You can find lots more information, including open tasks and daily tips, at the community portal.
  • You can sign your name using three tildes, like this: ~~~. If you use four, you can add a datestamp as well.
  • Before saving a page, it's a good idea to use the Show preview button to review your edits. Also, consider writing a summary for each edit.

Again, welcome! Chris Roy 02:04, 28 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] The Phoenix (magazine)

Thanks for seeing my mistake. Cheers.ant_ie 18:26, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] George Galloway

You criticised the deletions and you dismissed my argument, please read my post. -- Tompsci 00:09, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] no

I'd be in favour of gay rights activist, Its david who is opposed - That was an attempted compromise.--Irishpunktom\talk 22:55, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Trouble is, it's an over-wordy compromise that doesn't really work. "Human rights activist" is best. David | Talk 23:06, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
And now you see the problem. wanna get involved? --Irishpunktom\talk 23:09, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mediation

Greetings. I've taken the mediation case about Derek Acorah, filed at Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-10-04 Derek Acorah. Please add any additional comments or replies on the case page, to bring the summary of information and opinions in one place. If you have compromise ideas, it would also be nice to post them on the page. CP/M comm |Wikipedia Neutrality Project| 16:26, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mills McCartney

Hi there, thanks for your message. Apologies for reverting your edit. This was caused, I assume, by an edit conflict. What I meant to do was remove the dubious looking link listing the so-called divorce petition - the authenticity of which is being challenged. If you look at the story history, I reveretd at 1223 - your edit had been made one minute before - unbeknown to me - hence the conflict. I've now reverted to your version - but I think the external link to the divorce petition should still go - although I know you didn't add that. Hope that's ok. Escaper7 14:19, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

No problem, thanks for letting me know. --Paul Moloney 17:18, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] HELP!

Please visit the NAMBLA article talk page Talk:North_American_Man/Boy_Love_Association#categories_again and voice your disgust at NAMBLA being included as an LGBT organisation. Alternatively, if you believe that this is indeed an LGBT organisation, then you're welcome to voice that opinion. Either way, discussion is needed!Enzedbrit 21:13, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] quote

If you want to include the quote, we need a reliable source for it - this is standard BLP policy. --Fredrick day (talk) 12:33, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re homophobic agenda expressed at Cathal Ó Searcaigh article

You would be well advised to desist from leaving spurious material on my talk page, and from pursuing a slanderous agenda against a living person, or anyone at all. This is not what the Wikipedia is for. Your activity HAS been reported, and I will continue to draw attention to your abuse of this project.

I also note here that you have failed to address my critique of your contributions and your postings, on that article's talk page. I will not resort to some jejune tit-for-tat, posting some canned warning here, but be advised that you have to desist from ad-hominem attacks and relate strictly to the subject matter of the article. Period. Haiduc (talk) 14:51, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

An out-of-context quote by a third party that does not reflect directly on the subject of the article, even if it is "properly sourced" is still irrelevant and in this case seems to be intended only to discredit the speaker. This is not encyclopedic material, this is merely ammunition in a battle that does not belong in the Wikipedia. Your consistent and abusive deletion of edits made in good faith to remove biased and aggressive language from the article exposes you as a polemicist in that battle. Good luck with it, but not here. And you have STILL not refuted my accusation of posting homophobic material. Properly sourced hate speech is still hate speech and does not belong here. Haiduc (talk) 15:04, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
What "postings" are you talking about? I posted a single quote! Can you tell me which material that _I_ posted that was homophobic? If a quote from Maire Mhac an tSaoi doesn't have an relevance to the article, you should delete the whole section; you cannot cherrypick parts of her defence and ignore the unsavoury parts.

P. --Paul Moloney (talk) 15:09, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] River Poddle

Thanks for adding the photo of the confluence of the Poddle and Liffey - it's much appreciated! Autarch (talk) 16:58, 15 May 2008 (UTC)