Misplaced Pages

Signpost updated for September 17th, 2007.

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 03:07, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Abortion talk page

Sorry that I'm messing up your well designed talk page, SH - feel free to delete this message. I'd just like your opinion on the topic of mental health at the bottom of the Abortion Talk page. Regards, -- 17:12, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for September 24th, 2007.

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. R Delivery Bot 02:09, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

House

I was using the word pervert in a general sense. Some people (not me) would argue that hiring a Hooker is sexually perverted. I also don't think pornography is particularily perverted (although any addiction is a problem). In any event, I have simplified it to "sexual issues" now. I really wanted to say he was a se freak or sex fiend but that seemed less descriptive than sex pervert.--Dr who1975 01:30, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Hotels

You had expressed interest in the above project on the Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Council/Proposals page. This is to inform you that the project is now active at Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Hotels. Please feel free to remove your name from the project page if you are no longer interested in being a participant. Otherwise, welcome to the project! John Carter 18:17, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

House - Holms

Please read the articles cited before declaring something to be original research. Just about all the comparisons were pulled directly out of the BBC article. It's not original research. If it came from the BBC, it is cited research.--Dr who1975 00:19, 19 October 2007 (UTC)--Dr who1975 00:19, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, it's radio times... not BBC. --Dr who1975 00:23, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Zac Efron

Moved comments to Talk:Zac Efron. I didn't recognize your username/signature. --NrDg 02:56, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Haifa's age

Its pretty obvious she has lied about her age whenever she was born. However it would be impossible for her to win Miss Lebanon the year she did if she wasnt born in 1970 (I cant remember the year but it was the mid 80s). I removed askmen because I looked through it and it didnt list a birth year at all; just that she was 'in her mid 30s'.--Thegingerone 22:51, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

So Far from the Bamboo Grove

I have come in favor of your last version. Please read it once more. Thanks.Blue011011 03:43, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

which ayu song is this?

Basically, in the music video, you have a dystopian society, but then a little kid musters the courage to climb up a tower and meet Ayu playing at the top of the tower with her band. Hah. But yes, I've been trying to figure out that song for a while now. Pandacomics (talk) 07:11, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Post-abortion syndrome

Hi. Thanks for your continued efforts on the PAS page! PAS is not a legitimate diagnosis. I really object to the word "diagnosis" being used in conjunction with PAS in the intro. It is a matter of undue weight. And I'm not sure that my "used by pro-life" bit is too heavy-handed - it is well-documented. Only pro-lifers push PAS. PAS is a rejected theory of causation. Perhaps we could find some common ground between the edit I offered (which you reverted) and your reinstated version which made no effort to address concerns about the word "diagnosis". Do you think we can find some compromise? Phyesalis (talk) 17:05, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your response. I agree with your suggestions. Moving the "pro-life" commentary down in the lead would be a lovely compromise. Would you like to reword the intro re: "diagnosis" or would you rather that I did it? Again, given the recent contentious atmosphere over there, your thoughtful response was much appreciated. Phyesalis (talk) 21:59, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Asian fetish

This is regarding your deletion of the "Yellow Fever" link from the editorial section of the Asian fetish page. First off there is a history of people trying to delete any and all references on this page that does not mitigate the term. Obviously I will, with the help of the administrators and others will do my best to put a stop to this. Also there is already a questionable "Asian preferences in dating" which is an obvious gross interpretation of a study of just over 200 people. One whole section that generalizes people of all races based on a limited and very poor study. And there's a section "Opinion that Asian Fetish is not all bad" which is a racist opinion by, shockingly enough, an asian female against her own race. These two sections do not deserver to exist and are pretty much trying to say the same thing. Why don't you delete them? If all the references that supports the fact that asian fetish is not benign had its own section like these poor attempts at mitigating this term, then we would have thousands of section just like this. Yet you don't seem to mind those attempts at mitigating this term. If you really have a problem with anything then talk about it on the talk page. Tkguy (talk) 03:56, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

External link, source. Fine it's an external link. I agree it's not the best article. But it's a very very very famous one regarding asian fetish. It was published in OC Weekly and the Village Voice. Please do not remove the external link. Tkguy (talk) 05:56, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Once again you are deleting lots of content off the asian fetish page. This page just got off of protection because people are deleting anything that makes asian fetish a negative. Please stop your vandalism. I see you have nominated this page for deletion. With that your agenda is apparent http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Asian_fetish&diff=170474646&oldid=170463894. If you feel that your changes are justified then you should have no problem gaining consensus on the talk page. This is your last and final warning. Tkguy (talk) 05:43, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Let me ask you something. I

s Asian fetish a fetish at all? fetish is an abnormal obsession for an object. you obviously think it's a harmless preference. But the term has the word fetish in it. Can you explain why a term with the word fetish in it is just a preference? Well one way if this obsession has become so ingrain in society that it becomes the norm and therefore stops being an "abnormal obsession". Is that what you are trying to get at? Tkguy (talk) 07:02, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

'The definition of Asian fetish, and the term "fetish" itself, and the usage of the term in the media is broad' Ahhh. so there's no fetish in asian fetish. You wrote it. and that's your agenda. to take the fetish out of asian fetish. And you are telling me I have an agenda? of course, to keep fetish in asian fetish (it's right there! right in the term but you are saying it's not there.) It's a term to describe a racist behavior towards asians. And I will do my best to keep it that way. Btw I don't mind people bringing up that some thinks it's a preference. I show that by not deleting entries that supports that. Unlike you, who delete entries that are not mitigating the term. so yes, you have an agenda. and it's obvious you are trying to push it on this page. Tkguy (talk) 08:10, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Fetish, kink, it's kind of a gray area. Actually the article could be improved by a discussion of this issue. Either way, wanted to ask why you prefer the less specific version of Quan that doesn't mention PONY, over the slightly wordier version that does. Both versions have merit, and I think I understand Tkguy's logic, but I don't know if I understand yours. Thanks. Phyesalis (talk) 18:06, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Replied on my talk. Thanks. I appreciate you taking the time to respond. Phyesalis (talk) 18:39, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

You have violated the 3rr rule on this page. If you do it again I will have you blocked. Tkguy (talk) 01:23, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

If you've made the same edit in whole or in part, reverting four times within 24 hours (for example, removing the same passage four times—even if you do other edits), you can be blocked. Any others who also broke the rule should be blocked at the same time. I'm not sure whether you've actually broken the rule. I'll have took into that. Also note that three reverts is not an entitlement—it's the outer bounds of acceptable editing, and several consecutive days of three reverts may also result in a block.

There's no need for you to break the rule. It looks like several editors oppose this user's repeated changes. They can't bully their changes into the article because they're outnumbered. Cool Hand Luke 01:46, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

I think you might only have three. There's a lot of changes going on at once, so it's hard to tell. I think any count that would result in your block would also resort in Tkguy's (if that's any comfort to you). I strongly advise against reverting any of Tkguy's edits for a while. There is probably enough activity to get the page locked at WP:RFPP, if anyone were inclined to ask for it. Cool Hand Luke 02:03, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

A&F

There was nothing wrong with your edits. I was undoing (belatedly) the poor quality edits that Hpfan1 made at the beginning of December. If you can mend them another way that'd be fine. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 02:10, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Shunning

The problem is, we can't simply ignore him, since he is still screwing up the article content (and violated WP:3RR again). If he doesn't roll back his last edit, I'm reporting his disruption on WP:AN/3RR. *** Crotalus *** 04:04, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Possible temporary solution

We could create a temporary sandbox in user space and work on the article there. That way, we'll have something to apply right away when the protection expires. This article is much better without all the nonsense and fringe sources that Tkguy added, but it still needs work. *** Crotalus *** 07:13, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Ack! I'm sorry that I haven't been able to be more help, I'm in the middle of a troll battle tense situation on Reproductive rights. And then the one citation I produced was already in the article. Agh! Anyway, I've been wanting to find some more sources and when I get a free moment, I'll see what I can pull out of the Audrey article (I mean, I know I'm not obligated, but it seems like a subject worthy of some good work). Phyesalis (talk) 04:07, 2 January 2008 (UTC)