| Revision as of 18:18, 16 March 2007 editJonawiki (talk | contribs)332 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 15:17, 18 March 2007 edit undoMichael Glass (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users11,667 edits Information about forced circumcisions was rejected ''en toto''. Was it really unduly weighty? Do editors have the right to insist that other editors answer their questions about their opinions?Next edit → | ||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
| {{RFCheader|Society, law, and sex}} | {{RFCheader|Society, law, and sex}} | ||
| <!--<nowiki>Add new items at the TOP. Use ~~~~~ (five tildes) to sign </nowiki>--> | <!--<nowiki>Add new items at the TOP. Use ~~~~~ (five tildes) to sign </nowiki>--> | ||
| *]Information about forced circumcisions has been totally rejected by two other editors on two grounds: "undue weight" and that the editor putting forward the information has refused to answer their questions on the talk page about his motives. Is the material unduly weighty? Are the editors' actions appropriate? ] 15:17, 18 March 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *] Does the article have appropriate length, neutrality and attribution? 18:18, 16 March 2007 (UTC) | *] Does the article have appropriate length, neutrality and attribution? 18:18, 16 March 2007 (UTC) | ||
| *] - Is concluding that discrimination based on ethnicity is a kind of racism original research? Are the U.S. State Department, Amnesty International and the United Nations High Commission on Human Rights reliable sources? There may be more ... 13:33, 16 March 2007 (UTC) | *] - Is concluding that discrimination based on ethnicity is a kind of racism original research? Are the U.S. State Department, Amnesty International and the United Nations High Commission on Human Rights reliable sources? There may be more ... 13:33, 16 March 2007 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 15:17, 18 March 2007
Shortcut- ]
- ]Information about forced circumcisions has been totally rejected by two other editors on two grounds: "undue weight" and that the editor putting forward the information has refused to answer their questions on the talk page about his motives. Is the material unduly weighty? Are the editors' actions appropriate? Michael Glass 15:17, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
- Talk:Monarchy_in_Canada#Request_for_Comments:_Length.2C_Neutrality.2C_Attribution Does the article have appropriate length, neutrality and attribution? 18:18, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
- Talk:Racism by country#Iran II - Is concluding that discrimination based on ethnicity is a kind of racism original research? Are the U.S. State Department, Amnesty International and the United Nations High Commission on Human Rights reliable sources? There may be more ... 13:33, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
- Talk:Learning organization -- Edit-war problem: Is this edit appropriate? See also User_talk:Stevenson-Perez#Your_contributions. 22:07, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
- Talk:Rebuttable Presumption -- Should it be consolidated with articles on other kinds of presumption? --Jon Roland 03:40, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
- Talk:Conclusive Presumption -- Should it be consolidated with articles on other kinds of presumption? --Jon Roland 03:40, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
- Talk:Presumption of innocence -- Should it be consolidated with articles on other kinds of presumption? --Jon Roland 03:40, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
- Dispute whether the Mustafa Hefny Picture added in the U.S. subsection of the White People article should be removed. 16:32, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
- Is this new and amended version of the article appropriate on its own? Please comment here.18:09, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
- Talk:Constitution -- Is a newly-added section "Principles of constitutional design" POV? 17:46, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
- Talk:Pornography_addiction#Dobson, "opponents" out -- Is James Dobson a reliable source or an extremist source? Is this article NPOV? 15:27, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
- Talk:Norouz#Merge_2 Should the Kurdish celebration of Norouz be merged into Norouz or should it exist in summary style. 20:53, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
- Talk:Waldorf education#Request for Comment - need input on if the article has improved or not. In particular whether it is still unbalanced with respect to NPOV, written in a brochure style or deals with controversies in an inappropriate manner. Thanks in advance. 17:09, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
- Talk:Great Neck South High School. Dispute over whether it is appropriate to state that all students "have at least average ability". 01:07, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
- Talk:Islamophobia. Edit warring by editors who evidently believe that there really is no such thing as Islamphobia, and the Muslims have only themselves to blame. 00:16, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- Talk:Stillwater Area High School. One editor isnists on adding long sections of exhaustive detail concerning the performance of the school's sports teams. 22:19, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
- Talk:1957 Georgia Memorial to Congress#Rfc - are recent changes to the article helpful and do they adhere to NPOV? Which of two versions of the article is preferable? 15:02, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
- Talk:North American Man/Boy Love Association#Request for comment - This organisation espouses legalisation of sexual relationship between men and boys. A fairly heated argument has developped over whether this article should be added to Category:LGBT organizations. Further imput welcomed. 01:33, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
- Talk:List of male performers in gay porn films - Should each entry in this list be individually sourced? -10:04, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
- Talk:Religious_views_on_masturbation#Request_for_commentsImproper use of ref tag as platform for making unsupported point. 16:19, 19 February 2007 (UTC)