User talk:PierreLarcin2

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~&#126;); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Karm a  fist  14:36, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Spanish wiki
Hi! I have retired the picture of Paul Harris from the Rotary International article on the spanish wiki because it's a copyright violation as you will see in. Same reason was given at the english wiki to retire the image. If you need something more, please let me your message in my spanish page. Thanks. Airunp

My deep doubts on Rotary International
If you noticed my (negative.. just some balancing of all that propaganda) contributions for Rotary International (in most languages), hereunder (in French) my doubts on R.I. actions. It is an answer to "Enguerrand44" who claimed against my anti-Rotary propaganda (on the discussion page) by the fact that I added in first position Honorary Rotarians who were, according to international laws, criminals. - Augusto Pinochet, see Plan Condor - George Bush, see Crime againt Peace and also Abu Ghraib - General Mac Arthur see Unit 731 - Lindbergh, see his bio on Wikipedia and specially his antisemitism - Suleiman Frangieh, see his bio on the Lebanon civil war


 * Cher Monsieur,

l'émotion sans doute m'a étranglé quand j'ai lu QUI était Suleiman Frangieh. Lisez Wiki... Par ailleurs, vous avez parfaitement raison de souligner que les s... sont des membres honoraires, mais j'ai parfaitement raison de m'indigner. Je vous invite à relire dans les statuts Rotary la définition du membre honoraire et vous comprendrez que je sois archi-choqué ....que de tels s.. aient été nommés membres honoraires.

Avez-vous lu (sur Wikipedia ;-) ce qu'a FAIT Lindbergh (mis à part sa promenade en aéroplane) ? Des actes antisémites. Ce qu'a lancé Frangieh dans ce Liban paradisiaque d'autrefois ? Le communautarisme et sa fille, la guerre civile..

Par ailleurs je vous invite à trouver la chanson italienne 'Rotary Club of Malindi' A mon avis, cela devrait vous faire réfléchir sur la perception du Rotary en Afrique.

Concernant Mac Arthur, je vous conseille de rechercher de l'information sur l'Unité 731 de l'Armée japonaise, sur ses crimes, sur l'utilisation de ses résultats et sur leur mise en cause devant les tribunaux de criminels de guerre à Tokyo. Etrange membre honoraire...

Enfin, ne trouvez-vous pas étrange que Paul Harris ait été en Allemange en 1932, mais que lorsqu'on regarde ses bios Rotary, on trouve des tas d'actions entre 1905 et 1932, et puis à peu près plus rien jusqu'en 1947 ? Etrange, étrange. Saviez-vous que Henri Ford avait été décoré par les nazis ? Que ses camions... Saviez-vous que d'aucuns liens Rotary font remonter les ancêtres de Paul Harris aux passagers de la Mayflower, et QU'UN TEL LIEN A UNE SIGNIFICATION SPECIALE DANS LE MONDE ANGLO-SAXON ?

Si vous êtes au Rotary, une question : vous trouvez qu'il y a beaucoup de Noirs au Rotary ? Le Rotary se paonne de son action en Floride sur les effets du cyclone Katrina. La Floride est majoritairement peuplée de Noirs, qui, EVIDEMMENT, ont été les plus durement touchés du fait de l'absence de services publics en Floride (- qui est Gouverneur de Floride? -). Si vous êtes au Rotary, vous pouvez me dire quel est le pourcentage de Noirs membres du Rotary de Floride ?

Vous savez que le Rotary est peuplé de chevaliers d'industrie. Comment s'étonner qu'ils nomment Pinochet ou Lindbergh ? Je vais vous donner une clé de ma répulsion envers le Rotary : le camp de concentration nazi est l'usine parfaite, où l'ouvrier sert de main-d'oeuvre esclave et aussi in fine de matière première. A partir de 1933, en Allemagne, les arrestations de Juifs et d'opposants se font DANS LA RUE. Vous pouvez m'expliquer ce que négocie le Rotary allemand, de 1933 à 1937, avec le NSDAP de Hitler ? Vous ne pensez pas que cette histoire-là du Rotary a été réécrite ? Mais que faisait Paul Harris après 1933 ? Vous avez des documents, non, à la suite de cette fameuse "boum" du Rotary Centennial en 2005 ? Ah bon, on ne trouve rien ?

Ces doutes à relier éventuellement à ce qui se passe actuellement en Chine (dons d'organes suite aux exécutions d'ouvriers criminalisés), en Chine où s'implante le Rotary. Pourquoi pas ? Le Rotary "ne fait pas de politique"... mon oeil. Ne rien dire, c'est en faire !

A ce point de mon développement, je vais vous donner ma définition d'un s.. Un s.. est quelqu'un qui, devant un problème collectif, sait parfaitement quelle solution y apporter, qu'il peut parfaitement le faire, qu'il doit moralement le faire, mais qu'il ne fera pas PAR INTERET PERSONNEL.

Voilà pourquoi, à mon sens, le Rotary ne donne pas les moyens d'indépendance dans les pays où s'exerce sa pseudo-générosité. Vous connaissez le proverbe
 * si tu veux sauver un homme de la faim, ne lui donne pas un poisson,

apprends-lui à pêcher. Je ne crois pas que nos bonshommes, par exemple, aident à une industrie pharmaceutique indépendante en Afrique. A des sociétés de tourisme ou d'hôtellerie locales en Thaïlande.

Pour ma part, je ne m'étonne pas un instant que le Rotary accueille des conférenciers qui lui parlent jusquà plus soif de privatisation, d'enseignement privé et compétitif, de libre entreprise, de baisse des impôts. Témoin : le député Lellouche, les députés dits 'libéraux' (lisez conservateurs) en Belgique. Ce qui est affreux, c'est que Pierre Lellouche ne sait pas que Wernher Von Braun, ancien nazi, a lui-même donné des conférences pour le Rotary. Ou que Ron Hubbard, ouioui, LE Ron Hubbard devant le Rotary de la Rhodésie raciste. Ca ne s'invente pas. Mais ça, c'était juste pour alléger un peu l'ambiance. Ron Hubbard devant le Rhotary Rhaciste de Rodésie ! Surréalisme !

Je vous donne donc un conseil humain : tout sociologue en chambre vous dira qu'une organisation a des effets différents de la volonté de chacun de ses membres. Si vous aimez vos amis, si vous aimez vos contemporains, si vous vous aimez vous-même, ne restez pas au Rotary !!

Le réseau Ashoka ne doit pas valoir beaucoup mieux, le terme "mission" qu'ils enploient à longueur de littérature révèle à mon sens une mentalité de supériorité.

En conclusion, encore une fois, on peut espérer le développement d'un réel mouvement philanthropique humain, indépendant des "vues de l'esprit", ou des "théismes" (théisme communiste, Rotariste, bibliste, bouddhiste, etc ), un mouvement opératif et spéculatif, structuré, non-violent, qui permette à tout un chacun de contribuer à la solution des grands problemes de société du monde, accompagnant l'esprit républicain, et son outil le service public financé par l'impôt sur le revenu, sans avoir à se référer à un réseau de notables ou à un "grand Autre" ("libre entreprise", "guerre contre le terrorisme", "mission", "extension de la culture occidentale") qui justifie tous les abus.

pierre.larcin@ifrance.com

J'espère avoir répondu complètement à votre question. Bonne réflexion, amicalement, Pierre Larcin, France. 84.102.229.74 25 février 2006 à 22:40 (CET)

Famous members
(- H for Honorary - A for Active)

This is pretty. Well done. I prefer the style of the table at the bottom. To me it seems simpler and cleaner. I disagree with putting "see also" columns, since I think it allows for author bias. Putting tables like this on the Rotary page will certainly make it more visually appealing, and easier to digest the information. The word quality is the wrong word to use, I have changed it to fame Frade 23:42, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

The first I heard of Rogernomics was when you mention it. I guess it is before my time. In any case, it is from New Zealand, not Australia. Here in Australia unionism has declined significantly in recent years, in part because the need for union representation is no longer as necessary as it was in the past, and also partly due to union opposition to a number of popular policies from the current government. Personally, I think membership may rise in coming years due to a number of recent workplace changes made by the current government. I am not a member of Rotary, and I never plan on being a member. My interest with Rotary is that I have received scholarhips from Rotary for a few projects when I was a teenager, and I currently work with some projects which have Rotary support. My interest with the Rotary wiki article is to ensure that its main roles are highlighted (eg local community roles providing school equipment, drug rehabilitation centres, childrens playgrounds, scholarships and student exchanges, etc), and that there is separation between discussion of Rotary and discussion of external topics (conservativism, etc). My interest was first sparked when I read large sections of text on the talk page condemning Rotary because of conservative tendancies in the membership, as well as lots of writing on that page attempting to link Rotary with a number of blackspots in recent human history. I felt these were unjustified, and possibility innapropriate, for an encyclopaedia.Frade 08:19, 26 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Good Morning (CET ;-)) ! What you said here is VERY interesting. I need to prepare an answer, because there are different senses on, for example, "community" following your origin (culture) and political analysis (left or right) and I think that I need to understand your (english culture) meanings. There is a least one interesting Rotary program that would interest you also, I think. I suppose you speak of unionism as I am a worker union animator. For the criticism, you should have some lectures on sociology, and sociology of organisations, you would document yourself on the (fact...) problem that an organisation acquires a target which is different than the original target of the original founders of that organisation (so became workers unions...). The most important (for me is this) : the text I made with Rotary criticism was (a bit) wrapped, changed due to multiple interventions. In the original version (I think it is still on the Spanish wiki) my conclusion was like: "if this movement lies due to (christian-theis) visions of the world, we just have to hope for the apparition of another movement, more tolerant, founded without violence, better than a world whose flower is Rotary".
 * After all, Rotary is 100 years old, a good time to die ;-). Check also the ashoka.org
 * Have a good day. Today in France, 1,5 million of persons in the streets to strike against work and life precarity-flexibility organised by a new legislation for "kleenex-work-contract" named CPE. As liberals say we workers have to adapt to their needs. Be sure that Rotary is NOT supporting the contest. PierreLarcin2 04:55, 28 March 2006 (UTC)


 * I heard about what's happening in with the protests. The Australian government has also recently introduced new legislation to make it easier for smaller/medium businesses to fire employees without any reason. It became active two days ago. There has been lots of opposition to it from union and welfare groups, but there have been no major demostrations yet. I heard on the news this morning that a company has already tried to sack 25 staff for no reason, and then re-employ them on lower conditions. But the new law does not allow for this type of crooked action, so the company had to reverse their action.
 * There seems to be very different expectations of "worker's rights" between Australia and France. Historically, Australians are hard workers who do not complain about conditions, so there is much less "demands" of worker's rights than in some other cultures. This is good and bad, depending on the point of view. But, speaking generally, worker's here do not feel the need for unionisation and social action as strongly as perhaps in France.
 * It seems to me that the new legislation is more important than simply the needs of business. Globalisation means that entire societies must adapt if their country is to remain competitive. New EU countries such as Slovenia are very good at changing (mostly because they have a very small population and very small industry), and this will give them an advantage in coming years. Australia, also, is relatively flexible due to low population density and high level of service businesses. But this capacity for change is neither good nor bad, because it depends on the values of the society. Here we embrace change, and new ways of doing things. This is demonstrated in our very quick adoption of new technologies, whereas most other countries (including the USA), are much slower at adopting new techniques and technologies. But, like I said, this is simply a reflection of our cultural values and expectations.
 * I have been away for some time due to work and business commitments, but hopefully, like you, will be able to contribute more shortly.Frade 04:18, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Image of Rotary Banners
Bonjour Pierre, Je crois que le photo des "banners" Rotarian n'a pas un probleme de copyright, parce que ces "banners" sont en vue dans une espace publique. C'est comme un photo d'un machine a dispenser Coca-Cola, etc. Avec tous mes regards, Daderot 21:14, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Hello Pierre, I think that the photo of Rotarian banners does not have any copyright problems, because the banners were displayed in a public space. In short, it is like uploading a photograph of a vending machine for Coca-Cola. With all best wishes, Daderot 21:14, 25 March 2006 (UTC) (and please excuse my highschool French! very bad!)

Rotary Article: explanation for how to use a link
I am totally confused. As of the current time, I have not edited anything on the Rotary page. If you are referring to the comments on the edits, I'm afraid they are not my edits and they are not my comments. I'm just here asking about these odd directions. Personally, I think they're irrelevant. What other Wikipedia articles have such a explanation for how to use a link? I've never seen one, but I've seen many similar lists. My question is, "Why this article? Why Rotary?"
 * all explanations are on the discussion page for Rotary. Are you Rotarian Jjinfoothills ?

Because since I am editing Rotary I have to face a lot of Rotarian attacks : 'Wikipedia fiddling' as they did for Dianne Feinstein, US senator PierreLarcin2 21:02, 21 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Hi, could you leave the controversial link stuff on the Rotary International page alone for a bit. I'm going to make a comment on the Village Pump to get a wider range of opinions. Currently the majority on the talk page of Rotary International seem to not want the explanations on links added so we should respect their view for a little while until a clearer decision can be made. Thanks. --  127 . * . * . 1  22:24, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I should point out that I'm not asking you to stop editing the Rotary page, just to leave the contentious issue over explanations of links alone until a decision can be made. Thanks. --  127 . * . * . 1  22:28, 21 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Hello, would you be so kind to give me the link of the discussion you opened. The Village Pump is too complex and big. I cannot SEE all. I propose you another solution. For the moment we NEED to see at least some example of the link, so I replace the header. I cannot locate myself on the page alone without it.

I reverted your blanks. I had too many censure from Rotarians to allow what you do. Again today, a person came and removed even the "Folklorical" critics (as Hamas), despite the pages made by Rotary itself onto it.

1/ as I am blind almost, I propose you another solution. For the moment we NEED to see at least some example of the link. So you stop reverting and we open the discussion, but you give me the exact link in the Village Pump. What you gave me is the general URL, and the Village Pump is too complex for my reader and even for a person who helps me. 2/ As I said you, the structure I did (with a header) does not give a problem at all in the French Wiki since monthes I propose that YOU let it like that (stop reverting) and THEN open a discussion, as PERSONNALLY I CANNOT SEE ALL the examples in the list, as I am disabled myself. The majority is not an argument, as in other langages it is not a problem, and as Rotary club as 4 millions of members, which are perfectly active as you may remark. Thank you. 84.100.98.189 02:43, 22 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Sorry, I was in a rush yesterday to get off of the computer and I completely forgot to post a link for you. The request I made on the Village Pump yesterday was for assitance to end the edit war. The link is here (the message is at the bottom of the page): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_%28assistance%29. I will post a question on accomodations for the blind later and will give you the link. Sorry again. If the above makes no sense, forgive me, I'm still half asleep. Peace. --  127 . * . * . 1  12:40, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Oh, this I'll add, I'll stop reverting until a decision is made but I can not guarantee that the other editors will stop. There are 2 or 3 others who revert your edits asides from me. I have only reverted twice in the long history of that page. Peace. --  127 . * . * . 1  12:40, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Ok, I have made a post on the Technical section of the Village Pump. Since you seem to have left already, I'll keep a copy of all responses so you can read when you return. The link is here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_%28technical%29#Accommodations_for_the_blind. Good luck. --  127 . * . * . 1  16:11, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

There is also a discussion at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_%28policy%29#Accessibility_for_blind_users which has yielded more fruitful results. I would suggest that you peruse that discussion as it contains information that can be useful for you in your future endeavours on Wikipedia. Peace. --  127 . * . * . 1  21:46, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Rotary nonsense
Please stop you nonsense on Rotary - I am not sure whether your cat got run over by a Rotarian while you where younger or what got you on this bent, but your comments a. do not make sense, as discussed - I have still to figure out why Rotarians would want to use masonry as a facade - to hide from what? (as but one example) b. are grammatically illegible in many cases - nobody knows what you are trying to say and you refuse to even change a single word of the gibberish. c. you do not seem to be interested in logical discussion; whenever anuyone disagrees with you, you accuse them of being Rotarian puppets and ignore them - that is not the way to move ahead. Please act reasonably; when discussed, dismissed, inaccurate, out of context, and incorrect material is repeatedly restored, that is vandalism and abuse.Bridesmill 22:00, 15 June 2006 (UTC)


 * You're discussing and COMING NOW, but AFTER blanking large subparts of Rotary wiki. You should do it BEFORE blanking. Second, if you need to change or discuss, you PROPOSE. You pal AndyJones did.You did not propose anything, just insulting me or saying that I had an agenda. So do you up this : give me a personal mail please. Mine is "pierre.larcin@ifrance.com". What does my cat have with that ? You attacked my grammar. Enhance it, do not blank.

You just blanked the part about Rotary contestation of women as members. On which reason please ? You said in the RV comment "as discussed". You blanked WITHOUT discussion.

That's the reason why I will put a claim on wiki against you. Everyone following the history of your changes does understand what you do. You clean what you allow not to exist. It is typical of a faith syndrome. Problem : facts exist : Rotary excluded jews, Rotary members were racists and Rotary was agains women membership UNTIL A SUPREME COURT DECISION. Waow. Excuse me but what is YOUR problem. All these are facts. And you do not know what is the most evident about the Rotarian Internet proselytism (yes, being a Rotarian activist is of course relative to faith as you work more on belief than on facts). Rotary did ANOTHER big and obvious Internet wiki fiddling. Discover that in my claim.. and go back to your Rotarian friends saying: using Wikipedia as a showroom is not more possible.

Best regards, I wait for your mail [if you have any courage] PierreLarcin2 22:26, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Firstly, can the personal insults. Second, read the ongoing discussion of which I have been part for quite some time. I am not about to edit every single little word you post; if you slip in a little new stuff with the large chunks of rubbish, it is going to get trashed. Your logic is fatally flawed; Almost every oganization in the world excluded women util laws changed, so why pick on Rotary. and in WWII the Nazis did not allow jews anywhere, not like Rotary could do anything about it; if anything yourwords imply they actually tried to counter the Nazi rulings. By your logic, the France page should boldly underscore that all frenchmen are Nazis and Anti-semites because of collusion in WWII. That is also a fact. Yes, I know that it was only a very small number of Frenchmen that fit that bill, but that is exactly the logic you use. If you have the courage to put that fact on the France page, I will stop arguing that your Rotary posts are silly. Bridesmill 22:41, 15 June 2006 (UTC)


 * I do not insult anyone. Please tell me how I insulted anyone, and have the courage to exchange your mail.

All your above text shows that you are against French. There were collusions in France, and I will CERTAINLY do it tomorrow. BUT Rotarians collaborated with Nazis, and the proof of that, is that the founder was in Germany in 1938. He planted a tree. What he did after... mystery. BUT Rotarians excluded women UNTIL the court, as they were not obliged to : they could allow women BEFORE the court judgment. Why didn't they. BUT you laugh with my poor grammar. Ok. I may not be an English-driven real man, I am some under-mensch ? I am SOME FRENCH TRAITOR OR BITCH, aren't. All your say is about hate. I do not. What you did is simply censorship, because you simply blanked BEFORE TALKING.

AND YOU BLANKED A SIMPLE COPY PASTE OF A ROTARIAN HIGH LEVEL MEMBER. I just copied-pasted. Didn't you notice? And I am not silly.

Now stop harassing me. I am not French, I am Belgian, I do not hate Americans as you hate French, I do not hate Muslims as you (probably) hate, etc.

a last word : All the foundation of your hate comes from your communalism. You belong to a community which relies on faith, belief in a particular way of life etc. This spirit is against the Republic. This spirit sends boys to die in another country for values that are not respected in their own country, but in reality for a Rotarian value : money. Your hate is communalist and Rotarian : it destroys the Republic and it is done for money, or the representation you have of money.

These are facts : Rotarian excluded jews. Rotarian use the polio program to promote themselves. Rotarians use Internet and wiki to promote themselves. They did not allow women before late 1990's. AND ALL the politicians they support are ALL conservative, like Pinochet or Dianne Feinstein. SOME of these politicians are event racists.

Do not blame me. I did not mention that 90% of US and Canadian Rotarian executives are white. In a country of non-segregation, this is ... strange. How much women in Rotary executives ? In a country were 55% of the people are women ? Do you know why I did not mention that ? I have no fiable source. But just see pictures. The RI Governor of Botwana was a women... but white. Strange, not ?

I wait for your mail. You know mine. Pierre Larcin

Your questioning of my courage is the insult. I do not hate the French, never said I did. what I said was that using your logic that statement would be applicable. Which is why your Rotary submissions need to be drastically changed. I also stated "only a very small number of Frenchmen that fit that bill". I am not roatrian, therefore am not of that community. in fact, I do not personally know any rotarians. I am only interested in encyclopedic, good work here on wiki. So Rotarians advertise, so they use their programmes to promote their cause. - Who doesn't?? that's how you raise money for your causes. Most Rotarians actiually are not upper class, ratehr, small-medium business folks, a lot of them in the countryside in small towns. Tell me how RI membership is any different from most service clubs, like the Lions or Shriners or Optimists? They're not. So why pick on these folks? and what are "event racists"? So they're conservative - I'm a bit left of liberal myself, actually, but what's wrong with conservatives? Live and let live & all that. I'm also not laughing at your grammar - if I understood what you were saying, I would fix it, but I can't even figure out what half of this says. I will look at the fr: article tomorro, I assume your tripe is there also - maybe it makes some sense then. Bridesmill 00:41, 16 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Okay my Bride-sMill. You said "If you have the courage to put that fact on the France page, I will stop arguing that your Rotary posts are silly."

I changed the France page and added most of my knowledge, including antisemitic behaviors. SO WHAT ? I still wait for your eMail. Be courageous. By the way I liked the supern trio you made with the Copenhagen IP, AndyJones and you. Do you think we are stupid on Wikipedia ? PierreLarcin2 18:57, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

I stated " the France page should boldly underscore that all frenchmen are Nazis and Anti-semites because of collusion in WWII. ". You did not do that, nor do I expect you to be that silly; proof of the pudding that your logic for Rotary is fundamentally flawed. Who is "Copenhagen IP?" And Andy and I only ever met here at this article.... When you say 'do you think we are stupid on Wiki", I am very curious here, most of us are active broadly - the only thing you do here is disturb Rotary pages. I'm also not sure what you mean by 'still wait for your email' - I answered you on your page, as you know, in fact, I tried to email you, but you don't have an email registered on wiki - curious. I am not waiting for a response, as this trolling is getting tedious. Just leave WP alone please, unless you are willing to engage in normal wiki behaviour.Bridesmill 19:26, 16 June 2006 (UTC)


 * The answer is : my contribution are based on data. Yourse are just blanking what i did, and without justifications. My email, again is pierre.larcin@ifrance.com.

You just avoid to mail me normally (you prefer to use wiki anonymous facilities) because there is some danger to link you to rotary. By the Way Dianne Feinstein IS conservative, DESPITE she is registered at the Democratic Party. So what ? Is democratic party on the left ? Serious ? You're kidding ! A last word : remember : I promissed you a claim on wiki : an RfC and an arbitration. So... everyone will be judge about Rotarian activity on wiki ! A last example : the copenhagen IP added something about a communication at the actual RI convention 2006 in Copenhagen, about the virus polio. Did you blank it ? No ! And there is noWhere a justification of tha communication. Did I censure it ? No... Did I blank positive assertions on Rotary ? No... but you blanked negative things. You are... partial and communalist. I hope that wikipedians will give you a serious warning. so... Bye and stop harassing me. It is difficult for me to manage all your changes, and you know it perfectly. PierreLarcin2 19:38, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

ummm, that's the first time you mentioned you email address. Again, stop accusing me of being Rotarian. I think you need to take some deep breaths.Bridesmill 21:46, 16 June 2006 (UTC)


 * you should read when I write you. It is just upstairs. Two times at a total.

That's the problem with communalism : the communalist adapt reality to its vision, and he/she does not see the reality anymore. This way, I explain the violence of communalists, -like you-, who want to force people to adopt their "visions", using violence if necessary. So the violence of religious wars, as the war in Irak, both sides. PierreLarcin2 22:40, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Three Revert Rule
Hello again. You violated the Three-revert rule on Rotary International yesterday. Normally this is a blockable offense but I'm letting you go with a warning because I think you are not aware of this policy. Please read the policy's page and be more careful next time. Thanks. --  127 . * . * . 1  19:30, 16 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Hello, I well noticed your warning today about Rotary.

The problem is that I have sight problems and can't work all these changes without the help of a friend without a lot of work. So I use major changes by cut-paste, which is only practicable.

I have strong problems with many "rotarian-type" users, and I try first - to take apport about actual congress in cOpenhagen in consideration in my critics - to have an apport about the Duarte affair, who allowed women to join Rotary, with the help of supreme court. All this is justified by multiple links, and I am regularly blanked by two or three users, who just blank, without any justification. More of all, same blanks for links between some rotarians and segregationism, which founded (stupid) rumors for links between Ku Klux Klan and Rotary. I brought links, but they are systematically. More, I received some allusions to my French origins.

The last user seems a belgian student sent in Italy, like done by Rotarian programs.

In conclusion, dialog started AFTER multiple edit war by user Bridesmill. I want to launch an RfC (already spoke with Angela about that), and a arbitration request. These are prepared, but it is a huge work for us.

Thank you for your consideration, PierreLarcin2 19:52, 16 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Ok, that is good you are taking steps to mitigate the conflict. I would suggest that you have the Rotary International page protected until the conflict is resolved. By doing that you do not have to revert so much. Even unintentional violations of the three-revert rule have resulted in blockings; it is a very strictly enforced policy. I would help you but I am very busy in other parts of my life. I am actually on Wikipedia very little these days. Peace. --  127 . * . * . 1  20:26, 16 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Well no, but thank you very much anyway for proposal. No protection needed I think. Rotarians are very clever by selection. To think about it shows that it is a club of public relations, so...I believe in dialog. Obviously I receive some partial insults, etc, and also some info (for example the IP 10:29, 16 June 2006 85.82.166.107 who added a communication in front of Rotarian actual Congress). The real problem is this : first Internet is a way to communicate, second Rotary goes in schools for actions, third scholars use Wikipedia a lot, fourth the question is to make an opinion. I would not protect, because having negative points based on facts does oblige (if I may say) the Rotarians to add more positive facts, which opens it in a way, which gives more info : it is a closed club. So dialog is positive. I will not ask sanctions, just a warning because wikipedia is not a showroom, just a way to improve science and also science in human matters (sociology). This huge text for my claim at arbitration :-)

PierreLarcin2 20:34, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Right. STOP accusing me of being a Rotarian. STOP accusing me of being a 'communalist' STOP accusing me of being willing to take violemnt measures for the ends of some wacko conspiracy. That is VERY clearly WP:NPA.Bridesmill 22:55, 16 June 2006 (UTC).


 * well the problem is that you ACT as a Rotarian. You next add is "an example of successfull change of the inside". What does it mean for a text if you are NOT a Rotarian ? Which success ? The Rotarian lawyer said '"…[the decision] threatens to force us to take in everyone, like a motel'. Do you think it is an elegant inside success, specially associating women with a motel ? After about three full blanks on my chapters, you are now enhancing them ! And ---'I' am violent ? You say ABOVE that I speak of a wacko conspiracy. How can you say that after about ONE MONTH OF SUPPLEMENTARY TEDIOUS WORK that you gave us ? May I know what you did that ? Because of our poor English grammar, we stupid French traitors ? That's it ? And you accused us between the lines, and specially me -mu friend being translator- to hide that French were hiding antisemistic crimes in their history ?

WHY SHOULD WE HIDE THAT A TRIAL WAS NECESSARY FOR WOMEN, THAT SOME FAMOUS ROTARIANS ARE PINOCHET OR HELMS, THAT DIANNE FEINSTEIN IS A REAL CONSERVATIVE, DEEP RIGHT POLITICIAN, AND THAT THE ROTARY USE THE HELP TO SICKNESS IN THE THIRLD WORLD TO PROMOTE CONSERVATIVE POLITICIANS... WITH UNO PUBLIC FUNDS ?

What a world ! All that work just because people want to hide facts, as a religion ! PierreLarcin2 23:15, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Rotary rfc
Pierre: I read both the original Rfc as you posted it and the updated version. I based my comments, however, on the article's edit history. - &middot; j&middot;e&middot;r&middot;s&middot;y&middot;k&middot;o  talk &middot; 20:42, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Your text on the RfC is way too long. I saw the original one, by the way, and was glad when someone shortened it, because I read a few sentences of the original, then just clicked the link to see what it says on the talk page. Take a look at the other RfC posts, and you'll see that most are a line or two. When you make it much longer than that, people are less likely to read it. Besides, your RfC comment doesn't tell me anything I can't figure out from the talk page and edit histories. Like Jersyko above, my comments are based on edit histories and talk page comments. Until you drop original research and provide verifiable sources, you won't find much support. Sxeptomaniac 20:50, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Please don't revert the text at the Rfc page again. At the top of the page, it says "state briefly and neutrally what the debate is about . . . Do not continue the debate here, or make personal comments on this page." Your text is remarkably long for a request for comment and is not neutral, as it is argumentative. &middot; j&middot;e&middot;r&middot;s&middot;y&middot;k&middot;o  talk &middot; 22:50, 21 June 2006 (UTC)


 * my intention is not to continue the debate. I am shocked by

"Significance of KKK and Nazi associations " to replace my rfc. It is not at all the problem. The problem is wikipedia fiddling. Please remove KKK and nazi associations as the Rotary is not associated with KKK. The problem is "transforming a segregation of woman in a natural evolution process" "nominating someone associated with racists or extreme right movement as Honorary Rotariand and hiding that fact" We here perfectly undestand how to be concise but we are not sharp as you are : we said "possible wikipedia fiddling"

Thank you to leave it like that. PierreLarcin2 22:58, 21 June 2006 (UTC)


 * I shortened the request further and removed the KKK/Nazi reference per your request. I highly doubt, however, that the wording of the Rfc is going to have any effect on the final outcome at the Rotary article, however.  In situations like this, it's often wise to take a brief wikibreak from editing articles one feels strongly about. - &middot;  j&middot;e&middot;r&middot;s&middot;y&middot;k&middot;o  talk &middot; 23:11, 21 June 2006 (UTC)


 * the wording is not important, except for the "fiddling" (not a classical edit war) and the 'RI problem with women'. We need opinions and possibly sources, and came on RfC after advice of User:Angela (if you know her :-). We work here at two and try to have constant doubts, and we need to be sure before going to Arbitration that we do not forget anything. Please leave it like that now : 3 sentences. Previous RfC (Irak War)has 5 sentences. It is our RfC after all ;-) The word "fiddling" is important Many thanks. PierreLarcin2 23:28, 21 June 2006 (UTC)


 * "Fiddling" is POV and argumentative. It is an inappropriate word to use on an Rfc.  In addition, your most recent wording makes no sense grammatically or logically.  Pierre, I've been monitoring Rfc requests for months now.  I'm asking you to trust me on the wording of the Rfc.  Again, it will have little to no affect on the final outcome of the Rotary debate, so why are you fighting with me about it? &middot;  j&middot;e&middot;r&middot;s&middot;y&middot;k&middot;o  talk &middot; 23:34, 21 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Fiddling is

1/ if NPOV, fiddling is technically a biased way to influence wiki. Here they change structure of texts to smooth facts. Here they change the URL source ("Famous Rotarians" URL) to hide "bad" politicians like Pinochet. Good or bad, Pinochet is there...so the problem is complex : date and change of Rotary source to influence media. It is not an edit war : it is presentation of problems, and sourcing dissimulation, etc. Very difficult to prove. Anyway, Rotarians are a huge network no ? Do you think they use Wikipedia ?

2/ if POV, fiddling is our opinion. We speak here of human science (sociology). It is impossible to be neutral. So we announce that we are critic against rotary. So people can decode and check. This is the theme of Max Weber famous sociologist.

Above, if is has little affect on the final outcome, no problem. We do not want to affect anyone, just have opinions and check if we forgot something before arbitration. The less remarks, the best work ! So please leave it like that. We do not fight sure. Thank you many times for your help. Best regards PierreLarcin2 23:43, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Stop Now
In reference to, Please do not make personal attacks on other people. Wikipedia has a policy against personal attacks. In some cases, users who engage in personal attacks may be blocked from editing by admins or banned by the arbitration committee. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Please resolve disputes appropriately. Thank you. . Bridesmill 01:55, 22 June 2006 (UTC)


 * This is ridiculous : since WEEKS : YOU revert and blank multiple infos. YOU made an edit war. WE here do not PLAY on wikipedia. WE will put an Arbitration request for fiddling. Against YOU, and others. And YOU stop NOW. YOU stop to joke on us because of our grammar, our vocabulary, our criticism, and YOU are requested to give real REASONS for your edits. PierreLarcin2 05:09, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

If you want to block, do it. WE asked for RfC, and YOU went changed OUR RfC text to speak about plot, KKK allegations for Rotary etc. YOU are about to be blocked. What a world ! PierreLarcin2 05:12, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Late Response
Sorry for the late response, I have been very busy in RL. If you still like me to review the edit war let me know on my talk page but I must warn you that it may be a delayed response (again). I would also advise you to ask an admin, as I am not one and do not have much experience in reviews. Once again sorry for the late response, I hope this helps.-- Joe Jklin  ( T C )  07:54, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Crossing the Line - LAST warning (NPA 3)
In reference to Please do not make personal attacks on other people. Wikipedia has a policy against personal attacks. In some cases, users who engage in personal attacks may be blocked from editing by admins or banned by the arbitration committee. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Please resolve disputes appropriately. Thank you. Bridesmill 15:08, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Reverts
You're on your third revert; please read the talk page, explain succinctly why you feel this is valid if you want it there - I have explained there why it is not, you have said nothing about this, which leads me to believe you have no grounds for disagreeing with me.Bridesmill 16:35, 15 July 2006 (UTC)


 * It is not my third revert, it is your fourth blanking on the list of famous conferencemakers I have placed four times on the Rotary International wiki.

I am maybe blind, but I do not SEE where and how you (so-called?) "explained there why it is not". Would you ve so kibd to re-explain them ?? :-) My ars are : these guys are placed on Internet as people who gave conferences in front of Rotary clubs in the world. You said "have no grounds for disagreeing with me." Well I DISAGREE with you blanked four times that as for the moment 1/ you gave no reasons to blank that 2/ that's info on people giving conferences in front and of course with the agreement of the Rotary. If you find other Famous conferencemakers, feel free to add them. PierreLarcin2 17:05, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

'STOP BEING OBSTINATE
I don't know how many times and in how many ways I have explained that such a list is cherry-picking, wholly inapropriate, and in many cases logically flawed (attributional bias etc). One reason, one solid reason is all it needs not to be there. Now who is talking about blanking and modifying Talk pages? You, Sir, need to go away for a few days.Bridesmill 14:44, 16 July 2006 (UTC)


 * I did not blank any TalkPage.


 * 1/ On Rotary International, I placed another way, a bit at the right side, to keep your "blocking request against me" apart and keep the thread : my question : give your args for blanking the list of Rotary conferencemakers. Indeed you bia "we speak about the blanking, I do not answer to the question, I ask you to block that guy".
 * About the main question (four times you blanked the list of conferencemakers), you still do not answer. Inappropriate is not an argument. It is your POV. Where do you see bias ? Conference is done by invitation so of course that Rotarian knows who is giving the conference. "it needs not to be there", again, is POV and not an argument.

The main point is again, that Rotary or pro-Rotary do not write things on Rotary and give themselves the role of judges on what MAY or not BE WRITTEN on the Rotary wiki. As indeed Rotarians come on the Rotary wiki. Of course. We are not a propaganda media. PierreLarcin2 15:04, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
 * 2/ On YOUR talk page, I RESTORED MY QUESTION ABOUT YOUR SOURCE ON SO CALLED TOLERANCE ON GAY MINORITIES AND "COLOUR" (read "non white") IN THE ROTARY. you blanked that also, as this question was a problem for you. Please keep it : it is a question I need an answer : I would like you to say un where we can check
 * 1 what you placed : Rotary should recognize sexual or race minorities? Is is true ? May we check the text ?
 * 2 that these pro-rotary texts are, whether or not, written by Rotarians.

They are peer-reviewed academic and mainstream media texts; you have still not identified your 800p mystery source document.Bridesmill 15:24, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Stop modifying this page to hide remarks and requests. You have not even told us what this verifiable source is. All of the sources currently there are WP:V; go to a library.Bridesmill 14:48, 16 July 2006 (UTC) I note that I have forgotten a page reference (although I am the only editor to have provided these in the first place) I will remedy that immeiately. Stop vandalising my userpage, please.Bridesmill 14:55, 16 July 2006 (UTC)


 * I did not vandalize at all your userpage. I did not hide remarks and request.

You did it and you alone, hiding my question on your talk page as I want to know if 1/ 2/ we may check your source saying 'Rotary is gay tolerant' 3/ we may check your source saying "Rotary speaking women changed life of women in these countries". You still not say what it change, where, who spoke and if the source was Rotarian. As usual, you play with our feet.

I and only I remarked that a reference of yours, was not paged. Again you play with our feet. Second you claim that you are first to document, but it has been THREE MONTHES THAT YOU EDIT-WAR, without any source, and all my addings were sourced, and Interned checkable sourced. YOUR documents MAY not be checked. I ASK YOU THE WAY TO CHECK THAT. WERE DID YOU FIND THAT. HOW CAN WIKIPEDIANS CHECK THAT. Again your addings on so-called gay tolerance and asian tolerance in Rotary are still not verifiable and sourced. If you do not give us a way to check, I will remove all your propaganda within a day. Be warned on that. PierreLarcin2 15:37, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Last, I do not have to give my source, as I still not used that on wiki. AGAIN, you play with my feet, playing like an boy in a school ('well I am first') just to bring that on the personal ground and claim "hey he attacks me personnally". There is no mystery source. You play, again.

You have got to be kidding - ''Your' doctoral thesis? I can't wait; if this is true, then you have access ot the material I cited. Are you accusing me of faking citations? Please stop threatening and harassing me, and mixing up academic work with 'propaganda'.Bridesmill 22:27, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

In addition, I asked you to stop cross-posting Rotary talk page material in bulk to my user talk page. It is not necessary, does not follow WP procedure, and seeing as I nicely asked you not to, continuing this behaviour constitutes vandalism.Bridesmill 22:29, 16 July 2006 (UTC)


 * User:Aldux invited me to take a look at Talk:Rotary International. If you check the page, you'll see that I did leave a note there.  I think that mediation would be a good idea.  Jkelly 23:33, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Please please please...
I have a number of requests. I am not trying to be insulting, so please do not take it that way. All of these requests are intended to make communication easier.


 * 1) Please try to format your replies in a consistent manner.  I've been having a hard time figuring out where your comments start and end because you don't correctly indent.
 * 2) Please stay on topic. Every time I've seen you respond to someone you switch from subject to subject. In some cases you never get around to actually responding to the comment presented.
 * 3) Please stop with the accusational tone. Stop talking about other editors in your replies and talk about the article. Present logic.  Don't make unfounded accusations of bias when someone disagrees with you. Assume they just want to make the best article possible and try hard to work with them and try hard to understand what they are trying to say. ---J.S (t|c) 20:43, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Regarding your most recent addition to Mel Gibson's "Talk" page. You might want to found your rants in something akin to fact, although having read the rest of your talk page that does appear to be something you have a problem with. Wild allegations of a "conservative right" cover up which then extend to accusing people of wanting to wage a war with real guns and bullets upon you has just a shade of paranoia about it. This doesn't appear to be your first "offence" either.--Koncorde 15:07, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:41, 23 November 2015 (UTC)