User talk:Roux/Archives/2008/August

Age groups
Maybe my own personal feelings on the subject are somewhat blurring my argument; at the end of the day, I guess I was just irritated by the Victor Salva entry because I've heard so many people in the past equate being gay with being perverse. If a man who identifies as gay abuses a male child, then people receive the impression that all gay men are child abusers, but if a man who identifies as straight abuses a female child, then people regard it as a one off and not a reflection on heterosexuality as a whole. I've had this same argument with both my parents and somebody at college, because I'm sick of people assuming that child abuse is just a part of being gay.

Yours,

--6afraidof7 (talk) 16:40, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

DYK
Thanks! It was actually a lot easier than I thought. You merely write a new article and then submit your DYK suggestion on the DYK talk page and tada it's on the main page a few hours later! --Cameron* 19:50, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I've already been giggling about that...I realised just as I was saving! Just to clarify: I meant new sec, as in section! ;) What kind of article are you considering starting? --Cameron* 19:56, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Hehe, just saw your edit summary! Stop it! Wikipedia will chuck us out! :) --Cameron* 19:57, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Aww, sorry. I'll help you out on the new article (if you need it) to make up. :) --Cameron* 20:22, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

2012 Olympics
Are you Admin? (Please answer).

Did you read the talk page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by MissOrgum1996 (talk • contribs) 08:41, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Psychological Warfare
"Let me explain something: reporting on a fact is not 'supporting terrorists'" If new reports of an anthrax mail scare then this is successful form of terrosirm (no matter if there is anthrax mail or not). Perhaps you should check the wiki page on terrorism.--MissOrgum1996 (talk) 09:07, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Checkuser
Although you made the case page, you forgot to transclude it to the checkuser main page where the requests are handled. I have transcluded it for you Fritzpoll (talk) 11:45, 21 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Doh! Thank you; I thought that happened automagically. Prince of Canadat 11:59, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Polish
Hi, I don't speak Polish, but you may with to contact User:Piotrus. Posting at the talkpage of the Polish Wikipedian noticeboard might also find you someone. --Elonka 15:42, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
 * It seems to me she has passable English. I (or other Polish users at WP:PWNB) can translate, but I am not seeing the need for that? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 16:24, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
 * If you can point me out to a specific post/thread that makes the misunderstanding clear, I will see if I can help.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 17:55, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Olympic symbols
Hi PrinceOfCanada, you are right, it's always a good idea to include an edit summaries... The problem is that I didn't know where I was going to go with my edits before! Sorry but this time went like this. Anyway: Ciao, Sinigagl (talk) 13:51, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I fixed the symbols page with Main article references and See also references to all the symbols pages
 * I fixed the emblems page with emblems
 * I created a new page for the posters
 * I created a new page for the mascots, deleting the table from the symbols page
 * I put in all the pages:
 * See also link to the symbols page
 * External link to IOC and www.athensinfoguide.com
 * Category:Olympic symbols
 * Interlink to other languages pages

Precedence
Burke's is a secondary source cited as saying (as indeed it does say) that female-line grandchildren of the Sovereign are ranked as members of the Royal Family alongside male-line grandchildrem, and similarly with other female-line relatives. I have provided a primary source (a Royal Warrant) promoting female-line grandchildren to a lower position that this (i.e. lower than people like the current Dukes of Gloucester and Kent, who are merely grandsons of former Sovereigns). The two sources are irreconcilable, unless the order of precedence has fundamentally changed in the last hundred years, which no one has ever suggested, let alone produced evidence to show. I'm sorry if I come across as rude, but I get very frustrated when issues which seem to have been settled randomly pop up when an anonymous user cites something that is manifestly wrong. These random untitled Royal relatives simply aren't accorded such high precedence (indeed, they are never accorded any precedence at all), and Burke's is just being stupid by saying that they are. Proteus (Talk) 14:44, 22 August 2008 (UTC)


 * It's the exception that proves the rule. If there were a general rule giving female-line relatives Royal precedence, there would be no need for a specific grant doing just that (especially giving people lower precedence thant they already supposedly have). Proteus (Talk) 14:54, 22 August 2008 (UTC)


 * "The article stands"?! Yes sir! (Until I revert when I can access my copy of Debrett's, that is, since I'm reliably informed it says the opposite.) Proteus (Talk) 15:18, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

London 2012
Why did you revert the whole caption under the photo of the Olympic Stadium? Yes I know there was a typo and I was just about to change it until you reverted it all and had the nerve to call all my contributions vandalism because of one typo. What's why the aggression? 88.111.58.196 (talk) 03:28, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Heraldry
Wow, if that's what you call not much there...well done! The only suggestion I have is to add a subsection about the state coat of arms (ie EIIR's arms in Canada). I know you have already linked to it but a little section wouldn't harm the article! Anyways, well done and consider submitting it for a DYK! ;) Regards, --Cameron* 18:18, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
 * The article is absolutely wonderful! Congratulations! Be sure to suggest it to DYK, or I will! ;) Just one observations: Switch over the coat of arms of canada and france! ;) --Cameron* 11:36, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
 * OK, it's actually quite simple. Your article meets the criteria, so all you need to do, is think of a did you know question. Your question has to include a link to the Canadian heraldry article (obviously!) and it also has to be sourced within your article. Then you submit your question to this page. Specifically under the subsection "21st August" (the day you created the article). After your DYK write "self nom" and sign. Good luck! ;) --Cameron* 16:58, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Good luck on your first DYK! You will get a message when it goes live but first of all watch the page to see that it gets approved! ;) Best, --Cameron* 07:33, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Edit wars
I've discovered that G2bambino runs multiple edit wars, with negative comments about people. This user is up against the 3RR in four articles as I post. --Dlatimer (talk) 17:28, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Perhaps you should discuss this with me, instead of going to other parties. No? --G2bambino (talk) 17:31, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

I don't particularly care who did what, which is why I posted the exact same message on both your pages. I strongly suggest that you both take a step back from the page for 24 hours, and calm down. You have both hit 3RR. And do not bring your disagreements with each other to my talk page, thank you. Prince of Canadat 17:36, 25 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Involved? Not involved? --Dlatimer (talk) 18:16, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Carl Lewis and Doping
I have noted a long explanation by Canada Jack supporting the idea of putting in information about Carl Lewis testing positive for steroid use. A change has been made to the article to indicate that he did test positive but was not banned. I know that you had participated in this discussion previously and I would solicit your opinion on the Olympic Games discussion page. I see a potential edit war on the horizon and would love to avoid that at all costs. I will respond but leave the content pending further discussion. H1nkles (talk) 19:05, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
 * See the page. Prince of Canadat 19:15, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your input, you lend a weight of credibility that I do not have seeing as I am a relative newbie. H1nkles (talk) 20:16, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry for bringing you into this and causing such a scrum. I appreciate your input and agree with where you're going.  More importantly is the spirit of fairness and an unbias approach to relaying this information.  I don't blame you for disconnecting, it appears as though nothing further is going to be accomplished.  H1nkles (talk) 21:59, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Par for the course around here. Yell loud enough and act enough like a bully, and you get what you want, encyclopedia and facts be damned. Prince of Canadat 22:03, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
 * That's a shame. Keep up the good work. H1nkles (talk) 22:12, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Exceptional Newcomer Award

 * You're welcome. I support having images of oneself on one's userpage but wiki-dating is rather "naff"! --Cameron* 17:18, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
 * He he, I'm first in the queue for EIIR! --Cameron* 17:24, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Compromise
I just wanted to say that I thought Andrwsc and I had reached a compromise on the infobox. Andrwsc reverted my edits because he/she was opposed to the creation of a separate and unique US Olympics infobox. But it turns out that Adrwsc is fine with the edit, just not the location of the change. You're right, however, that more input is always welcome. Best, --Jh12 (talk) 19:11, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Category:Canadian territorial coats of arms
I assume that you wanted that deleted as you moved them into Category:Canadian provincial and territorial coats of arms. Cheers. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 11:43, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

RE: My discussion page
Hello, would you mind stop talk page stalking me? Its just that everything what has happened on my talk page you have interfered with. Especially the thing about references on the Andy McNab article, I am independant I do not need a shadow. Many thanks, Police,Mad,Jack (talk · contribs) ☺ 17:17, 30 August 2008 (UTC)


 * (Copied from the other user's talk page, as he already deleted my comment once, tsk.)


 * I'm allowed to comment where I wish, thanks. Prince of Canadat 17:39, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
 * My point is that I will comment where I wish. Welcoming a new user is not 'interfering'; indeed you will notice that I didn't comment on your page, only on his.  More to the point, I suggest you re-read WP:AGF and [{WP:Civil]].  Accusing a fellow editor--who, it should be said, has done nothing but be polite and helpful to you--of 'stalking' you is directly against both policies. I reverted your removal because this comment would make no sense without the preceding.  Prince of Canadat 18:05, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

I sincerly apologise, it was wrong of me. Police,Mad,Jack (talk · contribs) ☺ 18:07, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Lol, thanks very much. Police,Mad,Jack (talk · contribs) ☺ 18:41, 30 August 2008 (UTC)