User talk:Souldancer

Regarding my edit of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same-sex_marriage the General Links section to include a web-based radio so called "Same-Sex Marriage, Who Cares!?" This link seems to be consistently edited out as "self promotional." This link no more personally promotes me than the authors of any of the other links noted in the general link area. Please kindly review the show content BEFORE removing this link.

Thanks!


 * Hi - the issue with the http://souldancer.org/ssm/ssm.html link isn't a matter of the show promoting you -- it's that by adding a link to the show to Same-sex marriage you're promoting a show that you were personally involved in producing, which raises questions of whether your chief motive is to promote your own web site. There are any number of web sites out there with resource pages and in-depth essays or interviews on same-sex marriage, but is not necessarily the place of Wikipedia to include links to them all.  Tim Pierce 13:12, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

* Why Same Sex Marriage Should be Allowed by Amit Deshwar * New Scientist, 15 November 2004, Lesbian couples raise well-adjusted teenagers * James Davidson, London Review of Books, 2 June 2005, "Mr and Mr and Mrs and Mrs" - detailed review of The Friend, by Alan Bray, a history of same-sex marriage and other same-sex formal bonds * Legal regulations discriminating gays in Europe; http://www.rklambda.at/rechtsvergleich/europesex.php * Legal protection before discrimination based on sexual orientation in Europe; http://www.rklambda.at/rechtsvergleich/europelaw.php * Recognition of relationship of person of same-sex in Europe; http://www.rklambda.at/rechtsvergleich/europemarriage.php
 * Well then - by your standards, you should then remove the following links as well:

My radio show is produced by http://www.moosemeals.com/souldancing.htm. If you take a moment to look at the page of which I'm suggesting to link to - it features a variety of people. NOT JUST ME - as does the links above. All of which - PROMOTE their website as well.

Please advise as to how your definition of "self promotion" is different here.

Namaste Souldancer


 * Hi - I quite agree with you about the Deshwar article--it should be removed, and I am grateful to you for noticing that! But I am perplexed that anyone would consider adding a link to an article in New Scientist magazine or to the London Review of Books to constitute self-promotion. :-) Tim Pierce 23:20, 29 December 2005 (UTC)