Revision as of 20:25, 14 January 2007 editDoc glasgow (talk | contribs)26,084 edits →[]: r← Previous edit | Revision as of 04:17, 17 January 2007 edit undoNateland (talk | contribs)695 editsNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
Line 85: | Line 85: | ||
I noticed you uploaded this picture in September, and it was deleted as inappropriate. We cannot allow exposed pictures of private individuals, as we have no way of verifying that the subject (as well as the owner of the picture) consents. The pictures, or similar, have since been uploaded from another account. I was just wondering whether you had any idea who was doing this. And, if you did, whether you might ask them to desist.--]<sup>g</sup> 15:20, 14 January 2007 (UTC) | I noticed you uploaded this picture in September, and it was deleted as inappropriate. We cannot allow exposed pictures of private individuals, as we have no way of verifying that the subject (as well as the owner of the picture) consents. The pictures, or similar, have since been uploaded from another account. I was just wondering whether you had any idea who was doing this. And, if you did, whether you might ask them to desist.--]<sup>g</sup> 15:20, 14 January 2007 (UTC) | ||
:Thanks, for your response. The uploader has been told a number of times, but as they are using single purpose accounts, it is difficult to pin them down. I guess I'll just need to keep watching the article. But again thanks. --]<sup>g</sup> 20:25, 14 January 2007 (UTC) | :Thanks, for your response. The uploader has been told a number of times, but as they are using single purpose accounts, it is difficult to pin them down. I guess I'll just need to keep watching the article. But again thanks. --]<sup>g</sup> 20:25, 14 January 2007 (UTC) | ||
I am lodging a formal complaint about the user illuminato. | |||
Why?, because he IS ALWAYS inserting every possible kind of weasel | |||
word, POV statement, and he CONSISTENTLY reverts changes made by me | |||
and other people back to a HIGHLY POV state. | |||
I am stating this now. | |||
I request that Illuminato be BANNED from editing Misplaced Pages for a while | |||
at least. Due to his constant unwillingness to allow ANY sort of | |||
lettering into[REDACTED] other than his own biased views. | |||
This has been glaringly obvious to me in the articles on | |||
Adolescence, namely the adolescent sexuality section. | |||
And the new article created on Adolescent sexuality. Which he has | |||
CONSTANTLY been reverting back into an incredibly biased state with | |||
sources from 2 year old single day of printing newspapers, use of | |||
HIGHLY DUBIOUS sources to back up his OBVIOUSLY POV statements and | |||
claims which he injects, and how he HAS ON NUMEROUS OCCASIONS | |||
disregarded the requests and wishes of me and other people on | |||
wikipedia in order to revert and basically vandalize articles so they | |||
reflect a TOTALLY BIASED POV, | |||
I am sick and tired of this and will go into a revert war if need be | |||
until this gets fixed as HARDLY ANYTHING has managed to be | |||
accomplished with his constant interference which DOES NOTHING I | |||
repeat... NOTHING to help the article out whatsoever...... Although i | |||
am asking help from my fellow wikipedians n solving this issue and | |||
perhaps calling up a moderation committee person. | |||
If you check over the discussions and histories on these two articles | |||
I am sure you will CLEARLY see the point of contention. | |||
NOTE:your edit said fixing up the front part of the topic.... except it was basically reverting the article. now THAT is what REALLY annoys me, lying in order to rebias an article which is ALREADY in dire need of improvement. | |||
I hope my wishes are at least considered or met. | |||
] 04:17, 17 January 2007 (UTC) |
Revision as of 04:17, 17 January 2007
Cornell University
I have addressed your objections at Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Cornell University and would like further comments. Thanks! -mercuryboard ♠ 19:26, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
- Please review the additional changes. —mercuryboard 00:37, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
Tom DeLay
I believe that I have addressed all of your objections at Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Tom DeLay. Please let me know if there's anything else that needs to be done before you are willing to vote "Support". Thanks, NatusRoma | Talk 06:03, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
Adolescence
Good job fixing up the adolescence article. Jecowa 07:14, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
hey illuminato... about the adolescence article.
I see you restored the text i deleted WITHOUT CITING good reasons. Andi must have you know that what was in there IS biased. IS not backed up either by scientific OR nonrelegiously based evidence. And lacks ANY nuetrality WHATSOEVER!. Misplaced Pages is not a place to inject political opinions..
And the adolescence article is probably a reference for who knows HOW MANY multitudes of paretsn and teens seeking info on adolescence and teen sexuality in geenral or in detail. Replacing my CENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL backed information with leonard sax's own 'facts' on how teen sex is just a hook-up and that teen are emotionally immature is NOT valid!!!.
There is no way to measure if it's just a hook-up, and teenagers are quite capable of compassionate relationships... imagine how many teens you could have scared to death because they came here looking for information and now think that sexi s horrible and a disease until when... at age 18 it magically becomes... 'natural and acceptable'...
THERE ISN'T EVEN MENTION OF AGE OF CONSENT LAWS!. Don't think of your own opinions... think of the kids that come here looking for info. I redeleted this biased information and have requested protection from editing immediately.
I might be new to editing[REDACTED] but i know a lie* when i see one
- basically all of the completely unnuetral and unwikipedia acceptable information found on the page covering 'teen psychology and adolescence in general'.
P.S. sax's info is copied onto the psychology page when it doesn't quite fit... ---___---
about Leonard sax's data and sources derived from him
P.S.S.
I would REALLY appreciate it if more sources backing up the claims of harm done to teenagers from sex/ intoxication causing it/reducing embarrasment could be provided 'hopefully' in internet form that are seperate from Leonard sax's theories as a LARGE amount of ther references are from Leonard Sax and it would be gratefully acknowledged if you could come up with more sources to back up Sax's claims due to his ideas and facts filling up a lot of the topic of teen sexuality.
Oh yes... I'm wondering about a seperate[REDACTED] article SPECIFICALLY for teen sexuality and activity/behaviour due to the fact that it is a bit long and if info about other countries are included the length might be increased DRAMATICALLY.
Thus warranting another article based solely on this.
ok... here's a possible temporary replacement until desputes can be resolved.... plus more info.
I hope this can be used as a temporary replacement for the section on teen sexuality due to it's easily verifiable and trustworthy nature. (The Centers For Disease Control are pretty reliable in my opinion and many others) Plus it's layout would EASILY allow for inclusion of information on adolescent sexual activity and sexuality in other countries.. oh yes i'm thinking. Could someone come up with some internet sources to show that adolescents have as diverse sexual orientations as adults?, that would be a given and add some more info other then statistics on pregnancy and STD transmission.
I myself KNOW that teenagers (I myself am a teenager, a little over 14) have varied orientations both homo, hetero, and paraphilic, but do ont know of many good studies or surveys to prove this point which aren't under hot debate.
below is my idea of a good temporary replacement, i've also contacted an admin a few days ago to see if they can help out in this matter. Not sure if they'll get back to me though)
Your changes and 'facts' in the article on adolescence and adolescent psychology have also come to the attention of two other users. (The psychology one has also been critiqued by yet ANOTHER user whom i havn't been able to contact) If needed i would like to arrange a group discussion of this article to decide what to do.
http://www.cdc.gov/STD/HPV/STDFact-HPV.htm
http://www.ashastd.org/hpv/hpv_learn_myths.cfm
While a highly controversial topic, both sides of the issue for and against this activity have been fighting fiercely to prove their points on both relegious, secular, scientific, and statistical grounds.
This section deals with....
Adolescent Sexual Activity In The United States
Research (Shown in the paragraph below) HAS proven In The United States however that pregnancy and std transmission in sexually active teens has gone down dramatically over the past 10 years, both of which have been leading secular reasons for stopping adolescent sexual activity (For pregnancy this is vaginal intercourse and for STD's like HIV it is anal, oral, or vaginal sex that counts towards the statistics, other STD's like syphillis etc. are available at the reference page)
Centers For Disease Control study On Rates For STD, and Pregnancy in United States teens
Of US teens aged 15-19 who are having sexual intercourse almost all (98%) use at least one form of contraception. The most popular form, at 94% usage, are condoms and the birth control pill at 61%.
U.S. teen pregnancies had decreased 28% between 1990 and 200 from 117 pregnancies of every 1,000 to 84 per 1,000 by the year 2,000.
Plase note however that WORLDWIDE: "Genital HPV infection is a sexually transmitted disease (STD) that is caused by human papillomavirus (HPV). Human papillomavirus is the name of a group of viruses that includes more than 100 different strains or types. More than 30 of these viruses are sexually transmitted, and they can infect the genital area of men and women including the skin of the penis, vulva (area outside the vagina), or anus, and the linings of the vagina, cervix, or rectum. Most people who become infected with HPV will not have any symptoms and will clear the infection on their own."
Also, in the case of HPV condoms DO NOT completely stop the risk of contraction oh HPV, however the use of condoms has been shown by studies to lower the risk of getting this Disease
Some of these viruses are called "high-risk" types, and may cause abnormal Pap tests. They may also lead to cancer of the cervix, vulva, vagina, anus, or penis. Others are called "low-risk" types, and they may cause mild Pap test abnormalities or genital warts. Genital warts are single or multiple growths or bumps that appear in the genital area, and sometimes are cauliflower shaped.
yours truly, Nateland 22:15, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
File:Primal Scream 2.JPG
I noticed you uploaded this picture in September, and it was deleted as inappropriate. We cannot allow exposed pictures of private individuals, as we have no way of verifying that the subject (as well as the owner of the picture) consents. The pictures, or similar, have since been uploaded from another account. I was just wondering whether you had any idea who was doing this. And, if you did, whether you might ask them to desist.--Doc 15:20, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks, for your response. The uploader has been told a number of times, but as they are using single purpose accounts, it is difficult to pin them down. I guess I'll just need to keep watching the article. But again thanks. --Doc 20:25, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
I am lodging a formal complaint about the user illuminato.
Why?, because he IS ALWAYS inserting every possible kind of weasel word, POV statement, and he CONSISTENTLY reverts changes made by me and other people back to a HIGHLY POV state.
I am stating this now.
I request that Illuminato be BANNED from editing Misplaced Pages for a while at least. Due to his constant unwillingness to allow ANY sort of lettering into[REDACTED] other than his own biased views.
This has been glaringly obvious to me in the articles on
Adolescence, namely the adolescent sexuality section. And the new article created on Adolescent sexuality. Which he has CONSTANTLY been reverting back into an incredibly biased state with sources from 2 year old single day of printing newspapers, use of HIGHLY DUBIOUS sources to back up his OBVIOUSLY POV statements and claims which he injects, and how he HAS ON NUMEROUS OCCASIONS disregarded the requests and wishes of me and other people on wikipedia in order to revert and basically vandalize articles so they reflect a TOTALLY BIASED POV,
I am sick and tired of this and will go into a revert war if need be until this gets fixed as HARDLY ANYTHING has managed to be accomplished with his constant interference which DOES NOTHING I repeat... NOTHING to help the article out whatsoever...... Although i am asking help from my fellow wikipedians n solving this issue and perhaps calling up a moderation committee person.
If you check over the discussions and histories on these two articles I am sure you will CLEARLY see the point of contention.
NOTE:your edit said fixing up the front part of the topic.... except it was basically reverting the article. now THAT is what REALLY annoys me, lying in order to rebias an article which is ALREADY in dire need of improvement.
I hope my wishes are at least considered or met.