text:
User talk:Prcc27
Hello, Prcc27, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- Tutorial
- How to edit a page and How to develop articles
- How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
- Manual of Style
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place
{{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome!
- 1
- 2 List of House of Anubis episodes
- 3 Disambiguation link notification
- 4 May 2012
- 5 Photocaucus
- 6 Victorious season 4
- 7 September 2012
- 8 April 2013
- 9 References
- 10 iCarly
- 11 July 2013
- 12 November 2013
- 13 warning
- 14 Talkback
- 15 References
- 16 Edit warring
- 17 SSM polling
- 18 Review
- 19 Same-sex marriage in the United States - Illinois
- 20 Public opinion of same-sex marriage in the United States map
- 21 Same-sex marriage in Kentucky
- 22 Nomination of 2014 Eureka Earthquake for deletion
- 23 Ways to improve 2005 Eureka Earthquake
- 24 Nomination of 2005 Eureka Earthquake for deletion
- 25 Earthquake articles
- 26 Public opinion on SSM (states)
- 27 Same-sex marriage in the United States
- 28 Hi & sorry for the misclick
- 29 Public opinion of same-sex marriage in the United States
- 30 Barnstar!
- 31 Disambiguation link notification for May 12
- 32 Idaho
- 33 Cousins in Idaho
- 34 Regarding modifying others comments
- 35 Same-sex marriage status in the United States by state
- 36 June 2014
- 37 MSM blood donor controversy
- 39 Gay blood donation listed at Redirects for discussion
- 40 One of those maps you wanted
- 41 Men's rights movement probation notice
- 42 A barnstar for you!
- 43 About Pele' article
- 44 Disambiguation link notification for July 10
- 45 August 2014
- 46 Edit warring
- 47 Disruptive editing at Same-sex marriage in the United States
- 48 Request
- 49 A page you started (Same-sex marriage in the Seventh Circuit) has been reviewed!
- 50 Re: File:112th United States Congress Senators.svg
- 51 SSM in Coahuila state
- 52 Talkback
- 53 Forbes about Obama
- 54 Please don't ask for pages to be protected
- 55 Proposed deletion of Same-sex marriage by Circuit Court
- 56 Your contributed article, Same-sex marriage by Circuit Court
- 57 The Missouri/county maps
- 58 Same-sex marriage in the Tenth Circuit
- 59 Reply to Kansas colouring
- 61 Florida divorce
- 62 Idea for the Florida map
- 63 Chile Civil Union
- 64 SSM template
- 65 Consensus
- 66 Talk:Same-sex marriage in Texas
- 67 Warning 3
- 68 Matla
- 69 SSM in AL
- 70 Wiki Loves Pride!
- 71 Same-sex marriage in the Pitcairn Islands
- 72 Same-sex marriage in Florida map
- 73 Section links
- 74 SSM in US map
- 75 Statistical ties
- 76 RfC for 2016
- 77 A barnstar for you!
- 78 Editing your map for Statewide opinion polling for Democratic Party
- 79 Belief
- 80 September 2015
- 81 Swing state map
- 82 ArbCom elections are now open!
- 83 How margin of error works — Statewide opinion polling, Democratic Party primaries, 2016
I saw your edit question on Eureka, California. I did not revert the edit, but it looks like to me that since the earlier mention of snow is in a record-breaking year, that it would be notable whereas a light dusting in an otherwise ordinary year is not notable. Hope this helps ! Ellin Beltz (talk) 09:05, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
List of House of Anubis episodes[edit]
You are editing against what a reliable source states. You need a much better reason than "I don't believe it". Both the Futon Critic and TV Guide are very trusted reliable sources of broadcast information. Nick's promos conflict with what really is happening. Nick is promoting the normal weekday schedule but they ARE airing the first eps on the 7th. Until 8:30 comes and goes we won't have better information than what is the latest schedules. Geraldo Perez (talk) 21:42, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
- It's just a sneak preview! (twitter.com/NickelodeonTV/status/155710312182579200). This tweet is from the Nickelodeon official Twitter account.
- Great, further confirmation that the first airing is tonight. I added the Nick tweet as a reference to the article. It doesn't matter what Nick calls it, it may be "just a sneak preview" but the first airing of a season is the important info to be in the article. I did note that the official premiere is listed on the 9th. Geraldo Perez (talk) 22:31, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
- Fair enough!
Disambiguation link notification[edit]
Hi. When you recently edited List of House of Anubis characters, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Philip Wright (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:56, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
May 2012[edit]
Please do not remove maintenance templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to House of Anubis, without resolving the problem that the template refers to, or giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your removal of this template does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Thank you. Geraldo Perez (talk) 23:27, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
Hello, user. What pictures do you prefer?
--Belibaste (talk) 22:43, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
option c/e please!!!--Prcc27 (talk) 06:55, 26 May 2013 (UTC)
- Excuse me, Prcc27, ¿can you write this words in the page of discussion of the elections 2012. If you don't write this, is denegated. Thank you.--Belibaste (talk) 21:29, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
Victorious season 4[edit]
You started a discussion on the talk page. Don't edit war this issue. Work to get concensus on the talk page. You have made 3 reverts so far and could get blocked for breaking the WP:3RR rule. Geraldo Perez (talk) 00:56, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
September 2012[edit]
Please do not add or change content without verifying it by citing reliable sources, as you did to List of Victorious episodes. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Geraldo Perez (talk) 21:28, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
April 2013[edit]
Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to Sam & Cat. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Please heed the note that advises contributors "Don't add Cameron Ocasio unless and until there is reliably sourced official announcement." Orlady (talk) 04:34, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
There was a source thank you very much! --Prcc27 (talk) 07:07, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
Please use high quality references per WP:MEDRS such as review articles or major textbooks. Note that review articles are NOT the same as peer reviewed articles. A good place to find medical sources is TRIP database Thanks.
Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 12:29, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
Understand the term main character. Justice just appeared and was credited in a crossover of both TV series, in that sense iCarly cast must be added to Victorious just because of this. Consider that I've seen your editing in the past, reverting me is not WP:CONSENSUS and if it is needed you and me can be blocked or the page protected. For good of the three better discuss rather than start an WP:EW. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 21:07, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on ICarly. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:
- Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
- Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 21:15, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
July 2013[edit]
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at iCarly. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Understand the concept of main character. It was a special opening for that episode only. talk about it on the talk page before adding it. WP Editor 2012 (talk) 20:54, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at iCarly shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. 155blue (talk) 00:46, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
Please stop your disruptive editing. Your edits have been reverted or removed.
- If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
- If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.
Do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive until the dispute is resolved through consensus. Continuing to edit disruptively may result in your being blocked from editing. IMBD is not a WP:RS Please read that page. Also she is not a cast member WP Editor 2012 (talk) 17:21, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
November 2013[edit]
Please do not delete or edit legitimate talk page comments, as you did at Talk:List of House of Anubis episodes. Such edits are disruptive and appear to be vandalism. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. If you are really that IP, log out and make the changes as that editor. The dates of the original comments are important. Otherwise leave old comments in a talk page alone. Geraldo Perez (talk) 05:25, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
Your edit has been rejected. Please take it to discussion. If you continue edit warring, I will ask to have you blocked. — kwami (talk) 07:39, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
I did take it to the discussion. You started the edit war. --Prcc27 (talk) 07:45, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
- Uh, no. You made an edit. I rejected it. Then you started an edit war over it. If you want to make a change, then it's up to you to convince the rest of us. That's how it works here. (See WP:BOLD.) — kwami (talk) 08:02, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
Message added 15:08, 29 December 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Geraldo Perez (talk) 15:08, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
Please use high quality references per WP:MEDRS such as review articles or major textbooks. Note that review articles are NOT the same as peer reviewed articles. A good place to find medical sources is TRIP database Thanks.
Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 01:45, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
Does the claim "Circumcision does not appear to have a negative impact on sexual function." use a secondary source? --Prcc27 (talk) 02:17, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
Edit warring[edit]
Next time you add content without consensus you may be blocked. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 02:39, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
SSM polling[edit]
Would you check out the percentages and colors they match up to at Public opinion of same-sex marriage in the United States#By state? Right now Missouri which has a support rating of 38% is labeled as pink while Kansas at 39% is in red. I also want to know where you consider the "majority" point to be? Is 51% support stretching it a bit? - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 00:14, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
- At what number do you define the majority opposing SSM? - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 00:21, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:Reviewing. Regards. Ron 1987 (talk) 03:28, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
Same-sex marriage in the United States - Illinois[edit]
Gov. Pat Quinn has instructed county clerks to issue marriage licenses to all who apply. It's not just in Cook County - it's throughout the state. This supercedes the legislation. - ILBobby (talk) 00:01, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Public opinion of same-sex marriage in the United States map[edit]
Those colors where on there for a reason. I can't see the colors made in the edit by Bigdaddybrabantio. I'm getting sick of this. The colors where good for a reason, but you keep editing it. Please keep it the way it was.GayTenn (talk) 19:56, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
Same-sex marriage in Kentucky[edit]
Could you reply to my comment at Talk:Same-sex marriage in Kentucky ? I think the entry for Same-sex marriage in Kentucky could be made much better very easily in the way I suggest, but since you started the entry I'd like to hear from you. Thanks. Bmclaughlin9 (talk) 20:44, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
Nomination of 2014 Eureka Earthquake for deletion[edit]
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 2014 Eureka Earthquake is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2014 Eureka Earthquake until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Gaijin42 (talk) 16:35, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
Ways to improve 2005 Eureka Earthquake[edit]
Hi, I'm Dreambeaver. Prcc27, thanks for creating 2005 Eureka Earthquake!
I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. It seems you have made a mistake with the date of the earthquake, which you have stated in the article as 14 June 2014. Wanted to bring that to your notice. Happy writing!
The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse. Dreambeaver(talk) 07:47, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
Nomination of 2005 Eureka Earthquake for deletion[edit]
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 2005 Eureka Earthquake is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2005 Eureka Earthquake until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Dawnseeker2000 00:40, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
Earthquake articles[edit]
Hello, please do not create any more of these types of "articles". There is usually nothing to say about these types of low impact earthquakes because no one was affected, and all they'll ever achieve is stub class here. WP does not need stubs; it needs comprehensive articles where people can actually read and learn something. We have a solution for these types of events: the list articles. Thanks, Dawnseeker2000 00:44, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
Public opinion on SSM (states)[edit]
Please Stop removing my most recent addition to this section. The two polls that were added (NJ and NY) were from March of 2014. You can not just edit the section without reading the sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.108.40.206 (talk) 04:25, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
Yeah, but you added an older poll from California as well. If you don't want me to revert you, don't put older polls. Simple as that. --Prcc27 (talk) 04:32, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
Same-sex marriage in the United States[edit]
Hi, I reverted your edit to Same-sex marriage in the United States and changed it back to the plural. More than one marriage was performed that morning, so the plural is more accurate. — Bill W. (Talk) (Contrib) — 04:08, 29 March 2014 (UTC)
- Actually, the plural is less accurate. When you are specifically referring to a specific amount of marriages performed then it is. but if the amount isn't specified, generally it is referred to as plainly "Same-sex marriage" not "Same-sex marriages". A good example of that is the title of the page Same-sex marriage in the United States. Sure more than 1 ssm was performed, but it's referred to as "same-sex marriage". --Prcc27 (talk) 03:02, 30 March 2014 (UTC)
- If you marry several couples, you have performed several marriages. That is the grammatical sense in which the sentence in question is written. Several marriages were performed. When speaking of the phenomenon of same-sex marriage as such, the phenomenon is singular, hence the article title. Hope that helps clear things up. — Bill W. (Talk) (Contrib) — 03:25, 30 March 2014 (UTC)
Hi & sorry for the misclick[edit]
Been travelling this last week and have only been able to edit via a smart phone. Editing that way can be a little tricky (its happened to me before) and I inadvertently touched rollback while checking my watchlist. Apologies, and have a great rest of the weekend. Dawnseeker2000 03:10, 30 March 2014 (UTC)
Public opinion of same-sex marriage in the United States[edit]
Please don't edit war. Unreferenced material can be removed at any time. Use the talk page. — kwami (talk) 22:23, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
- @Kwamikagami: Sorry, I would have- but I'm on my phone... Prcc27 (talk) 22:55, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
Also, I noticed the thing that said colors in the table match the map. Prcc27 (talk) 23:00, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
@Kwamikagami:Could you please fix Connecticut; it doen't match the table..!? --Prcc27 (talk) 03:25, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
- I agree that should be navy then, but could you provide a link to where you got that data, so it's verifiable? — kwami (talk) 03:32, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
@Kwamikagami: Here's the link, it's already on the table... [1] --Prcc27 (talk) 03:37, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
@Kwamikagami: How is it dead...? On my computer it works..! :o What do you mean by "dead"..? --Prcc27 (talk) 03:45, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
- @Kwamikagami:Done. Unless those links appear to be dead to you they can now be updated on the map. P.S. Those edits might get reverted because they kept reverting Ohio. --Prcc27 (talk) 04:26, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
- @Kwamikagami: Okay good. That means Connecticut can be changed as well. --Prcc27 (talk) 04:38, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
What about Illinois? In the state article there's another poll from a few months earlier, but I can't access that either. I'm hoping it has better than a 9% sampling error; we can probably change the state from pea-soup to azure if you can access it. — kwami (talk) 04:58, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
- Reviewed all the refs & updated the map. Moved Nebraska down because the poll is over 2 yrs old; that was the only one.
- However, while I've always assumed that an uncertainty is 1σ (as it is in everything I work with), some of the polls give the error and then say they have 95% confidence that the true values are within that range of the results. This suggests it's the margin for p=0.05. I've asked at the help desk, but if this is the case, then we can move more of the 'maybes' to absolute majority, and break some of the statistical ties. It was only a day before s.o. answered by last question, so hopefully we'll know soon. (Meanwhile, best to be cautious with our claims.) — kwami (talk) 06:02, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
- I uploaded a version assuming all errors are p values, so it would be in the article history in case you need it, then reverted. The map does look bluer, with ME, DE, and the Pacific states going dark blue and only AR (+ old NE) going red, but there's no difference in the ties. — kwami (talk) 06:49, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
@Kwamikagami: Okay. I think it's good that we got rid of dark gray. But umm.. How come some of the states with polls that aren't two years or older have question marks; specifically Oregon and Nevada..? Prcc27 (talk) 19:52, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
- Oops, for Oregon I got confused with another poll. Nevada's because the margin of error slightly overlaps 50%. I suspect it's still a majority to 95% confidence, but I worked out the relevant numbers for standard deviations, not p-values. (Also, if the error were r
ounded off to 4%, like it is for DE, then we wouldn't worry about it, though it matters if the value is rounded off from closer to 54.5% or closer to 53.5%; that potentially changes Oregon as well.)
- Take Delaware: The poll result might be 53.6%, and the error 4.4%. I'll fix Oregon for now, but we should probably revisit these marginal cases (also perhaps the Carolinas) after I confirm the margins we're allowed assuming all polls are based on p=0.05. — kwami (talk) 20:03, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
- BTW, I got rid of the grey by using older polls w published errors. We still might be able to update them. I left Hawaii in the chart only because the discrepancy is so great.
- We should probably average all polls taken over the past year, rather than picking one that might turn out to be an outlier, but that would be a lot of work. — kwami (talk) 20:11, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
- Re. Texas, in WI 51% support SSM but 56% support recognizing SSM performed in other states.[2] Of course, that explicitly said 'in other states', which the Texas poll did not. — kwami (talk) 20:44, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
- Wow, look at the Utah and Louisiana polls I found. Found NE and SD too, but no surprises there. — kwami (talk) 22:48, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
@Kwamikagami: Pretty sure the Utah one is actually an old one; you might wanna check the other ones too. Prcc27 (talk) 04:10, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
@Kwamikagami: Another Louisiana poll [3] Prcc27 (talk) 04:23, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
- That's the one we had. But besides being older, it's completely incompatible. Since we have a couple refs now that LA is ~40%, I'm assuming it's an outlier. — kwami (talk) 04:29, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
Added map to Same-sex_marriage_in_the_United_States#Presently_in_litigation. You might want to check for accuracy & completeness.
I thought most states had cases pending. Maybe we just don't cover many of them? — kwami (talk) 04:25, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
- @Kwamikagami: Yeah, all but a few states... Also, here's the UT poll I was talking about.. Is it accurate..? [4] Prcc27 (talk) 04:45, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
- I don't know, but that's the other Utah poll we have in the table. They were polled in the same month, too.
- As far as analyzing whether a poll is accurate, that's a bit beyond us, I think. We could use Nate Silver's evaluations, but unfortunately he hasn't been active recently. Also, many of these polls are by newspapers etc. that don't have much of a track record to evaluate. The smaller the sampling error, the larger the sample, and hopefully the larger (and thus more expensive) polls are done fairly well. The Utah and Hawaii polls have differences of 10%, which means there's something wrong, but I don't know how to decide between them. Louisiana, though, was a 20% change, from dead last to middling. Generally when you have a bunch of data that is consistent and one datum that's not, you can toss the outlier (though two polls isn't exactly 'a bunch'). We should keep an eye on all three to see how upcoming polls track them. — kwami (talk) 06:00, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
@Kwamikagami: Yeah, but the colors on Utah need to be flipped since the most recent poll shows opposition rather than a tie. Prcc27 (talk) 06:39, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
- The polls were simultaneous, over the same week in January.
- I've also gone by the idea of not making a strong claim unless it can be substantiated. How can we justify coloring Utah majority opposed, when we have a poll showing nominal majority support? The gold means it's indeterminate, which is the weaker claim and basically the situation we have when we consider both polls. So Hawaii for example is also gold, with a question mark in blue, NC is pink, w a ? in red. — kwami (talk) 06:46, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
- Wow. Now we've got Georgia going from dark red to light blue. Light blue is the objectively weaker claim, but it's not what you'd expect. It looks really weird blue with a red question mark. What if we split the state, half one color, half the other, giving neither prominence? — kwami (talk) 07:33, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
@Kwamikagami: But shouldn't Georgia be beige..? It seems like it's within the margin of error. Prcc27 (talk) 10:21, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
- It would be, if the margin of (sampling) error were the standard deviation σ, but it appears to be the interval for 95% confidence, which is 1.96σ. So a difference of 1.65σ, for 95% confidence that the higher-polling opinion is actually higher, is just 0.842 of the sampling error, which in this case is a tad less than the 5% difference between support and oppose. Of course, all those numbers are rounded off; it would be nice to have them to 3 sig fig. BTW, I've posted these numbers at the humanities ref desk, and so far the only objection has been what we've already noticed with Georgia and Utah: a poll doesn't tell us all that much. I'm only working on accounting for the reported precision of the poll, but ignoring the fact that, precise or not, the results may not be very accurate.
- If we had a large number of polls, it would be better to average them, but it's not very meaningful to average two divergent polls. — kwami (talk) 17:33, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
@Kwamikagami: I think the other California poll was actually more recent.. Prcc27 (talk) 19:49, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
- Yes, but it's not as precise a poll, and it's only by a couple months. I tried to only include polls within ±4%, or a minimum of 600 people. — kwami (talk) 22:02, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
Hey, found another Texas poll. It's older, but also surveyed a larger base, and AFAICT was not about recognizing marriages performed in another state, and still it came back with the same results, a statistical tie. So I feel better about having Texas gold. — kwami (talk) 05:54, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
Hi @Kwamikagami:, sorry to bother you; I was just wondering if both polls for North Carolina should be pink. (Sorry, I don't fully understand how this works). --Prcc27 (talk) 04:39, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
- The numbers I used are listed in the legend of the map at Commons.
- Think of it this way: The sampling error is the range that the true figure should fall within 95% of the time. That means that 2.5% of the time it will be greater than that range, and 2.5% of the time it will be lower. So, if a poll result is 55%, and the sampling error is ±5%, there's a 95% percent chance that the actual figure (in the real world) is in the ±5% range of 55%, or between 50% and 60%. But there's a 2.5% chance that it's above 60%, and only a 2.5% chance that it's below 50% – that is, we can be 97.5% confident that a polling result of 55% indicates a true majority. But if we're only demanding 95% confidence, we have a bit of leeway – we can still be 95% confident that we have a majority even if the poll result is somewhat lower than 55%. Now, how much less? I calculated that 95% confidence would follow if the poll result is 0.653 times the sampling error above 50%. (I'm not used to working with p-values like this, but I posted the numbers at the ref desk, and there weren't any objections.) Now, if we look at the second NC poll, it's 53 ± 3.6%. Since 0.653 times the error (3.6%) is 2.35%, we only need to be at 52.35% to be confident we have a majority. The figure of 53% is of course rounded off to two digits, so it could really have been anywhere from 52.5% to 53.5%, but even at 52.5% it's slightly more than we need. We could try to dig up the original poll results if we were concerned about it being too close to call, but it this case we don't need to.
- That doesn't mean the majority of NC are opposed to SSM. The ±5% is only the sampling error, the likely error assuming they polled a perfectly random set of people. There are all sorts of potential non-sampling errors well. It only means that, if this was a perfect poll, with a random sample that perfectly reflected the proportions of the true range of opinions in NC, and there was no confounding influence, leading questions, priming, or other bias in the poll or afterwards, then we're just a tad better than 95% confident that the majority of NC are opposed to SSM. Of course, real polls are never that good. Usually only about 10% of people called agree to a telephone poll. Are they truly representative of the other 90%? Probably not. That alone means that we can't have 95% confidence in the results. That's why people like Nate Silver compare polls to voting records, weigh the pollsters against their performance, and consider as many polls as possible. If we had eight polls, with different wording and from different pollsters who all had a track record of getting these things right, and they all had results close to 53%, then we'd be very confident that the majority of NC opposes SSM. But with one or two polls of unknown reliability it's much more difficult to judge. — kwami (talk) 08:49, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
@Kwamikagami: Why does Alabama have a red question mark..? --Prcc27 (talk) 05:23, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
- I've read comments about AL having very low support, though I haven't found an actual poll. And where metastudies discuss polling coverage, it's the states of the upper Midwest that don't have any polling data, not AL. So I assume there's an old poll out there somewhere, and it almost certainly shows majority opposition. — kwami (talk) 07:06, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
@Kwamikagami: Should we add this misleading poll? Also, D.C. needs to be gray with a blue question mark (I don't know how that can be pulled off) and I'm leaning towards opposing having Alabama be a red question mark. --Prcc27 (talk) 01:36, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
- We can certainly take out AL. But I don't think we need to worry about blue states. Because support is steadily increasing, once a state polls support consistently, IMO it's just blue. — kwami (talk) 02:58, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
@Kwamikagami: Okay. Also, the most recent poll suggests that a majority of Americans are against same-sex marriage, but the polling sample seems to discredit it. Should it still be added to the by state chart to show how there were two (or three) different polls with different results. We could note how the most recent poll isn't that accurate in the sample size section. I should probably take this to the talk though... --Prcc27 (talk) 03:32, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
- Don't know which poll you're speaking of. For the past few years polls have pretty consistently showed support. There are always outliers, of course. Though I wonder if the 59% support we show have isn't also an outlier. You can't get there by adding up recent state polls. — kwami (talk) 05:02, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
@Kwamikagami: I put the poll on the talk. --Prcc27 (talk) 05:04, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
- @Kwamikagami: The map doesn't match the chart. Also, it looks like Oklahoma has a poll now. --Prcc27 (talk) 05:36, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
- I'll change the chart but I think Oklahoma needs be updated on the map. --Prcc27 (talk) 05:40, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
- I decided to change the chart back because I'm not sure if there's 95% confidence. --Prcc27 (talk) 22:04, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
- @Kwamikagami: As for the other states (SD & SC)... Could you explain how they were wrong..? I'm a little confused on that and don't know how to do the calculations. It looks like they're in the margin of error though. --Prcc27 (talk) 11:08, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
- Btw, now that I can edit the map (since it's text editable) I will change those states without messing with Oklahoma. --Prcc27 (talk) 11:10, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
|The LGBT Barnstar
|I also award you a barnstar for working to make Public opinion of same-sex marriage in the United States a better article through discussion and edits. Great work! =) - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 00:50, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for May 12[edit]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Gay sexual practices, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Frottage (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:56, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
So the gov who vows to appeal is named Butch Otter. I had to laugh. Do you think he's taking it personally? — kwami (talk) 04:39, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
- @Kwamikagami: Oh my gosh, are you serious? Isn't Butch a lesbian term and Otter a gay term..? xD --Prcc27 (talk) 04:59, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
- @Kwamikagami: And apparently he married someone named "Gay Simplot"..? I'm not sure if this is actually true (you can't always trust Wikipedia, you know?) --Prcc27 (talk) 05:39, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
- @Kwamikagami: Wow! :o --Prcc27 (talk) 23:24, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
Cousins in Idaho[edit]
Done! File:CousinMarriageWorld.svg You may need to clear you cache (usually hitting ctrl-F5 while viewing the page) to see the change. Pardon us using your talk page Darlwik. EvergreenFir (talk) 07:03, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
Regarding modifying others comments[edit]
Hello, please don't modify other peoples messages as you did here [6] and here [7]. Thanks! Thegreyanomaly (talk) 19:56, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
- @Thegreyanomaly: I'll try not to. I'm doing some of my edits on a mobile device (this edit included). Prcc27 (talk) 20:01, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
Same-sex marriage status in the United States by state[edit]
Can you explain your reasoning for the recent changes you have made to this page? I really don't see how the new map helps the article at all. 220.127.116.11 (talk) 03:01, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
- @188.8.131.52: Since the article is mostly about same-sex marriage, I added a same-sex marriage map. But since it also talks about other unions, I decided to leave the map. --Prcc27 (talk) 03:04, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
- The state by state chart includes civil unions and domestic partnerships, so the appropriate map was on the page already - adding the second map is confusing, and doesn't add any information. Please revert to the previous version. 188.8.131.52 (talk) 03:13, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
- @18.104.22.168: Since the article seems to actually be about same-sex unions in the U.S. by state rather then same-sex marriage, I feel like the name of the article should be changed first. You can change the name of the article and/or revert my last edit if you want... --Prcc27 (talk) 03:18, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
- Sorry for the intrusion into this convo, but I am having the same concern. The community has rejected taking out CU/DPs from File:Samesex marriage in USA.svg. Trying to remove that map and replace it with your CU/DP-gutted map is undermining the consensus against you. Please stop, thanks. Thegreyanomaly (talk) 04:42, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
- @Thegreyanomaly: The map isn't even on this article anymore because I realized that article touches on more than just marriage. Which is why I moved the page to what it was originally called. I don't remember there being consensus to not have a marriage map made but rather to not remove information from the partnerships map. --Prcc27 (talk) 05:16, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
- You made a marriage map and then you tried to replace the old map... You are undermining the consensus to leave all the information. Since you can't removing CU/DPs from the original map you are trying to replace the original map. This is evident by your edits at Same-sex marriage in New York and your active attempts to replace it at Talk:Same-sex marriage and Talk:Same-sex marriage in the United States. Please stop. Thegreyanomaly (talk) 05:23, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
June 2014[edit]
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at LGBT rights in the United States. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been reverted or removed.
- If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor then please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
- If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.
Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive, until the dispute is resolved through consensus. Continuing to edit disruptively could result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 02:00, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
I am placing this tag as you have inserted a map into the article that was not agreed upon via consensus and removed the map that was agreed upon. The agreed upon map File:Samesex marriage in USA.svg covers all the articles it is used in. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 02:00, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
- @Knowledgekid87: It was a bold edit. When the edit was challenged the map was removed from the respective pages. Furthermore, I didn't even remove the partnership map from the Lgbt rights u.s. article.
- @Thegreyanomaly: Don't come on my talk page and accuse me of lying. I did add the the map to the US Lgbt page but did NOT remove the partnership map. Prcc27 (talk) 02:28, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
- Adding redundant maps that the consensus was against is not being bold, it is undermining consensus which you did at more than just this one page. Thegreyanomaly (talk) 02:31, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
- @Thegreyanomaly: Cool, doesn't make me a liar though. Prcc27 (talk) 02:33, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
- You did remove and replace the map here though: [8], adding the map to LGBT rights in the United States was also prob not the best idea without first addressing the talkpage. WP:BOLD means to do things that are not reckless, anyways I just want to say that going around consensus in any shape or form is never a good idea here on Wikipedia unless you explain what and why you are doing what you are doing. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 03:02, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
- @Thegreyanomaly: Cool, doesn't make me a liar though. Prcc27 (talk) 02:33, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
MSM blood donor controversy[edit]
Prcc27, I wrote "per 3/4 participants", not "votes". However, I can see how anyone would take that as meaning the decision was based on majority. My bad.
There was unanimity that MSM blood donor controversy was not desirable. Gay male blood donor controversy was the only alternative on offer. You've since offered Men who have sex with men blood donor controversy, which would appear to me to fit with what others would support.
Can I suggest you move it to that title and leave a note on the current talk page (not the archive)?
Thanks, --Tóraí (talk) 20:23, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
- @Tóraí: I tried to move the page, but it said the title was on the title blacklist. --Prcc27 (talk) 02:50, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
Not much gets by without someone noticing... If I may, let me offer some unsolicited advice: Not now. I haven't seen a candidate even get close with less than 5000 contribs, they almost always end within an hour or two via WP:NOTNOW. Wikipedia:Guide to requests for adminship is worth a read. It looks like you might be on the right path, but it is just too soon for most of the community to trust you yet. Age and experience work against you, but fortunately, both of those are easily solved with time and by doing things. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 20:44, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
- Yeah, I'd suggest holding off too. In particular, <250 talk page edits would be seen as a sign of not enough experience at interacting with other users.
- I also think you're on a good path. A kicking now in RfA (and RfA is always a kicking!) isn't what you need. It could also spoil a future RfA because some editors would interpret an unsuccessful early RfA as a sign of power hunger, etc.
- So, my advice is also to take heed of WP:NOTNOW. Bring more articles up to spec, get involved in discussions, keep your cool, get more experience under your belt, and if things continue as they are now, you can expect my !vote in a year or two.
- (And if you want me to delete your current RfA page while it is still untouched by others - to give you a fresh run next time around - I'll do that. Just let me know.) --Tóraí (talk) 21:12, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
Gay blood donation listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Gay blood donation. Since you had some involvement with the Gay blood donation redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. - MrX 21:56, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
One of those maps you wanted[edit]
I was tired of seeing the CU/DP map as a PNG all over the place. I map an SVG map and uploaded it at File:Same-sex unions in the United States.svg. I have a lot of work to do, so I'll let you replace the PNG map. Thegreyanomaly (talk) 19:01, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
Men's rights movement probation notice[edit]
Thank you for your contributions to the encyclopedia! In case you are not already aware, an article to which you have recently contributed, Men's rights movement, is on article probation. A detailed description of the terms of article probation may be found at Talk:Men's rights movement/Article probation. Also note that the terms of some article probations extend to related articles and their associated talk pages.
The above is a templated message. Please accept it as a routine friendly notice, not as a claim that there is necessarily any problem with your edits. Thank you. -- Bbb23 (talk) 00:39, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
A barnstar for you![edit]
|The Editor's Barnstar
|For a good job in the articles about LGBT topics. Миша Карелин (talk) 20:21, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
About Pele' article[edit]
Dear user, I dont know you like European footbal or no, but there is a question about famous footbaler Pele's article. About his confesion to had a gay sex. The discussing is here [9]. Please take part if you can. M.Karelin (talk) 13:28, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for July 10[edit]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Same-sex marriage in Texas, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Orlando Garcia. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:58, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
August 2014[edit]
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Same-sex marriage in the Fourth Circuit may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
- List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
- A ruling striking down [[Same-sex marriage in Virginia|Virginia]]'s same-sex marriage ban]] goes into effect August 18, 2014.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 13:53, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
Edit warring[edit]
Your recent editing history at Template:Samesex marriage in USA map shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. You're well over the limit here. Please stop edit warring and take your concerns to the talk page. Artichoker[talk] 06:19, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
- @Artichoker: Calm down! All I did was switch "performed" and "recognized" around so they were in alphabetic order... Prcc★27 (talk) 06:21, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
- (I did accidentally remove a "<" though, but that was an accident). Prcc★27 (talk) 06:24, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
- (ec) Sorry, I saw on my notifications that you had reverted my edit and your edit had broken mark-up. However I can agree that your last edit wasn't necessarily a revert of the central issue. I have restored the alphabetical ordering. Artichoker[talk] 06:26, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
Disruptive editing at Same-sex marriage in the United States[edit]
I know you would like to keep thinking "A [temporarily] stayed ruling doesn't legalize same-sex marriage," when it actually does, but please don't disruptively edit articles to make your point as you did here [10]. The column edited refers specifically to when a bill was signed or a judicial order was filed. Every other state that received SSM by judicial ruling with a temporary stay uses the date of judicial ruling for that column (Massachusetts, California (In Re Marriage cases), Connecticut, Iowa, New Jersey). Admittedly, the Prop 8 case is slightly convoluted, but Walker's ruling was the only legal ruling that discussed the legal merits of Prop 8 (the vacated ruling doesn't count, and the 5-4 SCOTUS ruling didn't deal with the merits), and thus his order was the one that "re"-legalized SSM and it is his date that is relevant to the table. Please do not repeat this edit. (Also, if you are to respond, please direct all responses to the article's talk page where everyone will see it) Thegreyanomaly (talk) 15:00, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
- @Thegreyanomaly: Don't come on my talk page accusing me; it was a good faith edit. I thought CA's stay was indefinite pending appeal. All you had to do was revert and explain California's situation at the talk.. Prcc twenty-seven (talk) 17:26, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
- @Thegreyanomaly: Don't misquote me either..I didn't say "temporarily"; I didn't think the stay was temporary so.. Prcc twenty-seven (talk) 17:29, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
@prcc27 I'm going to be incommunicado for three weeks. Could you take care of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._state_laws_on_same-sex_unions if any rulings drop? Thanks. Mw843 (talk) 21:38, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
- @Mw843: Sure. Prcc twenty-seven (talk) 23:37, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
A page you started (Same-sex marriage in the Seventh Circuit) has been reviewed![edit]
Thanks for creating Same-sex marriage in the Seventh Circuit, Prcc27!
Wikipedia editor SantiLak just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:
Well written article. Don't forget to expand as events develop.
To reply, leave a comment on SantiLak's talk page.
Learn more about page curation.
Re: File:112th United States Congress Senators.svg[edit]
Message added 16:23, 14 September 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
SSM in Coahuila state[edit]
Hi, would you clarify the information regarding same sex marriages in Mexican state of Coahuila. Is that only recognition, or full marriage (they say it is in force since 17th of Senptember, see here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same-sex_marriage#Timeline). M.Karelin (talk) 12:33, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
Message added 03:41, 11 October 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
I have been waiting for multiple days, and you have not responded. Dustin (talk) 03:41, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
- @Dustin V. S.: Hey, I think I'm gonna quit Wikipedia/Wikimedia for a while. I won't be responding to anyone. Prcc twenty-seven (talk) 06:32, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
Forbes about Obama[edit]
Hello dear user. I started a new section in Talk page in the Barack Obama page - (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Barack_Obama#The_Best_Economic_President_In_Modern_Times.3F.3F). As far as only one person replied, it would be nice if you also say your opinion there in talk page, what you think about it? Thansk in advance. M.Karelin (talk) 19:37, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
Please don't ask for pages to be protected[edit]
I wish you wouldn't ask for pages/maps to be protected just because there is lack of consensus on what an edit should be. Protection is overkill because it prevents *anyone* from making any changes. Just let us sort it out on our own. (No need to respond on my talk page, I can check your talk page if you have a response.) Tinmanic (talk) 14:49, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
- @Tinmanic: The reason I asked for the US same-sex marriage map to be protected is because there was a dispute on whether Alaska qualified as transition or legal and the map was being changed 7 times. I didn't ask for anything else to be protected, the reason I supported the same-sex unions template being protected is because people kept removing Idaho from the "previously performed." Prcc27 (talk) 21:39, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
Proposed deletion of Same-sex marriage by Circuit Court[edit]
The article Same-sex marriage by Circuit Court has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
- Analysis of a judicial situation at an arbitrary moment isn't suitable as a Wikipedia article. It seems more like a Wikinews type of essay. WP:NOTNEWS
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the
{{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing
{{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. —Largo Plazo (talk) 09:53, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
Your contributed article, Same-sex marriage by Circuit Court[edit]
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
Hello, I noticed that you recently created a new page, Same-sex marriage by Circuit Court. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page – Same-sex marriage in the United States#July–present. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at Same-sex marriage in the United States#July–present – you might like to discuss new information at the article's talk page.
If you think the article you created should remain separate, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. —Largo Plazo (talk) 12:45, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
The Missouri/county maps[edit]
If you're dead-set on de jure over de facto, we should have a third color for the rogue counties, like a medium blue with the stayed ban counties not issuing in gray. That way the maps are not just legally accurate, but also reflect the real world. Also, your original Missouri map fails the Commons standards since it is not sizeable (you cannot zoom in and keep resolution). I am fixing that. Dralwik|Have a Chat 23:42, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
- I've put in the same medium blue as the recognition color on the main map for the rogue counties. Feel free to rewrite the legend. Dralwik|Have a Chat 00:34, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
- I've also put the rogue county blue on the county map. I've also put a link to a news story on Johnson County, KS still legally barred from licenses, but that is expected to clear up in the next few business days. Dralwik|Have a Chat 00:41, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
Same-sex marriage in the Tenth Circuit[edit]
Hello dear friend. I think the map in the mentioned article is very outdated. SSM is legal in Utah and Oklahoma, but the colores are NOT blue for those states. M.Karelin (talk) 05:15, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
- And the same for Same-sex marriage in the Fourth Circuit article. M.Karelin (talk) 05:16, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
- @Миша Карелин: States are only colored solid blue if a circuit court did not strike down a same-sex marriage ban. The map isn't just to let people know where same-sex marriage is legal, it's to let people know where same-sex marriage bans were struck down and by whom. I will update South Carolina though. Prcc27 (talk) 10:33, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
Reply to Kansas colouring[edit]
I'm sorry I said that. I can be a hothead when it comes to such issues and I feel like I'm being called out unfairly, and I tend to say the first thing that comes into my mind. I'll strike the sentence on the talk page and add public apologies there as well, it's only fair I do that. Kumorifox (talk) 14:32, 24 November 2014 (UTC)
MO != MS[edit]
Reverted your edits to the SSM timeline. You provided no refs, and are contradicted by our articles. 18.104.22.168 ([[User talk:126.96.36.199 64|talk]]) 22:51, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
- @184.108.40.206: You can't use Wikipedia articles as a source per WP:Wikipedia is not a reliable source.
- Mississippi: "He stayed his ruling for 14 days but also noted clerks could not issue gay marriage licenses until further guidance was given from the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals or the U.S. Supreme Court" [11]. This is why on the Wikipedia article for Mississippi I put "Same-sex marriages cannot be performed unless further guidance is given by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals or the Supreme Court of the United States." So if the stay expires but there is no further guidance from a higher court, same-sex marriages will not be allowed to be performed.
- Missouri: "If neither appeals, he said, the stay will expire on Dec. 9" [12].
- Florida: "U.S. judge keeps Florida same-sex marriage stay in place until Jan. 5" [13]. Prcc27 (talk) 05:15, 30 November 2014 (UTC)
Florida divorce[edit]
the divorce you count as Florida's third recognition of SSM is already counted as the second (Brassner). The news is just the divorce made final. Bmclaughlin9 (talk) 16:59, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
- @Bmclaughlin9: Oh okay! Prcc27 (talk) 17:06, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
Idea for the Florida map[edit]
How about making the Florida county map show only the local cases? That way, we can show the Miami-Dade development and avoid deciding the scope of the stayed federal decision? Dralwik|Have a Chat 09:04, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
- @Dralwik: Works for me. I left a message at your talk page too Lol! As of 12:01 a.m. Monroe County should be dark blue [14] Prcc27 (talk) 09:07, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
- OK, thanks! Nasty snowstorm here, wish I was in Florida. Dralwik|Have a Chat 09:07, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
Chile Civil Union[edit]
Why did you deleted my change on Chile's civil union?Kallme (talk) 02:10, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
- @Prcc27: The President will have vacations on February (so it won't sign the bill)and I think is impossible that you change your obsession with formalities, so I won't insist in the change of color for Chile. I think your argument that couples may be confused is not relevant...Don't you think that a couple that want to enter in a civil union in a foreign country will check other sites besides Wikipedia in order to make a informed decision? That being said, I think that what you did on Template:World_laws_pertaining_to_homosexual_relationships_and_expression adding and the bill was not even approved yet make everything more confusing. Its sad what you did in order to make your point and to keep your monopoly on the articles. Whatever color YOU want to put Chile I hope you remove that confusing note and add the same color to Easter Island that is grey for the moment. Kallme (talk) 03:27, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
SSM template[edit]
We say they were performed and are still valid in MI and AR, and also that they're recognized in MI if performed in MI. That means the same thing. Unless, as you say, they're not still valid in AR, in which case the entire 'still valid' section should be deleted. It makes no sense to have both. — kwami (talk) 21:14, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
- @Kwamikagami: Someone (possibly you) changed the wording from "not invalidated" to "still valid". Both states haven't had those marriages invalidated, but they are only recognized in Michigan, not Arkansas. And the only reason why we made the distinction of "not invalidated" is because people didn't want to add the Australian Capital Territory because same-sex marriage used to be legal there but was eventually invalidated. Prcc27 (talk) 22:57, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
- But what does it matter to not be invalidated if they aren't recognized? If you aren't married in Arkansas, why do we list SSM in Arkansas? I understand that they're rec'd by the fed, but so are numerous one-off marriages (rings on the map), and we haven't been listing those states. You can get married on an military base in Mississippi, and those marriages are valid, but we don't list Mississippi. If a state does not rec SSM, then we shouldn't list it as having SSM just because the fed rec's some marriages there. The fed is already listed for recognition. — kwami (talk) 23:07, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
Sorry, don't mean to nit-pick, but the grammar was good as it was. — kwami (talk) 23:54, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
Consensus is currently against you on the talk page. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 02:44, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
- @Doc James: Then how about trying to refute the last point I made..? Prcc27 (talk) 02:53, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
Talk:Same-sex marriage in Texas[edit]
New case. — kwami (talk) 23:05, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
Warning 3[edit]
Purposefully introducing errors is vandalism. Please stop. — kwami (talk) 03:34, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
- @Kwamikagami: St. Louis is the only jurisdiction under court order to issue same-sex marriages, the other two jurisdictions are rogue. Also, that wording has been up there for quite a while which means it has WP:EDITCONSENSUS. You were bold, I reverted you, now let's discuss (WP:BRD). Please also keep in mind that we already had a discussion on Missouri's footnote before. Prcc27 (talk) 03:41, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
Please explain how SSM is illegal in Kansas City. What is the penalty? A fine, or jail time? — kwami (talk) 03:42, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
- @Kwamikagami: Illegal: "forbidden by law or statute." That's all it means, there doesn't have to be a penalty or a fine. You need to stop edit warring and get consensus at the talk page before removing the wording. We already discussed Missouri's wording before and we ended up keeping the wording that we have now. Prcc27 (talk) 03:47, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
- In addition to section 18, section 19 further rebuffs it. If you think I misrepresented something in an article, template, or table discuss it with me on my talk page. I don't make edits without sources unless I have the source in its main page (i.e. LGBT rights in Malta or the LGBT Right in Europe). I'd rather you talk to me personally on my page than going back and forth with edits, it counter productive. I'm always on here, shoot me a message. Not trying to turn this into a Fry1989, Ron1987, or Kwangami feud. ;)
Chase1493 (talk) 22:46, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
- @Chase1493: I don't think you're supposed to interpret the source for yourself (WP:OR). I wasn't being counter productive, you made an unexplained edit to the template that seemed to go against consensus and I reverted it. I think you should bring it up at the talk before adding Malta to the recognition column. Prcc27 (talk) 22:52, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
SSM in AL[edit]
If SSM is recognized in AL, shouldn't it be blue-green on the map? — kwami (talk) 18:30, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
- @Kwamikagami: Only the AG is required not to enforce Alabama's same-sex marriage ban. Once/if the stayed class action lawsuit goes into effect then I think all of Alabama will have to recognize same-sex marriages. This has been discussed at the U.S. map's talk page,
but we might have to discuss the recognition more.Ireland shouldn't be blue yet because same-sex marriage isn't legal yet. And idk what the new color for Kansas means... Prcc27 (talk) 21:08, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
- Basically the original federal ruling that legalized same-sex marriage recognition was never "overruled" by the state court which is why I had Alabama in the recognition column on the template. If you want to color Alabama for recognition I guess that's fine. Prcc27 (talk) 21:11, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
- But the color means that AL recognizes SSM performed out of state. Does it?
- KS is the same color, just partially transparent, since SSM is open to all, but isn't recognized by the state. — kwami (talk) 17:12, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
Wiki Loves Pride![edit]
You are invited to participate in Wiki Loves Pride!
- What? Wiki Loves Pride, a campaign to document and photograph LGBT culture and history, including pride events
- When? June 2015
- How can you help?
- 1.) Create or improve LGBT-related articles and showcase the results of your work here
- 2.) Upload photographs or other media related to LGBT culture and history, including pride events, and add images to relevant Wikipedia articles; feel free to create a subpage with a gallery of your images (see examples from last year)
- 3.) Contribute to an LGBT-related task force at another Wikimedia project (Wikidata, Wikimedia Commons, Wikivoyage, etc.)
Or, view or update the current list of Tasks. This campaign is supported by the Wikimedia LGBT+ User Group, an officially recognized affiliate of the Wikimedia Foundation. Visit the group's page at Meta-Wiki for more information, or follow Wikimedia LGBT+ on Facebook. Remember, Wiki Loves Pride is about creating and improving LGBT-related content at Wikimedia projects, and content should have a neutral point of view. One does not need to identify as LGBT or any other gender or sexual minority to participate. This campaign is about adding accurate, reliable information to Wikipedia, plain and simple, and all are welcome!
If you have any questions, please leave a message on the campaign's main talk page.
Thanks, and happy editing!
Same-sex marriage in the Pitcairn Islands[edit]
An RfC has been started on Same-sex marriage in the Pitcairn Islands (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). FYI. Me-123567-Me (talk) 20:53, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
Same-sex marriage in Florida map[edit]
Regarding your map showing Florida counties and their stance regarding SSM...now that it has been legalized across the country, and Florida AG Bondi has of course dropped her case, I was wondering if the map could be made to reflect those counties that have legalization unhindered, and then those where clerks have stopped performing ceremonies (dark blue for the former, maybe purple for the latter (14 counties) like the US SSM map since it is technically legal, just more complicated to get the license validated as opposed to most other counties in the state). Would that be alright?
By the way, links showing these counties. Admittedly, it's been difficult to find full updates on where all of them stand post-Obergefell: [15] [16]Ghal416 (talk) 19:17, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
Section links[edit]
Either you are deleting section links from your edit summaries (they should appear as /* Section */) or you just aren't using section-only editing at all, but it is helpful for you to link the section you have edited in a talk page in your edit summary. If you use the section-only edit, it should automatically add text to your edit summary linking the section you have edited, but you are either always editing the page as a whole or deleting the section-link from your edit summary if you are not. On the File talk:Same-sex marriage in the United States.svg page, it is more difficult for me to track your comments than just about anyone else, so I thought I should point this out to you. Dustin (talk) 19:48, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
SSM in US map[edit]
Dear Sir: Would you kindly review this proposal/compromise: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Njsustain/sandbox Could this be all things to all people and hopefully avoid any future edit wars? Njsustain (talk) 15:15, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
Statistical ties[edit]
Statistical ties occur when two or more candidates report numbers that are within the margin of error. Nitroxium (talk) 14:28, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
RfC for 2016[edit]
There is a request for comment on the 2016 article, and your involvement has been noted. You may wish to vote. Spartan7W § 00:22, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
A barnstar for you![edit]
|The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
|I've been watching your edits on same-sex marriage since U.S. v. Windsor. You've always been on your game there. Love it. Thanks for all your contributions. Semperferox (talk) 05:41, 15 August 2015 (UTC)
Editing your map for Statewide opinion polling for Democratic Party[edit]
I downloaded your file and added Georgia. But before I uploaded it, I faced 2 challenges. First, do I have the authority to modify the map? Two, if I do, how do I update the map so that the history of map changes are maintained? Thanks All4peace (talk) 18:28, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
- @All4peace: I updated the map for Georgia. But in the future all you have to do is upload the file by clicking "Upload a new version of this file". Prcc27 (talk) 19:09, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
Hello, Prcc27
Is there a place where I can speak with you privately? This would be very appreciated. 22.214.171.124 (talk) 06:41, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
Well? 184.108.40.206 (talk) 06:47, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
- I don't even know who you are so no... Can we please keep conversations pertaining to Wikipedia on this talk page..? Prcc27 (talk) 06:54, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
- I take it you don't trust me? 188.8.131.52 (talk) 17:47, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
- Well? Don't be afraid to talk with me. I only desire to ask some questions. 184.108.40.206 (talk) 05:57, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
September 2015[edit]
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Circumcision. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:
- Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
- Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Alexbrn (talk) 19:44, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
Prcc27, don't worry- You didn't break any wikipedia policies. I've been blocked for things like this yk. What's your email? I want to talk to you in further detail about this. Cirflow (talk) 08:36, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
Swing state map[edit]
Hmm, now I'm feeling bad for sticking that on the 2016 article (stuck it there since it was just using text to say the same thing). Anyway... while it's cool you took an interest in this, I reverted your changes. There's quite a number of sources that make it clear that distance from the -nationwide- vote is what matters, with landslide elections being the classic case where this is obvious - Massachusetts was not a swing state in 1984, it was super-Democratic. If you look at the sources in the "potential battleground states" section (e.g. http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/05/2016-predictions-117554 , http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/the-gops-uphill-path-to-270-in-2016/2014/01/18/9404eb06-7fcf-11e3-93c1-0e888170b723_story.html ), you'll see that states like Nevada & Iowa (won convincingly by Obama by more than 5%) are marked as "toss-up", while Georgia (won by Romney by 7.5% or so) is marked "Likely R". Georgia is not really a battleground state; if the Democrats are contesting it in 2016, then they've likely already won anyway. Sources seem clear enough on this. SnowFire (talk) 14:06, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
ArbCom elections are now open![edit]
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:48, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
How margin of error works — Statewide opinion polling, Democratic Party primaries, 2016[edit]
User All4peace (talk) has initiated a discussion, on the article talk page on English Wikipedia about how we present MOE.
I would very‐much appreciate your participation ! Info por favor (talk) 22:31, 25 November 2015 (UTC)


text:
Camille Paglia on Freethought, Feminism, and Iconoclasm
Madigan, Timothy J., Free Inquiry
One does not really interview Camille Paglia - author of the best-selling works Sexual Personae; Sex, Art, and American Culture; and Vamps and Tramps - one gives her a forum to express her free-wheeling opinions in machine-gun delivery style on whatever issues she wants to address. What follows is a prime example of what might be called her "in-your-face feminism."
FREE INQUIRY: You're one of the few public intellectuals whose work is discussed both on college campuses and in working-class bars. Why do you think you've touched such a nerve?
CAMILLE PAGLIA: It's pretty amazing. Don't forget by the time I burst on the scene five years ago, I was in my forties, and I'd gotten absolutely no attention whatsoever. I couldn't get published. Not only was Sexual Personae rejected by seven major publishing houses, but parts of it had been rejected for years by magazines.
But by the beginning of the 1990s, the culture seemed to change, and suddenly people were listening to me. There was a big shift. I represent the best of the 1960s, which was all about freethought and free speech. I hate dogma in any form. I hate it in the Roman Catholic church, which is why I left it twenty-five years ago. I hate it in gay activism and feminism now. Dogma has also taken over the humanities departments in elite schools - poststructuralism and so forth. I think people are sick of the ideological and cliched ways in which cultural issues were approached in the 1980s. So I came like a breath of fresh air.
People who are interested in ideas welcomed me, and people who cling to a fixed belief system find me threatening. There's nothing more dangerous to a liberal democracy than fixed dogma. I don't like coteries. I have struggled to maintain my outside position, which is very rare in America.
FI: In Vamps and Tramps, you state that "the silencing of authentic debate among feminists helps the rise of the far right."
PAGLIA: That's right, and the fruits of this are now being seen. I've warned about this for years - the suppression of debate by the liberal wing has moved the entire nation to the right. People who were surprised by the Republican sweep have simply not been listening to me. It happened not because of any right-wing conspiracy; it happened because of a spiritual vacuum on the left. The left became too removed from the people. Leftism began 150 years ago supposedly to speak for the silent majority, for the people. True sixties radicalism really was populist. I'm a Clinton supporter and I'll vote for him again (God help me), but he has surrounded himself with these white, upper middle class elite professionals who speak about "the people" from a very great distance and, in a very paternalistic, condescending way, as "victims." It is insulting - I'm remembering my background in an immigrant family when I say this - they are totally removed from the people they pretend to speak for. These false progressives are merely voices of reaction, clinging to outmoded, broken-down liberal ideas. After all, a lot of sixties radicalism was critical of the liberal establishment, like Leonard Bernstein having the Black Panthers over for tea - radical chic. Liberals were the worst hypocrites in the 1960s. I despise "limousine liberalism."
FI: You also say, "To rescue feminism, we must give religion its due, but require it to stay in its place."
PAGLIA: That has to be done to rescue all progressive politics. One of the major crises that the heirs to the left have received is the neglect of spiritual values. I'm an atheist, but we people of the sixties were very spiritual in our own ways. That is, we abandoned organized religions, but we sought out Hinduism and Buddhism. We were very interested in cross-cultural spiritual experiences. A passage to India, as it were.
Now what's happened as part of the collapse of the progressive left is a descent into social constructivism, which says that everything that we are is made by society. …

subset: commoncrawl


text:
[IMGW]http://media.1up.com/media?id=3364093[/IMGW]Secret Level, a small Sega-owned developer, has only created a handful of games, most of which you probably haven't played. America's Army: Rise of a Soldier and an Xbox port of Karaoke Revolution, while not the worst gameography, does not mark the group as a must-play studio. Since being acquired by Sega last year, though, Secret Level has been asked with some major projects.
Sega announced today that Darrin Stubbington will be taking over as the vice president of Secret Level and overseeing development of next-gen Sega titles Iron Man and Golden Axe.
Stubbington has been in the gaming industry with various publishers including Midway and perhaps most famously as the vice president of Iguana Entertainment. According to his MobyGames profile, Stubbington is credited for work in such games as After Burner, Turok: Dinosaur Hunter, and the NCAA Football franchise.
According to Sega, Stubbington's new position with them is part of their move to make Secret Level into a stronger developer and to make "Western-specific content." Their current goal is to become a top-five third-party publisher of video games; in June 2007, NPD ranked Sega sixth among third-party publishers.
We'll be able to see just how much Stubbington and Sega's new focus are affecting the studio soon enough, as both Iron Man and the next-gen Golden Axe remake are due out in 2008.
Thanks to 1UP.com for sharing the news with us!


text:
Victor J. Malatesta and Matthew S. Robinson
The diagnosis of sexual addiction seemed ridiculous and almost laughable to this 41-year-old, married, successful businessman who actually enjoyed, and to some extent, took pride in, his long history of multiple sexual partners, extramarital affairs, and periodic frequenting of "high-class" prostitutes and "gentlemen's" clubs. He agreed to see a professional only after he was confronted again by his justifiably angry and exasperated wife, who threatened divorce if he did not see someone. Informed of his diagnosis after a clinical interview with a therapist who specialized in addictions, he was told that his initial treatment plan recommended (1) a period of complete sexual abstinence, including marital intercourse, masturbation, and bottom-line forms of sexual acting out, (2) weekly individual psychotherapy, and (3) involvement in a twelve-step, AA-oriented self- help group, SLAA (Sex and Love Addicts Anonymous). After reluctantly attending his first SLAA meeting and hearing the painful personal stories of men and women alike (who, surprisingly, were struggling with different, but in many respects similar, sexual activities and resultant negative feelings), he finally realized that since early adolescence, he had been "addicted to love and sex." (from the authors' case files)


text:
Hi everybody. I will be travelling to Kirkenes on my own in February and will be there for one night only. I would like to know what would be the best places to visit and the best place to have lunch and supper. I will already do dog sledding and reindeer sledding in Tromso, so I don't want to do that again. I would like to visit the Snow Hotel for sure but will not sleep there. How far is it to walk from the Thon Hotel to the Snow Hotel, how safe is this walk and how safe is Kirkenes generally for a woman on her own to walk around after dark? I know there are paid trips to the Snow Hotel but I think its crazy to pay NOK400 if I can get in on my own for NOK100. I also think the price of lunch or dinner is exaggerated when one includes it in the organized tour trip.
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Listings


text:
Ashley Judd Not Running For Senate
The Hollywood Reporter -- Despite months of speculation that she would be running for Kentucky's Senate seat in 2014, Ashley Judd has decided against the idea officially on Wednesday.
STORY: An Ashley Judd Senate Run Splits Democrats, Even Clintons
"After serious and thorough contemplation, I realize that my responsibilities & energy at this time need to be focused on my family," the Olympus Has Fallen actress wrote on Twitter.
"Regretfully, I am currently unable to consider a campaign for the Senate. I have spoken to so many Kentuckians over these last few months who expressed their desire for a fighter for the people & new leader," she elaborated in a series of posts. "While that won't be me at this time, I will continue to work as hard as I can to ensure the needs of Kentucky families are met by returning this Senate seat to whom it rightfully belongs: the people & their needs, dreams, and great potential. Thanks for even considering me as that person & know how much I love our Commonwealth. Thank you!"
The actress had reportedly been seriously considering a run for Congress. Judd, a Democrat, would have potentially been a challenger to Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell in an election race.
Earlier in March, the Huffington Post's Howard Fineman reported that she was already interviewing media consultants and field organizers and her advisors were filing papers for a run.
Related article on THR.com:
Ashley Judd Divorcing Indy 500 Champion Dario Franchitti
_ _ _ _
Find more online: THR.com
Most Watched on Wonderwall
Fashion Offenders
Fergie, Sarah Jessica Parker, and Heidi Klum all get an F on this week's Fashion Offenders.Watch Video »
Diva Double Date
Beyonce and Alicia Keys double date with their famous hubbies on today's Celebs Gone Social.Watch Video »
Where Are They?
See what the cast of "American Beauty" is up to today.Watch Video »
J.Lo's Mini Me
Jennifer Lopez shares an adorable photo of her look-alike daughter, plus more celebritots on social media on today's Celebs Gone Social.Watch Video »
First Pitch
Prince Harry, Jessica Alba and more stars who threw out the first pitch at baseball games.Watch Video »
Aussie Babe
Sofia Vergara poses in a revealing neon bikini while her "Modern Family" castmates hit the beach in Australia on Celebs Gone Social.Watch Video »


text:
Works without any issues on latest wp so far
It added a nice effect on http://sfilmfest.com/ where i enabled it
Very nice plugin, works perfect!
Just install and use! Very simple to use. The plugin is well written and the developer is very active. If you need a full screen background solution for WordPress, this is the way to go!
This plugin does exactly what it says, and exactly what you want! It is easy to install and set up, and there are loads of options you can change to get what you want. Very good. Very speedy response to questions.
Very good plugin, actually the best out there as per today, among those plugins that are recently updated. Keep it going!
Really simple to use and no un-needed features. Love it.
The plugin is really easy to use and the author is very helpful!
Thank you so much. Works great, love the slideshow effect!
Works great! Author is really helpful to my query, though I hope he adds more customization on the next update so we won't be hacking our way inside the plugin :)
thank you
You must log in to submit a review. You can also log in or register using the form near the top of this page.


text:
2003 Pontiac Grand Prix • 75,000 miles
Can you please give me detailed instructions with diagrams on how to replace the battery to my 2003 Pontiac Grand Prix GTP?
Thank You Very Much
Thank You Very Much
November 27, 2012.
November 27, 2012.
You could use a memory saver before you disconnect, anything. Might help. Do you have basic set of wrenches and sockets with several extentions? There is chassis cross-brace across top of battery, remove. Remove negative battery cable then remove positive battery cable. Then you have to remove battery hold-down, you may need long extension for that. On removal don't tip battery more than 40 degrees. I don't have bolts sizes, that is why you need basic set of wrenches and sockets, standard and metric. If your handy under the hood, you shouldn't have any problems.
Nov 27, 2012.
Nov 27, 2012.
How do I replace a battery in a 2009 Chevy Equinox LS with a 3.4L V6. Most cars are straight forward, this looks difficult. Shame on GM. Thanks.
1 answer • 2009 Chevrolet Equinox • 19,000 miles
My battery is dead and I was going to take try and take it out but it is located on the passenger side below the air cleaner. My question is how is it possible to remove/replace the ...
2 answers • 2002 Dodge Intrepid • 125 miles
About a month ago, the battery and brake light came on on my 2000 Mitsubishi Galant. The lights would sometimes stay on, sometimes flicker. A couple of weeks ago, I woke up and the car ...
1 answer • 2000 Mitsubishi Galant • 130,000 miles


text:
Sergio Rodriguez (Spanish Chocolate) ▪ Twitter: @serrod13
(born Sergio Rodriguez Gomez)
Position: Point Guard ▪ Shoots: Right
Height: 6-3 ▪ Weight: 168 lbs.
Born: June 12, 1986 in Tenerife, Spain
Draft: Phoenix Suns, 1st round (27th pick, 27th overall), 2006 NBA Draft
NBA Debut: November 3, 2006
Other Pages: Europe Stats
Like this page? Sponsor it for $20. Your message will replace this ad.


text:
- 35Promote
Art Print
snow fightby Jed Collins
Collect your choice of gallery quality Giclée, or fine art prints custom trimmed by hand in a variety of sizes with a white border for framing.
Stating the obvious...they're a little under dressed. I like the state of undress though. I like that they are dressed in shards of blue breath, long hair, and sleep wear. Its a moment when you are extending the night on the light of the snow. I really like this! Not just the content but the way you draw your lines too.


text:
So I am home this week, trying to adjust to the Davidless holiday. It's been awful, I won't lie. At the time my kiddos really need it the most, I am least able to be cheery. Indeed, our "tree" is actually a collection of tiny fake firs from the Dollar Store, dotted with cheesy mini glass globes.
I couldn't bear to have the Christmas totes come up from storage. I found this out when I was gazing at pre-lit trees at Wal-Mart. Assuming my lethargy was a result of being overwhelmed by decorating logistics, I thought I'd pay a few bucks for simplicity.
For you real-tree-or-die folks, let your minds wander to a place where the dog thought the inside was outside last year when he sniffed fresh pine. Exactly.
Gazing up at "600 bulbs! When one goes out, the rest stay lit!" I realized it wasn't the tree tugging at my Christmas roots, it was everything else. At that minute, I understood that to take the lids off those plastic boxes was to release a new wind of loss.
Couldn't do it. Not even for the stockings. And when I cried as I realized this, my 11-year-old -- in a voice aged with early wisdom -- put her hand on mine. "We'll get through this, Mom."
And we are. Tuesday we entertained, Wednesday we baked and wrapped, tonight we go to the annual neighborhood party.
Looking for gift wrap uncovered my present from David, in the form of a column I wrote in 2000 for The Oregonian, hidden under an avalanche of clippings. Let me share it with you.
But what happened next came as a shock. Humming a carol, I glanced over at the calendar hawkers and caught a glimpse of red. The sight stopped me short.
It was Santa. I began breathing rapidly and clenching my fists, my nails digging half-circles into my palms. Muscles knotted under my Rudolph sweatshirt. Gnawing at my lip, I pushed my way back through the crowd, averting my eyes until I was certain to be out of visual range.
Dang, I thought. I can't believe the emotion is still there, taking me back to that one special Christmas.
We're not big Santa Claus pushers in our family. It's a fun story for the kids, but not why we celebrate Christmas.
However it had long been a fantasy of my husband's to be Santa. To be Santa. Wandering through the malls year after year, he cast wistful looks toward guys stuffed into velveteen suits. His lip would curl at Santas deemed not cheerful enough. "I could do better than that guy," he would whisper.
So when he spied a blurb in the paper seeking mall Santas, he came to me like a little boy on, well, Christmas morning. He had already called to find out the shifts and discovered he could fill Santa's boots late afternoons and evenings.
I was delighted for him. A kid magnet since I had known him, here was his chance to shine like the star on top of the tree.
It was fun in the beginning. He came home and chuckled about which of our friends he'd surprised by knowing their names. More than a few adults began to wonder if Santa really was keeping a list.
David would regale me with tales of calming frightened children or scaring a little brat straight, at least until after the 25th.
I smiled with each story, although by the third day it was wearing thin. By the seventh I was definitely less jolly as I watched him drive off in his Subaru sleigh. Santa's own kids were getting whiny, asking when Dad would be home from work. We hadn't disclosed to the twins just why their Daddy was working so long. Earlier in the week, I had taken them to see "Santa," and Twin No. 1 had accused him of stealing her father's shoes.
Who would guess a 5-year-old would know one pair of black shoes from another?
By the second week I was thinking thoughts of Santacide. I was the one, after all, pulling extra parenting patrol and trying to do all the season requires. No one else was around to run to the Post Office or hunt down the ornament boxes.
When we bought our tree, I dropped St. Nick off for work and proceeded to drive home with a huge tree atop the van containing five tired daughters. Two miles down the road the tree slid into my line of vision, proceeding to rest on the hood in front of me. One mile later the tree slid backward, tumbling over the back bumper. In 20-degree weather, I stood on the highway with tears frozen on my face, silently promising to bungee Santa to the back of his sleigh.
Santa's reign came to a rather dramatic end. Thanks to Dad's extracurricular ho-ho-ho-ing, I had been daydreaming of splurging at Toys R Us. It made my hectic schedule more bearable. When David returned from work one night, I showed him the list I'd compiled, from baby dolls to computer games.
He looked at my list a long time. Flicking a stray white curl off his eyebrow, he turned to me. "Honey, I already ordered a telescope I've had my eye on," he whispered. OK, and flinched. Another long-time fantasy, it turned out.
That ended up being Santa's very last night to work. Once he tallied up babysitting costs and the price of buying me a vacation package, David discovered he just couldn't afford to wear the red suit anymore.
And if you look closely at the moon on Christmas Eve, you may just see the strangest sight: a Tasco telescope orbiting in the night.
More like this story
Use the comment form below to begin a discussion about this content.


text:
contact us
online store
January/February 2015 Features
The Storm Candle Lantern
...by Russell Kent
We live in the age of the LED revolution with the most amazing variety of torch and light designs that are very bright and last for a long time. But nothing is quite the same as a candle; it has a life of its own, a warm ambience and glow. It is fire after all, mankind's oldest friend. The humble candle has stood the test of time and is here to stay.
My Homemade Bushcraft Knives
...by Steve Hoolsema
After reading an article in Backwoodsman Magazine about making a bushcraft knife on a budget, I knew that it was something I could do if I had the right material or knife to rework. A couple of months ago I was fortunate enough to find a large homemade butcher knife at a resale shop for one dollar. The blade was made of heavy carbon steel with a handle that fit my large hands well.
My Personal Camp/Trail Rifle
...by Zeke Corder
For many years I've relied on one gun over many others. I carry a concealed pistol at nearly all times, however, it is not the best weapon for all purposes. When I need a camp gun, a trail gun or a backpacking gun, there is one in my arsenal that fits all those purposes better than any other. It is so much fun to shoot and it makes a great plinker too.
A Multi- Useful Survival Firearm
...by Ralph Denton
A firearm retained for survival, most of all, must be versatile. This article is about a tool that can function as a signaling device and when converted, a multiple-caliber single-shot firearm as well. I am referring specifically to the Russion/Polish 26.5 caliber flare pistols found on the surplus market. The only differences between the two are the carrier/holster and serial numbers. Otherwise, they are identical in price, operation and reliability.
Making a Portable Air Gun Trap
...by Jason Barlow
Airguns are a fun way to introduce others to shooting sports and to hone your own shooting skills. They're typically cheaper to own and operate than their firearm counterparts, especially in restrictive countries such as Canada (where I'm from). For many airgun enthusiasts their home is their range. I find it interesting that people are willing to shell out large amounts of money for their airguns, but never really put the same time and effort into what they shoot at.
How to Carve a Camp Spoon
...by Rick Peterson
Carving a camp spoon from raw wood is fun, not terribly time-consuming, requires only a few simple tools and can be done at home or in the field. They make wonderful gifts and I think they just plain feel better in your mouth than the metal and plastic spoons that most of us use every day. Using a spoon that you personally carved to eat a spoonful of homemade chili in camp is a wonderfully satisfying experience.
Privacy Policy
Copyright © Backwoodsman Magazine, all rights reserved.


text:
I'm 12 weeks 2 days pregnant and went to the doctor yesterday. I was told that baby looks great but that I have Antibody E most likely from a blood transfusion I had in June of last year. I don't know what it is and I'm freaking out. All I was told was that I am now a high risk pregnancy and that I need to see a specialist. Does anyone have any information that they could share with me on what this is and if baby is in danger?
I miscarried in November 2009 at 12 weeks 6 days so I'm obviously freaking out about all of this... I keep thinking that something is going to happen again and I don't know if it's because of this new found blood issue or if it was just a random thing that could have happened. I never experienced any of this with my first pregnancy so it's all new and very scary to me!!!
Please help giving any advice! THANK YOU!!


text:
Mon., February 11, 2013 1:31pm
Legendary Allman Brothers Concert Released
A piece of Georgia music history hits stores Tuesday — a legendary Allman Brothers Band live recording from the Macon City Auditorium is getting its first wide release.
Full Story
©Copyright 2015, Georgia Public Broadcasting. All Rights Reserved
Georgia Public Radio®


text:
Latest Tweets
- @NikToy76 "Does this exercise make you feel uncoordinated and awkward? Good. You're hitting all the right spots then.", Sep 9
- RT @iluvdomestica: Win 80 Penguin Books to celebrate 80 Yrs: http://t.co/mVN7rIlddd cc: @brendasuewegner @writerjenwilson @kellykegans @jessicathomasdesign, Jul 26
- Fitty cents! Who says it's a nonprofit! @Clay_Masters #garagesale #sold http://t.co/8ypGbhEknF, Jul 26
- RT @TheAtlantic: "This may be the mission with the most women in NASA history" http://t.co/B6i1Fdy3ER http://t.co/tx3wG7bRwI, Jul 18
- RT @AP_Oddities: Polish farmer celebrates return of cow who ran away 2 years ago: http://t.co/YI8d0EPloU #odd, Jul 18
Click here to buy the book.
Available now from Amazon.com, Barnes & Noble, and IndieBound
Upcoming Events
- No upcoming events
The Running Away to Home Soundtrack (a.k.a. What Was Usually Playing in the Peug)
Here is the Music Player. You need to installl flash player to show this cool thing!
From Running Away to Home:
"The kids loved the škola. God knows why. It was relatively barren, save for the decrepit Communist-era playground, of which they particularly liked the genital-squashing teeter-totter. Being able to climb trees was a revelation, too. They'd hogged most of the cherries, like good little Americans, and were moving on lately to apples, which weren't even close to ripe, but assisted their digestive tracts with all the mortadella and cheese we fed them. It probably seemed like a major adventure, being perched in the crotch of a tree, foraging for food. For my kids' generation, tree climbing was a lost art.


text:
Direct Mail
In 2010 we were approached by the Royal Mail to conduct a study looking at how people visually interacted with their mail and what could be done to maximise mail opening.
As a result of this major ground breaking study we have been able to help many of today's top companies improve not only visual engagement, but more importantly response rates.
To do this, we have developed our own research models that combine eye tracking, specialist qualitative research techniques and normative data to ensure that your direct mail items perform the best they can.
We are also the Royal Mail's Partner, running their eye tracking omnibus (see other services)
Stand Alone Or Fully Integrated
Our services can be provided as an individual study or easily integrated into other market research to complement the work and provide a greater degree of understanding.
Latest News
- 19/11/15 Next date for the eyetracker Omnibus set for December 4th 2014
- 16/04/15 eyetracker at Vox Pops seminar BFI
- 10/03/15 our next London eye tracking seminar has been announced for 23/03/2015
- 15/01/15 eye tracking seminar