User talk:Pelicanpaul

Welcome

Welcome! (We can't say that loudly enough!)

Hello, Pelicanpaul, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might find helpful:

If you have any questions or problems, no matter what they are, leave me a message on my talk page. Or, please come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

Please sign your name on talk pages and votes by typing ~~~~; our software automatically converts it to your username and the date.

We're so glad you're here! --(L'Aquatique: Bringing _chaos & ^{general mayhem} to the Wiki for One Year!) 04:40, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Baldwin I

Hey Paul, what's the problem with Baldwin I being homosexual? I know no one ever said that directly but it was implied by contemporary chroniclers and assumed by modern historians. The article does say "probably" and there is a reference. Should the wording be different? Adam Bishop (talk) 19:10, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

reply

I missed any citing references.I'll take a look. Without an awareness of such references the idea any Christian Ruler would be anything but aghast and in utter dread at the idea of being a homosexual would seem a given. The idea such a thing was anything but the ruin of one's life is scarcely a Century old. I would regardless of any proffered textural evidence be of a mind such a statement is of no relevance and at best highly suspect. Will I find you've cited references that Coeur de Leon was a poof too? Please these sorts of aspersions should really be left from any meaningful histories. As I stated up until the last Century being called a Homosexual was about the worst thing you could say about a Man especially one who lived in the forefront of Christian Civilization. Short of Thousand year old photographs of Baldwin and his Squire in flagrante delicto I see absolutely no value in including such at best dubious reports.Sincerely Pelicanpaul (talk) 03:28, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Toyah Willcox

Your edit summary "leave them alone" would seem to imply in some way that it is improper to state someone's residence in their biography. We have no policy that states this; however, there are several thousands of such articles in this encyclopedia; perhaps you are prepared to go through them all removing properly-sourced information? The information is only here because it is already in the public domain, and it would not be so if the subject had any reservations on the point. There is no suggestion, I take it, that they are being targetted or harassed because of this fact being public knowledge? Meanwhile, removing sourced content is vandalism and if you remove it again, it will lead to you being blocked. If that is a problem for you, please start a thread on the article talk page. --Rodhull andemu 14:34, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Assume good faith / Do not use Wikipedia itself as a source

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we must insist that you assume good faith while interacting with other editors, which you did not on Knights Templar. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you.

It is entirely inappropriate to accuse another editor of "vandalism" simply because you disagree with his or her edit, as you did with El Greco here: [1]. Aside from your inappropriate behavior--for which you owe El Greco an apology (here's his talk page)--the fact is that aside from the substantive disagreement on the article's content, your edit included an objective flaw that automatically called for reversion: Wikipedia articles do not cite other Wikipedia articles. Please see the relevant policy, Wikipedia:Verifiability#Self-published sources: "Articles and posts on Wikipedia, or other websites that mirror Wikipedia content, may not be used as sources." Good luck with your future editing.—DCGeist (talk) 04:23, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Westwood High

May I ask why you deleted the link to the Westwood High School link on the Westwood page? If the page exists, I don't see why you'd delete it off the page of the town it's in. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blackhawk441 (talk • contribs) 17:03, 25 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I never did.

If it wasn't retained when I edited the schools section by adding the  original names of two shcools  I didn't notice it and it.

I went to Westwood High Class of 1981. Lived in Westwood till I was 19

November 2013

Hello, I'm Atethnekos. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to BMW 5 Series (E34) because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, you can use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Atethnekos (Discussion, Contributions) 02:04, 3 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edit to Santa Baby

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Santa Baby, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you! Materialscientist (talk) 11:08, 21 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]