User talk:Fox/Archive5

From Conservapedia

Contents 1 TK Blocked? 2 Thanks 3 Heath Ledger 4 Contest 5 5 Don Hamrick 6 Greetings 7 Thanks 8 Question 9 CPTest 10 Neoconservatism 11 Mistake 12 Vulpes vulpes 13 Make your first pick 14 Kickoff 15 Block, rev, etc.

TK Blocked?

Just out of curiosity, why has TK been blocked? CPWebmaster 15:03, 27 January 2008 (EST)

Thanks

Hi Fox! Thank you for your nice comment. PunkGuy99 09:03, 31 January 2008 (EST)

Hi Fox. Thanks for archiving the news. --Crocoite 06:21, 7 February 2008 (EST)

Heath Ledger

I'm going to avoid an edit war and ask that you discuss the issue on the talk page. Given that nobody has answered the question of how Hollywood Values caused Ledger's death then I think this needs to be cleared up before we add him to the entry. TheGuy 04:50, 1 February 2008 (EST)

I have answered it on the Main Page talk page. Fox (talk|contribs) 04:55, 1 February 2008 (EST)

A brief summary of your posts on the talk page under the relevant heading:

• Ledger took drugs not really valid because he overdosed on legal, prescription drugs, not illegal drugs
• Some person who wasn't really acquainted with Ledger (she was employed by people who knew him) and who has no medical training claims that she heard someone else say that Ledger was taking cocaine the night prior (hearsay much?) and that therefore he must have overdosed on sleeping pills as a result of this not really a valid argument, the opinion of one person, who was neither a friend of Ledger nor a medical expert, does not provide sufficient evidence to support a claim
• Communist governments are evil (07:58, 30 January 2008 (EST))
• Abortion should be illegal, bird eggs are more protected (08:30, 30 January 2008 (EST))

TheGuy 05:04, 1 February 2008 (EST)

He was an A list celebrity who behaved irresponsibly and selfishly, choosing not to spend his vast fortune on getting the help he obviously needed and was warned he needed by others eg Jack Nicholson. He made no attempts to change his lifestyle even when he became a father, stoned on legal drugs and stoned on power and money. It is the unfortunate nature of the beast for many young people caught up in the celebrity culture promoted (not solely) by the Hollywood PR machine and glossy magazines. Period. Fox (talk|contribs) 05:14, 1 February 2008 (EST)

...and this is all directly connected to his death because... TheGuy 05:24, 1 February 2008 (EST)

What planet are you on exactly? Cease making disruptive edits; feel free to visit this link. Thankyou. Fox (talk|contribs) 05:31, 1 February 2008 (EST)

Hang on, you make an unsubstantiated claim that Hollywood values were directly responsible for Ledger's death, and then when challenged over it you tell others to cease making "disruptive edits". Here are the facts as I see them:

• Ledger overdosed on a legal prescription drug, this is a tragedy that affects thousands of people every year and does not discriminate on the basis of political orientation.
• Ledger's problems with child custody lead to insomnia which caused him to take sleeping pills, however many stressful jobs lead to insomnia, I don't think we're about to start blaming the practice of medicine and law for the accidental deaths of doctors and lawyers who overdose on their prescription medication
• Ledger took illegal drugs, however there is no evidence linking this to his death. He also was selfish, however there is no evidence linking to his death. Therefore Hollywood values cannot be blamed for Ledger's death

Please tell me exactly which of these points you disagree with, preferably with an explanation of why you refute them. Perhaps that may bring me back down to earth TheGuy 06:26, 1 February 2008 (EST)

I don't care about Ledger's politics. I don't care whether the movies he made were good or bad or so-so. I don't even know, and am not interested in looking up, what his stance was on religion or philosophy. I'm not villifying Ledger, I'm villifying the celebrity culture of, among other places, the Holywood movie industry, which is at best a moral vacuum, at worst a toxic, immoral culture which has caused the unnecesary and premature deaths of many, many young people. Ledger is a victim of Hollywood's influence, "Hollywood's Values", which promote the self over society, the self over the family, promiscuity, alcohol and narcotics abuse, and pays vast amounts of money to the people that are part of it. Ledger fell foul of this lifestyle, and it - allegedly - was responsible for the breakdown of his relationship with his daughter and her mother. It ensured that he was never short of hangers on, groupies or pushers. It ensured he was never short of the cash and the influence to make use of those. If you can't see that, then there's nothing more that it is worth my while adding to this discussion. Fox (talk|contribs) 06:44, 1 February 2008 (EST)

I'm not claiming that you're wrong on any of those points, what I'm saying is that you still have not said anything about how Hollywood values LEAD TO LEDGER'S DEATH. We are not discussing his morals or his relationships, but his DEATH, because it is currently written in the article in question that Ledger's death was due to his Hollywood values (that they are "deadly"). Please either justify this statement or remove it. TheGuy 07:00, 1 February 2008 (EST)

Contest 5

Hey Fox, as you were a participant in the last contest I'm just giving you the heads up that the draft of the point system for contest 5 has been written, and we're using the talk page as a forum for any notes/complaints that any users may have. Thanks, --IDuan 20:21, 2 February 2008 (EST)

Don Hamrick

That article is a duplicate of Wikipedia's. I was just about to warn the user to not make it an article. --David R^talk 20:02, 4 February 2008 (EST)

Did you ask him if he is the author of the WP article..? Fox (talk|contribs) 20:03, 4 February 2008 (EST)

It turns out that he is in fact the author of the article. My bad. But do we allow users to write articles about themselves?

We have in the past. Fox (talk|contribs) 20:08, 4 February 2008 (EST)

Ok, then. --David R^talk 20:09, 4 February 2008 (EST)

See {{WP no copying}}, which should normally be placed on the user's talk page, and which explains the requirements when copying Wikipedia articles. Philip J. Rayment 20:39, 4 February 2008 (EST)

Greetings

Happy Saint Valentine's Day! --User:Joaquín Martínez, talk 08:44, 14 February 2008 (EST)

Thanks

Thanks for finally removing the "generalized second law"! I had forgotten all about that, uh, "article". HelpJazz 22:32, 15 February 2008 (EST)

Question

How do we have pages deleted? I would like ()to be deleted. Wahrheit 09:11, 16 February 2008 (EST)

Thank you. Wahrheit (talk) 10:18, 16 February 2008 (EST)

Uh, you just broke some people's user pages, as well as the "sexuality" sub page of the user boxes page. Why did we delete that box? HelpJazz 10:55, 16 February 2008 (EST)

Why was it needed? Fox (talk|contribs) 10:56, 16 February 2008 (EST)

I don't think it's needed any more or less than any other user box we have. HelpJazz 10:57, 16 February 2008 (EST)

So what's the problem then? Fox (talk|contribs) 10:58, 16 February 2008 (EST)

The problem is, I don't see the difference between that box and any other, but you didn't also delete every other user box. Wahrheit's 7th ever edit was to ask you to delete something, and you did. We allow bisexual people to use the site, right? If I'm mistaken in this regard, then it makes perfect sense to delete the user box, and please accept my apologies. In the mean time, the sexuality sub page is protected, so I can't fix the link. HelpJazz 11:04, 16 February 2008 (EST)

That user is the second user that has requested of me deletion of that particular user box. My take on it is that we don't prevent users from editing articles, so long as they don't push an agenda that goes against the core values of CP. My personal opinions on the subject are that homosexuality and bisexuality are proscribed by Scripture, but there are many other - probably worse things - that people do which are also proscribed against. I don't feel it necessary to take a Westboro Baptist approach to it, but nor do I feel that I should turn a blind to it. As I said, it has raised two complaints and as it is merely a userbox, then I feel quite justified that it should be deleted. As for deleting "every other userbox" ... that is a pretty liberal (and I mean that by CP's definition) approach: "If we can't say we're gay then you shouldn't be allowed to say you're a Christian." It isn't the kind of blackmail we would or should give in to, so no, I won't be deleting every other userbox. Fox (talk|contribs) 11:13, 16 February 2008 (EST)

Eh, it wasn't "blackmail" as much as "logical reasoning". Thanks for explaining and for deleting the sexuality subpage. HelpJazz 13:18, 16 February 2008 (EST)

Sorry if I didn't explain that too well - I was reasoning that we shouldn't allow ourselves to start giving ground to the idea that a very vocal minority should force change for the majority, rather than implying that you were blackmailing. I can see that I didn't really put it very clearly. Apologies. Fox (talk|contribs) 13:27, 16 February 2008 (EST)

I understand now, thanks. I dissagree, but I guess that makes me part of the minority :) HelpJazz 13:32, 16 February 2008 (EST)

CPTest

Please don't block CPTest again, I created the user for something I'm testing out. I should have noted what I was doing somehow. CPWebmaster 12:56, 16 February 2008 (EST)

Haha. I'll be sure to give better warning next time. CPWebmaster 12:57, 16 February 2008 (EST)

Nema problema :) I don't have checkuser, so couldn't "see" who it was :) Fox (talk|contribs) 12:58, 16 February 2008 (EST)

Neoconservatism

Fox, could you unlock this page I would like to change some links. It was only locked when it was featured on the main page last April. BrianCo 14:15, 16 February 2008 (EST)

Just done. Sorry, was surfing PD image resources so didn't see your request straight away. Fox (talk|contribs) 14:19, 16 February 2008 (EST)

OK, thanks. You were quick enough! BrianCo 14:56, 16 February 2008 (EST)

Mistake

Fox - do you mind helping me out for a second, I just did a stupid mistake. I uploaded Image:Northeasternseal.gif, but I titled it wrong - I should have put Image:Northwesternseal.gif. Do you mind moving it?--IDuan 14:21, 16 February 2008 (EST)

Hi, I just spotted that too :D Images are different to pages - they are actually files stored separately so cannot be moved. Re-upload using the correct title, and I will delete the incorrectly named file. Fox (talk|contribs) 14:23, 16 February 2008 (EST)

Thanks so much, sorry I can't believe I did that! Thanks,--IDuan 14:27, 16 February 2008 (EST)

NP :D Fox (talk|contribs) 14:28, 16 February 2008 (EST)

Ha, its so easily done! BrianCo 14:40, 16 February 2008 (EST)

Vulpes vulpes

Not as good a picture as the previous one. I wish I had taken some shots when we had a vixen and three cubs in the field opposite our house. It has a steep bank and at various times has been home to families of badgers, foxes and rabbits. The slope gives us a wonderful grandstand view of their antics. (Although I can do without the bunnies). BrianCo 15:11, 16 February 2008 (EST)

Agreed, the previous image was a really nice shot of ole Basil! I have made a promise to myself that I will start getting out with my camera more this year, and releasing all of the results into PD. I lost a vast amount of images when a hard drive packed up on me a while back, and I never really regained the enthusiasm, but scrabbling around for PD has given me fresh impetus :D Fox (talk|contribs) 15:42, 16 February 2008 (EST)

Make your first pick

Fox, you're captain now of team 1, pick your first player!--Aschlafly 13:08, 17 February 2008 (EST)

Almost missed it - I had to finally relent and rake up the leaves from the lawn before my wife got home from visiting at her mother's. I'm a terrible procrastinator, and ended up doing it at dusk, but I'm "back at the keyboard" now :D Fox (talk|contribs) 14:06, 17 February 2008 (EST)

Kickoff

Great entry! I'm really enjoying this new way of playing. Let's win! ~ Sharon^Talk 18:00, 17 February 2008 (EST)

Very nice kickoff entry!!!--Aschlafly 20:49, 17 February 2008 (EST)

Great job on the Passover entry! We need those 100 pts too.! --Crocoite 09:20, 19 February 2008 (EST)

Block, rev, etc.

Yay! Thank you for blocking Libertarian9182. Although, I don't think I have any chance of competing in the contest with a revert of -900k, heh. -^_^- Fuzzy 21:54, 19 February 2008 (EST)

Hehe That must have shoved your +/- through the basement floor. Fox (talk|contribs) 21:56, 19 February 2008 (EST)

Is this a Conservapedia record? -^_^- Fuzzy 21:58, 19 February 2008 (EST)

If it isn't I'd be very surprised :D Fox (talk|contribs) 21:59, 19 February 2008 (EST)

Once again, you do the things that I wish I could do. -_- Fuzzy 20:42, 20 February 2008 (EST)