Talk:Gerry Studds/Archive 1
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 |
Article lock
Why is this article locked from edits?
- The article was locked due to persistent libelous vandalism in clear violation of our policy on the biographies of living persons. I believe the immediate threat is now over - however, I warn editors that any potentially libelous edits will result in reversion and blocking without further warning pursuant to WP:BLP. This is not a joking matter or something to trifle with. We are an encyclopedia. FCYTravis 23:26, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
"Ephebophilic"
Someone used the term ephebophilic, perhaps they should bother to read up on what the term means; because a 17 year old boy is not prepubesent.
- Sentence change in the lead paragraph. The previous one incorrectly ascribed ephebophilia to the former congressmen. There is no evidence that he is (from the linked wikipedia article on ephebophilia) "primarily or exclusively sexually attracted to postpubescent adolescents" to the contrary, he has been with the same partner (now married) for 15 years . Also, it just didn't flow as well. R. Baley 16:34, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
- It was also libelous. Thanks for pulling that vandalism out. FCYTravis 21:08, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
Dan Crane
Why is Dan Crane mentioned on Gerry Studds page? Gerry Studds isn't mentioned on Dan Crane's page. Is it because a Democrat cannot be fingered for bad behavior without mentioning a Republican? What's with the liberal bias? Can't just facts about Gerry Studds be on the Gerry Studds page?
- Studds is mentioned on the Crane page. As the two were "outed" almost simultaneously, and the two are often mentioned in juxtaposition, it is appropriate to mention them together. Take your whining about "liberal bias" to NewsMax. It'll play better over there. And sign your whinings, please. 70.144.120.161 02:28, 11 October 2006 (UTC)Black Max
- They're mentioned on the same page because the disclipinary measures against them were taken in tandem. Ruthfulbarbarity 23:04, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
- Exactly; and if Studds is not mentioned on the Crane page, he should be - so add it. And don't read in to things more than evidence would indicate - like there being some liberal/conservative bias.