User talk:Cmeyyur

February 2024

Hello, I'm ThaddeusSholto. I noticed that you removed topically relevant content from Neil Parrott. However, Wikipedia is not censored. Please do not remove or censor information that directly relates to the subject of the article. If the content in question involves images, you have the option to configure Wikipedia to hide images that you may find offensive. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. ThaddeusSholto (talk) 17:50, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There had been no direct link to the 2005 Herald Mail article for readers reference. "In March 2005, Parrott wrote an op-ed for The Herald-Mail arguing that HIV-positive patients who are given life-saving medication should be tattooed "in a spot covered by a bathing suit" to prevent potential sex partners from becoming unknowingly infected." Were they Neil Parrott's actual words? Where is the evidence that Parrott "argued" and should be "tattooed". If the original writer care to link it Herald Mail without adding his/her/their opinion, then that should be fine. Wikipedia should not have questionable information. Cmeyyur (talk) 18:00, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Parrott's words, "in a spot covered by a bathing suit", are quoted in the referenced articles from The Baltimore Sun and The Frederick News-Post. Wikipedia articles are based on third-party reliable sources, which these are. -- Pemilligan (talk) 00:53, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Neil Parrott was a private person in 2005 and also said compassionate and serious solution. In English "arguing" and "should" shall be used when it actually happened. Parrott as a private wrote letter the editor, not an op-ed. It is absolutely false to call a letter to the editor basically a comment as an Op-Ed.

Parrott’s March 2005 letter to the editor, written before he was elected a state delegate in 2010, cited an earlier article in the paper that reported a rise in HIV cases in Washington County and that there had been “cases in which people knew they were infected and continued to engage in risky behavior.”

Parrott’s letter called for a “compassionate and serious solution” that could protect the dignity of people who are infected while effectively preventing the spread of the disease.

“One such solution is a tattoo for those who are infected,” Parrott wrote. “This mark could be inconspicuously placed, perhaps in a spot covered by a bathing suit, warning only those who might engage in intimate encounters with the infected person. Cmeyyur (talk) 18:10, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Calling his letter to the editor an op-ed was a mistake that has now been corrected. -- Pemilligan (talk) 00:56, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]