User talk:XCD

This is my discussion page.

Conservapedia

I'm afraid I've felt it necessary to revert your changes to this article. The reason is that the language in the lead and the categories the article has been placed in have all been discussed at length on the talk page, and your changes do not reflect the consensus arrived at there. The talk page archives contain the relevant discussions, Talk:Conservapedia/Archive 14#Encyclopedia being a recent one that springs to mind. This is a controversial subject, so any drastic changes to the lead or the categorization need to be discussed on Talk:Conservapedia. If you could explain your rationale for these changes there (which is currently unclear because you did not use edit summaries) it would be helpful. Thanks,--Beeblebrox (talk) 23:26, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

welcome

Welcome!

Hello, XCD, 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:

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 {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! --Beeblebrox (talk) 23:27, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

United States order of precedence

I think your recent addition to this article should be backed out. I understand from your edit summary why you added this, but it seems unlikely. I expect anyone in a similar situation would chose to attend an event as the Secretary of State and not as a former First Lady. While one is slightly higher in this ceremonial ordering, being Secretary of State is vastly more important than being First Lady in any real sense. Imagine that she one day becomes President, will her husband act as First Gentleman or continue to act as a former president? I think the answer is obvious in both cases that they would choose the greater role without concern for this ceremonial ordering. Also, I couldn't find the conclusion you added (that she might choose the lesser role for the higher precedence) in the advice column you cited. Could you back out that change? Thanks, Celestra (talk) 01:35, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hilary Clinton might be able to choose to attend an event as a former First Lady and have that precedence, but she would be choosing not to attend as Secretary of State. Do you seriously think she would make the choice to attend as a wife of an official rather than as an official? Anyway, my request stands: please either provide a reliable source for that information or remove it. "I did some research via Google" is the definition of original research,not reliable sourcing. Thanks, Celestra (talk) 19:44, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the part of your message about Hilary as First Lady, but without her husband present, your source mentions Laura Bush attending without her husband and gives her an order lower than Sectretary of State. (There is a category there for widowed First Ladies, perhaps he extends that to include the solo First Ladies.) It is safe to say that Hilary would be ordered likewise, except for the fact she is the Secretary of State. Celestra (talk) 19:58, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that you can use Google to research facts and then present the sources you found along with the facts. The source you used for #6 would be iffy, since it is similar to a blog and not subject to either editorial or peer review, but the person seems to be an expert, so I am willing to accept what he says where it doen't contradict another source. The problem is that he doesn't say anything about Hilary Clinton by herself or even Hilary Clinton choosing to attend an event as First Lady. The example he gives has Bill and Hilary at the same event and Hilary being ordered by her role as Secretary of State. Is there something there I am missing? Celestra (talk) 22:57, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good luck with his book. Like I said above, the website mentions Laura Bush at that same event, without her husband. I can't imagine why that same logic wouldn't apply to Hilary Clinton as well. If the book says she has a choice, though, I'll withdraw my request and we can use the book as a source. Please let me know what you find out. Thanks, Celestra (talk) 00:53, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to hear that the book didn't pan out. Is there any reason to believe that she would be treated differently than Mrs. Bush was in the example you referenced (below SoS)? Is there really any doubt that she is treated as Secretary of State regardless of whether her husband is there? Again, in that example of yours, President Clinton and Hilary were both present and the author refered to them as a past president and a current SoS. It is an unusual situation, having the former First Lady in a important government position, so I can see the appeal, but the Order of Precedence is only symbolic and there is no real benefit to being ahead or behind another on that list. The comment you added isn't very different from the comments about the Speaker not showing up in the list of house members, maybe if you adjusted the text to say she would otherwise be in the list alongside the former President it would be better. Celestra (talk) 04:17, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Obama Bin Laden

Please do not make statements attacking people or groups of people. Wikipedia has a strict policy against personal attacks. Attack pages and images are not tolerated by Wikipedia and are speedily deleted. Users who continue to create or repost such pages and images in violation of our biographies of living persons policy will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Thank you.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 00:21, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Final warning (false allegation)

This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize a page, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Bearian (talk) 00:45, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This allegation is false and libelous. Administrator Bearian deleted the Obama Bin Laden page, which only said that Obama Bin Laden was a portmanteau which is generally considered a political epithet. XCD (talk) 01:27, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please, folks, read this page and view this user's contributions: res ipsa loquitur. Bearian (talk) 15:33, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]