User talk:Ron 1987

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Contents

I don't think I've given a barnstar before...[edit]

LGBT-Barnstar1.png The LGBT Barnstar
For your tireless, painstaking development and maintenance of Wikipedia's coverage of LGBT legal rights across hundreds of jurisdictions. I am continually impressed and inspired by your dedication and effort. Thank you! --je deckertalk 20:59, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Edit summaries[edit]

Hi, please use edit summaries. It helps others to understand the intention of your edit and you can even avoid accidentally leaving edit summaries blank, see Help:Edit summary. Regards Hekerui (talk) 15:53, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

04 EU page[edit]

You realise you can't talk to a bot? It is automatic. I've left messages on the bot's owners talk pages. They'll make the changes to get it to stop making the edit.- J.Logan`t: 23:36, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

2004 enlargement of the European Union[edit]

Hi, your bot is incorrectly adding interwikies to 2004 enlargement of the European Union. nl:Toetreding van Bulgarije tot de Europese Unie, fr:Procédure d'adhésion de la Bulgarie à l'Union européenne, ro:Integrarea României în Uniunea Europeană and simple:Accession of Romania to the European Union are not comparable articles. Please override your bot on this. Ron 1987 12:25, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, I didn't see, user:Trehill checked that, I overrode and all seems good now. --Sisyph (talk) 05:46, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

I'm not arguing the importance, I'm arguing the relevance. 24.207.61.64 (talk) 02:17, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

I fail to see which right. I cannot find a single constitution guaranteeing the right to make Youtube videos. 24.207.61.64 (talk) 19:12, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

2010 in LGBT rights[edit]

Just through to let you know that you are currently involved in re-adding a blocked user's addition that is against the grain of consensus on talk.Lihaas (talk) 08:43, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Firstly, there is way to say something and not WP:NPA. My response was a very courteous note. Secondly, your edit summaried were non-existant and against mention of both the other editors. per WP:BRD that addition needs consensus to come back in. Something the banned user did not do.Lihaas (talk) 17:11, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

LGBT rights in Finland[edit]

Hi, why can't the YouTube video[1] be there alongside the newspaper article, since the article is the primary source anyway? -- 94.101.2.145 (talk) 20:46, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Election updates[edit]

Hi, I don't think you need to update election numbers of ongoing elections every time the California Secretary of State updates the website. The results will be final on November 30 and the outcome is decided, so why not wait? Hekerui (talk) 00:10, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

RoughTranslation tag[edit]

Thanks for adding it. I'm, er, not sure how I missed it. Roscelese (talk) 18:08, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Illinois Civil unions?[edit]

How is the article up to date when the Illinois legislature legalized civil unions and it does not mention a word of that? (Tigerghost (talk) 05:59, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Removing tags from Same-sex Marriage in New York[edit]

I appreciate your efforts of contributing articles in Wikipedia, especially of current issues.
No offense, You have not summarized your edits [2]. Curiously, why would you remove the tags? The timeline sections should be reformatted into paragraphs, and you may not be familiar with proseline, which is the format used in Timeline. --Gh87 (talk) 19:37, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

Stop putting external links in edit summaries[edit]

Hi, I saw your edits on Template:Same-sex unions. Edit summaries are for explanations of changes you make, not for urls. If you want to explain an edit with a link, do it on the talk page. Don't cite external links that people have to visit but don't want to visit or that don't last (like Google News links, they are down quickly). No one can divine what you mean with an url, explain what you did instead, per WP:EDSUM. Thanks. Hekerui (talk) 20:39, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Slovenia[edit]

I just wanted to ask you whether you are sure that Slovenia will expand registered partnerships instead of legalizing same-sex marriage! I came across several sites that state that the government will approve SSM, like this one http://www.24kul.si/?id=798&fmod=0 Olliyeah (talk) 07:06, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Oregon and Washington[edit]

Now in 2011, both states have more and more progress and unions in these states ar similiar to marriages. 188.118.183.248 (talk) 03:17, 24 May 2011 (UTC) Unions in both states granting rights similar to marriage and there were only at the beginning a legislation granting limited/enumerated rights. 188.118.183.248 (talk) 03:21, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Template:Same-sex unions[edit]

Hi, if you have problems with the last section, please start a discussion on the template talk page.

Where is the agreement that "Only jurisdictions which does not recognizes same-sex unions should be in this section"? Hekerui (talk) 23:06, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Evidence[edit]

What evidence do you have that Australia, Brazil & Chile are unlikely? At least provide evidence on Australia & Brazil, since Chile is going for civil unions now, apparently. --Smart (talk) 00:20, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

LGBT rights in Utah WP: Infobox references[edit]

Thanks Ron 1987. Your edits to LGBT rights in Utah encouraged me to review how similar pages for other states distinguish the lack of certain state protections when other protections exist within state entities like universities and political subdivisions like counties, cities and districts. Several pages include references in the main body of the article, and shorter references in the WP: Infobox. I published similar short references for the Utah Infobox which explain that the state isn't completely void of protections. The references are proved by the main body of the article. In Utah, as in many states, such protections are currently creations of state entities and political subdivisions, not the state itself. Thanks again for helping make the difference clear. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.23.47.179 (talk) 02:25, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Same-sex marriage in Oregon[edit]

You reverted a good faith edit to Same-sex marriage in Oregon, but you did not explain why. I reverted your revert because, superficially at least, the edit appears to be an improvement. —EncMstr (talk) 05:42, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

New Hampshire Questions[edit]

New Hampshire is trying to Repeal there Same-Sex Marriage Law. Where would that go on Same-sex marriage legislation in the United States? Would it be under 2.2?

I don't know where it would go or not. It looks like they are trying to take all the marriages from now on and change them to civil unions. However everyone who was married is still considered married in the state. It would be just future marriages.

Samesexmarriage101 (talk) 05:38, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Same-sex immigration policy in Brazil[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg

The article Same-sex immigration policy in Brazil has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Some text is heavily copied and may be a copyright violation.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Bearian (talk) 00:43, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Template:Same sex marriage map Europe[edit]

Neither map would be compatible with this one, as it doesn't reflect constitutional bans on same-sex marriage. Ignis Fatuus (talk) 21:48, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Re:Housing discrimination[edit]

Thanks for the heads-up. I can't believe I missed Delaware, especially since the HRC has a page about Delaware's non-discrimination laws but doesn't reflect that on its map. I went ahead and fixed my map and emailed the HRC about its mistake. Xnux 20:23, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Same-sex marriage in Alagoas[edit]

Thank you for for your help with this article. When I created it, I had simply done a copy and paste of the guy who wanted a new article's comments on the template talk page. Since most of the sources aren't in English, I found it a bit of a challenge. So again, thank you and go hog wild if you want. :-) Me-123567-Me (talk) 16:09, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Template:Same-sex unions[edit]

Let's wait for a consensus before removing. Me-123567-Me (talk) 19:31, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Ron 1987. You have new messages at Template talk:Same-sex unions.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Same-sex marriage in Alagoas[edit]

I'm getting really frustrated with your lack of communication. I removed them because they are cited. I can move the citations if necessary. They're all at the end of the paragraph right now. Me-123567-Me (talk) 19:37, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

I invite you to join me in a new discussion. --Me-123567-Me (talk) 19:51, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

AfD for Chronology_of_diplomatic_recognitions_and_relations_of_South_Sudan[edit]

You participated in a related discussion before. The current one is here. Japinderum (talk) 11:36, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

This RFC is related to the recent AfD you participated at. Japinderum (talk) 08:19, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Seeking consensus on when to edit File:Samesex marriage in USA.svg following new legislation/court-rulings[edit]

Hello, I have noticed you made edits on File talk:Samesex marriage in USA.svg and/or File talk:Samesex marriage in USA.svg/Archive 5, so I am contacting you to take part in a newly-formed discussion at File talk:Samesex marriage in USA.svg as for whether we should update the map directly when a new legislation or court-order hits the books or if we should wait until said action takes effect. Historically, we have been updating the map when the new legislation is signed (or veto overrode or won at the ballot box, etc.), and thus it can be inferred that the consensus is to update as soon as one of those occurs. A discussion has emerged in regards to whether we should begin updating from the effective date instead of from the date of signing/etc. If you have an opinion over this matter please post it at File_talk:Samesex_marriage_in_USA.svg#When_to_update_map.3F_Effective_date_or_signing.2Fruling_date

Thegreyanomaly (talk) 22:42, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

European Certificate of Succession[edit]

Are u sure that it is only a recommendation? it's listed as a regulation - hence immediately enforceable as law in all member states! Furthermore, if it were a recommendation the UK wouldn't have insisted not to be included in the draft! http://www.eia.org.uk/view.php?id=2585&PHPSESSID=66195c1e24bcfd371fed4e78935af92f Olliyeah (talk) 18:38, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

I know that we talked about it some time ago but the same matter came up in the news today (http://www.gaystarnews.com/article/push-give-gay-partners-equal-property-rights-eu120612).. it's a regulation proposed by the EU-Commision (hence not an "opinion" by the European parliament - which usually are not legally binding)!Olliyeah (talk) 14:27, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Marriage in Brazil[edit]

Excuse me, same-sex marriage is legal in Brazil (although it can't be performed directly) the country's Supreme Court ruled that two women can be legally married, and I even included a reference [3]. Even the article on Same-sex marriage in Brazil states it "In Brazil, a same-sex couple may convert their civil union into marriage with the approval of a state judge, if approved that marriage is recognized in all the national territory". --DrkFrdric (talk) 18:54, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, but the ruling states that two people of the same sex can be legally married in Brazil, maybe it wasnt the Supreme Court, but as long as the Supreme Court doesnt strike the decision down, it stands. Now, you are right, not every single judge is going to perform these marriages, but a same-sex marriage is not illegal in Brazil, that was the essence of the ruling. So, same-sex marriage is legal in Brazil, even if not a single couple is allowed to marry, the court ruling was clear: Brazilian laws permit same-sex marriage. But obvioulsy, its not like Argentina where marriages are freely performed, that's why I put a "conditional" next to it. Only one same-sex marriage being declared legal is enough to show that a country's laws dont forbid marriage between two persons of the same-sex and as I write there are probably nearly a hundred valid same-sex marriages in Brazil. --DrkFrdric (talk) 19:26, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
With all due respect, the ruling does not give them permission to get married. The point was "is the marriage of two persons of the same-sex legal under Brazilian law?" and the court said yes. --DrkFrdric (talk) 20:02, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
Yeah, that's clear, but that's not the point. The question is: "is same-sex marriage legal in X country?". In Brazil, it is, as the court ruled; even if there still isn't a way for every couple to get that right easily. --DrkFrdric (talk) 20:24, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
Certainly, same-sex couples can get married in Brazil as easily as straight couples (although they all can, because there a lot of judges giving marriage licenses in almost every Brazilian state), but this turns Barzil into a "special case", because same-sex marriage is legal, but there still isn't a bill that regulates how same-sex couples can get married, that's why couples have to go with judges, but then as I sais, same-sex marriage is legal. So we should at least add a note to make people know of the situation in the country, because it certainly is not illegal. I think the "(conditional)" illustrates this, but we could also asdd a note, as I said. --DrkFrdric (talk) 20:42, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

2012 in LGBT rihts[edit]

Just say this, not sure if it should be reverted as a notabke person. Any idea?Lihaas (talk) 06:31, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Map[edit]

Huh? What is "disgusting and unacceptable"[4]? You might want to join in the discussion on the map; I have no idea what you're objecting to. — kwami (talk) 21:04, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

The colors are from Colorbrewer, which accommodates RG color blindness. Also, one of the problems with the current scheme is that it suggests that state-recognized marriage (light blue) is less legal recognition than no recognition of marriage (medium blue), which is backwards.
The distinction between 'most' (married in all but name) and 'some' (distinctly less than the rights of married) is not ours, but taken from the ILGA.
kwami (talk) 23:53, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

same sex marriage[edit]

Hi there, once the ballots are officially certified this month and will definatly be on the november ballot can they be added to the timeline page Guyb123321 (talk) 09:39, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

June 2012[edit]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed your recent edit to Same-sex marriage in Iceland does not have an edit summary. Please provide one before saving your changes to an article, as the summaries are quite helpful to people browsing an article's history. Thanks! Me-123567-Me (talk) 18:44, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Czesc[edit]

Hi! i am a spanish boy, i have lived in poland for a year. :) are you polish? --BernardaAlba (talk) 09:29, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Thay´s cool. And you participate in any assotation or movement about LGBT rights appart of "cyber activism"? --BernardaAlba (talk) 10:03, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

New Zealand Same Sex Marriage[edit]

Hi Ron I have noticed you have deleted my edit of: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Same-sex_marriage_in_New_Zealand&pe=1&#Public_opinion

I was wondering why you keep removing my edit.

I would like to discus the topic and come up with a consensus as I belief my points are valid.

Cheers

CRaZyKcNz (talk) 05:14, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

What the hell happened to WP:COMMONNAME? How the hell is "Question 1" more accessible for readers (who, especially as time marches on) are unlikely have a clue one what the ballot position of the question was? How is it absurd to reverse a move that was made without consensus as admitted on the talk page by the proposer? Aside from a visceral love of irrelevancies like "official" names, do you have any reason for your reversion? Having an article called Proposition 8 or Proposition 187 is reasonable because that is, in popular culture, what those are known as, but "Question 1" has no such currency. -Rrius (talk) 16:23, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Template_talk:Czech_elections#Presidential_Elections_prior_to_2013[edit]

Hello, seeing that you have contributed to the Template:Czech elections, I would like to invite you to share your view on inclusion of presidential elections prior to 2013 to the list. Thank you, Cimmerian praetor (talk) 12:55, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

A cup of coffee for you![edit]

A small cup of coffee.JPG Thank you for adding template:LGBT in Washington State to appropriate articles. Navigational templates like this do a lot to help readers find information they need and it makes a big difference. Blue Rasberry (talk) 20:29, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
Working Man's Barnstar.png The Working Man's Barnstar
For updating vote totals and checking many edits for correctness. Hekerui (talk) 10:06, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Oaxaca[edit]

He Ron, I reverted your revert based on my reading of the source. Feel free to re-revert however if I am missing something (data from those South American states is... complicated)... L.tak (talk) 23:34, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

same sex marriage map[edit]

He Ron, saw your revert of the South America map, but am unfortunately not capable of doing it myself (as the map does not have those handy svg-labels per state that are available in us etc...). How can we get that updated; are you capable of doing that? I am not very happy with an incorrect map, although I understand that it is good to keep consistency between the different same sex maps; so this situation can not stay there for weeks I'd say... L.tak (talk) 10:28, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi[edit]

I'm in the process of completing my edits to Maryland Question 6. The template I added is not the same as the one in the results section. My preference would be to have Washington, Maine, and Maryland look the same. If you prefer not having both on the page, I will re-write the results section. Please don't remove the template. I spent time making it. Thank you. Teammm talk
email
05:25, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

New Mexico Marriage Bill[edit]

Hey Ron, I know you update Same-sex marriage legislation in the United States a majority of the time. A House member in the state is proposing a consitutional amendment to legalize marriage equality in the state of New Mexico. Where would that go on that page. Like what section would it go in? http://www.nmlegis.gov/lcs/_session.aspx?chamber=H&legtype=JR&legno=3&year=13 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Samesexmarriage101 (talkcontribs) 20:45, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill - Tellers[edit]

Hi Ron,

The UK Parliamentary system is a little antiquated and anachronistic so I entirely understand why people from other countries often make mistakes when describing how it works. There are some guides produced by Parliament on votes and the roles of tellers here:

[[5]]

[[6]]

[[7]]

Although tellers do count the votes - and always support the votes they are counting - they do not technically vote themselves and so are in a slightly different position to all of the rest of the MPs who voted a certain way. As such, it's always useful to make this clear and the Parliamentary guidance in the third link notes that "...reports on some websites will, for instance, report “189 + 2 tell” as having voted in a certain way".

I hope this helps :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chid12 (talkcontribs) 10:24, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Finland Marriage[edit]

It was killed by committee but there will be a citizens initiative to force parliament to vote on the bill. --Smart (talk) 12:20, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Re: Argentina[edit]

Do you have any sources which are in English? And what way do you think this can be presented in the lead, as it most certainly is a notable fact? --Scientiom (talk) 14:54, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

LGBT at North Korea[edit]

  • “그리고 북한에서도 동성애자에 대해서는“세기말적인 부르주아적 타락”으로 몰아세우고 있다.”(And North Korea also lashed out at the LGBT is “decay of bourgeois at the end of a century”.), 《미국 공인회계사 손헌수의 시카고 통신

And according to testimony of North Korean defectors, LGBTs were shot to death at North Korea. Thank you. --Idh0854 (talk) 16:57, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Also, according to source of Japanese wikipedia, Woman's LGBT was publicly executed in North Korea. Thank you. --Idh0854 (talk) 02:39, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Same-sex union legislation Chile[edit]

I noticed that you deleted my entries for Chile (and replaced one for 2013 which is wrong as you can read in the references) arguing that These bills died in the committee, they were not voted by the parliament. I don't know where did you get that information which is incorrect as you may see in the references I posted. I intend to put my entries again if there is no objection in the talk page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kallme (talkcontribs) 21:31, 12 April 2013 (UTC)


Recognition of same-sex unions in Albania[edit]

I removed that part because it misleadingly suggested that same-sex marriage was not legalized because of the boycott.There was nor real promise,it was actually just a political stunt by the premier to suggest that Albania is european.Now that the opposition has returned to the Parliament the government has never mentioned the issue at all even if we are in an election year Vargmali (talk) 06:58, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Edit summary[edit]

"Bad idea" is a very poor edit summary, it tells me nothing as to why you reverted. CTF83! 23:52, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Marriage Equality Maps[edit]

Please stop outright reverting my map edits. diff If you would like to change something, alter what I have added, and then upload an improved version.

When you revert something I have worked hard on, I do not feel good about the Wikipedia project. WP:BITE

I do not think “looks bad” is a useful edit summary diff diff and summaries written this way hurt my feelings as a wikipedian. Thank you ―Info por favor (talk) 17:33, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

You are now a reviewer[edit]

Wikipedia Reviewer.svg

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges. A full list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on will be at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

File:World marriage-equality laws.svg[edit]

Info por favor (talk) 23:43, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Ron 1987. You have new messages at File talk:World marriage-equality laws.svg.
Message added 23:43, 20 May 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Germany and Croatian accession[edit]

Stop reverting referenced content. The link [8] clearly states that Germany has obtained parliamentary approval. Shokatz (talk) 10:45, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Shokatz (talk) 14:12, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Same Sex Marriage in Italy[edit]

Hi,

i saw that u added another bill for SSM in Italy. I made a quick research and found that there are dozens of other bills which would establish SSM/civil unions/registered partnerships and have been presented to the parliament in this legislative period! So what should we do? I need to add them all or remove the ones we already put in the list! What do you think?

as an example: http://www.senato.it/leg/17/BGT/Schede_v3/Ddliter/39495.htm http://www.senato.it/leg/17/BGT/Schede_v3/Ddliter/39865.htm http://www.senato.it/leg/17/BGT/Schede_v3/Ddliter/39506.htm http://www.senato.it/leg/17/BGT/Schede_v3/Ddliter/40058.htm

Additionally i looked at the members of the Justice comitteee and those bills don't have a chance to pass that stage, if the government isn't united on bringing a bill forward.Olliyeah (talk) 21:56, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Template:Same-sex unions in the United States[edit]

Hi, please take a look at Template talk:Same-sex unions in the United States#Civil unions recognized but no longer available. Thanks, SPQRobin (talk) 20:21, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Same-sex marriage in Mexico[edit]

Hi Ron, I moved the discussion from here to Template_talk:Same-sex_unions#Mexico as the issue seems to be recurrent in the template. I hope you don't mind. Cheers, --Xocoyotzin (talk) 22:53, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Template:LGBT in Japan[edit]

Yaoi has nothing to do with LGBT. Yaoi is culture of the heterosexuals. It is inappropriate to write in Template:LGBT in Japan.

ヤオイ(Yaoi)は1970年代の日本で、異性愛女性に生み出されたものです。ja:森鴎外の娘のja:森茉莉が、書いたのが一番最初ですが。基本的にヤオイは異性愛者の文化です。ゲイ男性の多くはヤオイは読みません。

Yaoi was produced in Japan of the 1970s by a heterosexually oriented woman. It is Mori Mari first to have written. Yaoi is culture of the heterosexuals. Most of gay men do not read Yaoi. It has nothing to do with the culture of LGBT.--Leoxaq (talk) 05:54, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Template:LGBT in Japan it's appropriate place to write about it. It's related topic. Ron 1987 (talk) 07:27, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
Yaoi is a cltures of the heterosexuals, by the heterosexuals, for the heterosexuals. It isn't related topic.--Leoxaq (talk) 07:47, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
You don't have any reliable sources to support your claims. Yaoi presents homoerotic or homoromantic male androphilic sexual relationships, so it is related topic. ~~
Yaio is an imaginary product of the hetero woman. It is different from the real homosexual. source:「オトコノコのためのボーイフレド」(1986,Japan)P72[9].--121.103.7.76 (talk) 02:53, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Since your talk page, IIRC, is how I learned about this topic in the first place, let me ping you that the discussion is now taking place at Template talk:LGBT in Japan. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 17:00, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 12[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited LGBT rights in Moldova, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Pîrliţa (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:58, 12 October 2013 (UTC)


LGBT adoption (Portugal)[edit]

Hi, you may have noticed my edit of your edit of my edit in LGBT adoption. I'm very open to any better drafting, but it is indeed incorrect to say that the bill was rejected in the second vote. The reference you gave yourself clearly says "adiamento da votação" ("postponement of vote"), so there was no second vote and the bill is technically still pending (as the parliamentary site I have referred to also says), but for the time being effectively blocked, while the motion to have a referendum is being discussed. Sigur (talk) 23:03, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

Polish article on civil partnerships[edit]

Please have a look at Polish article on Civil partnerships. It has been owned by a few editors. Have a look yourself.--188.79.94.53 (talk) 20:27, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

What is your problem?[edit]

It seems that you clearly intend to undo/delete every edit/contribution I make. Do you like to bite much? --Keshetsven (talk) 16:34, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Reference Errors on 8 December[edit]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:20, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Removing category[edit]

I'm trying to understand why you removed this category here. What is the rationale? hamiltonstone (talk) 05:17, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

January 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to LGBT rights in Peru may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • | [[File:Yes check.svg|15px|Yes]])

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 23:25, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Thank You[edit]

I'm just writting to say Thank You for this template below and your support, my Polish friend. --g. balaxaZe 15:18, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

Flag map of the Republic of Georgia.png This user supports Georgian membership in the European Union.

Edit summaries[edit]

I know others have said it before here on your talk page, but I'd like to remind you to use edit summaries so others have an idea what your edits change or intend to do. (I know I don't always use it myself, but I try to think of it.) Thanks! SPQRobin (talk) 14:20, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Date formatting[edit]

I just reverted your change in date format because WP:BADDATEFORMAT says that DD-MM-YYYY is an "unacceptable date format". It looks like you've been making a bunch of these edits, so you should probably go back and fix them. TDL (talk) 19:04, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Review[edit]

Hi, what does it mean when someone "reviews" a Wikipedia page? I got a notification that said you reviewed Same-sex marriage in Kentucky.. --Prcc27 (talk) 03:16, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

April 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to LGBT rights in Gibraltar may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • //www.vox.gi/Politics/Elections-2007/GGR_Makes_Submission_to_UK_Parliament-09102007.html</ref><ref>[http://www.ukgaynews.org.uk/Archive/07/Oct/1602.htm</ref><ref>[http://www.vox.gi/Local/GGR_Welcomes_

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 05:45, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

LGBT adoption by singles[edit]

Recognition of Foreign marriage in Malta[edit]

My name is Kenneth Grima a Maltese citizen and I phoned few days ago at the Public Registry Department in Malta to the head of the department Ms.Melinda Zahra to see what documents I need to register my marriage ( I married in 2005 in The Netherlands as my husband is Dutch) and it is gonna be recognized as a marriage but they will be registering them from mid to end of June 2014 as soon as all paper work is effected. The Law although published in both Maltese and English the Maltese version is the effective one and in the Maltese version it is clearly stated that foreign marriages effected abroad will be recognized as marriages and nothing inferior to that. If you want to check for yourself, her e-mail is ermelinda.zahra@gov.mt. One cannot base on the English version as Maltese is the official language when it comes to laws and legal matters, so if you are not a Maltese native speaker it will be very difficult for you or for anybody else to translate correctly the Maltese version and the English one is just for guidance more than offical laws in fact it is stipulated by law that if there are any differences between the 2 versions the Maltese one takes always precedence. Kenneth Grima ) 12:38, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Pride 2014[edit]

Hi Ron. (I think you are familiar with this efforts, but...) In case you are not aware, there is an upcoming campaign to improve coverage of LGBT-related topics on Wikipedia, culminating with an international edit-a-thon on June 21. See Wiki Loves Pride 2014 for more information. If you are interested, you might consider creating a page for a major city (or cities!) near you, with a list of LGBT-related articles that need to be created or improved. This would be a tremendous help to Wikipedia and coverage of LGBT culture and history. Thanks for your consideration, and please let me know if you have any questions! --Another Believer (Talk) 16:43, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

May 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Same-sex union legislation may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • ], [[Cyprus]], [[Greece]], [[Israel]], [[Italy]], [[Peru]], [[Philippines]], [[Poland]] and [[Slovenia].
  • 28aa01%29.pdf |title=Article 64, 1992 Constitution of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam (as amended 25 December 2001 |format=PDF |accessdate=2014-01-05}}</ref>

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 20:57, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Moving Montana page[edit]

It's not letting me move it. Here's what comes up: The page could not be moved: a page of that name already exists, or the name you have chosen is not valid. GayTenn (talk) 03:04, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

LGBT rights in the Pitcairn Islands listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

Information.svg

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect LGBT rights in the Pitcairn Islands. Since you had some involvement with the LGBT rights in the Pitcairn Islands redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Greggydude (talk) 18:11, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

LGBT rights in Inner Mongolia listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

Information.svg

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect LGBT rights in Inner Mongolia. Since you had some involvement with the LGBT rights in Inner Mongolia redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. TheChampionMan1234 00:18, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Same sex marriage in Kosovo; using the old constitution.[edit]

The constitution that you provided information from is no longer available. The new constitution was ruled in 2008 and it clearly states the same sex marriage position. The new constitution made the headlines with this topic.

The 2004 Family law is no longer available. The constitution of the REPUBLIC of Kosovo can be read here: http://www.kryeministri-ks.net/repository/docs/Constitution1Kosovo.pdf — Preceding unsigned comment added by PjeterPeter (talkcontribs) 16:52, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

Luxembourg promulgation[edit]

Do you happen to know or are able to find any source on when the Luxembourg law might be promulgated by the Grand Duke, and we can uncloak Luxembourg on the same-sex unions template? Dralwik|Have a Chat 19:01, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

July 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to LGBT rights in the European Union may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • |}

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 05:13, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

LGBT rights in x articles[edit]

Can you give me a reason why you reverted the neutral term 'public promotion of LGBT issues' and added the liberally biased term 'Pride parade'? The term 'Pride parade' is not a WP:NPOV. – Plarem (User talk) 09:58, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Your term is certanly not neutral and is weird. Stop to impose your personal views. There is no consensus for this change. You should read BRD, Consensus. Ron 1987 (talk) 21:02, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

WikiDefender Barnstar Hires.png The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
For your help determining a pattern of disruptive behavior from a POV editor on a large number of LGBT related articles.--Mark Miller (talk) 20:36, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Language icons[edit]

Hi, why are you reverting the edits of Monkbot (talk · contribs), as with this edit? --Redrose64 (talk) 00:05, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

Also here. --Redrose64 (talk) 10:00, 13 November 2014 (UTC)