I know one person really, really disagrees with this, but I can't see there being many objections if it is put back in there. Wouldn't it make more sense to put his own correction into the article, rather than his mistake? However, since I've gone from an administrator in very good standing to an edit warrior , I'll no longer be editing this article. Anyway, that's my view. She did not pose for Playboy and will not. When you're out to make someone look bad, always describe them as "anti-" something [28] rather than for something. Gaming the system Neutrality in this attack coatrack of a living person hasn't existed since it was created, from a redirect to Deal or No Deal , on April 21st. HARM For removal of sourced content emph.

Free carrie prejean sex video

Finally, votestacking does not require voting, which almost never happens on Wikipedia anyway; votestacking is an attempt to influence consensus. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? Own and puts and keeps unencyclopedic content in the article via WP: John Darrow referred to this policy, when opposing inclusion of the boob job. No, it is a similar situation and should be dealt with similarly - briefly mention it and move on. I agree with AniMate. What we should be striving for is a neutral article that presents the positive and negative aspects of the subject as reported by reliable 3rd party sources. A gang member then unilaterally declares " consensus " [5] to violate Wikipedia policies and guidelines. I know how you are and its not right if you are selecting things for me. It'd be a lot easier to stop quoting the same policies, if you'd stop arguing the opposite of what they say. You keep using that word. Are you really going to try to argue that this should be included based on WP: The only thing to do is clean them up, make them as streamlined and non-breathlessly adoring as possible, and carry on. Or maybe she'll go back to selling shoes, or whatever it was she did before this brouhaha. That's what integrity means. I don't recall Prejean ever confirming this. While I agree that the BLP is important, the policy specifically disallows this type of editing. Vote , despite WP: Additionally, "no clear consensus on the matter" means simply that: I also think that mentioning it at the level that Filthyfix wishes is ridiculous. No reasonable person would believe that all these editors -- that are so interested in homosexuality or same-sex marriage -- are here by random chance. By rights all three articles should be deleted, but I doubt it will ever happen, so we're stuck with them. Incidentally, do we have any source that's more reliable that Shanna Moakler to confirm Miss Prejean's private medical history, because Playmate Moakler never seemed very reliable to me. She has become a well-known figure now and losing the crown does not mean the article should be deleted. But it's worth bringing up. It's pretty disgusting to see people's activism amounting to attacking a living person with every derogatory thing that appears in a newspaper somewhere but not one like the New York Times or Washington Post , gossip website, Google Docs [8] , or on TV! You parade them around in swimsuits and then ask their opinion on the world's most intractable problems.

Free carrie prejean sex video

Video about free carrie prejean sex video:

Carrie Prejean Offered Millions For Masturbation Tape

SyntaxTextGen not activated

Free carrie prejean sex video

0 thoughts on “Free carrie prejean sex video

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *