Content deleted Content added
Binksternet (talk | contribs) →SBA List: zygote |
Lurielurie (talk | contribs) →John Lurie: new section |
||
Line 166: | Line 166: | ||
:::I have one question though, and you don't have to answer if you don't want to: You referred to abortion as "fetus killing". To kill means "to deprive of life in any manner", according to the dictionary. By calling it "fetus killing", are you admitting that the fetus is a life? [[User:NYyankees51|NYyankees51]] ([[User talk:NYyankees51|talk]]) 23:43, 11 March 2011 (UTC) |
:::I have one question though, and you don't have to answer if you don't want to: You referred to abortion as "fetus killing". To kill means "to deprive of life in any manner", according to the dictionary. By calling it "fetus killing", are you admitting that the fetus is a life? [[User:NYyankees51|NYyankees51]] ([[User talk:NYyankees51|talk]]) 23:43, 11 March 2011 (UTC) |
||
::::The sperm-fertilized egg, the zygote, is a life in my book. [[User:Binksternet|Binksternet]] ([[User talk:Binksternet#top|talk]]) 01:01, 12 March 2011 (UTC) |
::::The sperm-fertilized egg, the zygote, is a life in my book. [[User:Binksternet|Binksternet]] ([[User talk:Binksternet#top|talk]]) 01:01, 12 March 2011 (UTC) |
||
== John Lurie == |
|||
Shame on you Binksternet. Inventing source material to gas up someone you serve is frowned upon. Isn't it? |
|||
Lurielurie (talk) 01:30, 8 March 2011 (UTC) |
|||
No material was invented. Sources are cited. I serve only myself and Wikipedia. Binksternet (talk) 02:14, 8 March 2011 (UTC) |
|||
Better put. Clearly, you are self-serving. And yes, your sources are cited. Unfortunately the passage to which you refer does not exist on page 206 of Bowman, nor does Lurie's or O'brien's name appear in the index. |
|||
Your edit stating that Lurie has painted since the 70's and 80's, based on the reference you cited is also thin (at best), a fabrication (at worst). Unless a BLP subject's claims about themselves are acceptable support, I suggest you clean up your mess. |
|||
I can only imagine what other havoc you have wreaked on Wikipedia with your deliberate willingness to misinform in the interest of serving yourself. |
|||
If the anecdote you cited appears elsewhere in Bowman, please direct me to the proper page, I will stand corrected, and owe you an apology. |
|||
If it does not, may I suggest you direct your self-serving energies someplace other than Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lurielurie (talk • contribs) 05:16, 8 March 2011 (UTC) |
|||
Bowman page 206, just like in the cite: "Downtowner John Lurie was supposed to be in the movie, but turned down a part after O'Brien asked Lurie's black girlfriend to make girlfriend to make them some pancakes." |
|||
No need for personal attacks, man. Binksternet (talk) 05:32, 8 March 2011 (UTC) |
|||
Since you have somehow removed my previous correspondence, I say again; I am not sure why you assume I am a man, nor how you can characterize anything I have said as personal attack since you say plainly above that you serve yourself. |
|||
Also, and again, your edits which reference Bowman are wildly inaccurate and reflect your bias, as do many of your other edits. |
|||
I repeat, you are in big trouble.Lurielurie (talk) 08:58, 8 March 2011 (UTC) |
|||
Your threat is lost on me. My editing of the article is well referenced. "Wildly inaccurate" does not describe any of my work at John Lurie's bio. Binksternet (talk) 15:21, 8 March 2011 (UTC) |
|||
Where, based on your reference, do you get that "He (Lurie) would have accepted a larger role but for..."? And where do you find that Lurie has painted since the 70's? |
|||
It is clear you are editing on behalf of Lurie in an attempt to make him appear more favorable. |
|||
I have issued no threat. My statement that you are in trouble is simply an observation relative to your desire to be perceived as an editor. You are, by your own admission, self-serving. That makes you decidedly not an editor, but an advocate. |
|||
Unfortunately, it is contributors like you that allow people to question the validity of Wikipedia. |
|||
Shame on you.Lurielurie (talk) 17:20, 8 March 2011 (UTC) |
|||
Hello Binksternet, this is Maria, John Lurie's assistant. There seems to be vandalism going on John's profile and some of the information is inaccurate and misleading. Could you please contact me at art@strangeandbeautiful.com so I can provide you with the correct information? Thank you for you time. |
|||
If I get "the correct information" from you it would be original research on my part. Wikipedia uses only published information, and has a hard policy specifying WP:No original research. Your best bet it to get the correct information in print so I can quote it. Binksternet (talk) 18:03, 9 March 2011 (UTC) [[User:Lurielurie|Lurielurie]] ([[User talk:Lurielurie|talk]]) 13:34, 12 March 2011 (UTC) |