Hello, you recently participated in a straw poll concerning a link at the Campaign for "santorum" neologism article. I am giving all the poll participants a heads-up that a RfC on the same issue is being conducted here. B^e——C_ritical 19:45, 1 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "Santorum vs santorum". Thank you. --The Gnome (talk) 07:57, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, since you recently participated in an RfC at Campaign for "santorum" neologism, I thought you might be interested in this proposal for renaming the article, or perhaps another of the rename proposals on the page. Best, B^e——C_ritical 22:03, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

	New England Wikimedia General Meeting
	The New England Wikimedia General Meeting will be a large-scale meetup of all Wikimedians (and friends) from the New England area in order to discuss regional coordination and possible formalization of our community (i.e., a chapter). Come hang out with other Wikimedians, learn more about ongoing activities, and help plan for the future! Potential topics: What is a Wikimedia chapter and should we work towards one? Planning of regular Boston meetups (any other New England cities?) Planning for upcoming coordinated events (Wikipedia Love Libraries, Wiki Loves Monuments, Wiknic, etc.) Outreach to universities (WikiProject Academical Village) and cultural institutions (GLAM) Wikimania DC is this summer. Your ideas!
	Sunday, April 22 1:30 PM – 4:30 PM	Conference Room C06, Johnson Building, Boston Public Library—Central Library 700 Boylston St., Boston MA 02116
Please sign up here: Wikipedia:Meetup/New England!

Message delivered by Dominic at 09:04, 11 April 2012 (UTC). Note: You can remove your name from this meetup invite list here.[reply]

Hey, ZSB. My new essay/rant User:Chaos5023/Why your entire way of thinking about the Abortion Article Titles RFC is wrong expands on and clarifies the issues that I was bringing up in our discussion in the RFC. Check it out. —chaos5023 (talk) 23:03, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. As a participant in Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Abortion article titles, you may wish to register an opinion on its followup RFC, Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Abortion advocacy movement coverage, which is now in its community feedback phase. Please note that WP:RFC/AAMC is not simply a repeat of WP:RFC/AAT, and is attempting to achieve better results by asking a more narrowly-focused, policy-based question of the community. Assumptions based on the previous RFC should be discarded before participation, particularly the assumption that Wikipedia has or inherently needs to have articles covering generalized perspective on each side of abortion advocacy, and that what we are trying to do is come up with labels for that. Thanks! —chaos5023 20:34, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Decemmber 8 - Wikipedia Loves Libraries Seattle - You're invited

Date Saturday, December 8, 2012 Time 10 a.m. – 3 p.m. Location Seattle Public Library Meeting Room 1 on Level 4, Central Library, 1000 4th Avenue, Seattle WA, 98104 Event An editathon on Seattle-related Wikipedia articles with Wikipedia tutorials and Librarian assistance on hand. Hashtag #wikiloveslib or #glamwiki. Registration http://wll-seattle.eventbrite.com or use on-wiki regsistration. Yours, Maximilianklein (talk) 03:34, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Jurassic Park (film). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 03:15, 20 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Final Fantasy VII: Advent Children. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 04:15, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Paramount Pictures. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 04:15, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Dragon Ball. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 09:17, 19 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Terra Nova (TV series). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 10:16, 3 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:SF1 (television). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 10:21, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Flickr. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 11:15, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You are invited to the 2nd Annual Wikimedia New England General Meeting, on 20 July 2013 in Boston! We will be talking about the future of the chapter, including GLAM, Wiki Loves Monuments, and where we want to take our chapter in the future! EdwardsBot (talk) 09:44, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:RetroArch. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 11:15, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:The Twisted Whiskers Show. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 12:15, 2 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I largely agree with the relevance of your recent comments in the homophobia thread. But I don't think your adding the "don't mean to pull as s..." comment adds anything to the discussion, and there is a good case to be made its a personal attack and a violation of BLP. I suggest you consider deleting that part of the comment. The ref desks are supposed to be held to the same standards as in these regards as article space. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Medeis (talk • contribs) 15:26, 2013 August 12

I don't agree, but I also don't think it's worth either of our time (either of our times? What's the right grammar there?) to get into a big thing over it. I also concede my own possible bias as one of the upholders, perhaps even partisans, of the retention or expansion of the page I linked to. Thanks for taking time to point out where I might have come off as a dick, if nothing else. ☯.ZenSwashbuckler.☠ 19:38, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I had a question. Is the "belly of a whore" comment in the Tanakh? I remember the story of Onan, but not specifically that phrase. μηδείς (talk) 19:54, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I just spent half an hour trying to track down a source for the quote and for the life of me I can't find a citation. I think it must have just been spoken tangentially by my English teacher in the Bible [as root of English literature] class I took in high school lo these few years ago, but I couldn't tell you where he got it from. And yet before this very hour I would have sworn up and down that it was right there in Genesis. But Onan is struck down without so much as a single spoken word from the LORD, let alone that loaded quotation. Sometimes the malleability of the [my] human mind is just disheartening. ☯.ZenSwashbuckler.☠ 20:28, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

....

PS, "Either of our time" is correct. Use the singular when that's what applies to the individual. One wouldn't say "we each got shot in the heads". μηδείς (talk) 19:54, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

OK, the shot in the head example makes sense. But what if I say "Hold on, I'll do it with the oven mitt - I don't want either of our hands to get burned" - or better yet, "I don't want to get either of our butts shot off."? Since there are two of us, there are two butts in danger, thus the plural is called for, no? But that still sounds wrong as "...either of our *times." ☯.ZenSwashbuckler.☠ 20:28, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that is the appropriate counter-example to bring up. When the item is governed by "our" or "their" then the plural is correct because the pronoun is plural. They each got shot in the head vs They got shot in their heads. (My answer "either of our time" was wrong because time here is a mass noun like "not worth either of our money"--while "times" would mean instances, like "not worth either of our attempts".) μηδείς (talk) 17:37, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That clears that up then. Thanks for the assistance. ☯.ZenSwashbuckler.☠ 19:11, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Shooting of Trayvon Martin. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 12:16, 17 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Mariah Carey. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 13:15, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Disambiguation. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 01:23, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Zenswashbuckler. I noticed that you recently made this edit at Rick Santorum's views on homosexuality. Your edit restored a link from that article to Sigmund Freud's views on homosexuality. I think I should point out that Sigmund Freud's views on homosexuality likewise contained a link to Rick Santorum's views on homosexuality, but that link was removed. As I pointed out on the talk page of the article about Freud's views, it doesn't seem to make sense that there should be a link from the Santorum article to the Freud article but not vice versa. It might help if you could comment there. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 20:39, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The purpose of the edit was to revert what seemed to be an obvious case of simple vandalism - a section heading and the wlink were deleted without any explanation whatsoever by an IP with an empty talk page and only two other edits (one of which was a restoration of several instances of the deprecated term "BC" in place of the MOS-approved "BCE"). I agree that Freud's views on homosexuality don't have much to do with Santorum's views, except to refute them. I have no objection to the removal of the wlink if you wish to delete with an actual explanation in the edit summary. ☯.ZenSwashbuckler.☠ 20:57, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The IP made two edits, and if you look, you'll see that the first edit did have an explanation. Maybe it's best to look carefully at exactly what changes are being made before reaching the conclusion that the edits are vandalism? (Unrelated edits by the IP to an article on the Aramaic language are not really relevant). FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 21:06, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I do take note of edits made before jumping to conclusions. However, since two words isn't much of an explanation, and the section removal had no summary, I don't think the conclusion I came to was unreasonable. And while obviously edits to Aramaic are not relevant, the contentious nature of the BC-AD/BCE-CE fight that takes place in other sectors of Wikipedia, and this IP's seeming participation in it, certainly did support the possibility that the edit was not made for constructive reasons. Looking again, I see the date of that edit should have clued me in that this might not be the case. But it sounds like we've cleared it all up now. Thanks for your time. ☯.ZenSwashbuckler.☠ 21:20, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:The Big Bang Theory. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:10, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:PrankvsPrank. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:11, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:List of Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (2012 TV series) characters. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:09, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Zenswashbuckler. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 04:41, 14 November 2013 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Sportsguy17 04:41, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]