User talk:Lord Patrick

Welcome!

Hello, Lord Patrick, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! SqueakBox 05:47, May 26, 2005 (UTC)

SuperShadow VfD

Greetings: pawing through the SuperShadow edit history, I noticed you've edited the page in question before. I thought you'd want to know it is now the subject of a Vote for Deletion, at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SuperShadow. If you want, you could stop in there and cast a vote. --Maru 22:09, 4 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Joe Mele's talk page

See User_talk:RN#.3D.3DJoe.27s_Talk_Page.3D.3D please :) Ryan Norton ^{T | @ | C} 07:02, 27 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'll remember that. Lord Patrick 03:33, 28 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Just wanted to say thanks for your help and comments on the autism and related articles! Ryan Norton ^{T | @ | C} 07:06, 27 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

JoeMele

I don't think its going to be that much of a problem anymore - he was kicked out of AFF on the third and we haven't heard much from him since then and he even reverted some of his own questionable edits... Rdos is giving us some problems on Talk:Asperger's syndrome though, so the fun hasn't ended yet :). Ryan Norton ^{T | @ | C} 07:27, 9 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Well, and I admit I was a little harsh too and feel sorry for the guy :\. Ryan Norton ^{T | @ | C} 08:46, 9 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, it's just that he doesn't seem to want to admit that he HAS made personal attacks/Nazi analogies and genuinely apologise fully to the people here. I will try to be less critical of him. But I think that he did bring this upon himself, and feel a much greater magnitude of sympathy for those he attacked (in a very offensive manner too) after all the hard work they have done on the autism articles. I think that the level of harshness was appropriate for the situation.

Lord Patrick 03:14, 10 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah - that's a problem. Also, I may have spoken too soon too, we'll see how it goes I guess. Ryan Norton ^{T | @ | C} 03:24, 10 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hello!

P.B. Pilh e t / Talk has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Smile at others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Happy editing!

Hey there, Patrick! I see that you used my "God" and "Evolution" userboxes; you're one of the first people to use them. Thanks!

By the way, I noticed that you're a Catholic, yet you support same-sex marriage. How do you justify that with the Bible (not to mention Catholic teaching)? I don't mean to be offensive, I'm just curious about your viewpoint, that's all :-)

Happy editing! -- P.B. Pilh e t / Talk 03:53, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello to you too, P.B. As for my views on such matters, I feel that such laws fall under the same category as those prohibiting women leaving their houses during menstruation. Laws dictated by the rabbis of that time for Levites recorded and kept for historical reference. As for church teaching, well, I think that the Church, being run by fallible human beings, can sometimes be prone to errors such as these. I am also skeptical of claims that make out God as a violent, irrational, hateful being who hates his own creations for the nature in which he created them. Indeed, I find such implications of a petulant and malevolent deity to be blasphemous.

Lord Patrick 07:34, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you in that there are some laws that don't pertain to us anymore, such as the dietary laws. However, both the Old and the New Testament prohibits homosexuality, in my view, anyway. St. Paul spoke several times against it, and said that no immoral person will enter Heaven. He agreed that the gentiles didn't have to keep all the Jewish laws, such as the dietary laws; but they did have to keep from immorality. I'm not saying that people of the same sex can't love one another (far from it), they just can't engage in sexual actions (which I believe were intended only for a man and a woman within the bounds of marriage). And as for God hating His own creation, take note of several things:

God never hates people; only sin.
God did not create man in a sinful state; that was man's own fault.
God only acts harshly with people who refuse to repent (and in the Old Testament, there were many, many of these people).
God Himself came down and died a horrible death so that we didn't have to be punished.

I simply cannot imagine Jesus allowing two men or two women to engage in sexual acts. I'm sorry if you don't agree, but that's my opinion. Just let me state that I absolutely do not mean to be offensive in any way. It's not my intention to come off as an incivil, pushy know-it-all :-)

God bless! -- P.B. Pilh e t / Talk 22:11, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

While this discussion is interesting, it is probably better carried out on an internet forum than Wikipedia. Also, if you're going to argue it's "unnatural", I could argue the sinfulness and evil of the Internet, which was created after the Fall. Don't forget vaccinations, penicillin, the Catechism, fast food, cars, radio, TV, computers, electricity, clothes, etc..

Also, St. Paul at that time was speaking his opinion on the Romans pederasty (which was extremely common in his time), which was homosexuality in a loose sense of the term. In any case, as St. Paul, for all his wisdom, was merely a sinful and fallible human being, and was not the Lord sanctioned Pontiff, he cannot speak infallibly on such matters. And one must not forget that the Pope's too are mortal men, and sometimes like the rest of us slip up, or have flaws. After all, if humans were perfect and infallible, then Christ's death would be pointless. -- Lord Patrick 22:24, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting view, but I simply don't agree. What you're basically saying is that the Bible (more specifically, it's laws), are completely unreliable. This allows you to pick and choose what you want from it, and throw away anything you don't like (in modern times, this is called liberalism). Further, while I do say that homosexuality is unnatural, I don't believe that vaccinations, the Internet, cars, etc. is unnatural. How could they be? In the Book of Genesis, God commands man to use science to subdue the earth; cars, radio, and modern medicine are all forms of great scientific advances that society has made.

By the way, Paul was specifically commissioned by Christ on the road to Damascus to teach His teachings, and Paul himself supported that claim by saying that all of his teachings were inspired by Christ.

If you want to continue this discussion, I have a personal "wiki" website of my own that we could use. Here's the link:

Inspirational Music Wiki

Once you're there, just create an account and go to User:Justin Matas, which is my userpage there.

I like to keep an open mind when discussing things about Christianity, so I'd love to keep up this little "argument" :-) God bless, P.B. Pilh e t / Talk 02:27, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use images

Hi. It might be a good idea to remove Image:Kimjongil-wave.jpg, Image:Flyingdalek.jpg, Image:Tv sesame street Beautiful Day.jpg, and Image:Ming.gif from User:Lord Patrick/Random Insandity since fair use images are not supposed to be used in the user space according to fair use criterion #9. Thanks. Khatru2 04:58, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Invasive species

If you haven't read the Human talk page yet, you should. I explored the issue pretty thoroughly and talked my around to supporting the removal of the tag. Any comments are of course welcome. TimVickers 04:11, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I forgot to read and have since reverted it. Lord Patrick 04:12, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Article in need of cleanup - please assist if you can

The article Arabs and antisemitism, to which you have helped contribute, has been flagged as requiring cleanup.

If possible, we would appreciate your assistance in cleaning up this article to bring it up to Wikipedia's quality standards. If you are unsure what the nature of the problem is, please discuss this on the article's talk page.
If you do not want to receive bot-generated messages on your talk page, please consider using the nobots template on your user talk page

Your userbox contradiction

Lord Patrick, you have a userbox saying you oppose drug legalization while another saying you are libertarian. This is contradictory, as you know libertarians in America are the most vociferous opponent of War on Drugs. Plus, prohibition of drugs is one of the most appalling un-libertarian practice, as according to libertarianism we own our bodies and have the natural rights to do anything with it, including putting drugs in it. Wooyi 20:18, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey

Hey there Lord Patrick. I will oppose you greatly on the conversation we have on Revan, but would you like to be on my home page? Please answer, much appreciated. Darthan the destroyer 21:19, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for accepting. I'm talking about on the Revan page, when you and I argued about his gender.

Do you wanna be a Sith, Jedi, or a great (insert class here) who helps My team regularly. Darthan the destroyer 20:58, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An Orthodox Jedi, thank you. Lord Patrick 22:15, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is there anything I should change in my arcticle? Darthan the destroyer 14:58, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Touche, my dear Patrick. I see that we will never see the point in the argument of Revans gender. It goes without saying, as I have a view, as well as you. Darthan the destroyer 15:51, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see you have more important thing to do than chat it up with Darthan *sigh* We will meet again. Of coarse, you could type back and we could explain the Revan articles.:) Darthan the destroyer 02:52, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Darthan the destroyer has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

See ya soon.

Dom Kavash

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Dom Kavash, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of Dom Kavash. Jappalang (talk) 21:56, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Homo Sapiens Sapiens listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Homo Sapiens Sapiens. Since you had some involvement with the Homo Sapiens Sapiens redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 19:19, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:03, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]