Wikipedia

Talk:Clermont County, Ohio

Latest comment: 6 years ago by Paris1127 in topic Cleanup
Learn more about this page

Untitled

edit

Wondering how to edit this U.S. County Entry?
The WikiProject U.S. Counties standards might help.

Library denies access to Christians

edit
Latest comment: 16 years ago6 comments2 people in discussion

The Clermont County Public Library has just denied access to Christians. It went further and denied access to even more people. A lawsuit has been filed. I think this activity is noteworthy, but I also think the story is active now and time should be allowed for it to settle. In the meantime, here are my del.icio.us links to media and legal resources on this issue: http://del.icio.us/plan2succeed/ClermontCountyPublicLibrary --LegitimateAndEvenCompelling (talk) 06:32, 15 June 2008 (UTC)Reply

I note the following from history of this Talk page the reason for the improper removal of my first comment from this page by an IP address:
06:34, 18 June 2008 71.174.183.229 (Talk) (178 bytes) (Undid revision 219440798 by LegitimateAndEvenCompelling this user typically adds misleading info promoting the Christian right agenda
Note that American Library Association policy, had it been applied, would have prevented this denial of rights. And I wrote about this here:
http://safelibraries.blogspot.com/2008/06/library-denies-civil-rights-of.html
One could just as easily argue I was promoting the agenda of the American Library Association.
71.174.183.229's attack on me is factually incorrect, and procedurally he/she may not remove my comment from the Talk page for the reasoning done here. Further, it is very wiki unfriendly, to say the least, to do what he/she did and say what he/she did. Let's just stick to my original comment. Thank you. --LegitimateAndEvenCompelling (talk) 11:51, 18 June 2008 (UTC)Reply
I think the relevant policies and guidelines here are WP:NPOV and WP:RS and WP:COIN. What makes del.icio.us a reliable source? Blogs are not generally considered reliable sources here, and citing your own blog has the added disadvantage of being a conflict of interest. Do you have a link to a newspaper story about this, for example? Ruhrfisch ><>°° 11:58, 18 June 2008 (UTC)Reply
I agree with you totally. My links are only here as a starting point for someone who might be interesting in this issue. To be clear, nobody should be adding my blog or my del.icio.us links into this article. Indeed, I will not even edit this article just to ensure I do not introduce POV.
That said, the links I gave do provide links to wikiworthy newspaper stories and the like. That is their only value. --LegitimateAndEvenCompelling (talk) 12:09, 18 June 2008 (UTC)Reply
Thanks for your quick reply. Here are two more thoughts. 1) Currently the word "library" does not appear in the article, nor does "lawsuit" or "sue" (or other variations like "librar"). While I think the county library system should be mentioned, I am sure there are several lawsuits involving the county every year, none of which are in the article. See also WP:RECENTISM. 2) It is always helpful to provide the sources directly here, rather than make people dig for them. Hope this helps, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 12:26, 18 June 2008 (UTC)Reply
Np. You are correct about several lawsuits ongoing. But this one is unique, so much so that the media is reporting about it. And for the same reasons the media is reporting on it, it may be encyclopedic here. How many libraries do you know that allow almost anyone to speak, but block out Christians giving a financial seminar that might quote the Bible precisely because they might quote the Bible, then change library policy to block the public from using the room they have been using and that they paid for with their own tax money, and all this in violation of ALA policy. No, this lawsuit is not a dime a dozen. This one is potentially encyclopedic, and on the page where the facts occurred.
As to RECENTISM, I agree with you there too. But that is why I originally said, "I think this activity is noteworthy, but I also think the story is active now and time should be allowed for it to settle."
As to suggesting specific media links, 1) that's what my delicious link is for, and 2) the story is evolving -- so my updating delicious means anyone who uses my link here gets to see the latest and I do not have to do double work to also add the links here. 3) Further, I did not want to suggest specific links as that might be seen as me putting my spin on things. This being wikipedia and me taking my wiki duties seriously, I want to ensure people think what they want for themselves without my feeding them specific links. --LegitimateAndEvenCompelling (talk) 12:58, 18 June 2008 (UTC)Reply
edit
Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Clermont County, Ohio. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 08:02, 29 August 2015 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Clermont County, Ohio. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:26, 14 September 2016 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Clermont County, Ohio. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:09, 26 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Clermont County, Ohio. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:23, 27 July 2017 (UTC)Reply

Cleanup

edit
Latest comment: 6 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

The section called "Politology" is a mess. For one, why is it even called that? And what does that even mean? The section is strangely worded, using odd terminology, for example: 1. Clermont's peoplification, 2. Clermont has been visited by recent national tickets from both Democratic and Republican party sects., 3. Clermont locales are not publicated necessarily along historical or perceived collectivity. Also, why are Prebendalism, Civic virtue, and Social contract listed under "See also"? Two users added the strange material to the article. Is this vandalism or a sesquipedalian at work? Regardless, needs cleanup. Paris1127 (talk) 04:08, 30 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

Nota bene: I neglected to include one other possibility: this strange material could also be copied and pasted from somewhere in a book or elsewhere on the internet. That could potentially be a violation of copyright law. Tried using the CopyVios detector, but it couldn't detect anything. Still, it doesn't necessarily mean there aren't violations: I once had to do some digging to find where something was copied/pasted from, which the Duplication Detector later agreed was a possible violation. Paris1127 (talk) 04:14, 30 July 2018 (UTC)Reply
Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Clermont_County,_Ohio&oldid=1200665085"