Talk:Gary Lenaire
(Redirected from Talk:Cripple Need Cane)
Latest comment: 14 years ago by Will Beback in topic August 2009
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Gary Lenaire article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
| This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Book Release? edit
Today is Nov. 8, yet the column states that he is released a book in Dec, 06. The wording is a bit pretentious too.
The book was released in October, 2006. I know, I bought a copy.
Noted Essays? edit
States that he has "noted essays". I honestly believe this sounds like self promotion. Not a valid wikipedia entry, should be reworked - Iamvery.
"Noted Essays" I have been reading Lenaire for over 10 years. I have made many "notes" of them over the years. It is very clear that there are Christians on this page trying to attack Mr. Lenaire with ridicule. This only shows the the level of ignorance they dwell in.
- Attacks with ridicule? Give me a break. I see a article with a neutral point of view. Claiming the essays as being noted without providing any sources or references would be in violation of that policy. Perhaps it is very clear that there are atheists/agnostics on this page trying to make Mr. Lenaire's recent body of work appear more groundbreaking and important then it really is.--E tac 21:02, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
- Lenaire is probably writing this wikipedia entry himself. I've read his essays. They are nothing more then typical atheistic garbage that has been spewed out and recycled for over 50 years now. ~~Iamvery~~ —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.246.143.130 (talk) 20:00, 2 May 2007 (UTC).
- You know, I just read some of his stuff last week, and I 100% agree with you, however, I think it leans to skepticism rather than atheism. I ahven't read all of it but from what I've read, he seems to be a thiest with atheistic conformity (meaning, he says the same thing anyone else does). Is this article even notable? I've also wondered if his stuff is really a parody. I'm not sure, but you know, I don't find anything he has written to be notable. IronCrow (talk) 02:30, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
August 2009 edit
It appear that the subject is re-writing the article without any verifiable sources. All material on Wikipedia should be verifiable, especially material on living persons. Unsourced material may be deleted. Further, it is problematic to have the subject making extensive revisions without discussion. Will Beback talk 07:00, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
- http://www.garylenaire.org is being added as a reference, but it redirects to a Myspace page that doesn't contain much information besides that Lenaire is male and 100 years old. In other words it's useless. Will Beback talk 04:01, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
- Quotations, especially from living people, need to have a reliable source. http://www.zoominfo.com/people/Lenaire_Gary_35367135.aspx does not qualify. Will Beback talk 04:43, 19 August 2009 (UTC)