Talk:Sex scandal/Archive 1

message: Is the double life of François Mitterrand and his secret daughter a sex scandal ?
As it was in France this caused no real scandal.
Ericd 23:48, 21 Aug 2003 (UTC)
replies: text: This so-called scandal does not bear any resemblance to the other scandals already on this page. Can you provide a source that calls it a scandal? -Will Beback 20:15, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  IMHO I think it has hallmarks or similarities to elements of a number of the other "scandals" listed. I believe it was the NE article that first headlined it as "Clay's gay sex scandal". Here are a few cites I found, some of which admittedly wouldn't pass the verified sources test.    But just do a google search for Clay Aiken and scandal and you'll see what I mean.
I think another sex scandal that does seem to have at least somewhat similar bearing (though I don't think it is listed in the sex scandal article) is the Jim West gay sex scandal , in that he was alleged to be meeting gay men over the internet. Again, I'm not fond of edit wars. I would like to come to consensus on this and suggest other administration staff weigh in. Thanks for listening to my point of view and I apologize if I come across as snarky at times. --Rabinid 02:55, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

text: The West case was revealed due to investigative reporting with many pieces of corroborating evidence., rahter than a single partner waving a sticky towel. West admitted to his actions, which had an efect on the governance of one of a large city. By comparison, a barely notable singer had legal sex in a motel with a consenting adult. It has had zero repurcussions to society at large, and hasn't made it out of the gossip pages. BTW, blogs and forums are not reliable sources. -Will Beback 06:59, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  The point I was making with West wasn't to the reprecussions or the extent of supporting "evidence" to the story, rather the base similarities and how it is percieved in the public. They are both public figures meeting guys for sex on the internet and they both appear to have reprecussions extending to their careers.  
If you reread my prior comment I recognized and noted that the sources I provided with regard to the term sex scandal would not pass Wiki's verifiable sources test. They were provided to give a background to our discussion as to public perception, not for inclusion as an article citation. --Rabinid 21:35, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

text: West is a totally different case. He was (supposedly) using city computers to find sex partners, was supposedly offering them city internships, some of them were supposedly under-age, and there were allegations that he'd molested children in the past. All of those elem,ents are missing from the Paulus allegations.  -Will Beback 06:46, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

text:  The details of every case are going to differ in as much as a pop-star's responsibilities to the public vastly differ from a public official's, however you can not deny the broad strokes are strikingly similar. Again, they are both public figures meeting guys for sex on the internet and the revelation of same both appear to have reprecussions extending to their respective careers.   I will repeat again, because based on your comment in the John Paulus talk discussion you have misunderstood my position, I have not ever advocated any blog as a reliable source for inclusion in any article. Merely to the extent of this discussion, I provided some examples for you to personally view as to the term sex scandal being utilized in this instance and toward overall public perception. None of those are intended as a cite for any article, only as a point of reference in a discussion between what I would believe to be two reasonable editors. Again, I believe other admin staff should weigh in on if this constitutes a sex scandal or not.--Rabinid 09:11, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Your example of the investigative reporting into the West matter with corroborating evidence is bearing out here even as we discuss. I note the use of the word "scandal" in the headline as well. --Rabinid 21:06, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Your "evidence" was posted on the Sucks message board today, and you have linked from someone's personal webpage. It may be photoshopped, or it may be an actual Star cover; no one knows yet as that magazine has not yet been published, but your haste in posting unsubstantiated "information" betrays the POV nature of your interest in this entire matter. I don't see how you can be expected to be taken seriously given the sorts of sources you bring here.  At least this one doesn't load spyware. -Jmh123 22:20, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

message: * HRH The Prince of Wales. 
** Under a court order, certain details of the scandal cannot be released where it may be viewable by the British public. It is alleged that Diana, Princess of Wales had tapes on which an aide has claimed he has seen the Prince of Wales in bed with one of his male servants. 
- i.e. unfounded rumour, which may not be repeated because it is unfounded and defamatory.  Where is the substance to this allegation?
** Divorce of the Prince and Princess of Wales after it was revealed both had been cheating on each other during their marriage. Major James Hewitt was also involved in this scandal with rumours surrounding the parentage of Prince Harry.
- That may or may not be a sex scandal involving Diana, Pricess of Wales, but the fact that his wife shagged Hewitt is hardly Charles' fault. 
Neither of these appears to be a verifiable sex scandal involving Prince Charles by any accepted defintiion of the term. Just zis Guy you know? 13:58, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Prince Charles 

message: Anyone have a view on whether Mark Oaten should be included in this entry ? WMMartin 16:52, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've put him in, along with Chris Bryant. WMMartin 06:23, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mark Oaten