Talk:Terri Schiavo case/Archive 44

message: Happy Holidays, everyone.  It occured to me that in coming months, media attention will once again focus on this subject. *shudders* Wikipedia, and this article, have been called the best, most balanced sources of information on Terri and the tragedy that surrounded her.  But, we all know we can do better.  Let's do this:  
:Our goal should be for the article to best it can be by the time the public journeys back to the topic.  We have 2 good, solid months to further refine the article.    
To achieve this, we must work together.  Some things I'd like to see:
*Refinement of the chronological flow of the article.  There's still some jumping back and forth.
*Reviewing how much of the body of the article can be shifted to sub-articles to control size without leading to POV.
*Ensuring that the language surrounding Terri's condition is inclusive, rather than absolute.  We can avoid bickering and vandalism this way.
*Seeing if we can trim the references.  While amazing in their depth and breath, the references are 1/3 of the article's size.
*Resubmitting the article for Featured Article status.  Too many good people have put too much work into this article to deny it.
What are your thoughts?--ghost 17:57, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I haven't checked in here in months, but I just wanted to comment that the article is looking very good.  I had been paying close attention to it for a while, but got pretty busy with work.  I look forward to pitching in where needed.  Off to read more. (:--Minaflorida 23:38, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  I'd like to set a goal for all of us 

message: Where is the source that he was the Schindler's family doctor? I have a blog mentioning him as their family friend which does not seem reliable. Radiologists do not function as family doctors. --DocJohnny 12:39, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Does anyone speak Italian?  I've been wondering what this says...  Translation anyone?  -Kasreyn 16:43, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's definitely Italian. "I have not found another place on the internet to tell you..." There are a few words I don't know, so I can't translate. The second part of the post is the poster's revision of a poem by Pablo Neruda, "Dies slowly".Grace Note 00:25, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

text: As no one has replied with any sources regarding Maxfield being a family doctor, I will remove that reference. --DocJohnny 07:51, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  William Maxfield 

message: Anon user 24.194.166.146 removed the following link from the Advocacy and Commentary section:
*Rich Lowry
And added the following links:
*Citizens Concerned for Human Life
*Citizens Concerned for Human Life
Can we please review these and see if the link are/aren't appropriate?--ghost 15:24, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed the Rich Lowry link. It doesn't specifically support either side. Reading into it, one would conclude the oppsite - that Lowry did not support removal of the tube. I don't know his position, but that piece says nothing about it. --Elliskev 18:10, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Links added and removed by Anon user 

message: Someone sent me the following note: Hello 84.148.98.22, (that was ROHA) and welcome to Wikipedia!... (Welcome Template)  Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (84.148.79.1 07:57, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Um, forgive me for missing your point.  I see you copied the contents of the welcome template (which I reduced to improve readability for the other editors), and you mentioned an opinion about several things.  But how does this relate to the article?--ghost 21:18, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Welcome!

message: I'm new, so I don't know how to go about filing a complaint on this.
But it appears that user 209.173.6.202 is going around defacing entries. For example, saying Terri Schiavo deserved to die and that someone else's childhood was miserable after he found out his father was gay, etc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by NiftyDude (talk • contribs) 18:52, 17 January 2006
:You're welcome, and encouraged to revert vandalism like that.  For help, you can contact an Administrator.  Wikipedia has a very good record of quickly correcting such things.  You're welcome to help if you like.--ghost 19:38, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi, and welcome to wikipedia.  If you want to help with vandals, as a ghost said, first and foremost help by reverting their vandalism.  Open the page history, select the last good revision previous to vandalism (you'll need to do an revision difference compare, there is a button for this), and then edit the last good version.  Save it as is and the old good version will become the new current version, removing the vandalism.  You can also go to the talk page for a vandal (there will be a Talk link by their name even if they're just an IP address), and make a note of their vandalism on their talk page.  If they seem to be a new user, they might not know vandalism is wrong, so a friendly warning is always good.  If they seem to be a habitual vandal (which you can see from their contribs page), then you can post a notice of their continued vandalism and an admin can take that into consideration when deciding whether to block them.  Good luck!  -Kasreyn 22:38, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

text: Hi, NiftyDude! Can I join in the welcoming as well? And just to remind you to use the four tildes (~~~~) at the end of posts on talk pages. They will expand into your signature and the date and time of posting. Cheers, AnnH (talk) 23:14, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  User 209.173.6.202 

message: OK, since you guys will not accept an executive plan about the historical importance of TS, the challenge is just to find the next big piece of the current oversized article that can be broken out into its own article.  Any suggestions? -- Pinktulip 00:06, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes - the medical data is integral to the article. Proto t c 14:34, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Of course it is, but medical data footprint in the main article is way too much.  It could and should be condensed to a much smaller number of kilobytes.  This is very similar to how the Space Shuttle disasters stories can turn into what I call "Engineering pornography", with events recorded down to the milliseconds as part X of the Shuttle crumpled and part Y burned.  The Important thing is that the crew died.  And how they died was NOT recorded down the millisecond because they were NOT robots or some kind of mechanical extension of the Shuttles.  Again my point is: just because data is high-quality data does not make it Important.  You have to use a little more Judgement in deciding what goes into the main article.
Do you not get it?  What happened Politically is more Important that what happened in the Courts (except when it negated the politics), and what happened in the Courts is more Important than what happened in the Hospital.  And that is not always true, but it is true in this case.  I still say you guys just want to re-fight the Court battles.  That approach will consume your writing space (and the reader's patience) faster than almost any other.  -- Pinktulip 21:35, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I concur that the medical data is excessive.  Obviously, I don't think it should all get cut, because it's important; however, the way it's presented is not very accessable to a reader  I understand that a vry complete article is what y'all want, but it's difficult to read when every other sentence tells me what her blood sugar was at X time and what the measurments of her electrolytes were, etc.    I think PinkTulip is onto something with this.  No one will want to read the article if it records every single itsy bitsy detail because it becomes a sort of "can't see the forst for the trees" kind of thing.  I'm surprised Terri's haircuts aren't documented in this artcile.  (;  That's a joke.  Don't get mad at me.  hehe.--Minaflorida 22:38, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Next problem... 

message: I do not mean that as an insult to any one of you, but as an ensemble, you represent mental illness because of what you are doing with this page.  Here is what you are doing: You are re-fighting the court battles and DROWNING this story in details.  You really need to delegate all the legal stuff to a separate page (or multiple pages, if it bloats like that).   Just my trying to fight the link rot this page is painful because there are too many references.  Wikipedia technology breaks down after about 20 references and it becomes hard to use.  You have 70.   No wonder the quality and readability of the article is so low. -- Pinktulip 11:29, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Please read and consult WP:CIVIL - why not try and get your opinions across in a diplomatic manner, instead of smacking everyone over the head with them?  Wikipedia technology doesn't break down after 20 references - where did this come from? Proto t c 14:35, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

text: The ease-of-use breaks down, at least if you use a regular browser.  Just to find the 404 Dead links (which were listed in Wikipedia:Dead_external_links/404/t), I had to copy the text out to a local editor and start searching.  Why do you think they bother to have the web interface warn you "This page is 79 kilobytes long."? It is because for those of us who do not know the entire article well may find it tedious to find anything in it, like, the way references work: the label of the reference is not rendered in the regular page, and once you are in the edit form, you cannot search the text.  I feel justified in forcefully driving home the point that you guys have failed to make this a feature article.   I want you guys to do better and fulfill the vision of Wikipedia. Even Musical Linguist has referred to the consensus-building process as a battle and Wikipeida is not supposed to be a battleground, so just cool it and do not let your feelings get hurt when I call a spade a spade. -- Pinktulip 15:57, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  In sum, you guys are need of counseling 

message: Why does the article have font=75% footnotes?  What WP styleguide is suggesting this? patsw 03:55, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I haven't seen anything in the style guidelines suggesting this. I believe it's just common practice so that half the page isn't given over to footnotes. I've done it at other pages that have a lot of them and don't think it particularly bothersome. Marskell 07:52, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  font=75% footnotes 

message: "...graduated from Archbishop Wood Catholic High School, a private school in nearby Warminster Township, Pennsylvania."  The high school is already hyperlinked.  It is a Catholic school, so I already know that it is a private school (BTW: I went to Catholic grade and high school).  If I really want to know exactly where TS's high school was, I can click on the link.  You wanna include TS's brother and siser's names?  Fine (they are not notable, but I am unwilling to fight about it), but please do not adorn the hyperlinks with unnecessary verbiage. -- Pinktulip 05:24, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Judgement: please do not adorn hyperlinks 

message: We need to delegate some of the information to a subpage.  How about this?  We take everything from
* Rehabilitation efforts and the malpractice suit
to
* PVS diagnosis ruling – Schiavo IV
and we put it in a subpage.  We can call it "TS medical situation" or something like that.  Refer to it in a section of a similar name and breifly summarize what the Courts would conclude based on that information.  Even if this article is never makes FA, it will make the article better. BTW: I realize that the medical and court stuff is intertwined, but it can be quickly summarized.  -- Pinktulip 23:35, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Good for him (and her).  Hopefully now they can move on with their lives, assuming Jebbie stops trying to burn him at the stake.  -Kasreyn 05:36, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: My point in noting that here is to note the useful of having appropriate subpages.  We need to get the size of this aricle down: we need to create at least one more subpage. -- Pinktulip 06:39, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  A possible delegation 

message: I propose to standardize the font size of the text of the article to conform to the Wikipedia style and guidelines by removing the size=75% on the Notes and References section.  Personally, I have to reset my browsers font size to read them, so I suspect this is a genuine  web accessibility problem.  What support do you find in the Wikipedia style and guidelines for using size=75%? patsw 04:02, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There is no reccomendation, but it's done when there's a lot of references.  When I got the shoe polish article through FAC, one of the things I had to do was get rid of the size=80% it had, so I would suggest this article does the same. Proto t c 13:35, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Standard Font Sizes. 

message: I am looking for when history seems to repeat itself. I want to point out some of my recent efforts:
* O._J._Simpson and Robert Blake (actor)
* Space Shuttle Challenger disaster and Space Shuttle Columbia disaster
* Terri Schiavo and Elizabeth Morgan
* Attack on Pearl Harbor and September 11, 2001 attacks (this one is a bit of stretch)
I want you see how I have changed (I created the Morgan article under a different account) these articles and how they do form a pair, like a pair of bookends on a shelf.  My perspective is legal and political (well, engineering/management in the case of the Shuttles).  I want to point out what obvious parallels exist.
In the cases of Schiavo/Morgan, what interests me most are the judicial/political parallels.  Both are cases of legislative intervention, which does not happen by accident.  In both cases, conservative/religious forces formed the main thrust of that legislative intervention. I am attempting to point out the flaws in each intervention but not to otherwise judge those interventions.
I am saying this to share with you my true perspecitive on Schiavo's case.  I want to you see how beautifully Simpson's trial is delegated, without whitewashing (pun intended) him as a person.  Ultimately, we, as a society based on laws, have to accept the verdict of his criminal trial.  Do you see how the Blake trail is NOT about the Simpson's trail, but about Simpson after his trial?
Again, the Shiavo medical info matters, but it can be framed and summarized.  That is why I stress: the medical information is merely input to the judicial and political process. It can be summarized in the main article.  -- Pinktulip 09:42, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bookends 

message: I've changed one place where scenario is used to "events".
The other place it needs to be changed is from "Medical Scenario" to "Medical Background" or something equivalent. patsw 05:02, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Scenario is the wrong term 

message: I think that the autopsy can go down into the medical subpage.  The autopsy in and of itself is not a major event and it generally supports the assessment made in the 2003 bridge paragraphs.  I can wait two days while we talk about this move.   Feedback? -- Pinktulip 13:56, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Now, it is the autopsy's turn 

message: I am trying to highlight the fact that there are two major episodes of gov't intervention.  I do not think that have a single "gov't intervention" section is going to work.  It is too jarring to have two sections called "Terri's Law".  It breaks the chronology.  I have marked out the second "Terri's Law" section.  The obvious change is to put it into chronological order and maybe just reference the gov't interversion subpage twice.  I am going to think about this for a while and allow time for feedback. -- Pinktulip 14:38, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Two episdoes of gov't intervention 

message: patsw removed the link to:
http://www.nndb.com/people/435/000026357/
I find that NNDB is not perfect, and at times are quite snide, but the information is usually pretty good.  Their page certainly makes a large number of assertions of fact on the page.  They cannot all be wrong.  They jump to conclusions a few times.  I would hope that patsw would take the time to notify them and us about their specific inaccurracies. Wholesale deleting of stuff as "inaccurate" is so easy with this wiki technology.  Provinding accurate (or at least fair) information; now that is work. 
Oh..... Is it the Ka-deficiency causing-the-heart-attack thing?  I am still looking, but I noticed that http://abstractappeal.com/schiavo/infopage.html says:
*Q:What happened to Terri?
*A:The Second District's opinion in the first appeal in this case explains:
**On February 25, 1990, . . . Theresa, age 27, suffered a cardiac arrest as a result of a potassium imbalance. Michael called 911, and Theresa was rushed to the hospital. She never regained consciousness.
Did the court jump to conclusions also?  What authoritative body refuted this finding?
I also noticed that this precious artifact:
*http://www.libertytothecaptives.net/terri_schindler_schiavo_cardiac_arrest_lie.html
which suggests that there was a pre-concieved notion that no heart attack (and therefore, not-so-much brain damage) occurred.  But that theory seemed to have taken as much damage to its credibility as the "Nobel prize-winning" Dr. Hammesfahr's reputation has. And how come we do not refer to Dr.  Michael Baden? That web page does and we have an article on him.  Perhaps it is time to stitch him back into the story.  As you can tell from the Elizabeth Morgan article, I am a big fan of using's Wikipedia's special powers to drag all the power players back in, especially if they have Wikipedia articles (and, if necessary, making new articles for them if they are notable enough).
I am going to move this down the "medical background" page, where is belongs.  Really, the only question here is: Do we put the NNDB back in?  I say we do.  -- Pinktulip 20:59, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  NNDB link 

message: Check this out:
http://www.miami.edu/ethics/schiavo/1-24-01_DCA%20Opinion.pdf
District Court of Appeal, 2nd District
Opinion filed January 24, 2001.
:One February 25, 1990, their lives changed. Theresa, 27, suffered a cardiac arrest as a result of a potassium imbalance.
and that is pretty much how the Wikiepdia article is going read, unless someone has later and more authoritative information (and I do not mean some TV show).  No need to link it to some bulemia thingy.  Any objections? -- Pinktulip 21:50, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  2nd DCA in 2001 says its was the potassium 

message: You should explain a little more about what you mean by "lopsided".  The "medical background" article is where we examine the medical stuff and we provide the conclusions, if any, in this article.  If we need to, we can presentt the "he said"/"they said" dualities briefly if the courts did not make a finding.  Both sides had plenty of money and time and competent attorneys and appeals.  Yeah, people are sometimes wrongly convicted or wrongly exonerated, but this one is a clear case of the courts, for those matters that they addressed, as being the finder of fact. Who disagrees that we must defer to the findings of the courts in this case? -- Pinktulip 01:17, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  lopsided? 

message: I'm pretty sure there's vandalism on this page, but I'm not in a position to go through and fix it all up because it's scattered throughout the edit history.  Can someone do this please? - Richardcavell 05:27, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Richardcavell|: That's right. When things do not go your way, just cart out the V-word and see what knee-jerk reversions you can elicit with it.  Why do not just cry "rape" while you are at it?  How about terrorist? Plagerizer? Oh! Here is a good one: "abuser"!  Those words might work also... amongst mobs.  WHAT THE HECK MAKES YOU "PRETTY SURE"?  Huh?  And then suggest "Oh my!  I was so confused and naïve... I... I... certainly was not trying to be manipulative or tricky or just plain stupid or something...".  If you  cannot get very, very specific (and that might actually entail some WORK) about your problems with the recent changes that are have happened on this page, then please go to one of the other 900,000 pages on Wikipeida and make a constructive and more thoughtful contribution.  We are now reviewing this story as it was tried in the civil courts, rather than how it was tried in the headline-grabbing press.  Your v-word headline STINKS!  You want to engage me sir?  Then please do so at my level of intellect.  Otherwise, please leave this talk page.  You wanna see an argument?  Go read the 40+ archives this talk page has already piled up.  We have been having a conversation here at a higher level of mutual respect and trust and we do not wish to be dragged back down into that muck. If you are "not in a position" to "go through" the changes and post thoughtfully, then please make yourself "not in a position" to post at all.  -- Pinktulip 11:18, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I wrote that vandalism addition *before* I edited out your reference to Michael's marriage vows, Pinktulip, and did not apply the v-word to you. - Richardcavell 14:22, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

text: I won't take a stance on your claims of vandalism, but I'd like to point out that we're not here to edit for you.  I already have way too many pages on my watchlist and I have my own edits to make.  If you think wikipedia needs fixing, do it yourself.  If it's too hard, then don't.  Why should it concern me?  -Kasreyn 12:49, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'd suggest that we actually reduce the size of the main article but keep the extra information in additional articles. By the way, there is a CT scan that purports to be of Terri Schiavo's head. Should that be put here? - Richardcavell 14:22, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

text: The CT scan is on the medical page.  As long as we and the courts all agree on PVS and its legal implications, the details are best left to the page that drills into that area deeply: the medical page. -- Pinktulip 14:30, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandalism 

message: Folks: We do not really make it clear that the Terri Schiavo story dominated American politics for all of March 2005.  I think that the time has come to state that more clearly.  Would someone else like to try to make that clear?  Preferably in both the lead section and the gov't intervention section as it is a very notable aspect of the story? -- Pinktulip 13:58, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  We are underplaying the politics 

message: I am afraid that Micheal's choice of an ambigous declaration on Terri's stone that "I Kept My Promise" and his pre-existing adultery (and I mean that in the legal sense, say, in the way the Army decommisions officers for adultery) require us to note that discrepancy clearly.  If he wanted to go screw that other women, he could have paid the price and divorced Terri, ceding control to her parents.  He could have been more circumspect and left that eternal self-congradulatory comment out, but he chose not to do so.  There is a REASON why, even in the strictly legal vows, they say "In sickness and in health".  What say you all?  Do we note this discrepency or do we not? I say that we do.  -- Pinktulip 14:27, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Reading Michael's mind is not the task for the editors here. patsw 14:55, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Pat puts it right. Plz choose a second footnoting system before adding editor's notes--these were unneeded anyhow. Marskell 17:38, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Marskell: We all know what you want.  You want User:Marskell/Schiavo.  Let me tell you something Marskell: I got the real powerful hunch that even AnnH (who, I am happy to say, no longer reverts me so tersely) does not want something as stupid and easy as that.  Let her respond, if she chooses to.  Peace symbols are not very exciting, so they do not make splashy headlines or reports: they just make other Wikiepdia articles, and we do not need footnotes for those.  And the intention of these asterisks was to not INTRUDE on the solmenity of text of the stone.  That last "promise" line has historical irony to it, intended or not.  What do you think happened historically?  Terri said something like "Mike, if I get injured really bad someday, please promise that you will finish me off."?  Huh?  That might happen on some military battlefield between soliders, but not in a young couple in peacetime in a wealthy country.  I, "Pink tulip", have recognized that this line bugs a lot of people who read it,  and I recognize that the irony of the line, intended or otherwise, is what bugs people.  The preponderance of the evidence suggests that the most important "promise" that Michael ever made to Terri was that he would remain faithful to her for the duration of their marriage when he said the words "I do".  I bet that there were a whole bunch of other people there when he said, too.  If he made some private, personal promise (promise to himself, promise to her, however you want to put it) to finsih her off despite the length of the time he would have to wait for his turn to swing his scythe, well...  that is all fine and good, but he never really documented that promise at the time for posterity now, did he?  Huh?  No, he did not.  He was pretty wishy-washy there between 1994 and 1998, before he finally set his course.  And who knows if maybe he was already porking good ol' Jodi by then?  I respect him for going the distance on his court fight, but despite his fortitude, he is still lacking  sometime (maybe big, maybe small) in the departments of Character and Judgement.  If he was not prepared to keep his first promise to Terri, he could have just lived with her in sin or something.  We all agree that he started to refer to her as "bitch" (a fact that can safely go on his page).  Oh.... Oh....  I got a compromise for us. (because I am willing to THINK and WORK for these agreements)  He chose Terri's gravestone text, so that goes onto his page also, and we do the annoation there and let the reader decide what they think of this guy.  I will save this message anyway for the sake of posterity and to provide the reader of this talk page with insight into the creative process of writing fine historical narrative.  -- Pinktulip 21:04, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Pat put it well: "Reading Michael's mind is not the task for the editors here." I really could care less what he meant (I don't know what he meant, and I've never had a wife unresponsive in a hospital bed for 15 years if that matters). He said X, we report X. Nothing you've said overturns that basic obligation. Indeed most of what you've just said is inchoate, juvenile, rambling babble. Marskell 23:23, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Michael's marriage vows 

message: What is this page: Selected court cases in the Terri Schiavo case  ?  Note: If it is no longer active, I would still appreciate a few days to review it before it gets deleted.  -- Pinktulip 15:20, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Orphan page? 

message: Since the terms vandal, rapist, terrorist, plagiarizer, "blocked user" and abuser do not seem to stick, now I am "hijacker" because I moved Terri's smiling face down into the "early life" section (which, it seems to me, is where it belongs).  Now, ya look at NNDB and they have pretty limited format and attention span.  They do not do longitudinal studies like Wikiepdia can and they only they only do the one photo in the upper right-hand corner.  We have much better technology than they do.  We have sections.  Terri's beautiful, smiling slender photo is pre-1990 and that is the section that it belongs in.  I say it goes there.  What say you all? -- Pinktulip 23:37, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Now I am a "hijaker" 

message: Where the heck do you wantit to go?  Bottom of the page?  Not the "standard format",  but it works for me, for now.  -- Pinktulip 23:55, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The navigation template goes into the article 

message: I added  U.S. House elections, 2006 to the :Category:Terri Schiavo and User:Marskell removed it.  Terri Schiavo is an excellent tool for studing the candidates, but User:Marskell, who is a Canadian, would prefer that we U.S. citizens vote in ignorance.  I am adding the category back in and I expect the admins to intervene and stop this crazy man if he continues to destroy my work. I note that, while a Canadian citizen, he prefers to live in country that does not know Democracy. Perhaps his time over there has effected his judgement in some adverse way.  Ann: You have recently realized the benefits a serious Wikibreak.  Perhaps you could encourage the information-destroying and ignorance-expanding Marskell (à al Karl Popper) to take a long one and realize its healing properties. 
I note that he also reverted the memorial section, adding back the Protestant-heretic word "sermon" when the newspapar article clearly indicated that it was a Homily.  What is wrong with this man?  Is he spending too much time with those heathens in the UAE or something?  The word in the newpaper article, which is the cited source, is HOMILY. H-O-M-I-L-Y.  Get it?  Maybe patsw can help you to look it up in the dictionary, but in MY last version of that section, it was there and it was wikified.  Marskell: you have a performed a disservice to the reader of the article by your destructive act.
You know, had you done the WORK of EDITING the material, I might understand, but your style is the STUPID STUPID STUPID: approach of just reverting, no matter how many edits it took me to get it right, and no matter how hard I tried to get you involved in the process, with dialog.  I bet that even you would have left the word "homily" in, if you had noticed it, but rather than take the constructive and intelligent approach (which is WORK) you just hit the reset button and somehow expect us all to applaud you for that. 
AND you broke the wiki-link to Father Frank Pavone! -- Pinktulip 14:42, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Please try to discus editing issues more calmly. U.S. House elections, 2006 is not an appropriate category here. The images certainly are appropriate as they do impart relevant information. Jonathunder 17:32, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Marskell is becoming destructive

message: Read 'em weep User:Marskell . :Category:Terri Schiavo minor players .  There is no way on God's green Earth that you will succeed in convincing anyone that the minor players in the Terri Schavio story are not "notable" when taken in aggregate. Have a nice day.
Come hither Marskell!  Your ridiculous hair-splitting was anticipated.  Admit defeat in your attempts to hide this information, pulling strings on the Admin notice board, and controlling our view of the information from your desert fortress.  Come back to Democracy.  Sweet Liberty and Freedom beckon to you! -- Pinktulip 01:01, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pink Tulip rides agian! 

message: Tim Marskell chose to re-insert those heretic-words into the article about the Roman Catholic Mass.  He had his chance to show that he was an honorable man.  As we descend into dishonorable behavior, inevitably, the tactics will become a bit more loathsome. -- 68.122.117.175 11:34, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Now we are going to get serious 

message: So little Pinky became the Obi-wan Kenobe ghosty now.  What did he tell dear old Darth Vader?  Oh yes:
:You can't win, Adolf, er I mean Darth. If you strike me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine.
Do you all see what is happening in the change now.  It is no longer about Terri.  Even the admins are so despirate to GET Andrew, that they are breaking AnnH's precious highly Linguistically correct footnotes just for the put-down value of reverting Andrew's work.  It is just lik Tom and Jerry cartoons where Tom the cat tries to swat Jerry the mouse and breaks the window instead.  Like a fly on the vase that you try to swat and... oops!  Only too late do you recognize that you have forgotten about the complex hierarchy of your true priorities. 
I note also that Mitchel Park Library, branch of Palo Alto Public Library system uses the IP address of 199.33.32.40, which does not itself have a reverse DNS name, but it becomes clear anyway from
gatekeeper.city.palo-alto.ca.us  199.33.32.1
Thank you so much Mr. Bacchus.  I admire your purity.
 20:14, 9 February 2006, GTBacchus (Talk) blocked 199.33.32.40 (contribs) (infinite)
 (IP of blocked User:Pinktulip) 
-- 68.121.101.234 16:28, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm!  I guess I never would have realized.  Apparently he was a sock puppet for a previous blocked vandal/troll.  I'm disappointed, at first he seemed honestly well-intentioned.  :(  -Kasreyn 04:56, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The fly on the vase 

message: I know it is going to take a few iterations for the rest of you admins to see that I am merely trying to fix a footnote.  I am not desperate to fix this thing.  If it takes 100 tries over the next several months, fine.  I am not trying to "win", I just want to fix the footnote.  I expect that I will be going through admins before they all see that, on such a trivial point, they are on the wrong side of the argument, partially because I have successfully manipulated into that ridiculous position.  The sermon->homily word in the text change can occur later. -- 69.228.190.230 23:07, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Let the revert war begin 

message: Of the hundreds on my watchlist this article is like the never ending edit. Of this I'm sure, this article has become a cause and darn if I'll let a "so" where there should be a "but".  If this article with its minutia is your cause well then have at it with all of your attention. It at least keeps you away from the rest of this project.  hydnjo talk 03:56, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Heh.  Terri Schiavo as a flypaper for the priority-challenged.  I like that notion.  ^_^  -Kasreyn 05:48, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: the never ending edit...