Talk:Rick Mercer

message: It seems to me that the article should be organised into parts, rather than one continuous body of text. Iotha 05:03, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Organising the article into categories 

message: "The Quality of Mercer" http://www.torontolife.com/magazine/index.cfm?listing_id=47
:The article is now longer available.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.51.164.176 (talk) 02:40, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  There is a really good in-depth article in "Toronto Life" magazine 

message: I felt that it was unneccesary to have reference to Mr. Mercer's sexuality in the first sentence of the article. It is irrelevant nearly everything else in the article. Unless of course, you want to put heterosexual at the beginning of every article about a straight man.
: For the record, it was added to the first paragraph by an anonymous contributor about an hour before you reverted it. I agree, in the first paragraph it's simply gratuitous — and the article does already discuss the topic in a more appropriate way later on (i.e. it doesn't need more than one brief paragraph). Bearcat 09:34, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed unneccesary reference to homosexuality. 

message: Why does the first paragraph of this article have two sentences devoted (and a large picture) devoted to Rick Mercer's nephew?  This isn't relevant I don't think - I've removed it. Cyrie
: For the record, it was added by an anonymous contributor less than an hour before you removed it. Good job; you're right, it's entirely irrelevant. (And don't think I haven't noticed the irony that I made almost exactly the same comment less than a month ago in response to a different situation one subsection up.) Bearcat 03:46, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Why is Brennan Mercer featured so prominantly in this non-Brennan Mercer article? 

message: I understand that Rick Mercer is really short -- although exactly how short I don't know, somewhere around 5'5" or so I think.  This should be documented in the article somewhere.  --70.48.68.178 03:50, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  ==Height?== 

message: :(Bearcat's post moved to here from my talkpage -- LW)
"Relevant to the subject's notability" is not the defining standard by which we include or exclude references to a notable person's sexuality in a Wikipedia article. The sole standard is "this information exists on the public record". Bearcat 23:25, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd like to see where anything says that sexuality should be an exception to WP:BLP, which is one of Wikipedia's strongest rules.  Meanwhile, I've trimmed the entry to its encyclopedic core. -- Lonewolf BC 00:16, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The section in question is in no way a BLP violation. BLP prohibits unsourced rumours; it does not prohibit discussion of facts which a person has publicly acknowledged about themselves. Bearcat 00:17, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: BLP goes well beyond forbidding the inclusion of unsourced rumours.  Moreover, this putative fact was not even referenced when I deleted it twice. -- Lonewolf BC 00:44, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You can believe whatever you want about BLP, but it most certainly does not prohibit mentioning that a celebrity is gay if the celebrity themselves has come out as gay. It would prohibit the discussion of unsourced rumours about a subject's sexuality (e.g. Bill Graham), but it does not prohibit discussion of sexuality if the subject has openly acknowledged their own sexuality. As well, sexuality does not have to have special relevance to the person's notability to merit encyclopedic mention; all it requires is that the fact is documented on the public record. And incidentally, we do not describe people as "homosexual"; that's a clinical description, not an identity label. Bearcat 00:49, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

text: Deleting it for being unreferenced was in no way a distortion of Wikipedia policy.  By contrast, your saying that "the rationale...has thus far been based entirely on distortions of Wikipedia policy" is a distortion -- and uncivil.  Further, it is not clear from the reference provided that Mercer has "openly acknowledged" being homosexual.  It appears that the Globe and Mail printed such a thing, and that Mercer has not denied it, but the information at hand points away from his having "outed himself". -- Lonewolf BC 00:52, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: A reference was provided when the information was originally added; I know this because I added that reference personally. It appears that somebody removed the reference at some point later on. That's neither my responsibility nor my problem. And as for his own outness, he has an interview in the current issue of fab in which he discusses his sexual orientation; somebody has already added that as an external link as well. Bearcat 00:56, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: What matters is that there was no reference when I removed the material for being unreferenced.  And when material is removed, on grounds of BLP, for being unreferenced, it is your responsibility to provide a reference before putting it back, which initially you did not.  Perhaps you simply overlooked that the reference you had once given had since disappeared, but it certainly was not up to me to dig through the article's history to see if there had formerly been a reference.  So again, your talk of "distortion" on my part is quite unwarranted and less than civil.  In fact your whole tone -- though I may be misreading you -- seems needlessly combative and vehement.  Please try to be more matter-of-fact. -- Lonewolf BC 01:37, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm responsible for how I intend my tone to come across, not for your choice of how to perceive it. Bearcat 01:39, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't want to get into a philosphical tangent about how communication works, but that's not exactly the way it does.  You are responsible for how your tone comes across to a reasonable person.  I'm telling you, as a reasonable person, that it is coming across as combative and vehement -- and not because I wish that it should, but because of the text you have chosen to post.  If you intend otherwise, you should take that perception into consideration.  At the same time, if your intent in otherwise (is it?) then it is incumbent on me to take that into account.  The same things apply in the other direction, of course.  -- Lonewolf BC 02:33, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sexuality and WP:BLP 

message: I find it shocking that there's no mention of Mercer's other show, Made in Canada.  He was the creator and star, it ran for five seasons, and it was just a darn good show.  Mark (talk) 17:45, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where's Made in Canada? 

message: Rick is my cousin and I have no clue where this lebanese canadian thing came from in this entry. If there is a source (perhaps its from the other side of his family and a connection I don't know about). If there is no source then that should most likely be removed. Thanks.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.116.27.233 (talk) 20:21, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lebanese? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Rick Mercer. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070630193917/http://www.cbc.ca/mrl3/8752/vsu/wmv-hi/gordon-mercer070125.wmv to http://www.cbc.ca/mrl3/8752/vsu/wmv-hi/gordon-mercer070125.wmv
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090929030358/http://www.macleans.ca:80/culture/entertainment/article.jsp?content=20040216_75361_75361 to http://www.macleans.ca/culture/entertainment/article.jsp?content=20040216_75361_75361
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 12:29, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified