User talk:White hotel

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Deletion of Kersal Massive

Yes, Kersal Massive qualifies for deletion. Please see this page for the guidelines pertaining to whether this article qualifies for deletion or not. In fact, this page qualifies for speedy deletion because it was previously deleted. See Criteria for speedy deletion. Andrew_pmk | Talk 02:48, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Invitation

Hello, I saw your edits to Bisexuality and would like to invite you to join WikiProject LGBT studies We'd be delighted to have you on board! Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 01:36, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Welcome!

Hi, White hotel, welcome to WikiProject LGBT Studies!

We are a growing community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to identifying, categorizing, and improving articles of interest to the LGBT community. Some points that may be helpful:

  • Our main aim is to help improve LGBT-related articles, so if someone asks for help with an article, please try your hardest to help them if you are able.
  • Most important discussions take place on the project's main discussion page; it is highly recommended that you watchlist it.
  • The project has several ongoing and developing activities, such as article quality assessment, and a project-wide article collaboration, both of which you are welcome to take part in. We also have a unique program to improve our lower quality articles, Jumpaclass, so please consider signing up there.
  • If you have another language besides English, please consider adding yourself to our translation section, to help us improve our foreign LGBT topics.

If you have any questions, feel free to ask on the talk page, and we will be happy to help you.

And once again - Welcome!

Hey! Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 19:21, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] LGBT WikiProject Newsletter

The LGBT studies WikiProject Newsletter!
Issue III - February 1, 2007

Announcement: If someone requests help or feedback on an article, please try your hardest to help them out if you are able. Thank you.

Project News
  • The LGBT Portal has once again been revamped and a work rota started. Efforts towards Featured Portal status are slowly coming together.
  • The assessment system has been a great success, we have tagged over 4000 articles! Please tag any LGBT related articles you come across by adding {{LGBTProject | class=}} to the talkpage. Please see the Assessment Department for how to assess an article according to the grading system.
  • The Translation department has changed its focus, to LGBT articles about non-English topics and people on which there may be more information on the relevant foreign Wikipedia. Please add your name if you are fluent in any language other than English.
  • Jumpaclass is picking up slowly, with nine people having entered. With over 2000 stubs we need to improve our article quality. Please sign up and get it going! Challenge another user to see how far you can jump a stub!
  • There is an ongoing discussion about the current LGBT categorisation system here, here, and a little bit here. A special page has now been set up here to deal with this.
  • A Watchlist has been set up to monitor controversial and/or highly vandalised articles. It can also be used for article disputes, just add a note explaining the nature of the dispute.
  • With the influx of so many active members, there is now enough support for a LGBT studies peer review, which may be found here. It's in the beta phase at the moment, so bear with us if we make any mistakes. Feel free to peer review any articles you have been working on.
  • It was agreed this month to start reducing the uses of the Notice board, as many members felt that it was not effective. An open tasks template has been created, bringing together important announcements, FAC/FARs, Peer reviews, XfDs, the COTM, and requested articles. You may desire to watchlist it. A Deletion sorting subpage is also now working to bring together XfDs - this should be bot-driven, but we have not currently tagged enough articles to make this fully automated, so please update the list with any LGBT-related XfDs you come across.
Article news
Member News

To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please drop me a line.
If you have any news or any announcements to be broadcast, do let Dev920 know.

I am stressed for many reasons, but our disagreement is not one of them. :) My recent efforts at Marriage and with Cyberanth have taken its toll, and if it weren't for these Co-ordinator elections I'd take a wikibreak to recuperate. I won't even get started on my off-wiki life. I appreciate your concerns, even if I believe they are groundless. I think the scope needs shaking up anyway, so this discussion is probably beneficial and I thank you for it. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 16:22, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Bjork

Hi. Yes, it is rude, however sometimes when I'm using the AutoWikiBrowser, a few user pages slip through the cracks. I try to stay on top of things and make sure I'm only editing pages in the main namespace. Sorry. Evan Reyes 20:06, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WP:LGBT Coordinator Election Notice

This is just a quick, automated note to let you know that there is an election being conducted over the next 7 days for the position of "Coordinator" for the LGBT WikiProject. Your participation is requested. -- SatyrTN (talk • contribs)

[edit] your recent edits to the Courtney Love page

Whatever your beef with mistertruffles, way to make it kurt fans vs courtney fans. That's really going to help both pages.

I'm not going to RV your edits, because they make that ridiculous paragraph shorter, but by your own logic, maybe you should. If people's relationships to KC and opinions on whether he was suicidal or not are relevant on the KC page, then perhaps they're relevant here. This has really swayed me towards feeling I'd rather all of this nonsense was taken to a separate page, where perhaps it may stop provoking you and others into childish shows of force on the pages of two reasonably interesting and influential artists. White hotel 12:56, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

I genuinely do not appreciate your characterization. If it was ever "kurt fans vs courtney fans", it was certainly the case before I made those edits. I had not even read the paragraph in Love's article until just before I made those edits - it was not in the article the last time I read it.
I did not remove those statements because I disagreed them or as a "show of force" - I removed them because they specifically fail Wikipedia's three main guidelines: WP:V, WP:RS, and WP:OR
The absence of family members questioning suicide cannot be used as proof that he committed suicide. It's a drawn conclusion based on non-existent statements. We cannot assume any position that Cobain's family takes without their specific statements (or a reliable source compiling them). Most of Cobain's direct family are not on record saying anything about his death. That doesn't mean that they think he committed suicide or that he was murdered. (Without a source, we can't even prove that they've ever been asked for their opinion.)
The statement about Harrison and Grant never having met Cobain is also unsourced and irrelevant. If someone had to meet a victim in order to believe that they were murdered, police officers would have a very difficult time doing their jobs. If Harrison and Grant's character needs to be challenged, it should be done using citeable statements from verifiable sources, not on the grounds that they never met Cobain.
What was there did not conform to Wikipedia guidelines. That's the only position I was taking. -- ChrisB 06:46, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
I don't believe you. It seems obvious to me that you went to the Courtney page as a response to mistertruffles' criticism of the conspiracy part of the KC page. You've done that repeatedly. If you've done so because it frustrates you that two pages referring to the same conspiracy are so different, I can see that that's reasonable, and again I think that it points clearly to a separate page where the differences can be resolved, since the two pages don't seem able to agree what (in content, in tone, and in intention) constitutes NPOV on this one.
As for 'the absence of family members questioning suicide cannot be used as proof that he committed suicide' - it has never read as any kind of gesture at 'proof' to me. The conspiracy theory as a whole is there because it's notable - because many people believe it or don't. Speculating as to KC's family's beliefs is OR; stating that they've never challenged the official verdict is reasonable.
'If Harrison and Grant's character needs to be challenged, it should be done using citeable statements from verifiable sources, not on the grounds that they never met Cobain.' Right - because the Kim Gordon quote is thrown in on the KC page just as an aside. White hotel 13:21, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
"Repeatedly"? I can count my edits on Love's article with one hand.
The problem is that we don't know that they've never challenged it. For the most part, Cobain's family have not been given the opportunity to comment publicly. The only available quotes (that I'm aware of) are from his grandfather, who suggests that Kurt may have been murdered, and his cousin, who believes his depression led to suicide. The member of his family that Kurt was closest to was his mother, and she initially challenged suicide before backing down - her subsequent views are unclear. The only reasonable and verfiable summary one can draw is: "Apart from Cobain's grandfather and cousin, Cobain's family have not commented publicly." And, personally, I would even challenge the notability of that statement, given that Cobain was not close to his family - most of them would not be in a knowledgable position to challenge the offical verdict, since they would not be able to base their opinion on first-hand information.
We have the same problem with Grohl and Novoselic. They've been intentionally silent. Novoselic's statements seem to suggest that he's accepted the official verdict. Grohl's statements have basically suggested that he didn't feel he was close enough to Cobain to judge either way. But, without verifiable statements one way or the other, drawing a conclusion is original research. The best we can do is simply point out that they've been silent.
Here's the problem: one person can assume that silence means they agree with the verdict. Another person can assume that silence means that they believe he was murdered but don't want to get into a confrontation with Love. Another person can assume that silence means they feel they don't have enough information to judge either way - none of Cobain's immediate friends or family saw him after his return to Seattle from rehab, so they would not be in a position to have first-hand knowledge about him or his state of mind in the days leading up to his death. Their opinions would be based on what they've heard from Love, Grant, or other third parties. We can't assume anything - we can only use their statements. Cobain's family, Grohl, and Novoselic have not offered them, so we can't assume what their views are.
Which is precisely why the Kim Gordon is notable. Gordon was a friend of Cobain's, and is on record with the opinion that she believes he was murdered. Her statement is sourced, verifiable, and relevant. I've subsequently added statements from other friends, including Carlson, who believe that the murder theory is junk, as a way to balance her statement. -- ChrisB 17:40, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] LGBT WikiProject newsletter

[edit] LGBT WikiProject Newsletter

[edit] LGBT WikiProject newsletter

SatyrBot 05:24, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../w/h/i/User_talk%7EWhite_hotel_73b4.html"