User talk:Benjiboi/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive 1
| Archive 2 →

Contents


[edit] Invitation to join WP:LGBT

Just wondered if you were interested in the LGBT WikiProject? Take a look around, and if you are interested, sign up :) -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 21:15, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence (re: Tom Ammiano

Thanks for the note Benjiboi. Believe me, I know all about the Easter Day controversy. Your note to me suggests that Ammiano is Jewish. He was raised Catholic, was he not? I seem to remember him lamenting his miserable Catholic school education. Also, your suggestion that "Jews in SF were quite surprised that the SF Catholic Archdiocese was making such a stink about the street closure permit" is far-fetched. Most Jews did not care about it.

You're right about William Levada being an asshole, but I think you're wrong to suggest that this was just a "wedge issue" cooked up by some political enemies of Ammiano. There was genuine hurt on the part of SF Catholics to see their holiest day mocked like that. I'm convinced that one reason SF is so open-minded is because it was and still is to a large degree a Catholic city, not a puritanical Protestant city. We should respect the open-mindedness that Catholicism brought to SF.

I don't think Jews or Judaism had anything to do with the events of that Easter Day, even though there are Jewish members of the Sisters, which is why I keep taking Jewish stuff out of the article. BTW, I am a fan of the Sisters. I just think this episode was pivotal in Ammiano's defeat and it should be remembered. He made a big mistake there. Respectfully, Griot 16:23, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

I haven't researched him regarding Jewish or Catholic although I think you're correct. I do, however, disagree with your statement that "Most Jews did not care about it." and researched a good credible quote and tried to work it in appropriately. Jews and Gays share a rather long history of being killed in the name of religion with the Catholic Church amongst the more notable aggressors. With gays that continues to this day, I can't speak to Jewish issues as far as current activities but I'd be willing to bet there are plenty of issues to chew on if one were interested.
I didn't mean to imply to the wedge issue was cooked up but rather escalated ala what can we do to get our unknown Catholic newspaper in the hands of every SF Catholic and then it was recycled throughout the campaign. I also think the idea that SF is a Catholic city would be news to many but we don't have to go into that and just have to agree to disagree as we will about Catholics bringing open-mindedness anywhere.
As for the election there were many many things that contributed to the defeat of Ammiano including city workers campaigning for Mayor Brown from their offices on public time and dime and sanitation workers actively removing Tom's campaign signs against the law. The Sisters hyped-up issue was simply an easy way for anti-Tom folks to say do you really want a gay in office without saying he's gay which probably would have earned voter backlash. If not that issue something else would have been inserted as is the nature of SF (and US) politics.Benjiboi 22:08, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
I hope you don't misuderstand me. San Francisco was founded by Catholics and was until quite recently populated mostly by Irish and Italians, both Catholic groups. Culturally, these people were very open-minded compared to the protestants who ruled most of America. For example, Catholics opposed prohibition, whereas protestants favored it. It was no mistake that gays, for example, found a relatively tolerant society in San Francisco when they begin arriving after WWII. They were coming to a wide-open, Catholic city. I'm asking you to understand Catholicism as a culture, not as a church hierarchy.
As to the rest of your comment, Ammiano is an Italian-American raised Catholic. I still do not understand your point about Jews. You do realize that the Sisters dress as nuns, and that nuns are a part of the Catholic Church? Why would Jews be upset by men dressing as nuns when the Jewish tradition has no nuns? I think your point about Jews being offended is moot and doesn't belong in the article. I also don't think you should underestimate how much the Sisters' actions that Easter Sunday upset old-time Catholics in SF. They, too, are worthy of our respect, especially as they built such a fine city to which we only arrived lately. Griot 22:42, 2 May 2007 (UTC)


Whatever. you win, I'm too busy to get into an edit war at the moment. Remove all info showing that many including Jews were upset by the Catholic Archdiocese actions and words over this history changing event. And by all mean s remove the fact that the Catholic Archdiocese was ok with moving the Sisters event off their easter and onto the Russian Orthodox Easter. Seems fair and balance to me.

[edit] 3RR - 3 Revert Rule on Lonnie Frisbee

You and User:Burntapple both have 4 reverts on Lonnie Frisbee in the last twenty four hours. See the following diffs four your reverts:

Please consider this a warning. I have no interest in getting involved in this content dispute, but will report both of you to WP:AN/3RR if you don't both knock it off. There are better ways to solve content disputes - talk it out, and invite other editors to offer their opinions (you may try asking for a third opinion, editor assistance, or make a request for comment). Also, please note that "rvv" as an edit summary means "reverting vandalism" - a content dispute is not the same as vandalism. Thanks for your consideration. Pastor David † 19:54, 8 May 2007 (UTC)


You are in danger of violating the three-revert rule on Lonnie Frisbee. Please cease further reverts or you may be blocked from editing. - talk page, please! Same goes for your adversary - Alison ☺ 20:09, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

well here's where Burntapple and I do agree in that we are not adversaries, simply disagreeing and this is my first taste of the 3RR which (finally) is being adressed on the talk page of the article.Benjiboi 21:02, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
Yep. It's all good :) - Alison ☺ 23:14, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Advice

First, let me say that you probably do not want to file any sort of "official" report - when I went and counted again, it is only you who has violated the 3RR (Burntapple has 3 reverts, you have four). Second, there are any number of venues for sorting out a content dispute, and I doubt that you would be likely to get an admin to protect the page until you have tried a few other options. Let me see if I can help.

I have started a discussion thread on the article's talk page. Please discuss there instead of reverting. I will point Burntapple toward it as well. If you two cannot reach an agreement on the talk page - or if the other editor will not engage in the discussion there, we will try a request for comment. Pastor David † 20:15, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Lonnie Frisbee article is much better now and I have learned a bit more about researching which should effectively render this 3RR dispute null. Benjiboi 05:14, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Jerry Falwell is a key player in LGBT history

Hi, Falwell played a major role in the the development of LGBT history in the US (at least). Isn't there an appropriate tag for that in the LGBT timeline? Benjiboi 02:07, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

While he was a misogynistic twit (IMHO), I had two reasons for removing the cat. One I stated in the edit summary - the man himself isn't LGBT history. Secondly, LGBT wasn't his only (or even his main) focus. He got some sound-bites from some of the stupid things he said, but he got those for stupid things he said about abortion, stem-cell research, heck even things about the president. So while I agree he deserves mention - in articles like Timeline of LGBT history or Homophobia or Religious intolerance - I don't think the article on the man should be in the cat. Any more than Hitler is in the cat.
All that being said, if you still disagree, bring it up at WT:LGBT - I'd love to hear what others think. -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 02:13, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
In process. Benjiboi 02:54, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] your sig

Hey, Benjiboi, would you mind putting a link to either your user page (User:Benjiboi) or this talk page into your sig? It's helpful to be able to click on someone's signature and arrive at their userspace. If you set it to [[User talk:Benjiboi|Benjiboi]] at Special:Preferences, then your sig will point to this page. It's not required, but it's helpful. ··coelacan 14:18, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes, your sig works now. =) Not sure I have any reply about Falwell, but I read it. ··coelacan 20:46, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the heads up! Done. Benjiboi 23:29, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Another tip: you should probably read Help:Minor edit. You're marking almost every edit as minor, but many of them are not. In brief, only uncontroversial formatting and wikimarkup changes, or reverts of outright vandalism, are supposed to be marked minor. Marking edits minor also makes them not appear in some people's watchlists (there is a preference in Special:Preferences that does this), so marking a talk page edit minor will mean that some people aren't aware you've replied. ··coelacan 21:45, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

LOL! Thanks for heads up on minor edits flag, it was on auto set which I'll change. Benjiboi 19:10, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] SPI saints

Can any of the "saints" section be verified? -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 00:40, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

All if it. Benjiboi 00:48, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

LOL :) Then it probably needs a reference :) -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 00:49, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
I'm in the middle of another article but will return to it either today or tonight. Benjiboi 00:51, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
Ohh, hold on a minute, dear! I didn't mean to reference each and every entry! My question was can we verify that the Sisters sainted them all? Do we have any record like that? It would certainly be easier than finding a ref for each one :) My, that's a lot of work you've done!!! Exquisite! -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 05:19, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
The SF Sisters have sainted hundreds just by themselves, I thought it would be meaningful to list the more notable ones, as time goes on some folks that had been sainted earlier will become notable and can be added later. All are documented but finding online documentation is the challenge. Benjiboi 09:04, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
I'll say! Would it be useful to split the section out to have something like List of saints? -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 15:49, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
My hunch is that the ones that are notable can be listed right now with just a qualifier like "medical marijuana activist" and as the list grows it would turn into a list rather than a chunky paragraph. I'm not wed to any one concept as long as the information is there. Benjiboi 23:43, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Sounds good to me :) -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 00:40, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Faux queen

I noticed there are a few images of faux queens on Flickr under free licenses, here and here -- would you want any of those as illustrations? I'd be happy to copy any of them over to Commons for you if you'd like. —Celithemis 02:21, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

that would be so cool! I think the one "contestant holy mcgrail is a woman. faux queen" would be good as the lead and "the best little Faux Queen in Frisco" would also be good. Benjiboi 06:11, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
No problem at all; they're up now. —Celithemis 08:25, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] BAYSWAN

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on BAYSWAN, by Pavel Vozenilek, another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because BAYSWAN fits the criteria for speedy deletion for the following reason:

notability of the organisation is not suggested, WP is not Yellow Pages


To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting BAYSWAN, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Please note, this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate BAYSWAN itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. --Android Mouse Bot 2 23:02, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Benjiboi, I found some articles through NewsBank -- a subscription news archive service that I have access to -- three of which document the early history of BAYSWAN as it was happening (1997). I've emailed them to myself, & will add info from them tomorrow when I get a chance. I can also forward them to you through your "email this user" link on your user page if you're interested. Meanwhile, I'm adding my KEEP vote to the AfD for this article. You've done some damn good work on this article. --Yksin 06:59, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] LGBT Project Newsletter

Delivered on 16:00, 6 June 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Living Memory LGBT History Timeline from Trans perspective

Transgender Aging Network has launched a project to assist with aging LGBT folks

"the Transgender Aging Network has constructed the following timeline showing how old they would have been when there were critical events or changes in the lives of LGBT people."

Starting with the 1920s the events list can be cross-referenced with current GLBT timelines and used as a possible stepping stone to aid Trans projects and awareness. The PDF version is here [1] Html via Google is here [2] Saved here for ref Benjiboi 17:45, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Troll (gay)

A "{{prod}}" template has been added to the article Troll (gay), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but yours may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. --Rrburke(talk) 23:51, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

will work on this article in the next day or so. Benjiboi 00:11, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Tagging

I notice you have been creating several LGBT articles without placing our banner on the talkpage. Would you mind adding our wikiproject banner as a matter of course on your articles? otherwise it's very difficult to keep track of our progress. DevAlt 10:08, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Just learning the whole stub and tagging and will work to do so. Benjiboi 17:00, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] (Houston Gay Pride Parade) Thank you...

Just wanted to thank you for helping get this article off the ground again. I contacted the organizers for additional information, but I appreciate what you've done so far. --Hourick 20:06, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Very welcome! Benjiboi 21:56, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Allen R. Schindler, Jr.

Hello, I just wanted to let you know that we rather edit conflicted one another; I moved the ref and the statement down into the body of the article because it is too detailed for the lead, as the lead appears now, and it better pairs with a description of the individual's injuries since it coincides with the source. I reverted your edit when you re-added it to the lead because it was redundant, but when you removed the remaining statement and ref, none of it existed, so I reverted you again. It's now back in the body of the article, and I hope you agree that it's better where it is for now. Take care, María (críticame) 19:54, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Why do you not agree, if I may ask? As per WP:LEAD, the lead section is supposed to be an overview of the article's main points, and the statement and reference in question is unique and goes into too much detail for such a short article. The impact is still there in the body of the article, and nothing is lost. As for the use of "brutal," I originally removed it because it borders on WP:POV. Aren't all murders brutal in a sense? I can see the argument going either way, however; perhaps with more refs it will seem less so. It's always good to be careful about certain wording, so I wouldn't throw heavy words like that around often. María (críticame) 20:06, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
agree that throwing heavy words around should be avoided that's why I let the reference do it but you moved it. Benjiboi 20:11, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
Also, do you have a reliable source for "The attack was so brutal Hajdys-Holman could identify her son only by the tattoo on his arm"? That would make a great addition to the article -- but not in the lead. ;) María (críticame) 20:08, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
I do and I'm in the process of researching it and the campaign the family had undertaken for justice.[3] Benjiboi 20:11, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Hey, nice work! The article is much improved, and I definitely admire your research skills. As for your question about the captain not reporting the circumstances of the murder and the coincidental meeting, I agree with you that it isn't exactly clear. I'd add the {{fact}} tag for now, just in case there is a reliable source somewhere. If not, and it remains as is for a period of time, it may be best to move the statement to the talk page so it doesn't get wiped out entirely, and it can still be open for discussion.

On a side note, you may want to look at Wikipedia:Citation templates for help on ref formatting; it's such a pain, but the proper wiki-syntax helps with duplicate references. It's done by naming your references so the entire URL, title, date, etc, doesn't need to be repeated. For example, instead of listing one ref twice like:

He said "this"<ref>[http://wwww.something.com Something]</ref> and she said "that"<ref>[http://wwww.something.com Something]</ref>, you can do this number on it:
He said "this"<ref name="something">[http://wwww.something.com Something]</ref> and she said "that."<ref name="something"/>

That creates the little a, b, c next to the reference listed for every instance the same ref is used throughout the article, and makes it easier to navigate. Great job in turning the article around, though, it's reading great. I did a small tweak on whitespace removal and header formatting, but other than that I'm not touching it; you have it totally under control.  :) Hope this helped, María (críticame) 12:45, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:WikiProject LGBT studies/Translation

Ah, thanks, I hadn't noticed that existed. No Italian speakers listed, though, unfortunately. —Celithemis 01:24, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Welcome to Wikipedia!

welcome to Wikipedia, a free and open-content encyclopedia. I hope you enjoy contributing. To help get you settled in, I thought you might find the following pages useful:

Don't worry too much about being perfect. Very few of us are! Just in case you are not perfect, click here to see how you can avoid making common mistakes.

If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user talk (discussion) page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. A third option is to ask a more experienced user such as an administrator.

One last bit of advice: please sign any discussion comment with four tildes (~~~~). The software will automatically convert this into your signature which can be altered in the "Preferences" tab at the top of the screen. I hope I have not overwhelmed you with information. If you need any help just let me know. Once again welcome to Wikipedia, and don't forget to tell us about yourself and be BOLD!   Benjiboi 21:08, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Donna Sachet added as Candidate for Speedy Deletion

Sorry about this, but I added Donna Sachet as a Candidiate for Speedy Deletion in accordance with Wikipedia:Copyright problems. If you get a chance, please rewrite the article—it'd be great to have her on the site, just not with copied material!

Jeff Bowman 18:27, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

apologies for the delayed response - way too much going on~! We did have general license permission but I will add it onto a list of todo articles since it's been deleted already. Benjiboi 21:07, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Rosie O'Donnell article re: Clay Aiken's sexuality

bringing this over from my page:
Hi, not sure why any reference to Clay Aiken's sexuality need to be expunged when the article clearly stated his denial of talking about it and no proof has been presented showing evidence of him being gay. And if it did? Who cares? The section is about perceived homophobia which can happen to strait people who are simply perceived as being gay whether the person making that judgment is correct or not isn't the point. I've further softened the language to read "Although some have speculated or joked that Aiken is gay[44] he has steadfastly refused to discuss his sexuality stating "What I do in my private life is nobody's business anymore."[45]" I hope this further revision is acceptable. Benjiboi 06:12, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

I was not trying to expunge any reference to Aiken's sexuality. That would be impossible, given the topic, wouldn't it? My first edit was to remove the statement that "he never stated if he were homosexual or not," which is incorrect. I provided a quotation in the edit notes and a citation in the references, but you deleted my change and returned your version anyway. JReferee offered a version which incorporated the Rolling Stone statement, but his version, like yours missed the point. Your version now states that "he has steadfastly refused to discuss his sexuality," the implication of which is very similar to your previous "he has never stated" version, when in fact he willingly discussed it for years--he just didn't say what people want to hear. Aiken answered the "are you gay?" question multiple times in interviews in 2003 and 2004. By 2005 fans were writing skits about reporters asking, "Are you gay yet?" and he started to get gnarly about the question. There's really only one answer people will accept. In 2006 he told People, "Well, it didn't matter what I said. The only thing they would believe was yes. … People are going to believe what they want."[4] He told Lara Spencer of the Insider, "I'm just not commenting anymore. There's no point, I've answered before." He told Diane Sawyer, "I've gotten to a point now where I, A., am tired of trying, and B., I feel it's kind of invasive, you know?" Personally, I don't care if he's gay either, but I do believe in a person's right to define his own sexuality. I don't think Rosie should define it (and I doubt she does either), and I don't think Wikipedia should define it.
How about this:

...he refused to discuss his sexuality during 2006 promotional appearances, stating, "Well, it didn't matter what I said. The only thing they would believe was yes. … People are going to believe what they want." People.com "Clay Aiken Speaks Out About Rumors", by Carrie Borzillo-Vrenna, People, 09/20/2006 Retrieved 2006-03-07.

PS. I read your note and worked on this before going to the O'Donnell article. You didn't mention the other additions you made. If you're going to add the "dogged by rumors" phrase, why do you need to then say there's been speculation, with three more references? Kelly and Rosie had the big fuss; he was caught in the middle. I think you're putting undue weight on this. -Jmh123 16:00, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
Just in case you once again revert my changes, two of your citations are unacceptable. Page Six is a gossip column, and therefore not a reliable source, the Blade article is sourced to Page Six, and is therefore also unreliable, (please see Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons#Reliable_sources) and the Advocate link is dead, so I can't check it. At any rate, as I said, the point is made with your "dogged by rumors" citation. I don't see any need to belabor it. -Jmh123 16:23, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
I removed the Post-Chronicle reference. This is a tabloid-style online website masquerading as a newspaper; it isn't backed by any print newspaper, nor tied to any region. No problem with the other refs. -Jmh123 20:52, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
Hi, my apologies as after I made my initial note to you I started to research the various links provided in the Kelly Ripa and Aiken articles and found them to be less than stellar, that's when I found the "dogged by rumors" quote which I think is what the section needed most just a ref. that some had questioned his sexuality. I personally don't like to delete other editors research references but when I initially read the Rolling Stone ref. it was vague and didn't seem to address the question at hand. Thank you for your time on this. Benjiboi 20:57, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
No problem. I felt bad about deleting all that research. Thank you for working with me on this. You seem interested in the gossip about the message board, which is, like most gossip, off base, so I'm sending you an e-mail. -Jmh123 21:01, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
Not terribly interested just working to find decent references, I'm old school enough to know that sometimes a source like Page Six is accepted and sometimes it's off-base. Happy to do the legwork and the research/references should tell the story so no worries there. Benjiboi 21:10, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Discrimination template

Thanks for the help. Looking at your contribs I wonder if you'd be interested in WikiProject Discrimination? - Keith D. Tyler 23:58, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Discrimination template 2

Hey! I was also a bit hesitant to remove it since it's one of the articles in the template box. But still it felt awkward to have Homophobia and Armenian Genocide on the same page :) I checked to see if the Holocaust article has it, but it was not there. And I think that discrimination was one of the much lesser factors in the 1915 events compared to the Holocaust.

Bıt as I said feel free to put it there if you think it's needed. I wouldn't have anything against it. Regards, Kerem Özcan 06:46, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] LGBT WikiProject Newsletter

Delivered on 16:00, 6 July 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Thanks

Thank you for your kind and helpful suggestions. I really appreciate your taking time for a newbie. Nayehi 05:48, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

No problem! We're all new at least once! Benjiboi 05:53, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Slut Night

Very impressive! Well done. Pdfpdf 16:15, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you very much! Benjiboi 00:09, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] A little background info

This is in response to your comments at Talk:Matt Sanchez.

The cplsanchez.info site that has been mentioned is an attack site, run by now-indefinitely banned editor Pwok, who was the source of a lot of the strife that the talk page had endured in the past. (Sanchez's hostility towards gays didn't help.) Sanchez's demands to change the article are better than his earlier behavior, which was to edit the article himself. The article is terribly written, and nobody is happy with the article (Sanchez wants to whitewash the past and focus on his new career, and his critics want to tar him with the prostitution charge and tie him to Coulter.) However, it is almost impossible to edit the article, because anything other than the tiniest changes send someone over the edge. Horologium t-c 01:43, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

thanks for the info, please update the talk page with some of this info for future editors as well. Benjiboi 01:45, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:True Colors 2007 The Tour CD cover.jpg

I've updated image file with rationale and fixed tagging on all related articles. Benjiboi 11:57, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:SisKittysml.jpg

Image file updated and fixed tagging on all related articles. Benjiboi 12:02, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:DJ Pusspuss by Tommy Kohl.jpg

Image file updated and fixed tagging on all related articles. Benjiboi 12:02, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Sister Sew and Sew and Sew.jpg

Image file updated and fixed tagging on all related articles. Benjiboi 12:03, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Matt Sanchez Article - Response

Your weasel-worded "non"/accusation that I am being "disruptive" is very strange. I have made one single edit to the page. It was reverted, and I have therefore gone back to the talk page to discuss it, and I have been civil in doing so. Please tell me how you consider this to be disruptive. Please point to an example of my supposed incivility. As for my 'voluminous' discussion, how are you gauging this? What constitutes 'voluminous' to you? And why are your own comments not 'voluminous' and disruptive? I also note that many of my arguments are simply ignored, particularly in regard to whether primary sources are valid as long as they are not invasive. It's especially strange, since I thought you agreed that the prostitution reference belongs in the article. It is a large part of why Sanchez is notable at all. If you respond, please reply on my page. Thanks.Typing monkey 19:41, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

I pretty much agree with what you're stating in the talk pages. The style is disruptive-ish when you look at the talk pages history and see users such as yourself post 5-7 times in a row across topics. It makes it harder for any editors to follow the discussion and communicate. i first let a similiar warning on Matt Sanchez & Blue Marine's pages and felt it only fair to do the same for opposing viewpoint editors that may have been following his lead. If everyone can relax a bit the talk pages might become more useful to all concerned. Benjiboi 19:48, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
Benjiboi, it's really embarrassing that you apparently have no idea about the history of the situation before aiming any sort of censure to other editors. Please read the entire history of the discussion, and then read it again, and then go back and read the source material and read it again. You are asking questions that are basic and show that you have not given this the thought you're capable of. Typing monkey 06:39, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
There's the "history" tab which you can click on and see what changes have been made "across headings." I try to respond on the talk page where the discussion has been started. It can be confusing. However I don't think that replying that way is disruptive, which is what you accused me of, which hurt my feelings, I'm a sensitive, fragile soul. Be gentle with me. What hurt me most is that you said you might get around to reading the history/archives later. I was threatened with banning (by WJB) and then told I was "disruptive" (by you) because I was accused of not knowing the whole story. Hm. Please read the whole thing, please read the archives, even of people who have been not wikipedia-friendly, read all of it before starting another thread on the basics of the controversy behind this entry. Particularly before snapping at other editors about their behavior. I don't want to "bite" but you really need a history on the topic before you start snapping at others (like me) about whether or not they are being 'disruptive.' Please respond on my page. Typing monkey 07:09, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
Gotcha, now I have an idea what you're referring to. My chill admonishment above was really written for Matt Sanchez himself and his alter edit ID Blue Marine which I did post to his user pages and then, to be quite fair, realized that he could easily point out that both you and the Truthandjustice editor were basically doing the same thing. Who started it didn't matter. It was basically making it harder for all concerned. If I hur your feelings my apologies - not the intent at all. Once the talk pages quieted down i felt I could -finally- start doing an overview to understand what the subject of the article was and then compare to what it could and potentially should be. Throughout I have sought clarity and asked for documentation from all sides. Once "dangling" piece of info is within a military blog where it states something along the lines that Sanchez has deleted his former escort website. If such a site existed (which is pretty standard in the gay porn world) then I wanted to see what, if anything, it said that might have a bearing on the article.
Archived talk page discussions are quite useful however they are archived to house outdated discussions about matters already dealt with. I purposely was avoiding reading them to avoid undue (and probably negative) influence, just as I have been not studying the blogs as much as simply looking for any new relevant information and reliable sources that bloggers unearth. In fairness the lefty ones spew against him and they are completely balanced by the right-wing ones that see him only as hero. I think there is some truth in both and hope to simply find a good article underneath the rabble rubble. Benjiboi 07:34, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
The thing is, archived discussions are not necessarily "dealt with." Sometimes archives are created just to keep the discussion page from becoming too long. Elonka, for instance, just revived an un-dealt-with issue about consensus. Archived does not mean "dead" or "irrelevant." Archives just indicate lively discussion, and you need to be familiar with them before making "new" arguments. We're trying to establish consensus. The people who have contributed discussion in the archives should not be ignored.Typing monkey 07:41, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
I agree that past discussion are important and not "dead" or "irrelevant." Sometimes discussions are archived in error as someone wishes it were closed. This is the first time I've had to deal with that situation. I disagree with you that one has to be familiar with the archives before starting a new thread. Indeed the concept is that an archived thread is closed and there for reference and the current threads are in process. If a thread is newly opened that has already been answered it's completely appropriate to include a link to it stating "already answered." There is an idea that for "every one student who asks a question there are twenty who were thinking it" so, to me, simply asking for information didn't seem out of line at all. If the answer to my original question is in the talk archives can you provide me a link to where it is or what exactly to search for?
As for the consensus I'm only with y'all part way as the proposed text isn't written well and seems more foggy than clear. I'm not yet in a place to rewrite it myself but am trying to get there. Benjiboi 08:07, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Jesse Dirkhising

Jesse Dirkhising can be included in the rape victim category because his notability is about the crimes against him; he's deceased. WP:BLP is for living people. It is for living people who are public figure but want to maintain their rape as private that the category excludes. Fighting for Justice 02:46, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough, thank you for pointing it out. Benjiboi 02:52, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fudgie Frottage

[edit] Fudgie Frottage edit

Sorry for the problem barliner 16:01, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

No prob. Benjiboi 20:21, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fudgie Frottage

I have already changed my vote to keep. --Michael Johnson 22:15, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

I kept my vote as delete, but for notability instead of bollocks. Realkyhick 22:24, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for your attention and time. Benjiboi 22:26, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fudgie Frottage

I have changed my !vote after the expansion. Thanks for alerting me to the improvement. Cheers, -- Anonymous DissidentTalk 00:19, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

you're quite welcome. Benjiboi 00:33, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fudgie Frottage

Thanks for the comment, I've changed to keep. Giggy UCP 01:55, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

You're quite welcome. Benjiboi 01:58, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Great work Benji. Enough of us flipped to where it's safe to say you saved it. Fudgie owes you some comps when he opens in Vegas. :) - Crockspot 02:40, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
lol! That'd be just swell! Benjiboi 02:41, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fudgie Frottage refs reminder

From talk page, [5] has a few refs yet to be cited in article please add when possible. Benjiboi 11:38, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs
List of social movements
Disability Discrimination Act 1992
Cisgender
White Aryan Resistance
Nazi concentration camps
Daniel Goldhagen
State racism
Voting Rights Act
Mass racial violence in the United States
Political movement
Kielce pogrom
Minority rights
Social rights
European Region of the International Lesbian and Gay Association
Black pride
Special rights
Group Areas Act
Gay friendly
Aryan Nations
Cleanup
Reverse discrimination
Second-class citizen
National Afro-American League
Merge
Transitioning (transgender)
Fair housing
Essenes
Add Sources
Homosexuality and transgender
Civil unions in Croatia
March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom
Wikify
Molecular biology
CRY America
Men's movement
Expand
Gay pride
Asian Social Forum
Night of the Long Knives

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 20:54, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Jeffree Star

Hi Benjiboi. I don't have time to do this, but would you please incorporate into Jeffree Star the information from Shuster, Fred. (November 29, 2006) Los Angeles Daily News. Caught in their web; For Mickey Avalon and Jeffree Star, fame begins with rocking Myspace pages. Section: U; Page 4. (accessible on July 22, 2007 at here by searching for "Mickey Avalon and Jeffree Star" and as reprinted here.) Thanks. -- Jreferee (Talk) 06:13, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

no prob.

[edit] Thanks: tag on Jeffree Star

Thanks for changing the tag I added on Jeffree Star. I wasn't entirely happy with the Magazine tag either. The new one is probably more appropriate. Also, as per your suggestion, I described my reasoning here. -kotra 00:23, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Replied here. Benjiboi 00:42, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Second Jeffree Star EP

The notability tag on Second Jeffree Star EP simply means that there is not enought reliable source material independent of Second Jeffree Star EP to write an article on Second Jeffree Star EP. I couldn't find any information to use in the article. -- Jreferee (Talk) 22:48, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for looking! between his MySpace and buzznet stuff plus all the blogs and fans I was overwhelmed with finding material to work with. Benjiboi 23:03, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Jeffree Star article edits

Hi, please excuse me as I am getting the hang of Wikipedia. Sent in to correct a few things in the Jeffree Star article. Great Job by the way. Quietcharms 22:30, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

No prob, we're all new sometimes! Benjiboi 22:34, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Plastic Surgery Slumber Party

I made a separate page for Plastic Surgery Slumber Party since in most cases the album is a separate article from the artist.--milk the cows (Talk) 18:25, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

I noticed. You probably shouldn't have since it was deleted just days ago by consensus. I imagine it will be re-added and combined once the new album is out but your un-deletion is probably premature. Benjiboi 19:09, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
I reverted the Jeffree Star article with the album included, and removed the template along with moving the section under the "Music career" section. The Plastic Surgery Slumber Party article now redirects to Jeffree Star as it was before.--milk the cows (Talk) 19:51, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Benjiboi added as maintainer on Jeffree Star

I added your name to the maintained template in Jeffree Star's discussion page since you have greatly contributed to the article.--milk the cows (Talk) 17:25, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

no prob.

[edit] Barnstar

The Original Barnstar
I hereby award you this barnstar for your outstanding work in improving and expanding the depth of the Jeffree Star article milk the cows (Talk) 02:53, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
Thank you!

[edit] Renaming image help

The only way to do it is to upload the image again with the new name, replace the old image in related articles, and then tag the original image with {{duplicate|Image:NEWNAME.jpg}}. This marks the original image for speedy deletion, referencing the new duplicate. If you are the uploader of the original image, you can use {{badname|Image:NEWNAME.jpg}}. TAnthony 03:46, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

lol. thanks It's gonna stay where it's at for now as it took a lot to get the new editor to understand the free licensing concept and ruthless editing protocols. Benjiboi 09:58, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Redstone Building

Thanks for letting me know. Sometimes the new page patrollers really get, like... oh, what's the word... paranoid. I'll see new articles in C:CSD that were tagged less than two minutes after they were created, and it's killing us. I _hate_ that we lose many potentially-good editors due to overeager tagging, even on articles where notability and/or copyright permission are asserted. I don't know if the article will survive a deletion debate, but at least it has a chance now.

Don't you love San Francisco? I haven't been there in three years and I'm dying to go back. Just seeing a photo of that building warms my heart. :-) Thanks again! - KrakatoaKatie 05:16, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

I'd be stunned if it were brought to AfD - it's miles ahead of well established building articles and we have only been at it a...day.
I do love SF, great people and climate and culture. Benjiboi 09:57, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] List of queercore bands

Thanks for piping up in defense of the article, but it's now been deleted. I saved the content in my user space: User:Larrybob/List_of_queercore_bands -- it may come in handy in the future. --Larrybob 19:24, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Guaranteed it will - your work to document queercore will be appreciated for generations to come! Benjiboi 08:46, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Deleted talk page comment re: Masculism

Just wanted to inform you that Bremskraft deleted the concerns you posted about their edits on their talk page. Neitherday 22:06, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes I noticed that too, sad. I've posted for some admin support to get guidance on what steps are appropriate - the Masculism article as is - is a mess of tags.
Please let me know what comes of this. My concerns with edits to another article Feminists for life were twice deleted from Bremskraft's talk page as well. Neitherday 21:54, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
I'm happy to support you on that article (mainly as it's not too long! Benjiboi 23:43, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for your help Neitherday 04:33, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] tag for genderfuck next updating you do

Sexual Identities tag no rest for the wicked. Benjiboi 11:43, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] San Francisco Graphic

The picture you submitted to the Graphic Lab to improve has been reviewed and a version is available for your judgment. Please come to the Graphic Lab and let me know what you think. Thanks. -- VegitaU 12:43, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

I just was it looks great! Thank you! Benjiboi 12:44, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] advice on a template

Hi Benjiboi, just thought I'd ask you to give my {{Feminismfooter}} the once over. I think I've got it right code-wise but if you have any advice it'd be much appreciated--Cailil talk 14:38, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Did some formatting bits and one alpha-sort, not sure if you want the top two sections in amplha order or not, i would yes but not bothered either way. Benjiboi 15:35, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for that Benjiboi! I think the top two are okay - that's the order Neitherday has them on the vertical template so I'm not too worried about listing those lines alphabetically.--Cailil talk 16:32, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
I would consider alphasorting them anyway. The vertical template works for the columns both horizontal is closer to a standard text. It's not a huge issue but it makes for ease of use. Benjiboi 17:02, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
I see what you mean, I'll sort them now. Thanks for the advice--Cailil talk 17:05, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Transphobia edits

Thanks- I will try and edit in smaller segments next time.

No problem. I could tell you meant well! Benjiboi 00:22, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Apologies Re: Twinkie defense

Sorry for the erroneous revert on Twinkie defense; I undid myself (sounds funny to say that)--Kubigula (talk) 04:28, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

I was wondering what was going on when I saw you were an admin. Thanks for catching it. Benjiboi 04:29, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
One of the dangers of using anti-vandalism scripts - it makes it that much easier to foul up :(. Great work on the article, by the way.--Kubigula (talk) 04:48, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
Lol! Thanks, I'm still cleaning up the language and dangling ideas and such. Benjiboi 04:50, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Use of Twinkie image

I see you're the main contributer to this article, so I'm asking here rather than being bold (which can sometimes inadvertently turn into being a dick); Do you not think the image as it stands gives the article a rather frivolous look? As somebody who lived in San Francisco at the time of the assassinations, and participated in the White Night riots, I would think a picture of Dan White would be more appropriate. Just a suggestion.

I hear you but there is a picture of him on the other related articles. If you think about Twinkie defense you and I probably know why it's called that but the vast majority of the world (even most of the queer world) will have no clue about the connection. I gave it a lengthy caption labeling it the namesake and it's main purpose it to provide clarification. If it was called the Pepsi meltdown then we'd have a photo and caption of that. Benjiboi 11:11, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
On reflection, perhaps the image is appropriate after all. What could be more appropriate for a silly, frivolous defense technique than a silly, frivolous image. And your caption is certainly clear in its explanation of why the image is there. Are you planning on expanding it further? Both it and the White Night Riots are certainly worthy of expansion. Let me know if you need any help in searching out info or references. Jeffpw 11:20, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
Thanks, I needed the rest from it for a bit. I got fed up defending it being in the LGBT category first then an editor was removing "frivolous info that Milk's homosexuality was "irrelevant." Perhaps the article allowed it to appear so at the time but I was determined to source as much as appropriate to ensure Milk's being gay was understood to be a major motivating factor. This was a true culture war and Milk and Moscone died for it.
If you looking for some challenges...
1.White had on his hitlist a few others besides Milk and Moscone so it would be nice to include those
2.I've done little to the White Night Riots article - this was a major gay riot
3.Both incidents sparked SF-based LGBT groups to be formed
4.The retaliatory police raid on the Elephant Walk I don't believe is well documented (or at least not with easily accessed sources) so it would be nice to suss that out a bit and speak to an uneasy legacy of police actions against queers, etc.
I'd be happy to look for the names on the hit list. I'm on vacation right now, so have the time. As to the White Night riots, I have many links in my bookmarks already. Don't know why I never bothered to check out Wiki's coverage of it. I firmly agree that these incidents were important milestones in gay history, and not only because I was a participant. :) They really awakened the world to the continuing opression of gays, as well as setting Dianne Feinstein on her path to national power. I'm glad I stumbled upon the articles. I was sort of looking for a new Wiki challenge. Jeffpw 16:19, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "Rant Nonsense" on Gay pride article

I don't appreciate being dismissed as having contributed "nonsense". The sentence made sense, that some of the LGBT crowd do not appreciate Gay Pride as they fear it does more damage than good for the gay cause, and the link I provided works fine, it is a download link to download an MP3, the only thing I screwed up on was the layout of the citation thing. But I'd appreciate this being put back in, as it has a gay comedian expressing a controversial view within the gay community. Hope you can sort it soon. TR 16:21, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

As I wrote in my edit summary "removing "rant" link as nonsense, prodded user for constructive edit instead."

"However many of the LGBT crowd also oppose Gay Pride, feeling it does more damage for the cause than good, as explained by gay comedian, 2 Gryphon."[1]

This first part was wonky and needed clean-up as why the crowd thought it did more damage than good. The rambling rant was far from encyclopedic and I regret having to listen to most of the lengthy tirade. WP is not a soapbox. I suggest you get a concise quote that encapsulates the ideas 2 Gryphon presents or find a noteworthy critic who's able to say the same thing with far fewer words and some appreciation for clarity and brevity. Benjiboi 00:42, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Static pixel sizes (Drag queen article)

Hi

I noticed that you added static pixel sizes to all the images in the Drag queen article. I realise that you might not be aware of it, but in WP:XIMG#New syntax for images, it says: From m:MediaWiki 1.5 the default thumbnail width can be set in the preferences, so it is recommended not to specify "px", in order to respect the users' preferences (unless, for a special reason, a specific size is required regardless of preferences, or a size is specified outside the range of widths 120–300px that can be set in the preferences).

I don't believe that there is a special reason why the images in that article need to have static pixel sizes. I'd suggest that, if you feel that there is a special reason to set static pixel sizes in an article, you should probably discuss it on the article's talk page first. --AliceJMarkham 23:52, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't believe most users (especially newer ones) are aware of setting image size preferences to images. I'm not terribly bothered if the images are larger or simply the smallest possible in this article. However, since the subject of the article is predominantly about appearances it would seem that visual information aids in understanding the subject to the average reader so I welcome any effort to find a way to increase the image sizes for this article. Benjiboi 00:02, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
Given that I run a preference size of 300px (and would go larger if the option existed), your setting static sizes had the effect of reducing the image sizes for me. Actually, your comment has inspired me to look into asking a question about setting image sizes based on browser window width. Someone else was saying that they'd like to be able to set the images to a percentage of browser window width. Now I just have to figure out where to ask the questions. :) --AliceJMarkham 00:37, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
Lol! Per your inspiration I eventually found the image size preference under files and quickly set mine to 300px as well. As for where to ask you might lean towards Wikipedia:Image use policy. Thank you in advance! Benjiboi 00:53, 17 August 2007 (UTC)