User talk:Benjiboi/Archive 2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
← Archive 1 |
Archive 2
| Archive 3 →

Contents


WP:LGBT Random Picture

Ready for your magic touch

Pictures! Just go to User:Allstarecho/LGBTPics, then edit this page tab and add away! It appears all the design bugs are worked out and it's looking good on my user page. -- ALLSTAR ECHO 22:37, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Bleh, ok, run into a problem here. We can't use nonfree images because for every nonfree image, there has to be a fair-use rationale and that's just not possible with this kind of script.. So if you add any images, they have to be free. fun. -- ALLSTAR ECHO 23:54, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
OK, NOW it's ready. All images currently in there are nonfree and ready for more to be added. -- ALLSTAR ECHO 05:26, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Batman and Robin

I had to remove your Batman and Robin entry because it wasn't a free image. If there's any sort of copyright notice on the image's own page, we can't use it. It has to be free of copyright or under GFDL license, (templates removed for space) Basically as long as it has the copyright C with a line through it or that moose/ox head, it's free and clear to use. Watch though as some might have the copyright C and/or moose/ox head but still have a note in it that to be able to use it free and clear you have to attribute the owner (see this image: - read the light blue box under the Licensing section) -- ALLSTAR ECHO 12:36, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Once you've read the above, feel free to remove it because it's placing your talk page in all those crazy categories at the bottom. Just noticed that. -- ALLSTAR ECHO 20:55, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

So, what do ya think?

<center>{{User:Allstarecho/pic}}</center> gets you this:

<center>{{User:Allstarecho/pic}}</center>

Of course, if you didn't want it centered, you'd just remove the center tags.. And it won't show the little blue edit tag in the title box when placed on namespace as seen on mine. -- ALLSTAR ECHO 20:53, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

First off, fab! I would remove the second rainbow flag icon and maybe shrink the first a bit. Benjiboi 21:07, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
Done. Better. -- ALLSTAR ECHO 21:47, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
Also the formatting when the text is longer seems wonky. Rather than a long item I'd rather the image and text be side by side if the image isn't a lovely wide one. Benjiboi 22:35, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
I couldn't even begin to figure out how to do that, I'm not that advanced. I'm sure it has something to do with tables or div layers but ack! Hrmm. -- ALLSTAR ECHO 23:05, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

OK, per your suggestions

Look at User:Allstarecho/LGBTrandompic. I'm having an issue in that it's outputting, as you can see, every image in the list but once I find that bug and fix it, it'll look like that except just one box instead of 12 or 60. ---- ALLSTAR ECHO 02:31, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Yay! I'm still looking for images that are free and all. Benjiboi 02:35, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

yay!

<center>{{User:Allstarecho/LGBTrandompic}}</center> gives you:


User:Allstarecho/LGBTrandompic


Now we can fill it out with more images/articles/descriptions, and that's done at User:Allstarecho/LGBTrandompic. Once we get it to 60 entries, it'll be ready for WP:LGBT. Finally.

And on another note, you really should move the LGBT newsletter below off page. It's causing issues with using the little blue edit links on each of your sections and subsections. It did it to my page as well and I just created a newsletters archive linked from my archive box, then moved the LGBT newsletter there. Now, no problems on my page with the edit links. -- ALLSTAR ECHO 04:43, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

I don't like to delete it so I moved it up above as to mitigate the formatting issues. I will quest again for photos. Benjiboi 10:25, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Starting draft page

User:Benjiboi/LGBT image quest for current pile. Benjiboi 12:25, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Done and in place at Portal:LGBT

This project is complete and has been implemented into Portal:LGBT, now showing on the main page!

Use {{Portal:LGBT/Pics}} or alternatively <center>{{Portal:LGBT/Pics}}</center> if you want it centered on userspace.

To add pictures, do so at Portal:LGBT/Pics.

Happy happy, joy joy! -- ALLSTAR ECHO 20:46, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Personally and formatting wise, I would add the photo to the top of the listings since its a nice square. Benjiboi 20:50, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Thankyou

Thankyou for the barnstar, and sorry for not saying so sooner.. Been busy in real life (too many assignments to mark). Fosnez 20:21, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

You're so welcome and I think it was my very first one. You certainly deserve a virtual pat on the back so happy to offer one. Benjiboi 20:25, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your help. Re: U.B. Funkeys AfD

Thank you for your help on adding the proper rescue tag for the U.B. Funkeys page, it needs rescuing because someone keeps deleting two-thirds of the page then saying it should be deleted for being too short. --JRTyner 06:44, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

You're very welcome. Benjiboi 14:45, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

jpeg compression Re: Dyke March image

Hi Benjiboi,

Just a quick note on jpegs: The original Dyke March jpeg was 1 MB, but if you just take the file and save it as a jpeg with quality on 80%, you will not be able to see any decrease in image quality, but suddenly the file has shrunk to 222 kB. --Slashme 08:59, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Umm, I have no idea what that means. Is that good or did I do something wrong or am I suppose to do something? Benjiboi 09:59, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, let me explain more clearly: When a jpeg file is saved, a "quality" parameter is used. Quality and file size are the trade-off here. A digital camera always saves files with the quality parameter set quite high, to avoid losing detail. When you upload a jpeg, it is a good idea to open it with a photo editor (like the GIMP, Adobe Photoshop or Microsoft Photo Editor) and then save it, but this time use "advanced options" or some such, and set the "quality" a bit lower. I know the GIMP has a setting where you can see a preview of the image while you tweak the quality. Basically, you decrease the quality until you start seeing the image degrade, and then increase it a bit above that. You can usually reduce the size of a photo about five times just by doing this.

Let me know if you want to know more ;] --Slashme 12:42, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Lol. So I do know a bit more but ... the picture seems fine and all right? It's on the article and looks great (thank you again!) so mission accomplished. Benjiboi 14:47, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Yep, all good now. --Slashme 16:12, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Dates (re:St Stephen's House, Oxford)

See WP:MOSDATE#Autoformatting and linking, particularly, "Wikipedia has articles on days of the year, years, decades, centuries and millennia. Link to one of these pages only if it is likely to deepen readers' understanding of a topic. Piped links to pages that are more focused on a topic are possible ([[1997 in South African sport|1997]]), but cannot be used in full dates, where they break the date-linking function."

I really don't thnk that in this case linking the years added anything else to readers' understanding. David Underdown 17:09, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Well, we can certainly agree to disagree. I'm happy to defer to your knowledge on the subject and what is needed to make the article work best. Benjiboi 20:50, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Re: Gay and lesbian retirement

I just put it up for review. See Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2007 October 16 ---- ALLSTAR ECHO 03:52, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you! I was very disheartened to see it deleted but I'm so not into fighting about AfD beyond a stress limit. The subject is certainaly notable so if nothing else I'd like to get the material myself to work on writing it up. Benjiboi 14:49, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Reposted for editing

User:Allstarecho/gay and lesbian retirement Benjiboi

Have at it. I'll help as time allows. Got a lot of irons in the fire so to speak but I won't leave you hanging by yourself. Bearean should also help since he originally wrote it. :) -- ALLSTAR ECHO 22:37, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
I'm letting my anger subside for the moment and will fluff when the moment is right. Benjiboi 22:40, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
np. I'm trying to resurrect WikiProject Mississippi and right now that means finding every single Mississippi related article and tagging it or if they already have a tag, giving them a class and importance since WP Mississippi has never had that capability before. Just give a shout if you need something. -- ALLSTAR ECHO 22:49, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
lol. Good luck with all that! You know there is a google search specific to wp? Maybe starting with all major cities? You might also suss out who were key editors and search some of their edit histories. Benjiboi 22:51, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
Ya, I've installed the script in my monobook.js that gives me a Google web or Google WP Only search box right under the regular WP search box over there in the left. It's soooo handy. The ratings implementation has also cut out alot of work as its bot has finally stared building a log and ratings lists which at least gives me articles that already have a Mississippi tag but that need class and importance ratings. It'll probably take me a year instead of 2 thanks to that. haha :) -- ALLSTAR ECHO 22:56, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Please stop removing discussion material - it is vandalism (re: Talk:List of gay, lesbian or bisexual people)

62.64.201.170 16:03, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

It's not vandalism to remove clutter which doesn't help improve the article and this is one massive spam farm although it does seem to be LGBT-focussed. Please make specific suggestions rather than telling people to check out the website that is littered with all manner of banners, links and rainbow-related ... stuff. rather than stating "someone should follow up these names" simply list the names and any non-commercial links about them. Benjiboi 16:53, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Lonnie Frisbee

I was trying to REMOVE pov.

The article was blaming Christians for his inability to overcome the sin of homosexuality.

Are you claiming the church has no right to expect that it's leaders refrain from homosexual practices.

The article as it's currently written, is biased in favor of people who hate the church because of their pro-homosexual activity stand.

My edits will make sure the article is balanced which is DESPERATELY needed in Wikipedia in general and this article in particular.

Please DO NOT revert my edits carte blanche. That's what the talk section is for.

Your actions reflect anything but a nPOV and are utterly unconstructive.

Thank you very much! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.238.68.127 (talk) 14:51, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Labeling homosexuality as a sin and claiming people hate the church because of their pro-homosexual activity speaks clearly to your POV problems but I'm happy to work with you to remove POV-pushing from both perceived sides. Benjiboi 20:20, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

One more thing...

Anyone that has a snarky LGBT quote featured prominently on his page is hardly a dispassionately objective repository of information on this case.

You CLEARLY have a bias and I am asking you nicely NOT TO TOUCH my edits which are there to REMOVE the bias you injected into this article because you disagree with the church on homosexuality.

thanks again :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.238.68.127 (talk) 14:53, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

If you have an issue with any of the LGBT quotes feel free to document which one and we can investigate if it's not appropriate. Everyone has bias and it's important to work with other editors on this wiki to make better articles. You'd have to pick a particular church and point in time to sort out wether I agree with its stance on homosexuality but many churches respect all humans without judgment so without knowing which church in particular I have to assume you're displaying your predisposition to discriminate against LGBT people and perhaps editing articles on people you would freely label as sinful isn't a good proposition for wikipedia.

I will freely edit and remove anything that flies in the face of the article's neutrality, asking nicely for anyone not to edit actually comes off, in this case, as passive-aggressive homophobia. Benjiboi 20:27, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Warning! You are in danger of VIOLATING the 3r rule (Re: Lonnie Frisbee)

DO NOT REVERT my edits which BALANCE your LGBT tainted views

The fact that he was molested as a young boy and lost his father are RELEVANT facts that you are trying to suppress from an Encyclopedic article.

Do not continue to engage in this EDITING WAR that you have initiated.

Thank you! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.238.68.127 (talk) 04:52, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

"tainted" views?? WP:ATTACK and WP:CIVIL much? -- ALLSTAR ECHO 05:38, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
Interesting. You seem to have a reasonable command of some policies and wp lingo yet disregard core pillar of WP:NPOV. I have been extremely communicative on this subject with you and prefer you act civilized and concisely bring up these concerns on the talk page of the article itself. Benjiboi 22:23, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Drag queen

Hey - I think this is a good discussion for the Talk page, and in the end should lead to some better citation in the article as to what is and is not a drag queen. A lot of people, including drag queens, don't believe that trannies qualify. Also, a customer who is paying for a drag queen is often not wanting to pay for a tranny. It's an issue for drag artists: if they go the full route, it makes them less a sell. Let's raise these arguments on the Talk page and flesh out the discussion more, and try to get some citation to social researchers on the issue. --David Shankbone 11:49, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Go for it! Benjiboi 11:50, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
Sure, but it will have to wait until I have time --David Shankbone 12:03, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
Same here, no rush. Benjiboi 12:11, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Sisters.jpg

Image was replaced by someone else so I've reloaded original image with rationale and fixed tagging on all related articles. (adding sig file for archiving purposes) Benjiboi 16:21, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Need help with vandalism from 81.145.240.106

I listed on Admin vandal noticeboard. Benjiboi 22:55, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Homosexuality in women's sports

Reply on my page please. Check the 'what links here' and you'll see its barely anything save for 'wikipedia articles needed attention' and talk pages etc etc. The article is basicly orphaned. Cornell Rockey 02:53, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Homosexuality in women's sports

Reply to your comment on the AfD, and please reply on my talk page. I don't have the first clue how to fix it, and I doubt it can be fixed. Popular opinion says otherwise, so if it can be fixed, as I said, knock yourself out. Also, read WP:AGF before accusing me of abuse. Cornell Rockey 02:56, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

(reply posted on Cornell Rockey talk page)
Hi, The orphan tag is not appropriate as speaks to the wikilinks which are internal to WP. I've added over a dozen myself so I know that it's no longer an orphan. I wasn't accusing you of abusing the AfD process you were stating it. The AfD process is for hopeless articles which can't be improved through regular editing, many do abused the AfD process so please avoid doing it. Many articles do need improving but doing so by use of AfDing doesn't bring the inspired and enlightening editing that makes truly great WP articles, IMO. No one seems to disagree with you that the article is poorly written and needs work but it's not a hopeless or unencyclopedic article just one that needs work and can be greatly improved with regular editing. Benjiboi 13:21, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Your query at WP:AIV

See at dispute resolution Raymond Arritt 16:55, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

On a related note, I have protected the page from editing until September 1. I will end it earlier if an agreement can be reached on the talkpage. The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 16:56, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
Thank you, I was just about to ask for protection, however this editor seems to surface every few days and reverts everything; they deleted 27 refs down to three (I think absolutely everything I did) as well as a further reading section which I find hard to believe they were readily familiar with. It's hard for me t o assume good faith in this instance. Benjiboi 16:59, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Twinkie defense

Hey Benjiboi, I want to let you know that User:192.250.34.161 has written to me on my talk page about the Twinkie defense article & the content issues there. I've read through the sources & have concerns, though unlike 192.250.34.161 I'm all for WP:AGF, particularly inasmuch as you & I have had good if passing acquaintance before. In any case, I've decided to go ahead & start up an article RfC, which I'm in the process of preparing. My object is to be as neutral as possible in stating the main issues of the RfC; everyone can speak for themselves after that. I have a lot of concerns about civility issues; I hope that 192.250.34.161 & other parties can remain civil in the RfC. --Yksin 23:26, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Personally I'd like to first simply move the content that is more appropriate to other articles although from User:192.250.34.161's posts that would seem all of it. Like many conflicts I think there is a good solution somewhere in the middle and User:192.250.34.161's mass deletions seem to fly in the face of consensus building or playing nice in the sandbox. As for the Solomon sources it seems like either the ones that were there have been removed or they were switched somewhere in an edit, in either case I'm not in the mood to trek to the library and dig through court transcripts just to reinsert a ref. I'm simply not into conflict and User:192.250.34.161's actions make me pause as to the value of my work here. Benjiboi 23:58, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
Sorry I didn't write back sooner, I had no time after posting the RfC until just now. I agree that there's a solution somewhere in the middle -- I hope the RfC will help to find that way. Meantime, I have a low tolerance for incivility & personal attacks whether they're made on me or on someone else, & I really doubt the dispute would have gotten this far if 192.etc. had explained with as much civility to you as s/he did with me what his/her issues with the article were. Which is part of what I'm about to say in my "Outside statement" in the RfC. I see that you've gone on break; I hope you will at least check in with the RfC. And remember that no matter what 192 accused you of, you're one of the good guys. Don't let it get you down. --Yksin 02:36, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Twinkie defense RfC initiated

Please see Talk:Twinkie defense#Request for comment: Twinkie defense content dispute. This article RfC is was initiated per the Dispute resolution process. Please see WP:RFC, particularly the section on Request comment on articles, for information about this process. Thanks. --Yksin 01:26, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

LGBT WikiProject Newsletter

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

Break template, hopefully not needed again


Break!

I've found some of my experience here quite stressful and have been accused of some quite unpleasant things so...I'm taking a break.

Benjiboi 22:13, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Welcome back!

You've been sorely missed. I hope you're feeling somewhat less stressed (though I see you've having to interact with Lulu lotus on the Genderfuck article, which is never a pleasant experience, in my experience), and if I can be of any assistance, I'm only a holler away. Jeffpw 05:33, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Thank you! And I appreciate your support through it all, I guess anonymity does have a downside. Benjiboi 00:28, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Gay Pride

...has been semi-protected for one week. Let me know if it continues, and I'll make it longer.  :-) - Philippe | Talk 02:15, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, I'm quite sure it will be vandalized as soon as protection is removed but even a small break is a good one! Benjiboi 05:09, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Homosexuality in animals - Hyena mounting dispute

Please don't just re-add that section. We should not let this devolve into an edit war. Please let the discussion decide the outcome before more edits take place. That's how it's supposed to be. (Please respond to me in that article's discussion, or my talk page, thanks.) -Freak104 16:26, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

This section states that both male and female hyenes mount members of the same sex, what else do you need to see? I responded on the article talk page before re-adding the section by the way. Benjiboi 16:28, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
Your one comment does not count as a full discussion. Other editors have to put in their opinion. And I responded to your comment about play mounting. -Freak104 16:30, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
I have seen nothing that the mounting researchers documented was considered play and, in fact, believe that they would have quickly (and more readily) categorized the mountings as such. Please stop deleting the entire section and instead find a reference that supports that all the mounting exhibited by hyenas is exclusively "play mounting" and that "play mounting" cannot be considered homosexual activity. Benjiboi 16:36, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Just letting you know that I'm going to continue this discussion in the discussion section for the article, so I won't be checking here. Please let other editors express their opinion. -Freak104 16:39, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Sounds fine to me. I look forward to any research that supports the statements either way. Benjiboi 16:45, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Hello

Becksguy has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Cheers, and happy editing! — Hope you feel better and are less stressed. Nice to see you back. — Becksguy 00:44, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Cheers. thank you! Benjiboi 02:28, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
I like your careful and courteous editing. Down is not what you should be, please be up and strong. Soczyczi 19:19, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
I really appreciate that! I don't believe in a world where everyone agrees with everyone else but there is a part of me that yearns for the polite manners that beckons finger bowls and gloves! Benjiboi 22:15, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Wolf Hudson

I wanted to say thanks for working with this editor and for spending your time cleaning up the requirements of PORNBIO that I excerpted on the talk page, and for the lesson I learned from this. I'm feeling guilty about this because I went a certain distance -- found the requirements and copied them to the talk page -- but didn't go the whole way and help the guy work out just what he should have done and how he could have done it. I have to confess, when I first saw the page, I didn't think he had a snowball's chance of qualifying under PORNBIO so I rather thought that copying the requirements for his reference was enough of a good deed, but you've made me see that, yes, I could have spent more time with the guy so he would have understood what was happening and why it was happening. I think what I've learned here is that "don't bite the newbies" may mean I had an obligation to help him instead of just refraining from biting him. So, thanks, I've learned something -- in the future, I will be doing less new page patrol and speedying, but trying to make the few that I do do not leave a bad taste in the mouth of the person who created the article. So if there's a barnstar for "wake-up call", you get it. Cheers, Accounting4Taste 20:22, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

lol! Yes, I think a lot of new and potentially promising editors have been sent packing because they tried a good-faith effort to contribute in a bewildering new arena and then were told by some faceless voice that the work they had just done was essential worthless and their judgment poor at best. It's like screaming at a pre-school child that their finger-painting "SUCKS!!!" and then we wonder why we spend so much time dealing with vandals and drive-bys while lamenting the lack of talented editors and admins. here's to supporting new talent and being just a little more nice even if it's for selfish reasons like recruiting new editors who will do work we don't want to! Benjiboi 20:40, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

German O.S.P.I.

dear benjiboi,

i would like to understand why you revert true and proovable information which i gave in the article on the sisters of perpetual indulgence today regarding the german houses.

the two incorporations about which we talk here have been founded by two expelled members of the order here, one is excommunicated, the other has not vene finished his noviciate. as the berlin motherouse has been exsequated as sole authority for the sisters in germany i would, as spokesperson for this motherhouse, ask to understand our point of view and not allow these people to misuse wikipedia for their personal battle against the berlin motherhouse, which exists since 1991.

it is sad, that such people, copyists, thiefs of names, ex-members who have prooven before a collective of more than 70 people that they are unable to fulfill even the least little standards of the order and where therefore expelled by consensu of the group of fpm's and members are allowed to broaden themselves here. i am shocked and extremely sad.

nonetheless i understand your point of view and appreciate your way of keeping to the standards of the wiki.

greetings from germany

archmother johanna, foundress of the german sisters, berlin --Erzmutter 22:35, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Greetings. As I wrote previously but will also provide a link so you can hopefully read up - the standard for inclusion is verifiability, not truth. What you state very well might be true but it also has to be verifiable to Wikipedia standards. If SPI has an absolute registry of official or authorized houses then that would do it. If not then somehow proof that those houses are not a part of the oprganization should be found and verified. Benjiboi 01:07, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Twinkie defense RfC and possible new home for content

Hey Benjiboi,

I noticed you were back several days ago, & saw your statement in the RfC on Talk:Twinkie defense, & quite frankly felt awkward... not knowing what to say, given that I basically agreed with 192 on content issues -- but certainly not with his incivility & personal attacks on you.

Well, let me be awkward then, as I belatedly welcome you back, though with many regrets about how things turned out, esp. as the RfC was my idea. I know how hard you worked on all the info you added to the article, & I know you did it in good faith, & I don't want your work to be lost -- if it's not in that article, it most definitely is relevant & has a place in others. Not just Moscone-Milk assassinations & Dan White either -- why shouldn't there be an article on People v. Dan White -- which, with a different scope than Twinkie defense leaves much more room for the full account of the trial & its aftermath both legally speaking & in terms of its impact on gays & lesbians. (I remember so well the very first issue I ever bought of Boston's Gay Community News, when I was a college sophomore in my early & very scared coming-out period: the cover story was on the White Night riots.)

Anyway, I understand if you have feelings about me based on how things turned out -- if there are, can we work it out? In any case, I wish you all the best, & I'm very glad you're back actively on Wikipedia. --Yksin 23:56, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

I have absolutely no hard feelings at all towards you and appreciate what you tried to do - I simply was regretting being involved and chose to put my energy elsewhere until I felt I could return with a good spirit to volunteering my time here.
If you think there is a good place for that work by all means please find a good home for it. Filing under Dan White would make sense as much of it speaks to his life and experience and he is known for the assassinations and the resulting trial/twinkie defense. At this point I feel I just have to avoid 192 for a while and leave the Twinkie defense article alone. It's also good for me to remember that anonymous and even folks just not dealing face-to-face people are a little bit more free to be...mean, and generally less conscious of their impact on others so I'm trying to use the whole lesson to be fair and reasonably open-minded about content disagreements. When several editors with sharply different viewpoints churn the same information sometimes some brilliant writing that is far better than anything I would have written comes out. If you do more the information and want help once it's moved to a new article fell free to give me a heads up. And thank you for all your work to try to resolve an unpleasant time for me. Benjiboi 01:05, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for you reply Benjiboi. I frankly don't know why it's so hard for some people to be civil in disagreement, esp. since incivility usually ends up turning a situation into one of polarity & enmity, which kinda shoots the whole idea of cooperation in the foot. Anyway, yes... especially given I've actually got (on interlibrary loan) a book that contains most of the trial transcript, I think it would be very possible to make use of the work you did re: background of the trial in a People v. Dan White article, as well as adding relevant material to the other articles about the assassination, riots, & on White himself. And since this aspect of American LGBT history is important to you, it might well be an article you can feel comfortable in working on, assuming 192 will stay away from it. I must run now, but I feel a lot better knowing that we appear to be on good ground with one another. Best wishes. --Yksin 01:21, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
Anytime. Benjiboi 01:23, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
Hey Benjiboi, I haven't forgotten my commitment to an article on the trial itself. Especially after having read a good ways through the book that has the trial transcript in it -- I think it can be constructed as a combination of a sort of play by play of the trial (brief summaries of trial testimony by various witnesses) with the kind of background & aftermath info you worked on as a frame for it. But I realized that I've stacked up a few commitments to various articles, & I'm confusing myself. So... I'm in the process both of organizing my work & then working on the various articles I've made a commitment to on Wikipedia. Right now I'm more actively working on Battle of Washita River, as those commitments are of longest standing; but I will be back with this idea as soon as I can be, & will be back in touch then. Best wishes. --Yksin 02:21, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
No worries, all is well. Benjiboi 11:45, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Hibiscus_.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Hibiscus_.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Rettetast 15:55, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Updated license. Benjiboi 14:23, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

wikify request of Channel disambiguation page

Hello. I've removed your wikify reuqest at Channel. This page is a disambiguation page, which are a little different than normal pages. One of the big differences is that we try to keep the number of links to a minimum (see Wikipedia:Manual of Style (disambiguation pages) for more.) Thanks! Ewlyahoocom 05:39, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Well perhaps a different template is more appropriate as that page is a mess and needs clean-up which I thought that template addressed. Benjiboi 05:42, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
I'm sorry, I must have misunderstood your concern. Perhaps if you were more detailed in what you mean by "a mess" I could try to address the problem. Thanks! Ewlyahoocom 05:43, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
No problem I just added clean-up tag and put a few notes on the talk page. Benjiboi 05:45, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Chris Crocker (internet celebrity)

geographical info

I'm not sure if you thought I took out the info myself (i only took out the redundant "southern united states" line). I'm not sure I have an opinion about the "tri-city area" bit. I don't have much sympathy for crocker (he seems to be playing groups against each other for his own publicity), but I also don't want him to get killed. On the other hand, "tri-cities" seems fairly nonspecific. And if it's general information, it'll be available outside wikipedia. The typical thing to do would be to directly ask crocker whether he has a problem with that info being included (via his media inquiries email, I guess), though I don't know if he'd try to somehow spin the wikipedia contact into a big media storm. Cheers, Tlogmer ( talk / contributions ) 08:11, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. I feel like I want to avoid doing something that could lead to someone getting killed myself so I'd rather just leave it until the issue comes up again. It's pretty easy to connect the dots given a few of the businesses and basic references given like distance to gay bar and such. I'd be surprised if he doesn't get revealed soon but maybe he'll escape there soon anyway. Benjiboi 08:16, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

See also's

archiving here for future incorporation. Benjiboi 14:34, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

(Britney Spears)"lackluster"/"critcised"

I tend to go with "criticised" or "praised" other than "lackluster" or "wonderful", because the former terms tend to convey a less strong POV if they do at all. For example, we can say that something was "criticised" and then source two or three and we're closer to NPOV than if we say "lackluster", because using the latter can look as if it's Wikipedia's official view on it. I made a similar point here about widely held views and NPOV. Will (talk) 15:54, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

I hear you and that does seem to be a reasonable guideline. I like the quote solution as well as it's not our judgment call then. I also see this a s an issue of recentism and people will care less down the road a bit so better editing will take place and will survive - don't hold your breath though!

Chris Crocker personal info

Hey Benjiboi - if you look at the edit, you can see that I was actually changing the information back to what you had, not the other way around! Thanks for all your work on the article though. Surfeited 17:14, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Oh, you're right, I did add the date of birth back, while removing place of birth - I was just undoing all the edits of the one before me, who seemed like he was undoing the last 25 edits. Surfeited 17:24, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
lol. yay when I got this morning I had high hopes of actually adding a bunch of material but had to stick with fixing the damage first and warning a few folks (many, like yourself, were friendly fire) about the privacy issues. Benjiboi 17:56, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Chris Crocker personal info

Sorry about adding his date of birth. I know Chris and certainly understand his desire for privacy, but I wasn't aware that his date of birth would be a problem. I hope that someone will in general clean up his entry so that it can stay on Wikipedia since there are some who wish to delete it. The fact that his real surname and location are not listed certainly seems like a good idea. But can we improve this entry so it looks more like a proper biography?Mike 20:22, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

No problem. And yes we certainly can improve the article, my hunch is that add easy things now and when the AfD is over it can start to morph into a better article. This also is somewhat dependent on if he gets another big wave of publicity which attracts less than ideal editing. I felt my job was to keep it from getting deleted. Benjiboi 22:03, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Re: Crocker date or place of birth, Please Stop

Even if he's a public figure? That's what the whole AFD debate was about... People want to kill President Bush everyday but it's no secret of his hometown. I just find it odd in cases of public figures. Thanks. -- ALLSTAR ECHO 22:32, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

  • I just re-read it again and yes, even for public figures. The tipping point seems to be when it has been verified by WP:RS. Keep in mind that if i wanted to disrupt that queeny kid down the block I could tell everyone it's him. So until Crocker outs himself it seems like we err on safety. the other issue that came up was identity theft btw. Benjiboi 22:35, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Re: Chris Crocker

I noticed you've posted several times on the Chris Crocker page that Crocker's date of birth and location are not to be disclosed under the premise of "do no harm", but this is considered to be censorship. The "do no harm" is referring to libelous statements and the like, not the location of a person and certainly not a person's date of birth. What harm could come of knowing a person's date of birth anyway? I believe you should thoroughly familiarise yourself with what WPBIO actually says before citing it as a reason for not including a person's date of birth. Heirachy of guidelines and policies determines that removing censorship takes precedence over a simple wikiproject guideline. lincalinca 01:22, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

I will read up more right now yet I believe the basic tenet does apply. He is gay teen in the South who has received death threats. Revealing his true identity, city where he lives could easily be used by those who wish to harm and harass him.Benjiboi 01:25, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
Update. OK, Do No Harm, which is an essay and not a policy or guideline, is broader than just libel issues. Amongst other things it states there is a presumption in favor of privacy and unsourced, poorly sourced, or dubious content, especially if potentially libelous, should simply be removed on sight from biographies of living persons. It explains that nonpublic information consists of private details about an individual that have not been published in the mainstream media and are not widely known. In most cases, Wikipedia articles should not include such information; Wikipedia is not a tabloid, and we are not in the business of "outing" people or publishing revelations about their private lives, whether such information is verifiable or not. As Wikipedia has a wider international readership than most individual newspapers, and Wikipedia articles tend to be permanent, it is important to use sensitivity and good judgment in determining whether a piece of information should be recorded for posterity.
This, I believe, is in line with WP:LIVING Presumption in favor of privacy -

Real people are involved, and they can be hurt by your words. We are not tabloid journalism, we are an encyclopedia.

– Jimmy Wales[1]

An important rule of thumb when writing biographical material about living persons is "do no harm". Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a tabloid, and as such it is not our job to be sensationalist, or to be the primary vehicle for the spread of titillating claims about people's lives. BLPs must be written conservatively, with regard for the subject's privacy. To me this is clear enough on both fronts that information is to be kept private and the issue can be revisited once it is both widely known and in reliable sources. Benjiboi 01:59, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
To address What harm could come of knowing a person's date of birth anyway? I want to remind you that the subject of the article has received death threats and has refused to state his name. I once worked in a District Attorney's office and it was my job to hunt down people. If I had I could easily find Crocker's city in a short time and it wouldn't be too difficult to track him to his home if one had the correct birthdate or birth city as well. In the insurance world employees on a companies' insured list for a price quote are often listed as simply Male 36, female 23 (including only the sex and age) and a researcher proved they could correctly determine exactly who the people were in more than half the cases. Identity theft happens in the same manner, pieces tied together. So someone who intended to cause harm to Crocker should not be aided by us against our own policies. To me another concern is that entering the wrong information could identify someone else in error who would then be attacked mistakenly as Crocker. Benjiboi 02:20, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
Identity theft is not a concern we need to consider, as simply seeking the media attention Crocker has illicited removes him from the public eye's position as a person that could have their Identity stolen, unless his identity is not clearly portrayed.
Anyway, all of this discussion is moot until verifiable sources can be provided to validate the claims. If his date of birth, hometown and real name become reported on a verifiable site (i.e. news.com or nyt.com or something) then it can be considered that Wikipedia is doing no harm by listing this information here. It'd be ridiculous to refuse to include information that's otherwise readily available by other sources. Just as a last note, if I really wanted to, I could get his IP (myspace isn't very discrete, even though they try to be, about that sort of thing) and using that, pinpoint where he's located and find out everything about him, down to his social security number, how much he weighed at birth and if he has any extra toes, in the space of about 3 hours if I asserted any concentration towards it. Anybody can do these things (I can skip a few steps saving me time) and so I don't really see why there's an issue? I don't even live in the USA and these resources are freely and legally available to me and anybody who has access to this inter-web of ours (though to take 3 hours, it wouldn't be quite as legal). lincalinca 05:19, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
Well, we do agree that we could find out who he is on our own and that until his identity and personal information is revealed on WP:RSs that the info should stay out. I think we need to err on the side of caution even past that threshold per BLPs must be written conservatively, with regard for the subject's privacy. The test that would seem to be most appropriate is "widely known" in WP:RS so just one RS might not be enough, but if the subject is, in fact, notable enough, multiple WP:RSs should cover the information. In Crocker's case I imagine that would come quickly once the first source publishes. Benjiboi 11:02, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Threats of article vandalism linked on talk page

It's publicly stating that they will vandalise the page. We don't allow that, external or internal. Will (talk) 15:16, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

We don't allow which? Vandalisms or the mention that someone is talking about vandalism? I'm trying to understand the acceptability for deleting talk page comments which is usually frowned upon. Benjiboi 15:21, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Chris Crocker fix - thanks

Thanks for the fix 'twixt the part 1 and part 2 videos, I didn't realize I had them mixed up ^_^ Milto LOL pia 18:17, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

No problem, I added some extra context for others who might make the error. We learn we grow! Benjiboi 18:28, 18 September 2007 (UTC)


Request for Comment on User Conduct - Matt Sanchez / Bluemarine

Hello, may I ask for your participation in an RFC established for user Bluemarine/Matt Sanchez? The reason for the Request for Comment is set out in the RFC summary here. Whether you support or oppose it, your input would be appreciated.Typing monkey 18:15, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Will check it out, thanks. Benjiboi 18:29, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
(re:your support of my statement) Thank you for cutting to the chase and noting Sanchez's (possibly justifiable) paranoia. I was attempting to imply that with my statement, but it was not clear until you came out and said it. Horologium t-c 01:55, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
NP. When I first was getting snipped at I was wondering what was going on and currently postulate...that we're dealing with a potent cocktail of youth, homophobia (internal/external who knows?) and a machismo'd testosterone effect fueled by cultural influences both from childhood and his current political and work environments. I really think he could be a great editor but I'm also a sucker for happy endings.Benjiboi 02:10, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
Just a thought, shouldn't we all get a certificate of merit for surviving these attacks? The list of names and things we've been accused of is pretty amazing.Benjiboi 03:12, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Shepherd's World is flat comments on The View

Hello Benjiboi, I'm not sure of the protocol on response to user comments so I'm posting here. 1) "That information is hardly considered a controversy as much as an embarrassing comment." True, but it is an interesting piece of information so perhaps it belongs in a different or new section.

2) "I'd be willing to bet that even if it's true that the Huffington post is not considered a great source" a) The huffington post is a reliable and well-regarded source of information on the Internet. Granted it is not the NY times, but it is is highly cited source on the net. Its traffic rating is comparable to that of slate.com. b) I suggest you watch the clip *on the Huffington post* linked page. Unless the you're suggesting the Huffington Post is capable of sophisticated video editing, or that they hired the actors to engage in a fake segment.

3) "You may want to revert your edits and wait a day or two and see if any mainstream press actually cover the comment." How is that relevant? Whether NYT reports it or not (for example) *does not* suddenly make it fact. The event occurred, there's video proof, and it's spreading across popular social websites. It is now public knowledge and an interesting part of The View's history. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sural (talk • contribs) 11:07, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

1.If you're determined to get it somewhere then a very abbreviated version could go into Sherry's article.
2.I personally admire Arianna Huffington and agree that the video is probably genuine, however Wikipedia probably does not consider it a reliable source - too POV. I could be wrong but I've never seen it used as a source.
3.What's true and what's relevant for an encyclopedia are two different things. It's cold outside but does that information make for a better article? The View has a ten-year stretch so the gaff of Shepherd's is not likely to be a noteworthy event of the season. I will, however, reserve the right to say "I told you so" if someone else deletes it. Benjiboi 11:17, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
p.s I taped the show so I'm going to watch my own copy and see her be a goofball myself! Benjiboi 11:19, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
Hi, after watching the epidsode I now know what these comments refer to and I must say I don't find them to accurately portry the nature and depth of the conversation and don't provide them in the context to which they were presently thus making Shepherd look foolish. I will look at the current version and see what changes might help more accurately characterize them. Benjiboi 19:18, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

village pump question

I saw you posted a question on the village pump that has went unanswered so far. If you post your questions on the WP:Help desk instead, you will typically get a faster reply. User:Alutena(talk) 19:05, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Cheers! Thank you for the suggestion. Benjiboi 19:09, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Male bra

I read somewhere that the cumberbun was a bra for the gut. -- Jreferee T/C 10:42, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

I believe it although it seems like a...stretch! Benjiboi 12:24, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Deletion gestapo

Hi Benjiboi. I've removed the {{Rescue}} template from the above article. The template is for articles that may be deleted because of something obviously fixable, such as a lack of content, poor or no sources, or poor formatting. Neil ム 10:59, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Per the AfD process, articles that can be improved through regular editing should be before taking to AfD. I've re-added the {{Rescue}} template as tag is for AfDs that need improvement. I hope you're not suggesting that there is no way this article could ever be improved enough. Benjiboi 12:42, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
I have removed it again. All articles (on AFD or otherwise) should be improved, an extra template is not necessary on that count. Again, {{Rescue}} is for articles that are sorely missing references or badly need cleanup. It is not for putting on articles you think should be kept because you like the article and it looks like the AFD is heading towards deletion. Stop abusing the template, now, please, as this is disruptive. Neil ム 15:24, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
I believe you are mistaken as nothing on that template's page currently indicates its usage is restricted as you suggest. However I think you are an admin so I defer to your far reaching powers as your opinions on the matter seem quite clear as to how the template should be used and where its use should be segregated to. Benjiboi 15:47, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
It wasn't clear, you're right; I have tried to put something on the WP:ARS page to clarify when it should be used. Your comments on the talk page (WT:ARS) would be appreciated. Neil ム 15:51, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Grand Wiz - Ernie Roth documentary

Hey, I'm working on a documentary about Ernie Roth. Saw you updated page. Would love to connect. Please email me at grandwiz@gmail.com Thanks, Brian —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.167.135.119 (talk) 17:09, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I can't say I would know anything more than the article states so I may not be a great resource for you. Benjiboi 03:50, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

FYI

Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_LGBT_characters_in_modern_written_fiction -- ALLSTAR ECHO 05:50, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of links on El DoboLocoPapo

Yep - adios to those; I always check the what links here and I nuked all the redirects: you can check whether I did it right by going to the article page which will show you the deletion and clicking the what links here (it still works after deletion or before creation) and seeing if I missed something. Your user talk reminded me that I ought to sign up for the LGBT wikiproject which I promised someone I'd do then forgot. :-( Bad Carlos. Carlossuarez46 06:42, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Coolio. Thanks for confirming. Benjiboi 06:47, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

LGBT Barnstar

The LGBT Barnstar
I hereby award you the LGBT Barnstar for all of your outstanding,

hard and endless work on LGBT related articles, especially your,

IMHO, single-handed save of Chris Crocker (Internet celebrity)!

-- ALLSTAR ECHO 03:59, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
Yay! Thank you so much although saving his article from AfD was hardly just my effort but it's nice to be recognized. Thank you! Benjiboi 23:13, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
Indeed, many contributed but when I look at the history pages, your name fills 'em up! :] -- ALLSTAR ECHO 00:34, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
As the original creator of the article, thanks for saving it :-) Fosnez 23:43, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
You're very welcome, I will even point out that were it not for the Rescue tag I probably wouldn't have bothered! Benjiboi 23:45, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Current Events Barnstar

You beat me to it! I was going to give him The Current Events Barnstar. The LGBT one is prettier, I guess. Oh, what the heck:
The Current Events Barnstar
Both on behalf of the oodles of people who read Chris Crocker (Internet celebrity) last week, and on behalf of the encyclopedia for which the article became a showcase, I present to you this, The Current Events Barnstar. Thank you for your efforts, and congratulations. Ichormosquito 03:55, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
I'm honored. Actually I was worried that my "new messages" alert was another drama perking up but am thrilled it is being recognized for anal retentiveness turned into actual productive output! Thank you! Benjiboi 08:16, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Your comment regarding homosexual "bashing"

Your comment showed your ignorance regarding the moral difference between homosexuality and heterosexuality. Your response acted as if they are on the same plane morally, but the Judeo-Christian belief, upon which the United States was founded, states clearly that anyone who practices homosexuality is going against God's plan for humanity, just as someone who practices heterosexual adultery is also missing God's plan for their life. This "missing the mark" is called "sin" in the Bible, and continual unrepentant sin condemns a man to an eternity separated from God. Man's only hope is to trust Jesus Christ, who paid the penalty for man's sin. Therefore, to speak against the acts of homosexuality is merely an attempt to promote the morality that is taught throughout the Bible. It is an act of love, not hate, to point out a man's error and point him toward the way of life in Christ. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.247.200.254 (talk) 17:09, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure which comment you're referring to but save the preaching for someone else. If whatever god you're citing has a grand plan for humanity I rather doubt that you would be her spokesperson. We live on a big planet with many gods and belief systems and the traditional hypocritical stance of "hating the sin, love the sinner" has been used by your sacred Judeo-Christians to justify all forms of human rights abuses including war. And in war more people have been killed in the name of religion and god than for any other reason. It's hard for me to see your pointing out some mystery error as anything but you promoting your twisted mythological Biblical views. As far as I know Jesus was a butch homo who believed in New Testament healing and said something along the lines that love is the only drug. I'm not interested in your life in Christ if it involves demonizing and oppressing others while encouraging terrorism and violence against LGBT people and anyone with a belief system different from yours. Begone wicked hypocrite - you have no power here! Benjiboi 18:16, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Cazuza: Thanks

Thanks for your help with article Cazuza. :-) -- Writtenonsand 11:07, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

If no one beats me to it I'll work the references in as well. Benjiboi 17:17, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Robert Mugabe/Ian Smith articles

I've been declared a vandal but I'm not.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.101.75.15 (talk) 00:53, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi. Not sure why you're messaging me about this but...since you are a newer editor I can clarify that a lot of anonymous editors do vandalize amd when any editor reverts edits it's easier to simply call them vandalism so even well-meaning edits occur they are sometimes labeled as such. As a suggestion ensure that anything you do add is neutral and referenced, if possible. Also simply making minor edits like spelling and grammar are a good way of getting experience without potentially changing the content of an article. In any case good luck.Benjiboi 01:05, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Flamboyant (gay) article and wikilinks

create appropriate page for flaming, flamer, flamboyant as adjective and wikilink potent edits from this[1] from mid-September 2007 going back in time.Benjiboi

Done. Benjiboi 01:20, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Transgender

You have too many images from one event on there. One or two is fine, but right now the page is too cluttered with too much WP:WEIGHT given to one event. --David Shankbone 05:03, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Someone else added several in a row so I was just splitting them up, delete whatever you wish, they aren't mine I was just formatting. Benjiboi 05:05, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Jon Sims Center for the Performing Arts

Thanks for the update on the Sims Center. I was going by information that (former?) BOD president Stephanie Smith had sent out, and just assumed that was the last word. I'm glad to hear that The JSC is still up and running.

I'm still new to editing Wikipedia pages-- I'm going off to explore yours. It looks interesting and invaluable! -- Mojave66 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mojave66 (talk • contribs) 19:59, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

I could be wrong! They still have a web presence and it says they are still renting out space so presumed they were still operational. Regardless I don't thin k I changed the information in the article as i wasn't able to confirm as what is true and what can be proven through reliable sources are often two different tings. Benjiboi 20:38, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Woman in latex catsuit

What is wrong with this image? I was under the impression that Wikipedia is not censored for minors. You claim she isn't wearing a catsuit, but she most certainly is. Her large, exposed breasts are an excellent example to illustrate the concept of breast fetishism. Also, I am offended by your calling this photo porn. Are you just saying this because the model is an attractive young woman with large breasts? She is mostly clothed and there is no sexual intercourse present in the picture, something that needs to be there for you to call it porn. Titan24 23:23, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

P.S. This time, I won't include the image, as GoodDamon apparently considers it to be vandalism. What is Wikipedia coming to?

It's vandalism to leave pictures on someone's talk page that you know will offend the page owner. As for the images you've uploaded to Wikipedia, a quick review of your contributions shows you seem primarily interested in appending erotic material to pages that don't particularly need it and blanking pages. I suggest you spend some time making constructive edits to unrelated pages. For instance, the Perennial plant article needs some work. --GoodDamon 23:30, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
Thank you GoodDamon for removing the image. I was indeed offended by its use and indeed would have been offended by its unnecessary inclusion on my page, I had seen it one too many times. In context I absolutely respect your right to own and share pornography however Wikipedia is not the most effective place to do so as we approach all the articles in an encyclopedic manner. Although that photo did indeed show breasts it didn't do much to educate about Breast fetishism and even though you assert she was wearing a latex catsuit it seemed to be in the process of being removed and thus did little to illustrate either Latex and PVC fetishism or Catsuit. Benjiboi 01:16, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

SHOCK!!! (Re: Transgender edit)

OMG! Someone who doesn't see a revert and just say "Screw you!" but rather insightfully realizes that it's a piece of constructive criticism, and resolves the matter fully.  :) Way to go, you get kudos from me! :) --Puellanivis 01:18, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Lol! Yes, luckily it was a quicky so I was fine doing it. I've been beaten up by a few trolls and anons so I've tried to be a bit more judicious in where I spread any fire and brimstone. Benjiboi 01:22, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Transsexuality in Iran editing issues

While it might not have been otherwise clear, we've had problems with this editor before. He was previously editing the Transgeneration article, was banned on 1 IP address, and the page was semi-protected. There was a discussion about this on the talk page. He decided that he didn't care about consensus, the manual of style, or anything else really and kept reverting which led to him being banned. Showed up with another IP address, which was also banned I believe. Page was semi-protected.

With that not available to him he got another IP and started focusing on the transsexuality in Iran article. During this time, the Transgeneration article was unprotected and he's begun editing it again. I have no doubt that things are perfectly clear to him, he simply doesn't care. - ZoeF 22:59, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Well, let's keep those articles on semi-protect and if that editor pops up and starts disruptive editing we'll sort it out. Whatever the issues let's try to see any valid ideas presented regardless of style and focus on getting the article better each time regardless if that editor likes the ideas presented or not. I'm with you and the rest of the wiki world is too - we need better articles not edit wars. Benjiboi 00:21, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Shaant

He is their lead singer I understand. Have a look at the page history, I did. Rich Farmbrough, 10:03 3 October 2007 (GMT).

got it, thanks. Benjiboi 10:11, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Pink dollar

Just an FYI... see merge discussion at the top of Pink dollar. -- ALLSTAR ECHO 07:44, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

I left an opinion. At first I thought a merger would make sense but the countries, cultures, economic structures (taxes, students loans, class systems, etc) as well as the GLBT communities are vastly different so one article would only briefly do justice to either. Benjiboi 16:48, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

AFD:LGLBP RE: List of gay, lesbian or bisexual people

I think that's a good change to "notable" and it has survived for a good 30 minutes now. Ex-cel-lent!

I'm not the primary or secondary (lists are too much work! But if it;s a good idea they'll use it.Benjiboi

The linked pages A, J-M, whatever also need to be changed.

All in time.Benjiboi

Can you think of a way to better word "who have been confirmed"? That just seems like an opinion to me, an opinion formed by someone somewhere, know what I mean? The only way I can see is when they have said themselves "I am ..." gay/lesbian/however they choose to self-identify. Have been confirmed sounds a lot like gossip. Dead people is a problem - who did the actual confirming? 'Course it can't be you WP:OR

In process, if it's not amended prod me again or tickle the talk page stating this wording is wonky and needs clarity. Benjiboi

I mentioned kd lang mostly because of her voice - an illustration for me that I don't really care what she does off-stage and I also don't care much about the lyrical content if I like the music. Heck I listen to Christian and Satan music if it sounds good :) But I notice that Bif Naked isn't there and I really think she'd say "hell ya" if asked. And speculating, but Holly McNarland also, but you would have to find that reference yourself. Equally good musicians but not US-known.

Yes, music is a a universal treat! Benjiboi

Which brings me to a few points: - WP is not = US - this becomes such a huge list - brings in the d'uhh factor - Most importantly, reword it a bit more and re-title it maybe. It's a valid list with any other list, just a few tweaks...Franamax 11:49, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Well, these are all valid concerns. WP is not = US do you have a specific concern, if so what is it? such a huge list, and? We've already started dividing into smaller articles and I imagine that will continue. Take any suggestions to the article talk page with specific suggestions. I'm a semantic junky, sometimes, when the mood strikes but the talk page will document ideas and discussion and effectively bring change to the article itself. I agree the wording could and should be better but just added my bits for the moment. Benjiboi 03:37, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
WP not = US - the concern would be about making an automatic assumption that Supreme Court refers to US Supreme Court, which I don't necessarily claim you have done. Just pointing out that it's an international project from my spot here in Canada. Also a little bit of haha creeping in there, when talking about Supreme Courts my POV is that we have a pretty darn good one :)
"such a huge list" - well I think that is maybe what makes the article vulnerable in the first place and is why I made my initial vote the way I did. Lists of everyone possible who are "something" will always be questionable. I could grab the phone book and start a List of Canadians (analogy is NOT proof). For a conflicted individual to be able to seek out a list and see "wow, I'm not alone, I'm in very good company" (which I think may have been one of your arguments) is certainly laudable, the question being whether Wikipedia is the appropriate place for that to be. Splitting up the list as you mention is certainly a good response.
Sounds like you have a good handle on where you are going and I will stick with my proposals below. Franamax 04:13, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
And sure enough List of Canadians came up blue!! LOL now I will have to attack that one if I am to have credibility :) Franamax 04:16, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

AFD:LGLBP cont.

Proposal: 1. Rename article to List of Notable Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgendered (GLBT) People

-catches most searches
Take this to article talk for consensus. Benjiboi 03:48, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
-inclusion of TG - up for debate but why not?
I know there was a good reason, probably because trans folks are gender minorities rather than sexuality minorities although they can be both. Benjiboi 03:48, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

2. Redirect previous name to new article.

Not an issue, goes with any move. Benjiboi 03:48, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

3. Redirects as appropriate for famous gays, notable lesbians, GLBT history - to catch searches.

Not sure what this means but take it to article talk page so those who would actually do the work can have input. Benjiboi 03:48, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

4. Change famous to notable through all related articles.

Will happen if new wording sticks. 03:48, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

5. Figure out wording for how we know they're GLBT other than "confirmed to be"

Take to article talk. Benjiboi 03:48, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

5. Get volunteers to review the list

- re-check criteria for notability on this list (see below)
- re-check WP:BLP to be sure of ref's (& fix my Armani suit :)
- confirm or kill the "disputed sexuality" - that's poison, whatever your POV
Not sure if any of this work needs to be done and wouldn't simply be duplicative. My hunch is that disputed sexuality is there because people keep adding those folks and this documents the official line - this person cannot be documented as GLB although widely believe to be etc. This might be another area where it is spelled out painfully clear that sexuality is disputed. Benjiboi 03:48, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

6. Create list article or category - GLBT-identified people in Wikipedia

- this would be probably self-identified (so no outing, must have RS)
- would include ANY WP entries that don't make it to Notable
- and then maybe Notable could be made back into Famous
I think these exist already but again, take it to article talk page. Benjiboi 03:48, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Why? - takes away most/all of the -legitimate- arguments on AfD - improves the article - meets your needs and mine! F-max Franamax 12:45, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

I've replied to all points the majority of which should be vetted on the article talk page. If I've missed something feel free to cover it there unless you just need more of an opinion (those I have!) Benjiboi 03:48, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your valuable input. I put a refined proposal on the article talk page. Regards. Franamax 11:30, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Stonewall and the death of Judy Garland (Re: Gay Pride et al

Although I had planned to mention this, the reference that I found was that this is an urban myth. Could you provide links or references to information that can substantiate the claim?--Amadscientist 01:01, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Lol. Actually the urban myth is that the riots started because the gay bar ran out of ice for cocktails. Judy Garland's death most definitely played a role as her tragic life was empathized by many queens (remember that celebrities generally were a lot less tragic in those days) and she was a gay icon for her character Dorothy from the Wizard of Oz - "A friend of Dorothy" as in any friend of Dorothy is a friend of mine. Her funeral was the topic of the day and had just ended hours earlier.Benjiboi 03:52, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
I think the following puts it best:

"The uprising was inspirited by a potent cocktail of pent-up rage (raids of gay bars were brutal and routine), overwrought emotions (hours earlier, thousands had wept at the funeral of Judy Garland) and drugs."

June 28, 1969 By JOHN CLOUD (printed Monday, Mar. 31, 2003)[2]
To get a sense of what the street kids, patrons and queens were like here is an excerpt from Martin Duberman's book "Stonewall"[3]

More:

  • Thousands Line Up to View Judy Garland's Body[4]
  • Madonna As Postmodern Myth: How One Star's Self-Construction Rewrites Sex, Gender, Hollywood and...[5]
  • Culture Clash: The Making of Gay Sensibility[6]
  • The Arena of Masculinity: Sports, Homosexuality, and the Meaning of Sex[7]
  • End of the Rainbow[8]
  • Talking Stonewall - Stonewall Inn riot; gay rights movement, Interview magazine, June 1994 by Jeffrey Slonim[9]
  • The 1960s: The Stonewall Riots and Their Aftermath[10]
see Gay icon Benjiboi 19:05, 20 October 2007 (UTC)