User talk:Benjiboi/Archive 4

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 3 |
Archive 4
| Archive 5 →

Contents


Transsexual and Transgeneration vandal (seems to cycle every few weeks)

Please be aware that I am not 75.187.191.206. This person happens to be editing transsexual pages as well, however this person is vandalizing them and I am not. I am only correcting them to reflect fact. Although you label my edits as vandalism, it simply is not so. 68.106.61.137 07:13, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
Your edits and issue with reverting the gender pronouns in violation of WP:MOS is identical and on the same article(s). It will take more to convince me you're not the same person or a sock thereof; luckily for you I'm not an admin so others can make the call if you are the same person or not. Benjiboi 22:58, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
Well, it ultimately doesn't matter to me whether or not you think we are the same person, this is why I said please be aware, but whether or not you choose to recognize this fact is up to you. I am only trying to set the facts straight, which leads me to my next point: I follow the facts regardless of rules, opinion, bias and even desire. This includes the rules of wikipedia (which by the way, you seem to have broken a few yourself.) The fact is that somebody who is born one sex is truly that sex, regardless of how they might modify their bodies or their outward appearance. Sure they may desire to be the opposite sex, in other's views they might be of that opposite sex, but the fact remains that the only thing that has changed is their image. This could come off as sounding homophobic, but rest assured that it is not. 68.225.212.93 03:29, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
I appreciate that there might be two people making the same edits on the same articles so thank you for pointing that out. The edits are both in error and violate Wikipedia's policy on gender pronouns so will continue to be reverted. Benjiboi 10:17, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
Actually he only made that one edit that I am aware of, and it didn't target gender pronouns. 68.225.212.93 05:01, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
Both that anon IP's edits to wikipedia seem to be adding This is becoming increasingly dire, due to the fact that nine out of ten women are, in fact, transsexuals to the article. I'm not going to invest more time on this matter except to continue reverting vandalism which all those IP's seem to be doing. 07:46, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Your break

I'm sorry to hear that you've been stressed by your experience here. I do hope you'll come back. I know it's frustrating, but you're making really solid contributions, and that's the type of person we need around here. - Philippe | Talk 04:52, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your note. I'm not quite back yet but did want to check in on a few projects I was working on, one which sadly is being vandalized. Benjiboi 10:19, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
Which article is that >reaches for the Watch tab< -- ALLSTAR ECHO 16:31, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
It was List of animals displaying homosexual behavior which is better now that I've added 100+ refs next I guess it'll be Fruit (slang). Benjiboi 20:20, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Your Break

Take a break, Benjiboi, but come back when you're refreshed.Your contributions are enjoyed and valued, and we're sorry you're 'encountering turbulence' just at the moment. All good wishes from Bath, UK. Tim & Tom. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.156.195.106 (talk) 20:22, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi, thank you so much for your note. I'm not really back yet but appreciate your support. Benjiboi 10:24, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Re:List of animals displaying homosexual behavior

Hi. I notice that like me you've been involved in sourcing some of the material at List of animals displaying homosexual behavior (you mammals, me birds). I'm keen that we try to aim for a consistent style of referencing throughout. Could you take a look at the format I've used for referencing and let me know what you think - I think it conveys the maximum amount of info in the smallest amount of space. If you like it, would you be interested in adopting it for your species? Thanks SP-KP 19:27, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

The notation intrigues me and is neater which I like but I'm not comfortable leaving off a weblink and access date which is useful to future editors. I'm also not using a physical copy of the book so need to include accurate cite info. Having said all that I have no issue with someone cleaning it all in the future. For now I'm back just to work on this article. Benjiboi 10:24, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for saving that list from the editor who was deleting. Your work is appreciated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.139.48.84 (talk) 18:27, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

You're very welcome, I see they are still hovering to delete as much as they can. Benjiboi 20:21, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Fruit (slang)

An article that you have been involved in editing, Fruit (slang), has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fruit (slang). Thank you. Powers T 19:58, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

LGBT issues

Hi, Benjiboi. I am deeply wounded by the thought that you might think me hostile to issues facing the gay and lesbian community. I'm sorry if I gave that impression, but I assure you it's not the case, any more than my previous nominations of articles for deletion represent hostility to the subjects covered. You can peruse my contributions and see for yourself. As an example, my nomination of Rape (word) for deletion (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rape (word)) was not done out of disrespect for rape victims, or out of hostility to rapists; likewise, my nomination of Fruit (slang) is purely policy-based, not part of any agenda or prejudice on my part -- except maybe a prejudice against articles about words. I hope this clears things up for you. Powers T 21:48, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

I can't remember a day of not fighting homophobic vandalism and deletionism on wikipedia so you'll need to forgive me if I refrain from tending to your wounds. Benjiboi 11:56, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
You would have a lot less wikistress if you would stop interpreting my words in the worst light possible. I wasn't asking for sympathy; I was explaining that your accusations were unfounded. Why do you insist on driving away a potential ally? Powers T 13:26, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
Perhaps because you haven't once on any page besides this one acted in the slightest bit as an "ally". You have been downright hostile on the Afd discussion page in an effort to defend your point of view. Benjiboi was polite enough to respond to your first disingenuous message. Let's not prolong things, eh? Jeffpw 20:46, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

SPI disambig alpha sort

Hello Benjiboi. Thanks for your work on alphabetically sorting the SPI page earlier in the month. I just went and added Software in the Public Interest after noticing that it wasn't listed. Would it be worth doing a check over the page to check if any other entries got dropped during the resort? Once again, many thanks for the tidying up! —Sladen 22:29, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

You're very welcome. Sorry for dropping one but they all seem to be there now. Benjiboi 23:40, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Multiple refs needed from one source on List of animals displaying homosexual behavior

List article in need of sourcing asap. Benjiboi

Done. Benjiboi 02:48, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Possible ref

Goudarzi, Sara in Notes section may have a dozen leads.Benjiboi

Didn't use as not needed. Benjiboi 02:48, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Google book copies

Hi again - when you say "Google book copy", do you mean that the text itself is actually available online? All I get is something like a catalogue entry/contents page - I can see no copy of the book text. There is a sign up link - do you have to be a member to see the text? SP-KP 21:28, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

No, not at all. What I see is a main frame (the book) a top frame with the title and a column frame on the right side with links to buy and get more info and to ... search. If you pop in a a few words or short quote it should pull the page up. It's hardly perfect but it's better than nothing. it sometimes scans letters wrong (like r's and n's as the same) so if you're not finding something you're not crazy. Benjiboi 21:35, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I understand now. Apologies for my slowness! SP-KP 21:40, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

no prob. I've been up for hours on that stupid list so I'm going to bed now; if any of the birds still need doing I'll sort it out tomorrow. Benjiboi 21:44, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Sorry to bother you with this again - I typed that last message before actually checking whether I got the same thing as you. Trying it out now, I don't. I just get a single frame with "Biological Exuberance: Animal Homosexuality and Natural Diversity By Bruce Bagemihl" as the main title at the top, and then sections entitled Summary, Contents, Reviews etc... There is something on the right of the sumary section with bookseller links, and a Google Product Search, but when I click on that I just get a list of copies with prices. I've tried this both with Firefox and IE and get the same result. I guess we need to get a few other people to test this to see whether it's just me! SP-KP 22:10, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

On the right side I get a summary, Contents, Subjects, Buy this Book and then Search in this book. Benjiboi 04:33, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

I've asked Allstarecho to take a look and tell us what s/he gets when clicking on the links. I'll let you know. SP-KP 18:44, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Benjilicious! As I posted on SP-KP's talk page, here is the screen capture of what I see: [1] -- ALLSTAR ECHO 23:47, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. That's exactly what I get with the search on the right side. I think that's how all the google book pages are set up. Benjiboi 23:53, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
He/she could have cookies blocked so it may not be loading correctly for him/her? -- ALLSTAR ECHO 23:59, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
I'm so not technical in that respect so don't know, it could also pull different in other countries. Benjiboi 00:08, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Benjiboi, you may have hit on something there - I'm in the UK, where are you? SP-KP 19:03, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. I get something very similar to the page that you & Allstar get - if I search for out-of-copyright books. The problem seems to be with material that is still under copyright. Doing a little bit of research it seems that Google have different rules for what can be "Googlebooked" depending on which country the user is accessing the site from. I'm pretty sure that because the book is still under copyright, Google won't let UK-based web users see it - just the catalogue entry. I think the best way forward would be for you to convert all of my abbreviated references into the same format as the ones you added, so that we then have a consistent format for the references in this article for now, and then we need to check out what the policy is for web pages that can't be viewed from all countries. Probably the best place to do that is a dicussion at the WP:V talk page or somewhere similar. SP-KP 17:03, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

In this instance, since it's from the same book I would say leave well enough alone. It'd be nice but certainly not necessary to have them be uniform but unless I'm simply forced to I'm a bit reffed-overloaded to deal with the prospect of revisiting to pretty them up. If we have to fine but i don't think we do. In other news I'm proposing that we split the birds and mammals into their own pages with transcluded intros for all. The page is simply huge even without all the refs and even if we shrink them it's a big-a** article. Benjiboi 17:08, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
No probs - I'm amazed that you managed to do as much work on this article in such a short time. Of course, you needed Squeakbox watching over you to make sure you did it ;-) SP-KP 17:22, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
Yes, truly inspirational. As was said to Judas - "You'll be remembered forever for this." Benjiboi 17:28, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar

The LGBT Barnstar

The LGBT Barnstar
For never fearing to speak out against injustices perpetuated against the LGBT community, and for doggedly continuing to improve the Wikipedia in spite of harassment from cowardly anonymous IPs. I admire you more than I could ever say. Thank you for gracing Wikipedia with your presence. Jeffpw 17:25, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
Hear, hear! Well deserved, Benjiboi - Alison ❤ 17:26, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
That's so sweet! You like me - you really really like me! lol. And it is the homophobes who often turn out to be ... well let's just say they have issues. But it's good to know they are terribly interested in gay sex and culture (and sex). Benjiboi 17:31, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

fair use

Fair use images need to be much smaller, so I've shrunk your image to an appropriate size and uploaded it at Image:Fruit machine.jpg. Also, fair use images never go on Commons; they can only be uploaded to Wikipedia. Commons is for freely licensed images only. You can't license another's fair use work as GFDL, either. So, please go to Commons:Image:Fruit machine.jpg and put the template {{speedydelete}} on it, to have it removed from Commons.

Oh, and, what do you know about the artist? You only put in "FM". We do need to know who the copyright holder is. ··coelacan 09:07, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Awesome work on "Fruit"

The system works! =) --- tqbf 15:36, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you but I disagree completely with violating the AfD process, nothing but a prod tag preceeded an effort to delete the article which goes against the AfD process which instructs that if an article can be improved through regular editing it is not a good candidate for AfD. Benjiboi 22:55, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
I didn't AfD the article, but note that there's nothing wrong with AfD'ing something and keeping it. In this case, the AfD drastically improved the quality of the article, so it's hard to fault it. --- tqbf 23:01, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
Well I fault it and am angry that I lost a night of sleep and hours of time to other projects to instead doing a rush job to save it. It's still in need of attention and does not represent my best work as i pretty much had to have it done within a couple of days to fit within the 5-day AfD window. All of this easily could have been prevented by simply tagging the article appropriately. "Needs sources", "Expand", "Global perspective", etc. If none of those tags gets response within a week or two then a polite message on the talk page, "this article seems like candidate for deletion unless it is dramatically improved beyond a dicdef state". And number of discussions on the article talk could have helped bolster the article along. Benjiboi 23:07, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
I agree with Powers assessment of the original article; if you didn't want to work on the article, you could have let it go, and just recreated it when you were ready. I'm glad you did it right away though. Awesome work, just wanted to say that. --- tqbf 23:40, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
Thank you. Benjiboi 23:46, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar (redux)

The LGBT Barnstar
For all your very fruitful efforts, may I say "Thank You" and "Excellent Job" and "You Go, Girrl!" SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 01:04, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
Thank you very much, may we all be fruitful and multiply. Benjiboi 03:38, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Edit summaries (Re: Drag king)

Edit summaries such as this are not the place to question a person's actions, especially someone who is well-known on the LGBT project and has given a lot to it. If you have a question, why not just approach me about it instead of putting in an edit summary that questions my actions as if there is some other reason why I took an action aside from that I thought it improved the article? I'll appreciate the good faith in the future, thanks. --David Shankbone 23:27, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

I appreciate all that you do but we will have to agree to disagree that removing other images from articles and replacing with your own is always an improvement. As an artist I respect your gift, time and energy as well as your freely making the world a bit better by offering them to all. What I find troubling is removing other photos altogether, especially good ones which, IMHO, help the article. Fudgie Frottage is a drag king hero as is Murray each in their own right, each doing unique contributions and there is room for both in the article. If the article had a dozen photos I would see the appropriateness for starting a talk thread to sort out excess image issues but the article in question had all of three photos, you removed two of the three and replaced them with one of your own. As soon as I figure out the best place to reinsert Fudgie's I will do so. I think the article will hold up to the weight of four photos just fine and if more surface that add more racial and geographical diversity then all the better. The article is likely to grow as well. Since I've been working on it it has steadily improved but I, personally, like to nurture and let things organically develop when possible. I see no rush to remove a photo or material that isn't stellar perhaps a light touch on some articles is more appropriate. If you had simply added Murray's and appropriately reshuffled the rest this would be a non-issue. Benjiboi 23:45, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
That's not the issue, Benji. The issue is your insinuation that I'm trumping photos on pages for my own, and that's not cool and is bitchy. Instead of assuming you know why I do anything I do--you don't--you should be more professional and cool-headed and simply ask. Since you can't pay the basic respect to a very active member of the project who has improved it by leaps and bounds to extend such a basic courtesy, I won't pay you the respect to explain myself, either. If you're this stressed, maybe you should take a break instead of attacking people who are on your side. Give it some thought. Later. --David Shankbone 23:49, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
Indeed, you give me a lot to think about, I think this marks the first time I've been referred to as bitchy. Benjiboi 00:06, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
To specifically address your statements, I never assumed a thing instead stating that I found your repeated deleting of photos troubling, which I do. I didn't want to engage you further as my past experiences with you in this manner have meant me simply "walking away" from an article with unresolved issues having to accept that I would have to wikilawyer or argue or battle or whatever you term it in order to save a photo on an article and frankly that's not my passion. Protracted debating does not fulfill my spiriti and if I have wikifaults that is chief amongst them. The basic courtesy every editor should pay to one another, regardless if they are a newby or Jimmy himself, is to explain their actions which I did. The fact that we both are regular contributors to the LGBT project does not mean we're on the same side on all issues as you are probably all too aware and I will continue to "disrespect" you by restoring deletions of content and images I feel are unwarranted and make the article in question worse for wear. We are here to build an encyclopedia for the world so multiple perspectives, viewpoints and strong disagreements are to be expected and, I think, part of the process. Benjiboi 08:06, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

BDSM

Thanks a lot for helping to improve the article!--Nemissimo (talk) 10:03, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Happy to help, BTW what's up with the deletion of talk items? Benjiboi 10:04, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
Nevermind, we were doing the same thing, I've cleaned it to an archives format. Benjiboi 10:14, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
 ;-) --Nemissimo (talk) 10:54, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Rod and Todd Flanders

Need gay refs for content and sort out verbiage, repeated removal of any gay content so ref and sort out verbiage first. Benjiboi

"relentless sheltering by his parents, Ned and Maude--whenever Todd comes into contact with anything outside of his family and their pious ways" Benjiboi

Editors seem determined to delete article anyway and persistently find reason to remove any mention so shelve for now. Benjiboi 22:47, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Kudos for all your work

I just wanted to tell you that your work on the list of animals displaying homosexual behavior, the fruit (slang) article and all the other articles you have been editing are much appreciated. Keep up the good work, but don't forget to step back and take a break from time to time. TechBear (talk) 14:22, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you and yes, about the breaks tis why I've tried to be on wikibreak but still sorting out loose ends on a few articles. Benjiboi 21:32, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Fruit (slang)

Hi Benjiboi. In reply to your message, the AfD closer is an admin. When listed at AfD, the delete reasonings had merit. However, the hey improvements during the AfD compounded the deletion issue. The initial deletion positions didn't change their position in view of your improvements to the article, so there was no clear consensus. I wouldn't read too much into it. Keep and no consensus are about the same and usually only affect the time when AfD#2 can be listed. The article is a B and you should now proceed to seek GA status. Also, you should list the article at DYK as a 16 November 2007 [2] expanded article so that Fruit (slang) appears on the Main Page. -- Jreferee t/c 15:05, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi, appreciate your insight and will follow your suggestions. I don't think I've done either a DYK or a GA before so both good chances to try something new. Benjiboi 21:00, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
Definitely go for the DYK - and do that soon, as it's time sensitive. The GA thing may take time, and some people (like Dev) would tell you to skip GA and go straight ahead for FA. But that's up to you :) -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 21:24, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

DYK

Here is what I submitted to DYK:

The Coster's Mansion, 1899 sheet music
The Coster's Mansion, 1899 sheet music

Misread 200 characters as 200 words so here is the latest draft:

The Coster's Mansion, 1899 sheet music
The Coster's Mansion, 1899 sheet music

GA

See WP:GA? for specifics. Benjiboi 22:09, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Good Queen Jane

Could you please weigh on on the article now that a consensus version seems to have been achieved? Jeffpw (talk) 22:25, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

It bothers me but I'm finding it hard to express why exactly so I'll have to think about it still and delay a response. Benjiboi 22:45, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Okay (Rod and Todd Flanders)

There have been exactly three jokes about Rod and Todd possibly being gay. There have been dozens about Homer and Bart, not to mention entire episodes about it. Besides, a character section is supposed to be an overview of who they are in the series, and giving an entire paragraph to a couple of one-off lines and jokes makes it seem like possibly being gay is a huge part of their character, when it really isn't. Why are you so determined to make it seem like they are definitely gay? -- Scorpion0422 02:33, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Well let's WP:AGF first as I'm not trying to do anything but present the information that has been unearthed as best as possible. There may be more out there as I'm a fan but not a researcher of the genre. You might try reversing the question - why are you trying to prove they're aren't gay? I would say the answer we both have is that we aren't, we simply disagree (and apparently others do as well) as to how best to convey the content as well as what is allowed to be included. My hunch is that you'll find the latest version I entered will appease those like myself who intuit the homosexual undertones of those characters and at least want the issue explored even if it's all of three sentences. You may recall that for years it was denied Smithers or any Simpson was gay, how long before one actually came out? You may also note that being gay is a huge issue in America (as well elsewhere) and that people are routinely fired, have their kids taken away, are beaten and killed. Apparently homosexuality is a concern to many, good or bad - it's a hot-button issue. I also presented balancing information (complete with wikilinks) that characterizes perceived gayness with instant rebutals and qualifiers so those that wish can rest in heteronormative comfort. The article needs a lot of work but trimming this information, to me, seems more a disservice. Benjiboi 02:51, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
I really don't care about any of that stuff. I just want to make sure our Simpsons articles are as good as they can be and you'll find that none of the good character articles go into such detail about minor things. -- Scorpion0422 02:59, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
We'll have to agree to disagree then. Benjiboi 03:02, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

We're not going to, so I have started a discussion here. -- Scorpion0422 03:10, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Benji, there is no reason to mention that they are possibly gay. I am gay, so you can't say I'm just not putting it because I don't want to put anything gay. With Waylon Smithers it is different, cause there have been several jokes about him, in many different episodes. Unless Rod and Todd have an entire episode related to their orientation, it doesn't need to be listed Ctjf83 03:29, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
Someone's sexuality hardly makes them an experienced editor nor does it preclude them from having an opinion or being biased in a manner that may keep them from having a balanced view towards a subject. I hereby concede. You win, they have no queerish aspects, never happened, never will. Benjiboi 07:30, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
Can you put, or tell me how to, the LGBT quote on my page, under the barnstar? Ctjf83 01:50, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
Done. Benjiboi 02:19, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
thanks bud...umm...do u by chance live in Iowa or Illinois? Ctjf83 02:21, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

I don't mean to be nosy, i'm just curious? Ctjf83 06:24, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Ok, the only reason i asked was cause i saw a cute boy online with a similar name Ctjf83 14:15, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Awww, wikilove. haha ;) -- ALLSTAR ECHO 17:11, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

LOL, i try...Ctjf83 22:09, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
Benji, is it by chance you?? Ctjf83 22:52, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
basically i'm wondering if you are this cute guy that lives in either iowa or illinois..can't remember what state for sure Ctjf83 22:56, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
lol, just answer me a yes or no for the above question, then i'll drop it! Ctjf83 03:41, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
lol. Sorry, I am considered a guy by some and even cute and maybe midwestern by others but I don't think I'm the one who's all three for you. Benjiboi 03:50, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Ugh, ur not answering the question! do u currently live in iowa or illinois, and are in your early 20s?! just answer that, and i'll be done! Ctjf83 04:01, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

List of animals...

Absolutely excellent work. This has now gone from an article that the reader would find highly dubious to something well-referenced. I love it.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 15:48, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

(insert comment) Thank you. We're now in process of reformatting referenecs as their volume more than doubled the article and are looking at options for turning the list into a table with even more information. Benjiboi 18:43, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
Minor comment, Benji: the included templates for the lede and footer will probably cause comment. I tried to do the same thing for the List of gay, lesbian or bisexual people and was told quite forcefully that "content doesn't belong in Template: space." Just FYI. Nice work on the list! -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 16:00, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
I wondered about that but will deal with it after the reference overhauling. I kept trying to transclude information but could only get an entire article transcluded rather than one section or just the lede. I'm open to suggestions though, maybe just converting both those to their own articles makes sense. Benjiboi 18:43, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
I ended up having to copy the same text to each article. Then, of course, they'll drift from each other, but I can't be bothered. :) -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 22:43, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
Well after I deal with the references I'll start stepping through this, hopefully I have a few days before more drama finds me. Benjiboi 22:57, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
OK, I've been trying to break for a bit and this new potential issue rattled me so i did a bit of research and apparently the except to that rule is ... lists. Benjiboi 23:10, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Templates should usually not masquerade as article content in the main article namespace; instead, place the text directly into the article. This does not apply to templates which are transcluded onto multiple articles, such as templates that display the introduction for a long list (which is split into multiple smaller lists), because it would be extremely tedious to edit the same text in many different articles every time a change is made.

—per Wikipedia:Template namespace

Talk about needing sources..

Watch this: Queerty.com -- ALLSTAR ECHO 17:10, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Actually I'd love to see a few lawsuits filing so Cooper and Manilow can prove libel as they aren't gay (actually I think Anderson simply doesn't address and Manilow denies it). They could go on Oprah and make her squirm a bit.Benjiboi 18:37, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

DYK Kob - need pg version

...that the female kob (and over 200 other mammals) display homosexual behavior including cunnilingus, genital stimulation, and urolagnia? Benjiboi 03:23, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Spray it on

Wouldn't this make a great article? -- ALLSTAR ECHO 04:26, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

lol. Even better than those tubs of plastic one would have to dip into - an _so_ much more convenient than condoms. Is that a tube of spray-on or are you just happy to be here? Benjiboi 14:13, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

DYK

Updated DYK query Did you know? was updated. On 21 November 2007, a fact from the article fruit (slang), which you recently nominated, was featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Zzyzx11 (Talk) 04:29, 21 November 2007 (UTC)


Good job Benji! :) Image:DYK.jpg -- ALLSTAR ECHO 04:45, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you! It took several tries but if it helps so be it. Benjiboi 14:14, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

DYK

Updated DYK query Did you know? was updated. On 21 November 2007, a fact from the article List of mammals displaying homosexual behavior, which you recently nominated, was featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Zzyzx11 (Talk) 23:46, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes, would have been nice if it wasn't sanitized repeatedly and again at the final step without consensus to do so but I suppose I should be gracious that it was considered at all. Final version "that the female kob (pictured) (and over 200 other mammals) display homosexual behavior?" Benjiboi 23:48, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
Yes, I noticed it was shortened even after I put it on DYK – one minute later.[3] What can you do... Cheers. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 23:52, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
Revert it to what the agreed upon version was. Benjiboi 23:53, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Censorship

It isn't censorship, it's simply pruning the entry to the minimum length required to get across the point. I've no objection to having the links in DYK, it's just that in this case it's not necessary. I'd do the same if you were linking to golf, pogo stick and pie. DYK entries are to be as short and "punchy" as possible, and the addition of extraneous terms adds nothing. I've been doing the same for entries to the section for over a year now. GeeJo (t)⁄(c) • 23:58, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

I'd also remind you in future to assume good faith. Accusing others of homophobia isn't really the best way to get people to do anything. GeeJo (t)⁄(c) • 00:01, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
If it quacks like a duck... I'm not particularly bothered with how long it's been doing so and in this case the one entry dealing with a sexual/gender minority issue has been trimmed the most. Removes any inspiration for me to do anything with DYK. Benjiboi 00:01, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
Oh spare me. It was pruned the most because it had the most fat to trim. Since I've referred to one policy already, I may as well hit another. Quoting from WP:OWN: "If you don't want your material to be edited mercilessly or redistributed by others, do not submit it." I'd say more about being prickly, but I've had a fair bit to drink tonight (celebrating my father's 50th) and I'd only regret it in the morning. Apologies if you've been offended by any actions taken, but bear in mind that we're all aiming for the same thing here :) GeeJo (t)⁄(c) • 00:06, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
If I'm wrong I apologize, if I'm right we all lose. Disagree completely that it had the most "fat" to lose. Benjiboi 04:40, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

DYK

Updated DYK query On 22 November 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article List of birds displaying homosexual behavior, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Zzyzx11 (Talk) 06:07, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Yay! I'm glad this one was left intact as well. Thank you! Benjiboi 21:44, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

List of animals displaying homosexual behavior

Shouldn't humans be on this list? Afterall, we're just animals too. ;) -- ALLSTAR ECHO 15:28, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

I agree with this. --David Shankbone 21:29, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
Well humans were on the list so I see no reason they shouldn't still be. Benjiboi 21:34, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
And indeed they still are. Benjiboi 21:36, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

FYI... DYK (Kob from list of mammals) -- context checking

You nominated a DYK which was selected for the main page, I have raised some concerns about its wording at Wikipedia_talk:Did_you_know#DYK_--_context_checking you maybe interested in joining the discussion. Gnangarra 15:49, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Damned if you do, and damned if you don't, eh Benji? Awesome work regardless. Thanks for being a tireless editor. -- ALLSTARecho 16:01, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Main points; hook was for item on list rather than list itself, hook was from image description and hook was modified after posting by admin. Concerns my work seem to be addressed as hook was referenced even though it was from an image and hooks should not be boring as sometimes happens when trying to hook a list so address an item not seen as terribly problematic. Benjiboi 21:49, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Photo Shoot For Halloween 1995 Poster Photo by Brian Ashby.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Photo Shoot For Halloween 1995 Poster Photo by Brian Ashby.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. 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 it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 21:25, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Benji, I added a fair use rationale. You may want to tweak it. -- ALLSTARecho 21:40, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
Thank you! Added rationale to image description. Benjiboi 21:51, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Remark (Re:BDSM)

Hallo Benjiboi, please don't get me wrong, I really appreciate your help in improving the article. I'm no naitive speaker, so please don't take it too seriously if I might sound harsh sometimes. ;-) Kind Regards.--Nemissimo (talk) 21:38, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

No problem. I'm familiar with German culture of getting down to business but your use of common sense will often be lost on the English wiki and Americans are notoriously independent and free-thinkers who are more likely to simply edit the article than even engage the talk page. The end goal remains improving the article so we're on that path. Benjiboi 21:43, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Michael Lucas (porn star)

Hello Benjiboi. I notice that you have been one of the active editors on this article. Just now someone left a message for me on my User talk that User talk:Lucasent was deleting mentions of Lucas's work as a male prostitute, which is said to be correct and well-sourced. Logic suggests that if we feel strongly about this issue, someone should file a new posting at the Conflict of interest/Noticeboard. Do you have an opinion on how important it is to refer to Lucas's apparent work in prostitution? It seems a strange crusade to embark on, but for those who feel it is important, WP:COIN is probably the way to go. I only got involved with this article at all because of a previous COIN nomination, and I have no particular affinity for the subject matter. If it gives an important light on his career, maybe we should work to keep it in. (I'm not 100% certain of the relevance, myself. I would be more convinced if it was included in Lucas's own writings in reliable sources). But the rules still deserve to be enforced. Since you've been a regular editor of this article, you may have read more of the references than some of us. Waiting to hear what you think. EdJohnston (talk) 00:48, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

It seems an essential part of his bio, and it is referenced. I saw Lucasent editing the article, too, and reverted him several times. Michael Lucas has had people edit his article by proxy through his blog on several occasions, which is one of the reasons it has had semi-protection. Sorry to butt in, but Benji's page is watchlisted and I thought I might be able to help. Jeffpw (talk) 00:53, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
PS: The reference stating he was a prostitute comes from the Yale Daily News. I think we can consider that a highly reliable source. Jeffpw (talk) 00:56, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
Thank you Jeffpw! I appreciate your efforts always. Benjiboi 20:24, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
I'm a little surprised that that Lucas or someone posing as him either as an ally or to discredit him would edit out that small bit of history. Indeed it's quite common for actors in gay porn to be male escorts and seems a symbiotic part of the industry with those who don't seemingly an exception to the rule. As many of the gay porn bios and related articles have been vandalized and been built by anons I don't see an easy answer except to stick to WP:RBI until a COI is painfully warranted. Even then we need to ensure it's actually Lucas or some version of a puppet. Benjiboi 20:24, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
Maybe the name Lucasent should be reported at WP:UAA as it's a commercial name in violation of WP:UN? -- ALLSTARecho 13:25, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
I would tend to agree. Benjiboi 21:40, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
User:Lucasent is on his last vandalism warning from WP:AIV. I reported him there earlier this evening. If he reverts again without discussing it, do not hesitate to report him and have him blocked. Jeffpw (talk) 21:53, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
Done (I'm in a mood). Benjiboi 22:03, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

DYK

I'm afraid I'm not in the position to update DYK at the moment. It takes quite some time to do it properly (especially in cases where the next time template isn't populated). I simply don't have enough free time in a continuous period to handle this at the moment. I hope you can find someone else to tend to the template. - Mgm|(talk) 19:43, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

No problem. I probably messaged you because you were listed on the page of those able, etc. but I messaged several folks at the same time in hopes that someone could. Last I looked the template had been updated but since the cycle is every six hours it does seem to regularly get backlogged so anytime you're able to deal with it your efforts are appreciated. Benjiboi 19:53, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

COI/N Thread

Your favorite IP ranges posted a COI/N thread on an article you worked on, R Family Vacations. I've closed the thread after he supplied contradictory evidence, and encourage you to add to this ISI page. -Jéské (Blah v^_^v) 03:08, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

OMG! Thank you for telling me I had no idea there was this brewing pot of drama going on! Benjiboi 04:37, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
Ahh it returns! I hadn't seen it either. So you buying boats and ferrying all the fairies around now?? lol ;) -- ALLSTARecho 04:45, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
You know it's I saw a couple of R Family Vacations edits go by and thought ok, improvements, move on, and then this whole thing was going on and viola! sorted out. As a parent it's always exciting when massive problems are completely taken care of and all you have to do is nod and smile while being told all the gory details! Benjiboi 04:50, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Transgender edit

Using "gay-bashing" can be seen as transphobic for mischaracterizing a transgender person's identity although most agree that any attacks is unacceptable regardless of the label used to describe it.

Find source and quote for above (criticism section) Benjiboi

eh? [4] -- ALLSTARecho 06:11, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

DYK

Updated DYK query On 29 November 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article R Family Vacations, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Carabinieri (talk) 22:03, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you so much for the Barnstar. It was completely unexpected, especially as I know you would do the same for me. I feel really lucky to be able to participate in the LGBT project, and to have made such good Wiki friends as you.

By the way, I'm going to research the chicken article today to see if we can save it from deletion. Jeffpw (talk) 12:57, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

You're very welcome and it's well deserved. And it was fun in its own way sorting out finding an appropriate one to use and such. Keep up the good work on behalf of all those helping add valuable contributions to the LGBT communities! Benjiboi 20:15, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Chicken

There is a difference between 'twink' and 'chicken'

Chicken is a young, naive boy, newly gay, "bi curious" at best. Easy prey for "chicken hawks" older dudes who looked for fresh meat. Not always of age. Sometimes turns "pro" to survive.

Twink tends to be a bit more sexually self aware, not naive. Perhaps self absorbed and superfical, but that definition tends to be fading in favor of "just barely legal." It used to be a perjorative, but seems to have evolved into something less biting. Jacksinterweb (talk) 04:44, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you so much for offering some guidance on this! Hopefully the sources will help "fluff" this out as well but I'm convinced we'll get this article worked up regardless. Benjiboi 20:12, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
I'll be working on this too in the weekend, Benjiboi. The term still resonates with me--I remember men going "cluck-cluck-cluck" at me when I was a gay teen! Jeffpw 20:17, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
Ha! Finger-licking good indeed! Benjiboi 20:19, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
MMmmm, do I smell chicken??! Sorry, I was away busy being banned for the last 24 hours and couldn't particpate in this discussion of my fav-o-rite commodity! However, as I am back and fairly young and gay (fairly young, strongly gay), I'd also like to point out that "twink", at least from what I have experienced of the term, means of legal age but of illegal age looks. In other words, 18 but looks 12. 24 but looks 16. I've never ever heard it used in a conversation as having to do with sexual self awareness. "Oh look at that twink!". -- ALLSTARecho 06:15, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
Interesting, I wonder if this is a regional difference. My experience has been more like Allstarecho's. - Philippe | Talk 06:18, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
I imagine it's a combination and used to largely passed on as part of queer (ahem) oral history but just as other words had currency with several possibly interpretations dominant ones emerge eclipsing others and mainstream usage perpetrated some usages more than others. As with all wikithings, however, it's verifiability not truth so we'll have to see what WP:RS's emerge to fluff our collective understanding. Benjiboi 09:12, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Oral... Fluff... Worked up... Smell[s] [like] chicken (or was that teen spirit)... OMG, what's next. I don't think I wanna know. — Becksguy 09:32, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Well I'm sure I have no idea what you're referring to but dipping sauce comes with chicken so maybe a warm washcloth with which to wipe-up. Benjiboi 09:37, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
I left a message for you in the chicken coop, Benjiboi (cluck). I've also added refs to the article. Jeffpw 12:18, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
This would be a twink, and my fav-o-rite I might add. I got some dipping sauce and a wet nap for him. -- ALLSTARecho 15:21, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Yikes! My dear young (and fairly young) chickens, I was speaking in generalities when the AfD debate was skewing towards merging with "twink" and definitely not issueing an edict. I was feebly trying to draw a distinction between the two terms (and apparently ruffled some feathers). Back in the day, chickens not only looked like boys, but were boys, but it also applied to any barely legal types. Thirty years ago, information about gay sexuality wasn't readily available for teens who were questioning, age of consent laws were more restrictive for gays, making for a lot of naive young queers in their teens, easy prey for the "hawks." Chicken had a negative connotation (the gay equivalent of "jail bait"), made even more so by those chcickens that turned pro. "Twink" never had that kind of baggage, even when it was sometimes used as a dismissive term. An 18 year old today is more worldly and not as clueless about sex as teens were 30 or 40 years ago. Jacksinterweb 16:00, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

I wouldn't take any stress over concerns or coop feathers ruffled or otherwise stuffed into pillows, I think it's all friendly fire and as I'm still trying to reconcile the terminology in the references your insight is actually quite helpful to place the usage into context. We didn't have cell phone cameras and youtube until recently nor was gay porn so mainstream and the modern LGBT movement was kicked of in 1969 so it's been a journey from clandestine to Queer Eye for the Strait Guy. I think we're all on the same side of writing a verifiable if not accurate article and anything is undoubtably better than the stub that apparent ruffled someone enough to AfD it. Maybe it was Larry Craig toe-tapping his way onto wiki? who knows. Benjiboi 21:44, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
Well said BB! No harm was meant, just spirited discussion about finger lickin' chicken. ;) -- ALLSTARecho 22:24, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

tidings of comfort and joy

you busy wiki elf, you! you get several mentions in this month's newsletter. Jeffpw 23:46, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Well that sounds ominous! Let me know (with plenty of time mind you) if you ever are looking for newsletter fluff and fodder or just another set of eyes. I think the style and wit encourage folks to actually read it and I suggest two possible additions; one being an ask your cruise director where you respond to viewer mail asking for advice (perhaps a question of the month?) that flexes your bot-mot-inator as well as providing some insightful and helpful resource (on wiki or not); the second being something along the lines of The voices in my head are telling me to redecorate that gives similar advice but could be a Home Depot list of a few ideas for freshening up an article. "Here are a few ideas to inspire an article makeover" with a link at the end for a wikisite how to write a good article. Benjiboi 00:00, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
Great ideas, Benjiboi! I don't know if there's time for this newsletter, but that will make a great new change in the January issue! Take a peek if you want. Jeffpw 00:08, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
Brilliant! Benjiboi 00:37, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
What in the heck is a "bot-mot-inator"!?!? :) -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 01:07, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
An unhilarious typo! I'm such a bad speller it's amazing. Try bon-motinator. Benjiboi 01:12, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
Actually, as a bot owner, I thought it was funny :) -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 01:25, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
The system works! Benjiboi 01:40, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

FYI

Please see Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/SatyrTN and discuss accordingly. Thanks! -- ALLSTARecho 03:17, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

For the sweet message. My adoptee has turned out to be Rosemary's Baby, and I needed a kind message from a friend right when you popped in. You're a peach. Jeffpw 13:57, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

I had a hunch something was going on. I suggest using a tough love approach either way as civility and blocking issues are rather non-negotiable on wikipedia whereas they're expected elsewhere. I try to be gracious in hope that anyone can be a good editor but often they need pokes with a hint stick to get them to play nice and such. And sometimes you get folks who simply need time to sort out each lesson. Youth - wasted on the chickens! Benjiboi 03:00, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

LGBT WikiProject Newsletter

Delivered on 20:05, 3 December 2007 (UTC). SatyrBot 20:54, 3 December 2007 (UTC)