User talk:Benjiboi

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search
Current date and time is: 11 November 2008 - 09:28

AIDS is an absolutely tragic disease. The argument about AIDS being some kind of divine retribution is crap.

—Calvin Klein
Oscar Wilde
Credit: Photo by Napoleon Sarony (1821–1896)
Oscar Wilde (1854–1900), Irish playwright, novelist, poet, and author of short stories. Known for his barbed wit, he was one of the most successful playwrights of late Victorian London, and one of the greatest celebrities of his day.



[edit] Roman Polanski asap

flup

  • BLP name
  • clean-up coordinatation/tags
  • awards. -- Banjeboi

[edit] InterPride

restore usable content. -- Banjeboi

[edit] possible ARS pic

Seaking heaven.JPG
-- Banjeboi
Pilatus Agusta A109 Flug.jpg


[edit] Disruptive editing that evades detection

Since attempting to improve the Halloween in the Castro article I have poked around a bit and I believe that I have observed the editor User:Benjiboi engaging in disruptive editing practices which exploit the open nature of Wikipedia to make it difficult for others to improve articles, including:

  • Driving away productive contributors: act in spite of policies and guidelines on a low level that might not exhaust the general community's patience, but that operates toward an end of exhausting the patience of productive rules-abiding editors on certain articles.
  • Tendentious editing / Filibustering / Refusing to get the point: Continuous editing of an article or group of articles in pursuit of a certain point for an extended time despite opposition from one or more other editors.
  • Edits occur over a long period of time; no single edit may be clearly disruptive, but the overall pattern is disruptive.
  • Edits often avoid gross breaches of civility, especially by refraining from personal attacks, even though they interfere with civil and collaborative editing meant to improve the article.
  • Edits may be distributed over a wide range of articles that few people watch.

--Andy54321 21:19, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Interesting, seems like you are the one engaging in some odd battleground mentality to get your way while accusing me of various things. I'm happy to get more folks involved so we can best serve our readers. Meanwhile you may wish to dial back the blanket bad faith accusations. -- Banjeboi 20:08, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Andy54321,

I was on the opposing side of Banjiboi just recently, and while I found this user to be headstrong, annoyingly persistent and at times maybe a LITTLE condescending, I would have to honestly say that Banjiboi operated at all times within the boundaries of etiquette and I do have to say, totally within the confines of the rules set here on Wikipedia. While I do understand your frustrations as they pertain to your article not being what you think is right, I am fairly certain Banjiboi feels the same way. You always have a second opinion option, if you feel that you are right, to appeal to a neutral third party administrator. Why not go to that forum and ask someone to take a look at your and Banjiboi's respective edits and see if you can come to some sort of consensus? You can do that by going to WP:ANI and asking an Admin to investigate the matter for you.Chris Hawk (talk) 07:59, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

First off my apologies if I was or even seemed to be condescending, that's unhelpful and I should be cautious about that. Secondly your advice seems sound. I don't feel the accusations are well founded but this user certainly could ask for even more eyes if they feel the situation needs attention. -- Banjeboi 01:43, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
It is important to note that, as a principal to our discussion and not a neutral third party, what one perceives and what actually is, can be two totally different things. Condescending maybe isn't the best choice of words, but one that best describes the point I was trying to get across. I see myself as someone who is reasonably smart, and on the Brandon article I felt I was right. You, however, don't know me, nor anything about me, so in the way you were explaining a few things came across as condescending, like I was not as up to speed as I thought I was (And turned out to be true, I am NOT an authority on LGBT issues) so, to me, a possessor of ego, it smarted. Let me state this categorically: It has been my observation that Banjeboi does as best as humanly possible in upholding the values of fair play and proper, ethical and NPOV here on Wikipedia. It is my opinion that if more people operated within the same confines of the rules set forth here like Banjeboi, that Wikipedia would, no doubt, succeed even further in it's purpose of being everything it's capable of being. You're A-ok in my book.

And, yes, this user is probably just upset that their POV isn't being represented the way they see fit. Which smarts sometimes, but they'll get over it. I did. Chris Hawk (talk) 14:46, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Lol. I appreciate your insight. They make a good point that the article needs help - it's still missing some vital content that I wasn't able to source before. Once things are reworked a bit I think the article will be fine - and I've been called a lot worse so I'll just have to get over it. -- Banjeboi 02:45, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
Ahh, yes, that pesky sourcing problem. Maybe sourcing is the reason that Wikipedia is considered a "work in progress" rather then a static finished project. Which, if it was finished, would not be open for any more article writing, and the continuous changing of articles as circumstances evolve. Just keep doing what your doing, it will all come out in the wash!  :-) Chris Hawk (talk) 19:35, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
Well yes, sourcing is a pillar in that all content has to be verifiable. Even if I know something to be true it's much better to only write what is readily source-able. This does cause problems but long after I've come and gone I hope that the articles continue to improve so that future readers have the chance to understand a subject as fully as they wish. That I choose to work in what ends up being gender and sexuality-focussed issues only make it all that more exciting! lol! -- Banjeboi 21:38, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
That I choose to work in what ends up being gender and sexuality-focussed issues only make it all that more exciting! lol!

Some people are just gluttons for punishment. LOL I have learned to pick my battles, I went through a whole bottle of Excedrin pills going 'round with you..HA! In all seriousness though, like Ric Flair, the greatest pro wrestler of ALL TIME say's, "Whether you like it or don't like it, LEARN to love it..Because I'M (Or it, for Wikipedia article writing purposes) the best thing going today...WHOOOooooooooo!" Chris Hawk (talk) 02:55, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Greek Love

Thanks for your contribution to the Talk Page of Greek Love. I've just now scanned your User Talk page and I think you are the sort of editor who could help make much needed improvements to that article. I think Gay Rights activists have a useful role in guarding against prejudice - but some articles seem to be written by Gays for Gays and they are better suited to Gay Magazines than to an encyclopaedia that anyone can edit: in other words, sometimes Gay Rights get too far ahead of Gay Responsibilities. Greek Love is currently that kind of article - it wanders far outside its proper scope and its conceptual limitations are simply ignored. However, I particularly take issue with pederasts who wrap themselves in the banner of Gay Rights (most pederasts are heterosexual misogynists, in my opinion, if not paedaphiles), and I notice that some editors have steered Greek Love towards an emphasis on idealized pederasty. Idealized pederasty is one of the meanings of Greek Love but that's no excuse for yet another infatuated detailing of the imaginary beauties of Boy Love - links would suffice. In short, I am concerned that I could be labelled a homophobe on account of my opposition to that article. I will press ahead with the rewrite it needs and I hope that the great majority of Gays will back me up. I will also listen to Gay advice on this issue as much as I can. In fact I probably need a Gay advisor to help me through this. If you are unwilling to take on this role, maybe you could direct me to somebody else who will act as my mentor. Anyhow, thanks for your help thus far. Amphitryoniades (talk) 05:27, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Been away for a few bits so apologies for not responding sooner. Setting aside all the other points raised ... I would recommend, since you have a full draft there, adding a note yourself to all the wikiprojects listed on the talkpage. Likely you'll get very little response but you never know. User:Haiduc would likely be the best person to contact. -- Banjeboi 20:24, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

OK thanks for this. Unfortunately, Haiduc has previously denounced me as a homophobe on the basis of my opposition to his edits of Solon and I am disappointed that you have directed me to him. I am looking for advice/guidance from a Gay activist who clearly distinguishes homosexuality from pederasty. It's an important distinction. I think posting a note on all the listed wikiprojects will probably open old wounds again and I have no intention of starting an edit war. I'll leave my proposal on the Talk Page. Hopefully it will get something positive started. Amphitryoniades (talk) 02:23, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Ooo, Ok. Well I'm sorry if you and that editor don't seem to connect well. I guess I would fall back on asking at each wikiproject for more eyes. I don't think you need, BTW, a "Gay activist" as much as someone who is knowledgeable on LGBT issues. Pedophilia issues are part of LGBT history but are also a distinct from LGBT people. Haiduc has been very helpful pointing out issues in the past so you might try contacting them - "I know we have had some issues but would appreciate your view on this proposed replacement draft". They may surprise you, who knows? -- Banjeboi 01:48, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

I can't work with Haiduc since his edits are almost all pederasty based. One issue editors are the source of the problem at Greek Love. I'm sorry to hear that pedophiles have infiltrated LGBT ranks - that sort of confusion is going to cause lots of problems for Gays if it ever shapes public perceptions.Anyhow, thanks for your frank and co-operative replies. I'll continue waiting for someone of good faith to turn up at the Greek Love Talk Page. I'll try the project pages if that doesn't succeed. Amphitryoniades (talk) 05:11, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

I appreciate that you recognize a difference in working styles, whatever they are but I do encourage you to also appreciate that we each bring to Wikipedia our expertise and evn enthusiasm in a number of areas. I have no idea if Haiduc uses alt accounts but it would not surprise me since they work in an area that is quite uncomfortable for many. Just because one editor may cause issues doesn't mean all who edit in that area share their beliefs or styles. The LGBT ranks include anyone who wishes to improve articles on LGBT subjects regardless of their personal beliefs or any other attributes. We generally are less keen on judging than simply supporting each other producing better articles. I have no clue of any of those who are members are or are not pedophiles and generally I don't care as long as nothing illegal is done and they follow Wikipedia policies like everyone else. Frankly an alcoholic may have a POV that would help an article about alcoholism so I'm open to at least hearing what they have to say that would actually improve the article itself - as that's what we're here to do. Also we are not here to shape public perception but to follow what reliable sources show is public perception. I've messaged all the projects in hope that someone interested may reply. -- Banjeboi 01:11, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Amidst extraordinary measures ...

Inspired by your use page ... a quick note of completely unconnected noise to say that I am so looking forward to seeing Ian McKellan in the AMC miniseries of The Prisoner next week here in America. Cheers. Proofreader77 (talk) 02:34, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Yes, he's lovely in just everything I've seen! enjoy! -- Banjeboi 02:46, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Your quote

I have saved a quote of yours as a brilliant example of understanding the NOR policy. I have attempted to include it in NOR policy, but am in doubt, and others have commented here. Please participate. I would very much like to see you add the quote yourself. It would enhance the policy. -- Brangifer (talk) 02:51, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

lol! Yes, every once in a while - and despite my poor spelling - i drop a pearl of sense here and there. Feel free to use it however it may help. -- Banjeboi 02:50, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Help with dermatology-related content

Are you interested in dermatology-related content? I am looking for more help at the dermatology task force, particularly with our new Bolognia push 2009!, history of dermatology, or list of dermatologists pages? Perhaps you would you be able to help us? ---kilbad (talk) 01:44, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm overloaded presently however I have a few ideas that may help. Advertise on all the relevant articles and maybe post a note at Village Pump. You may also do well to look into the contributors and send individual notes as well. Good luck! -- Banjeboi

[edit] Long time no hear

Haven't seen you on WT:ARS for a while... last time you commented on the board is on September 10.[38]

You okay with creating a deletion sorting page for ARS? Please respond there.

Wikipedia_talk:Article_Rescue_Squadron#Articles_currently_tagged_with_rescue_template

Ikip (talk) 15:10, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

take your name, I am just happy to hear from you again. Ikip (talk) 19:15, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] The Wikipedia Signpost: 9 November 2009

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:44, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Katastrophe (Rocco Kayiatos)

add infobox and possibly album covers. -- Banjeboi

[edit] For paid notes

Bullypedia, A Wikipedian Who’s Tired of Getting Beat Up noted at Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2009-11-09/New pages experiment. -- Banjeboi

[edit] buildings and ships comparisons image

very nice. Decora (talk) 05:50, 11 November 2009 (UTC)


Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Benjiboi"