And if there were a footnote, it would read "The Hero ISBN whatever, passim. ;-> We can do that in text; at least until the footnote brigade get their way,
I agree that Raglan should be mentioned at Hero; but not as the analysis of Greek hero cult, which may need to be another separate article. There's a reasonably good start at an article at FitzRoy_Somerset,_4th_Baron_Raglan#The_Hero, btw; it needn't start from scratch. Good luck. SeptentrionalisPMAnderson 20:14, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Why did you remove sourced material without adding to the discussion on the talk page? Could you please go into more detail about "Dubious statements" and what you mean by "better sources". I feel no reason to continue the article when I would expect further edits with no explanation. Many hours of research and writing went into that. I don't see how I am supposed to understand what your meaning is without your talking directly to your actions on the discussion page to know what you expect or what you feel is needed. The edit summery only conveys so much. A little more information would be helpful. One other question. Your placement of the expansion tag is in the middle of a section. Does that mean you feel expansion is only needed for the Roman section or the entire ancient history section? Any help you wish to give would be appreciated.--Amadscientist 02:15, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Could you tell me what your thoughts are on this person and his writings. As I understand it there is some controversy with his theories or research or just possibly his use of such.--Amadscientist 05:33, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. Since we often express similar arguments in deletion debates, I thought you might want to read an essay I've written, found at User:Eyrian/IPC. I'd be interested to hear any feedback on its talk page. --Eyrian 15:19, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
First of all, Cav, I should apologize for a quick, visceral response to your remarks. As I noted, I had just spent more than 5 hours laboriously typing out quotations word for word from a thick volume balanced on my lap; I was tired and sore and snappish, and perhaps I did overreact a bit.
Still, if more than one editor has reacted to your innocently-intended comments as I did, you might think about bookmarking what you wrote, and coming back to look at it in a month or two when you can see your own words perhaps a little more objectively.
It's hard for me, looking at your comment now, to pin down the precise irritant that snagged my tripwire. Really, it's not so much the words themselves per se, it's how you phrased them that conveyed what felt--rightly or wrongly--like a dismissive sort of rebuke to me.
Trying to be more specific here, when you say "You want to do this, BUT it WOULD BE BETTER to do . . ." feels like you don't think my judgment is equal to yours. It sounds like what a parent, a teacher, or an employer (a boss) would say. As if I need to be corralled, controlled, and channeled into Doing the Right Thing, which I can't be trusted to know or do on my own.
Ditto for when you say "without using language that is too . . ."; again, it felt like you were implying that I could not be trusted to use appropriate language in a mainspace article, like some kind of child or new trainee.
If I were in fact a clueless newbie asking for guidance, your comment as written would have been most appropriate, I think. But of course I'm not; you can see the list of articles I've created or significantly edited over the past year by looking at my user page. And I think if you were to skim over a few of them, you would see that they are all quite acceptably written. Not perfect, but above average in most cases, if I do say so myself, and some other editors have agreed.
But of course, that brings us to one of the real flaws of Wikipedia: anonymity is a great lure--I probably wouldn't be writing and editing all these gay-related articles if I had to sign on with my real name and identifying details (this is Texas, after all, and some folks are still a bit behind the times on the whole idea of gay rights, I'm sorry to say)--but on the other hand, unlike in a brick-and-mortar enterprise where you know your co-workers by sight and have a fair idea of each one's skill level and experience, here on Wikipedia, we don't really know who we are dealing with unless we see the name often, or take the trouble to go look up what they've done and how well they've done it.
So, as I reflect upon this difficulty, it seems to me that this anonymity might be a contributing factor to the frequent incivility we find in Wikipedia. I hasten to admit I have been guilty, too, from time to time, and usually regret it in a cooler moment (it usually happens at the end of a long night of typing, when I'm feeling exhausted and irritable). Certainly I would never lash out at a co-worker face-to-face in the way it is so easy to do here. I might well think it, but I wouldn't say it. ;-)
But I often encounter other editors, new or old, who are a little too quick to change what I've worked laboriously on for hours, or to throw out little sneering, I-know-better-than-you comments and digs--without one single word of appreciation for anything good I've done. Very galling, let me tell you, when I've sat here hour after hour after hour, pouring my best efforts into crafting something the community can feel proud of--and more importantly, to me, something a general reader from the outside can solidly rely on.
So this is a systemic problem, it would seem, of the way we do wikibusiness here, and I haven't got a clue what the answer would be. Except to forgive and forget, and I do apologize if I took your comments in an unintended way.--Textorus 01:33, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, man, I may well call upon your expertise some time. BTW, looking at your stated credentials, I feel a bit envious; I actually toyed seriously with the idea of majoring in classical studies at one time, but by that point in college I'd been away from high-school Latin so long, I was afraid I'd never catch back up, so I chickened out. Would have dearly loved to learn Greek, too. Much too late to start now. Like those piano lessons I thought I'd take "someday." ;-) Oh well - c'est la vie.--Textorus 02:02, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for you essay, which I think you should add to one of the debates. Let me respond briefly-- In the case of Pac-man and the like, a point could be made that that the page is not really necessary, for the entire discussion of pacman is about the subject IPC-- that's the inherent locus of the subject. For influence of X, then you are right that in general more academic titles are much better--and i would be suggesting them except the same parties have nominated several such articles and seemed it would just confuse the discussion. I'm not sure about Miltonic tradition--this is really over-formal and would sound strange to most WPedians. But there's a third point: the influence of Milton on literature, music, and so on, is a perfectly sound and delmited set of topics. But there is also the influence of Milton on non-literary things. The total sum of references and allusions in even the most trivial of places indicates the impact on the world as a whole, not just the literary or creative part, for it is assumed the viewer/reader will understand. And all of these allusions are related to each other--the set of them, how they are used, why people who have never read the works still use and understand them, is a topic, and the topic is best shown by the collocation of the findable references.
I'm not a specialist in this subject in the least, but I am a bibliographer. I once collected 18th and early 19th century references to Samuel Richardson's works--in the pre internet era, by systematic searching of likely places and by following leads, working in libraries which had perhaps 90% of the possible sources. I didn't work on visual references--I do not have the knowledge of the sources and the tools. And I could never work on 20th century media references at all, for the same reason. But for everything since about 1990, this is different now, and the place to do it is Wikipedia. There is a sense in which this is OR, but for the topics WP concentrates on, it's a logical extension. Gathering is not OR; only interpretation is. Even if WP is the not the place for the work, it's the place to collect the sources,. I don't want to do this work, but I don;t want to destroy the sources for it. I am as a librarian horrified by the speed at which we are destroying access. I will still have access as an admin, and the material should certainly be transferred to another wiki--I can help with that but do not have the time to work on it or organize it-- and it is unnecessary--it could have been kept right here.
The question is how to build these up. The current way of deleting them first is so much the wrong way to go, that it is about this that I am fighting. I have things both at WP and in the RW I should be doing rather than defending or rewriting these, things I could do much better than this. So will you help preserve some of it? Will you, for example, help with the Eiffel Tower article, and categorize the ones you know. And then look for the sources for them individually? will you perhaps look at Irvine for a book discussing it to add to the references for the article? On a longer scale, will you rewrite at least the academic sections for some of the ones based on classical topics--your own field? Will you -- even -- be prepared to say at some of the AfDs, "keep, and edit." ? DGG (talk) 02:36, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
thanks for the response. I agree that a project is the way to go--but I am a little to busy arguing to organise! if you want to suggest one, I'll certainly support and help, and a project supported by people of different views is the best way to proceed--projects started by people with a declared single view on the matter do not usually get far. No need to userify Eiffel Tower yet, it still has a few days to run--let's just work on it where it is. That way people can see the improvements as it goes along. But if you want to do something radical, then sure, do it there, and it can be combined. Thanks for the suggestions. DGG (talk) 03:51, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The article was not userfied because of the overwhelming consensus to delete it outright. Given some of the concerns raised, userfication wouldn't have fixed anything. --Coredesat 22:58, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have stated on my talk page my willingness to userify anything that is not copyvio or libel or otherwise BLP. I don't want to contradict my colleague above, so if you will send me an email address or activate your email, i will email you a copy. DGG (talk) 07:48, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Nice work on Gay Cabal, by the way. I was impressed that there was already an essay so perfectly fitted to the point you were making :-) bikeable(talk) 15:31, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
As someone who has been active on the talk pages of this article, this is a request to please have a look at Talk:Dissociative_identity_disorder/ArticleSandbox. This sandbox represents an attempt to format the article as per the medical template and to retain an NPOV stance. After a period of discussion in the main article talk page and subsequent editing on the sandbox article, I would hope to copy the sandbox version over to the actual article. --CloudSurfer 19:20, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This article was recently deleted and I am submitting it for deletion review. As I see you supported keeping Yale in popular culture - an article almost exactly the same as NYU in popular culture - please support me in restoring this page. As the creator of the page I plan on bringing it to the level of Wikipedia in culture should it be restored. Please comment on the process here: Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2007_August_14#NYU_in_popular_culture. Your support is appreciated. Thanks. -- Noetic Sage 23:33, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the heads up. I was unaware of the canvassing policy before you let me know! I will definitely refrain from doing so in the future. The purpose of my message was to garner attention but I agree it should have been done in a more neutral manner. Thanks for letting me know. -- Noetic Sage 00:21, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Message from Coordinator: It's been almost two months since the last newsletter came out, so there are a fair few people who haven't really been kept up with our project. I'd like to welcome all those who have joined and those who have returned, and strongly reccommend that you use the talkpage for any queries or problems you have. Happy editing!
Article News
The ongoing effort to create a comprehensive list of LGB people has begun to bear fruit - /A AND the /W-Z lists have been featured! Congratulations to Dev920 and SatyrTN who nominated them respectively. Please consider pitching in the the remaining lists to help us get them finished before the end of the year.
Project News
WP:LGBT now has an IRC channel! It is #LGBTProject on Freenode. Users without IRC or Xchat can use the java app at java.freenode.net to access the channel from their web browser. Hope to see you in there sometime!
David Shankbone has taken a LOT of photos. An idea has been mooted to create a page for listing people who are willing to take images in their area on request, please give your thoughts here.
Considerable discussion has recently been held on our coverage of same sex marriage, civil unions and domestic partnerships. You may be interested to read it.
The list of LGBT people to be sorted has now been reduced by over 30%. Please help us with it, all of us adding just one person a day would have a dramatic effect!
A gay cabal conspiracy ghost has been created to do with what you will. :)
Wooh, massive gay conspiracy...
Member News
Since the last newsletter was released, we have had more members been labelled inactive than who have signed up - please consider recruiting a few more people if you can, a WikiProject is only as good as its members. :)
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please let us know here. If you have any news or any announcements to be broadcast, do let Dev920 know.
I completely sympathize with your frustration, CaveatLector. And as you can see from the edit counter's summary of my activity (scroll down to the green bars), I cut back my Wikipedia activity substantially from April to July. That break helped considerably. When I came back, I trimmed a lot of dross off my watchlist and focused on a single goal: getting Fun Home to FA status. I've just achieved that goal, and it feels good.
Looking back on the way I was feeling earlier in the summer, and the way I'm feeling now, the main difference is that instead of letting myself get ground down by fighting POV-pushers, rabid deletionists and defenders of the bureaucracy, I'm balancing that reactive activity with creative activity. That helps me remember what it is I like about Wikipedia: the ability to find information, present it in a coherent fashion and share it with the entire world. Yes, the process can be tiresome, and maintainance of good content can be exhausting (I can't wait for the "stable versions" to be implemented!), but it can also be rewarding when you get it right.
It's also good to remember that although the POV-pushers, bigots and trolls take up a lot of time and energy, they don't define the Wikipedia community. The key values of Wikipedia-the-community are still those of a civilized and civil society, and that's not something you can say for a lot of communities on the Internet. Yes, the open nature of Wikipedia makes it difficult to ensure that all the participants share those values — but they are still the values of the community as a whole, and that's no small thing.
My advice to you is that you take a wikibreak for as long as you need to recharge your batteries, and when you feel ready come back with a project in mind. At least, that worked for me. It may be hard to let go of articles which you're used to defending, but I've found that when you step back others will step forward. After all, that's the point of a wiki — none of us is irreplaceable. And that can be liberating.
Whatever you do, I wish you happiness and good fortune. You're a good egg, C.L. — don't let this place make you feel scrambled. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 17:47, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I too have experienced this. I see it in various ways. On one hand, it is definitely a degradation of the principles which governed this project a couple of years back (I think I will soon enter my fourth year of editing here). It seems to be happening with greater frequency that groups of like-minded people impose their own moral imperative on what should be a factual debate. On another hand, it was only a matter of time until something like that happened. Frankly, I have been expecting it. A project that started out with a handful of intellectual idealists has now been discovered by less evolved individuals who use numbers to overcome reason. It reminds me of what Thurgood Marshall said upon leaving the Supreme Court: Decisions were being taken not by strength of reason but by force of numbers, and he wanted none of it.
So, I sympathize. On the other hand, I prefer to take a long term view of it, namely that people can and do learn, and that over time reason will prevail. You do have to be willing to lose some battles, even when you are right, and not take it too much to heart. I personally find it painful when I draw the attention of the community of people interested in LGBT matters to this kind of conflict, and no one gives a damn. But what can you expect of a group led by a person who criticizes edits on the basis of them not "serving the cause"? Screw the "cause," the only cause we have here is accuracy and intellectual integrity. So that is how matters stand, but in closing let me just point out that if all reasonable people pack it in, the field will be left to the bigots and the gang bangers, and that would be too bad. Haiduc 23:50, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The LGBT studies project has been rather quiet of late. Though we've added over 180 new members in the last year, only a small percentage are active participants. If you haven't visited our project or talk page in a while, please stop by for a look. Also, if you happen to bump into another editor who you feel might enjoy working with us, please extend an invitation. There's lot's do do, and the active members would sincerely appreciate some help.
Our Peer review project is struggling at the present, with only a few people reviewing the articles. While it is certainly possible to submit articles for a general peer review, a review by members of the LGBT community can be of additional value for LGBT specific writing. There are several articles currently up for review on a wide range of topics. At the very least, reading the articles will undoubtedly broaden your intellectual horizons :-)
At the moment, David Le Brocq, Malmö Devilants and Trajectory Hermeneutics are up for deletion review. Please take a look at them and make your voice heard at the deletion review. Articles nominated for deletion also present a challenge for improvement. See what you can do, and watchlist our deletion review page.
The Pederasty articles continue to be a point of controversy both within and outside of our community. Various editors have suggested that to include them as LGBT Project related somehow taints the project and brings Wikipedia into disrepute. Other editors have stated that the articles, and especially the Pederasty article, are part of the core of LGBT studies. Well meaning editors continue to remove our tags from the articles themselves as well as the talk pages. If you have time, please read the articles and watchlist them to protect them from vandalism and well meaning but counterproductive edits.
The list of LGBT people has survived its 4th nomination for deletion. Please watchlist this list to protect it from vandalism and unsourced additions. There are many in Wikipedia who would like to see this Featured status list removed from the project. It is up to us to keep it to such a high caliber that it never is removed.
Our project member David Shankbone is now working as a journalist for Wikinews, as well as continuing to improve our project and Wikipedia as a whole with his photographs. A sincere thank you goes out to him for all of his hard work. Wikipedia would not shine nearly as brightly without your contributions, David.
Happy Halloween, everybody! Be happy and celebrate!
The surviving life partner of prominent LGBT rights activist Barbara Gittings recently called one of our editors and, among other things, complimented us on what a great job our project is doing on Wikipedia. Thanks to everyone who contributes to this project, either through their article edits or support for other project members. We really are making an difference here!
Member assistance
Some of our project members have been having difficulties related to editing on the encyclopedia. If you are feeling frustrated or distressed by your editing experience, please don't keep it to yourself. Wikipedia is a collaborative effort, and we are all here to help one another. Drop a line on our talkpage or on another editor's page, and other members of the LGBT project will happily give you the support you want and need.
Lastly, Halloween is just around the corner. More than most holidays, Halloween is a holiday embraced by and tailor made to our community (though God only knows why we are invisible in the Halloween article here. Perhaps somebody would like to rectify that editing oversight). Have fun, everybody, and remember to both trick and treat!
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please let us know here. If you have any news or any announcements to be broadcast, do let Dev920 know.
Hey, Peeps, it's that time of the month again (no not that time — get your mind out of the gutter): time for another monthly edition of the LGBT Project'sLove Boat newsletter from your cruise directorMiss Julie. So much has been happening this month and I just can't wait to tell you all about it!!!
Let's start with some good news: Alice and the project lost the bothersome sock puppet who had been disrupting many articles we monitor, and now most of us can edit in relative peace. Congratulations, Alice, for being able to come out of semi-retirement. Benjiboi, on the other hand, has gained an anonymous IP stalker who seems to be more Catholic than the Pope and who has a hard-on for the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence. We seem to have a sort of Yin and Yang thing going on here, which helps both to keep us in balance and on our toes <bright smiles all around>.
Albus Dumbledore got outed this month, and was immediately adopted by our project. The international brouhaha surrounding this disclosure reached all the way to Wikiland, and his article was briefly locked due to homophobic vandalism (as well as well meaning editors who just couldn't believe that that nice man could possibly be gay). This is a wonderful article to add to your watchlist, and will surely give you hours of reverting fun on cold winter days.
On a more serious note, Fireplace has suggested a new article series about LGBT rights in the United States, state by state. This ambitious topic will surely require many editors and a lot of research, but has the potential to add further prestige to our already prestigious project.
Same name, same sexuality: a riddle for the ages[edit]
Francis Bacon (not the new gay one, but the old gay one ... though they're actually both dead, now that I think about it) has also aroused passions here on Wikipedia, with editors opposing his sexuality being disclosed in his biography. The always helpful Haiduc has thoughtfully provided any number of sources, but it is slow going getting his point across. Anyone want to lend a hand?
And speaking of passions, Jack Kerouac has inflamed the senses once again with editors, including administrator Irishguy, mounting a spirited defense to keep him as heterosexual as possible for Wikipedia purposes. Why? I don't know. Perhaps some of you can drop by the talk page and ask your questions there. I feel certain a stimulating debate will ensue that will be enjoyed by all.
Did you know that one of our Featured articles, Lawrence v. Texas, lost its shiny gold star? That was a shocker. It has been suggested that we turn our attention to it in an effort to restore it to its former glory. I took a peek, and it does need our help badly. For our American editors, it would seem almost a civic duty to edit it (not that I'm hinting....).
Though it was far too intellectual a debate for a mere cruise director like myself to take part in, Intersexuality was certainly a hot topic a week or two ago. The thrust of the debate was over inclusion in our project. Lots of good editors had lots of good opinions. For those too lazy to check out the discussion, we decided to leave it out for now.
Peer review is, as always, short staffed and seemingly unloved. Wouldn't you feel better about yourself and the world in general if you took a few minutes to read one of the listed articles and offer some helpful advice? I know I'd feel better if you did.
The article LGBT movements in the United States certainly raised eyebrows last week, especially when it was discovered that copyrighted content had been added to our article. Tragedy was averted at the last minute, though, when the original hosts of the article where the material had been pilfered agreed to make it free to everyone. Our thanks to them, whoever they are. Busy Bee that I am, I haven't had time to read it, but I'm sure it's sensational.
Not content to run for Best Actress, plucky Bannon won a Best supporting actress Oscar... whoops, I meant to say Ann is also getting more than her share of womanly attention on the Good Article list. Joining her on this exalted plane are Freddy Mercury, Waylon Smithers and Lance Bass. Good articles indeed, and the last one mentioned just goes to show that one needn't admire the subject of an article to appreciate the effort put into making him worthwhile reading. What on earth Britney ever saw in him I'll never know. Truly a riddle cloaked in an enigma and wrapped around a puzzle.
On a personal note, your already overworked cruise director is being cyberly whipped almost daily by Nemissimo, who desperately wants to get the German BDSM translation copy edited and used as a replacement for the current one. It's such a ... err, stimulating topic that I am sure many of you will want to join the copy editing fun. Jump right in, folks! It's so lonely copy editing it all by my lonesome!
A little birdie just whispered in my ear that our noble collaboration project was delisted from the Community Portal due to inactivity. When asked how this scandalous turn of events could have occurred, the answer I received was "we suck at stuff like that". Well. In the first place, I disagree that sucking should be considered a negative, but to each his or her own. In the second place, I have full confidence that we can and will collaborate with other projects in the future. So let's not view this as a setback (even though it is), but rather a challenge to improve (and good Lord, I sound almost Wikipedian!).
Lastly, the holidays are rapidly approaching. Our American cousins are currently getting ready to slaughter masses of poultry in an effort to show their gratitude and generally peaceful demeanor, and those of the Canadian persuasion, trendsetters that they are, celebrated a bit early this year. I'm sure all us foreigners will join together in wishing them all a very happy Thanksgiving on their respective holidays, both already celebrated and forthcoming... though I would hope somebody would enlighten me as to why they don't celebrate it on the same day. I was awake all last night trying to figure that one out.
In the spirit of this peculiarly North American holiday, let me take a moment to thank all of our editors for their contributions to this project. It's people like you who make people like me...well, a "people person"! May all your Wiki days be bright, and may your Love Boat never turn into a Poseidon.
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please let us know here. If you have any news or any announcements to be broadcast, do let Dev920 know.
Quelle Suprise! King James is a Queen!
Our dear Haiduc, never a stranger to controversy, recently decided to delve into the wardrobe of the British Monarchy, and what did he discover? King James had more than appreciative eyes for strapping young men! Naturally, Haiduc felt the need to share this news with the community, but instead of being praised for his scholarship, he was reviled. In fact, one rabid heterocentrist even rummaged around in his own wardrobe until he found an old pair of socks to play with. All seemed lost until astute editor Jeffpw noticed some odd postings and did some sleuthing of his own. The socks were uncovered, the Wicked Witch was melted and readers the world over were able to learn that Good King James regularly ordered tube steak from the menu of the day. Thank you, Haiduc! Thank you, Jeff! And let Miss Julie add (for readers who might not know) that tube steak tastes just like chicken!
It's Britney, Bitch!
Well, maybe it's not Miss Thang, herself, but it's the next best thing: Chris Crocker! he stirs up just about as much controversy as his idol does, even here on Wikipedia. Though it's all a bit of a muddle, one of our editors hopes you can drop by the talk page and leave a message of hope for those battling the forces of obstructionism in that little corner of the Wiki World. It is so hard to spread enlightenment. As Miss Parker herself said, "You can lead a whore to culture, but you can't make her think".
Game show for nerds
Wallowing in cash from the latest beg-a-thon, the powers-that-be have decided to sponser a little contest here to improve the articles, with a Grand prize of $100. Yeah. Just enough for a Burger King dinner for the family. Still, the thought is nice and the goal is noble, so we should support it. Our little Queer beehive has taken a look at what's on offer, and both the Greek Traditionalists and Daughters of Bilitis are well represented. The ever useful SatyrTN has made a little list, which can be found here (if that malignant bot hasn't archived it already, that is). So find a pal, roll up your sleeves and dive right in. Let's show this Encyclopedia just what Queers with firecrackers up their....err, I mean, let's show the others what we can do.
Jón Þór Birgisson
I can't pronounce his name, but he's awfully cute, he's deliciously foreign, and best of all...he's GAY! But he won't be for long, if certain users have their way. A concerted effort has been under way for a while now, designed to neuter poor Jon (pretend I put a little accent thingy over that O) and make him into a sort of rockin' Ken doll. So please watchlist this hunka man, and keep him queer! If anybody questions you, tell them "Miss Julie sent me".
TranSanta
Everybody loves a sequel
Readers not afflicted with Alzheimer's will remember that last month we had a little story about Alice and her harasser. That proved so popular that we bring you the sequel: Benjiboi and his stalker. After a chance meeting at the Michael Lucas article, this anonymous user took a shine to our Benjiboi, and has been showering him with attention on virtually every board on Wikipedia. Flattered though he is, Benjiboi finds the attention a bit distracting, and administrators have been seeking various remedies for this. It has proven difficult, as the stalker has an IP address that changes quicker than Superman in a telephone booth. So perhaps some of you would like to watchlist Benjiboi's page, and lend a hand if you see some love letters from an 11 digit friend. I was actually thinking we should get Alice's harasser and Benjiboi's stalker together. Then we could have another sequel, sort of like Freddy vs. Jason. Any bets as to who would win??
Not quite the second coming, but special just the same
Let me be the first to give a warm, wet, Love Boat kiss (though not with tongue) to our newest Project members: Jacksinterweb, Cleduc, Pigman, Becksguy and Iamandrewrice. Even in the month of our Saviour's birth, your popping into our Wikipedian lives is a blessed event indeed. As Jesus Himself said, "Live long and prosper". He did say that, didn't he? I think he said it. In any event, if he was standing next to me now, I'm sure he'd say it, and add, "Happy homo editing!"
Battle of the Wikipedia Stars!
Indomitable Ann Bannon is holding her own in Wikipedia's answer to American Idol: The Featured Article candidate list! For four feverish weeks, she has mastered the challenges and not been eliminated from the competition. Drop by the FAC page and show Ann you love her....or give her the hook (I'm not supposed to tell you how to vote). Giving our plucky Ann reason to hope is the recent promotion of List of gay, lesbian or bisexual people: Sa-Sc. If Miss Julie has her way, we will have the entire alphabet of Queerdom Featured here on Wikipedia soon! And I would be remiss if I did not give a warm, Lesbian salute to our own Belovedfreak, who showed Wikipedia with But I'm a Cheerleader that even pom poms are no protection from the Love that dare not speak its name, and got a gold star for her efforts.
Climbing the Wikipedia career ladder is User: Tim1965, who has not only written, but is now promoting Reel Affirmations to Good article status. Best of luck, Tim, and remember: there are no small parts, only small actors. We're sure you'll be trading that green circle for a gold star soon (assuming you get the green in the first place!).
Santa's on his gay way!
Santa needs elves
Yes, I know: packages need buying, trees need trimming, egg nog needs drinking. The holidays make many demands on our time. It's ...well, it's a bitch, is what it is. So I wouldn't blame you for skipping this little section and putting off my request until next year. But...think of the children. Our future. They need quality information about the homosexual "lifestyle" if we are to indoctrinate them properly. That's why I am asking you to drop by our Peer review area and give your meaning as to the efforts of your fellow gay Wikipedians. And think: in this season of kindness and good will to all, isn't it nice that I am pointing you to someplace where you can (in a Wikiloving way, of course) rip someone a new asshole? Think about it...and those children with their shiny, bright eyes, thanking you for contributing to their future.
Even more festively, consider joining in on the deletion discussions of our favorite articles. Here you can bandy about such words as "homophobia", "Right-wing Christian agenda" and my personal favorite, "just who do you think you're pushing around?!?!?". If you play your cards right, there might even be an extra present under the tree for you. :-D
Urgent Christmas appeal Tovojolo asked me to ask you to edit Elizabeth Bishop as part of the Collaboration Project. She's an old dead poet (Miss Bishop, not Tovojolo. I've never actually met Tovojolo. She's probably very young and attractive. Maybe somebody should ask if she's single), but she was a flaming homosexual long before most of us had even been conceived, so we owe her some respect. Tovojolo actually asked me for the last newsletter, but Miss Julie forgot. Bad Miss Julie. She was so busy boosting morale it just slipped right by her. Nemissimo, maybe you need to crack that whip again to get Julie back in line.
Surrender, Dorothy!!!!!!! Friend of Dorothy has attracted the attention of a group of....the more senior elements of our gay society. They disagree with our thesis that Saint Judy was the possible source of the term, and demand we change the article to reflect their contention that Dorothy Parker was the origin. The problem is, their source didn't check out. So we agreed to disagree. Well, we at the project did. They got kinda mad at us, said unkind things, and started edit warring. Though they are old, they are certainly quick, and could revert the article faster than my nimble fingers could press the undo button. To quote the divine Miss Parker, every time I saw the article on my watchlist, I thought to myself, "What fresh hell is this?". The page was protected by sympathetic administrators, but keeping an eye on it will keep Dorothy safe from future Wicked Witches of the West or East.
Ambrosia
Our dear Benjiboi has been busy indeed, lately. He recently made fruit salad out of Fruit, turning a once nasty word into a damn good article, and saving it from deletion! Congratulations, Benjiboi! I hear he has turned his attention from fruit to poultry now. Before he is through, he will have turned every major food group gay on Wikipedia!
Christmas came early
Yes, indeed! Valued administrator WJBscribe was raised out of the mire of mid-level management and placed squarely into the Pantheon of Bureaucracy! And Miss Julie is just too proud of him not to mention that he got the most support votes in the history of Wikipedia! Congratulations, WJB! We know you will not prove the Peter Principle correct!
You!
Yes, you! It's you who make this project shine! It's you who make Wikipedia such a valuable resource for all humanity! And it's you who make Miss Julie's dull life just a little bit better. So I want to take this moment to thank each and every one of you for all you do here. Merry Christmas, everybody! Happy Hanukkah! Festive Kwanzaa!Delirious Dong Zhi!Delicious Diwali! And for our oppressed Iranian brothers and sisters, I wish you a safe and joyous Yalda. And if I didn't mention your favorite December holiday, well, it's because I feel it's so special I should just keep it between you and me. Always remember: You light up my life!
May we all have a joyous holiday season, and a safe, healthy, happy and prosperous 2008.
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please let us know here. If you have any news or any announcements to be broadcast, do let Your Cruise Director know.
Delivered on 20:05, 3 December 2007 (UTC).
SatyrBot 20:58, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
just in case you check here, you may wish to again discuss Bisexual erasure[edit]
While assuming nothing but good faith on the part of the editor who merged the articles, due to the history of as well as lively and vigorous discussion about this article, I have restored the article and substituted instead two merger discussion boxes, one on Bisexual erasure and one on Biphobia.
I look forward to discussing and working on this and other subjects with you in the future. Respectfully CyntWorkStuff (talk) 02:46, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Request for comment on Category Redirect template[edit]
Because you are a member of WikiProject Categories, your input is invited on some proposed changes to the design of the {{Category redirect}} template. Please feel free to view the proposals and comment on the template talk page. --Russ(talk) 21:36, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
