User talk:Redban

Welcome!

Hello, Redban, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially your edits to 2008 World Series. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

• Introduction and Getting started
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article
• Simplified Manual of Style

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or click here to ask for help here on your talk page and a volunteer will visit you here shortly. Again, welcome! EvilLair (talk to me! | contribs) 02:19, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Redban, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Redban! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Come join experienced editors at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a space where new editors can get help from experienced editors. These editors have been around for a long time and have extensive knowledge about how Wikipedia works. Come share your experiences, ask questions, and get advice from experts. I hope to see you there! Jtmorgan (I'm a Teahouse host) Visit the Teahouse This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 16:21, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Porn biography AfD's

Hello, Redban. You recently participated in an AfD for Audrey Bitoni in which you attempted to persuade users that she is notable enough for a Wikipedia article. Her article was still deleted and I understand your frustration, but attempting to delete articles on other notable porn actresses who you're simply not familiar with is counterproductive. In Bitoni's AfD, you stated, "Either this page remains or you remove 99% of the pornstar biographies on Wikipedia", which seems to me like your only motivation for starting these AfD's. I'm sure you've noticed in Bitoni's AfD that Wikipedia has many anti-porn editor's, such as the one which said "We shouldn't be hosting articles about living people, especially when they are claimed to be involved in activities that many people find distasteful". Now, you're not angering the anti-porn editor's who changed the WP:PORNBIO guideline as an excuse to delete several notable porn star's articles (including Bitoni's) by asking that we delete even more, since that is actually what they want to do to Wikipedia, eliminate as many porn biographies as possible. Who you're hurting here is the pro-porn/neutral editors (many of which are probably on your side) who have contributed to these articles, spending several hours on them by both searching for sources and writing content. I also disagree with the deletion of Audrey Bitoni's article and several others as well, and that is why I would like to prevent even more deletions of notable porn stars. You're new to Wikipedia and I'm sure you think it's preposterous that Bitoni no longer has an article and that Wikipedia's PORNBIO guideline isn't more inclusive, but many anti-porn users are still not satisfied with the amount of porn stars passing PORNBIO and are looking for an incentive to make it even stricter. Most of the AfD's you started are for porn stars who do pass PORNBIO. Did you even read the PORNBIO guideline before starting these AfD's? Rebecca1990 (talk) 08:29, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

Your recent edits

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

1. Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
2. With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 20:57, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

Warning

Do not disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point. Stop it, now, otherwise you are in for very tough times. This is not a menace, take it as a friendly advice. We are here to build an encyclopedia, not to play WIKIPEDIA:THE GAME. --Cavarrone 10:02, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

I've closed the two AfD's that you created as a speedy keep. While your points are noted, these seemed to be retaliatory and disruptive. Please read WP:POINT, WP:BEFORE, and WP:DELETE before nominating another article for deletion. Dusti^{*Let's talk!*} 18:46, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

Numerous AFDs

Could you please wait for the numerous AFDs that you've started to work through before creating any more. Jamming all of these through will not give people enough time to potentially improve the articles before the AFDs close. Or find that they indeed can't improve them. Dismas|^(talk) 16:06, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Not a problem -- I won't make another one for at least two weeks Redban (talk) 16:08, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Please calm down

There's no need to be so upset over the deletion of Audrey Bitoni's article. Just because she didn't pass PORNBIO this time doesn't mean she can't pass it in the future and have her article restored. If she ever wins an award or is inducted into a Hall of Fame, I'll probably be the first one to recreate her article. Are you sure you really want PORNBIO to become stricter or for the guideline to be eliminated entirely? If that happens, forget about ever having Bitoni's article restored. Bitoni is a lot more likely to pass PORNBIO one day than GNG. And just so you know, articles aren't required to pass EVERY guideline, just ONE. Bitoni's article was deleted because she didn't pass either PORNBIO or GNG. If she would have passed just one of those two, her article would have been kept. Most of the articles you've started AfD's for pass PORNBIO, but you're arguing that they should still be deleted because they don't pass the GNG as well. Eva Angelina, another one of your favorite porn stars, passes PORNBIO with flying colors, but likely doesn't pass GNG. I really wonder how you would feel if someone decided to start an AfD for her and argue that her numerous accolades and accomplishments are worthless and that we should ignore them and delete her page. If you really want 99% of porn star biographies deleted from Wikipedia, Eva Angelina's would likely be one of them. Rebecca1990 (talk) 17:43, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Tagging for notability

Let alone 4 (at least) disruptive and baseless AfD discussions you started. The time-rate of your tagging (even a notability tag every 30 seconds!) shows you do not even care to check the articles you tag. Many of them are baseless, some of them (eg 1 or 2) are SPECTACULARLY baseless (and not just per PORNBIO guideline). I am starting to be tired of your childish and disruptive behaviour. If you don't change your attitude I will be forced to ask for a ban/block of you at WP:ANI (if someone else do not anticipate me). There are editors who were banned for much less than what you're doing. Cavarrone 18:18, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Tags are harmless. And the tags that you've removed are debatable. Vicky Vette, for example, has awards for her website and "Best Tease Performance"; none of which are prestigious enough to qualify as "well-known and significant" per WP:PORNBIO. Again, the tags are harmless and only alert editors to a page's faults, or potential faults. The result thereof can only be improvement. Another example: Ashlynn Brooke, whom I had tagged, now has a clear page because apparently an award for "Favorite Breasts" is well-known and significant. Redban (talk) 18:31, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Pretty much everything is debatable on this site, but we do strive for some consistency and acceptable guidelines even in the Porn Project. If you have concerns, please bring them to the Talk page of the project and we'll be happy to address them. Thx! --Scalhotrod (Talk) ☮ღ☺ 18:32, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Tags are not "harmless", considering that you are tagging articles such as Lexi Belle, which leaves other editors to clean up the mess after you. Stop it or I will bring this to WP:ANI. Nymf (talk) 19:03, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Lexi Belle doesn't deserve a tag? Her awards are for best Supporting actress, best social media, and best new web starlet. I don't treat those internet awards seriously, and best supporting actress, based on the word "supporting," does not seem to be significant.Redban (talk) 19:09, 13 December 2014 (UTC)