User talk:Sexperts

.

Advice, on the way I'd do it

based on a certain amount of experience trying to defend sexuality-related articles.

1. When you make a link also give the ref. to the author & the magazine & the date, e.g. not *[http://nsrc.sfsu.edu/MagArticle.cfm?Article=735 That Ain't White: The long and ugly history of 'trash' talk] but

*[http://nsrc.sfsu.edu/MagArticle.cfm?Article=735 That Ain't White: The long and ugly history of 'trash' talk] by Matt Wray. ''American Sexuality magazine,'' 27 Jun 07. to find the date, look at the link "Cite article" at the right of the page.

1. and the advice by jdlh is very good: it is much better to make it to some sentence in the article, especially since most of the articles are marked "unreferenced"If the article already has a references section with the code , add it as <ref> "That Ain't White: The long and ugly history of 'trash' talk" by Matt Wray. ''American Sexuality magazine,'' 27 Jun 07. [http://nsrc.sfsu.edu/MagArticle.cfm?Article=735]</ref> (the punctuation matters), If refs have been added otherwise, do similarly--if there is no section , make one. Link to the most appropriate sentence or paragraph, but not the lede. The details are at WP:CITE, but you probably know all this.
2. and I have always preferred to do possibly controversial things a few at a time, to see if anyone objects, before doing all the work.
3. and also doing other useful things as seen along the way

Happy editing DGG 17:21, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

thanks DGG! Sexperts 18:11, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Moved link to article "The Key to Enlightenment"

Hi there, realize that you all are probably getting tired of hearing this but have removed the link you put onto the wikipedia article Frameline about the movie "Semper-fi". The reasoning here is that almost all the movies shown at the festival probably have websites and (a.) there isn't enough room (& it's not really wikipedia policy) to list them all (b.) it's not fair or reasonalbe to only list a couple of films.

However your link was not just wiped out, it was put into a corrected format and moved to what seems to be a more appropriate article Don't ask, don't tell.

If you'd like to discuss this the way to do it is to go to OUR user talk page (yeah weird, but if you don't no one will see that you are responding to them and they will think you are very rude or stuck-up), to start a conversation off click on the little (+) for add at the top of the page, put in a meaningfull title (maybe copy over the same title you are responding to), put in your comments, and sign it with the 4 tildas BiAndBi 22:34, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Conflict of interest rules

I see from your user page you are from American Sexuality Magazine, and your edit to moral panic was to use yourself as a source. This is a violation of our rules on conflicts of interest. I hope that you did not create this account for the purposes of advertising your own group, as that's not allowed here. DreamGuy 00:54, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

It does look like you have a conflict of interest. But I thought you contribution to the moral panic page was worthy - someone has to mention sexuality as a bogeyman. I will add that information. Missionboi 09:48, 10 August 2007

I see now from looking at the history of your talkpage that you were warned previously that adding links to yourself is a violation of our rules. You were also warned that you would be blocked if you continued. You removed those comments, which is your right, but then you continued to add links to your own site, which is not appropriate. Before making any more edits you need to read and folow our [WP:COI]] rules. Willfully ignoring them makes you an outright spammer. DreamGuy 13:56, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

• American Sexuality Magazine is an academic journal, not a commercial publication. The fact that Sexperts works there does not imply that ASM is Sexperts's "own site" any more than my contributions here imply that Wikipedia belongs to me. It is not an inherent conflict of interests to cite a publication with which one is familiar, especially one published by an accredited university.
  
  And, Sexperts, since DreamGuy has been stalking you for a while, you may want to chime in at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/DreamGuy 2.  — Bigwyrm _{watch me}^{wake me} 01:12, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Commercial or not makes no difference for the WP:COI rules, and working at a publication most certainly DOES imply that it's his/her own site. And as far as "stalking" claims go, undoing edits of an individual breaking policy should not be construed as any sort of bad behavior. I find your entire characterization of this to be wholly at odds with Wikipedia policies. You should be encouraging people to follow policies, not ignore them. DreamGuy 15:43, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

• Dear DreamGuy, it seems to me that "Wikipedia is about experts and informed amateurs coming together in the spirit of cooperation to provide as accurate and wide-ranging source of information to the e-world as is humanly possible." Not only I am an accredited expert in the field sexuality, my only interest is spreading the knowledge. Does that qualify for the conflict of interest then? Sexperts 12:45, 16 August 2007 (EST)

Your only interest so far seems to be promoting your own publication. Did you read the Wikipedia:Conflict of interest page? Because it spells it all out to you there. I am an accredited expert in my own field, but I do not use Wikipedia as an excuse to go through and make every edit include something from a publication I am involved in. I encourage you to spread knowledge, but keep in mind that knowledge, as well as the notability/genuineness of such knowledge is a subjective aspect. Certainly from your situation you are not in the best position to be objective about whether you are spreading knowledge or promoting your own side. When someone has a clear interest in a topic they should be extremely careful about edits. In your case, if you think something in your own publication is useful to be included, you should bring it up on the talk page and see if other editors agree with you. You, instead, have not been careful at all, jumping in to make major changes and link to yourself left and right, even after you had been previously warned about it by other editors on this talk page. You simply removed the warning and continued on your way. That seems to show that you are more interested in self-promotion than in following rules or contributing helpfully. But by all means, if you'd like to try to contribute per Wikipedia expectations and improve things, all you have to do is follow the policies that have already been pointed out to you. I hope you do. DreamGuy 15:43, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

This issue has apparently continued, despite previous warnings^[1] of WP:COI. Ive opened discussion @ WP:COIN, → Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard#National_Sexuality_Resource_Center.--Hu12 18:24, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Conflict of interest

Sexperts, the nature of your editing does appear to be self-promotional. I will not give a formal block warning at this time, but I do caution you that there is a nontrivial possibility of landing on the spam blacklist if this continues. Durova^Charge! 20:15, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

It seems to me that some of the edits done by admins to counter what is perceived as "self-promotion" on Sexperts part cross the line into hostility toward expertise. This is a problem. ----Pleasantville 13:39, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

WP:LGBT

If this edit really is yours, would you mind signing in and saying so? Otherwise I'll assume it's spam introduced by an anonymous IP. Thanks! -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 22:27, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

LGBT WikiProject Newsletter

Delivered on 17:31, 11 October 2007 (UTC).

LGBT WikiProject Newsletter

Delivered on 12:00, 1 November 2007 (UTC).

Notice of Inactivity

In trying to deliver the LGBT Project newsletter, SatyrBot detected a period of three months of inactivity from this account. You have been placed in our "Inactive Members" section. If this has been done in error, please let my bot owner know and change your status in he project. Thanks! SatyrBot 21:29, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of National Sexuality Resource Center

I have nominated National Sexuality Resource Center, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/National Sexuality Resource Center. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Outsider80 (talk) 22:35, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of National Sexuality Resource Center

A tag has been placed on National Sexuality Resource Center requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a company or corporation, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for companies and corporations.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Mister Senseless™ (Speak - Contributions) 02:08, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Pride!

You are invited to participate in Wiki Loves Pride!

• What? Wiki Loves Pride, a campaign to document and photograph LGBT culture and history, including pride events
• When? June 2015
• How can you help?

  1.) Create or improve LGBT-related articles and showcase the results of your work here

  2.) Upload photographs or other media related to LGBT culture and history, including pride events, and add images to relevant Wikipedia articles; feel free to create a subpage with a gallery of your images (see examples from last year)

  3.) Contribute to an LGBT-related task force at another Wikimedia project (Wikidata, Wikimedia Commons, Wikivoyage, etc.)

Or, view or update the current list of Tasks. This campaign is supported by the Wikimedia LGBT+ User Group, an officially recognized affiliate of the Wikimedia Foundation. Visit the group's page at Meta-Wiki for more information, or follow Wikimedia LGBT+ on Facebook. Remember, Wiki Loves Pride is about creating and improving LGBT-related content at Wikimedia projects, and content should have a neutral point of view. One does not need to identify as LGBT or any other gender or sexual minority to participate. This campaign is about adding accurate, reliable information to Wikipedia, plain and simple, and all are welcome!

If you have any questions, please leave a message on the campaign's main talk page.

Thanks, and happy editing!

User:Another Believer and User:OR drohowa

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:28, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Pride 2016

As a participant of WikiProject LGBT studies, you are invited to participate in the third annual Wiki Loves Pride campaign, which runs through the month of June. The purpose of the campaign is to create and improve content related to LGBT culture and history. How can you help?

1. Create or improve LGBT-related Wikipedia pages and showcase the results of your work here
2. Document local LGBT culture and history by taking pictures at pride events and uploading your images to Wikimedia Commons
3. Contribute to an LGBT-related task force at another Wikimedia project (Wikidata, Wikimedia Commons, Wikivoyage, etc.)

Looking for topics? The Tasks page, which you are welcome to update, offers some ideas and wanted articles.

This campaign is supported by the Wikimedia LGBT+ User Group, an officially recognized affiliate of the Wikimedia Foundation. The group's mission is to develop LGBT-related content across all Wikimedia projects, in all languages. Visit the affiliate's page at Meta-Wiki for more information, or follow Wikimedia LGBT+ on Facebook. Remember, Wiki Loves Pride is about creating and improving LGBT-related content at Wikimedia projects, and content should have a neutral point of view. One does not need to identify as LGBT or any other gender or sexual minority to participate. This campaign is about adding accurate, reliable information to Wikipedia, plain and simple, and all are welcome! If you have any questions, please leave a message on the campaign's talk page.

Thanks, and happy editing! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 21:16, 30 May 2016 (UTC)