User talk:Mabalu

User:Jasonbenz + User:Jasonbenz2

Hi. I'm also trying to figure out if this is simply another sock account of User:Jasonbenz. It seems likely. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:46, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi Shawn in Montreal! I looked at them already, but didn't see any connection to Malan Breton. A quick look for links between Jason Benz and Jay Parini isn't pulling up anything on Google, so I'd guessed it might be a coincidence of name. I really can't see a credible link between an American author-academic and a Taiwanese-American fashion designer, apart from the coincidence that editors using the same name focused on both. There are zero Google hits to link Jason Benz with Jay Parini. So I don't think they are connected - Rhelen305's editing appears to be focused on literary subjects rather than fashion design. Mabalu (talk) 17:56, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

You may well be right. I was wondering if Parini wasn't simply a client and Rhelen305 was doing PR work for authors. But the zero Google hits to link Jason Benz with Jay Parini is of course a concern, far as this SPI is concerned. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:59, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

I see Rhelen305 was originally User:Leoparini and writing about Jay Parini. Hmm. But yeah, can't draw a link between Malan Breton and Jay Parini either. I don't think Jasonbenz and Jasonbenz2 are the same person. The subject matter is too different. Mabalu (talk) 18:02, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

I think it must be something in the air - just had to take another article to AFD for similar reasons, again, long-running ongoing COI editing.... Mabalu (talk) 15:09, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

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) 13:50, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Thong and dance

) Well I agree with u. By the way Ive just replaced some pics on the pages of Thong, Lingerie, and Bra. Plz see if its OK.

(P.S.- Im a female, so Ive added these pics for making these articles more interesting n not for voyeuristic purpose :D ) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shreyoshidasgupta (talk • contribs) 02:49, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi. how about this 1 as lead image of wiki page on Thong? U can crop it if u want. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Yellow_bikini_45545.jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.197.19.226 (talk) 02:57, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

Well, that photograph certainly appears to show the thong clearly and in a straightforward manner. On the other hand, I am a little confused as to why you deleted part of the comment above from Shreyoshidasgupta. It's generally seen as very bad Wikipedia etiquette to edit or delete other people's user talk page posts/comments (unless they are clearly abusive/threatening/offensive). Only the person whose talk page it is, and the person who originally posted the comment, should make that call. As I don't think you are Shreyoshidasgupta, (I'm pretty sure you are Utbindas) please leave her comments alone. Mabalu (talk) 14:45, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

• Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Utbindas. On that note, firmly closing this discussion.

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

skirt edit

hi. u have simply reverted all the edits that i had made. Dont mind but i think u r being impatient with me. Just becoz some other guys have being making non-sense edits doesnot mean that u shud paint everyone with the same brush. Now I dont have the inclination to fight it out with u by bringing back my edits.

It may be that few of my pics r not good .. in that case u can remove them .But u cant simply say that all of my edits r bad. For instance.. Rah-rah skirt is mentioned in this article. I simply opened its wiki page and found a pic thr. That pic I put up here. How can u remove that pic? Why do u think that an online encyclopedia shud b as boring as possible. If a pic has a sketch given (like of pleated skirt) and I replace it with a pic of a schoolgirl wearing a pleated skirt .. then u remove it. Similarly "short skirt" is mentioned under the Basic Types heading. When I put up a pic for that .. u remove it. How can u say that "the defining details of the skirts in these new pictures are barely visisble".. does this single comment apply to all the pics that I put up? I also took care not to put obscene pics this time.

Now Im not goining to fight it out with u. But if u think that what I say makes some sense then plz put back atleast those pics which u think r good. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shreyoshidasgupta (talk • contribs) 12:29, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

Your new pictures were not useful. Your "full skirt" did not show a full skirt, but did show bare midriff and cleavage and a clinging tight skirt (which is NOT a full skirt). Your "pencil skirt" showed a Kardashian in a skin-tight minidress rather than a pencil skirt (Weren't you moaning before about dresses not being skirts?). Your "pleated skirt" looked really bad at thumbnail size and even blown up, the skirt was far too short and in too busy a plaid to show the pleats (although it was a great shot of legs if you like that kind of thing). The "ra ra skirt" picture was also useless at thumbnail size as you could barely see what was in the picture. Bluntly, you appear to have more interest in exposed flesh and legs and body parts than in pictures that accurately show garments. To be honest I've long had reason to suspect that you are User:Utbindas (probably pretending to be a woman) and after this recent batch of edits I should warn you that I am opening a sockpuppet investigation on you and Utbindas and all your anonymous edits so that this can be investigated in depth. There are far too many similarities between all your edits, both logged in and anonymous, for it to be coincidental. Mabalu (talk) 12:54, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

) Just as i had thought ... u appear to have developed a mania of some users and see them acting behind every edit. Go ahead and do what u want.

By the way ... I had also put a pic of Indian Lehenga ..what reason will u like to give for removing it especially becoz it is mentioned in text but its pic was missing? Is the Lehenga pic obscene? Was the pic not needed at all? Was the lehenga not visible in the pic? Ure amusing me now :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shreyoshidasgupta (talk • contribs) 13:27, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

And u know I had also put a pic of Skort thr. Just click on this link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Morgan_Pressel_-_Flickr_-_Keith_Allison_(12).jpg U know this pic has been rated as one of the best pics of wiki (open this link and see what is mentioned below this pic). Why did u remove it? Now dont say that this is not a Skort. Just read the wiki article of skort and ul understand.

And regarding the Short skirt pic. It was mentioned in article so I put up its pic. Had I put a close-up of the short skirt.. Im sure u wud have said (and rightly so) that this pic has not been taken from the right angles.. it focuses too much on the legs .. and now that the pic has bn taken from a distance u think that the skirt is not visible. Now dont say that the pic looks obscene .. if u think that girls in short skirts look obscene then u probably belong to Taliban. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shreyoshidasgupta (talk • contribs) 13:34, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

And regarding the Denim skirt. U only seemed to be too keen to put up that pic as the main pic of "Miniskirt".. as can be seen from Talk page of Miniskirt. Now suddenly u find this pic to be not good enough. Im a bit busy right now but Im surely going to complain against u in future... u think Wikipedia's articles related to clothes r ur personal property and nobody shud meddle with it without ur permission. Ur single minded goal is to revert as many edits of other users as possible. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shreyoshidasgupta (talk • contribs) 13:40, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

Yes I did make a mistake regarding Kim kardashian's pic of pencil skirt due to an oversight .. but that probably is the only wrong pic I put. I have also put a skater skirt pic. How can u remove it? Its not like I put it up afer replacing some old pic .. its a new pic I put and skater skirt is mentioned in article. Until u bring a better pic to replace it.. how can u remove it? Totally whimsical and unjustified. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shreyoshidasgupta (talk • contribs) 13:44, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

Either u give a separate reason for each and every pic that u have removed today ..or put back the pics u think r OK and give reason for not putting back rest of the pics. I just read in wiki rules that I am supposed to warn u before complaining against u. Let this serve as that WARNING. I will again be checking back on this page and on wiki page of skirt ... after 24 hours... b4 contemplating further action. I know some people who r established wiki editors and Im going to refer ur case to them after 24 hours (if I am not satisfied with ur response). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shreyoshidasgupta (talk • contribs) 13:59, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

Okay. Re: Morgan Pressel allegedly wearing a skort - Just because a picture is one of the best images on Wikipedia does not mean it is the best image for illustrating everything in the image. How do we know she is wearing a skort? She could be wearing shorts or a skirt for all you can see. It is an useless image for this purpose. Yes, there are things that should be illustrated in the article, but a poor or unreadable picture is worse than no picture at all.

Oh, and since I've just seen you started blasting out incoherent, screaming threats, I am done. I will not interact with you any further on this page. Mabalu (talk) 14:04, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

• Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Utbindas. On this note, firmly closing this discussion. Mabalu (talk) 11:05, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Giuliana Camerino

Am always amazed at just how many old timers prefer a huge red line error message at the bottom of an article, however, different strokes for different folks! C'est la vie!!! --MurderByDeletionism^"bang!" 15:35, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

MurderByDeletionism Thank you for your message. I realised as soon as I hit revert what the problem was and fixed it. Looking at the edit difference, it appeared you had simply added a dash to a citation as I couldn't see any fixed red-links. Anyway, it's fixed now. Mabalu (talk) 18:01, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

• No worries! --MurderByDeletionism^"bang!" 18:06, 11 December 2015 (UTC)