Jump to content

User talk:Benjiboi/Archive 64

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 60←Archive 62Archive 63Archive 64Archive 65Archive 66→Archive 68

Template:Glee

Overhaul. -- Banjeboi

done. -- Banjeboi 13:58, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

FLUP

[1] -- Banjeboi

done. -- Banjeboi 13:34, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Your edit

I really can't see why you considered this edit justified after two very experienced Wikipedians explained that it was plagiarism.[2] Unintentional plagiarism might be excusable in a first instance, but blanking the feedback and then restoring the plagiarism looks very problematic. Is there some part of the picture that isn't obvious? Let's see if we can work this out. Durova403 19:30, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

It was explained already, in short I pulled that sentence from the history and didn't realize it closely matched the TV.com "article". I don't know where it actually came from but it was a mistake. As for those experienced editors they approached it in an unneeded adversarial way rather stating - "did you realize?" - instead the assumption was that I was purposely doing copyvio which is ridiculous. My re-inserting shouldn't have taken place but neither should have any of the drama. This is why we at least attempt to be civil with one another. Their assuming bad faith against me is not a a great excuse and it didn't help my dealing with the situation which was unfortunate, hopefully none of us will ever repeat these errors again. -- Banjeboi 03:14, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
The manner in which they approached you is unrelated to the merits of the reinstatement. If you encounter difficulties interacting with another editor, please seek dispute resolution rather than letting it color your decisions in article space. Alison is one of the kindest people at Wikipedia--she really does manage to stay on good terms with nearly everybody. And JoshuaZ hardly takes his cues from Wikipedia Review (quite the opposite). Turning to a neutral third party often helps in an ambiguous situation. Durova403 03:50, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
My experience with both those editors may not match yours but I appreciate the advice. It felt quite over-the-top but as you say I should have separated the message about the content from any other subtexts. -- Banjeboi 03:54, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 25 January 2010

Trans man lede

Hey Benji, I left you a message about this a month or so ago, but I didn't see a response so I just wanted to make sure that you had seen the change I made to the Trans man lede and were okay with it, rather than simply missing it. I'd just like to make sure everything is kosher. Let me know what you think. Thanks, Throwaway85 (talk) 04:08, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Apologies, was traveling so just took a break. I'll have a look in a bit. Thanks for the heads up. -- Banjeboi 04:10, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Further concerns concerning use from sources

Benji, I'm concerned by more of your edits. Given the recent discussion, including your reversion to a copyvio version, I'm deeply troubled by some of your recent edits to Barney Frank which apparently lift texts closely from sources you leave cited, in particular the New York Times and The Tuscaloosa News. You wrote "Months after coming out he met and fell in love with Herb Moses, an economist and LGBT activist" nearly identical to the New York Times statement that "Some months later, he met and fell in love with Herb Moses, now 38, who works for the Federal National Mortgage Association and is a gay activist". Similarly, you wrote "Moses has been the first partner of an openly gay member of Congress to receive spousal benefits" while the Tuscaloosa wrote "Moses was the first partner of an openly gay member of Congress to receive spousal access privileges through the Capital, although the decision was controversial." This is borderline. I'm not completely sure if this is plagiarism or not given the very short nature of the material. However, when someone else edited the content to make it more neutral you reverted them to your version which is both less neutral and closer to the wording from the newspaper. I hope you understand why editors are finding this to be worrisome. JoshuaZ (talk) 04:56, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

My reversion, as explained was to make it less weasely worded not my version as you insist. Indicating two lovers are merely involved is bad writing but if you have a better suggestion I'm sure all are open to hearing it. Summarizing very short passages and rewording them to avoid plagarism while recounting the facts presented is indeed an art and I try my best to do so while avoiding awkward word choices and poor phrasing. We could simply quote them directly and sometimes that is the best option. Sorry you are deeply troubled, hope this helps explains my edits. -- Banjeboi 12:01, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Photo: Michael Buckley

Hello, Benjiboi. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Graphic_Lab/Photography_workshop.
Message added 18:43, 26 January 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

-- DMS (talk) 19:02, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

That looks great - thank you! -- Banjeboi 19:24, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

thanks for the barnstar :) Suggestion I wish you would take: delete comments on talk page, ask editors to go to other page, or say "thank you" and remove. Editors act stupider in their own user talk page, I think it is a territorial thing. I know I do. ;) Ikip 00:28, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Sexuality of Robert Baden-Powell

clean-up. -- Banjeboi

done. -- Banjeboi 13:16, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

List of male performers in gay porn films

FYI: I started an RfC about the redlinked entries in this article. ThemFromSpace 16:38, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Jason Tyler

Just a heads up, but there isn't a lot to save with this article. In addition to an unourced real life name and birthday, there a such gems like "a perfectly shaped nine-inch circumcised penis." There's some anecdotal stories about how past relationships, about how he came to be in porn, and a filmography. If you must, I'll be happy to give you a copy in your user space to work on, minus the unsourced personal information. I will insist, however, that this article is impeccably sourced before you return it to article space. Actually, I'd appreciate it if you gave me a heads up before you import into mainspace, so I can look it over and determine if I stuck my neck out on a losing cause. Incidentally, you seem to be fighting several fights on several different battlefields. Well, not just you, it seems like everyone has gone on overboard on the drama here lately. For your own sanity, consider putting this aside for now and focusing elsewhere, since you've got a lot going on. If you still insist, I'll give you a copy, but really think you should wait a couple of weeks. AniMate 19:10, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for looking. I actually found a mirror or copy on another site which gives me some of the context of what I was hoping to see. Good advice on the hold off for now part - we actually have about 8 gay porn bios at AfD which need attention first. -- Banjeboi 20:09, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 1 February 2010

Alec Powers

Hi, I recently recreated Alec Powers. I felt that the original deletion WP:Articles for deletion/Alec Powers was on weak grounds due to lack of discussion and relied on apparent failure of PORNBIO and not paying attention to wider notability (such as the number of award-winning films he has starred in). It may help if you cast your eye over the article to see that there is enough material for him to be re-added to the List of male performers in gay porn films without provoking a knee-jerk speedy-delete debate. Ash (talk) 10:42, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

I have a problem with potentially identifying information in these kinds of articles. Unless the performer is definitely in control of his website, we cannot and should not present identifying information as fact. AniMate 11:40, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

It sucks to be an IP

Thanks for your message on my talk page. I'm actually a Veteran Editor III who went inactive for a few months, forget the last password I used here, and no longer have the email address connected with my account. Maybe I can eventually get the situation fixed as I did upload many photos to which my real name is attached but -- if it's even possible -- it means a quest through a jungle of red tape (not that I am complaining, account protection is important). Among other things, I have good recent (Jan 2010) photos of José Sarria I'd like to upload. Peace. --208.59.93.238 (talk) 17:57, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

It sucked to be an IP

So I have a new user name that I hope I'm not stuck with forever. --Griseum (talk) 12:35, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 8 February 2010

Thanks!

Hey thanks for the barnstar, it is much appreciated! Fallschirmjäger 10:02, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

You're very welcome! -- Banjeboi 14:02, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Golden Dickie

Hi,

I noticed that this re-direct exists (created by yourself) but there seems to be no history of an article on the Golden Dickie Awards. I suspect these may be considered non-notable but I don't know the history here. Ash (talk) 11:25, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

If memory serves i believe the Golden Dickies became the Gay Erotic Video Awards. -- Banjeboi 14:03, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
Cool, added a reference to GEVA to make this clear. Ash (talk) 14:10, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
Confusingly RAD Video appear to have a more recent award they call the "Golden Dickies"[3] which was the source of my original question. I'm not sure if the article needs a clarification as these may not be notable enough to worry about. The GEVA nickname appears to be just "Dickies" rather than "Golden Dickies". Ash (talk) 14:23, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
Actually I think Rad is a leading authority of sorts, Their endorsement, an award that is, is exactly what we would look for to cite a performer or studio as part of their notability. If comparing awards we would note the distintions. I think it would be wise to explain the difference as I think both are called Dickies. I recall seeing a bunch of different awards but was in the midst of researching which were which when the edit warrior started "helping". -- Banjeboi 14:33, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
Luckily, Adams has an independent article [4]. The facts are a bit uncertain at the moment as I believe (based purely on an absence of sources) that the awards did not exist in 2007 or 2009, so are probably a one-shot deal. I think there are enough sources and notability to add the nominations and award winners as an embedded list on List of gay pornography awards but not for it to have its own article page. The awards are distinct from other American porn awards by recognizing studios that do not have a safer-sex video policy, consequently awards for films made by studios such as Treasure Island are useful reference material for supporting notability. Ash (talk) 14:49, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
Agree, that's why the list of awards page is helpful. It collects the information and helps give a quick overview that multiple separate pages simply wouldn't. Keep up the good work! -- Banjeboi 14:55, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 15 February 2010

Dominik Trojan another AfD I never saw

Rewrite, ref and launch. -- Banjeboi

It was userfied to my space and I asked the admin for a clarification (User_talk:Kevin#Dominik_Trojan_deletion) as the AfD closure was not an obvious delete decision and appears to ignore the independent sources (if ARTIST #3 truly is acceptable). However I'd be reticent to raise this to DRV, it's probably just easier to add a couple more reviews as suggested then re-create. Applying common-sense Trojan ought to be notable enough, it's just the issue of the over-literal application of PORNBIO rather than considering the actor's body of work, again.
BTW, if you are missing some of these interesting deletion discussions, it is worth keeping an eye on Wikipedia:WikiProject LGBT studies/Article alerts. Ash (talk) 09:54, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
Thanks! -- Banjeboi 10:33, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Paul Dawson (actor)

Any interest in nominating Paul Dawson (actor) for DYK? I'm having a bit of trouble thinking of a non-obscene hook. --Griseum (talk) 16:01, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

It looks short? Is it at least 1500 characters? If so we can find a hook somehow and sanitize it enough for main page use. -- Banjeboi 16:06, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
I'm 90% sure it's long enough but I forget the little minutae of how they count (do we exclude section headings? etc.) If it isn't they would note that on review and I'd add a few more lines of text. That happens all the time, it doesn't ruffle feathers. No worries either way, it's your call. --Griseum (talk) 17:03, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
OK, I found the tool the use and it clocks in at over 1700 so far, no worries there. It needs a bit of clean-up and more context but I'll help if you'd like. -- Banjeboi 22:23, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
This is Wikipedia, make whatever edits you want. --Griseum (talk) 23:58, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for getting the photo. I knew that User:David Shankbone had photographed Dawson but didn't know where to find it. --Griseum (talk) 14:47, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
No problem, I was looking at the Shortbus article and there it was! I'm still looking to filling out the article more and definitely think a DYK is there somewhere. -- Banjeboi 14:52, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
DYK...TV Guide said a duo played by Paul Dawson and PJ DeBoy might be the "most adorable gay couple ever?" --Griseum (talk) 15:25, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
Article has been nominated. Thanks for photo and other help. --Griseum (talk) 05:00, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Randy Mixer speedied (sigh)

rewrite and relaunch. -- Banjeboi

Wouldn't this be a de-PROD candidate? He obviously passes PORNBIO due to the 1992 Gay Erotic Video Award. The article had every prospect of being improved so the PROD was spurious and misleading to say the article was "negative", it was just a stub. Suitable citation: "Gay Erotic Video Awards 1992". Adam Gay Video Directory. 1993. Ash (talk) 10:00, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
I'm being wikistalked, as you may have noticed, but am open to whatever. -- Banjeboi 10:32, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
Okay, I've raised the matter on User talk:Kevin#Randy Mixer Speedy Delete, too Speedy?. I think he's misusing the tools by speedying PRODs when they have barely started their 7-days grace time for improvement. I'll put this down to enthusiasm and have asked him to un-delete.
Getting stalked must be a bore, let's hope they get bored of it too. Ash (talk) 11:12, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
Hope springs eternal! -- Banjeboi 13:37, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Re: Arthur A. Goldberg

Thanks, Benjiboi. You may want to zip over to Goldberg's AFD page to register your views. David L Rattigan (talk) 13:33, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

LOL. I just came from there. -- Banjeboi 13:37, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Hey Ben

RE: [5]

It is not on the official deletion sorting list, but it should be!

Thanks for your edit, in the next couple of days I will create all of these categories, then we can all choose which categories we want to watch on our user and talk pages, using collapsible categories. Okip BLP Contest 02:24, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Done, including yours: Category:Article_Rescue_Squadron/Wikipedia_deletion_sorting/LGBT
Problem is someone has to source to go around and tag the articles for them to show up on the list.
I also need to make a working template with no bugs. Okip BLP Contest 12:24, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Pearl necklace (sexuality)

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Pearl necklace (sexuality). We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pearl necklace (sexuality) (4th nomination). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:06, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, I commented there. -- Banjeboi 00:01, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Johnny Weir

I have no doubt that there are editors breaking WP policy on that article, but I prefer to ignore such things and deal with the words on the page. I learned from that discussion that a skater's scores can be affected by personal allegations, and so I could not agree with you more that all of that editorial debate should wait until after the Olympics. I would support any effort to make that happen.--Jarhed (talk) 20:50, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

BLP RFC

This Q&A might be useful. Maurreen (talk) 06:30, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Cole Carpenter

Another one that may need to be restored. -- Banjeboi

Maybe, I !voted to keep on the basis of a good body of work but I failed to find any awards documented in the usual sources. He does appear well know in some significant films of the mid 80's/mid 90's but sources will be hard to pin down and unfortunately a rationale for a BLP is likely to stay contentious in the current environment. Ash (talk) 12:14, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Note

You've got email. Wine Guy~Talk 22:08, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Replied. Wine Guy~Talk 05:08, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Benjiboi/Archive_64&oldid=1190229714"