User talk:SatyrTN/Archive 10

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Archive 9 | Archive 10 | Archive 11

Article Rescue Squad help

Hey SatyrTN! and Happy New Year! I'm inquiring to see if you may be able to help with a searching challenge again. I'm hoping to find every article that the {{Rescue}} template has been used on; for my purposes the deleted ones don't matter as much as the ones that are still here. My hope is to start the project's recognition (with barnstars) of those who've worked to save articles from deletion. The template is removed so one idea I had is maybe a bot could search each day through the category's history and see which articles are listed as a way of generating a list. Is this possible? Benjiboi 04:27, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Hm. Um. The way the database works, the bot would have to take an article and search through the revisions to see if the template was there - I don't believe it keeps track of categories in the way you're hoping. It's an issue I get frustrated by, too, but it doesn't work that way. I believe there are bots that can do that, but mine isn't one of them. I suggest a note at WP:BOTREQ asking about it.
And Happy New Calendar to you as well! =D -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 05:22, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
Is it possible to search through the revisions of Category:Articles that have been proposed for deletion but that may concern encyclopedic topics and pull the articles that are listed or should I challenge the good folks at WP:BOTREQ? Benjiboi 12:35, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
Categories don't have revisions :( Think of the list in a category as a "what links here" - there's nothing stored there, it just searches for what articles have "links" to the category. But there might be another way that I don't know about... -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 23:14, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
Harumph! I wonder if digging through AfD for survivors makes more sense...oi the pain of it all! Benjiboi 23:47, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

LGBT people lists

Happy New Year! Just wanted you to know that I responded to your message on my talk page, in case you hadn't seen it. Cheers, Melty girl (talk) 05:35, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, still need it, if you don't mind. That's a great picture to use I reckon. :) Say, how long do you think it will take to complete the LGB people list, for one person? Because I thought it might be really great if as part of LGBT History Month I persuaded Bradford University to print off the entire list and put it up somewhere - and if they agreed I could probably also persuade a few of my Dorothean friends to help out (as well as lazy, bad, sinful me. :( ) But I don't know how much faster they would make it. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 12:41, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

I have no idea. It's taken me months to get through Q through Z, but I don't work on it exclusively. But we're technically over the halfway point, so if several of us were to knuckle down, we might be able to get through the rest in a month. But that's a guess. Maybe if we get the project to get more involved? As a "LGBT History Month" thing we want to get done by the end of January? Julie, are you listening? -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 22:54, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
Mm. I'd say I'd get more involved but I'm rapidly turning out to be completely useless at that. What I will do though is propose a meetup with some friends where we break out our laptops, sit in the library and actually work on the list, thereby doing a social AND improving the list. That'll get some more names on it for sure. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 09:28, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
I thought October is LGBT History month? Benjiboi 23:48, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
"LGBT History Month occurs during February in the United Kingdom, but during October in the United States." quoted from that article... Aleta (Sing) 00:05, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Because both October and February have *so* much to do with being LGBT. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 00:43, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
My understanding was that October was seized upon for it being the first complete month in a new school calendar year and the connection to Halloween. Benjiboi 00:50, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
April however is trés gay because of its association with a giant rabbit rolling a chocolate Easter egg away from the tomb - thus themes of delicious reincarnation and fertility. Benjiboi 00:53, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Pity that no-one has LGBT History month in April then. Satyr my love, I love the wings: you have fabulous taste. :D Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 09:28, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
ROTFL! Thank you very much :) I've emailed the guy who made them - he's a Wikipedian User:Robodesign, so I'm hoping he'll release PD or CC. If not, I'll find an outline of wings that will work. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 15:20, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Your edit to Steven Howard

Hi there. Thanks for taking an interest in the above article. Just to clarify Category:LGBT politicians from the United States is not a sub-cat of Category:Gay politicians, or vice-versa. They are both sub-cats of Category:LGBT politicians but are not linked directly. I have therefore reinserted the category you removed. Cheers. -- Lincolnite (talk) 08:09, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi, Lincolnite! Within the LGBT project, we try to put people in a) a profession and b) a place. If they're in a cat that has both, so much the better. So having Mr Howard in both categories is redundant. Is there a particular reason for him to be in both? -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 15:07, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
Sorry for the delay in replying. It's become standard practise to include LGBT politicians both in a country category and a sexuality category (G, L, B or T). You'll find that almost all articles in country categories (such as Category:LGBT politicians from the United States or Category:LGBT politicians from the United Kingdom) are also included in one of Category:Gay politicians, Category:Lesbian politicians, Category:Bisexual politicians or Category:Transgender and transsexual politicians. I'm merely proposing that Mr Howard be treated the same way. -- Lincolnite (talk) 19:38, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Dance floor (surface)

I see you speedily deleted this page and did the same too to 'Marley Floors'. Could you please use 'article for deletion' instead if the article looks like somebody means it to be there so the author can develop/explain or whatever. In my view what you have done amounts to vandalism. Dmcq (talk) 22:59, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes please could you restore Dance floor (surface). Sorry about the vandal epithet but I felt annoyed. Please note under deletion 'Before nominating a recently created article, please consider that many good articles started their Wikilife in pretty bad shape.'. I'd have thought that should have been stuck into the speedy deletion section too. I can get away without Marley Floors as I just put it in as the company to which marley floors owe their name rather like every vacuum cleaner is a hoover.
Dance floors are of great interest to people designing or running community halls, dance studios and theatres, as well as many dancers and there are european and national standards which apply to them. I have had a bit of trouble on the title for this part though if you look under Dance floor. Very often when people talk about a dance floor they mean a special vinyl flooring which can be rolled up and replaced rather than a complete installation. This article was to be about such vinyl flooring. The article can't be joined up with the Sprung floor article in any sensible way as that can have a wooden or other surface, and a dance floor surface may be used without a sprung floor. They are also called performance surfaces and marley floors. Sometimes small ones used on their own are called dance mats but that seems to be applied more usually to dance pads nowadays. At a quick estimate about half a millon of the 14 million pages you get from Google for "dance floor" refer to this sort of thing. Another problem is that it would be nice to take the bit about traction from the sprung floor article and move it to the dance floor surface article - but traction applies to all dance floor surfaces not just vinyl ones. I think I'd have to just make the article apply to all dance floor surfaces and have the vinyl ones as a special subsection. Dmcq (talk) 00:21, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
I've put the deleted page in your userspace. Two comments for you: One way to start articles is to start them in your userspace (see Wikipedia:User page#How do I create a user subpage?). Also, to keep the "Dance floor (surface)]] article from being deleted, you'll want to ensure it follows Notability.
Glad to see you're very much in to the subject :) And sorry if I stepped on toes. Happy editing! -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 01:06, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

If you're on

Wave at me. I need you to look at something... -- ALLSTARecho 04:47, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm trying to restore United States Senate special election in Mississippi, 2008 per the merge discussion at Talk:United States Senate election in Mississippi, 2008#Merge but for some reason all of the history is gone from United States Senate special election in Mississippi, 2008. Someone earlier today merged it anyway, regardless of the merge consensus and I'm trying to put it back. Where's all the history so I can just hit revert or restore?? -- ALLSTARecho 06:23, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, I just figured that out while waiting on your reply. lol I've got it fixed. Thanks! -- ALLSTARecho 06:30, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

FYI

[1]. WjBscribe 06:36, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

I approve :) -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 06:39, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

Thanks SatyrTN, for the feedback on Talk:Rumor in Town. I really appreciate your direction and feedback. There's a learning curve here but I want to do things right! I'll read more about Wikipedia:COI.--Low2snow (talk) 14:48, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Troy Perry

Hallo. I took another momentous trip to the golden library halls, picking up a crapload of few books, 2 by Troy D. Perry and another about him, that I'll be reading over the next couple months to improve his article. My master plan with the article was to start bringing it to GA status little by little. I started with the info by Kay Tobin, that I put into a bibliography and referenced where necessary. I saw you shifted it, since it did look a bit goofy. I suppose I should have told you about my master plan...Would you care to work on it with me, or will I be left to my own evil devices? --Moni3 (talk) 23:04, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Evil devices. I'm snowed under with a goal of getting through the list by the end of the month. But I really support you and your work! -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 23:07, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
Exxxxxcellent! Kick ass with your lists, by the way. Rock on. --Moni3 (talk) 23:12, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Cliff at last

Hi, yes I guess that's so. Currently his notability is via his mother and being a rebel sculptor in a conservative minor state in Australia. Not the sharpest profile to be had. Something may yet turn up, who knows? Cheers Julia Rossi (talk) 08:10, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Reg Livermore

Hi Satyr, I added Reg Livermore to the list of LGBT people yesterday, using this source. I'm not sure how to add it to his article though, other than a random sentence "He is gay." Can't see anything about a partner or any other personal life info (eg. Livermore is gay and lives in Sidney with his partner...) or any way that his sexuality impacts on his work. What do you think? --BelovedFreak 15:16, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Maybe in the part about his autobiography? And, if I can't throw in a ", who is gay," someplace, I've just added a bald-faced sentence like you describe. Rude, but if the article doesn't have a "Personal life" section, perhaps that sentence will start one off :) -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 15:35, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
Ok, thanks. I have added a 1-sentence "he is gay" personal life section. Hopefully someone will flesh it out a bit! --BelovedFreak 15:45, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Mary Burns (US Civil War soldier)

I saw you listed Mary Burns (US Civil War soldier) on the AFD page, however, the AFD header is not on the article. Were you planning to add that? Personally, I follow the instruction set at WP:AFD. --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 16:22, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

My bad! I put it there, but hit "preview" and went on to the rest of the instructions without hitting save. Thanks for bringing it to my attention! -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 16:25, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Hi SatyrTN -- I got a bot notice about the Mary Burns article. Assuming you set the bot on the article, make sure you do it on the original Mary Burns article, which has the history of the contributors, most of whom were to the civil war person not the English labor radical. Notification to me doesn't do much, since I only care about the English labor radical. <g> --Lquilter (talk) 17:57, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

BLP

Per BLP: This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous. In regards to Matt Sanchez, it is sourced and certainly not poorly since it's him in his own voice admitting he was a prostitue to Alan Colmes on FOX News. -- ALLSTARecho 17:08, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

David Kalstone

Your SatyrBot removed David Kalstone from Category:Gay writers because it wasn't sourced in the article. What kind of source is good enough? The article does include a source claiming that Kalstone was the basis of a gay character in a novel by Edmund White, also documented as one of Kalstone's good friends. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dlauri (talkcontribs) 18:07, 5 January 2008 (UTC)


Hi, Dlauri! I (under the bot's account) removed the category because it doesn't state he was gay or bisexual. Implying such doesn't quite cut it :) If you can find a source that states he was gay, add it in the article and put it back in the cat - that would be great! -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 01:17, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

What is going on?

Why is Matt Sanchez suddenly indefblocked? There seem to be far more ANI threads about this than is necessary and I'm finding it impossible to work out how we have suddenly jumped from my 2 day block to indefinite.... WjBscribe 00:29, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

His indefinite was because of his legal threat he made today. Look on his talk page at his unblock request box. Yeah, what Satyr said. Dealt with him so much today I forgot the order of it all. Sorry. -- ALLSTARecho 01:02, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
The blocking admin (Coredesat) decided the community had had enough. He blocked Matt indef. Matt made an unblock request that said "Who blocked me? I'll sue!", which, of course, in as indef-blocking offense. And here we are. This seems to be the main thread. I tried to mention that we should follow process, but Matt's threat threw everything up in the air. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 01:09, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
Of course, I suspect the threatened suit was because of the prostitution discussion that was in the article at that point, compounded by his being blocked. Aleta (Sing) 01:18, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
I agree. I don't agree that it shouldn't be in the article, but do agree that's what set off the legal threat. And quite frankly, so what. He wouldn't win. The sources are his own mouth admitting his prostitution. If you're interested, I have proposed on the talk page a way to include the information so that BLP has no baring on it. I know WJB has had dealings with it so I'm interested in hearing his opinion on my proposal as well. -- ALLSTARecho 01:25, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
I'm sorry. I had to indefblock User:Pwok (a.k.a Charles Wilson) for harassment of a number of users involved involved in the Sanchez article. I received a number of abusive emails from him myself. Are you trying to make a point by linking to the site he has devoted to attacking Matt Sanchez? WjBscribe 01:31, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
No, not trying to make a point at all and if you really believe that, I'll remove the link. I said I was interested in your opinion on my proposal and that's what I meant. I only used the link to point out that you had been involved before so therefore I'd value your opinion. -- ALLSTARecho 01:38, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
I'm uncomfortable with the speed at which things have moved. A week might have made sense, indef seems too much. And I don't think that's a real legal threat, more an exclamation of anger. I think it may take an ArbCom case to fully untangle this one. WjBscribe 01:21, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
Oh - sorry - forgot to mention the "OTRS correspondence" that blocked the article. I suspect at this point it's moved to (or past) ArbCom. I advocated for less of a block (a week), but that was mere minutes before the legal threat and ensuing brouhaha. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 01:24, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
Not so sure on that WJB. He's been warned for what, over a year now, about WP:COI and editing his own article? How long does it go on before someone says enough is enough? -- ALLSTARecho 01:28, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
You know, we do have a process. Four warnings, block for 24-48 hours. Warning, block for a week. Warning, block for two-four weeks. Indef-block. Is it Matt's fault we skipped several steps in between? No. And see where it led? There's such a thing as being *too* hasty, just as moving too slowly. This one did both. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 01:30, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
I think that's unfortunate, but true. He was allowed to go for ages without any serious repercussions, then suddenly the boom was lowered. Aleta (Sing) 01:37, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
He's been blocked 3 times as Bluemarine and 2 times as Mattsanchez and I'm sure a few times on IPs. Are you serious? -- ALLSTARecho 01:38, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
The block of both accounts that resulted from a misunderstanding doesn't really count. It was not for his incivility or conflict of interest. Aleta (Sing) 01:42, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
Right - due to another mistake on the part of an admin. I'm not excusing his behaviour, which was offensive every time he touched the keyboard. What I'm saying is that WjB is right - the final (?) bit of the episode moved way too fast. I'm sure we haven't finished the full season, but can we all put this on hold and get on to something useful - like editing an encyclopedia? :) -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 01:46, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
I am seriously unhappy with the speed with which things have moved here. And Allstarecho's reference to a site dedicated to pretty nasty attacks against Sanchez makes me doubt the good faith of recent contributors to this debate. I dislike the politics of Sanchez and some of his attitudes, but I'm not persuaded his treatment here has been entirely neutral. He's been baited by a number of trolling accounts. He's had to interact with people like User:Pwok who had an entire site dedicated to what he sees an a misrepresentation of a part of his life he'd rather forget. He's increasingly felt people have been ganging up against him. That doesn't excuse his offensive remarks - I've warned and blocked him myself - but I'm not sure how we've suddenly ended up at an indefblock. WjBscribe 01:43, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
Well, I know that Mercury asked him to retract the legal threat. If he does that, can you convert it to a week-long block? Aleta (Sing) 01:48, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
If the OTRS situation resolves and Matt retracts his statement (and it's in my power - I haven't done it before), I will change it to a week. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 01:54, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Allstarecho blocked

I've only just seen Allstarecho's recent edits to the Matt Sanchez article. The "prostitution" section he added, and edit warring with you over it are one of the worse WP:BLP violations I have seen on this site. His conduct is unacceptable and I have blocked him for 48 hours as a result. WjBscribe 01:59, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

I have spent the last many months explaining why that content is not acceptable. It should be obvious to anyone who understands our policies. I find Allstarecho's quotation above on this page [2] of a website established attack Sanchez (and to a page attacking me personally) to be pretty strong evidence that he isn't acting in good faith here. I will reduce Sanchez's block to one week unless someone provides good reason as it now seems (having reviewed edits to his biography) that he was provoked in a totally unacceptable manner. WjBscribe 02:07, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
I wouldn't worry about Matt - I have a feeling the OTRS thing is going to take a while.
I think you ought to review your dealings above with ASE. While the insertion of the material into the Matt Sanchez article was bad, and re-inserting it worse, sie then took to discussing whether and how it should be included. At that point he stopped "disrupting the project", which is when blocking should be used.
And I understand the material on the CplSanchez site must upset you (I haven't actually read most of that site, so I didn't even know you were mentioned). But perhaps that touched a nerve and you're reacting to that, rather than acting in good faith? ASE seems to have a POV that needs to be addressed, but that can be done by discussion. Blocking runs the risk of throwing a good editor away when trying to deal with a probably bad editor. Think about it? No pressure or required response, just a request. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 02:15, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
I have the greatest respect for you mate, you were one of the first people who made me feel welcome here. Perhaps I've been in the trenches too long over the Matt Sanchez thing, but it wasn't Allstarecho's reference to the site that bothered me. His casual addition of material even some of Sanchez's harshest detractor's agreed wasn't appropriate combined with a casual familiarity with a site designed to attack him seems a problem to me. Editor warring with an admin over it is a big problem. Reviewing the situation, it looks to me like Sanchez was baited into crossing the line and slapped down overly harshly as a result. I think (despite my disagreement with his politics) that Sanchez has a right to feel aggrieved by his treatment today. Am I really being too harsh given the serious consequences of this BLP breach? WjBscribe 02:36, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
I agree with you, FWIW, WjBscribe. Allstarecho ran into the breach without bothering to read the 11 pages of talk archives, which should have clued him in to just how contentious this subject has been. Sanchez should have been blocked for a week or two, not indefinitely, and the the legal threat was issued when Sanchez was blocked with the article in libelous, BLP-violating, full-throttled character assassination form. I've avoided editing this article for over a month, and have had more than enough of Sanchez, as my final discussions on the talk page made clear, but I may end up coming back just to maintain some semblance of balance, since you two can't do it yourselves. Horologium (talk) 02:44, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
With all due respect Horologium, I really should have read through 11 pages of archives?? And I'd also point out that Sanchez was blocked indefinitely for his violations of several policies long before his legal threat or me placing the content in question into the article. His legal threat had nothing to do with the block. The legal threat got the article fully protected. Thanks. -- ALLSTARecho 03:34, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
You know, I've been reading and re-reading this thread, and I think it was about the tenth time through that I finally read the last sentence - which made me laugh :) Thanks! And I hope you'll come "fix things up" :) -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 03:30, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
I think the block of ASE is rather harsh. As has been stated, after I deleted the material, discussions were begun about whether or not it is appropriate, and ASE began contributing reasonably to the discussions. Even though he and I have opposite views about the material, I think he was acting in good faith. Blocking him is being punitive rather than preventing someone from disruptive editing. Aleta (Sing) 03:10, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

I have reversed the block. That you Horologium for your support, and to the rest of you for your thoughts on the matter. My reasons are further explained on Allstarecho's talkpage in accepting his unblock request. WjBscribe 03:23, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#Matt_Sanchez

I'm passing this case over to ArbCom. You might want to comment on whether they should accept or reject the case. WjBscribe 04:05, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Nate

I missed that he wasn't in the template. I've redirected to the TY show article, until someone wants to provide the necessary references. --Stephen 05:03, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Re:Jerry Morton

I'm in the process of giving the article a tidy by updating character information. It just doesn't seem right someone who has made more than enough appearances to be considered a series regular being bundled into the minor and recurring. I'm also trying to find worthwhile Darryl information, so far he's only really been a spare part for David and Jerry's stories.

Conquistador2k6 8 January 2008 18:40 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/DJ Pusspuss

Please close this. It's had its 5 day run. Thanks. -- ALLSTARecho 16:25, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

I had taken it off my watch list because of ... legionaire's disease or something was making me sick, there's still two radio-show interviews that were there but now I'm not finding the transcripts for them and the database that holds the recordings only makes the last 5-6 weeks available (theye wer earlier in 2007). If it has to be deleted then by all means. Benjiboi 17:59, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Who and how

Who's Julie? Who are Gopher and Isaac? Anyway hmmm not sure how I can help with the newsletter?Zigzig20s (talk) 17:57, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Julie Anne Peters

No, not published, unfortunately. It was through email, the same way I got the signature and list of influences. — Emiellaiendiay 23:51, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Talkheader and Skiptotoc template usage

Thanks, I initially came here to ask why you removed the talkheader and skiptotoctalk templates from the talk page of And the Band Played On, but after looking at the template documentation and talkpage, especially here I think I understand the logic behind it. I don't neccessarily agree with it, but I'll go with consensus. So thanks for inadvertently teaching me something new. I'll just smile at you and move on, thanks for the heads up, I'll stop adding the templates to every talkpage I see. -Optigan13 (talk) 05:06, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Aww! Thanks for the smile! Glad to point out new information - I guess we all get to learn while we try to make the encyclopedia better for others to learn with :) Boy - that sentence didn't really work... Ah well - happy editing! -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 06:34, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Just another thanks!

I came here to post a smile on your page, but I guess I rather give you a rain check, seeing that you just got one! It was nice of you to ask me, but please, if something like this happens again, don't hesitate and just revert my change. I won't take offence as long as you keep writing nice messages on my talk page! — Sebastian 08:17, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

A question

Hey SatyrTN, I dont know if you remember, but you filled a request for me a while back for tagging Green Bay Packers articles with a project banner. Well you were right and the template now supports the "class=" and needs assessment. I was wondering if you were interested. I filled a request here but it seems that a user has taken this to mean that they need to create a bot for this work. If your not interested thats fine, but I figured since I had worked with you before I would ask. Hope all is well.
Gonzo fan2007 talkcontribs 02:05, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Have a look?

Since the Sanchez circus, and to avoid 3RR myself, would you mind having a look at this history and see, what I believe based on what you told me with the Sanchez article, about handling the BLP content that keeps getting inserted? Of course, as a gay man, I can't stand Trent Lott and even more so that I'm from Mississippi but I still don't see it as acceptable content, based strictly on policy being my keywords here. I agree with the content but also agree it can't be used according to policy, just as in the Sanchez case. So, have a look see? Thanks. ALLSTARecho 02:49, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

You (and Benji) are absolutely right in removing that content until/unless something *far* more reliable than a gossipy blog is found as a source. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 07:01, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Paranormal to do list

The main paranormal to do list still isn't updating. Only the short version is.

perfectblue (talk) 13:45, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Ah, so the page updates but the history does not?

That's a sensible way to do it, it saves on processing cycles. My only comment would be that I used to use the diffs in the history section to tell me what had recently been added or removed. - perfectblue (talk) 17:15, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeh, it does mean watchlisting all 8 subpages if you want to see what's changed. But the number of changes per page is less (which means better loading time on each one) and there are often times when particular sections have no changes. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 06:04, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of animals displaying homosexual behavior

I was wondering if this AfD should be an immediate procedural close since the nominator only made a comment, rather than providing a rationale for deletion. About process, as differentiated from supporting/opposing deletion. Thoughts? — Becksguy (talk) 00:23, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Personally I'm fine with it going its course as that takes the steam out of the next person who comes along, whereas if we close on technicality someone might begrudge the article itself. That list is referenced within an inch o its life so I honestly think it's fine. Benjiboi 01:11, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
OK, makes sense. And thanks to your hard work, Benji. — Becksguy (talk) 07:28, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
Total agreement :) Thanks, Benji! -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 06:04, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Chicago

How is the tagging going for Chicago. I assume SatyrBot is still checking WP:CHIBOTCATS twice a week.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 18:38, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi! I think it's just once a week, but yes - from a quick glance at the bot's edit history, it ran on the Chicago articles an the 7th and the 11th. Do let me know if it seems to hang or anything, though I keep pretty good track of what it's doing :) Thanks! -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 19:18, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Category depopulation

I see you have recategorised several articles from Category:LGBT events in xxxx to Category:LGBT events. Has there been some discussion at WP:CFD or elsewhere, which has resulted in a deletion decision? Usually, the category page is tagged with information about the deletion debate, but there seems to be no such tag, and a "what links here" fails to show such a debate.

The case I noticed was Hero parade and Category:LGBT events in New Zealand. The result is that the article is now not connected at all to Category:LGBT in New Zealand.-gadfium 19:09, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi, Gadfium! Yes, just yesterday I moved a few articles from categories where there were only two or three entries up to to their super-cat. No, there hasn't been a CfD discussion that I know of, though WP:CAT and WP:OC#NARROW are pretty clear that sub-categories (by location or whatever) should only be created:
intersection categories should only be created when both parent categories are very large and similar intersections can be made for related categories.
I'm open to suggestion, though, if you feel there's a good reason for the "LGBT events in New Zealand" category? -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 19:24, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
I'm not defending the category, but you should nominate it (and others you have emptied) for deletion, rather than just leaving them empty. You should also make sure the articles you removed from the categories are properly recategorised, for example that Hero Parade should now be categorised in Category:LGBT in New Zealand.-gadfium 00:14, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
Looks like you can use {{Db-catempty}} on the categories if they are still empty after four days. I'm not sure that this is intended for categories that you have depopulated yourself though.-gadfium 00:24, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

newsletter

Sure can. Going out tonight, tomorrow and tomorrow night, but I will try to find some time to add stuff. Certainly there are some things I asked Jeff to put in that I will do myself. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 19:23, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Me too. I just created a section. I'll try to think of some more. Aleta (Sing) 19:57, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
Thank you all for putting it together this month. I have been busy both on wiki and off working on an icky arbcom case and don't have the patience or stamina to put this together on top of that. Jeffpw (talk) 15:28, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
I was wondering if we could mention that I've been working on Willa Cather short stories - although that's not directly LGBT, she was gay and also a lot of her stories have covert lesbian desire. I'm planning to do the same thing with other lesbian authors, and gay authors too.Zigzig20s (talk) 15:46, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Hey! I didn't moan. That was Raystorm trying to give me props. (Much love to Raystorm...). Looks good otherwise. I don't think I have anything to add. I still get calls from Kay Lahusen, who edits Barbara Gittings' article over the phone with me. Last night she told me she and Barbara had been worried because encyclopedias had awful information in them - not enough and inaccurate to boot. She said she was glad that some folks are trying to set it right. --Moni3 (talk) 16:25, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Part of it was the moan / Moni thing I couldn't resist... :) Please feel free to change it or remove it - my silliness should *not* get in the way of a good newsletter! I haven't reviewed this evening, but I think I'll try to get it out tomorrow. Thanks for your help!!!!
I will allow silliness. I can stand a reputation as a whore or ballbreaker, but not so much as a whiner. So, in my mind, "moaning" will be along the "whore" line... (Here's a tip about how I got my user name) --Moni3 (talk) 15:31, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
Ewwwww! You're soaking in it! Benjiboi 16:04, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
That's Palmolive! Rather, I'm soothing...things... What can I say? Sometimes nicknames stick regardless of how much we like them. --Moni3 (talk) 16:51, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
Well, as a drag queen named Patty Melt used to say ... "It's what's between the buns that counts..." Benjiboi 17:52, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Dammit, it's been so long since I have had decent Internet time (mad partying, friend staying, then it crashed, of all times to choose), I've forgotten what I wanted to put in it! I'm thinking FA buddying, Portal news, did I mention anything else to you? Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 01:40, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Um. Newsletter? Oh. Yeah. Without a whip being cracked, things just sorta fall apart <sheepish grin> -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 02:58, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

USAA

So why did you take out the text about the ability to make deposits from home? It is unique. Do you know of any other bank that let's people deposit checks from home using their scanner? It was in sevearl magazines and newspapers.

Why do you think the fact that USAA is a direct (employees, not agents) company needs to be cited? It is recognized by anybody in the insurance industry. Ever see a USAA agency anywhere? No. There aren't any. No agents. Just employees. Not signed in, but I'm known as the Hill Country Grump... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 167.24.104.150 (talk) 16:55, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi! I took out the bit about the ability to make deposits from home because it's not sourced at all. If it's in several magazines and newspapers, let's put a reference in the article. Otherwise it just sounded like an advertisement.
The same holds true with the other statements - in order to keep the encyclopedia entry on USAA factual and to the point, we should include information that is referenced - that other sources found interesting enough to include in newspapers and articles. Otherwise it's original research. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 19:11, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi. Ok, I see your point - kind of. It would seem to me that you need to source every single item in every single wiki subject regarding corporations (I checked Navy FCU, B of A, Pentagon FCU). Everything needs to be sourced using your criteria. Just because you didn't see the articles doesn't mean it isn't common knowledge to people that work the target industry (insurance, banking, etc.). By the way it is in Wesabi, Netbanker, Digg, eOpinions, PR NewsWire, Google Finance, San Antonio Express News, San Antonio Biz Journal. So, are you sticking to your criteria?207.155.4.175 (talk) 02:18, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi! I'm not quite sure what you're asking. Controversial statements *always* need to be sourced. Comments about notability *should* be sourced - and by that I mean any statement like "X is the only..." or "Y is the fastest..." or "Z is the best...". Mundane and easily found information doesn't necessarily need to be sourced - like "headquarters are located in..." or "Mr. Somebody is CEO". You might want to read Wikipedia:No Original Research about what needs to be sourced and why.
Hope that helps! -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 03:21, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Luhan, etc.

Darling sorry if I offended u, I am a little cranky as a result of too much work. Please don't think I was attacking u - the way I see it, I was being queeny and queer - I mean both terms in their theoretical senses. I think u do a great job overall. The trouble with Lillian Faderman's book might be that it is an essentialist study for the most part (it's lesbian criticism rather than theory). But anyway, that person was a bisexual according to a phd'd published historian. And this is no inference of hers as she is taking the info from the person's very own memoirs apparently. Kiss and make up? I was just mad because I'm trying to disrupt the politics of silence surrounding the LGBT "community", and ur deleting the info I'd added seemed to reinforce that silence.Zigzig20s (talk) 22:08, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Goody good. Google is limited, there is no access to her book on GoogleBooks for instance [3]. As you said for Pierre André de Suffren de Saint Tropez, there is such a thing as a library...I would recommend reading Faderman's book, it's really quite comprehensive and fun to read.Zigzig20s (talk) 22:21, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
You're absolutely right to throw that back at me! :)
The book is searchable on Google - just not readable. Try that link and type in "luhan" - you'll see what I mean. 'scuse me now - I have to run to the library before it closes :) -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 22:43, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
Do you mean like this [4]? There is not even a snippet preview...Anyway I've added the exact quote on the talkpage - it comes at the end of a paragraph on her influence on Greenwich Village. I'm gonna have to return the book so I can take out new ones though. BTW I don't like the references/notes layout - is that recommended, or can I change it for inserted footnotes? I hope I can, it would make things much clearer imo.Zigzig20s (talk) 08:37, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
I was looking at [5]
I'm totally not fond of the ref/notes thing either. I'll help with the cleanup, if you like :) -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 08:42, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
Where can u search inside the book from there? There is no side box as there is on limited previews...Zigzig20s (talk) 10:15, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
On my screen there's a search box on the left, just under the picture of the cover: [6] -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 02:57, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
There's not even the picture of the book cover here [7]. Are u using another link? (Maybe there is more content available online from the United States for copyright reasons?) BTW can u fix the notes/ref section as promised?Zigzig20s (talk) 12:07, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Bot requests page

I think last time I made a request there Betacommand told me not to use a subpage when I did use one, and actually changed the content of the lead of the page to reflect that. Personally, given the length of the request, I certainly would have put it on a separate subpage if I hadn't alreaady been told not to earlier. And I commented on your otehr concerns on the page in question. I think I know why no one ever filed such a request before, though. It took me four days to go through and list the various subcats, and tag the articles which fell in subcats although relevant to other states, myself. John Carter (talk) 15:17, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

SatyrBot

Anyway you can have your bot run though Category:WikiProject Mississippi and go to every cat's talk page listed there and wipe out the WikiProject Mississippi tag and replace it with {{WikiProject Mississippi|class=Cat}}? I've just realized I've been using the wrong cat tag and it will take me forever to go back and redo all of those. ALLSTARecho 08:53, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

See if that works? I've changed the banner rather than sicking (sp?) the bot on it. I *can* put the bot on it, but if this works, it's easier :) -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 16:42, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
No, it doesn't. You just basically tagged the template page with the project's template. ALLSTARecho 16:53, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
Isn't Category:Category-Class Mississippi pages what you wanted to have done? -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 16:59, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
Every article listed at Category:WikiProject Mississippi needs to be moved to Category:Category-Class Mississippi pages. The only reason they are in Category:WikiProject Mississippi is because I used {{WikiProject Mississippi category}} which I shouldn't have been using but instead should have been using {{WikiProject Mississippi}} with the class set as Cat. ALLSTARecho 17:06, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
Yes, I totally understand what you're saying. And the change I made will accomplish exactly that. Because it's a template change, it's going to take a little time to work itself out, but you can see that it's going to work by:
  1. Go to Category:WikiProject_Mississippi
  2. Pick one of the category talk pages listed and click on it
  3. You'll notice that the page is *not* in Category:WikiProject_Mississippi but rather is in Category:Category-Class Mississippi pages.
Give it a bit of time - say an hour - and the pages should move over. Let me know if it doesn't happen. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 17:13, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Several hours later and all those articles are still listed in Category:WikiProject Mississippi. So anything else I need to do? Thanks! :] ALLSTARecho 02:02, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Excellent. As always, you know how to fix things. Thank you! :] ALLSTARecho 17:56, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Dalton

Hello, thanks for your message. I have no particular qualms with the article, just a general concern about references.

I tagged the article because I noticed that the article had only one in-line reference, and no additional sources/references listed. I think in general it is an important thing for Wikipedia to move towards being more diligent with our references.

I know we often essentially ignore providing references for these Rambot type articles, but I don't think we should do that. I think we want to progress towards a future where people trust Wikipedia articles, or at least a future where we are giving them the tools (references) to check up on us.

In this case, if the bulk of the article comes from one census source, then the expedient thing to do would be to add it that source as a general source so that people can see that the whole article essentially came from one place.

In short, I would love it if someone sees the tag and adds another reference or two. But I won't make a fuss if someone removes the tag. Force10 (talk) 05:52, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi, Force10! My worries when I saw the tag are a) most of the info *does* come from one source. While it might benefit from a ref in the "references" section, it says it comes from the US Census. b) The other 220+ articles... -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 17:28, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Inactivity of Brianna Goldberg

After a short while of in activity, I am back to work on Wikipedia. --Brianna Goldberg (talk) 20:19, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Pat Patterson

No, he's in two separate subcategories of the same parent category. That's not really the same thing. Bearcat (talk) 21:28, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Talk:Irwin Kostal

Hello. I noticed this article has been designated part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Chicago, and I'd appreciate it if you could explain why it qualifies. Kostal was born in Chicago, but spent his entire career working on Broadway and in Hollywood. Is the fact that Chicago was his birthplace enough to warrant including his article in the project? If so, should I add this template to any articles I create in which Chicago is merely a birthplace or has a similarly minor mention? Thanks for explaining. MovieMadness (talk) 18:21, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Leaves of Grass

Behold the references for Leaves of Grass... as per Mabel Dodge Luhan? I'm too busy atm but it'd be useful.Zigzig20s (talk) 07:44, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Hm. Because there are several editors of the LoG article, I'm not willing to step in and reformat the refs. Not without discussing it on the talk page, anyway. Whitman's got more admirers than Luhan does, so messing with his article is likely to cause knickers to be twisted. IMNHO, anyway :) -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 07:48, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
But their layout is confusing!Zigzig20s (talk) 07:49, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
Bring it up on the talk page first? Give it a couple days? If no one objects, I'll be glad to reformat. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 07:54, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
Sure. BTW I've realised you have removed the Faderman reference from Luhan's page? Why? IMO it would hold more sway than ref no 3, which is not apparently a very reliable website...Did u do that on purpose?Zigzig20s (talk) 07:59, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
No - I think Nightjar might've deleted it? I don't remember. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 08:01, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
The history is confusing, I tried to go through it to figure out if I should bitchslap u or not, but in light of assessment failure I shall 'assume good faith'..Anyway I've added it, not sure if the ISBN should come before or after the page number? Also, do u really think a geocities webpage and no 3 look reliable?Zigzig20s (talk) 08:07, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
<Whew!> Spared another bitchslap! :)
I didn't even look at the Geocities one. Do as thou wilt! -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 08:09, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
[8].Zigzig20s (talk) 08:24, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Newsletter

Okay, news items have been written, may as wells end it out now. Bit of a bloody long wait for two things, but Rome wasn't built in a day. In fact, I was at this fascinating lecture a few months back about how it took seven hundred years actually, you'd be really interested I'm sure... Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 16:43, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

ROTFL!! I might :) I just spent a day with the local chapter of The American Chestnut Foundation learning about the endangered American Chestnut and how I can help plant some! I'll send out the newsletter now... -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 23:06, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

::snore:: Estrella roja alada.svg ALLSTAR echo 23:24, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Oh and lmao @ Delivered sometime in January 2008 on the newsletter! Estrella roja alada.svg ALLSTAR echo 23:26, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

LGBT WikiProject Newsletter

Delivered sometime in January 2008 (UTC). SatyrBot (talk) 23:53, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Matt Sanchez

I would like to thank you for a sensible discussion. Have a super day. Wjhonson (talk) 19:06, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks :) I think we're managing to keep civil and productive - well, as productive as we can be without actually editing the article! :) -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 23:12, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
Speaking of which... there's both the ArbComm case and the OTRS ticket. Any idea how long it generally takes to resolve such things? (I.e., how much longer can we expect to wait with the article frozen?) Aleta (Sing) 23:33, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
Absolutely no clue at all. Never been involved in any of these - and don't particularly want to be more involved in this one! -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 23:38, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
OK. It has gotten crazy (even crazier the past few days!) hasn't it? Aleta (Sing) 23:45, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
There is the very real possibility that Matt's email was compromised...meanwhile he has managed to break every restriction on his editing. Personally I'm on a wait and see as I've found a few sources myself but want to see where the Arbcom hammer falls. Benjiboi 00:44, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

ITMFA!

beautiful ;] ALLSTAR echo 05:29, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

BLP request

I wonder if you would mind having a quiet word with Lobojo, who continues to name a psychiatric patient who had an auto accident, in spite of his being non-notable and having less than 15 minutes of fame, as it were. I and others have reverted him several times, but he continues to add the content, as well as copyrighted material from YouTube. This is a pattern with him, both here and on other articles which were ultimately deleted as BLP violations. It's getting tiresome. Some pleasant diffs for you.

I would note there appears to be nothing on the Talk page about any contention. Wjhonson (talk) 14:34, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
The edit summaries have been very clear that the material was removed due to BLP violations. Lobojo chooses to reinsert it with the contention that WP is not censored, which is immaterial to the BLP issue. BLP violations may be deleted on sight, without discussion, per jimbo. Jeffpw (talk) 14:45, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
And he reverted again. This is why I no longer discuss with him. If I had to discuss every time he violated BLP (one time it was serious enough the article had to be deleted) I would never get any work done at all. I am reverting it one last time today, that will make 2 times. I won't edit war, but it is not only a BLP violation but supremely tacky to add that info (with no encyclopedic value), merely because he thinks it's funny. Jeffpw (talk) 15:04, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Without Talk page discussion, none of us know this is happening or why. That is why talk page discussion is useful for the history of the situation and why the revert-wars are occurring. Many people do not necessarily pay close attention to edit summaries, they are much more ephemeral than archived discussions. As far as BLP violations, I'm not sure naming a person is any kind of violation. His name does appears in published sources doesn't it? It may be undue weight to include it on this page. All of these issues are why we discuss. Wjhonson (talk) 15:11, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
By the way "per Jimbo" isn't really a great argument ;) Have a super day Wjhonson (talk) 15:12, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Perhaps you should read the relevant policies on BLP before weighing in. You have a great day yourself. Jeffpw (talk) 15:31, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
So now BLP says "don't include names reported in reliable sources" ? I missed that part, can you direct me to where you read that on BLP exactly? Thanks JeffWjhonson (talk) 15:37, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
  • I am restoring this discussion to this page, since neither I, nor Satyr (that I have seen) has asked you to move it. I will also ask you politely one time to NEVER remove my comments from a talk page. Further, I take umbrage at you restoring the BLP violation to that article, and ask that you revert yourself. I really need to ask this: Just who the hell do you think you are, Wjhonson, to unilaterally remove comments from other's pages, and involve yourself in a dispute that doesn't concern you, violating policies as you go along? I'm amazed, to be honest. Jeffpw (talk) 16:26, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Back off, Jeff...
I moved the discussion to the talk page :)
And I do believe Wjohnson has been agreeing with you and is not an "adversary" -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 16:29, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for the vote of confidence! I've enquoted the relevant section of BLP to that article's talk. We can hope that Lobojo agrees :) Wjhonson (talk) 16:32, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
And my bad for moving the discussion without saying anything. When it got to specific questions/comments about the BLPness of adding to the article, I moved it, but I should have said what I was doing and why. Sorry, Jeff! :( -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 20:17, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

User:SatyrBot/WikiProject new pages

I recently stumbled across the page above, and honestly it looks like something pretty much every WikiProject in existence would be very, very happy to have access to. Would you be at all agreeable to having it placed on the toolserver, and perhaps letting us advertise its existence more? John Carter (talk) 20:11, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi, John! I thought you'd never ask! :)
Actually, I've sorta been tinkering with the code and such, getting it to where I think it might just - possibly - maybe - be ready for release. You know how it is.
So I suppose it's pretty stable now and I could be convinced to let others tear it apart and make it better.
I know there's something about getting an account on the Toolserver - what should I do? -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 01:14, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
I honestly know little if anything about the toolserver, and only found the page on meta at m:Toolserver today. I do think that some of the other editors with toolserver accounts, listed here, would probably be the best people to ask. User:Betacommand, User:Slakr, and User:Oleg Alexandrov are among the names on the list I best recognize. I think the last named party might be the most approachable regarding this, as his bots are among those which the majority of the projects are already using and he would probably grasp its significance most clearly. I would love to see it being used as quickly as possible myself, and I think he might be the one with the most similar enthusiasm for it. John Carter (talk) 01:30, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Re Image:Selempangtkk.jpg

I don't think the hang on tag will actually work in this case. Its gonna get scrubbed in a couple days by the deletion-scripts because of the BetaCommandBot tag. Really the issue is that the image has NO source information whatsoever, so it almost impossible to repair as a non-free image. MBisanz talk 08:38, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Question on MiszaBot

Hi

You use this archiving bot, and are a bot writer, so I was wondering if you could look at my talk page and see why it's not archiving everything before Jan 1st. I was hoping for a 2007 archive in other words. Or can I just cut and paste as easier without screwing up the history? Thanks. Here's the archive page. — Becksguy (talk) 21:56, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Bots are pretty stupid. If the date at the end of a post isn't exactly right (an extra space, parentheses correct, whatever), it won't archive properly. I recommend cut-and-pasting the offending posts into your archive. I end up doing that every so often, too. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 23:42, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks, that's what I did. — Becksguy (talk) 03:35, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Category on project talkpage

May I ask that you remove the "gayass" category from Wikipedia talk:WikiProject LGBT studies? I don't approve; if some people want to call themselves names, fine, but I don't. Manners, for crying out loud.Zigzig20s (talk) 13:51, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Do I look like I'm in charge? Be Bold! You may also want to chime in on the discussion being held on that page: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject LGBT studies#Category:Queer Wikipedians
Or are you being sarcastic and I'm missing it?
-- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 14:49, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
No sarcasm here - I guess my upper-middle-class manners are taking over. I said something on the queer wikipedians category on the project talkpage a while back and it was shamelessly ignored. "Queer" eludes definitions and categories, therefore it seems like a pointless debate.Zigzig20s (talk) 16:57, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
As stated in the discussions / project talk page, "Gayass Wikipedians" is a joke, mostly because Category:LGBT Wikipedians, Category:Gay Wikipedians, and Category:Queer Wikipedians all got deleted in a WP:POINTed fashion. I suspect the category is on the talk page because someone wrote it [[Category:Gayass Wikipedians]] instead of [[:Category:Gayass Wikipedians]] - that leading colon makes all the difference.
As for "Queer", I'm much more likely to use that. Categorizing myself is so .. restricting :) -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 18:06, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
I don't see it. Remove it please?Zigzig20s (talk) 19:34, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
Found it. It's included in the user template: {{User:Allstarecho/gayass}}
I don't see why it matters? It'll be archived in ~3 days. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 23:04, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Anna Livia Brawn

Do you want to have a discussion about her - or do you give me some time to find further articles/etc - I mean a published author - a translator, and academic, I am a bit unsure what thinking was happening with a possible afd then a notability tag - ? cheers SatuSuro 12:06, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

I think I can help here SatyrTN. Give me a few hours to see what I can find. Meanwhile I've UC'd the article. Have a great day. Wjhonson (talk) 16:15, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
I'm up to seven novels so far that she's writen, plus some non-fiction and articles. I'm going to remove the Notability flag unless you still see the article as problematic for that reason. I'll check to see if there's some kind of existing biographical data to flesh that out. Wjhonson (talk) 17:20, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Will you take a glance, and comment that she now seems notable? I don't want to work more on this if it's going to end up on the cutting room floor. If she seems notable, I'll work a bit on biographical sources to see what I can find. Thanks! Wjhonson (talk) 23:27, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
She is notable, and relevant in 1980's stages of lesbian novel writing - as well as a translator -I cannot see why the response to a start encourages the afd/notability tags so easily - I happen to be 'on the road' and dont expect to be able to source some items for a week or two. Thanks SatuSuro 10:28, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
As I mentioned, the article is currently eligible for speedy deletion. I didn't do so, and won't, because I have faith y'all are right and that she is notable. But the article needs to say so, that's all. If, for some reason, it gets deleted, let me know and I'll get a copy and/or restore it - I'm sure something can be worked out. Have a good trip? And happy editing :) -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 14:38, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks only just back now - appreciate your good faith - cheers SatuSuro 05:39, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

A call to Gayass Wikipedians

I've started a discussion of the recent uproar here. I'm inviting all the other gayasses to join in and see if we can't work toward some unified position to present at the discussion - maybe a move to "Queer" or "LGBT"? Hope you'll look it over. Thanks! --Phyesalis (talk) 16:34, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

This whole gayass situation is very upsetting.~ZytheTalk to me! 21:22, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Mitch Cullin

Hi, I'm a bit perplexed as to why the author Mitch Cullin's notability was called into question in the first place, and, by default, his collaborator Peter I. Chang? I know Cullin isn't a household name, but as a writer he's hardly an unknown entity either (at least for us literary folks). The fact that Terry Gilliam turned one of his books into a film alone should be notability enough. In any case I've done some work on the page to bring it up to snuff, so hopefully it passes muster. I do think, however, that the notability tag is sometimes thrown around a bit too casually, especially in this caseBenderEnder (talk) 14:42, 28 January 2008 (UTC).

Hi, BenderEnder! I'm sorry you feel like that. I tagged the article because the version I came across said, in a nutshell:
  • Here's someone who wrote seven books. He was friends with some notable people.
The current version is better - it seems to satisfy Wikipedia's Notability policy - "multiple substantial sources about the individual from reliable sources."
I appreciate the effort you put into the article! -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 15:46, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
I'm a bit worried about Chang's article, though. He doesn't seem to meet the Notability criteria? -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 16:07, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi. I replied on my talks page, I think. Still getting my Wiki-sea legs.BenderEnder (talk) 23:10, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

re: Stiff Upper Lips

Replied on my talkpage. --BelovedFreak 20:40, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

possible project member

here. Benjiboi 03:20, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Benji, do you have an aversion to inviting people to the project? Having seen some of your makeup, I somehow doubt you have any trouble being bold! =D =D -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 03:22, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Check new articles for mistakes

best greetings from Germany. GLGermann (talk) 18:44, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Gunvor Hofmo

I really don't care one way or another whether Gunvor Hofmo is categorized in the LGBT category. It is only of passing relevance to her poetry, though it does have interest for the way gays and lesbians have been perceived in Norwegian history. But you're on very thin ice in asserting that Norwegian sources are not reliable. If this were the case, we might as well delete the article about her altogether, as well as many other quite notable Norwegians. Please either refer me to the relevant policy that states that only English-language sources are reliable; or else remove the tag. --Leifern (talk) 19:03, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi, Leifern! I'm sorry if that tag seemed harsh - it wasn't meant to be! My concern is that English speakers aren't able to verify the statement that Hofmo is a lesbian. With any other article, if I don't believe a claim, I can go to the supporting evidence and read it for myself. I can't do that if the source is in another language. That doesn't mean that the source is any less reliable, and in hindsight that tag is probably not the best one to use - but it does put us in a quandry.
The relevant guidelines, IMHO, are WP:RSUE and WP:REDFLAG. What might help is perhaps providing a translation of a relevant passage from the source? I don't know.
Again - apologies for implying the sources provided weren't reliable - they're just not all that verifiable to non-Norwegian speakers :) -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 19:44, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Sewanee & Richard Quest

Love your User:SatyrTN/Sewanee traditions page. Having married a Sewanee girl at Otey Parish 18 years ago, I never tire of wandering around the campus and town when passing thru on the way to and from Nashville.

I found it only because I was curious who edited out the fact that my friend Richard Quest is gay. That edit doesn't much matter to me, and I doubt it does to him, but he's decidedly out. I only mention because his gag about interviewing with al-Jazeera is that much funnier when you know his background.

Tom Wood (talk) 23:21, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi, Tom! I did some searching for a source that Quest is gay, and I haven't found any. As you might know, Wikipedia is less about "truth" and more about "verifiability". If we can find a source that says it, then we can add it to the article.
I'm still trying to work on the Sewanee Traditions page - I graduated from there in .. well, a few years ago :) Finding sources for *that* is a real challenge, since most of it is oral, passed on from seniors to freshmen. But I'll work on it over time :)
Do let me know if you know of any printed or web resource that mentions Quest's sexuality - I'll be glad to add it back to the article! -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 23:45, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Human sexual behavior external link

Resolved

Is this Sexual Fantasy Forums external link OK per WP:EL? — diff. I don't want to remove it unless I'm sure, but at least it should be in a External Links section if kept. — Becksguy (talk) 19:59, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Satyr, thanks for your response on my talk. Someone else got to the article before I did and removed the link. Anyway, now I know a bit more about WP:EL for the next time. — Becksguy (talk) 00:42, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Re: Blackpool

Hi, I have replied on Benjiboi's talkpage to keep the conversation together. --BelovedFreak 17:05, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Tony Holiday

Tony Holiday meets Wikipedia:Notability (music) several times over:

  1. He has a charted hit on any national music chart. - He has charted several times in the top twenty in both Germany and Austria.
  2. Has been placed in rotation nationally by any major radio network. - Two songs charted, and therefore assume they were on the radio.
  3. Has released two or more albums on a major label or one of the more important indie labels (i.e. an independent label with a history of more than a few years and a roster of performers, many of which are notable). - He was on both Polydor Records and Koch International.
  4. Has performed music for a work of media that is notable, e.g. a theme for a network television show, performance in a television show or notable film, inclusion on a compilation album, etc. (But if this is the only claim, it is probably more appropriate to have a mention in the main article and redirect to that page.) - Has appeared on numerous German television shows such as ZDF-Hitparade and one charted song was used prominently in a film by François Ozon.

Additionally, he has a large volume of Google entries and has articles on both the German and French Wikipedias. I am not quite sure why you have issues with his notability, perhaps because he was not so popular in the USA or anglophone nations. I have added further sources for his passing of AIDS in 1990. Let me know if you'd prefer more. ExRat (talk)

SatyrTN, thank you for your help with the Tony Holiday article. I very much appreciate it. It is always good to have others immediately reach out and offer help. Cheers! ExRat (talk) 22:11, 31 January 2008 (UTC)