User talk:Benjiboi/Archive 53

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 50 Archive 51 Archive 52 Archive 53 Archive 54 Archive 55 → Archive 60

Edit quality

Hey - I just made some more edits to Clint Catalyst, and was wondering if you could please check them over for me. Thanks, I appreciate your help thus far! Granny Bebeb (talk) 22:57, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Also, I was curious if these links would count as valid alternate sources for his list of awards (which was removed previously): http://vagabondagepress.com/90401/V1I11IN1.html (a literary journal) and this news link also mentions them: http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2009/07/19/18609171.php I want to make sure they're solid for inclusion. Granny Bebeb (talk) 23:13, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Template

OK, I will get a list together, but I will be very grateful if you can lend a hand with the execution, I am not all that swift with all this coding. My Fortran days were long ago. Haiduc (talk) 02:36, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Check my spelling?

Or whatever else might be needed? I am considering going live with User:MichaelQSchmidt/sandbox/National Fibromyalgia Association. I'm feeling pretty good about 10 hours of work. Please take a look and advise of any concerns. Thank you, MichaelQSchmidt (talk) 07:58, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

A bit late to the game but ... post a note on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine asking for someone to take a quick peek to see if there is any gaps or misinformation, misleads that need addressing. -- Banjeboi 21:13, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Immigration Equality (organization)

There is nothing on the Talk page about this issue. Where is the consensus? Lionelt (talk) 20:53, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

I think if you follow the link --> Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#The New American reliable source and is this appropriate for Immigration Equality .28organization.29 <-- that I placed in both the edit summary, which you do seem to use as well as on your talkpage. You'll see where I asked for outside opinions on the reliability of The New American. In short The New American is the propaganda arm of the John Birch Society and should only be used to reliably source the opinions of that society. As this is an encyclopedia article about an organization we need to follow policies on NPOV and reliable sourcing. -- Banjeboi 21:00, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

RSN

You're welcome. I had no idea which side you were on in that debate, so I'm glad to be of assistance. Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 23:24, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for making WP:NODRAMA a success!

Thank you again for your support of the Great Wikipedia Dramaout. Preliminary statistics indicate that 129 new articles were created, 203 other articles were improved, and 183 images were uploaded. Additionally, 41 articles were nominated for DYK, of which at least 2 have already been promoted. There are currently also 8 articles up for GA status and 3 up for FA/FL status. Though the campaign is technically over, please continue to update the log page at WP:NODRAMA/L with any articles which you worked during the campaign, and also to note any that receive commendation, such as DYK, GA or FA status. You may find the following links helpful in nominating your work:

  • T:TDYK for Did You Know nominations
  • WP:GAC for Good Article nominations
  • WP:FAC for Featured Article nominations
  • WP:FLC for Featured List nominations
  • WP:FPC for Featured Picture nominations

Again, thank you for making this event a success! --Jayron32.talk.say no to drama 02:25, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Brilliant job, I wish I could have done more! -- Banjeboi 02:31, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Immigration Equality WQA

You have been mentioned at WQA for deleting the POV tag. [1] Lionelt (talk) 03:40, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Indeed, thank you for getting more eyes on this. -- Banjeboi

Anderson Cooper

Rewrite his sexuality section, again,

  • speculation prevalent, bundle the notable blogs
  • called gay ..., current note is fine
  • response to that speculation, - our summary of the explanation is better that the quote, attribute the interview
  • criticism to that response - bundle Naff's 3? relevant articles; bundle Olberman's with where that was repeated
  • follow up why Cooper avoids addressing the speculation. - Elle has a good section on this -- Banjeboi

Umm, instead of citing a policy or example in support of your edit, or even answering, you archived the discussion. I guess that means you have no objection if I restore the note back to a reference, as it was before you changed it?TVC 15 (talk) 20:06, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

GayVN awards to List of male performers in gay porn films

 Done*use this and do GayVN 2005 going back in time. The awards started in 1986. If inspired there were other awards (see Cole Tucker AfD for link). -- Banjeboi
 Done* AVN pre-GayVN, 1989-1996.
 Done* Do 2001 GayVN
 Done* Look into international awards
 Done**Venus Award and
 Done***1997, first year any gay category
 Done***1998 [2]
 Done***1999 [3]
 Done***2000 Kai Hart try [4]
 Done***2001 Antoine Mallet - I think assoc. w/Jean-Daniel Cadinot try [5]
 Done***2002 - [6]
 Done***2003 - no gay performers awarded
-- Banjeboi 01:15, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

No drama notice

Shh...this user is observing The Great Wikipedia Dramaout from July 18-23 and are probably busy creating content or WikiGnoming. If you have a question, please leave it on the talk page but it is possible that this user may not get back to you until the Dramaout has finished. Join us! Signup is here.

The Dramaout article-improvement log is located here.
Got Immigration Equality (organization) in and cleaned up some others. -- Banjeboi 21:55, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Talk:Homosexual_behavior_in_animals#Incest_and_pedophilia

oy vey. -- Banjeboi

Done. -- Banjeboi 21:55, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Dirkhising

Hi...this is the editor from the Dirkhising article - the one who pointed out the presence of materials about abuse of a girl. I don't quite see how that's POV, considering it's fact. This information should be listed (okay, maybe in the section about accusations of homophobia) because it provides a clinical answer to whether the killers were gay. Apparently they weren't gay - they were gender-indiscriminate pedophiles. NPOV doesn't require us to give credence to fringe theories (such as the killers being gay) at the expense of posting fact. We can still include the mountains of evidence for evolution in an article that mentions 'intelligent design.' That those facts shoot ID out of the water isn't our problem. I think you and I understand each other better than you realize. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.11.135.246 (talk) 01:26, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Well, reliable sources state they were indeed gay. From what your stating do you feel we need to find ways to address the pedophilia angle or ? I guess I would want to look at what reliable sources state about the "abuse of a girl". I'm open to suggestion but we also can't leap to a conclusion. If they were accused of, had materials about, talked about, etc then we state that and let the reader draw their own conclusions. Sourcing states they were gay so we state that, if other sources state they weren't then we reconcile then in a NPOV way with due weight. Thank you for posting and let me know which sources to check out. -- Banjeboi 02:29, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
All of the articles about the case reference the same affidavit, linked here: (http://groups.google.com/group/soc.men/msg/21fef01ecd95f434?). The Dirkhising article's existing reference for the statement that the killers were gay is citation #13, "A Special Kind of Killing," which is also based on the court affidavit.
The affidavit includes self-reports by the killers that they were in a same-sex relationship, not that they were exclusively gay. So ultimately the statement that they are gay is an assumption based on statements the killers themselves made. Meanwhile, the same affidavit notes that police officers found writings describing the abuse of young girls (one a real-life 10-year-old seen at a bus stop, the other a 9-year-old who may or may not have been real). There is no inevitable conflict between the killers' statements that they were in a relationship and the police statements regarding the abuse writings. But most articles are jumping to conclusions by stating that these killers were exclusively gay, and they don't mention the abuse writings at all. The issue here is that the sources are POV-biased (homophobic), with the sole exception of the affidavit on which they are all based. So they mention the same-sex relationship and completely omit the writings - which should be of interest, since the writings raise the question of whether there were other crimes in the killers' past.
There are articles which jump to the conclusion that the killers were also abusing girls. I don't make that assumption, because no charges were pressed and the affidavit does not speculate as to whether the abuse writings were truth or fantasy. But the presence of these writings does indicate that the killers were not exclusively attracted to males. And the source stating that they had these writings is more reliable than the killers, who are the only source for any statements about their relationship with each other. -74.11.135.246 (talk) 18:20, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
It will take time to dig through this but I appreciate your bringing the issue up. -- Banjeboi 21:58, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
OK, in looking through this the first key statement is "While being

questioned by Detective Martha Armstrong after being Mirandized, Josh Brown stated that he was Davis Carpenter’s lover." Nothing contradicts this but I think we should clarify this and state that they had also stated they had lived together in three states and were presumed to be a gay couple. The also-assaulted-young-girls-evidence isn't terribly convincing I'm afraid. It's clear that Dirkhising was degraded in various ways including some feminizing and it's unclear where any actual encounter with any other minors, or anyone else really may have ever occurred. The handwritten story referring to an assault on a young girl could easily be more of the same - fictionalized role playing done in story form. Often in written pornography the genders are changed from an original story to suit the desires of an audience. We don't know who the story was written for and if it was based on any real people or any real desires. For all we know he was an aspiring porn writer making some extra money - that the subject of the story wa a young girl sexually assaulted makes it disturbing and suspicious but not conclusive to anything. -- Banjeboi 17:37, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Just out of curiosity

Hello, Benjiboi, I'm very curious about your moniker and it would be very nice if you could you tell me - why your signature Benjeboi does not match your registered moniker Benjiboi and what is the meaning? I've assumed that your name may be related to Benji the fictional dog, or Benjamin, but I could be totally wrong. I hope you do not mind a stranger (like me)'s sudden visit.--Caspian blue 22:25, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

No issue with curiosity! It's a combine of Banjee and boi, I thought of actually moving it but meh, "Benji" is also a Jewish nickname but I get enough grief with just the LGBT stuff as is. Those who hate have enough to work with. -- Banjeboi 22:30, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for the reply, so the mystery is solved. :-) As for the grief, well I think Wikipedia is more liberal than in real life, but well, cleaning up andy POVs would do good for the Wikipedia. Best regards.--Caspian blue 01:31, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
Lol! Thank you for the perspective, I find Wikipedia more conservative than real life so may be if no one is happy we really have reached consensus! -- Banjeboi 00:53, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Recent deaths

Hi, concerning the use of bare references at Recent deaths, that has been the consensus there for some time. Some earlier discussion exists at Talk:Deaths in 2008#Bare references. As for overlinking, eg America, each date is different to a "section" that is written as a cohesive entity. Deaths on a particular date grow over days and weeks; it's unlikely that the many contributors are going to look up and down to see whether a particular nationality has been added previously, and is already wikilinked. Indeed, the first occurrence of a particular nationality will vary over time according to additions in alphabetical order. I agree that there is excessive linking (eg every occurrence of the word "actor"), but that seems to be the fashion over there. Being a tolerant wikignome, I just try to maintain some consistency. Regards, WWGB (talk) 05:39, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

I think you're mistaken on the bare refs front but as a partial solution I suggest converting all the previous years' over, really [6] is of little use when our MOS clearly prefers any citation style beyond that. I have no vested interest in that but anyone who did would likely find clear consensus given wider community input. A bot could convert all the past lists within days if not hours. I certainly see the case for leaving the last year or so as is until the lists stabilize. Ditto with the overlinking, leave the current as is and maybe clean-up the older ones. I'll leave you to it though as I know wikignoming can be tedious! -- Banjeboi 16:12, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 27 July 2009

Delivered by -- Tinu Cherian BOT - 07:43, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:The Suburbs Title card S2.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:The Suburbs Title card S2.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 07:48, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

I've re-added for now. -- Banjeboi 22:30, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Clive Fiske Harrison

I put up an article about my father - see the sources there and also [7] - and it has been put up on the AfD board, and as a result so has the article Alexander Fiske-Harrison for which you voted keep. I thought you should know. --Fiskeharrison (talk) 09:41, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

I've added my comments. -- Banjeboi 22:39, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

rescue Black Cap (London pub)?

start with these. -- Banjeboi

Done. -- Banjeboi 07:58, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Immigration Equality (organization)

Updated DYK query On July 30, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Immigration Equality (organization), which you created or substantially expanded. ... that Immigration Equality has been the main advocate for the Uniting American Families Act to give same-sex couples the same status as heterosexuals under the U.S. Immigration and Nationality Act? You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Orlady (talk) 13:28, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you! -- Banjeboi 02:39, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Quentin Elias

Please discuss any reasons for your edits here Talk:Quentin Elias before making such. The article is properly sourced and structured. Thank you for your cooperation.--XLR8TION (talk) 04:23, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

You have some serious WP:Ownership issues which are clouding your judgment there. -- Banjeboi 04:31, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Your questions at the Checkuser/Oversight election

We have not delineated a specific "target number" of candidates for selection from this election.

Current and past holders of advanced permissions and those in roles associated with additional responsibilities have been contacted in real life, or had family members, employers and others contacted, by individuals who (generally speaking) are dissatisfied with the Wikipedian's activities. Such contacts have ranged from mildly harassing emails to outing of pseudonymous editors, to attempts to break into homes and physical stalking.

Hope you find this helpful. Risker (talk) 20:41, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

It would be helpful to clear that up, as someone who was just looking to make an informed vote i wasn't sure if focusing on the top three I think or all that would be good, etc made sense. It seems all who pass a threshold will be accepted then? We should state what the threshold is and that those who meet are likely to be approved.
We should clarify the offsite harassment as well, just a sentence would do. Thank you for the info but we really should clear that up on that page. If I have these questions likely others do as well. -- Banjeboi 20:46, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
The sections of the CU/OS election page addressing harassment were, I think, intended to be read by the candidates, so I don't think clarifying them would help you make an informed vote (although it would certainly help to clear up any confusion the candidates may have!). AGK 21:00, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
I agree to a point but I also think, as assuming a wide audience would be invited to the page, we should be clear that people in those positions, even candidates face offsite harassment. The way it was stated it sounded as if the Foundation would be doing due diligence of some sort liek a background check. We should be clear on this, no? -- Banjeboi 21:04, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
I can see your point, Benjiboi. I think perhaps it is better just to do a bit of a rewrite of that section since it is no longer particularly germane. Incidentally, there is some discussion on the number of "seats" on the talk page of the election page, if you're interested. Thanks for your questions. Risker (talk) 21:19, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
No prob, I wouldn't mention it if it I didn't care. -- Banjeboi 21:30, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Miss Gay Philippines asap

fix, rewrite, DYK, 30 year pageant. -- Banjeboi 23:23, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Hey, Benjiboy, thanks for the welcome!

I've actually been editing Wikipedia for some time, under IP cover. Thought it was time to log in and take credit for my work.

I'm also a member of the GLBT world. Power to you!

Maceis (talk) 05:53, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

You're quite welcome, visit the WP:LGBT wikiproject and add yourself as a member - all the cool kids are doing it! -- Banjeboi 05:56, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Benjiboi/Archive_53&oldid=1190229786"