User talk:Tabercil/archive11

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Pornographic actress pages

Why do you spend so much time editing pornographic actress pages? Just curious... 68.149.137.181 (talk) 05:12, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Nooo... don't try to shift things from your actions, which are now properly vandalism, to what I do. Have fun not editing for the next 2 days. Tabercil (talk) 05:22, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
It's all true, and now sourced. I'll report you to someone who matters for abuse of newbies (that's a rule- Don't bite the newcomers), and abuse of power when you banned me over adding true statements to an article (now cited). You've really backed yourself into a corner; if I was you I'd leave well enough alone, because it can only get worse for you from here 68.149.137.181 (talk) 04:08, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
My apologies. When I saw that you had readded the information, I did not see that you had provied sources. However, I had made some edits to the article and had provided sources for those edits - such as his time in Sweden and his $4 million deal with the Islanders. Your restoration of your version of the article blew those edits away. As well, I would advise you to try and edit from a neutral point of view and not to take ownership of the article by insisting on having your version of the article be the only one present. Tabercil (talk) 04:15, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

I know we're supposed to WP:ASF and make WP:NPA but don't you think it's a little funny that a 16-yr-old is currently recommending multiple pornography articles for deletion? I uhh don't know if he has the uhhh proper knowledge and maturity to ascertain the notability of a porn star at that age. Oh wait, who am I kidding, knowing how precocious kids are these days. Morbidthoughts (talk) 22:49, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

... Ummm... wow. Maybe he found his father's (or maybe even his grandfather's) stash of Playboys? <G> But I honestly think he can properly evaluate if an article properly argues notability without having to step outside of Wikipedia. Tabercil (talk) 23:37, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
Well, that's assuming he is indeed a 16 year old kid... and he might not be after seeing him be blocked as a sock of a different editor. Tabercil (talk) 00:46, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Lexi Belle

Please, look Talk:Lexi Belle. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.120.200.8 (talk) 00:09, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Bernie Dexter photo

Hi, the photo of Bernie Dexter (Bernie_Dexter.jpg) is fine. I paid for the shoot that it comes from and the model and photographer are perfectly happy for it to be on the site. As she's a model surely it makes sense to have a pic of her modelling something? Could you explain how my rationale was lacking? I thought I'd covered all bases? I'd originially uploaded a version of the pic under the free license, but someone deleted it because they considered it not to be free. So I thought, ok, I'll upload it saying it's not free, then. And now you've removed it saying something else. This is confusing the hell out of me. Because you removed it from her article, a bot turned up and threatened to delete the photo. This is the second time I've had to put the pic back in and it's driving me mad! STOP DELETING THE PHOTO!!! Helvissa (talk) 09:40, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

  • I understand, I sympathize, see my comments on your talk page for suggestions on how to fix the situation. Tabercil (talk) 11:11, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Bridgette Kerkove

I was reading her articletalk and your comment. Knowing Skeeter and her and having experienced her ire towards Skeeter indirectly on set. Yeah, I'd say that was her. *smirk* I'm troubled though that the source for her name was Gene Ross (self-published porn gossipist and friends with Skeeter) and she was outed by her husband as a way to get back at her. Morbidthoughts (talk) 05:29, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Doesn't surprise me that Gene and Skeeter are friends; I've seen how often Gene runs stuff from Skeeter and that guy seems to have a mouth that engages well before his brain does based on what I've read on Gene's site. And you're right that the source is troubling that it is a blog, but at the same time, who best would know what her real name is than her ex? Tabercil (talk) 10:47, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
I thought about replacing her biography references from Gene's adultfyi with articles from AVN. When I looked at the AVN articles about bridgette, almost all of them were written by Gene! Same issue with lack of editorial oversight since he was the editor in chief of AVN at the time. Reason why gossip sites like adultfyi and luke ford are so frequently relied upon by people is because AVN really isn't that much more reliable. I decided against touching the article also because of not wanting to draw the Kerkoves' attention in case I cross paths with them again. Morbidthoughts (talk) 16:01, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
Smart... you're a heck of a lot closer to Porn Valley than I am and as a result more likely to bump into those people. Tabercil (talk) 18:32, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

WP:PORNBIO

I really don't agree with it.

  • Why number of films is invalid critia? If a non-porn actress starred in about 100 films she would be deleted? Think about it - millions of people watch her.
  • Why mainstream appearance makes a porn star notable? Does any person who take a part in a talk show is notable? --THFFF (talk) 11:45, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
  • A lot of what you've brought up has been debated before. At one point, PORNBIO was its own stand-alone page before it got folded into the general WP:NOTE page and a number of the clauses got hashed out back then. You might want to take a meander through the Talk page from that time, which can be found at Wikipedia talk:Notability (pornographic actors). I know the film count topic got discussed on several different occasion. Tabercil (talk) 11:53, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Can you find a source?

I know how good your skills are with sources for porn star articles. So, how about Playmate articles? Kona Carmack could use a few. The way it reads right now, she has a couple jobs but it's not real clear if she left any of them or if she's going to them concurrently. Care to lend a small hand? Dismas|(talk) 12:41, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Haham hanuka strikes again?

I saw your name at the notorious Haham hanuka's talk page and on some porn AFD's, so you may find this interesting:

Thanks. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk)

Gwerf. Now that's one from the wayback machine. All the stuff involving Haham's original block predates my admin vote, and I'm quite surprised you found my name on his talk page, especially since I've never edited it and a search of the last version of the page before AnonGuy turned it into a redirect to the user page doesn't show my name. Anyway, that's irrelevant, especially since one of the accused socks of Qwerty1234 (THFFF) does seem to match Haham's areas of interest. No smoking gun, but lots of smoke in general. Tabercil (talk) 00:43, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Puma Swede

Can i have the source code for the Puma Swede page i created last night? I would like to keep until she becomes more notable to wikipedia standards. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Terrence12690 (talk • contribs) 03:14, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Nadia Nyce

I posted a quaere related to your reversion of my substitution of photos at the Project you cited. If you wouldn't mind, would you ping me at my talk page when you respond as my watch list is a bit out of control at present and I'm very interested in your response, I had no idea the project had such a guideline previously. Thanks and cheers!--Doug.(talk • contribs) 04:47, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Hannah Cornett

I've received a couple images of Hannah Cornett from her management. I emailed them a while back asking for info. So, can I use your Lukeisback page as a template for how I should approach this? Would that be the best way to go? Dismas|(talk) 19:58, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Alexandra Nice

Thank you for improving the situation. I still don't think it's enough, but I respect your expertise here too much to edit further. When I posted my original edits, I also posted this. I'd like to hear your response and then what others think. Is Luke Ford in some sort of BLP nether region - not a reliable source but "the best we can do so it's ok"? Thanks. David in DC (talk) 22:37, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

  • About the only time I feel Luke is suitable is when we're looking at one of his interviews with people. In that instance, I feel it's safe to assume that there is back up for what's printed. Beyond that, he's pretty much a standard blog and I'd be very reluctant to use him as a source. Tabercil (talk) 22:56, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
I understand. Would you be willing to add that as a response over here? David in DC (talk) 22:59, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
Already there. <G> Tabercil (talk) 23:00, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Help?

Hi... You were helping me with the Mason Marconi page... can you take a look at my talk page?

-Librarian2008

NEW POST: Hi... I had taken the photo I tried to upload before, but I can upload a different photo if needed? Are candids better for this kind of thing? Thanks for helping me figure this out... it's still very confusing to me!!!

Librarian2008 (talk) 07:38, 18 September 2008 (UTC)Librarian2008

User: 70.15.7.174

Thanks for your assistance with the ongoing vandalism of anonymous user 70.15.7.174. You and I both reverted his edits to Devon, Emmaus High School and Saucon Valley High School. Regrettably, he has returned from his brief ban and is right back to the same vandalistic edits. I am hoping you can check it out and administer appropriate justice. Thanks. PAWiki (talk) 05:43, 18 September 2008 (UTC)


User: 70.15.7.174 (round 2)

Anonymous user User:70.15.7.174 has returned from a temporary block to continue, without explanation, to remove cited information from articles and to replace it with uncited and inaccurate information. You and I both reverted his edits to Devon and Emmaus High School previously. He has been properly blocked twice, following abundant warnings. He just returns and continues his vandalism. Would appreciate your assistance. Thanks. PAWiki (talk) 00:53, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Renee Alway in Chinese Wikipedia

Hey Tabercil, You deleted the image of Renee Alway in English Wikipedia. It is nominated for deletion in Wikimedia Commons image. There's an image still remaining in Chinese Wikipedia article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.96.111.81 (talk) 13:04, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

  • I deleted it thinking it was a local image, then discovered it to be on Commons. Since the Commons image should get cleared away pretty soon, I'm not going to worry about the image on the Chinese article. Tabercil (talk) 23:38, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

stop deleting my things because it is true

She has been none as a recurring character Cruz Perea 21:21, 4 October 2008 (UTC) [disney.com] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cperea1994 (talk • contribs) 17:21, October 4, 2008

  • There have only been two shows aired so far, and she's not been on either. Until then, let's leave the show off the page eh? Besides, all the information I can gather is that she will appear on the show as a guest star, not as a recurring. Tabercil (talk) 22:52, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Brea Bennett

Don't we need a source one way or the other for the "natural bust" section of the infoboxes? Dismas|(talk) 17:38, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Dismas you might wanna use your eyes, anyone can see that she didn't have a boobjob Wikicallisto (talk) 17:43, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
Easy folks... it is a legitimate question. Strictly speaking, everything in Wikipedia should be backed up with a source, save obvious and non-contentious material. So, yeah, I'd say putting a {{cite}} tag there wouldn't be a problem, even though we are probably trying to prove a negative here. Tabercil (talk) 17:59, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
I thought we might run into the "prove a negative" situation but even when we say "yes" then we are stating something that should be able to be sourced. I would rather just leave it blank until something can be referenced either way, yes or no. And I did not intend any animosity to be implied in my question. Dismas|(talk) 18:07, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
"save obvious and non-contentious material" you said it right there, how is there any doubt that her breasts aren't natural, please go look at some nude pictures of her, did she maybe get the world's smallest boobjob? sorry, but this is taking it to an insane level, if she had scars on her breasts we could have a discussion Wikicallisto (talk) 18:23, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Awards and titles

You removed Brea's Twistys title from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brea_Bennett with the reason being "Rm non-encyclopedic award"

Where do you draw the line? Many models have that title listed on their Wikipedia page, in addition to titles from Danni, Penthouse, Playboy, JJgirl, Hustler, Hawaiian Tropic, Mystique, ...

say the benchmark is Playboy Playmate or Penthouse Pet, fine, but it seems Cyber Girl is also a valid title on Wikipedia, as is Playboy's Model of the Year, as is Hustler's Honey etc...

Also Twistys attracks vastly more traffic than Penthouse, as much as Playboy and even beating them in the month of September 08 Wikicallisto (talk) 02:35, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

  • Generally, any award which appears in the Category:Adult movie awards or an appearance in a notable mainstream magazine such as Penthouse, Playboy or Playgirl would count. The other items you mention (JJgirl, Hawaiian Tropic, Hustler, etc.) are much further down the notability list. Tabercil (talk) 03:23, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
    • I don't contest that they aren't more down the notability list, I'm just saying that many models have those on their Wiki page and it seems random that they would get deleted for some and not for others, you see what I mean. + I just noticed a list of DanniGirls is on Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_DanniGirls and that title is much less known than Twistys Wikicallisto (talk) 12:09, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
      • The "It's on other pages, why not this one" is a bad argument. See WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Basically, you're judging one page (Bennett's) according to something else which may not be correct/formatted correctly/etc. Dismas|(talk) 13:09, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
        • that said, there is not a list of approved titles anywhere on Wikipedia, so it's just your opinion against someone elses and seeing how many models do have them, most Wiki regulars have no problem with them Wikicallisto (talk) 15:20, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
          • There's 2 issues here. One, are the awards themselves notable by being reported on in independent reliable secondary sources? Do a Google News search with the terms "Playboy Playmate" or "Penthouse Pet" and compared that to "Twisty's Treat". Two, policy dictates that the specific award must be verified against a reliable source. Babereporter who had referral codes to twisty's isn't exactly an independent reliable source. Morbidthoughts (talk) 20:30, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
            • Invalid point, if you use Google News as a source, almost no porn star would get mentioned on Wikipedia, since Google News isn't really known to publish adult news sources, you would have to use sources as AVN and Xbiz. And the reason why Playmate and Pet get mentioned at all is because of gossip columns that report when they marry or divorce some other famous person. As said before Twistys outperforms Penthouse in surfers and is even with Playboy. Secondly the source was CORRECT, btw The New York Times website also has affiliate codes Wikicallisto (talk) 23:22, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
              • Google News hits are just evidence of mainstream notability that Playboy and Penthouse confers, something that Twisty's doesn't. I don't see you citing any evidence to the contrary, and notability is not just mere web performance. The New York Times may use affiliate codes but not on the subject of the article they are reporting on since that would be a blatant conflict of interest without disclosure. It doesn't matter if the promotional source you used is correct. The standard is not accuracy but verifiability. Babereporter.com, a glorified affiliate linkfarm, is not an independent reliable source. Morbidthoughts (talk) 00:03, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
                • You dodged the porn star point, very few porn stars will have results in Google News. BTW just noticed something above about Lexi Belle http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lexi_Belle#cite_note-afwg-5 it mentions she won the "Adam Film World Guide Award", the what now? My overall point is that there doesn't seem to be any standard for this stuff and some people here take it too far. Look for fashion models and beauty queens all their titles get mentioned, even if it's Miss Small-town-no-one-knows 1990 Wikicallisto (talk) 02:48, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
                  • Adam Film World Guide. Porn performers are covered by WP:PORNBIO. Using the trade journals, AVN or XBIZ, to confirm notability for the performers is proper under that guideline (specifically criteria 1) because the journals goes into specifics while mainstream press just glosses over with general coverage of the awards. For the general notability guidelines which covers awards, I'm a lot more conservative. My point has always been Penthouse Pets, Playboy Playmates, AVN Awards, even AFWG (you don't know your porn history if you don't know what that is) Awards are more notable than any Twisty's Treat due to mainstream coverage. Twisty's, the website, probably still couldn't even qualify for an article right now. However, notability does not directly limit the content of an article. If you had thrown in the Treat mention cited to the AVN article (which does exist by the way), I would have shrugged and move on. Morbidthoughts (talk) 03:31, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Template talk:Infobox Playboy Playmate

Please see Template talk:Infobox Playboy Playmate#Sources. Thanks, Dismas|(talk) 05:41, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Commons

Good day, Tabercil. What do you think of applying for adminship on Commons? --Kanonkas :  Talk  19:26, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

LOL... it does seem like I'm spending more and more time there than I am here... lemme think about it for a bit. And by a "bit" I could mean months... If you take a look at my EN RfA from last year, you'll see that there was a three month gap between when I was first broached by AnonEMouse on the topic and when I finally assented to stand for the mop. Tabercil (talk) 19:46, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
Oh ok, feel free to take all the time you need till you feel you're ready to go. Best regards, --Kanonkas :  Talk  12:29, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
Anything now? Just left a note just incase so you wouldn't forget this heh. --Kanonkas :  Talk  20:05, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
Awright. I'll stand... if only cause it'd help me in terms of clearing copyvio material off Commons that much faster. Tabercil (talk) 01:27, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Prods

User:RMHED seems to be going on a very pointy crusade to prod most every Pet. Therefore, I'd like to find where the criteria of Pet and Playmate got dropped out of WP:PORNBIO. When the guideline was first written, it specifically stated that Playmates and Pets were notable. Right around the time that PORNBIO got folded into the overlying guideline of WP:PEOPLE, those criteria, from what I recall, mysteriously disappeared. I can't find that now though since WP:PORNBIO was deleted before the redirect to WP:PEOPLE was put into place. So, do you think that, as an admin, you could view the deleted guideline and see where and/or why the criteria of Playmate and Pet were dropped from the guideline? At one time they were specifically given as examples of notability. Thanks, Dismas|(talk) 03:28, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

  • Hmm... the last version of PORNBIO before it got moved to PEOPLE can be seen [1] (which I believe you should be able to see Dismas). It clearly states there that Playboy, Penthouse and Playgirl were considered to be notable. And in fact if I look at WP:PORNBIO as it stands now, it still lists them among the criteria. So offhand, I don't think RMHED has a leg to stand on. He's probably acting in the aftermath of the Ginger Jolie AfD thinking the decision from the AfD meant that being a Penthouse Pet means you're not notable on just that basis; however that line of thinking seems to have been firmly squelched based on comments made at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Angelica Bella (3rd nomination), Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vanessa Chase and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Prinzzess. Ginger Jolie was a special case where Notability and BLP/privacy came directly into conflict. I've since opened up a DRV to have that looked at again as I think that "no consensus, default to delete" decision was a lil' hinky. (Personally, if I had my druthers I probably would've chosen to keep the article, stub it down to the barest minimums then lock it so only admins can edit it with a note for would-be editors to see the AfD first). Tabercil (talk) 03:42, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
    • Interesting. I must have been looking at the history of PORNBIO instead of Notability (pornographic actors). Going through the history, I see that my suspicion was correct. Playmate OTM and Pet OTM were once specifically named. Now to figure out when and why they were dropped in preference to the more ambiguous "...well known award... such as Penthouse, Playboy, or Playgirl..." The term "well known" is vague and POV. It leaves a grey area as to whether "of the Month" would qualify or just "of the Year". And "such as" is a bit grey as well since it lacks an objective bar to measure a publication by. Some could argue that Hustler is a "major magazine". IMO, Hustler Honeys are not notable. I'm on the fence about Pets and feel that Playmates are definitely notable. Dismas|(talk) 04:31, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
      • Yep, here it is. AnonEMouse removed the "of the month" without any discussion on the talk page specific to this. This brings in ambiguity if someone were to argue whether "of the Month" is notable enough. Dismas|(talk) 05:03, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

my comment

y did u erase my edit?! its true she is the fukin hottest porn star ever!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.168.151.158 (talk) 04:30, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

female adult bio template

I remember that you had managed to successfully pull the orientation from the template because of the BLP issues. I'm beginning to think the natural bust field should be pulled too due to the OR and BLP issues. Too many people are filling this field out based on personal observation/analysis. Morbidthoughts (talk) 20:34, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, it's perhaps the biggest magnet for WP:OR left in the infobox. Tabercil (talk) 01:05, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
I've brought up the issue on the template talk page now. Morbidthoughts (talk) 19:43, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Lisa Sparxxx

It appears that Lisa Sparxxx has created an account. As you can see, I've notified her of our concerns as far as usernames goes. She posted her email address (which I don't think will be an issue since it's rather obvious) and her personal cell phone number. So, that leaves me with a couple questions. Do we have to go through some sort of confimation process in this case? And shouldn't we remove her cell phone number from the history of her talk page? I've looked over WP:USERNAME but I don't see anything that says what to do next, unless I missed it. I'd appreciate it if you took a look.

I've never gone this route in dealing with the subject of an article. The last case, I just kind of dealt with on my own and no personal information was revealed on the talk page. Thanks, Dismas|(talk) 01:47, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Best thing I think would be for her to do what it says at Wikipedia:USERNAME#Real_names: send an email to info saying who she is. Tabercil (talk) 03:10, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
Just what I figured but wanted to double check. What about the cell phone number? Will the people that she emails to confirm that she is who she says she is remove that? Thanks for your help, Dismas|(talk) 03:33, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
Hmm... good point. I'll take a moment and see if I can redact it. I expect the volunteers who tackle the email that come from info have admin access, so they'll be able to look into the deletion history to see what it is. Tabercil (talk) 03:35, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Kathy Shower image

I'm bringing this to your attention since you're more familiar with how things work on Commons than I am. An anon IP recently added an image supposedly of Kathy Shower. I don't think that the person in the image is a 55 year old woman. And I think it's highly suspect that the only image that was uploaded from this time with Shower was one where you can barely see her face. So, what can be done about my suspicions? Thanks, Dismas|(talk) 14:22, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Lisa_sparxxx

Do you still want us to hold on to the rename? =Nichalp «Talk»= 13:29, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

She hasn't done any more edits since she put the rename request, so I don't know if she's seen the OTRS confirmation of her ID on her talk page, nor my response to her about that laying out her options. Let me drop her an email to see if she still wants to change her nickname or go with Lisa Sparxx. Tabercil (talk) 16:13, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
Could you give me the ticket number, so that I can check up on OTRS what's happening? =Nichalp «Talk»= 20:05, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
Sure. It's 2008110410030942. Tabercil (talk) 20:41, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. I checked the ticket, she seems to be the real person, so I renamed here quoting the ticket number. =Nichalp «Talk»= 12:43, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Check an edit?

I'm at work and can't really check this edit safely. Really, I can't confirm the info on the supplied web site. Would you mind? Dismas|(talk) 02:28, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

It's hard to say... there is a webcam present on the site, but I can't tell what the cam does. There's no explicit mention on the public side of the site what happens on the cam, so I'm pulling the edit out for now. Tabercil (talk) 03:38, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
Okay, I'll keep that in mind. Thanks, Dismas|(talk) 03:49, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Query

If you don;t mind my asking, I don't understand why you declined the speedy tag on Stoya. I can't find barely any reliable information about the article's subject and the only 'reliable' sources listed in the article give little or no info that is of substance. I had actually deleted the article a second time today until I saw your 'decline' and I restored it because I don't want to start a wheel war. Thanks. Thingg⊕⊗ 04:24, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Take a look at the criteria behind WP:PORNBIO... I feel she's notable as she's won one award and was nominated for a second. Tabercil (talk) 04:26, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
(ec)On second thought, nvm. I still think it should be deleted, but I most definitely DO NOT want to have to look at any sources relating to this topic. Sorry for the trouble Thingg⊕⊗ 04:27, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
LOL... no problems. I understand the squick some feel about the topic. Tabercil (talk) 04:29, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Pornbio change

There is some dispute over whether you are opposed to changing to multiple award nominations, or just listing the problems with the change. Would you mind clarifying on the talk page?Horrorshowj (talk) 04:42, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Steven Diet Goedde

I've been in contact with Steven Goedde after someone left a message on my talk page regarding an article here about Goedde. It seems that User:Videmus Omnia helped him get a few images on Wikipedia and VO also was in contact with him about the Goedde article. One example of the images is the second image on the Dita Von Teese article. Anyway, Goedde is now wondering why the article about him was deleted. The deletion message says something about copyvio from a link. Without the link or the text of the article, I can't tell. I don't think VO would have written a copyvio article. So, can you provide me with the text of the article? Or even just take a look at it to see why it would have been deleted? Thanks, Dismas|(talk) 04:14, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Okay, the last edit before it got deleted gives the details. Basically it said that the biography was an exact duplicate of what was on Goedde's own site, specifically this page. And it was an exact duplicate of the page in question. And from looking back in the article's history, the copyvio happened well before VO's edits - specifically it looks like an edit that came from the IP address 66.92.40.236 on June 21, 2005 (VO's edits were in August 2007). You could safely restore the article - just make sure there's no copyvio text on it. Check your email for the last version of the article. Tabercil (talk) 05:05, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
I appreciate it. I'll get to it when I have time. Thanks, Dismas|(talk) 05:56, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
Wait a sec... If VO's edits were after the copyvio edits, why is the last version (the one you sent me) an exact copy of the bio page at his web site? Can't we just go back to VO's last version of the article and restore that? Dismas|(talk) 06:20, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
Nope. I did some checks of what there was after the June 21st edit - they all had the copyvio text in it. As for what was there before then? This is it: "Steve Diet Goedde is a self-taught erotic photographer who has made a name for himself by going against the traditional cliches of erotic photography. While most erotic photographers explore nude landscapes, Goedde prefers to survey the sensual appeal of fetishism and fashion's effect on libido. While lovingly documenting such textures as latex, PVC, and leather, Goedde manages to remind us that there are indeed people under the clothing. In addition to the high degree of eroticism, a sense of individuality and warmth seep through his portraits and settings. His two hardcover retrospectives, "The Beauty of Fetish: Volumes I & II", were published by renowned Swiss photography publisher Edition Stemmle in 1998 and 2001 respectively. In 2005, Slish Pix released a DVD anthology of his work entitled "Living Through Steve Diet Goedde"." Tabercil (talk) 13:28, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Sunset Thomas.

Re [2]. Emails aren't reliable, published, third party sources as required by Wikipedia's verifiability policy which states "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth—that is, whether readers are able to check that material added to Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source, not whether we think it is true. [...] The burden of evidence lies with the editor who adds or restores material."

I know about the OTRS ticket:2008111810023022, I removed the email sourced information because I answered the ticket.

Please be careful with reverts, you put the Unreferenced template back on the page even tho it does have several references. -- Jeandré, 2008-12-10t08:47z, -- Jeandré, 2008-12-10t08:52z

So what am I to tell Sunset then? Tabercil (talk) 13:01, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
Eh, never mind. Found a diff source. Tabercil (talk) 13:03, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

banning links to certain sites

Could you remind me what hoops you had to jump through to get certain sites banned from being linked to? There has been a spammer lately adding a bunch of links to babes2babes.net. See this link for instance. Dismas|(talk) 22:04, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Ah, I see you've been noticing them too... [3] Dismas|(talk) 22:36, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
If he's being really persistent, I'd pay a visit to Wikipedia:WikiProject Spam for help in getting the site blocked from being added. And you could also use Special:LinkSearch to make sure you've caught all of the ones added. Tabercil (talk) 00:21, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Jett Blakk

When you get a moment, would you pop by Jett Blakk's afd and clarify what you mean? Thanks! -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 06:57, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Advice sought

Since I note that you were involved in the previous discussion on the Sade Adu talk page (not sure if you're still watching that page) about his WP:BLP violations, what do you suggest I do at this point? At first I thought User:Swampfire was just clueless, but now he seems to have clearly tipped over into abuse. I can't tell if the guy is just gunning for me for some reason, or is trying to make a WP:POINT, but it seems to me clearly disruptive at this point.[4] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Xihr (talk • contribs) 22:20, December 16, 2008

Hmm.. lemme take a look & figure out what's occuring... Tabercil (talk) 03:59, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
If he/she can find a valid source of her being a british citizen then it can stay. But as with many other articles just because someone has british ancestry, and moved to England for a portion of their life, does NOT make them british, unless they obtained citizenship. So once he/she finds a valid source of her actually being a citizen, and not just a article of someone calling her british, it can stay once the valid sourceof citizenship is found. Also it is clear that not me but Xihr is in violation of WP:BLP not me, it is also Xihr is the one the is WP:POINT. As stated I have no objection to it being there once he/she PROVES she is a citizen. Otherwise all biographies on this site should be changed to reflect other people being citizen of countries just bcause they lived in them. Keira Knightley would become British/American, Joss Stone would become British/American, Elton John British/American and so on. The burden of proof is on Xihr once it is found I have no problem with it staying. But since he/she is set on trying to make a WP:POINT he/she needs to find a valid site of her british citizenship. Swampfire (talk) 18:14, 17 December 2008 (UTC) Swampfire (talk) 18:08, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
I placed the page at a truly neutral point of view. The same as has been done on other pages with similar issue. I removed "nigerian and british" both. Her birthplace is stated in other places on the page along with her living in England. That one statement was totally not needed anyway. From reading the article you read the same stuff.Swampfire (talk) 18:38, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
And I've essentially replied to this on Talk:Sade Adu. Tabercil (talk) 00:51, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Maria Ozawa real name / privacy issue

Hi, Tabercil. At the Talk:Maria Ozawa an editor has, in a good faith comment, I believe, mentioned her real name in passing. Another editor removed this, without comment. I restored it, and he left a note that his concern was over Ms. Ozawa's privacy. Since that is a valid reason for removing the name, but not-- I believe-- a reason to remove another editor's entire comment, is there an established way you Admins have for dealing with this? (for example, selectively removing her name from the page history while keeping the rest of the message?) I see the original editor has just restored it, so I'll try a compromise edit in the meantime... Dekkappai (talk) 15:56, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Dunno of any such policy... offhand, I think what's being done is the best option. When I have time I'll dip into the article history and clear out the prior versions where her real name can be seen. Tabercil (talk) 16:55, 19 December 2008 (UTC)


Hi, thanks for removing the personal details in the Maria Ozawa article's discussion page, would it be possible to also delete said details in the main article history ( several edits were made in may 2007) and also on the following talk page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Davidkazuhiro#.2A.2A.2A.2A when you have some time? As suggested by another user, I already asterisked it out.

Thanks Drplatipus (talk) 07:28, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi Tabercil. I'm the good faith editor Dekkappai referred to. To be honest I'm a little peeved that I heard about the permanent removal of my edits second hand. Thankfully I'm not one to rant =P, and I understand that you can be busy.

However, would you please explain to me - on my talk page - the evidence which caused you to make your decision, and cite the relevant Wikipedia policies to me which back up your decision. Thanks! --Davidkazuhiro (talk) 22:28, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Nope, no questions. I was just a little confused and put off with the way things were done, so all I needed was an explanation. Thanks a lot for taking the time to do so. Merry Christmas =). --Davidkazuhiro (talk) 07:46, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Template:Japanese erotic cinema

Hi, Tabercil. Looks like we've got a low-level edit war going on at Template:Japanese erotic cinema. An editor is redirecting the Title to Pornography in Japan. There are all kinds of reasons this is inappropriate-- Pornography includes many more genres than cinema. Pornography in Japan has a history far older than cinema. Erotic cinema is not necessarily pornographic (the pink film subjects for example), etc... Any ideas? Dekkappai (talk) 14:05, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Porn

Could you add your thoughts to this please? Thanks, Dismas|(talk) 04:59, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Finding Pictures.

You seem to be very good at finding pics that are proper for use here at Wiki, particularly for female adult actress. My Props to you.

I was wondering if you could figure out a way to find one for former (Norway) Playboy Playmate and current soap opera star Ewa Da Cruz? Thanks a lot!My72.name225is.502.2 (talk) 23:55, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Tabercil/archive11&oldid=1141001853"