User talk:Benjiboi/Archive 27

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

← Archive 26 |

Archive 27

| Archive 28 →

Note about Jeff

Thank you for the note about Jeff, I may well have missed if if you hadn't let me know... Dev920, who misses Jeffpw. 11:05, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No prob. I miss him very much. Banjeboi 21:28, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks...

...for bringing the problem with my signature to my attention. However, I can't remember where I did that little experiment and I frankly don't care enough to hunt through all of my contributions to find it. But the info is useful and I appreciate your being helpful.

However, I doubt I'll continue to "fancy" it up. In any event, thank you for letting me know withOUT the patronizing and condescending tone far too many "editors" use when they see an opportunity to beat another editor around the head and neck. For a lot of them--obviously, with waaaaay too much time on their hands--it seems to be their raison d'etre.

Some people seem to positively get off and pretending to have power to ban people when, in fact, they have no such power at all. There's an example on my talk page where this guy actually threatened to ban me (as well as including a bulleted laundry list of my alleged wiki-sins, though he holds no administrator or any other such position. (He also asserted that I said things I hadn't.) The über-seriousness with which some of these people regard themselves can be absolutely hilarious.

"Wikistress". Probably be in the DSM IV before long. I too take breaks just to get away from the cliques, the snottiness and those people who think they own a particular article and rain down hell on anyone else who dares to make edits to it; even if one is removing material completely irrelevant to the article's subject! (E.g.: just try changing a single word in the Rush article and see what happens! Guess I don't know the secret handshake and phrases.)

Regards,

PainMan (talk) 13:23, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. And don't sweat the small stuff (and it's all small stuff)! Banjeboi 21:30, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Sexual orientation proposals

Thanks for the courtesy of your alert. I know I'm insufficiently informed to comment content-wise, but hope people won't mind if/when I pass by whatever template results and maybe amend it a little cosmetically (e.g. remove dividers from ends of lines, sentence-case, boost "in human sexuality"'s font-size). Sardanaphalus (talk) 23:47, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've set up User:Benjiboi/Sexual orientations template/sandbox just to see what you mean. If your up for it could you tweak this to see if they should be incorporated now? I have the original on another page. Banjeboi 23:51, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I've fiddled with the template to see what you think. I'd appreciate hearing about any amendments you certainly don't like or seem to be without apparent reason, as it'll be useful feedback. I'll mention the reason for one change now: I reduced the template's basic font-size to 90% in order to try using a template width of 17.0em; this seems to be common among similar kinds of templates (sidebars). Also, with smaller screens or browser windows in mind, it also means there's a little more room for whatever text ends up beside the template. I'd understand, though, if you or anyone felt the links in the template were now too small. Sardanaphalus (talk) 21:01, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sensitive to folks with special abilities who are going to have readability issues with text getting small. I have, however, integrated some of the other suggestion to the original as they all seem quite helpful. My hunch is that that template needs some cooling off once the proposal is accepted. Banjeboi 22:53, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds wise. Any text sized 90% upward seems fine to me -- if anyone has problems seeing 90%-sized text, I'd say it's time they boost their browser's default font-size -- but I've wavered between using and avoiding <small> text in templates. Currently, I support the idea (for parentheses etc), since the reduced size means less distraction from the templates' purpose -- links -- and nowadays it should be relatively easy for people to (temporarily) boost their browser font-size if/when necessary. (With Firefox, it's facilitated via the mousewheel.) Sardanaphalus (talk) 04:34, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FYI

FYI. This will take me longer than usual, I think, just to find many sources that are in paper form. I thought you might be interested. --Moni3 (talk) 00:00, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent! I'll help out when you need. Banjeboi 00:04, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

2008 Summer Olympics medal table

Hi, I noticed that you have removed the pixels from images on several images with your summary being "per wp:mos", I checked the MOS and couldn't find anything that explains this. In fact, it recommends that lead images be 300 px. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 14:31, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually I believe it says that sometimes the lede image is resized but not that it's recommended. What I see is that it's better to not set a size for all users if the default is satisfactory. The guidelines are at: Wikipedia:Image use policy#Displayed image size and Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Images. Banjeboi 14:42, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, if you're working on that article, the other three images are overflowing onto the table. It may make sense to set them up as a gallery instead. Banjeboi 14:43, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

JIDF

Hi. Thanks for archiving etc, but perhaps you'll help folks deal with that Facebook paragraph too? (I missed you, pout.) HG | Talk 19:40, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(sigh), I can only take so much of all of it at once but I'll see what I can do. By the way, was it you that added the {{sanctions}} tag? If so where does the Arbcom or ? state this article is under sanctions? We should probably be clear on that. Banjeboi 19:45, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

LOL! OK, saw your explanation further down and I modified the template so we could add a comment field and link - and I did so. Banjeboi 20:03, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Glory hole (sexual slang)‎

In Glory hole (sexual slang)‎ I removed links to photos outside of Wikipedia. You reverted my appropriate edit. As I respect your editing and hard work I'm leaving them there for now. I see your reasoning in the edit line, but do not agree that it is correct.

My perception is that they are there merely because someone previous to us did not spend the time or energy to do it properly. The difficulty with such links, harming the quality of the article, are that the links can change, they may be copyright violations, and go around the quality control and other critical reviews that other images must survive. Certainly it cannot be to hard to upload of those into the commons site.

My preference (clearly) is to remove them and let the contributor do it properly. I don't believe that the omission of an image would greatly damage or harm the article in the week or month that it would take someone to do it right. Atom (talk) 21:39, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In most cases I may agree although we get the new (problem-free) image onto the article first then delete the links as no longer needed. I've seen a lot of images come and go so I would exercise a bit of caution. Glory holes still exist but are getting more rare. I did a search myself for free images but found nothing. If we can use one or two of those linked images and convert them into images for use then fine. Also the systems for loading images isn't the most intuitive and user friendly so I understand newbies reticent to go that route. I'm supportive of efforts to get good images but I also see those links as somewhat helpful until we have those images. I'll ask Shankbone if he'd like an image challenge! Banjeboi 22:19, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Conversion therapy category dispute

Benjiboi, I'd like to ask for your input regarding a dispute over the recently-created Conversion therapy category, which in my view is being inappropriately added to several articles. The relevant disputes are here [1], here [2], and here [3]. I am not asking you because I expect you to agree with me, but because you have taken an interest in related matters, and in my view something with implications as great as this should be discussed as widely as possible. Skoojal (talk) 01:32, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We really need a category specialist or two to resolve this. Banjeboi 06:56, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed non-free use rationale for Image:True Colors 2007 The Tour CD cover.jpg

Thank you for uploading Image:True Colors 2007 The Tour CD cover.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:42, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use and copyright holder info added. Banjeboi 21:55, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You! :)

Hello and thank you very much for fixing the goofs I made on the Briar Rose (band) page!! I looked at everything you worked on and I will do my best to learn from it. I hope it saves the page! Thank you again! (TinkerBoop (talk) 04:10, 31 August 2008 (UTC))[reply]

You're very welcome! I too hope it survives. Banjeboi 14:31, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Judaism Newsletter

This newsletter was automatically delivered because you are a member of one or more Judaism related WikiProjects. If you would like to opt out of future mailings, please remove your name from this list. As always, please direct all questions, comments, requests, ~~barnstars~~, offers of help, and angry all-caps anti-semitic rants to my talk page. Thanks, and have a great month. L'Aquatique[approves|this|message] 20:31, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Newsletter delivery by xenobot 20:59, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Cockettes

photos on flickr. Banjeboi

None free Banjeboi 07:31, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!

Thanks for the offer to help. I will give it a go today and see how it works -- if there are problems, I will let you know. Ecoleetage (talk) 11:02, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No prob. Lt me know if you want help. Banjeboi 00:47, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

David JIDF

Hi,

I am in contact with David... but you can contact him youself. Two ways to contact him are (1) via facebook (find him in the JIDF group) or (2) there is an e-mail address for him on display at the JIDF site.

Not sure what this has to do with not wanting to out him (is there a discussion I've missed?)

Oboler (talk) 22:12, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I prefer to keep out of contacting someone if we already have someone able to do so. What I meant by outing is that he has received death threats for his work and now we are identifying him on the world's encyclopedia. We should confirm he is fine with that, if not we should strike it as a BLP concern and keep it out until multiple reliable sources have revealed his identity. Banjeboi 00:50, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I dedicated a photo to you

If you read the description, you will see I dedicated this photo to you. It will be on Fire Island Pines. I have to say, Benji, I was proud that I got such a spot-on illustration of the infamous 'meatrack' on the island. I intentionally kept it at a setting that his features are not the most clear, even blow up. Keep an eye out on my contributions for some really great photos coming from this weekend... Very good work. --David Shankbone 02:30, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wow! thank you! Banjeboi 02:36, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm so jealous!!! :) -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 03:38, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:IPCOLL invitation

Dear Benjiboi:

It's been a pleasure getting to know you a bit and observing your fine work at JIDF. I suppose we've disagreed on a few things, but it seems to help move us forward in constructive ways. It's great to see how you lend a calm presence and that you've trying out a creative approach to the sources.

Following the ArbCom case on the I-P topic area, we've set up WikiProject Israel-Palestine Collaboration. While the WikiProject is still developing, our goals are to promote a more hospitable editing environment for Israeli-Palestinian topics; quiet the battleground among editors; help prevent or resolve POV disputes; and mobilize Project members to work together to improve articles.

We'd like to see a broad range of participation from Wikipedia editors, from all points of view and from various editing and admin interests. We especially benefit from people taking on roles like yours at JIDF. I realize, of course, that this WikiProject may not be your primary interest. Still, you're working on JIDF effectively anyway and hence are making a big contribution to the the project's goals already. So, please join this WikiProject as a member, give us a !vote of support, and keep making a difference with the articles in this topic area. Let me know if you have any questions or suggestions for the WikiProject, too. Thanks very much. HG | Talk 09:34, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I may be able able to help in some ways ... btw, is this a neutral image that may work for the project? I'd be happy to work up a banner for you. Banjeboi 09:47, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If it's not neutral how should it be changed to make it so? Banjeboi 09:49, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's great, like I said, you're doing the work already, it'd just be nice to have you join (and bolster) that group/project feeling. I don't know if it would be perceived as neutral or not (and not my decision). Would you be willing to post it on the Project's Talk page and float your idea of doing a banner (or userbox? or barnstar?) with it. We already have one banner-type image there but it's borrowed and I don't know what folks think. Thanks very much! HG | Talk 04:16, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PS. This is probably already clear to you... just want to mention we are promoting "peace" among Wikipedia editors only, the project isn't intended to promote peace in the Mideast (it has no position vis a vis the real world). Thanks HG | Talk 04:18, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The one banner-type image ... where is it? Banjeboi 18:50, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. You might want to look at this banner discussion and version, and more discussion of graphics/awards higher up. Also, a logo/userbox shown here. Hope that's useful. We seem not to have tackled these decisively. Thanks muchly, HG | Talk 23:11, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would avoid using the same symbol as another wikiprojects as a rule. The text also is less inspiring so that brings me back to the dual flag image - we could remove the words or add "on Wikipedia" to help NPOV concerns. Would either of those work? Banjeboi 23:19, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]