User talk:SatyrTN/Archive 17
![]() | 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 10 | ← | Archive 15 | Archive 16 | Archive 17 | Archive 18 | Archive 19 | Archive 20 |
Julian Bond
- In this edit summary, what exactly is your definition of "central"? THE AMERICAN METROSEXUAL 05:22, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
- I don't know much about Mr. Bond, so I'm going with what's in the article. There are four sentences, tucked at the end of the section on his career. That doesn't seem to correlate well with WP:CAT, which says that "Categories are for defining characteristics." If you were to talk to Mr. Bond's best friends, would "LGBT rights activist" be included in the first paragraph about him? Since it doesn't seem so, I felt the category was out of place. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 05:25, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
- PS: You have an amazing number of userboxes :) -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 05:29, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
Re: Deletion of Vodka Party
Hi SatyrTN, I've been offline for a few months (due to computer death) and I noted that the article for the Hobart Band Vodka Party that I penned has been deleted. I would like to discuss the significance of this band as a link between bands that are already on Wikipedia (Nation Blue, Sea Scouts (band), etc...) and other bands that I'd like to include in my work regarding Tasmanian Music 1994-2005 (50 Million Clowns, The Stickmen, Little Ugly Girls, etc...). Can I re-write the article to better assert its importance, or should I try another angle? Thank you for all your help. --E. Swann (talk) 02:03, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
- Hi, E.Swann! You're welcome to try writing the article again, if you like. But I urge you to read WP:MUSIC, which details when bands are considered "notable" by Wikipedia standards. The article that got deleted indicated that the band had *not* signed to a major label, had not received any awards, and the references provided did not meet "reliable sources" standards. Furthermore, the Wikipedia guideline WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is notable here. But I know nothing about the band and am not generally involved in band-related articles, so I probably won't be involved in any decisions about the this one :) -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 05:08, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks SatyrTN, I'll have a look at the link and reconsider the article. I appreciate the help. Catch you 'round. --E. Swann (talk) 06:20, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
SDI
Is the original Systron Donner Inertial article in a place where it can be viewed / edited? It seems a shame that a well-known source for MEMS technology devices should be kicked to the curb simply because of the quality of the originator's Wiki skills. What is your opinion? I would consider spending some time researching this article for possible re-introduction unless, of course, there is a major objection. JimScott (talk) 18:28, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
LGBT people + writers
Why would this category tree count for some kind of special exemption from duplicate categorization rules? Bearcat (talk) 00:55, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
- The best (and simplest) approach would be to let any discussion about the use or deletion of subcategories run its course, and stick to the existing rules about duplicate categorization in the meantime. It really isn't all that difficult to switch the categories out with HotCat or AWB, if and when there's a consensus to kill a subcategory, so I don't see that there's a particularly compelling reason to prejudge the outcome by double-filing on the pre-emptive assumption that a dedicated subcategory will definitely get canned. Bearcat (talk) 16:28, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
- Duplicate categorization means that you don't simultaneously apply a category and that same category's own parent categories to an article. It doesn't mean that you can't apply two distinct subcategories of the same third parent category which aren't subcategories of each other.
- "Gay writers" does not duplicate "LGBT writers from Norway", because "Gay writers" links all gay male writers without regard to what country they're from while "LGBT writers from Norway" links queer writers from Norway without regard to whether they're L, G, B or T. They serve two distinct purposes that aren't redundant with each other, and neither one of them is or can be a subcategory of the other one. Whereas "LGBT people from Norway" is duplicating "LGBT writers from Norway", because the writers category is already in the people category.
- If it's any clearer, applying "gay writers" + "LGBT writers from Norway" is like applying "American novelists" + "American poets": they're two different things that contain a few entries that overlap and many more that don't. While they're both subcategories of "American writers", they aren't redundant with each other, because not all novelists are poets and not all poets are novelists. Whereas applying "LGBT writers from Norway" + "LGBT people from Norway" is like applying "American writers" + "Writers": you're adding nothing to the category set that isn't already there, because the former is already a subcategory of the latter. Bearcat (talk) 06:09, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
- Believe me, I understand categories. I also understand overcat. And I understand what you're saying.
- I also understand that we (you and I) have been butting heads over these categories for quite a while. And that your solution is removing a category that I find to be necessary, just as my solution would remove a category you find necessary. So, rather than argue and wrangle over each article and why this one and not that one should be removed, can't we agree that *you'll* keep the ":LGBT people from Country" category, while *I'll* keep the ":LGBT occupation from Country" category. Neither of us likes the result, but until we have the category structure ironed out, let's live with the slight overlap. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 06:21, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
- What I'm waiting for from you is an actual reason why you view it as necessary to have every single article sitting directly in "LGBT people from Country" without any form of subcategorization; so far all I've gotten from you is "because I like it that way". And quite simply, I'm not going to agree to overlook duplicate categorization, because that's basically creating an exemption from Wikipedia policy without an actual reason behind it. There's a process for deleting categories, if that's what you want to do, but what I still haven't seen is a reason why you think we're better off deleting them all — or a reason why we should skip the proper process and just slowly empty them out one "cat tweak" at a time. Bearcat (talk) 06:32, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
- Look - I'm not trying to subvert anything, including guidelines (which are not policy, as I'm sure you know). What I'm trying to do is to find a way you and I (and others) can work together. And that has nothing to do with my desire to delete categories or not - simply a way you and I can work on categories without constantly reverting each other, or working at cross-purposes. I'm willing to follow process - I've never deliberately tried to go against it. But that's not the issue at hand.
- Looking at the guideline for duplicate categories, the reasons *for* duplicating apply (IMO):
- Makes it easier to find articles
- Different category structures for looking up articles
- Multiple taxonomies
- Since users may be surfing through the Category:LGBT people by nationality and may not know a person's occupation, or may simply be interested in knowing *how many* LGBT people there are in, say, Costa Rica, it makes sense to have articles in ":LGBT people from country" as well as ":LGBT people by occupation". -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 23:59, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
- Anybody who knows any given article topic well enough to even be aware that the person in question would be filed in the LGBT category tree in the first place knows fully well what that person's occupation is. And by the exact same rationale, we should arguably be upfiling everybody directly into Category:LGBT people too, since people might not know what country the individual is from — in fact, using that rationale to justify double-filing basically requires that we triple-file in that manner.
- And I don't buy that it makes any meaningful difference in the ease of locating articles, either, as the subcategory is already present in the parent category. That guideline is actually kind of outdated in several ways — for instance, the Category:Film actors example that WP:SUBCAT was citing as a canonical demonstration of when to duplicate categories has since been diffused so thoroughly and comprehensively that the guideline didn't even match the category's basic reality anymore.
- It doesn't serve to identify "how many LGBT people there are in Costa Rica", either — it serves only to identify "how many LGBT people from Costa Rica have already had articles written about them on Wikipedia", and applying non-duplicated categories doesn't make that harder to accomplish.
- And yes, guidelines aren't policy — but they are articulations and clarifications and examples of how policy is applied. Bearcat (talk) 20:08, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
- Bearcat, why are we arguing here? You don't want me to sub-categorize in one way, I don't want you to subcategorize in another. Isn't that the basic problem? So until we can get a broader consensus together, why does this solution not work? -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 19:00, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
- What I'm waiting for from you is an actual reason why you view it as necessary to have every single article sitting directly in "LGBT people from Country" without any form of subcategorization; so far all I've gotten from you is "because I like it that way". And quite simply, I'm not going to agree to overlook duplicate categorization, because that's basically creating an exemption from Wikipedia policy without an actual reason behind it. There's a process for deleting categories, if that's what you want to do, but what I still haven't seen is a reason why you think we're better off deleting them all — or a reason why we should skip the proper process and just slowly empty them out one "cat tweak" at a time. Bearcat (talk) 06:32, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
Little context in 1932 in LGBT rights
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/3/35/Information_icon.svg/62px-Information_icon.svg.png)
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on 1932 in LGBT rights, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because 1932 in LGBT rights is very short providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles.
To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting 1932 in LGBT rights, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 05:00, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
Question
Here's a dumb question, my friend. I rejiggered some user boxes on my user page, and now they are jumbled with weird spaces in there that I can't make disappear. What accounts for that? Thanks, as always! MarmadukePercy (talk) 23:15, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
- Hi, MarmadukePercy! The heights of each of the boxes are different, so the HTML is trying to line them up funny. You might try using a table structure:
{| | box 1 | box 2 | box 3 |- | box 4 | box 5 | box 6 |}
- See if that does what you want :) -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 19:03, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks, as always. All straightened out now! Best,MarmadukePercy (talk) 11:51, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
Hello!
I had signed on a while ago... must have been like 2007, to help with the LGBT wikiproject, and then I pretty much disappeared from Wikipedia for a while. I'm back now, and I was wondering if you could give me some direction. I really wanna help, but I just don't have the foggiest of where I could even begin! Please help. I'd really appreciate it. :3 Lychosis T/C 19:32, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
Subscribing WP:LGBT to WoltorBot for to-do list functions?
Wondering if you would be opposed to WP:LGBT switching to WolterBot for the to-do list functions. Alot of projects (Category:WolterBot cleanup listing subscriptions) are signed up for it, and according to the instructions, all it would require is adding the User:WolterBot/Cleanup listing subscription template to the WP:LGBT project page. thx, Outsider80 (talk) 23:14, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
- No problem - I don't have SatyrBot doing much of anything right now, so that's kewl. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 04:43, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
- added the subscription template... (though apparently(?) WP:LGBT previously had a subscription to wolterbot, though it hadn't been updated in quite awhile (until a few days ago on Feb 25 for some reason))... Outsider80 (talk) 12:25, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
WikiProject tagging
Are you back in action with the bot? YellowMonkey (click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model!) 08:31, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
Thanks
For your help with the drama I was dealing with, a sad situation and the article is still, well it could be worse. Anyway I have better things to do but wanted to thank you personally. -- Banjeboi 17:20, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
- NP - glad to see you back :) -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 06:49, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Question on reverts
Hello my friend, I have a question on reverts. I have long worked on the article on Phillips Exeter Academy (even having to sort out a phony poster awhile back who was inserting bogus entries to the list of alumni). Now a relatively new user wants to seemingly revert or challenge nearly everything added to this page, even from longstanding contributors. I don't find this constructive, especially reverting without discussion on the talk page. (I rarely revert anyone, unless I feel it's outright vandalism; otherwise I take it to the talk page). Your opinion on this? Thanks again! MarmadukePercy (talk) 21:01, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
LGBT project
The is a discussion about the direction of the project on the talk page, and possibly restructuring & reassigning the coordinators. Do you still have enough time/desire to be a coordinator, possibly one of several? OR are you concentrating on mainspace work for a while? Just wanted to ask before the conversation got too far advanced.YobMod 11:21, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
Hiya Satyr, I got up to get something to eat and forgot that I hadn't hit the history button yet on this one that I just deleted per the db-spam tag. You were the last admin to look this over, and if you want to take it to AfD instead, that would be fine. I support the idea of not being hasty to trash "conservative" groups in Wikipedia, and I'm always willing to consider that I may be biased, but I scrolled through 7 pages of Google trying to find some shred of credibility for these people, and can't find it. They simply issue press releases that please a certain constituency, and no one reports on them or talks about them (except bloggers, who curse them). They had no reliable sources, and the tone was I think very much in line with the tone that gets similar articles speedied as spam. (Watchlisting) - Dan Dank55 (push to talk) 19:14, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
- Is it appropriate to "speedy delete" something that's been around for three years (since Dec. 2005)? Aleta Sing 19:28, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
- I won't do it (unless I screw up, as in this case). If we delete the promotional bits, then I don't think there's any rush, and AfD would be fine. - Dan Dank55 (push to talk) 20:19, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
- I take it you restored it? Good move. I guess for now we can see what happens with the prod. If it is uncontested, then that takes care of it. If someone does contest it, then AfD would be appropriate. Aleta Sing 04:02, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
- I did, and agreed. - Dan Dank55 (push to talk) 04:12, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
- The Prod has been removed. Time for AfD if you want to pursue it. Aleta Sing 03:30, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
- I wish I had come across this conversation earlier. It appears to meet notablity requirements, even if it is a small organization. APK How you durrin? 16:36, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
- Someone else realized that the original article was copied huge chunks from ACP's website and speedy deleted it G12. Another person took it to deletion review, but a G12 is not likely to be reverted. However, if you want to create a new, non-violating of copyright article, go ahead! Aleta Sing 19:00, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
- I wish I had come across this conversation earlier. It appears to meet notablity requirements, even if it is a small organization. APK How you durrin? 16:36, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
- The Prod has been removed. Time for AfD if you want to pursue it. Aleta Sing 03:30, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
- I did, and agreed. - Dan Dank55 (push to talk) 04:12, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
- I take it you restored it? Good move. I guess for now we can see what happens with the prod. If it is uncontested, then that takes care of it. If someone does contest it, then AfD would be appropriate. Aleta Sing 04:02, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
- I won't do it (unless I screw up, as in this case). If we delete the promotional bits, then I don't think there's any rush, and AfD would be fine. - Dan Dank55 (push to talk) 20:19, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
Introductions
Hi SatyrTN, I'm being bold and introducing myself. My name is Christian Hejnal and I play in a band called Scarling. with my wife Jessicka. I've noticed there's been a little mud slinging and finger pointing in her direction by a disgruntled user:Godblessyrblackheart with a certain agenda. I just wanted to put it out there that if you had any issues with any pages related to my wife, my band, our roommate Lisa Leveridge, my co-worker Rickey Goodling or myself, please don't hesitate to come to me directly. I'm happy to help.
I am new to wikipedia and currently trying to get familiar with all the rules and protocol here. I believe whole heartily in a neutral stance but also would like things written about any of the previously mentioned pages to be factual. I'm about to do an interview with a third party publication to set some things straight. Until then I just wanted to introduce myself.
take care, Xtian1313 (talk) 03:50, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
Editing of archive
Hi,
I've removed a paragraph of text from one of your archives of talk pages; I hope you won't mind my taking this liberty. It's a long, on-going saga - a user has requested that certain personal information/attach comments be removed from several places; the user has also requested that they are oversighted, but in the meantime I agreed to remove the offending comments. The edit is here.
Hope this is OK; revert if not, let me know etc.
Cheers, -- Chzz ► 20:40, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
File:Image01 SSM Recognition-Model(columfix).png
In this immage are some mistakes; Finland, Greenland and Slovenia needs to be green. Slovakia should be white and Nepal should never be blue (there are no same-sex marriages allowed). Also some more federal states in Australia should be green. 85.8.124.34 (talk) 20:45, 1 April 2009 (UTC)GLGermann (talk) 20:49, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
merging templates
I suggest to merge Template:YouTube user with Template:External media Greetings Wandalstouring (talk) 17:56, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
Category:LGBT-related television episodes up for discussion again
You had participated at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2008_November_18#Category:LGBT-related_television_episodes which ended five months ago with a strong consensus of keep. The subject is up for discussion again at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2009 April 18#Category:LGBT-related television episodes, where you may want to review the matter at hand and express your opinion on the subject. Alansohn (talk) 04:35, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free media (File:Brookline Town Seal.png)
Thanks for uploading File:Brookline Town Seal.png. 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 'image' 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 "Image" 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) 05:15, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
- I took care of this. A vandal removed it from Brookline, New Hampshire which caused it to become orphaned. - ℅ ✰ALLST☆R✰ echo 05:23, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
FL merger discussions
There is currently a merger discussion at Talk:Lists of Michigan Wolverines football passing leaders for merging Lists of Michigan Wolverines football receiving leaders,
Lists of Michigan Wolverines football passing leaders, and
Lists of Michigan Wolverines football rushing leaders. You were involved in the original WP:FLC discussion of at least one of these lists. If there is a merger consensus then there will be a discussion at Wikipedia:Featured list removal candidates.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 05:42, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
SatyrBot message on page added in to LGBT project
Added Intersexuality as LGBT Project, and have now added LGBT project to Intersexuality main and talk page, and get this on talk page: "SatyrBot ignore this article for LGBT project - please don't change" Please advise. Mish (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 01:27, 30 April 2009 (UTC).
- Satyr seems to be on a wikibreak. Previous discussions have resulted in disagreement over whether to add intersexuality to the LGBT project. We've talked of making it LGBTI; I would like to see that happen. I've been among the minority before on that, however. If you think it's time to revisit the idea, I suggest broaching it at WT:LGBT. LadyofShalott 02:19, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
- Hi Shalott, I asked on the Intersexuality talk page about formally proposing this and asked if there was any strong opposition, I have had two positive and no negative responses, so took it to LGBT (and sociology). The response to the LGBT enquiry was to do it immediately, so I went straight back and did it. I wondered why the above message appears beneath, and whether I need to do anything about it. Mish (talk) 09:41, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
Oh where
Oh where is our Satyr?!?! Most folks that go on break at least say, "Hey bitches, I'm on break!" Hope all is well... - ℅ ✰ALLST☆R✰ echo 10:00, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image (File:2006 PGA Championship.png)
![⚠](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/34/Ambox_warning_blue.svg/35px-Ambox_warning_blue.svg.png)
Thanks for uploading File:2006 PGA Championship.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images 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 any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Kalel2007 (talk) 18:28, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
Unsourced articles
Please see User:SatyrTN/Cat_Search_4_New_Pages#Unsourced_.26_Awaiting_Review that I have removed all articles there, in part after sourcing them and otherwise improving them. I have not added them to any LGBT projects, as that does not fall in the scope of my Wikipedia activities, but since I updated that userpage for each article I finished, including to-the-point edit summaries, it should not be a problem for you to do this.
I have added a link there to Category:LGBT articles with unsourced categories, which contains at the moment 4 articles, three of which have been in want of a source for their LGBT category for over three months now.
If you need to contact me, please do so on my talk page. Debresser (talk) 19:50, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
I have also posted a message on Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_LGBT_studies#Work_to_do because I noticed you've been scarce on Wikipedia lately and because "many hands make light work". Debresser (talk) 08:39, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free media (File:Antrim Town Seal.png)
Thanks for uploading File:Antrim Town Seal.png. 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 'image' 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 "Image" 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) 05:07, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
- File was orphaned due to vandalism. I fixed. - ALLST✰R▼echo wuz here @ 05:30, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
Hey
We're missing you. We do hope everything is ok. It's not like you to stay gone this long.. over 2 months now. Please just drop a line to let us know you're ok. - ALLST✰R▼echo wuz here @ 05:30, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
What Happened to the Clean Up List?
I just learned that your bot had been compiling a list of Talk pages that could use WPBS. In my work of resolving DEFAULTSORT conflicts and adding listas parameters I have applied countless WPBS. I know that is because I just started about six months ago and you have not updated the list in two years.
If the list is resurrected and cleaned I would be more than happy to take care of any pages that pop up on a daily regeneration of the category.
bromance
i'm dave carnie, and i'm trying to discover who wrote the etymology section of "bromance." ultimately i'm looking for the actual source of the word in print. thanks. Advicedrain (talk) 21:40, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
- I've answered on this user's talkpage. -- Banjeboi 23:09, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
explanation of citation of LGBT tag on Ouran High Host Club
explain your motive for doing so, or I will immediately remove the tag and all information linking the series to that portal. Murakumo-Elite (talk) 07:01, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
- Because that article concerns transgender and transsexual-related anime and manga. -- Banjeboi 00:22, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
- i've seen no evidence of that. enlighten me! Murakumo-Elite (talk) 07:53, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
Starkey Laboratories (deleted article)
I noticed you deleted the article I began on the company Starkey Laboratories per A7, that is, because the article did not indicate why the subject is significant. I believe I can easily rectify that (indeed, I thought the original article had addressed that, but I cannot read it presently as it has been deleted); a quick search of Google News ([1]) turns up many facts about why this subject is significant. Would you consider restoring the article? Edurant (talk) 21:27, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
- Satyr appears to be on an extended wikibreak. Per your request to him, I have restored a copy of your article to your userspace for improvement before moving back to the mainspace. You can find it at User:Edurant/Starkey Laboratories. LadyofShalott 21:37, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
- Thank you for restoring a previously deleted User:Edurant/Starkey Laboratories article to my userspace for improvement before being recreated. From the style, I can see that this is not the version I started. Was there perhaps another version that was deleted? I appreciate your quick response to my request to SatyrTN's talk page, and your help and patience -- I'm at a disadvantage as I cannot see (at least I think I cannot see) the logs of my deleted work. Edurant (talk) 21:55, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
- You're welcome. Click on the history of the article in your userspace, and you should see what you're wanting. There were several edits to it after your initial two, but you should have access to all those versions. Let me know if you need any more help! LadyofShalott 22:02, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
- Thank you for explaining that; this is the first time I'm working with an article that was deleted and it makes sense now. I reverted the article to an earlier version that doesn't have the policy violations that it got deleted for. I think the current version is ready to be moved back to the mainspace. Is there a particular way that I should ask an editor to do that, or is asking here the correct way? Thank you. Edurant (talk) 01:23, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
- It looks ok; you can go ahead and just do it. Click on the the move tab at the top, remove the part of the title that is your username, and insert a reason in the box. Oh, you should uncheck the box that says leave a redirect behind. LadyofShalott 01:31, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
- Done, thanks. Except, I did not have an option to not leave the redirect behind (only available to editors?), so I marked the redirect for deletion. Edurant (talk) 17:37, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
- It looks ok; you can go ahead and just do it. Click on the the move tab at the top, remove the part of the title that is your username, and insert a reason in the box. Oh, you should uncheck the box that says leave a redirect behind. LadyofShalott 01:31, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
- Thank you for explaining that; this is the first time I'm working with an article that was deleted and it makes sense now. I reverted the article to an earlier version that doesn't have the policy violations that it got deleted for. I think the current version is ready to be moved back to the mainspace. Is there a particular way that I should ask an editor to do that, or is asking here the correct way? Thank you. Edurant (talk) 01:23, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
- You're welcome. Click on the history of the article in your userspace, and you should see what you're wanting. There were several edits to it after your initial two, but you should have access to all those versions. Let me know if you need any more help! LadyofShalott 22:02, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
- Thank you for restoring a previously deleted User:Edurant/Starkey Laboratories article to my userspace for improvement before being recreated. From the style, I can see that this is not the version I started. Was there perhaps another version that was deleted? I appreciate your quick response to my request to SatyrTN's talk page, and your help and patience -- I'm at a disadvantage as I cannot see (at least I think I cannot see) the logs of my deleted work. Edurant (talk) 21:55, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
Wikiproject LGBT Newsletter
Sorry to bother you, but I just recently got back on Wikipedia after an extended abscence, and noticed that SatyrBot had put me in the inactive members section; I would like to continue receivin the newsletter, if it still exists, that is! User:Sappho'd (talk) 03:01, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
WikiProject LGBT studies Newsletter (June 2009)
The Miss Julie Memorial LGBT studies WikiProject Newsletter: Special Pride 2009 Booty call edition | ||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
- Newsletter delivery by xenobot 17:42, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
RfD nomination of Template:Nobot
I have nominated Template:Nobot (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) for discussion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. –xenotalk 16:12, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
Signatures
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button
located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --Flashflash; 15:56, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
WikiProject Tagging by bot; inheritance of GA/FA/FL and check for stub templates on article page?
If you have a minute, could you tell me how you were having your bot inherit GA/FA/FL tags from other projects when tagging? I am using WP:Plugin++, is it possible with that, or is there something additional you had programmed? See Wikipedia:BOTREQ#WP:INDIANA Project banner tagging. Thanks! (P.S. the wikibreak template at the top of your page is out of date) –xenotalk 13:16, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi, cat restore
Hi SatyrTN. I have restored the cat you removed. I think the change I made to the article justifies my change. Duffbeerforme (talk) 13:15, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
LGBT queery
Hi, I put a reply at the project but there have been multiple discussions on various issues; I've worked on LGBT so I may be able to help a bit depending on what you're looking for. -- Banjeboi 08:04, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
Please restore Jon Appleton classification, based on:
http://www.mountainpridemedia.org/oitm/issues/1999/dec1999/oe_voices_love1.htm
Assistance on Harry Hay page
I am attempting to include historical quotes, photos, link to photos, etc to include photos of his ashes spreading this year at wolf creek.
there is a user who does not have a user page who seems to be deleting a lot. OK... if i post the quote of harry that was published in RFD, then is that a crditable sorcue? I'm the cource?
How should i do that?
The photos are factual, so is that not enough? he's in them..?
HELP!
CodySteed (talk) 22:29, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
List
An intersting list here - 1956 and All That: The Making of Modern British Drama. By Dan Rebellato. London: Routledge, 1999 Meadsey (talk) 00:59, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
NowCommons: File:NicolaGriffith.png
File:NicolaGriffith.png is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:NicolaGriffith.png. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[File:NicolaGriffith.png]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 08:17, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
Leonardo
Concerning his presumed/confirmed homosexuality. No, it is definitely not "confirmed". Leonardo wrote absolutely nothing about his private life. The evidence is as follows.
- When a student in Florence, he was arrested by the "Night Police" with a group of young men accused of sodomy with a young male prostitute. Charges against Leonardo were dropped.
- Some years later, he took in an urchin off the street, called him Salaino (the Little Devil) and spoilt him, even though, according to Leonardo's own records, the child repeatedly stole from him and lied to him. He was a very pretty boy with long golden ringlets. He acted as an assistant, was referred to as a servant rather than "apprentice", and learnt to paint, but never made a name for himself like some of the other assistants.
- When Salai was in his late teens, a wealthy nobleman put his ten-yr-old son, Count Melzi, into an apprenticeship with Leonardo. Odd thing to do, if Leonardo was suspected of having a pedarast relationship with his "servant"!
- Melzi later described Leonardo's feelings for his pupils as "deep and ardent love". This is often quoted and misquoted. At present the article says "Melzi "described their relationship as a deeply felt and ardent love". I have otherwise read this as a description of Leonardo's feelings for his pupils, rather than "description of relationship". It makes a considerable difference!
- To put this in context- Firstly we are looking here at a translation from the Italian that is not always exactly parallel in strength or meaning. Secondly we are dealing with Renaissance sentiment here, and it was common at the time (and right into the 19th century) for people to use stronger terms to express emotions than one would use today. Most people from English-speaking communities would hesitate to say that they "loved" their best friend of the same gender.
- Leonardo's works as evidence.
- The painting of John the Baptist could be said to express homoerotic sentiment, and is considered strong evidence for Leonardo's homosexuality.
- The drawing "incarnate angel" is obviously based on it and is overtly homoerotic. However, it is not at all certain that Leonardo actually drew it.
- The only other erotic artwork associated with Leonardo is a sketch drawn on one of Leonardo's manuscripts of Salai's bottom being pursued by rampant penises on legs. This is almost certainly not Leonardo's work; a number of pages of his manuscripts have crude drawings by other hands. Even if it was the master's work, its vulgar humour doesn't prove intent. We can only presume that it implies Salaino was a popular fellow!
- In the 1500s, years after Leonardo's death, a satirical author wrote an imaginary interview in which he asked Leonardo about his relationship with his students, and in this fictitious interview Leonardo talks about a love of 15 year old boys.
This is a summary of all the evidence that we have of Leonardo's sexuality. It has never been "confirmed". The statemnt quoted in the article on his private life that "he wasn't put off by the arrest, he just became more cautious" is a totally POV statement by the author. To take his homosexuality as confirmed by this statement would be like accepting that the descendants of Jesus and Mary Magdalene practised a sexual ritual in front of their followers, just because Dan Brown said so. It is certainly written in a book, but this doesn't make it quotable fact. It is merely quotable opinion. In this case, it is given a degree of authority that it shouldn't have.
I want to point out here that I am not denying that Leonardo might have been homosexual. And I am not denying that Leonardo might have had an erotic interest in, or relationship with the youths that were in his care. The fact is that we do not know.
The case against Leonardo having a pedarast relationship with either of the two youths is that there is a distinct absence of drawings of young boys in his hundreds of pages of notes. There is no evidence that he had any interest in their anatomy whatsoever. There are a few pictures of Salai as a young adult. Several are "head studies", several display designs for pageant costumes using S. as a model, and two are detailed anatomical drawings of a textbook variety. (He was writing a "textbook")
I want to point out the difference between Leonardo's works in this regard and those of the sculptor Donatello. Donatello sculptured teenaged boys in all his relief panels. He created a naked image of a pubescent David with decidely erotic overtones which is a gay icon. Likewise, Michelangelo, given the opportunity, painted a series of twenty beautiful young men on the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel. Although they are not erotic images in themselves, they do reflect a known interest. When it is all drawn together, the evidence of Leonardo being homosexual is very scant, and is decidedly lacking among his drawings where one would expect it to be apparent. Moreover there is only one image of a female that is erotic, the drawing of Leda and the swan, and the painted copies of an original, now lost. This was to fulfil a commission. Perhaps the rather erotic John the Baptist was also painted for a particular client. (This happens. Caravaggio, for example, painted a number of pubescent street urchins as Cupid and the like, to meet the tastes of a client)
Based on the evidence, it is my opinion that Leonardo was not particularly sexually motivated, and may have been celebate, or nearly so, all his life. This would not preclude him from loving two children who were in his care in a way that might later be described as "ardent" (in other words a "burning love".) This does not necessarily mean either that it was erotic, or that it was expressed in a physically sexual way. I am sorry if the page on Leonardo's personal life has wrongly given you the impression that it is widely accepted or even confirmed that he was homosexual. This simply isn't the case. What is true is that he suffered arrest under the suspicion of comitting a homosexual act. And it is true that an erotic work of fiction was written after his death by someone who never knew him (a sign of his celebrity status).
Leonardo's celebrity status means that everyone wants to analyse him or claim him in some way. A huge amount of nonsense is written about him. It is frequently suggested, for example, that he was an alchemist or dabbled in the occult. However, both these are counterindicated by his meticulously recorded observation of the natural world. Amandajm (talk) 11:03, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
- How random. I assume you're referring to this comment Satyr made waaay back in January. I doubt you'll get a response because he rarely edits the 'pedia nowadays. APK because, he says, it's true 11:32, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
- Hi, Amandajm. I'm leaving this alone because I haven't paid any attention to the article in many months. Thanks for stopping by. And thanks, APK, for letting people know! I may have more Wiki time this winter, but no promises :) SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 22:49, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
- Yay! APK and Delta miss you. APK because, he says, it's true 23:09, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
Walter Breuning
(Eastmd (talk) 18:27, 21 November 2009 (UTC)) Re Walter Breuning. Mr Breuning was to be award the record for the oldest living man, but the award has not been made since the discovery of Laung Pu Supha in Phuket Thailand. He has been visited by the Gu.Bk.Wld.Rcds. and his government documentation shows his birth as being 17th Sept 1896, although he claims that he was 2 years old at the time of government registration record. Even so, using the current birth records he would still be 4 days older than Breuning. references of these post are http://www.phuketgazette.net/news/index.asp?id=7736 and http://www.jendhamuni.com/news/articles/oldestman.htm as well as http://www.adventureinthailand.net/2009/09/big-phuket-birthday-party-for-worlds-oldest-man/ and http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/115-year-Buddhist-Monk-Luang-Phu-t298996.html. The award to the oldest living man is still under discussion, but it favours Laung Pu Supha with his government record of 113.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Eastmd (talk • contribs)
AfD nomination of List of male performers in gay porn films
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/1/15/Ambox_warning_pn.svg/48px-Ambox_warning_pn.svg.png)
An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is List of male performers in gay porn films. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").
Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of male performers in gay porn films (5th nomination). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).
You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.
Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:39, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
Same-sex marriage
Hi, you voiced your opinion on this, about the inclusion of the Coquille Indian Tribe. Please do so in the new debate. Thank you, CTJF83 chat 10:12, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
Richard Hunt
Hi! I'm an administrator at Muppet Wiki. I answered your query here, but the short answer is yes, feel free to take whatever you can use (keeping in mind the fact that Muppet Wiki can go into as much detail as we want and list every single one-shot Muppet he played, while Wikipedia tends to frown on that, and our citation system differs slightly). -- Aleal (talk) 02:50, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks, Aleal! I'll copy some of the Muppet Wiki article over - it really is well written! -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 05:41, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
Virtual Ventures Article
I have a problem with the speedy deletion of the Virtual Ventures article;
G11. Unambiguous advertising or promotion. Pages that are exclusively promotional, and would need to be fundamentally rewritten to become encyclopedic. Note that simply having a company or product as its subject does not qualify an article for this criterion.
- Point One, the article contained only a not-for-profit box with basic encyclopedic information. Between the creation and deletion of the article elapsed about twelve hours which overlapped when the majority of people in the eastern time zone sleep. This is no where near enough time for us to contact and create a page which outlines our many accomplishments and historical events that have touched the youth of Ottawa.
- Point Two, G11, by nature, would include ANY BUSINESS PAGE ON WIKIPEDIA. It is ambiguous in meaning and needs to be fundamentally rewritten to carry any meaning at all. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jcampbe (talk • contribs) 15:20, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Hi, Jcampbe!
- What I recommend is two things:
- Read our conflict of interest policy. My reading of your comments makes me think that you are intimately involved in Virtual Ventures in some way, and therefor are not necessarily the best person to be writing an article with a neutral point of view.
- If you feel you really must create the article yourself, try writing it in your own userspace. You can then refine the article to good status before moving it into the main articlespace.
- Hope that helps! -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 02:22, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
CSD Declined for Leopold Ross
Hi! I have declined the speedy deletion of Leopold Ross, as notability has been asserted: a member of a notable band (Error (band)) and produced work for a number of notable artistes. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to drop me a note on my talk page. Cheers, Stephen! Coming... 17:12, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
Hello. You said additional sources have been added to this article since its previous AfD. Can you identify a few of them for me? You also stated that there is a COI concern as well. I guess I'm not seeing it...What is it? Oh, and greeting from Nashville! Regards, PDCook (talk) 00:58, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for the info! Regards, PDCook (talk) 14:36, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
Satyr's back?
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e2/Eye_See_You.jpg/170px-Eye_See_You.jpg)
Welcome back!!! LadyofShalott 15:38, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
- I guess I'm back, though no promises on how much I'll end up doing... :)
- BTW, the WikiProject has been pretty slow, eh? -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 20:22, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
Kingdom of Bosnia
Hi, this is in regard to your revert http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kingdom_of_Bosnia&curid=25025399&diff=338355980&oldid=338287539 Please see the discussion "1535 or 1527 instead of 1463" on the Talk:History_of_Bosnia_and_Herzegovina. I would appreciate your contribution there, as I appreciate your reversal. Muchos thanks Regionlegion (talk) 13:55, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
- ...which has also been copied by Marek69 to Talk:History of Bosnia and Herzegovina (1463–1878) Regionlegion (talk) 14:00, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
- That diff isn't mine, and I haven't ever edited that article. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 20:22, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
Typo
Hi - thanks for reviewing this. Can I ask though, why this is not eligible? It's a misnomer with it's missing space, and is certainly recently created. I've never had a reviewing admin decline these before. Do you recommend RfD instead? Just trying to make sure I understand the background. Thanks. 7 03:08, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
- Hi, 7!
- I haven't run into a lot of speedy requests for redirects, so I'm not sure if there are guidelines that I'm unaware of. My reaction when I ran across the CSD for it was that it wasn't that uncommon a typo - missing a space is something I could see doing when I typed in the title. So rather than delete it, I figured it could just stay. If you disagree, my guess would be taking it to WP:RFD would work. Thanks for the note! -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 03:12, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for the reply. My reasoning was that while somebody who was planning to type "Starless (album)" might actually forget the space (as you said) it is very unlikely that anyone is ever going to be searching for the disambig version. R3 says if its common / plausible it can stay... I just personally didn't feel it was. But (as everyone says) redirects are cheap so I won't bother with RfD - just trying to keep the place tidy. Thanks. 7 03:20, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
You deleted the article The National Association of Women in Construction under WP:CSD#A7. This was not unreasonable, the only claim of significance present was "international association" which is pretty weak. However there are a number of GNews hits, and quite a few Google web hits, and i think a reasonable article can easily be created on this subject. Please undelete. Thank you. DES (talk) 08:53, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
Could you explain the speedy deletion request of Rocket Racer (Spider-Man: 1994 TV series)? I'm unsure what's being moved and why the redirect is being deleted? Thanks! -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 17:00, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
- I had requested the removal of Rocket Racer (Spider-Man: 1994 TV series) just as a form of cleanup. Basically, when all the episode articles for the Spider-Man animated series were created, they were all created with the format Episode Name (Spider-Man: The Animated Series). However, there began a debate about the true name of the series; that it was simply Spider-Man. However, over the time some of the episode names were moved, and some weren't, which resulted in episode names resembling Episode Name (Spider-Man: The Animated Series), Episode Name (Spider-Man episode), and Episode Name (Spider-Man). Because of these multiple moves, there were a ton of broken links all over the place, and there were (and still are) a number of redirects in place.
- I fixed the links, and moved all applicable episodes of the series to Episode Name (Spider-Man) per the MoS.
- This lone episode, however, was once moved to a unique format: Episode Name (Spider-Man: 1994 TV series). Since nothing linked to this redirect, and it fit no other format, I'd hoped to do at least a minor housekeeping to kill this redirect.
- It probably will cause no concern if it stays. I was just hoping to cut down the mess of redirects by 1. Jrh7925 (talk) 22:48, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
Deleting user talk pages per user request
I noticed you deleted User talk:Nightmote due to a CSD U1 request. User requests do not allow for the deletion of user talk pages. It says "Personal user pages and subpages (but not user talk pages) upon request by their user."
User talk pages should remain intact. This is because someone could have their talk page deleted and thus hide a bad history. I think this is exactly what has happened here if you look at the deleted history. Do you object to me restoring that users talk page history? Chillum (Need help? Ask me) 15:01, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
- Hi, Chillum! Sorry about that - my bad! I'll undelete. Thanks for letting me know! -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 20:44, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
Deleted article recreated
Hi there. Just wanted to inform you that the article which you deleted has been recreated by the same editor. Amsaim (talk) 14:04, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
Speedy vs. AFD
Someone else in the AFD called for a speedy deletion as well. I've been unable to find anything that says speedy and AFD can't overlap, and I see articles at AFD get speedied all the time (usually G3s, but a few A9s and G11s as well). It must be acceptable. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 00:05, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
Requesting an undeletion
Hello. You appear to be the admin that has most recently deleted Lui Che Woo. It was deleted under G12. Would you be willing to undelete it? I have a ticket in OTRS with permission.--Rockfang (talk) 15:45, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
- Hi, Rockfang! The matter is being investigated - see User_talk:Moonriddengirl#Question_re_copyright_.2F_OTRS for details. Thanks for writing, and happy editing! -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 17:33, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
- Verified, undeleted, attributed and tagged for cleanup :) MLauba (talk) 17:50, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
- To SatyrTN: I've replied there.--Rockfang (talk) 17:54, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
Hi, an SVG version of the logo is now available for this article Arena club MaenK.A.Talk 09:26, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
Acrystal
Hello,
this night I wrote an article for the first time in Wikipedia, in a foreign language (I'm french)to talk about a very innovative product of high importance for human's health. I'm bored by teachers like you which instead of explaining what's wrong just take the power to "delete". Thanks for your help. Honestly, with your stupid position, you prevent people of the moulding industry to use for the first time in their life a SAFE RESIN. Over 100 tonnes of this product are sokd each year in Europe to full satisfaction of the users. What a responsability just having the power to say I don't like your style to play with other peoples health. Think about... Either you provide help or your take responsability. The future will be judge... Take a minute to visit our web : www.acrystal.fr and I'm sure you will understand the importance of this world innovation.
And please also explain we why you accepted the article "Jesmonite" which was the same product under a former name ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.148.211.144 (talk) 05:41, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
Sorry to tell you that my english is not of the level of yours to understand all the details of the "help" pages. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.148.211.144 (talk) 05:43, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
Best regards
Serge —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.148.211.144 (talk) 05:39, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
- Hi, Serge! I'm sorry your article got deleted. The issue you seem to be running in to is that not *every* product falls into Wikipedia's Notability guidelines. I recommend you read those before trying to create the article again. If you can come up with reliable sources that discuss Acrystal and why it's significant, then the article will be kept - that's about it. Thanks for stopping by! -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 05:46, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
Hi SatyrTN,
sorry I will not make the effort to write this article again. You engaged your responsability by deleting. It's your responsability to put it again or to keep your readers ignorant of a product preserving health and environment. I mine mind it's a crime knowing everything we do about planet earth.
By SatyrTN good luck. I'll not fight with you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.148.211.144 (talk) 08:23, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
False copyright infringement
Hi, SatyrTN. Remember a long time ago when you deleted that page List of Italian regions by GDP (nominal) saying that it was copyright violation because the statistics were those from the europa website. I checked on the page of copyright problems, and it told me that "copying facts from a page isn't copyright infringement; only copying phrases, expressions, sentences or paragraphs". Technically, the only thing that was identical were the statistics, but since those are facts, it does not count as copyright violation. I then recreated the page, clearly stating that there was no violation, but it was thoughtlessly deleted shortly afterwords. I know that it's been a long time since, but I would like the page re-installed and that ugly violation message (actually, two messages) taken off my page. Reply--Theologiae (talk) 10:20, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
- Thank you for your supportive message. Yes, it is very true, copyright is a very fragile point in wikipedia because not only does it damage the encyclopedia, but it also can create serious legal problems outside of wikipedia. Just one thing. I will recreate the page as you said so, but is unfortunately protected, because some editors think I am constantly breaking copyright. This is totally untrue. Even though it may look like that, I know about all these laws and would never just copypaste a whole chunk of info onto the page. I only saw the statistics, rewrote them, and quoted the website, a thing wikipedia does all the time without any problems. It seems that the admins probably got caught in overzealous deletion and just dismissed the page as an infringement without even considering it. Anyway, please remove the copyright messages of the thing off my page and we can collaborate in recreating it. Reply--Theologiae (talk) 11:09, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
- Ok, I will do so. In that case, does that mean that I am free of violation charges on this case? If so thank you (I probably think you've spotted, I'm suffering from severe copyright paranoia). I will do so. The only thing is that if I do upload it, other editors will still think that I'm violating the rule again. Also another thing. Since you have the wikipediholicism clinic, I was wondering if there was a copyright paranoia clinic, 'cause I seriously need help to stop being so paranoid about all sorts of copyright things (i.e. spotting copyright, accidentally violating etc.) Reply--Theologiae (talk) 19:02, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
- I'm sorry I'm getting really paranoid. I'm just so worried that every time a make an edit I might be violating copyright, also because I'm a child. Could you advise me on anything?--Theologiae (talk) 19:58, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
- Well, thank you very much for your help. I'm sorry, these must be the serious symptoms of the paranoia. I'll just ask you a last question. Do you know if there's a help desk or something in order to tell people your problems or something? Reply--Theologiae (talk) 08:36, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
"Deesha Philyaw" deleted
Hello,
You deleted a page ("Deesha Philyaw") that was created for me, citing copyright infringement related to thefastertimes.com. A link to The Faster Times, a site I write for, was listed along with several others...how is this copyright infringement?
~Deesha Deeshaphilyaw (talk) 07:01, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
- I took a look at Deesha Philyaw and it was a straight copy and paste from a thefastertimes.com article, without even a link to the site. As such, it was a copyright violation and was deleted under G12 of our speedy deletion policy. EVula // talk // ☯ // 07:17, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
AfD nomination of Yugoslav University Debate Network
An article that you have been involved in editing, Yugoslav University Debate Network, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yugoslav University Debate Network. Thank you.
Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Codf1977 (talk) 09:30, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
Dear SatyrTN,
I'm sorry that I deleted stuff on your projects. I was just mad that you deleted my project Frank the Turtle. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikifan502 (talk • contribs) 14:07, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
Something we can agree on?
Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Wikiproject tags on biographies of living people--Scott Mac (Doc) 17:08, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
- Thank you :) I have only ever started one RfC and was just trying to put together how to do that. Thanks :) -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 17:12, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
- I wonder whether you would review the "scope" that I've written for neutrality? I genuinely hope this can be a useful and fair way forward.--Scott Mac (Doc) 17:19, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
- I'm not fond of singling out WP:LGBT like that, but in general that seems fine :) -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 17:24, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
- Well, I wasn't wanting to single it out. I was wanting to honestly narrate where this had come form, and then say "let's now talk about the wider issues this raises". If you can think of better ways of wording it, feel free to edit.--Scott Mac (Doc) 17:28, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
- I think you managed it. I'm going to widen the scope a little in my View and bring in other WikiProjects, so I think it's probably fine. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 17:34, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
Sorry
I'm sorry that i did stuff to your pages —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikifan502 (talk • contribs) 21:25, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
Hi
Hello SatyrTN, please can i know why did u remove my article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dubai Man (talk • contribs) 23:50, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
Please help
I'm just starting to learn Wikipedia and I'm curious why my page was deleted "Shaun Rieman". I'm a LGBT business owner and though I know i'm not famous, why would my story be removed? I'd had a previous conversation with "Singlish_speaker" about my page and I was under the impression that my page met the requirements for Wikipedia. Please advise. Thank you! Webshaun (talk) 03:20, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
Deletion of PhantomsRL page
Please give feedback on why this page was deleted after reasons for non-deletion were provided on its talk page. Thanks (PhantomsRL (talk) 12:04, 16 February 2010 (UTC))
PS. I think the page is written from a neutral standpoint (PhantomsRL (talk) 12:07, 16 February 2010 (UTC))
This page had been re-created. Please confirm whether it is now acceptable - or not. Thanks in advance (Jimac99 (talk) 14:42, 1 March 2010 (UTC))
"Placing a requirement solely on WP:LGBT is exactly that"
Who has suggested that? Not me.--Scott Mac (Doc) 22:19, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
- Actually, it was Off2riorob's View that required a specific condition to be met for WP:LGBT on BLP articles. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 22:22, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
- You might take that up with him. I'm sorry, I'm just very sensitive to accusations of homophobia. I can assure you my reaction would have been the same with any other tag that seemed to me to imply something about the subject that they had denied or chosen not to affirm. You may strongly disagree with me, you may consider me an abusive admin, and a bad wikipedian, but I would ask you to assume my good faith in this regard.--Scott Mac (Doc) 22:27, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
- You and I haven't run in to each other recently, so I found your initial actions (threatening to block, specifically) to be awful. But the more I read you, the more I hope you and I can work together. As I read your comments, I find that you're not evil :) I totally AGF :)
- I also hope you understand I'm not calling you homophobic. My view is that putting a policy in place that restricts WP:LGBT and only WP:LGBT is, in fact, homophobia. It also implies, if not outright stating, that "these editors cannot be trusted to manage what articles are within their scope". But that's my feeling about the policy suggestion, not about any particular editor (at the moment).
- Thirdly, as you may have noticed, this whole issue has touched some nerves - a whole passel of them. At the root of it is the assumption that "gay is bad", which (as a gay person) I grew up with and has colored my life. It's the reason that 1/3 of teen suicides are LGBT teens. It's the "Mother culture" view of homosexuality, which thankfully seems to be changing, but is still strong. So I understand you feeling raw about being called homophobic - it's the same rawness LGBT folk feel when they see something that smacks of "gay is bad".
- I hope that explains a little bit of the ire that this issue seems to have raised :) -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 22:38, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
- I can understand that. I guess I started here from the naive assumption that, in a neutral encyclopedia, the sexuality of an editor should be irrelevant, as should their moral views on other people's sexuality. Providing we edit in a neutral way and don't use prejudicial or discriminatory language, we'd all get on fine. I oppose POV-pushing of every type and find it particularly distasteful when the biographies of living people are used for agenda-pushing. The last vested group I opposed were anti-fascists who were violating BLP on the articles of a bunch of people who'd have made my skin crawl. But even in disagreeing with them, none accused me of fascist sympathies. I many be a "BLP extremist", but I've always played it ....(I was going to say "straight" but lets go for...) neutrally.--Scott Mac (Doc) 22:48, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
- You did notice that the view you endorsed said "the editors whose prejudices led to this RfD should be deeply ashamed and should spend some time thinking about their own anti-LGBT issues.". OK, thought about it. And, I'm not ashamed and am confident that my personal views/prejudices on "LGBT issues" (which are as irrelevant here as the question of whom Johnny Weir chooses to sleep with) didn't enter into it at all.--Scott Mac (Doc) 22:52, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
- That may be, but you still came from the "gay is bad" camp with your actions. In a different universe, the Weir article with only one (non-)sentence about his sexuality could have been discussed and *not* tagged, and I (and others) would have been fine with that. But to have the entire discussion removed because "gay is bad" triggered the sandstorm. After all, we weren't discussing whether or not to include a statement in the article - we were discussing the scope of the WikiProject and this particular article. In fact, proponents of tagging the article were almost all in the camp of "less is more in the article", though we wanted to watch it. And within the past week Weir has been in the news because some CBC broadcasters questioned his gender, which would argue that the Project could be of more help on the article.
- I'm not saying anything new here, so I feel I should stop. My biggest concern about your actions is that deleting the discussion of whether or not to tag the article severely hampers one WikiProject. And to do so claiming BLP violations seems heavy-handed and implies that everything gay is bad. Can you see how that would bring about the (over-)reactions of some of the members of the WikiProject?
- I recognize that your personal views probably haven't come in to play in your actions - you're trying to uphold what I view as an essential part of Wikipedia - WP:HARM. In my personal editing, I've done countless hours of research on the List of gay, lesbian or bisexual people, bringing seven of the nineteen to FL status. Most of the work on those lists was researching each person to find WP:RS that state their sexuality. So I fully support and understand BLP - and I support your work. I just feel that in this case you may have used a sledge hammer when a pair of tweezers would have worked :) -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 23:14, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
- Perhaps. But I don't take the "gay is bad" inference. In Wikipedia "gay is neutral" as is all else. However, when an individual doesn't want to discuss their sexuality, we need to tread with care. There's nothing verifiable to say about his sexuality, and he doesn't want commentary. I think there those working on the content are pushing it with their concept of "notable and verifiable speculation" - but I didn't ever comment on the content and at no time tried to interfere with editors discussing what was, or was not, appropriate there. Content matters - it is what we are about. Wikiproject banners are trivial at best. Discussing his sexuality with regard to content decision is, I suggest, as "necessary evil". It may be intrusive, but we can't establish what is and is not intrusive and appropriate without discussion. However, to have an extended discussion about Weir and his sexuality for the sake of establishing something as inhouse and as trivial as a banner is inappropriate. If "err on the side of the subject" means anything, then when someone suggests that a banner might be read as implying something which is not a verifiable fact, then it is time to exclude the banner, and certainly the trivial and meaningless inhouse discussion of the subject wrt a banner. I fail to see how this implies anything about being gay. The lead I take is from the subject - he doesn't want to be labelled as gay (or as straight). It may be that's a disappointment to some people - I really don't know. But if we respect our subjects, we start there. We only then do what's definitely neutral, verifiable and strictly necessary for an encyclopedia article. As I say, people may disagree with that view, but it gives them no right to accuse me of homophobia or assume anything about my irrelevant attitudes to sexuality.--Scott Mac (Doc) 23:32, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
- This is how it looks to me:
- On the one hand, discussing the banner is trivial. If that's the case, severe measures to curtail it are inappropriate.
- On the other hand, discussing the banner is a BLP violation. That means that discussing the WP:LGBT banner is a bad thing, because being gay is bad. In that case, one specific WikiProject is stifled because being gay is bad.
- That's from my perspective, anyway :) -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 23:41, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
- This is how it looks to me:
- Perhaps. But I don't take the "gay is bad" inference. In Wikipedia "gay is neutral" as is all else. However, when an individual doesn't want to discuss their sexuality, we need to tread with care. There's nothing verifiable to say about his sexuality, and he doesn't want commentary. I think there those working on the content are pushing it with their concept of "notable and verifiable speculation" - but I didn't ever comment on the content and at no time tried to interfere with editors discussing what was, or was not, appropriate there. Content matters - it is what we are about. Wikiproject banners are trivial at best. Discussing his sexuality with regard to content decision is, I suggest, as "necessary evil". It may be intrusive, but we can't establish what is and is not intrusive and appropriate without discussion. However, to have an extended discussion about Weir and his sexuality for the sake of establishing something as inhouse and as trivial as a banner is inappropriate. If "err on the side of the subject" means anything, then when someone suggests that a banner might be read as implying something which is not a verifiable fact, then it is time to exclude the banner, and certainly the trivial and meaningless inhouse discussion of the subject wrt a banner. I fail to see how this implies anything about being gay. The lead I take is from the subject - he doesn't want to be labelled as gay (or as straight). It may be that's a disappointment to some people - I really don't know. But if we respect our subjects, we start there. We only then do what's definitely neutral, verifiable and strictly necessary for an encyclopedia article. As I say, people may disagree with that view, but it gives them no right to accuse me of homophobia or assume anything about my irrelevant attitudes to sexuality.--Scott Mac (Doc) 23:32, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
- I'm afraid I don't understand that. The banner is trivial it in its utility to the project. Therefore there is no justification for keeping it on the talk page, or for a prolonged discussion about it, when both tend to draw us into discussing, implicitly commenting, or drawing attention to the sexuality of someone who has preferred not to comment on his sexuality. Nothing is stifling any content work here whatsoever. Views of "gay" don't come into it - only the fact that the subject has declined to identify as such.--Scott Mac (Doc) 00:31, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
- I don't think I understand where you're coming from either. Are you saying that talking about adding the WikiProject banner is the same as talking about Weir's sexuality? I see something a bit different. The WikiProject is interested in Weir for more than his sexuality - it's interested in the article because of the subjects that Weir is often involved in - Weir's refusal to talk about his sexuality, the recent comments by broadcast commentators regarding gender, Weir's presentation/skating style, etc. There is a definite intersection between figure skating and gender/sexuality - see Figure Skating and Cultural Meaning, or this article in The Advocate. Weir's actions are smack dab in the middle of these issues and he's exemplifying a notable phenomenon - how his sexuality (and refusal to talk about it) relate to his profession and sports in general, as well as how our culture in general views the sport and the men involved in it. Note that I'm not talking about his sexuality specifically - I'm talking about how his refusal is related to cultural views of sexuality, as well as the intersection of gender/masculinity and sports.
- So while you may feel that the banner is trivial to the project, I feel that there is a definite and obvious need for the WikiProject to be involved in the article - and to be open about it. What "stifles content work" (as you put it) is that a unilateral decision stopped the process of deciding whether or not the WikiProject could be of assistance. And from what I read above, you're saying "he doesn't want to talk about it" is the same as "talking about it would harm the subject". The latter is what BLP is for - the former isn't. Wikipedia deals in a *lot* of articles where content is added that the subject doesn't want - that's where the WP:WELLKNOWN section of BLP comes in. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 05:19, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
- I have never suggested that members of the wikiproject (or any editors whatsoever) can't assist with the article. However, I find the arguments you are using strange, and I think if I used the same ones I'd certainly be accused of unacceptable stereotyping. "He's not talking about his sexuality....but y'know he's a skater, and we know what skaters are like....so he's interesting to gay people."??? How isn't that crude prejudice and sexuality stereotyping?--Scott Mac (Doc) 11:55, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
(outdent) Thank you - I needed a smile from wikipedia this morning :) Yes, part of it is that he is using and/or challenging the stereotype of flamboyant gay male skater. He is also using and/or challenging the mainstream idea of masculinity in sports while denying a "normal" hetero label. This article from NPR last night speaks exactly to that, in fact. My reasons for including the banner are based as much on society's reaction to him as on his non-heterosexualness - not that he's gay, but that he's refused to take the label "straight". -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 16:44, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
Waaaacking
Greetings Satyr! Just stopping by to let you know that an article you propsed for deletion in the past, Waacking, has been restored after the proposed deletion was contested at requests for undeletion. Feel free to nominate the page for deletion at AfD if you feel it is appropriate. I thought you'd know better than I, cheers! Arbitrarily0 (talk) 01:44, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
Question Re: DMXReady Page Deletion -- Trying to Fix A7
Hi SatyrTN,
I went back to add to the DMXReady ([2]) entry, and saw that it was deleted because it did not prove importance.
I’d like to continue working on this article. DMXReady is the only commercial software company in the world (that I’m aware of) still supporting ASP-based applications. Its biggest rival, WebAssist, announced on October 13, 2008 that it would stop producing ASP (as well as ColdFusion) applications ([3]).
In an About.com article at the time of WebAssist’s announcement, Jennifer Kyrnin wondered aloud if ASP was dying ([4]). She pointed out that most people were abandoning ASP for PHP for one reason: price.
Her comments reflect the general notion floating around the programming community. That notion does not reflect the facts though.
It is important to note that “most” people is not the same as “all” people. Many businesses and even government agencies that run their own servers are using Windows-based platforms because they are so much easier for their employees to use.
Some larger companies include Mattel ([5]) and Scholastic book publishers ([6]). Government agencies like the U.S. Department of Transportation ([7]), the Connecticut General Assembly ([8]), and the National Institutes of Health ([9]) also use Classic ASP for part or all of their websites.
These examples don’t include the millions of websites from smaller companies and organizations, which really make up the bulk of Classic ASP users today.
And, also contrary to some programmers’ claims, there are also many resources available on the web for Classic ASP – here is just a short list: ([10]).
It has become fashionable as of late to “bash” Classic ASP, but this is coming mostly from programmers. Certainly, there are a lot of reasons why programmers prefer PHP. But really it comes down to what the end-users – the web owners themselves – prefer. And many of them prefer Classic ASP because of its ease of use and because it runs on Windows.
The truth is that Classic ASP is still alive and being used around the world. And right now, the only commercial support for the technology comes from one source: DMXReady. I believe that this represents importance.
Of course I’d like to get your opinion on this. If I centre the article around DMXReady as a commercial supporter of Classic ASP, will this prove importance in your mind? How do I proceed from here?
Thanks,
Litany42 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Litany42 (talk • contribs) 16:50, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
- Hi, Litany42!
- I deleted DMXReady because another editor had placed a Speedy Delete request on the article. The reasoning was that the article did not "assert notability" - in other words, there was nothing to say why the company was important.
- I recommend "userfying" a version of the article - which I see you have already done at User:Litany42/DMXReady. On that userpage, work to find reliable sources that satisfy Wikipedia's notability guidelines. I hope that helps, and Happy Editing! -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 17:09, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks SatyrTN! I'll get back to you once I've tracked all that down. --Litany42 (talk) 16:08, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
Re "DJ Pusspuss"
Hello, SatyrTN. As you've returned to active editing, it seems like the right time to ask you if you can explain this comment:
- "Okay - you're getting close to wikistalking, Legionarius. Link one is totally not a reliable source, and links 2 & 3 don't even support your claim. And from personal knowledge, you're barking up the wrong tree."[11]
How could you have had "personal knowledge" which supported what we now know to have been a sham and a fraud perpetuated upon Wikipedia's readers, as well as your fellow contributors? I also see that you blanked this archive box with the (apparently) deceptive edit summary "Cleanup headers."[12] Since you're not only an administrator, but the deputy coordinator of Wikipedia's LGBT Wikiproject,[13] I consider this a serious matter, and would appreciate a candid and timely explanation.24.22.141.61 (talk) 08:34, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
- Since it seems you don't much like that question, how about this one:
- "I think it's extremely important to make sure our [LGBT-related] information is correct and truly 'in-your face.' With that kind of reliable information available, the LGBT community can only benefit."
- Did you say that?24.22.141.61 (talk) 07:36, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
Wb. I see you added the other guy's name on Aaron Henry's page. I wasn't sure about that, to protect the other guy's privacy, since this article isn't about him. I came upon the same problem with Belhaven College, as you can see from the history. I decided to remove the faculty member's name.Zigzig20s (talk) 05:09, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
Hi SatyrTN - thanks for taking the time to rate the above on the WP:LGBT quality scale. I was a little disappointed that it only got a "start" class rating, but such is life :)
Could you give me some pointers on the areas you would tackle first in order to increase that rating? Cheers. Gonzonoir (talk) 09:15, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
- Hi, Gonzonoir! I've upgraded the article to "C" class - my initial viewing was too low. My suggestion for "B" rating is to get some other editors involved - perhaps at WT:LGBT and WP:NOVEL? I'm not very versed in writing articles about novels, so I don't really know the "B" or "GA" ratings well enough to tell you how to get there. Hope that helps - and again, great writing! -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 17:53, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks SatyrTN. It's actually nonfiction rather than a novel, but I will see what interest I can drum up at the projects. All the best. Gonzonoir (talk) 11:31, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
Hey, SatyrTN. What do you mean by this edit? Her sexual preference is backed up by reliable sources in her Personal life section, and was extensively discussed on the talk page of her article. She has not outright stated that she considers herself bisexual (not publicly, anyway), but she has stated (in more than one interview) that she is open to being with women romantically/sexually. Not too long ago, some reliable sources were reporting that she was overheard openly saying she had a girlfriend (in the romantic sense), which is mentioned in her article (though that part is sort of gossipy, it is succeeded by more questioning of her sexual orientation). Flyer22 (talk) 00:33, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
- Hi, Flyer22!
- Has O'Day said that she's bisexual? According to the "Personal Life" section, she has not stated such. Per WP:BLP, until and unless she does state it, she shouldn't be put in the category. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 00:42, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
- I understand what you mean about the bisexual category, SatyrTN. We have kept her out of the bisexual category. But since she has expressed a romantic/sexual interest in both sexes, we have kept her in the LGBT category and the LGBT banner on her talk page. As I stated above, these discussions were had on her talk page. I would appreciate you posting there any thing you feel we got wrong; those discussions have not been archived yet, since her talk page is not that active, as you may have noticed. Flyer22 (talk) 01:43, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
Please, the article has fonts in the wiki-pt and wiki-es. [14] [15].
some of my enemies are proposing elimination here and wikipedia in Spanish (in Portuguese they have no courage). I ask that you restore the content so that it can be improved. In fact, missing references, but I placed them, as I did in Wikipedia in Portuguese and in Spanish.
It should not be eliminated by deletion log. 201.17.79.52 (talk) 02:40, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
- Hi! It looks like the article has been WP:USERFY'd to User:Quintinense/GRES_Império_da_Praça_Seca. If you have any further questions, let me know. Thanks! -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 18:39, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I see you declined the speedy delete for this page. If you are going to decline it then you have to resolve the issue otherwise it has to be deleted per WP:COPYVIO:
"If there is no such older version, you may be able to re-write the page from scratch or obtain permission from the copyright holder (see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission), but failing that, the page will normally need to be deleted. In limited circumstances, administrators may delete obvious copyright violations on sight; see the relevant section of the speedy deletion policy. Contributors may list pages that meet these conditions for deletion using the {{db-copyvio}} tag."
G12 states:
"Text pages that contain copyrighted material with no credible assertion of public domain, fair use, or a free license, where there is no non-infringing content on the page worth saving. Only if the history is unsalvageably corrupted should it be deleted in its entirety; earlier versions without infringement should be retained. For equivocal cases (such as where there is a dubious assertion of permission, or where free-content edits overlie the infringement), please consult Wikipedia:Copyright violations."
Neither state that it's OK to violate copyrights if it's only one sentence. Please rewrite the article or delete it. Thanks. Wizard191 (talk) 17:05, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
- G12 also states "unambiguous copyright infringements". This is not an unambiguous case - it's not a direct copy/paste of the material, and has already been rewritten. If you disagree, I'd be glad to post a note on the administrator's noticeboard to see what others think - or check for a third opinion someplace, but as it stands I don't see a need to do anything with the article. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 17:16, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
- I don't see how it isn't unambiguous; the wording is near identical. I would like a third-opinion. Wizard191 (talk) 17:32, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
Silverfleet Capital
Where is the assertion of notability? 16x9 (talk) 22:42, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
Quake
Somebody did the Quake move, without fixing all the hundreds of now wrong links. They even redirected the talk-age. I think this should be undone, or properly done. --DanielPharos (talk) 13:05, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
- Hi, Daniel!
- I'm not quite sure what you're asking for. My understanding is most redirects will be (or should already have been) fixed by a bot. Or do you mean reviewing the 373 articles and talk pages to make sure they're pointing to the right page? -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 16:27, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
- The page was originally a redirect to Quake (video game) (you made that), but somebody then changed it to point to Earthquake (which makes more sense). But now all the Quake-pages are pointing to Earthquake! That's obviously wrong, but like you, I have no desire to manually need to change them. Where are those bots located? --DanielPharos (talk) 13:31, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
- Sadly, a bot can't do that. I'll go through the list and change as needed - I like those kinds of tasks :) -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 17:11, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
Icy (application)
Hi there, help me understand the process here: Why was Icy (application) not meeting DB-11? The article just talk about a product that is not remarkable or noticeable, without one single reliable and independent reference to back it up?
I also know that DB-A7 does not specifically say "software", but the whole DB-A7 applies to this article as well. Perhaps we need a DB-software template, within DB-A7. I have nominated for deletion to continue the process regardless, I just want to understand what to do going forward.
Thanks, Miguel.mateo (talk) 22:20, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
- Hi, Miguel.mateo!
- I declined the speedy G11 because it didn't seem (to me) to be simply promotional - more of a description of the product. G11 doesn't require notability, it's meant for articles that are started simply to promote a product. This article has been around for half a year, with multiple editors, so I didn't feel it fell under that criterion.
- As for A7, that one is specifically for people and web content. It's meant to nip articles that people start about themselves or people they think are notable, but don't have any reliable sources to back it up.
- Personally, I have no idea if the article will survive AfD, but I couldn't delete it under those reasons. You're following the right process - Speedy (where applicable), AfD where some discussion is needed. Thanks, and happy editing! -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 00:24, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I was hoping to get this redirect deleted. At the moment it shows up as a bluelink wherever used and as there is a gradual process of removing redlinks, the assumption being used on lists such as Grabby recipients is that the bluelinks indicate valid articles. In am unsure in this case what the benefit of a bluelink would be. Cheers Ash (talk) 05:46, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
- Done :) -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 06:14, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks, now re-created as a stub article based on the Grabby source. Ash (talk) 15:49, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
Sarshar Uqaili
I'm trying to help user Cooldemocrat render an article on this topic, I'm guessing he wrote this one. If Sarshar Uqaili was a copyright infringement, I was wondering if you could direct me to a copy or representation of the newspaper article from which it was copied. I'm trying to locate good sources for the current incarnation, and it seems to me that that might be a decent start. tia, --Nuujinn (talk) 22:46, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
- Hi, Nuujinn! The articles cited on the page that the copyvio text came from are: [16] and [17] - hope that helps, and happy editing! -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 05:45, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks! Unfortunately those references don't really help much, but I appreciate the quick reply. --Nuujinn (talk) 10:39, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
Girltrash! is most certainly LGBT-related. I had it on my watchlist due to this fairly overt case of conflict of interest from December. That LGBT Project tag was the only thing stopping me from taking it to AfD, so you'd best re-add it. ;) Delicious carbuncle (talk) 18:22, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
- There's nothing in the article that says anything about it being lesbian-related, though I see one link to AfterEllen.com. It's not my area of expertise, but maybe Moni3 will take a look at it? -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 18:29, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
- Jumping in here... One episode's description says something about two of the females flirting with one another. I have no other knowledge of the subject though. LadyofShalott 18:42, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
- I just put the project tag back based upon this quote: "GIRLTRASH! is the story of three hapless chicks getting by any way they can. Tyler and Daisy are small-time criminals and best buds. Their friendship is put to the test when Tyler is seduced by the two-timing temptress, LouAnne." That's from "Girltrash! - about. LadyofShalott 18:54, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
- Can we put something in the article so the tag isn't hanging there with no indication why? -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 19:10, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
- OK, I just added a three-word sentence to the plot section. See if you think that does it. I'm not sure how much more I can/will do never having seen the show, and not really feeling like searching for good references for this topic. (Did anyone else notice what a mess the article was?) LadyofShalott 19:42, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
- Bleh. It isn't AfD'able - not with that cast. But you're right - it was in horrible shape. At least now it's a respectable "start". Is the show itself really LGBT-related? One sub-plot? I don't have the energy or will to research it, either, so I guess it will lie fallow :) -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 22:03, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
- OK, I just added a three-word sentence to the plot section. See if you think that does it. I'm not sure how much more I can/will do never having seen the show, and not really feeling like searching for good references for this topic. (Did anyone else notice what a mess the article was?) LadyofShalott 19:42, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
- Can we put something in the article so the tag isn't hanging there with no indication why? -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 19:10, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
- I just put the project tag back based upon this quote: "GIRLTRASH! is the story of three hapless chicks getting by any way they can. Tyler and Daisy are small-time criminals and best buds. Their friendship is put to the test when Tyler is seduced by the two-timing temptress, LouAnne." That's from "Girltrash! - about. LadyofShalott 18:54, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
- Jumping in here... One episode's description says something about two of the females flirting with one another. I have no other knowledge of the subject though. LadyofShalott 18:42, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
Msg from Harveymilk
Thanks for the warm welcome to WP! Very much appreciated. Harveymilk (talk) 05:15, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
Please read the articles before you remove the LGBT tags. When there's a reference saying they're gay, they are.Zigzig20s (talk) 12:14, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
- Sorry about that, ZizZig - I totally missed that. My bad! -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 14:16, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for your coaching
I appreciated your advice-- yes, I would like to participate in the LGBT articles-- I think I'd have something to offer and I will look around. Is there any particular project you are working on that I could help with? Also, do you have an association with the Radical Faeries in TN? I do, and am coming down for the spring gathering in a few weeks. Also-- how do I make a pretty signature like yours? Harveymilk (talk) 22:06, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
- Hi, hon!
- Personally, I'm pretty good at finding references for un-referenced biographies, so I've been spending time on Wikipedia:WikiProject LGBT studies/Unreferenced BLPs. But if you're looking for something to do, take a look at WT:LGBT - at the top of the page are a bunch of "to do" items - jump in wherever you feel appropriate, and if you need help with anything, feel free to ask at WT:LGBT. We're a pretty friendly bunch :)
- Yes, I live near the Sanctuary. You might know me by the Ribbons I wear - and I'm pretty sure I know who you are, too :)
- As for your signature, take a look at WP:CUSTOMSIG - there's a bunch of information there to help you customize your signature to your heart's content. And if you need any help with that, let me know.
- By the way, I'm writing this on *my* talk page, though I left a note on yours. A helpful tool for "watching" other people's talk pages is the "watch" link at the top of the page. Watchlisting a page makes it so any time that page is changed, you're alerted on your Special:Watchlist - another helpful tool :)
- Hope that all helps! -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 22:12, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
Why delete my article
i try to make new article "otara_gunewardena" but you delete that one can i know what is that or how i correct my content vishal.dj.fa9@gmail.com pls reply to me —Preceding unsigned comment added by Todaylanka (talk • contribs) 07:09, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
Chai Feldblum - Obama's pick to head the EEOC, advocate for LGBT rights
Hi Satyr, I would like to improve the bio of Chai and I believe it should have an LGBT template of some sort, although I am not sure how that is decided or how to do it. Recently Feldblum has been the target of a smear campaign by opposition of LGBT rights....--DCX (talk) 22:22, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
- Hi, DCX!
- I'm not quite sure what you're asking here. I took a look at Chai Feldblum, and the article looks good. I added the LGBTProject template to the talk page.
- Do you mean you think she should have a template like Template:LGBT in the article? You could add that one, with the
|rights=expanded
parameter. Is that what you're thinking? -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 23:12, 4 April 2010 (UTC)- Hi Satyr,
the template you've added is perfect, thank you. Additionally, I wanted to bring awareness of this person because she is a Lesbian involved in LGBT rights and policies at high level Federal govt. and a target of an anti-LGBT smear campaign. See some examples below http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/03/31/obamas-pick-join-eeoc-blasted-conservative-groups/ http://www.traditionalvalues.org/read/3752/if-you-hate-america-you-have-a-lawyer--chai-feldblum/ http://mediamatters.org/research/200910060029 http://noapologies.ca/?p=7640 A few things in the article should be improved, such as wording, etc. I don't think lesbian needs to be redirected more than once...I would also like to balance the article with more examples of her work for the disabled instead of so much on her views about multiple domestic partners. --DCX (talk) 00:45, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
LGBT Project elections
Hello SatyrTN, you are receiving this message because you are listed as a deputy coordinator of WikiProject LGBT studies. I have decided to hold elections for new coordinators, so I am formally inviting you to run for the position if you feel you can carry out the responsibilities. Thank you, The WordsmithCommunicate 19:52, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
Hi, would you like to help me work on this to get it to GA status? CTJF83 chat 18:47, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
- Hm. Chicago's not my town, but I'll take a look when I get a chance. I just signed on to GA-ify Johnny Weir, so my hands are a bit full, but I'll do what I can :) -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 18:51, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
- Ok, cool, I have User:Ctjf83/Lakeview started too. CTJF83 chat 19:02, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
Karseri & Melakkal
Hi, Whats the reason for deleting the articles Karseri, melakkal, Kanavai. Melakkal & Kanavi are same and have to be re direted once all the contents have been added.
Karseri is a different article. Whats the reason for deletion? Wasifwasif (talk) 08:10, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
- I have replied on your talk page. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 14:04, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
Please help with Don Martin Public Affairs deletion
I appreciate your attention to this article as I am new to Wiki. Don Martin himself has been a significant contributor to the Austin, Texas area in many respects and has done so through his company. How can I better improve this post? Should I re-write in his name? I would not have attempted this post if I had not seen that Hahn, Texas (another public relations firm in Austin, Texas) is considered notable and included in Wiki. They are equivalent in tenure, scope and impact in this part of the world. Your guidance is much appreciated.Jmanriquez (talk) 14:53, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
- I have replied on your talk page. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 06:07, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
Deletion nomination of Wikipedia:WikiProject College football/SatyrBot maintenance/Translation
![blanked page](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/9e/Edit-delete-2.svg/48px-Edit-delete-2.svg.png)
Hi SatyrTN, this is a message from an automated bot, regarding Wikipedia:WikiProject College football/SatyrBot maintenance/Translation. You blanked the page and, since you are its sole author, FrescoBot has interpreted it as a request for deletion of the page and asked administrators to satisfy the requests per speedy deletion criterion G7. Next time you want a page that you've created deleted, you can explicitly request the deletion by inserting the text {{db-author}}
. If you didn't want the page deleted, please remove the {{db-author}}
tag from the page and undo your blanking or put some content in the page. Admins are able to recover deleted pages. Please do not contact the bot operator for issues not related with bot's behaviour. To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=FrescoBot}}
somewhere on your talk page. -- FrescoBot (msg) 21:13, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
Page marked as an orphan
Hello SatyrTN-- I hope you are well! I need some advice. Somebody has marked my Wiki page as an orphan. Chris Bartlett (activist) There are links to the page from other pages-- I'm wondering what the standard is for number of links before a page is not considered an orphan? And if it is not an orphan, how do I contest this with the person who marked it so? Any advice would be appreciated. Chris xo —Preceding unsigned comment added by Harveymilk (talk • contribs) 14:21, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
- Hi, Harvey!
- The description of an Orphan says fewer than three links from other articles is a standard. I would suggest removing the orphan tag from the article, and if you really feel froggy, leave a comment on Talk:Chris Bartlett (activist) with an explanation. That should be enough :)
- Oh, and by the way - you'll want to end all your comments on talk pages and user talk pages with four tildes - ~~~~. That automatically adds a signature. Happy Editing! -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 14:46, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for your suggestion that I read the COI page-- it was very helpful! Would you suggest that I post the fact that I am editing my own page on the page? I am totally open to any feedback you might have with regard to Chris Bartlett (activist) and how I should address COI. Thanks Satyr! Harveymilk (talk) 17:17, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
- No prob, hon! I suggest putting {{Notable Wikipedian}} on the talk page, up near the top (under the WikiProject Banners). In general, there probably wont be any issues, but if you think you might be getting into a gray area, feel free to drop me a note. And / or you can use the {{Request edit}} template in a new section on the talk page to request others to review your potential edits. But in general, I wouldn't worry too much :) TTYL! And see you soon? -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 21:17, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
Notice of inactivity - useful
I've noticed User_talk:Boomboomeve#Notice_of_Inactivity. I just spend an hour delivering newsletters and checking who is active for WikiProject Sociology (Wikipedia:WikiProject Sociology/Newsletter). How could I automate it with your bot for the future? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 18:45, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
- Hi, Piotr! At one point I had SatyrBot running and delivering newsletters. I haven't had it running for months now, but it would do a check for recent activity, and if none in the past three months, would move a person from active to inactive. That was specifically on WP:LGBT/M. I don't know if I'll be getting the bot running again, so you may want to post at the bot noticeboard to see if anyone else has something similar. Hope that helps! -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 06:41, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
Inquiry to Learn More About WikiProjects: LGBT
Hello! I am currently a media student who is doing a project on Wikipedia as an open source entity. Would it be alright if I sent you some questions to get your thoughts on what it's like to organize LGBT studies pages via a WikiProject, and your thoughts an the success of everyone's contributions in this type of an environment? Also, I think that I want to try contributing in all of the departments. If you have any suggestions that you think that I might find helpful, feel free to pass them along. Thank you! Joy299 (talk) 22:31, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
- Hi, Joy299! I'd be glad to answer whatever questions you might have regarding WP:LGBT. Feel free to send me an email using the link on the left-hand side of my main page that says "E-mail this user". Can't promise I'll respond the same day, but I'll get back to you fairly quickly :)
- As for contributing, I find that it's best to focus on one or two departments. For instance, I spend time assessing articles for the WikiProject (which doesn't take much - I keep on top of that :) ). I also find that I'm good at finding references regarding people's sexuality, so I use this project page to see which articles need them.
- Hope that helps - and happy editing! -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 06:17, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for your willingness to answer my questions. I have been trying to find the "e-mail this user" link on your main page and I do not see it. Is it possible that I do not have the necessary permissions to email you? Joy299 (talk) 23:32, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
- Sorry - I thought everyone could email. You should be able to use this link: Special:EmailUser/SatyrTN. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 01:23, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
I just realized that I had not originally typed in my own email when I created a log-in. It's the inclusion of an email address in one's own profile that gives access to the "email this user" function. But now I know! Thanks for your help though! I sent you an email with a list of questions. Feel free to answer what you want/can. Thanks!!! Joy299 (talk) 03:12, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
Carl Bean
Thanks, nicely done. Was it the project tag that caught your attention? ϢereSpielChequers 07:08, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
- Sort of? The project tag led to Wikipedia:WikiProject LGBT studies/Unreferenced BLPs, which I occasionally work on :) -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 07:13, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
- In that case I may do a bit more project tagging as I go through the uncategorised. I don't suppose you know of a list of project tags? ϢereSpielChequers 07:16, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
- There are a gazillion, but quite a few aren't all that active. Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory is where to find them all :) -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 07:20, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
- In that case I may do a bit more project tagging as I go through the uncategorised. I don't suppose you know of a list of project tags? ϢereSpielChequers 07:16, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
Fair use rationale for File:Aquateen Hunger Force logo.png
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/c/cf/Copyright-problem.svg/64px-Copyright-problem.svg.png)
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Aquateen Hunger Force logo.png. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.
If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. 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 any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 21:27, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
Please help stop MarmadukePercy
Please help me stop MarmadukePercy from adding false information to the history of King, North Carolina. He keeps adding articles about the history of the "Rock House" which has nothing to do with the history of King, North Carolina. The Rock House is in another town, no where near King, North Carolina. If he would like to publish his article about "The Rock House" help him create a new page, but his article has nothing to do with the History of King, North Carolina!!!!! Thank you, KingHistory! —Preceding unsigned comment added by KingHistoryNow (talk • contribs) 21:48, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Mountain Dew Baja Blast logo.png
![⚠](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/34/Ambox_warning_blue.svg/35px-Ambox_warning_blue.svg.png)
Thanks for uploading File:Mountain Dew Baja Blast logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
PLEASE NOTE:
- I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
- I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
- If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
- To opt out of these bot messages, add
{{bots|deny=DASHBot}}
to your talk page. - If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.
Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 00:46, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
It appears that the alleged murderer may use a gay panic defense. Supposedly, the victim exposed himself and demanded sex. Will Beback talk 01:37, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
- PS: Legal cases can be slow to progress. Let's give it a bit longer to see if that angle develops, or maybe there'll be a plea agreement that short-circuits the process. It's no big deal either way. Will Beback talk 08:26, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
- I don't mind waiting a bit. It just seems weird to leave the project banner on an article that has little to no information pertaining to the WikiProject. Especially after having had a significant row over someone who is living, though that articles has much more content that is LGBT-related. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 22:02, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Aquateen Hunger Force logo.png
![⚠](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/34/Ambox_warning_blue.svg/35px-Ambox_warning_blue.svg.png)
Thanks for uploading File:Aquateen Hunger Force logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
PLEASE NOTE:
- I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
- I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
- If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
- To opt out of these bot messages, add
{{bots|deny=DASHBot}}
to your talk page. - If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.
Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:45, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
File at Commons
Hello, hope your wikibreak is going well. I uploaded this file to Commons today and knew it would be of interest.[18] Best regards, MarmadukePercy (talk) 22:31, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
- Neat! Is that this Joseph Cabell? -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 01:51, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, I believe that's the same person. You may want to see here. [19]. MarmadukePercy (talk) 03:33, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
- Actually the most interesting volume is this one.[20] MarmadukePercy (talk) 21:13, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
- Oddly, I've never read it. Though it's on the bookshelf of every member of my family - including my own :) -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 04:20, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
- I think we're all like that: we tend to overlook the stuff closest to home. I'm related to the Penns, so I usually run the name through image banks when I search, but if someone presented me with a whole volume, I'd probably set it aside for another time. :-) MarmadukePercy (talk) 05:41, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
Invitation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2010_June_16#Category:LGBT_people_of_Puerto_Rican_descent In case you want to comment on this discussion. Thanks.--Lawrlafo (talk) 01:43, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
You might be interested to know...
The article for Bruce and Pepper Wayne Gacy's Home Movies by Bruce LaBruce and Candy Parker is up for speedy deletion. It seems to me that it might be of interest to the LGBT Project, but I don't know how to access them. Are you an administrator? It seems to me that in your contributions there are lots of admin-type edits, so I thought I might ask for your assistance. I hope you don't mind. Intheshadows (talk) 06:37, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
Quick question re: a deleted article
Hi! It looks like a few years back on 9 Feb 2008 you had deleted the article at Innography. It looks like the reason for deletion was due to a non-neutral point of view, or advertising. I'm not sure who created the original article, what it looked like, or what their motivation was. I wanted to check in with you before I placed an article I've been working on in my user area the last day or so at User:TonyHagale/Innography out in the main area. I had a couple of friends look at it, and it seems to be very neutral. In the interest of full disclosure, I work for Innography as an engineer...but I think I've created an entry that doesn't show any conflict of interest. If you get a chance, please let me know if you think this new version might run into any snags, as well. Thanks! TonyHagale (talk) 18:15, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
- Hi, Tony! Thanks for your note! As an admin, I routinely respond to deletion requests and don't often remember the articles. I trust your judgment - and thank you for letting me know! -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 18:29, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
- Cool, many thanks! TonyHagale (talk) 19:13, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
- I just put it up in the live site at Innography. I've got my fingers crossed. :) TonyHagale (talk) 19:21, 1 September 2010 (UTC)