User talk:Valrith/Archive 2

Julia Vlassov

What part of her article do you particularly want sourced? It all seems very NPOV and non-controversial to me. Kolindigo 04:12, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

• Even things that don't appear to be controversial are required to be properly cited using reliable secondary sources. Valrith 04:21, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
  • And why don't her USFSA bio or ISU bio count as reliable secondary sources? Kolindigo 04:45, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
    • They're not cited as references. Valrith 20:19, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

SpyHunter

Why do you keeping claiming there's no source? It's at the end of the sentence. --Wafulz 15:20, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

• Claiming that "so-and-so" said something is all well and good, but unless you can provide evidence that they actually said it, it's still not sourced. So either provide a citation for your source or don't bother adding the claim.
• Never mind ... I see you've added a link to the assessment... Valrith 19:48, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Briana Banks unref tag

I actually referenced the points that were marked as needing references - what parts are left, please? --AnonEMouse ^(squeak) 20:29, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

• That would be basically everything except for the sex toy lawsuit. Valrith 20:45, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
  • All right, got it. :-). The tag will stay for a while, then ... --AnonEMouse ^(squeak) 20:49, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
    • Better? :-) --AnonEMouse ^(squeak) 21:13, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
      • Much! Very cool. Valrith 21:17, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Carnegie Mellon School of Design

Please check out the above page. I am keeping your tags just until we resolve this matter on the articles talk page.PadreNuestro 12:36, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

"Handbra"

Two editors have reverted you, you should cease your disruption. See WP:VANDALISM. Matthew 22:47, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

• Other editors have removed the same crap that I removed ([1]). See WP:OR, WP:V, WP:Crappy editors like you. (eg. you should shut the fuck up.) Valrith 03:17, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep your nasty personal attacks to yourself please. If you continue this disruption, you'll be blocked again. Majorly (hot!) 12:14, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Reference for TV show elimination?

For the article Edyta Sliwinska, I don't know why you think the most recent elimination from Dancing with the Stars needs a citation, but I added a source lest you think the elimination was untrue. I fixed the article to what I hope is at least a decent state. Tinlinkin 11:05, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

RfC on Big Sister (brothel)

Hello, I'm about to file a Request for Comment on Big Sister (brothel) and would like to solicit your position statement on Talk:Big Sister (brothel). Thanks, AxelBoldt 01:12, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

• I've added a comment (and reverted the article) despite the fact that it will do no good. The inmates are running the asylum, ignoring policy and guidelines alike. There is likely money changing hands. Valrith 04:03, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

  Just because people don't agree with your point of view doesn't make them 'inmates'. You need to grow up and stop making idiotic accusations. Cary Bass ^demandez 12:47, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

• Hello Valrith, Look for an email from me. Take care, FloNight 13:01, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Lauren

I didn't do that to the Lauren page. I did, however, delete a comment someone else had written that I considered vandalism. Chelsey21 18:19, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

• My mistake ... I must've clicked the wrong user link... Sorry. Valrith 23:06, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Brandi Lyons

Privacy information, no matter how relevent, is never appropriate for pornographic actors/actresses. Please try to avoid including personal names on articles about these people. Imdb, which is not itself verifiable, is not a credible source. Thank you. Cary Bass ^demandez 20:04, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Jesse Capelli

The same goes for this article. Do not insert personal information into pornographic actors/actresses articles. Cary Bass ^demandez 20:13, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

• Wikipedia should not be in the business of omitting information. Information quoted in other sources will continue to be included here. Valrith 23:08, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

You have made an edit that could be regarded as defamatory. Please do not restore this material to the article or its talk page. If you restore this material to the article or its talk page once more, you will be blocked for disruption. See Blocking policy: Biographies of living people. Cbrown1023 talk 23:10, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

You have been blocked for disruption of Wikipedia, because you added material that could be regarded as defamatory. See Blocking policy: Biographies of living people. You may return when the block expires. Any further attempt to restore the material will incur another block. Cbrown1023 talk 23:28, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

• What utter crap. Try looking up defamatory in a dictionary before you start slinging that word around. Valrith 02:31, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Please see WP:BLP. IMDB does not meet Wikipedia sourcing standards for information contained in the biographies of living persons. FCYTravis 04:31, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

I may well have warned you again instead of blocking at this point, but if you keep reverting good faith editors with the edit summary 'rvv' as you did here, I'd have blocked you myself eventually, so I think Cbrown1023 was well within policy with this block. I'd strongly request that you reconsider your approach. If you contest the block there are channels to do so. Ask here if you are unclear as to what they are, but your block expires shortly. Use the time to reflect, instead, and come back with your good will and collegiality renewed. ++Lar: t/c 17:50, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Jazmin again

Lost interest, buddy? Please, take another peek at the article. If help is what you need, I am ready to do whatever much I can. Respond to my talk page. Aditya Kabir 18:34, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Oh, damn. I thought I've found someone who could actually improve the article mercilessly. Well, my darn luck. Aditya Kabir 14:03, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Sorry I'm not moving fast enough for you... sheesh. Valrith 21:22, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Tim Clarke

Just letting you know that I have removed the tags that you put on his page. If a guy who has played almost 100 games of Australian rules football is not notable then I trust you will be spending the week deleting over 500 articles of Australian rules players wikipedia pages as they fit the same category as Clarke Crickettragic 03:37, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Marcus Christian page

I've added internal links to this page: to the New Negro and to Dillard University for example. Why do you insist that there aren't any to other Wikipedia pages?

Another of your criticisms is 'wikifying.' I'm still wondering what in the world that is. Is there a model that you can suggest? I mean, I have my own writing style.

This page is also being expanded. I will be adding pictures, more references and filling out the Negro Federal Writers Project section. Perhaps you didn't figure that one out. gab 17:37, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

The {{Orphan}} tag indicates that no other pages link to the page where the tag appears. Not the reverse. See Special:Whatlinkshere/Marcus_Bruce_Christian. The link in the header ([2]) might be of use in finding other Wikipedia articles that could benefit from a link to the Christian article.

And the {{Wikify}} tag is likewise explained in its header. See the Wikipedia Manual of Style and Guide to Layout. I've already done initial wikifying, however, and have removed this tag. Valrith 21:37, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

What the hell are you doing getting rid of all the revisions that I spent up to three hours doing last night (August 17-18, 2007)? Including linking externals that you said were missing last time you decided to go on a power trip? In the next few days I plan to put in photographs that have been approved for use by another site. This version I redid had better be there. gtdanyelzgab 04:45, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Lisa Ann Taylor

You should see the discussion there that I have added. This should be responded to rather than edit warring. You also shouldn't accuse people of vandalism that have made good faith edits. It appears you have done this in the past also. I also hope you're not trying to bait me into a 3RR in lieu of discussion, as that would not really be a tactful thing to do. Chicken Wing 22:42, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Kasara

I'm not sure why you placed a speedy delete tag on this article: [3]. Please could you elucidate. Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nichalp (talk • contribs) 05:25, May 26, 2007

• I would've thought it would be fairly obvious given the state of the article at the time. It was also explained by the speedy tag I used. The article was very short, providing little to no content and context. I couldn't even figure out what the article was trying to describe. However, that was in November of last year -- the article is greatly improved since then. Valrith 13:41, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Byron Calvert

I contest the 'speedy deletion' of this page. The subject of this article has been cited in numerous prominant publications, most notably the Washington Post. He came to national attention when his home was raided by the FBI and his views gain widespread attention throughout the American neo Nazi community.----Edchilvers 10:51, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

speedy tagging

G'day Valrith,

I'm in the middle of cleaning up CAT:CSD this arvo, and, as usual, roughly half the articles tagged for speedy deletion

• Don't meet the speedy criteria, or
• Are good articles

This is to be expected. However, I see that your strike rate in particular is very low. The vast majority of times you have recently placed a speedy tag on an article, you have done so inappropriately. Improper tagging offends the creators of good articles, and creates a heck of a lot more work for people like me.

I note from posts by other users and admins (and one bureaucrat!) on your talkpage that you have been questioned about improper use of the speedy and notability tags in the past. Please refrain from tagging articles in the future, until you feel you have properly understood the speedy criteria. We have a lot of work to do to make Wikipedia great. There is no need for us to create extra work for ourselves. Thanks, fuddlemark (befuddle me!) 08:47, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Josh Lewis Rugby League

This player is a well known professional sportsperson. He plays for the Sydney Roosters. He is well known in both Australia, New Zealand and Britain. Would also venture France as well. Certainly not to be deletedCorleoneSerpicoMontana 12:16, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

I reverted your edit

Hi, unfortunately I had to revert you, please see Talk:Brittany Andrews#BLP issues for explanation. Cheers, MaxSem 14:21, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Please don't edit war over this. I'll review the OTRS ticket if you'd like. --Tony Sidaway 20:28, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

I'd appreciate that. If editing of WP is intended to be restrained by decisions made by OTRS (whoever that is), the decisions should be publically accessible. I'd also like an answer to my question about interviews on the talk page. Valrith 21:08, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

The interviewer is apparently a gossip writer, not a reliable source. The OTRS ticket cited by MaxSem is valid. --Tony Sidaway 21:17, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

I've made further comments on my talk page, and would like to continue any further communications on that page, or in email if you prefer. --Tony Sidaway 21:25, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Sources

Please allow me to ask how many sources are necessary for one person? Or when I am allowed to delete the unref? Doma-w 22:48, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

• In reference to what article? Valrith 04:25, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Hi! The article Annelise Coberger. The article has two sentences therefore I have added three external links as references. Nevertheless you have restored the unref. Is it really necessary to have more sources for these two sentences? Please see, that this is not a complaint, I respect your work! Thank you and :) Doma-w 19:18, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

External links aren't the same as references. I see someone else has already changed the 'External links' header to 'References', which should do fine... Valrith 13:39, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I didn't think that there is such a big difference. :) But thank you, I will be more careful. Happy editing and :) Doma-w 21:33, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Sources complaint 2

Side Note, Will you please stop hounding over every single edit I make. If you would like I could give you her phone number so she can tell you personally --Spinachmaster 00:31, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

• By all means feel free to pass along her phone number. However, unless she can give me a reliable source to reference, the content still isn't keepable. Valrith 04:25, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
  • read her myspace blog --Spinachmaster 15:33, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
    • Blogs are not reliable sources. Valrith 21:19, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
      • Blogs/Journals are in facta fine reference for statements about an individual. --Spinachmaster 00:07, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Alyssa

Dear Valrith, this is Zabriskiepoint from good old Germany. Please believe me: Alyssa is a name of Old German origin. --Zabriskiepoint 15:52, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

• I don't doubt your word, but if we want to keep it in the article, we need a reliable source to cite. I've removed all of the unsourced claims from the article for now. Valrith 13:36, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

I have given a reliable source earlier in the article. The very reliable source is: Deutsches Vornamen-Lexikon. You can also look at the German article in de.wikepedia.org --Zabriskiepoint 18:53, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

re: Unspecified source for Image:Michelle-Lamour.jpg

Thanks for the notice. I am the photographer, and it was taken with Michelle's permission. I'll fix the Image: page.

MattHucke^(t) 00:40, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Playboy celeb sources

I noticed you added the references tag back to the celebs section of the Playboy article. What kind of references are you looking for? Don't the issues themselves serve as their own reference? Dismas|^(talk) 16:35, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

• Well, crap. That's not the section I was intending to tag... What I want sources for is the "International editions" section. I'll retag... Valrith 18:15, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Well, that's cool. Not that you made a mistake but that my confusion is sorted out. Thanks, Dismas|^(talk) 21:21, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Katja Kassin

I have been watching you and User:Spinachmaster steadily flip-flopping back and forth between two versions of the articles. I for one am sick of it all and strongly suggest the two of you start hashing out your differences on the Talk:Katja Kassin. Tabercil 05:51, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

It's even a bit stronger than that - apparently it involves Katja Kassin's own edit, deleting unsourced incorrect information. Please read Talk:Katja Kassin#Katja Kassin's edits and revert war. --AnonEMouse ^(squeak) 07:07, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm getting pretty sick of being taken to task for removing unsourced/badly sourced material from articles.

Please note that User:Spinachmaster added the bisexual claim to the article [4] repeatedly ([5], [6], [7]), even after User:Katjakassin removed it [8] with a statement that it was false. After I added to the article a citation [9] for her being heterosexual, User:Spinachmaster removed the citation and restored the bisexual claim ([10], [11], [12]).

As to the usability of MySpace as a source, I still don't agree. Doing a "People" search in MySpace for "Katja Kassin" produces at least two profiles claiming to be hers [13]. We have no way to choose between them. Valrith 18:44, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Summer Olympics medalists

Up to now it is not a super-cat. But I think we had to create one, because we have 10,000+ "Summer Olympics medalists" with articles and there are "only" 100-200 listed in this cat. So it is easier to pick them out and add them in an appropriate subcategory. I am trying to clean the Olympic-cats. Thank you and :) Doma-w 21:35, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Acrylic glass

In the acrylic glass article, your deletion of a 'see also' link to a Wiki article showing images of acrylic sculptures by a noted artist is wrong.

The acrylic glass article even mentions modern sculpture among the uses of acrylic glass. It's as though there were an article about diamonds, and you wanted to confine it to discussion of the chemical structure of diamonds, with diagrams of the chemical bonds as the only images. Earlier, another editor deleted images placed near the portion of the text referring to artistic use of acrylics; and now you delete even an internal link to a Wiki article with images. Your behavior is contrary to sense and to the mission of Wikipedia. MdArtLover 16:14, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Jenna Haze#External links

Looks like it's unfortunately time for admin action to enforce the guideline and consensus decision on Jenna Haze#External links. Please see Talk:Jenna_Haze#Ending_external_link_edit_war. --AnonEMouse ^(squeak) 12:52, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

• It's about damned time. Er, I mean, Thank you! Valrith 13:06, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Categories for Ida G. Athens

Can you explain why you made this revert? Seems like since the article had categories, my edits were not wrong. Or am I missing something? Cheers. --Fisherjs 14:15, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

• That particular page contains no date of birth or death, just the years, so those reverts are fairly obvious. Also, pages should remain as {{uncategorized}} until placed into one or more major categories, so that they get more exposure. (eg. "American artists", "Politicians", etc.). Valrith 21:03, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Ah yes, "Year" does not equal "Date". I see that. I also see what you mean about when to remove the uncat tag. Fair enough. Thanks.--Fisherjs 09:57, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Re Eleanor Roosevelt as a lesbian Icon

Dear sir, Your edits are impressive and you seem from your user page to be a bright nice Man (I may borrow the little brother/sister templates). Let's be civil and agree to disagree as to the importance of Eleanor Roosevelt as a lesbian icon. As a lesbian I can tell you that I have an Eleanor Roosevelt poster and she is a role model for ALL women straight and lesbian. I have had similar disputes that were quickly resolved by moving my link to my pet project Look alike contest by moving this tidbit to the Trivia section and posting a page on the discussion board if anyone else objects to the inclusion. So far NOT ONE other editor has a problem with this and I have even made "Wiki friends" with my disputing editors. PLEASE humor me on this and send me a polite exchange with your concerns-Happy Editing. Cr8tiv 20:27, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

PS I Have a great hat with a flower in my Eleanor costume set. Cr8tiv 20:27, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

• I am always pleased to make a new acquaintance. I think it's great that you've got a "pet project", but it has no connection of any kind with the Eleanor Roosevelt article, and is thus not appropriate to appear there. Please see WP:SECTION#See_also_sections. Valrith 00:33, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Your knowledge of Pornography is vast

Fair enough, I noticed you are a Republican and male Republicans seem to love erotic works of art and German dungeon porn as much they love censorship. Is there a WIKI PORNOGRAPHY GROUP? Can we start one? Will your little brother and sister help contribute? My girlfriend is a GAY REPUBLICAN and a supporter of Log Cabin Republicans Which is her "pet project" could you help us?Cr8tiv 22:23, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

• Not sure I understand the question. What exactly do you feel you need help with? Valrith 20:32, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
  • You may be looking for Wikipedia:WikiProject Pornography, perhaps? --AnonEMouse ^(squeak) 20:57, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

HR-XML

Can we move the afd discussion on the HR-XML article to closure? There doesn't seem to be a clear consensus for deletion. Hopefully, I and others also have put forth a reasonable basis establishing HR-XML's notability (HR-XML has been around for awhile (8 years), has a membership that includes the leading companies in the field of HR services, and as User:Jayvdb pointed out in the afd discussion, it has been cited in numerous articles and books.)

I imagine it must be a constant battle to keep marketing-driven articles about "non-notable" organizations articles out of wikipedia. I don't believe that every consortium is necessarily a "notable" organization. However, notability as a consortium should rest on the notability of its members and documented adoption within the particular market the organization is intended to serve.

I think the problem with the HL7 proposed deletion was the misunderstanding of the organization as some type of dot.com. In HL7 article, they devote a section to explaining that the organization is not a software company -- which is a common misconception about HR-XML as well. The other issue is that the work of many consortia, while important, is narrowly focused on esoteric, technical aspects of bigger business, industry, and societal issues.

On a positive note, the afd discussion served the purpose of focusing attention on the quality of the article, which I believe is now much improved.

Laura Michaelis

This article has two outside sources (the two Goldberg references in the references section) and there are three articles (Charles Fillmore, Paul Kay and Construction Grammar) that link to this one, so why restore the tags 'few or no articles that link to this one' and 'insufficient outside sources'? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aquilafer (talk • contribs) 20:26, July 8, 2007

• The {{Primarysources}} tag is for articles that provide no reliable secondary sources. It applies here because this article contains only references written by the subject of the article or references that don't appear to be about the subject of the article. The {{Orphan}} tag is for articles that are linked to by 'few or no' other articles. It applies here because there are three articles that link to this one. Valrith 20:01, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
  • It is highly unlikely that one *could* find corroboration of bio data on a junior US academic. The only source I could think of is the subject's departmental website. If that isn't sufficient, you should explain what would be. In addition, you have not explained what you consider to be a sufficient number of links to an article from other articles. Three seems sufficient to me, especially as there are other articles on living linguists that have fewer such links and yet don't show this tag. What is your numerical criterion for sufficient links? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aquilafer (talk • contribs) 16:13, July 21, 2007
    • I usually look for 5 other articles linking to an article before removing the {{Orphan}} tag, but since you disagree, I won't readd it. You shouldn't have removed the {{cleanup}} tag, either, but instead of readding that, I've cleaned up that section as you should have done. Generally, "junior academics" and people who are "highly unlikely" to have independent coverage are not notable enough to be included here. I've added the {{bio-notability}} tag to the article for this reason. Valrith 16:49, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
      • I removed the {{cleanup}} tag because it appeared redundant; the article was tagged for more specific faults (e.g., lack of reliable, third-party references), so this entails that the article needs clean up. The same holds for the {{bio-notability}} tag that you added: it's redundant with the {{Primarysources}} tag, and since too many tags affect the readability of an article, I'd like to remove the former. Would you be willing to compromise on that? More generally, I disagree with you that 'independent coverage' of a person is necessary to ensure notability. In academics, notability is secured through peer-reviewed publications in major journals and invited speaking engagements at scientific conferences. One would find biographical information on very few living linguists (with the exception of Noam Chomsky and George Lakoff, who are covered mainly for their nonlinguistic work). Laura Michaelis is notable primarily as one of the founders of Construction Grammar. The Construction Grammar article is extensive and it is widely cited by linguists, and since her name is prominently mentioned in that article, it should be linked to a biographical article on her.

Dawn-Marie Wesley

I have removed the {{prod}} tag from Dawn-Marie Wesley, which you proposed for deletion, because I think that the deletion of this article may be controversial. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the {{prod}} template back to the article. Instead, feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks! Dsmdgold 13:46, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Christa's Anscestry

Irish-Lebanese American. I made the following edit.

• ... McAuliffe was the oldest of five children of Edward (deceased) and Grace George Corrigan. Her mother, born Grace George, is of Maronite Lebanese origin through her father and is a niece of historian Philip Hitti.[14]
• the first time carelessly w/o the citation. Usually, when a cite is missing, a citation needed request is put in. But it was deleted. Fair enough I guess. I sourced the fact, then it was deleted again with the tag line that it was not relevant. Since when is bio info not relevant in a bio article. It is relevant to her bio that Christa is a quarter Lebanese American. Just as it is relevant to Guv Richardson's bio that he's part Native American, Sen George Mitchell that he's Irish-Lebanese or Barack Obama that he's American-Kenyan. So what now an edit wheel with someone with a revert button? Godspeed John Glenn! Will 22:32, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Cynthia Myers

OK, I'll bite, Valrith. What is the reasoning behind your removal of Playboy Playmate and Russ Meyer actress, Cynthia Myers from the List of big-bust models and performers‎? Dekkappai 21:05, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

• Just that there's nothing in Cynthia Myers to indicate she has any reputation for performing in big-bust entertainment... Valrith 21:06, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Ah, I see. Check out Russ Meyer sometime, Valrith. You might enjoy his work. I prefer the early stuff, pre-Beyond the Valley of the Dolls, but each to his own taste. Though it's true not every actress who appeared in his movies was a "big-bust model and/or entertainer", his name is pretty much synonymous with the genre, at least in film. Now I'll go put Ms. Myers back on the list. Regards. Dekkappai 21:25, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
    • Russ Meyer, as far as I can see, didn't make any adult entertainment. The claimed purpose of the List of big-bust models and performers‎ is to catalog women notable for performing in big-bust adult entertainment, which leaves Ms. Myers out... Valrith 21:31, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
      • Leaves a lot of people out. Who says all big-bust models and entertainers perform in pornography? And, from the Russ Meyer article: "Despite the fact that hardcore pornographic films would overtake Meyer's softcore market share, he retired in the late 1970s a very wealthy man." (From the Softcore article: "Softcore is a form of pornography...") It seems rather absurd to claim Russ Meyer did not deal in big-bust entertainment... And that Cynthia Myers was not a "Russ Meyer" girl. Dekkappai 21:45, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
        • I thought it was the point to leave a lot of people out. If you expand this to include every well-endowed woman in any form of media, it will quickly become an indiscriminate collection of information. Valrith 21:50, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
          • Yes, it should leave out well-endowed women in any form of media, since it is not set up as a "List of well-endowed women in any form of media". Nor is is a list of List of big-bust PORNOGRAPHIC models and performers. The list as it stands is exclusive to big-bust entertainment, and Ms. Myers, and Mr. Meyer both worked in that field. Dekkappai 22:03, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
            • For what it's worth, I agree with Dekkappai. Tabercil 23:36, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Last of the Believers article/entry.

I would love to know as to why you deleted the article that I recently created and submitted titled "Last of the Believers". It was all relevant and correct information with all sources cited. You seem to have a habit to plainly delete whatever you want just because you don't like it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Abolishamour (talk • contribs) 22:34, July 12, 2007

Taylor Rain

Valrith, I understand how to edit Wikipedia, and have for awhile. I will say, though, that not everything has to be cited. Some things yes, but to say that Taylor Rain's breasts must be cited is going too strict with the editing. Look at other pornstar articles...there is no citing for if they are real or not. If they were supposed to be cited, people would be marking them or putting a tag saying that sources were not being cited. Along with that, not all pornstars are going to say that they are real or not. In fact, many do not. If you have seen pictures of Taylor Rain, she clearly is not. Even the picture in her actual article is proof she is natural. Jade Owl 8:00, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Valrith, it is not controversial...it is that you are being too strict with your editing. If you wish to puppy guard an article by being overstrict and erasing things that do not need citing, then have fun. I am not going to argue with you over an article because you wish to have everything cited and control the article to your wishes. Jade Owl 15:52, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Kerry Marie

An article that you have been involved in editing, Kerry Marie, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kerry Marie (2nd nomination). Thank you. -- Jreferee ^(Talk) 02:04, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

• a) you linked the wrong AfD (I've now fixed that), and b) did you happen to notice I'm the one that nominated it? Valrith 03:03, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Ashley Renee

Thanks for citing the birthday. I had removed it because the model had complained about the birth year being there and incorrect (I contacted her for a free image, which she said her webmaster would be sending shortly.) Videmus Omnia ^Talk 04:28, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

rvv

See this edit. rvv means "reverting vandalism". Please don't use a summary like that when it is obviously not vandalism. Also, what was wrong with the edit? Garion96 (talk) 10:21, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

• Unfortunate typo. I meant to put "rv", for "revert". Looking at it now, I shouldn't have been so quick to revert, either. But the {{Unref}} tag belongs at the top of the article, not buried at the bottom, and the links my edit removed are inappropriate per WP:EL. I should have just fixed those things and left the rest alone... Valrith 20:07, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
  • There isn't really a fixed place of the {{unref}} tag, see the discussion page of that template. It makes more sense, IMO, to have it in a references section. (not that I am going to revert over it though. :) Regarding the external links, I didn't reverted all your removal's, like the fansites. I only re added the official myspace and official myvideo sites. Myspace pages are not always fansites. Garion96 (talk) 15:59, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Vera Coking

I placed a comment to you at Talk:Vera Coking. I look forward to your response. Unschool 00:43, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Lightspeed

Copied and Pasted from the Talk:Lightspeed page:

'Not Reliable?

The official website for the girls and the company is unreliable? Wow.... The Rypcord. 00:37, 22 July 2007 (UTC)'

The Rypcord. 00:48, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

• a) I don't see anything on any of these sites claiming these models/actresses are either bisexual or natural-busted. Can you provide a specific link?
• b) Even if they made either claim, it wouldn't be reliable, as porn is frequently marketed via implications, half-truths and outright lies. Valrith 01:47, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

So then why even bother having porn pages? Where could we possibly get factual information then? The Rypcord. 13:16, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

You should be able to get more factual information from interviews with the people than from the websites they appear on or promote. Valrith 15:31, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Claudia Ciesla - more sources needed

Enclosed pls find the model info with many personal references and many photo link refereces info of Miss Claudia Ciesla due to XING (biggest Business Networking site worldwide) https://www.xing.com/app/profile?op=aboutme;name=Claudia_Ciesla

My name is Gregor Kaden - I am shooting and cooperating with Miss Ciesla since 2 years. If you need more specific or additional information, pls contact me - I will be very glad to assist you - I can provide you with phone numbers of most of the personal references as well as any kind of photo-material and cut-outs of publications - Thank you.

k a d e n p r e s s G r e g o r K a d e n C o n c o r d i a s t r . 11 D - 9 6 0 4 9 B a m b e r g Phone (landline) +49-951-56043 Mobile-Phone +49-160-3524129 Fax +49-951-52830 e-mail: kadenpress@email.de

Model Information - Claudia Ciesla, Modelnick: CClaudia

Publications and important Shootings with personal references and photo links :

Photos in "Bild" Munich, Reference: Editors office, Mr. Malte Biss Photos in "Bild" Nuernberg, Reference: Editors office, Mr. Phillipp Hedemann Photo Shooting with "BILD"-Nurnberg with "BILD"-Photographer, Reference: Mr. Thomas Lange Photos in "Bild" Hamburg, Reference: Photo-Chief-Editor, Mr. Thorsten Fleischhauer Photo Shooting for "BILD" as Football/Soccer World cup Girl in AOL Arena Hamburg, Reference: Mr. Thorsten Fleischhauer Photos and Interview for "Bild" Hamburg, Editors office, Reference: Mr. Jens Tuchenhagen Photos and Interview for "Bild" Berlin, Reference: Mrs. Donata Meyer Photos in AUTOBILD, biggest Car Newspaper in Germany, Hamburg, Tuning Editors office, Reference: Mr. Ralf Becker Photo Shooting for AUTOBILD, Photographers Reference: Mr. Dirk Behlau Photos for "MATADOR" - as Miss Matador, Chef Editors office, Reference: Mr. Stefan Gessulat, Photo Shooting as MISS MATADOR, Photographers Reference: Mr. Deniz Kalkavan Photos in German MAXIM, as Super Single Girl, Editors office, Reference: Mrs. Judith Fischer Photos and big Interview in "Fränkischer Tag", Editors office, Reference: Mrs. Petra Meyer Photos in "Milwaukee Journal Sentinel", online, biggest Newspaper of Wisconsin, Reference: Dr. J. S. Photos in AUTOTUNING Magazin (German biggest Autotuning-Mag) , 11/2006, Reference: Mr. Ralf Becker Photos on Start Page, AOL Germany, Single Girl of the week, Sept.2005 Photos for Fashion Company ANNA ROXXAH, Paris in Venice Lido Beach with "Le Chales des Stars" , Reference Director Anna Roxxah Photos for Calendar, Flyer, Advertisement, Dental-Equipment-Company, ORANGE DENTAL/Germany, Photos for Advertisement, Flyer, WEB Presentation, Exclusive Dirndl Fashion of the Finest, Moschen-Bayern/Germany, Reference Director Mrs. Gina Moschen Photos for Fashion Shoot, with Top Fashion Photographer: Pierre Thomas Karkau, Duesseldorf/Germany

References Companies and Persons:

Bild München, Editor, Malte Biss Bild Nuernberg, Editor, Phillipp Hedemann Bild Hamburg, Foto-Chef-Redaktion/ Chief Editor, Thorsten Fleischhauer Bild Hamburg, Editor, Jens Duchenhagen Bild Berlin, Editor, Donata Meyer AUTOBILD, Hamburg, Tuning Editor, Ralf Becker MATADOR, Chef-Redaktion/Chief-Editor, Stefan Gessulat, Ivonne Wiesner MAXIM Editor, Judith Fischer Fränkischer Tag, Editor, Petra Meyer Hawaiian Tropic, Ormond Beach/FL/USA, Owner/Founder, Ron Rice FilmlineLA, LA, USA, Owner, Producer, Steven Greenstein Dalhousie Film Productions, London, Owner, Peter Ramsey Wiffen-Film Productions, London, Owner, Paul Wiffen Cohen Sisters Productions, Berlin/Los Angeles, Director, Gabriala Tscherniak Maverick Global Entertainment Group, Deerfield Beach FL/USA, Jack Campbell Rocket Pictures, Van Nuys, CA/USA, Owner, Mark W. Gray Ujena Talent/Ujena TV/Ujena Bikinis, Director, Bob Anderson Kohler Films, LA/USA, Director Frederic Kohler ACEA Production, Lyon/Paris, Director, Jaques Mollon Casting Agentur Suhr, Berlin, Director, Angela Suhr Casting Agency, 030 Casting, Berlin, Direkcor Imke Arntjen NewFace, Model Agency, Director/Photographer Rod Meier Model-Firmengruppe/Company Group Buchstab, Germany/Switzerland, Director, Dieter Buchstab American German Business Club, Munich, Chairman Dr. J. S. Starway-Model Agency, Paris, Director, Ives Brun Avalonentertainment, München, Director Volker Arend Arrangement Group, Radolfzell, Director Manfred Auer Weryton Musik Studio, München, Director Hermann Weindorf

Credits/Awards/Acknowledgments/Honors

May 2005: Shoot for German MATADOR Magazine (right now the No 1 - the best and biggest-lifestyle/men-magazine in Germany), published in Edition, 08/2005 on 10 pages as Miss MATADOR (first and last time till now posing for very esthetic topless-shoot in a Magazine!!)

Model Contest organized by most important Media and TV in Germany 2006: I have won the Super-Girl-Contest 2006 organized by AUTOBILD, BILD, SAT1, KABELEINS; with big lead over with over 400.000 hits and 41.000 Votes with 1. place, Reference: AUTOBILD, Editors Office, Mr. Ralf Becker http://www.autobild.de/voting/autobild/supergirl/finden.php?...

May 2006: Selected by "BILD" Chief Editors as Football/Soccer World cup Girl 2006- during Football World Cup 2006, 8 Publications on page 1, "BILD" nationwide, Reference: Photo-Chief-Editors-office, Mr. Thorsten Fleischhauer ("BILD" is Germans and Europe's strongest daily Newspaper - now bigger than the English SUN - daily circulation about 5 millions, daily range about 14 million readers)

Aug. 2006, Invitation at Venice Film festival, with English Film Prod. Peter Ramsey and Film Director Paul Wiffen

Other Descriptions, Comments, Assignments etc.:

1.) My English/US Fan Group (Yahoo-Model-GRoup) now due to member figures No.2 Top- Group of all 9300 US-Model Groups with over 31.000 Members. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CClaudia_Modeling/ 2.) Engl/USA Myspace-Fangroup, starting Aug. 2006, now about 9000 members http://myspace.com/cclaudia_model 3.) French Yahoo-Fan-Group #1 IN FRANCE with ca. 4.800 Members http://fr.groups.yahoo.com/group/CClaudia_Groupe_Francais/ 4.) Spanish Yahoo-Fan-Group with ca. 1.500 members http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CClaudiaGrupoEspanol/ 5.) My new German Yahoo-Fan-Group, after 6 months now #1 of all Yahoo Model Groups in Germany http://de.groups.yahoo.com/group/cclaudia_model/ 6.) XING-Profile (XING is the biggest networking site in Europe) with about 260,000 profile hits, about 3500 direct contacts, https://www.xing.com/profile/Claudia_Ciesla pls. also see my "about me" site at XING https://www.xing.com/app/profile?op=aboutme&name=Claudia... and my numerous Guestbook-Entries at XING https://www.xing.com/app/profile?op=guestbook&name=Claud... 7.) In HOTorNOT (biggest photo rating site in US) CClaudia several times "Girl of the Week" and was rated with 14 pictures 9.8 and 9.9 (out of 10 = Best) 8.) Model of the month June 2005 of IGPA; INTERNATIONAL GLAMOUR PHOTOGRAPHERS ASSOCIATION, INC. / USA 9.) SUPERSTAR OF THE MONTH MARCH 2005 in US/French/Spanish Show-Biz Magazine BIOSTARS 10.) Winner of "Spainmodels" contest Dec 2004,Spainmodels Model-Agency Madrid/Spain 11.) AUTOBILD, BILD, SAT1, kabeleins - Model-Contest 2006 with 350.000 hits and 41.000 Votes have won 1. Place http://www.autobild.de/voting/autobild/supergirl/finden.php?... 12.) Football World-Cup Girl of "BILD" - during Football World Cup 2006, 8 Publications on page 1 13.) Advertisement Photo Shooting for Calendar, Poster and Flyer for dental accessories producers company "ORANGE DENTAL" near Stuttgart/Germany for sales promotion. Photographed by Rod Meier. 14.) Fashion-Fotoshoot in Venice Lido Beach with ANNA ROXXAH Paris (le Chales des Stars) 15.) Fashion Dirndl Shooting with one of the best and most exclusice Dirndl- and Country Fashion Producer in Bavaria called "MOSCHEN-Bayern" -pls. have a look at www.moschen-bayern.de 16.) Video Shoot in Tenerife, with ROKA-Producciones, Roberto Lopez, Cologne 17.) Feb. 2007: CClaudia for Advertising on ISPO (worldwide biggest international Sports Fair in Munich) as Model for the French Sports Garment and Sports Cloth Company Zsport - www.zsport.fr 18.) Fashion Shoot with Top Fashion-Photographer: Pierre Thomas Karkau, Duesseldorf/Germany

Experience regarding Singing, Dance, Acting:

Show Dance and Fashion Shows; Shooting for TV-Show "Hanging with the Commander" at the Film festival in CANNES with Producer/Director Steven Greenstein Film Shooting with the US Film- and TV-Producer Frederick Kohler for "The AmericanDreamer" in Paris . Trailershoot for Vampierfilm Carmilla in Siena/Tuscany, with Engl. Film-Director Paul Wiffen Shooting for TV-Soap "Beach-Baby", Film Director Manfred Auer, http://www.avalonentertainment.com/beachbaby/soap.php Song Recording with Music Marsh Studios in Hamburg Song Recording with Weryton Studios in Munich

Videos (Pls. see all my Videos here)::

http://www.livevideo.com/CClaudia http://youtube.com/profile?user=cclaudia

Most important WEB Sites where you can find actual Info about me:

http://myspace.com/cclaudia_model https://www.xing.com/profile/Claudia_Ciesla https://www.xing.com/app/profile?op=aboutme&name=Claudia... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claudia_Ciesla http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CClaudia_Modeling/ http://fr.groups.yahoo.com/group/CClaudia_Groupe_Francais/ http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CClaudiaGrupoEspanol/ http://de.groups.yahoo.com/group/cclaudia_model/ http://modelmayhem.com/member.php?id=30096 http://onemodelplace.com/CClaudia/ http://member.onemodelplace.com/model_list.cfm?ID=144119 http://brianx.com/model-cclaudia.html http://www.premiermodels.com/popupuser.asp?userid=23152 http://freelancemodels.com/ModelDetails.aspx?mid=6375 http://musecube.com/CClaudia/ http://babewarehouse.com/model_portfolio.php?model_id=946 http://foto-agentur.de/categories.php?cat_id=869 http://ujenaparty.com/masters/11484.html http://www.modelbc.de/index.php?option=com_comprofiler&t... http://werbemittel.de/profil/CClaudia

Personal Info: Name: Claudia Ciesla, Artist Nick: CClaudia Living in : Bamberg/Germany Citizenship: German, born: 12. Feb. 1987 in Loslau/Silesia Age: 20; height: 174cm / 5`8" ; weight: 56kg/123 lbs breast: 98cm/ 40"; waist: 66cm/ 26"; hips: 95cm/ 38" hair color : dark blond (natural) color eyes: blue/green clothes size: German 36 /American-US Small/2 /British 6 bra size : 75DD German/ 32DD US (all natural / no silicone) shoe size: German 39 /American-US 7 /British 5 1/2 length of legs from belt to floor: 114cm/ 45"

Contact: Email: CClaudia@stars.ms Postal Address: Claudia Ciesla, POBOX 110246, D-96030 Bamberg/Germany

Gladys Li

I've removed the speedy tag you placed there since there seemed to be sufficient claim of notability that it should probably be taken to AfD. JoshuaZ 03:34, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Jasmine Sinclair

Thanks for moving the images to Commons, but how come the image descriptions aren't coming through on the Commons version? Just curious. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 04:06, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

• Beats me. I don't work with Commons often; I used the CommonsUploader tool to do it - I guess there's a chance that has something to do with it...

Also, was there a reason you deleted the image gallery from the talk page? Videmus Omnia ^Talk 04:30, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

• Talk pages are not meant to be image galleries. If people want to see the images, they can go visit the Commons. Valrith 20:47, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
  • You really shouldn't edit or delete my comments on the talk page - see WP:TALK. That said, if future editors wish to use the images as the article expands, how will they know that they exist? Videmus Omnia ^Talk 20:52, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
    • By looking at Commons. That's what the {{Commons}} tag is for, after all (see my latest edit at Jasmine Sinclair)... Valrith 21:32, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
      • OK, thanks for putting {{Commons}} on the article page. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 21:36, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Jean Thesman

Let's agree to disagree. Or you can move your unhelpful suggestion to the discussion page of the article. Or you can submit it for review to the higher powers. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alwpoe (talk • contribs) 22:50, July 26, 2007

You call it "content", I call it "comment". Again, let's just agree to disagree. Thanks!--alwpoe 23:39, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Smile

Connell66 has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Recent prods

Hello! My watchlist tells me that in a 21 minute period, you prod'ed 4 of the articles that I applied a DEFAULTSORT to last night. I have NO ISSUE with the prods, one way or the other, but thought that 4 in such a short time was an interesting coincidence; I'm just idly curious as to how you happened to picked Jennifer Tomazic, Čeněk Kožišovský Tunkl z Brníčka, Jennifer Westhoven, Jillian Windham to look at. Since your recent contribs suggest that you're NOT looking at my contribs, I'm guessing you're keying on some particular change that I happen to be making in addition to the DEFAULTSORT (perhaps adding "Living people" category).

As you can see from my history of edits, lately I mostly do gnomish work, like DEFAULTSORT, and I'm just curious as to how other people work. FYI, I had picked those 4 (and others) as being mis-sorted in Category:Uncategorised people; it initially seemed like a "target-rich environment" but I've since given up sort work in that category because so many articles there seemed marginal and likely to be deleted; if you're interested in candidates for deletion, that would be a good category to review.

Just curious. Studerby 22:01, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

• I'm working through the Category:Uncategorised people, adding DEFAULTSORTS where needed. I am finding a good number of less than marginal articles that I'm tagging with either speedy or prod tags... Valrith 22:05, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Jenna Jameson

Why do you keep deleting my contribution? If there is a pronlem with format would you please explain a better way for me to format then? Maybe someone else on here would like to help. This information is valid, proven and in writing, so why does it keep getting deleted? Maybe you are a fan of Jenna Jameson working on her page and are not willing to put up negative facts? This is how it appears. What extra steps should be taken to assure proper wikipedia content? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Daisydog7 (talk • contribs) 19:28, July 27, 2007

I'm not Valrith, but I think I can explain, at least partly. (I also moved your comment down to a separate section, rather than at the top of the page.) I know the incident you're referring to in Jameson's autobiography, however we need a reliable secondary source that describes the murder accusation and lawsuit before we can write about it. You'll notice we wrote about the Preacher rape accusation because it has been written about in the Sydney Morning Herald, The Age, and CNN - go to that section of the article, and you'll see links to those sources as references. They're "generally credited with high standards of journalism" (that's a quote from our article on the SMH). If you find similarly reliable sources that describe the Vanessa murder accusations and subsequent lawsuit, we'll absolutely add information on that to the article. But we can't rely on merely the lawsuit filings themselves, anyone can file a lawsuit, and many famous people have dozens of frivolous lawsuits filed against them every year, it's like having stalkers, and not particularly notable. --AnonEMouse ^(squeak) 23:57, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

WikiThanks

By the way -- Valrith -- thanks. --AnonEMouse ^(squeak)

Dana Choi

Hi, I removed the prod tag from this article, I deleted yesterday by prod, its recreation is a way to contest the tagging. You are free to send it to AfD, of course ;). -- lucasbfr ^talk 15:53, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Kate Ground

Please stop removing content from Kate Ground with no apparent reason. Feel free to explain yourself on the article's talk page. ~ | twsx | ^talk_cont | 20:28, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

• I've already "explained myself" with every edit comment I made. The content has no reliable source. Valrith 21:07, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Playboy.com is a reliable for the topic. Please take this to RFC before removing content again. ~ | twsx | ^talk_cont | 06:44, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
    • Playboy.com does not source any of the content I removed. Valrith 13:11, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Prod declined, again

Your proposal to delete the entry was already declined. You do not get to re-enter the original prod. If you wish to contest this: deletion review. El_C 17:05, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

• Fine. The first one should have sufficed. See my question on your talk page. Valrith 17:15, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

AfD procedure

Please follow proper AFD proceedure on articles for The Right Stuf International and Nutech Digital per WP:AFD. Snarfies 19:34, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

• Guess I should've looked to see if they'd been AfD'd previously. I assumed they hadn't. Valrith 19:45, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Jenna Jameson filmography- sourcing

I saw your unsourced tag on Jenna Jameson chronology of performances, and am wondering how to fulfill it. I looked around Category:Filmographies, and they're basically all unsourced. (Though none are tagged that way.) Do you think IMDB is usable as a source for filmographies? If not, what do you suggest? --AnonEMouse ^(squeak) 21:20, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

• The main reason I tagged it so was because of the recent introductions of erroneous information in to the Jenna Jameson article by the same user who I was reverting in Jenna Jameson chronology of performances. That person seems bent on adding material without proper references, so I was hoping to provide additional discouragement. At any rate, I'm not sure IMDb should be used as a source; it is generally accurate, at least for mainstream Hollywood films and well-known actors/actresses. However, it seems to have significant issues with lesser-known films/people and with the pornographic films genre in particular. IAFD is likely to be more accurate for adult films. I don't know if we could reasonably call either a reliable source... Valrith 21:31, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

I am the indivual you are referring to. My source is the US Copyright Office. The information is avilable online. I am sorry if that is not a proper reference for you, but it would stand up in court. By the way, Jenna's real name is Jennifer. Besides her own autobiography every source on the internet except Wikepdia has it correct. Perhaps you should do a google search. I intend to correct the errors again until the factual information displayed is ACCURATE. baronvon

• Fine. Can you point us to some of those other places? The concept here is called verifiability. Tabercil 12:11, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Silvia Saint

This message is being left for both User:Mathmo and User:Valrith:

I have seen the two of you steadily reverting each other's edits over the link to Silvia Saint's MySpace page in her article. I strongly urge both of you to take your dispute to Talk:Silvia Saint. Further additions and/or deletions prior to discussion occuring will result in the offending party being blocked and/or the article in question being fully protected. Tabercil 22:45, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Why was my edit redone? I'm new here but did research the topic regarding before editing AdultSexpert (talk) 23:36, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

WP:AIV

You have been reported to the above venue, regarding removal of certain sources re modelling. This is since you reported an ip to the same place (which is why I recognised it). Can you point me toward an example where you explain why the Fashion Model Directory is not reliable, so I can see if I can help. Thanks. LessHeard vanU 21:34, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

I subsequently protected the page and reverted back to your last version as I have doubts about the sourcing and believe this to be a BLP problem. I have reported this to ANI [15] as this is contra the protection policy and have notified interested parties. Spartaz ^Humbug! 22:39, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

In brief, I have repeatedly stated (in edit summaries) that the Fashion Model Directory is not a reliable source. I didn't realize it had a Wikipedia page, but that doesn't change my opinion. From what I can see, the Fashion Model directory is no more reliable for biographical info than, say, IMDb. Valrith 10:58, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Felix Vicious

Hey Valrith-- thanks for pointing out the necessary info on WP:EL. I've removed the link as per the info you supplied. Best regards. Dissolva 15:57, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Anal sex images

As you gave no explanation for your reversion in your edit summary or on the talk page, I have reverted to my addition of the images and started a talk discussion on the article. Rather than starting an edit war, it is necessary for you to provide a reasoning for making the changes again if you choose to revert. Thank you VanTucky ^(talk) 20:21, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

• I don't intend on changing it again. Your reasoning is sufficiently clear. Valrith 22:17, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Saige Thompson

I kept the article because while the reasons for keeping weren't that strong, there were enough that a delete decision would likely be overturned in a deletion review. --Coredesat 22:15, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

External links

Hi Valrith. Once again I see there is some dispute over the external links on List_of_big-bust_models_and_performers and Breast_fetishism. I can't speak for the other links, but I believe Boobpedia is a useful and appropriate link for those pages. It is on topic, free of ads, and provides a place for the lesser known subject matters that Wikipedia doesn't have a place for. I have used it for several months now, and have not seen anything spammy about it. Last time we almost got into an edit war about this, so this time I'm writing to you first to explain my views before restoring the link. I appreciate all the hard work you do in keeping the articles clean, since I visit them all the time. --FranchisePlayer 00:47, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

• Well, I can't speak for Valrith, but I personally see a problem with Boobpedia in that it violates clause 12 of "Links normally to be avoided" in WP:EL: "Links to open wikis, except those with a substantial history of stability and a substantial number of editors.". Tabercil 01:38, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

• • I'm in agreement with Tabercil. There appears to be no additional value in that link. Not all "on topic" links are appropriate. Valrith 06:03, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
• I'm in agreement with the gist of what FranchisePlayer was saying. Mathmo ^Talk 07:14, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

• Okay. Then what argument would you give that WP:EL's clause 12 I cited above does not apply to Boobpedia? Tabercil 19:50, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

• Exactly what he said below me..... briefly checking out what you are discussing makes a world of difference. Mathmo ^Talk 20:26, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks for the response guys. I think I can make a case here. For one, Boobpedia has been around for a while now. I don't remember when exactly I stumbled on it, but it was definitely in 2006. It has over 1000 articles in a very limited topic, and also has had a large number of edits and editors - "There have been a total of 13,146,764 page views, and 16,530 page edits since the wiki was setup" and "There are 519 registered users" [16]. Registration is not necessary for editing, so there are even more editors who don't bother to register. Keeping in mind its limited subject matter, I would say it passes clause 12 of WP:EL. --FranchisePlayer 20:01, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
  • I don't believe any of that gets around WP:EL, nor justifies including the link. Valrith 21:06, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
• The issue was raised about clause 12 of WP:EL, which I had addressed. I am a frequent visitor of Boobpedia, and I can see with my own eyes it is a stable and actively updated wiki. I don't think even Wikipedia has coverage of over 1000 busty models, and Boobpedia provides an important outlet for information on those models which are deemed not notable enough to be on Wikipedia. I see you having to remove red links from List_of_big-bust_models_and_performers all the time, so people obviously want coverage of the not so notable models. Giving them a place to write about those models would probably result in less wasted time removing red links. The link on Breast_fetishism is entirely appropriate, because Boobpedia is one of the best example of breast fetishism you can find.

I see you have simply gone ahead and removed the links again, without us having come to any sort of agreement. Your edit summary once more says spam link. I don't know what you are using to justify the spam link assertion. Something that is directly related to the topic, provides expanded information and examples, and which is noncommercial, is the exact opposite of spam. I would like to hear your reasons, other than just "I don't think it's justified" or "spam". --FranchisePlayer 23:54, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for inviting me into this conversation, FranchisePlayer-- though I think it probably belongs at the article's talk page where it can get more input. As I recall, the last time Boobpedia was being removed as an external link, the addition of ths site was being called "Vandalism" and "Spam." I think it's pretty obvious that the site is neither-- it's not vandalism, because the site deals, in an informative manner, with the subject of the article. It's not spam, because it's an even less commercial site than many links that are all over Wikipedia-- IMDB to name one. The "Spam" accusation seems to have originated from the time, several months ago, when the site owner posted invitations to Boobpedia on several talk pages related to the topic. In my opinion, the apparently sanctioned and encouraged practise of spewing dozens of identical paragraphs blaring that the image you were suckered into uploading under the "Fair use"/"promo image" ruse is now being deleted on user's talk pages is a far more annoying and invasive example of this sort of "spamming" than an invitation to a non-commercial site on a topic related to the subject of the article is... but that's another story...

Tabercil's citation of clause 12 of WP:EL seems to be a good argument against the inclusion of Boobpedia, since it's an open Wiki. There are a couple reasons I don't think this clause really applies in this case, however, and that this is a good example of why Ignore all rules is an official policy. I think Clause 12 is an excellent guideline to follow generally. Why link to a Wiki on a general topic like American history or mathematics when there are so many good, reliable, authoritative sources that can be linked instead? Also, linking to a Wiki, presumably, would be redundant in Wikipedia's case, since Wikipedia, presumably, already covers the topic in much the same manner that any other wiki could. Neither of these reasons apply in Boobpedia's case. Boobpedia, unlike a wiki on history or mathematics, covers a topic on which it is very difficult to find reliable, informative, non-spam-like sources. The Boobpedia articles I've seen cite their sources and are written in a fairly encyclopedic style. Further, because the Wikipedia community often excludes or deletes articles on topics covered by Boobpedia, Boobpedia is not redundant to Wikipedia, but a more like more subject-specific addendum to it. Also, Boobpedia, through its interviews with the subjects of its articles, is becoming more than just a wiki, but a source of information in itself. Dekkappai 18:54, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

R Kelly Trail

I added a Chicago Sun Times cite to an already credible MSNBC cite. Further deletion will be takin as a sign you are just messin with me 69.114.117.103 04:18, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

• You are modifying an existing reference without justifying it. Just add an additional reference instead... Valrith 06:01, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

I deleted the old cite that I put in because the information in it had become outdated by the more recent cites. As long as the cites are credible and relevant to the topic of the article I do not need to "justify" it to you or anybody. I see no reason why in an article about a tape to be played at a trail why the trail start date should not be relevant. Since the man is being listed under the "alleged" category his defense lawyers claiming that it was not him on the tape represents a notable source and relevant information for the article. 69.114.117.103 06:38, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs Kimberley Conrad Dirty talk Levirate marriage Susan Hart Veronika Zemanová Constance Marie Kelle Marie Jesse G. James Wall calendar Brooke Ashley List of porn stars who appeared in mainstream films Bridgette Kerkove Exotic dancer Adriana Sage Chesty Morgan Darren James List of people with breast implants Paul Thomas (actor) Randy White (porn star)

Cleanup Ed Powers People of Dallas, Texas Human skin color Merge Gonzo Spitting fetishism Panchira Add Sources Julia Ann List of bondage models by decade Nikita Denise Wikify Jessica Thomas Tiger Beat Mr. Marcus Expand Pandora Peaks Sex therapy Dominique Swain

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 17:12, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Smoking fetishism

You posted a {fact} tag on this stub article but is isn't clear which fact you want to see sourced. Could you drop by the talk page and let us know your concern? Thanks, ·:· Will Beback ·:· 20:50, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Susan Chesler

Hi, you tagged this as a speedy delete as an empty article. However, although it was very short, it was not empty. It also provides enough context that CSD A3 does not apply. The assertion that Ms. Chesler is known for being the voice acrtess for a television series is an assertion of notabilty, that makes this article not eligible CSD A7. In short it does not seem to meet any of the speedy criteria. In reviewing the articles's history I also not that an earlier, near identical version was deleted through the PROD process earlier this year. The creation of this article would count as cpost-deletion contesting of the PROD. It seems that idf you feel that this article should be deleted, the only avenue left is AfD. Dsmdgold 19:34, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I note that you retagged this and another admin deleted it. I have started a discussion at deletion review. Dsmdgold 14:07, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Courtesy blanking of an AfD

Hello Valrith. Please consider undoing your revert of the courtesy blanking of this AfD. You didn't leave a message as to why you considered it improper. EdJohnston 21:58, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

• I haven't seen any argument as to why it was proper. Valrith 22:31, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Simple - any AFD about a living person that contains negative material about them is a legitimate target for courtesy blanking. It was extremely inappropriate to describe your action as "rvv" - courtesy blanking is not vandalism. GRBerry 00:04, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

No reference tag for Dawn (comics)

Hi, I originally removed the unreferenced tag for this article because it had several references already, including issue citations. Was there something specific that you felt needed a reference? Thanks for you help. Konczewski 01:34, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

• The only reference I see is in the "Appearances in other media" section, and that is a primary source. None of the other prose is backed by references... Valrith 20:45, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
  • There are two footnotes and an external reference section. If you're questioning something in the fictional character biography, perhaps you should consider putting in a after the line(s) that concern you. It would make it easier to improve the article. Thanks, Konczewski 01:55, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
    • a) There are no footnotes. b) External links are not references. As the entire article is, as I pointed out above, unsourced, it is unreasonable to put a fact tag after every sentence. Valrith 02:56, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Gianna Michaels' boobs

"Big D: You've been in the industry for about two years now and you are not the cookie cutter porn girl. You are all natural with no plastic surgery and you are not this frail, stick figure stereotypical blonde porn star. You are a freaking woman in every sense of the word. What do you attribute your success and popularity in porn while still not having the same look as all of the other porn stars?

Gianna: I think you basically answered that question yourself. I am not every other chick that is in the industry."

She certainly seemed to agree with the interviewer's statement that she is "all natural with no plastic surgery". Or do you think she's trying to subtly sidestep by saying "I think you basically answered that question yourself"? Frankly, I think she's just being brief. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.13.205.99 (talk • contribs) 23:09, August 15, 2007

• I don't feel it's Wikipedia's place to draw a conclusion. She made no statement to either support or deny the interviewers statement. Valrith 02:58, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
  • A little off-topic, but we got some new Gianna Michaels pics today, they're on Commons. I haven't sorted them yet. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 03:42, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Depictions Section

Put back your removal section as there is a previous open invitation in the talk page of the article to discuss what to do that section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.114.117.103 (talk • contribs) 04:52, August 16, 2007

• And I re-removed it. It is a large amount of unencyclopedic garbage that has no place in the article. Valrith 21:07, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
  • And how was that section different from other sections you kept in that article or the numerous Wikipidia lists or list like sections for which there are no citations a lot of the time? Many Wikipedia articles discuss the the effects of the topic of the article on popular culture. Long articles on the latest pop star all very untraditional encyclopedic. Wikipidia likes to think of itself as a encyclopedia but in a some ways it is people magazine in an encyclopedia format. In other ways it is a traditional encyclopedia. Look I actually agree there are problems with the section. But your just being a bully about about it. I have edited a bunch of Wikipedia articles in the last year and a half. There are others I just check up on occasionally. I have rarely seen the likes of people removing whole sections with no discussion or stated reason for doing so. "unencyclopedic garbage" is vague and does not tell me or anybody anything. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.114.117.103 (talk • contribs) 03:56, August 17, 2007
    • Try taking a look at WP:NOT. Valrith 21:32, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
      • What sections are being violated?. By abruptly deleting the section you are violating the wording about going to the talk section first and the wording about building a consensus. Reading above this is a continuing problem. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.114.117.103 (talk • contribs) 18:13, August 18, 2007

Stephanie Abrams

Photo Image:Stephanie Abrams promo.jpg is tagged Replaceable fair use disputed and awaits an administrative review. By removing until such review, you place the image as orphaned. Can you leave this photo up so that an administrator can make a determination on status? Noles1984 15:13, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

• The photo is a copyright violation anyway, so whether it is fair use or not is not of any importance. Valrith 17:45, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Hehe

How many times have you been blocked anyhow? I can already tell this is actually going to be fun :) 85.77.226.156 14:06, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Luanne Rice

Please stop citing this article as unreferenced. There are four sources listed under "External links." Everything found in the article is supported by them. Thank you. ConoscoTutto 12:38, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

• Please see Wp:el#References_and_citation and note that it states that references should be in the "References" section. Valrith 21:10, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
  • This is a matter of semantics, you could simply relabel the external links section as references instead... Mathmo ^Talk 03:34, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
    • Have you clicked on the links within the article??? These lead to sources or references in reliable, third-party publications or websites. Please stop tagging this article. It has sufficient references from and links to reliable sources. Thank you. ConoscoTutto 19:54, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism vs unsourced

Could you do me a favour and be a bit less quick to use the "rvv" tag when the edit in question is better described as unsourced? This is what prompted this note, but I'm noticing it's a bit of a trend with you... Tabercil 22:22, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

• The Jessie Capelli article, you'll notice from the [history] has had a birth year inserted repeatedly with no source provided. When that is being done by anonymous IP addresses instead of real accounts, I treat that as vandalism. Valrith 21:56, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Dolcett

I have seen that the article Dolcett has been deleted. Do you have any idea of what can be done to challenge this ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hektor (talk • contribs) 07:56, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

• As far as I can tell, that's unlikely to ever be possible. I don't see any way to satisfy the verifiability requirement (nor, for that matter, the notability requirement. Valrith 21:04, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Prods

Thanks for all your good catches. But you could help even a little more by making it easier for us admins who have to sort through them to do the final deletion--when you mark a bio as non-notable, please say what sort of a person it is -- a singer, a politician, a businessperson, or whatever. Not all of us are competent at everything--I don't want to be the one to screen bios of athletes, for example. DGG (talk) 19:28, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks. I'll try to note that in future. Valrith 21:05, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Chesty Morgan

Why do you systematically remove her made up day and month of birth? You are constantly asked to change the template to accept just a year instead of ruining the ability to easily tell her age. -88.153.91.89 08:16, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

• Simple arithmetic allows anyone to easily tell her age. Valrith 20:54, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Sue-Ellen Case

I noticed that you restored tags to this article. However, there are references, it is not really orphaned, and consensus recently seems to run toward considering that level of academics/publication to be a sufficient assertion of notability. I've left the article with your last edits but some rationale would be helpful. Cheers! --Stormbay 01:26, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

• See WP:EL. External links are not references. Valrith 12:16, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Augusta Jane Chapin

You removed a reference I made to: Cassara, Ernest. "Chapin, Augusta Jane" Notable American Women. Vol. 1, 4th ed., The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1975. as "rm reference to non-existent book" but I have the complete set of 3 vols. 1975 ed. and this is exactly where I got the information. The book does indeed exist, perhaps I should have said 1975 edition instead of the 4th ed.? Daytrivia 15:35, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

• Perhaps you could provide the ISBN? My search of the LOC didn't find this by either its title or its author... Valrith 15:46, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Please see: [17] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Daytrivia (talk • contribs) 18:46, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

ISBN 0-674-62731-8. If you would please put back the reference I would appreciate it because most of the article comes directly from that particular book. I will have to get use to using the ISBN which I am not a fan of because it limits any others editions or formats. Thanks. Daytrivia 18:56, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

• I restored the original reference and added the ISBN to it. Thanks! Valrith 19:53, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. Daytrivia 20:18, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Denise Bode

Hi Valrith--Could you explain what parts of Denise Bode's page are falling short of WP:ATT or WP:CITE? Thanks. Jlittlet 17:39, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

• All of it. Perhaps I'm missing something, but nothing in the "Notes" section appears to be a reference of any kind... Valrith 18:25, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

I suspect you've misunderstood; I was asking which lines of WP:ATT justified your use of the unreferenced template. As far as I can tell, the article has 20 or so notes based on 15 or so references, in Harvard style. Is your objection to the use of that style? Jlittlet 19:13, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Your personal attack re Tavia Yeung

If you truly feel it is vandalism, then imediately report it. Otherwise knock it off. Put up or shut up. --Oakshade 20:06, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Tara Conner

Why delete the information on Conner being the second woman to place at all three pageants (Miss Teen USA, Miss USA, and Miss Universe). All this information is true and can be viewed for accuracy at the Miss Teen USA 2002, Miss USA 2006, and Miss Universe 2006 articles.

Sam72991 20:58, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Please slow a bit removing information

You seem to have recently been removing recently added uncited information, rather than trying to cite it. Please don't. WP:BLP says that contentious information about living persons should be removed without discussion, but is the statement that Victoria Lanz has olive skin and was born in Caracas really contentious? And how about that Kirsten Price and Jessica Jaymes recently appeared in bit parts on Weeds (TV series)? Those were each easily citable with a quick Google search. We do want to remove libel and slander and things our subjects don't want to publicise, but we also don't want to discourage well meaning contributors who don't know how to cite facts to our standards, and deleting additions outright does do that. Think back to your first edits: wouldn't you have felt discouraged if your contribution that Jim Varney graduated from Lafayette HS had been just removed? (It's still uncited in that article, by the way. Hint, hint. :-) ) Thanks. I know you mean well, but please slow up on undoing other people's well meaning work, if you at all can. --AnonEMouse ^(squeak) 17:44, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Ashley Blue

I really suggest you enter the discussion on Talk:Ashley Blue, rather than just constantly removing the paragraph. --Golbez 22:31, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Nikki Nova

Excuse me, but the changes I brought to Nikki's profile were OKayed by Wikipedia:Administrator Joe Beaudoin Jr. The changes I've made are based on hard facts from her official website. Please do not revert back to an earlier version of her profile. Thank you. RageOfFury 00:59, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

More details seem to be on my talk page. User_talk:AnonEMouse#Nikki_Nova. We should probably copy it to the article talk... --AnonEMouse ^(squeak) 02:47, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Stacy Burke

At 11:20 (UTC) on October 3, 2007, I undid your revision to the Stacy Burke article because this article had previously been listed for deletion. On August 1, 2005, a consensus was made to keep the article. 24.168.42.182 11:30, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Kristy Starling restored

This article has been restored after its deletion was contested at Wikipedia:Deletion review. As you nominated the article to be deleted via WP:PROD, you may wish to nominate the article for a full deletion discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion.--chaser - t 00:52, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Please note that according to WP:PROD, you may not prod an article twice. I respectfully request that you not prod the article a third time. Chubbles 00:56, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Fiona Mont article

Could you please take a look at the discussion page. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.7.22.179 (talk) 15:25, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Jenna Haze

Why did you delete some entries in the infobox? Purplehayes2006 22:03, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

• "Natural bust" and "Ethnicity" have no source provided. "Flag" you've already seen the reason for, apparently... Valrith 21:31, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I saw the reason about "Flag", thats why I retired my question about it. Are you serious about "Natural bust"? c'mon.... as far as I know, women born with natural bust, the source should be needed to state a surgery that she got, not vive versa. It is not the case of Jenna Haze, she never got surgery. You are taking it in the wrong way :-). I do know that she is Spanish and German/Irish, she even says it in some videos and in her fan club. Hmmm I will look for some source over internet about this to get back the "Ethnicity" entry. 23:04, 30 October 2007 (UTC)Purplehayes2006

Thanks for fixing the broken reference. I just realized about the bad reference.

About Jenna Haze official website link in the External link section, please read the talk I had with administrator Joe_Beaudoin_Jr before I went ahead to add that link to the External link section too.

About the "natural bust" entry in the infobox: basic common sense and logic says that we don't need a source to verify that a woman has natural breast when you don't even have any reference that she got surgery of any kind at any point of her life.

Women have natural bust. If you find a source for the contrary... use it. If not, then she has natural bust. Don't bother yourself, you will find nothing. Jenna Haze is 100% natural.

Anyway, from Rog interview:

"Measurements?

34B-22-24.

All real?

Oh yes. Most definitely.

Are they staying that way?

Yes, forever.

Forever?

I am scared to death of surgery and I will say for the record, I wont have my breasts done.

If we ever see you with them, I am going to bring this tape to you and remind you that you swore over a salad that your boobs would stay real."

If you find any reliable source that states that she got any kind of surgery, use it and change her bust status. But as I said, don't bother yourself, you will find nothing. She is 100% natural.

Just a note: reliable sources are needed only in cases of controversial claimings. Say that a woman has natural bust when there is no info for the contrary is going against basic common sense. I just say this because there is no need of go and delete whatever and discourage people from make the most simple contributions to an article. Purplehayes2006 00:49, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Official website link

The inclusion of Jenna Haze's official website link in the External links section in addition to the infobox was already discussed with administrator User:Joe_Beaudoin_Jr.. He said: "On a second look, the article is now large enough that it might warrant having the link located in the External links section. So I would go ahead and do that in this case. When it comes to shorter articles though, having the links duplicated in two places wouldn't be worth it, though". Please check the talk here: User_talk:Joe_Beaudoin_Jr.#External_links_.28official_website.29 Purplehayes2006 01:24, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Meh. I respect Joe's opinion, but I don't think we need the redundancy. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 02:21, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

To be honest, I didn't think this would be a big issue. But that's Wikipedia for you, I guess. Not surprising. Anyway, to be honest, since there does seem to be consensus that the link be kept solely in the infobox, I would just keep it there and be done with it. -- Joe Beaudoin Jr. ^{Think out loud} 04:20, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

I didn't think that this would be a big issue either. I talked with you about the inclusion of the link in the External link section, and you told me "go ahead" to put it there. After that, users Valrith and Videmus Omnia were the ones with a different opinion. If now you change your mind, it is Ok. I respect it. I will not go over this again. BTW, I HATE drama. Purplehayes2006 20:16, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Proposed deletions of Michele Raven and others

Over the past 24 hours, you have prodded 4 porn star articles and tagged one more as not-notable per WP:BIO/WP:PORNBIO despite verifiable citations of award wins or nominations. A win or nomination for a recognized award is sufficient evidence of a porn actor's notability per the current WP:BIO guidelines. Also, please use prod only for uncontroversial deletions. Michele Raven survived a prior AfD. • Gene93k 22:55, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Reverts

How would you like me to source that info? I think I perfectly did the job in the "edit summary" line. Why do you have a preference for May 5, 1982, since there is absolutely no source for that neither? The only move I would be able to understand would be leaving the blank space, which is not something you have chosen to do. This seems to be quite a weird way of doing things, indeed. ziel & 21:21, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

• You're right, I shouldn't prefer one piece of unsourced data over another equally unsourced piece. Fixed. Valrith 21:36, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

External Link on Jayne Mansfield

I have written David Monniaux at Wiki about you consitently deleting my fan site from the Jayne Mansfield section. He has said their is no problem with me having the site as an external link since it does pertain to the subject of the page and since it DOES offer information about Jayne Mansfield including an extensive biography and current news on DVD and Movies availability. Mr. Monniaux also mentioned several other celebrities who had fan sites included in the external links of their pages. So please refrain from constantly deleting my fan site which incidently is approved by the Hargitay Family. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hilljayne (talk • contribs) 00:36, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Vanessa Angel

I've added yet another source for the Vanessa Angel article pertaining to her being originally cast as Xena. Since this particular source is from the BBC News site, I should think it's quite "reliable" and not "poorly sourced". As far as the info you deleted from the infobox (spouse, birth name), this information is properly sourced and is also allowed in biographies and done so quite often in other articles on actors or in biographies in general (see: Julianne Moore, Patty Duke or Rita Hayworth). I've also re-added the external links to IMDb and Tv.com because they are acceptable and nearly all actors have those links in their articles. All this information falls within the guidelines of Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons. Instead of deleting the info and anything else you don't personally want in the article, please start a consensus discussion on the talk page. I'll be more than happy to follow the consensus. Pinkadelica 02:59, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Tiffany Vollmer

In the discussion page of Tiffany Vollmer I've added my two cents worth on why this page should not be deleted. I can only hope they persuade you to remove the delete tag from that page. If they don't, please let me know ASAP. In a couple of days my access to the computer will become limited and I simply don't have the time to go into a protracted discussion with you. K9feline 03:10, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Courtney Simpson

Hello Valrith. Just a quick note to explain my reversion of your edit to above. The policy WP:BLP#Privacy_of_names indicates that we should take extreme care with real names. To quote it, "When the name of a private individual has not been widely disseminated or has been intentionally concealed (such as in certain court cases), it is often preferable to omit it, especially when doing so does not result in a significant loss of context." - in Courtney's case, the real name adds nothing to the topic. Hopefully you understand, but feel free to contact me personally. The Rambling Man 07:16, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Hello again. Please stop inserting a link to a gossip column. It certainly doesn't meet WP:RS. Continuing to do so will ultimately lead to a loss of editing ability. The Rambling Man 13:02, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

article does cite references and sources

I had removed your "does not cite references and sources" tag from the Tiffany Vollmer page because it simply wasn't true. The external links at the bottom of the page ARE the references and sources. Practically everything in the Vollmer page can be found on the links provided. K9feline 14:27, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

• External links are not references (see Wp:el#References_and_citation). Valrith 23:28, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Melt the clouds of sin and sadness, drive the dark of doubt away!

Joy

Marlith ^T/C has given you a kitten! Kittens promote Wikilove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Share the WikiLove and civility with everyone and keep up the excellent editing! Send kittens to others by adding {{subst:Joy message}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Marlith ^T/C 02:10, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Please, advise

Since you have helped the Jayne Mansfield article to become what it is today, I'd like to draw your attention to another article split off from the main one - Jayne Mansfield in popular culture. It has been nominated for deletion a second time here, and the supports so far are three way - "Delete", "Keep" and "Merge" - with a few comments thrown in (mostly by the nominator and I). Would you take a look at the debate and the article? Even if you stay away from voicing your view on the debate page, you can advise me on my talk page (may be lend a hand, too). I hope I am not canvassing :P. Aditya^{(talk • contribs)} 14:35, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Handbra

An article on which you previously commented has been proposed for deletion again, at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Handbra (second nomination). You may wish to comment.DGG (talk) 03:56, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Jayne Mansfield biographical timeline: A request

I don't have enough resources to bring the article to a really respectable status, but still think we need it to put a timeframe to understanding JM (especially since the biographical article is broken down into a contextual layout). And, I know you to care about the Jayne Mansfield article. Would take a look at the timeline article and lend a hand there? Aditya^{(talk • contribs)} 16:23, 6 December 2007 (UTC)