User talk:Scalhotrod/Archive 12
 | 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 5 | ← | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12 | Archive 13 | Archive 14 | Archive 15 |
On Asian pornogrpahic list
I have this page on watchlist for last 1 day. If I saw edit war, or opposition on Main page, it will be a issue then. For now it's clear that we can add only notable people on the list. Bladesmulti (talk) 03:45, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
- I no longer care, the list article is not worth the effort. I'm moving on to other articles. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 03:52, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
- Assisting in stirring up hornet's nests and then "moving on" isn't very productive behavior. I understand that you've been frustrated with some of your choices of topics to edit on Wikipedia, but you really need to be more strategic in your thinking in how you word or emphasize things on talk pages & boards. IMHO, you haven't been very helpful in those terms, and it needs to change. Guy1890 (talk) 21:58, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
- There are different reasons to make a variety of comments. Sometimes its to interject common sense into the conversation and other times its just to make others contemplate other possibilities beyond their own narrow thinking. I appreciate your sentiment, but trying to guess or presume any motive I have other than wanting this site to contain as much reliable information as possible is pointless.
- Assisting in stirring up hornet's nests and then "moving on" isn't very productive behavior. I understand that you've been frustrated with some of your choices of topics to edit on Wikipedia, but you really need to be more strategic in your thinking in how you word or emphasize things on talk pages & boards. IMHO, you haven't been very helpful in those terms, and it needs to change. Guy1890 (talk) 21:58, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
- By the way, I've moved on from that particular article, but I'm far from giving up on editing porn articles or defending the 1st Amendment and that's, in some small part, what I consider this debate. I refuse to let a WP policy be change so easily. Wikipedia will ultimately succeed or fail based on these types of discussions. You're welcome to disagree or just not feel as strongly.
- This is the far more important discussion currently taking place... PORNBIO. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 19:33, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
- I really don't think that you see the bigger picture here, and, to be fair, you're not the only Wikipedia user that's been acting in this way in recent weeks. Posting overly provocative comments on talk pages and then walking away soon after does not further whatever goal(s) you have here on Wikipedia. All your recent comments have really done is open up a variety of discussions (in more important venues on Wikipedia) which are ending up openly questioning the validity of a key reference (IAFD) that's used in literally hundreds (if not thousands) of pornography-related articles, which is not constructive on any level. This isn't about the "defending the 1st Amendment", since obviously no one has an Constitutional right to have an article on Wikipedia. All I am asking you to do is stop and try & think several moves ahead to be sure that your actions & words here don't end up hurting the very cause(s) that you appear to be trying to champion. Guy1890 (talk) 02:52, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
- This is the far more important discussion currently taking place... PORNBIO. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 19:33, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
Guy, you keep trying to make a point, but leave out either many of your assumptions or supporting evidence. Furthermore, since we seem to have similar interests, I'm happy to collaborate, but as yet I still don't understand what stance you are taking other than "don't make waves because of unknown repercussions". One of the tenets of the site is Bold, Revert, Discuss. If you don't believe in this or wish to use the process, I can respect that, but I'm still trying to understand what the "way of thinking" is you're trying to impress upon me.
On a separate note, yes, I completely agree that "no one has a Constitutional right to have an article on Wikipedia", but I'm unsure as to why that statement is necessary in this conversation unless you truly don't understand the significance of the 1st Amendment to the Adult industry. Then again, I would be very curious as to how an interpretation of Pruneyard Shopping Center v. Robins could be applied to Wikipedia. The Adult industry's very existence is based on 1st Amendment claims, precedents, and standings. 1st Amendment issues are one of the main reasons that I continue to edit Adult related articles on Wikipedia.
Finally, if IAFD is a "weak link" in the chain that holds the sourcing together for many of the porn articles, then quite obviously we need to better establish it and make it less challengable or at least have ample evidence in hand when someone ignorant of its uses and background starts taking shots at it. And if we can't, then so be it and there will be far fewer new porn articles written and the ones that are created will have to be better sourced. I have no desire or agenda for their to be 100s, 1000s, or Nth number of Adult related article unless they are Notable in the context of the Adult industry. On the Talk page both you and Srich have acknowledged that its an acceptable source, but that it alone can not be used to establish WP:Notability. Not only do I agree with that, but I think its a reasonable guideline under the policy of WP:Context and whatever else may apply. But if major sources for any industry are going to be challenged, these discussions need to take place on a regular basis to maintain their effectiveness as a source.
All of this taken together only makes the site better. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 22:47, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
- Wikipedia has little to do with the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, and the sooner that you realize that, the better. No one is going to sucessfully sue Wikipedia to force coverage of any particular subject on Wikipedia. The fact is that, as I'm sure you are well aware of by now, there are many (sometimes powerful) forces at work on Wikipedia that would like to wipe out as much coverage of pornography-related issues as possible from Wikipedia. Your recent actions (along with, to be fair, others IMO) have been doing more to help out those forces than blunt them, and, if you can't see that for yourself, then fine. I can't help you out any more...you can just learn the hard way. Good luck... Guy1890 (talk) 02:04, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
- Guy, the sad thing is that we probably agree on a lot of things, but our communication styles are preventing us for reaching any kind of mutual understanding. You're entitled to your beliefs and I sincerely wish that you could explain them better. I also wish that you tried to understand my viewpoints better, so my apologies for not explaining them better. Best of luck to you too, --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 02:55, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
Talkback
Message added 23:44, 3 January 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Speedy deletion nomination of Jeanette Littledove
A tag has been placed on Jeanette Littledove requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section R2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect to an article talk page, image description page, image talk page, mediawiki page, mediawiki talk page, category talk page, portal talk page, template talk page, help talk, user page, or user talk page from the article space.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 23:44, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for January 4
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
- Heather Kozar (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added links pointing to Brut and Green High School
- E. Remington and Sons (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Jenks
- Jack Okey (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Marie Wilson
- Paul Raymond Publications (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Paul Raymond
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:09, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
I am inquiring about whether the two women named Brooke on the show - from 2002 and 2013 - are one in the same. I may have to fix my edit on Aly Michalka if I determine that they are not. — Glenn L (talk) 23:06, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
- I think its just one of those unfortunate circumstances where the same name was used and the writers just didn't realize it. Plus the way that IMDb works, it would match the two together since they are spelled identically. It's definitely not an intentional error on anyone's part. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 23:42, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
A kitten for you!
_by_Ron.jpg)
Thanks for alphabetizing the alumni on green high school
Your submission at Articles for creation: Danica Dillon (January 6)
- If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Danica Dillon.
- To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
- If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the . Please remember to link to the submission!
- You can also get real-time chat help from experienced editors.
- Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! JSFarman (talk) 02:27, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot's suggestions. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information on the SuggestBot study page.
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation, and please do get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
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. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 13:01, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
Hello!
I thought I'd drop by and say Hi! I have to say that I really thought I was onto something with that last rewrite of the lede. I thought is sort of gave credit to both sides of the debate. Yes, I'm a gun control advocate, but I also believe in common sense, and common sense tells me that guns in the hands of law-abiding citizens reduces trouble. It also seems to me that keeping guns away from insane and the criminally violent is also a good thing. I don't think anyone would disagree with either of those statements, and I was hoping to show that all of the arguing is over the other stuff. I just wanted you to understand my intention with that edit. Be well! :) --Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ 00:33, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
Reference Errors on 10 January
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
- On the AVN Award page, your edit caused a duplicate page number error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:34, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for January 11
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
- Free Speech Coalition (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added links pointing to Bush administration, Blow Up and Pandering
- AVN Award (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added links pointing to Variety and Chatsworth
- Alexander Devoe (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Producer
- Holly Randall (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to The Insider
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:07, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Twistys (website), requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect to a nonexistent page, or a redirect loop.
If you can fix this redirect to point to an existing Wikipedia page, please do so and remove the speedy deletion tag. However, please do not remove the speedy deletion tag unless you also fix the redirect. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 23:05, 12 January 2014 (UTC)