User talk:Tabercil/archive12

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Tabercil. 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.

I've been talking with a new user, User:Luttycane, who says they work at a review site for actors/movies/etc and they publish various facts about the stars of the movies on their site. Do you have any incite on whether they would be violating WP:OR or WP:RS if they were to cite their site here? Please join the conversation at their talk page. Thanks, Dismas|^(talk) 00:54, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

If you look at the history, it's been de-prodded and technically is not eligible for prodding again. I'm not very experienced with filing AfD's so I'm going to use this to learn on. I won't deprod again til I've successfully created the AfD nomination. I'd welcome your input thereafter. Cheers. David in DC (talk) 23:32, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

• As you said, "technically". Ah well... the result will be the same, just will take longer. Tabercil (talk) 13:12, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
• I'd already IARed one deprod by a driveby anon and put a notice on the IP's talk page. When a registered user deprodded it again, within a day, I thought a third prod one too many. Sorry. David in DC (talk) 18:20, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Since disagreement over the Jessica Drake image has been unsettled, I've decided to create a poll which will hopefully settle the issue and create a rough consensus. The poll is at Talk:Jessica_Drake#Poll:_Jessica_Drake_image. Valrith (talk) 05:30, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Hi, Tabercil. Question on one of the pink film articles, Zoom In: Rape Apartments. I've always had to cringe a little when putting them in the category "Pornography", and sometimes even thought about removing that category, and the project header, because they're really just films, with extra doses of softcore nudity/sex... But that's not the category I'm asking about now-- This particular film has been dubbed "Horror" for some reason... My sources on Japanese erotic cinema say nothing about this one being particularly "Horror"-style, and say it's actually less violent than many pink films of the era, though it has some surrealist touches. But for some reason IMDb has put the "Horror" tag on it, and now ours has it too... Would I be wrong to remove it from the horror category? Dekkappai (talk) 17:03, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

OK, how about this one: I've moved my work on Chesty Morgan over from BP, with modifications for the different venue-- e.g. removing all Wiki-banned material, like images, filmography, list of performances, appearances, and all that other "unencyclopedic" stuff. But here's the question: I've got her birth name off a primary source which is publicly available-- the Florida marriage index. How does Wiki stand on that? (Also, another primary source shows she was born in Oct 1938, but I couldn't find it in a secondary source. I haven't cited that because the primary source in question give current contact info, and I felt it would invite invasion of privacy.) Dekkappai (talk) 06:58, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

The wikipedia policy on this is at WP:WELLKNOWN. No use of public documents or court records unless it is republished by a reliable secondary source because of privacy issues. I am wondering though. How did the marriage index create the association/link between her real name and her stage name? Morbidthoughts (talk) 15:42, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Never mind. I'm guessing you just looked up the name of her husband since you knew they were married at a certain point in time. Morbidthoughts (talk) 16:05, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply, Morbid. Her real names (that is, her two married names) are given in several newspaper articles/interviews I checked, but not her birth name. She did not seem to go out of her way to guard her privacy. And, knowing both her name and her husband's it was simple to check the Florida marriage index-- publicly available through Ancestry.com. That is where I found the birth name... So you think it's OK? Reading the policy, I get the impression the answer is "no", since her birthname is not given in secondary sources... on the other hand, her real married name is, so I'm not sure... Dekkappai (talk) 20:43, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

I didn't touch anything because as you pointed out, her real married names were not private and repeatedly published in reliable secondary sources. Wikipedia policy just discourages editors to start digging into public records of people as if they were reporters when no other secondary source has done so. You did good research with the inferences but it may also be prohibited synthesis. You can ask the BLP noticeboard for third opinions on whether to keep the birth name in the article. As an aside, I haven't thought of Chesty Morgan since the 80s and I was just a kid back then. Didn't realise she was written about so much. Morbidthoughts (talk) 21:12, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

I knew of her back in the glorious '70s when she was the big new thing on the strip circuit... used to ogle her ads in the SF Chronicle. (Which reminds me, I haven't gone through that paper yet for info...) It was very interesting and a lot of fun putting the article together over at BP, figured I'd share what I could here. Right-- I have no qualms about taking out any private information if it's not kosher. Like I say, the married names are given all over the place, she didn't attempt to hide them at all. But the birth name is not-- I assume just because it didn't come up in the article. But I'll take it out myself. Thanks again for the advice. Oh-- I also found out enough for a whole section on her first husband's murder. I put it together, but reading it kind of gave me the creeps, when we were promoting her nudie/stripping career-- over at BP that is. Any thoughts about putting it back in here? The article's already too long, probably. Dekkappai (talk) 21:24, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Well, wikipedia is not censored so it should be mentioned that her first husband was murdered especially if it was during the marriage and verifiable. It should be written in such a way that doesn't overshadow her article since her notability is as a dancer not who she was married to. Morbidthoughts (talk) 21:35, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

OK-- it's already mentioned. But putting the whole section in, right at the beginning of her life, as it was, did seem to overwhelm the article. I suppose it might be notable enough for its own article, though not one I'd really be interested in writing... Dekkappai (talk) 21:38, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Any, that's a fine biography you wrote. It should be nominated to be reviewed as a Good Article but I have no idea how to do that. I'll look up how to do so later or maybe someone can beat me to the punch. Morbidthoughts (talk) 21:44, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

For GA status, check out WP:GAN. Including her married name(s) is not an issue since you have numerous RS, but the birth name took some digging... I'd be leery of including it simply on WP:OR grounds, but I'll defer to whatever the BLP board says on the topic. Tabercil (talk) 23:03, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Tabercil. I don't do well at discussion boards and prefer to ask trusted individual editors. I took Morbid's advice and took it the birth info down. I had a feeling it wasn't OK anyway, because of the sole primary source... I've been through GA review a couple times, so it won't be too much of a chore for me this time. I plan on doing some more polishing first though. Dekkappai (talk) 23:06, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

You clearly can see the internet came into hands of only few websites. Before you claim websites has affiliate ads you have to think how do all these websites make big money in million. You don't run your website with your own money. Google is only overrated and against many websites. If you have Lotta junk they will approve ads to you. when someone supported Independent singers community they didn't approve ads for them. You shouldn't forget that we had the same life when we didn't even have a computer. If you think people come and promote their websites its very wrong. If you think its wrong there shouldn't be any links that has an advertisement. You think if a website is big they are good if its not popular you think they spam. You take gogle as a role model. All the websites that has good content have a right to get promoted. Internet is not limited to only few websites. If the money is not distributed properly the economy sucks. Many of these website owners canceling the accounts because of your poor standars. Please respect all the websites. Don't be cruel and make only greedy a corporate internet. How many websites are free of ads under Debbie Gibson's external links? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jag666 (talk • contribs) 08:51, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Links all come down to one simply policy: WP:EL. That says "one should avoid any site that does not provide a unique resource beyond what the article would contain if it became a Featured article." And looking at the webpage you went to add for Debbie Gibson, I do not see anything that makes it a intrinsically needed page to link to. Wikipedia is not a link farm. Tabercil (talk) 05:07, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

so what is wikipedia? There are videos where people can watch more videos. You allow links to websites that puts cookies on your comps and steal all the information to make money. all the google ads has cookies that steals the inforamtion. so its allowed here but when normal websites got linked you remove them? because of editors like you many people are pissed off and leaving wiki. what about imdb and cnn under links? Myspace is allowed here as debby owns the page. save the Internet and stop deleting the links. That link is usefull for debby gibson's fans. Its only place they can watch videos without diversions. Im going to complaint wiki for your deletion. Jag666 (talk) 18:10, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

You want to complain? Fine... post a message on the WP:ANI board to that effect as I stand by my actions. Tabercil (talk) 00:51, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Anita Blond, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

No reliable sources. No Assertion of WP:Notability. Fails WP:PORNBIO.

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. David in DC (talk) 15:38, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

"You're the first one in the history who's not blocked or banned"??!? That's a sad situation... Tabercil (talk) 23:35, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

so your removing external links and talking about some rules. Then What about the social networking sites? They clearly mentioned that social networking site links are not allowed , then why don't you remove them? Why do you allow lins to sonicbids and sounndclick? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.98.116.9 (talk) 20:57, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Let's see... the sonicbids link isn't working so that can go, and it appears the sonicbids page is similar to the myspace page as in something which the author themselves put up. So half of them do get pulled out. Now I see you yourself tried to deleted these links but they got reverted.. probably because you didn't say why you were deleting them. Edit summaries are your friend, y'know. <G> Tabercil (talk) 00:39, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Hi,

I've been adding references to stars' awards on their pages. I'm not sure why you think that it promotion. A fellow move critic showed me how to do it yesterday and I'm following through. Drjayxxx (talk) 13:49, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Calling it advertising is a bit of a stretch, but none of the other categories for the particular rollback software I use fit. The section for awards is pretty much reserved specifically for awards found in the Category:Adult movie awards, and you're not on there. Who was the other movie critic you were speaking with? Maybe the awards he was adding were already on the list... Tabercil (talk) 14:11, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Den Cavr was the one who told me about adding my awards to the lists...he added the Dr. Jay's Must See Girls Award for Tori Black yesterday and I wanted to do the same.

I am a member of XRCO and an adult critic with over 10 years experience for adultdvdreviews.com. I would like my annual award to be added to the Adult Movie Awards page. Can this be done? Drjayxxx (talk) 18:42, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

I have no clue why it has to be deleted. I'm sure CSI fans, like myself, are excited to be able to read about the next season. I don't think it should be deleted at all.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Rybeast (talk • contribs) 09:38, February 23, 2009

Fine. Give a source. Tabercil (talk) 00:38, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Hi, Tabercil. Did you know the winner of the Best Foreign Film at the Academy Awards last night-- Yōjirō Takita-- started out as the director of such pink film classics as Molester's Train: Underwear Inspection, Pink Physical Examination, Molester's Delivery Service, Molester's Tour Bus, etc... I wonder if he's the first director to get his start in pink films and wind up with an Oscar? Dekkappai (talk) 00:41, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Nope... mind you, I didn't catch all of the show. And given that he's now an Oscar winner, I think you'll probably be able to find more sources for info for him. Tabercil (talk) 00:44, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Oh, sure. I'm eyeing his article over for work at the moment. Might make an interesting "DYK" or something for the porn project though :) Dekkappai (talk) 00:46, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Well at the very least, I'd say the film chronology should be flipped so his most recent work is at the bottom per WP:LOW. Tabercil (talk) 00:50, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Unless you have evidence that my post contains libel or erroneous information, I suggest you leave it alone, or I will report you to Wiki admins. Just because you do not agree & take issue with my edit doesn't mean the information is controversial, libelous, or fiction. May I suggest you read up on the definition of those legal terms? If you insist, I can scan documents that contain her name, but also contain her address, which I believe to be a bit far-fetched. Thank you, Eaugatis (talk) 03:23, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

We have to abide by Wikipedia's verifiability policies. You need to provide a reliable source for the information, and you haven't. Until then, I will continue to remove it. And oh, I AM an admin (proof). Tabercil (talk) 03:34, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

I was sleeping with her, is that good enough intel for you? Just because you don't have paperwork in front of you, doesn't mean my info isn't valid. It's 100% valid. What kind of evidence do you seek?

If I must, I can post legal documents here to Wiki, then everyone can see her home address, to spite your ignorance, Mr. Tabercil. Stop being such a mouth-breathing fanboy & get a life outside of this place.

If this isn't to your liking, delete my account & all accompanying edits / posts. Or I will just continue to make the edit over & over.

Well it may be accurate, but it counts as original research chum. Tabercil (talk) 03:57, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Hey there, I was just wondering; since you seem to be the head editor for the ManDingo article what exactly is and isn't allowed to be posted. The Project Page seems to be a little too vauge for me. MDino (talk) 05:54, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

There was a blatant BLP violation in the Roxanne Hall article that was quickly reverted by a bot. However, it is still in the history and needs to be deleted. Please take care of this. Morbidthoughts (talk) 23:14, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

And scrubbed. Thanks for the heads-up. Tabercil (talk) 00:23, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi Tabercil: we are Daniela Mercury's international management, Tempest Entertainment - and I and the artist want to change the foto on her pageto reflect her work more accurately

here is contact info for my company from daniela's website http://danielamercury.art.br/contato.php

1. I uploaded a foto by fabio Cerati - who was contracted by the artist to shoot carnaval last year. we have used this foto many many times.

2. Once I clear this with you do i change the photo on her page?

many thanks! LianElemcivs (talk) 22:29, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

• What you'll need to do is to send an email to [email protected] explaining what you told me. What will happen then is they'll tag the image as having permission. Then you can change the image on her page. <G> Tabercil (talk) 23:27, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

• Could use some help concerning bullying and an articles for deletion page at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/YNOT_News . Help. I feel like I am swimming upstream against those against adding information here. LaserVaZer (talk) 15:48, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I was just checking out that article - I know its sparse but isnt it better to help fill these articles out and improve them rather than slap a prod on them? The subjects clearly notable enough Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 05:19, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

How is he notable? As it stands right now, it only states he was in a movie that is red-linked, and is the brother of a different actor and notability is not transferable. Heck, I even checked out his IMDB listing and it's pretty much all one shot appearances on TV shows. Tabercil (talk) 05:16, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

It's a long long list of things he's been in though - he looks at least as notable as his sister and there doesn't seem to be any probs with her entry. Moving to AfD might have been better to get a consensus? I agree that the article is rubbish as it stands, but I'd be more for having it worked on than deleted Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 16:06, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Sorry to butt in but... If you don't think it should be deleted, you're allowed to remove the prod tag and improve upon the article. Dismas|^(talk) 02:15, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi Tabercil, i noticed, that you were already helpful with File:Nikki Benz 2009.jpg on Commons, i helped (or i hope to helped) Glenn to get rid of all the doubts on his uploads. The requested image is uploaded here under wrong copyright, the rest is posted on the image itself. Thank you for removing it, --Martin H. (talk) 11:11, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Now gone. Tabercil (talk) 18:21, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi, Tabercil. The name appears to be Yuka Ozawa, no long U, no long O. In Japanese: Yuka Ozawa (小澤 友香, Ozawa Yuka). Hope that helps! Dekkappai (talk) 23:49, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Strike that-- big boo-boo-- wrong person there :) The name is Yūka Ōsawa (大沢佑香, Ōsawa Yūka). Japanese wiki article HERE. Official blog Hope that helps better ;) Dekkappai (talk) 00:03, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

According to JA-Wiki, she's used the name Hitomi Nishikawa. Her father is Turkish, mother Japanese. Made her AV debut in 2005 in an opus entitled "First Flower" (初花). Apparently in 2007 she grabbed the title of "shiofuki Queen" away from retiring champion, Hotaru Akane. The director SAKKUN (Natural High) won first place in the Challenge Stage at the 2006 AV Open for Naked Continent (裸の大陸), which starred Ōsawa. She won Best New Actress at the 2007 Pink Grand Prix-- for theatrically-released pink films. A charming piece co-starring Ōsawa, entitled Vomit Enema Ecstasy X won the Digital Sales Award at the 2009 AV Open, and she took the Best Lovely / Moe Video for Tera-Dick (Real Creampie Absolute Angel) (真正中出しの絶対アングル　テラちんぽ) at the ceremonies the same year. Hey, you're not muscling in on my territory are you? :) Dekkappai (talk) 00:18, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

LOL... nope. Doing some work on Commons; I'm an admin there now. As I said, I wanted to clean up from a failed rename attempt by figuring out first what her name should be spelled as. Tabercil (talk) 02:01, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Ah, well she's definitely one I'll keep in mind for an article. Seems to have several points of "notability". MOS-JA insists on the macrons (ū and Ō) rather than the doubled "uu" and "Oo". Dekkappai (talk) 02:48, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. One to remember - which should be easier as the macrons look cleaner than doubled vowels. Tabercil (talk) 03:00, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Do you know how long it takes to get a response from the [email protected] address? It's a longish story but you can see my talk page for the fuller version. I basically need a way to verify that someone is who they say they are, Debi Diamond. Dismas|^(talk) 03:47, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

No idea offhand as I've never tried to use it. Now that I've read about it, I'll check with some of my sources to see if they can independently give me an email for Debi. Tabercil (talk) 04:19, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Any progress on this? Dismas|^(talk) 03:32, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Well I was able to get an email address for Debi, but I've not seen any response as yet... Tabercil (talk) 02:45, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Ding. Got a response from the email address, and I've forwarded said response to permissions to back up the ID. As well, she's also passed along a photo which she wants used on the page; I'll upload that to Commons once the license is nailed down. Tabercil (talk) 00:26, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Nice! Thanks! Dismas|^(talk) 03:10, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

What exactly do you mean by "I'd checked with subject to determine which is the current wife"?

The information you added had been removed for a reason: The subject had stated publicly that the Wikipedia article is wrong in this regard.

Other sources contradicting your statement are [1] (November 2006), [2] (October 2007), [3] (April 2009).

Regards, HaeB (talk) 03:44, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Oh, sorry, I started to write this before your later correction, should have checked back before posting it. Still, I hope you are aware that personal communication is not a valid substitute for proper citations.

Regards, HaeB (talk) 03:48, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

I know, and I did dig up cites for the marriages. Tabercil (talk) 05:03, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

for the naming clarifications on some of my images from flickr that have been copied to Commons Sparr (talk) 13:48, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

http://www.campusequestrian.com/zone/3zone/3z4r/z3r4BLOO217.html. Last photo on the page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Starkravinglunatic (talk • contribs) 22:01, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Hmm... potentially proof. But the image that you've offered up is small and doesn't enough detail to make it a uncontestable ID. I'm still going to say we done have the proof needed for WP:BLP. Tabercil (talk) 22:06, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

The photo looks very clear to me. Also, the bio that you keep "defending" about Ellie Murdoch says that she previous studied international relations and French at a junior college. That does not hold water since both subjects are so specialized as to NEVER be offered at a junior college (especially IR, which is too theoretically based for teaching to junior college students. She was a student at Lynchburg College in Lynchburg, VA. where she also rode horses competitively. Another thing, coincidently, "Alighatti" leaves porn in 2007 and Ellie Murdoch "coincidently" restarts college in 2007. Photo evidence and lots of circumstancial evidence. In most states, that is sufficient for proof, unless there is another reason not to recognize the obvious. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Starkravinglunatic (talk • contribs) 18:24, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Please read the wikipedia policy on original research, particularly the section on prohibited synthesis. Morbidthoughts (talk) 18:28, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

As Morbid points out, it's all circumstantial; WP:BLP requires a smoking gun in this instance. Tabercil (talk) 00:53, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

I have nominated Category:Former Adult film stars (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. Tabercil (talk) 02:26, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Hello, I was wondering if you could clear something up for me. I noticed that you uploaded this image on Commons which shows Alexander Graham Bell's star on Canada's Walk of Fame. However, according to the Walk of Fame website, Bell does not have a star. Was it part of a seperate section or was it in with the other stars? Thanks, Scorpion⁰⁴²² 14:42, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

In with the others. Based on the background around it, it was among the ones I photographed on Simcoe Street. My guess? If you look at the Walk of Fame website, you'll see that there's one star there that doesn't pop up who it is (almost directly below the "St" in Simcoe Street, between Louis Mayer and Shirley Douglas) - that's Alexander's. And I have a lot more to upload as well - I took photos of all the ones on Simcoe St and the south side of King St. There aren't any yet of the north side as I was not aware at the time that there were any over there (one for the next time I'm in Toronto). Tabercil (talk) 17:06, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Actually, I just found one pic that proves it. Look at File:Walk of Fame star on Walk of Fame.jpg - the star closest to the camera is that of Bell. Tabercil (talk) 02:17, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

[4] Wow, I have never seen any mention of this before. I'm assuming they dropped the category and now consider Bell an unofficial inductee. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 23:20, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Considering User:Latinstud09's other edits, do you think that the license on this image is suspect? Maybe I'm just paranoid? Dismas|^(talk) 05:11, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Hmm... it doesn't immediately jump out as a copyvio. Nothing locatable through TinEye, and Googling the first few pics for Ida and Kara together doesn't return this, and that's my two fast tests for finding copyvios on Commons. I'd say engage him in conversation - ask him if he has other images from the same event, or if he has a higher quality version of the Ida pic. But do so from a good faith basis. Who knows, he might actually be someone who can get in and make the photos. Tabercil (talk) 12:10, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Why did you remove the entry regarding implants as "non-notable controversy"? It is addressed in almost every Internet article (other than Wikipedia) about this actress. The entry did not say anything slanderous. I hope this is not a morality policing.

Calvin93

167.206.65.114 (talk) 23:27, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

• Lessee... go to Google News and type in "Christina Hendricks", all dates, I get about 397 hits. Add the word Implants to the search, I get only 2 and both of those results are for the phrase "cochlear implants". That's why it's non-notable. Tabercil (talk) 23:50, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

But that misses the point - it's not as if the information is defined by the Google search - a lot of those 397 hits surely talk about her figure, and there is a discussion out there about natural vs surgical - why is is censored, and who decides on a public encyclopedia what is "information" versus "non-notable"?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 167.206.65.114 (talk) 14:35, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Calvin93 (talk) 15:01, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Also - here are some results from Google searches, by number - this should verify the "notability" of my post, which was neutral in content:

Christina Hendricks measurements 17100 " " breasts 51300 " " size 57100 " " breast size 21100 " " breasts real 30100 " " breast implants 24600 " " implants 25,700

I ask that you let the info stay, assuming that it is your sole decision.

15:01, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

This article verifies it: http://www.ocweekly.com/2006-02-09/features/local-girl-gone-gonzo/

So does this thread: http://www.softballfans.com/forums/showthread.php?t=566052

It's on IMDB: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1040252/

Linkedin: http://www.linkedin.com/pub/8/9b8/208

Her Google blog info: http://www.google.com/profiles/jennahazeblog

tv.com: http://www.tv.com/jenna--haze/person/380490/summary.html

Dose that verify it reliably?

-- 71.123.33.200 (talk) 02:43, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

But none of those sources are reliable sources. Tabercil (talk) 03:47, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

A request for mediation has been filed with the Mediation Committee that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Christina Hendricks, and indicate whether you agree or disagree to mediation. If you are unfamiliar with mediation on Wikipedia, please refer to Wikipedia:Mediation. Please note there is a seven-day time limit on all parties responding to the request with their agreement or disagreement to mediation. Thanks, Calvin93 (talk) 16:27, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Hmm... interesting. Rejected pretty much out of hand. Tabercil (talk) 21:58, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

MOSIMAGES does NOT say you can't limit the sizes of images. It says this is discouraged but IS allowed. So there was no reason for you to remove them, especially since they made the images larger and squished the text. TJ Spyke 03:35, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

You're right in that MOSIMAGES does allow for image size setting. However, it also does give examples of when it is appropriate to force an image to a specific size, and for the ones I changed, I didn't see anything that matched up against those criteria. Now, note that I did not remove the limiter from all of the images - the one that shows her split entrance is one case where overriding the default is justified ("Images containing a lot of detail, if the detail is important to the article", which is true for panoramas). Tabercil (talk) 03:46, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Non-notable people don't make the cover of the LA Times or have 1 million plus Google hits. Prior to their recent hit piece on Quintana (by a former Court TV columnist), The LA Times identified him as a producer with ties to Speaker Nancy Pelosi and the Clintons on three separate occasions:

The day ends with a 3,000-seat black-tie dinner and concert, with scheduled performances by Carole King and Jimmy Buffet, among other. Invited glitterati include Warren Beatty and Annette Bening, said Brian Quintana, a Malibu producer involved in the planning. “Nancy Pelosi wanted a humble swearing-in and to go about the people's business,” Quintana said. “Then calls started coming in from all over the country. She decided we needed to thank the people who helped her get here.” Faye Fiore 12/11/06 http://articles.latimes.com/2006/dec/11/nation/na-pelosi11?page_type=article&exci=2006%7C12%7C11%7Cnation%7Cna-pelosi11&pg=1

"and former Pelosi staffer-turned-Hollywood producer Brian Quintana also attended the morning festivities." Tina Daunt, January 5, 2007 http://webapp1.latimes.com/yourtimes/media_personalities/poli_td_story.html

"If Clinton loses in New Hampshire tonight, predicted longtime political operative turned Hollywood producer Brian Quintana, Hollywood "will defect to Barack in droves. It is not a question of loyalty; Barack is simply too close to making history for Hollywood not to be part of it," Quintana said. "For most of us, Hillary was our first choice, but she has come up short. Barack has become a movement." http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/la-et-cause8jan08,0,4545063.story

Four Presidents, Speaker Pelosi, and countless national figures appear cozy in photographs with Quintana on his website and other published sites. No one has questioned the authenticity of those photos. The LA Times has since retracted their story and as I noted in an LA Times blog:

Shame on the LAT for the hatchet job you did on producer Brian Quintana last Sunday (3/22/09). As a native of East LA who has emerged as one of the ranking Latinos in Hollywood, Brian serves as a role model to countless Latinos and young people from lower socio-economic backgrounds like me. Prior to his current lawsuit against Jon Peters, Brian has sued exactly one person, and that was in small claims Court in 1995. (He prevailed in the civil matter.) You failed to mention that he has never been sued until the current counter claim by Peters. That's not bad in the entertainment industry. http://www.edpadgett.com/blog/2009/03/response-to-brian-quintana-article.html The fact that two separate Courts granted him protective orders ten years apart and lifted one of the two is not unusual. As for his pending suit against his producing partner, The Hollywood Reporter which is an industry standard is by far the least tabloid write up. http://reporter.blogs.com/thresq/2008/12/superman-produc.html

It appears Quintana's foe Jon Peters planted the hit piece and removed his screen credit on their $175M Superman sequel, but other industry sites continue to list Quintana as co-producer: http://www.hollywood.com/celebrity/Brian_Quintana/5351986 http://cinema.theiapolis.com/movie-0C9K/superman-man-of-steel/ USA Today and other national outlets tout him as a prospective candidate for Congress which clearly qualifies him as a public figure. At best Quintana is a self made role model to the Latino community. Read his website and links thoroughly www.brianquintana.com At worst the verdict is still out. Let's not write his obit yet. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Michaeledean (talk • contribs) 13:02, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Ahem. I do not have any kind of vendetta again Mr. Quintana. Instead you have taken ownership of the article and refuse to allow any version of the article other than the one you have authored, and that's against Wikipedia policy. Tabercil (talk) 14:16, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Dakoda_Brookes —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.120.202.57 (talk) 01:18, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Is Twitter acceptable as a source? [5] Dismas|^(talk) 18:25, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

If it can be proved that the account in question really is Alexis, then I don't see why not. Tabercil (talk) 18:58, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

I think we collectively improved this Wiki so that it can be removed as a candidate for deletion, and lose the article issues. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Michaeledean (talk • contribs) 03:37, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

The article is better than it was, but I ain't withdrawing the AfD as I still feel there are serious questions about notability... as one person has pointed out in the AfD so far, "He didn't do anything notable." Tabercil (talk) 03:41, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Tabercil - ты сука фашистский долбоеб, эти фото принадлежат мне, я целый, гребаный день заполнял эту долбанную википедию, а ты нацистский критин ввзял их и удалил, ничего блять я приеду и в англию тоже, я тебе устрою партизанкий досмотр, ты к клавеатуре больше в жизни не подайдешь, ФАШИСТСКОЕ ОТРОДИЕ!

       Жди гостей!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Couldlie (talk • contribs) 12:08, 21 May 2009 (UTC) 

• That's not nice at all to say. As for the images on Commons, they got pulled as copyright violations by me and another admin as copyright violations. If you feel that you do have the rights to the images, then you will need to contact Wikimedia Commons with proof of that. Tabercil (talk) 18:14, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Tanya Lawson, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

fails WP:PORNBIO as recently made more restrictive, no other indication of notability

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 19:27, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi...I've been working Orsi's article (my first) and would like to improve it's ratings. Orsi is Hungarian, well know in Europe but coverage for references is difficult to obtain. I believe there are additional news media articles about her, but not being familiar them I have had little success in obtaining relevant information. Can you give me further input on improving the article? Thanks! Pete Rogers NYC (talk) 21:09, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

For starts, try Google. Work thru the results of the results from Google News (http://news.google.ca/archivesearch?um=1&ned=ca&hl=en&q=Orsi+Kocsis&cf=all) as well as the main Google search (http://www.google.ca/search?um=1&ned=ca&hl=en&q=Orsi%20Kocsis&cf=all&sa=N&tab=nw). You'll find a fair chunk of material in there - you need to mine it for what's suitable for Wikipedia. Tabercil (talk) 23:39, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

I'd barely uploaded the image of Joni Mitchell after some admin. in Commons had deleted it before I could even upload it. That's why I chose a different name for the photo. I did promise the owner attribution in the infobox, which I'll add. Thanks for placing it. You don't know the ins and outs of Commons, do you? Often I have to go to bizarre methods to get BY-SA-CC images into Commons, and have uploaded about 500 sorely needed photos in the last couple of months, but have a lot of grief from whomever is overseeing things there sometimes.--leahtwosaints (talk) 23:00, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

I think I know how Commons works... they did make me an admin there.  ;) What specific problems are you having? Tabercil (talk) 04:29, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Just wondering if Linsey Dawn McKenzie is on your watchlist. The article seems to be going through a slow edit war over the address of her official site. Dismas|^(talk) 11:25, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Problem is, it's hard to figure out which one is the official site. And I can't locate quick'n'dirty any recent interviews of her where she'd give out a website, so there's no help there... Tabercil (talk) 12:15, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

This user has been adding a number of birthdates without sources. I'm at work and only have a minute or two at a time where I can get online, so reverting these is a bit of a challenge. If you're online, could you help out? Dismas|^(talk) 02:51, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Do you happen to know if there is a compelling reason why we're using Infobox Actor for Sasha Grey instead of Female Adult Bio? I noticed this a while ago and have been meaning to figure out why she doesn't have the same infobox template as any other porn star. Your edit to repair the infobox made me think to ask you. Dismas|^(talk) 00:47, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

I asked and didn't change it back. Morbidthoughts (talk) 20:15, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Good question... when I edited it, it was more to clean the damn thing up. Never occured to me to ask "why aren't we using FAB here?"... after we use FAB on Jenna Jameson, who has a much stronger mainstream profile than Sasha. And it's not like it was a recent change: it was first changed to the generic Infobox Person back on April 20 (see here) and it was then changed to Infobox Actor on the 7th (see here). I'll restore the original FAB box. Tabercil (talk) 21:42, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

It will be interesting to see your proof that Miss Stevens was not robbed. You think that ITN and MSN are all liars. I have noticed your odd edits before. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.194.34.71 (talk) 13:48, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Ahem... if you're referring to this edit, the onus is on you to provide a source, not me. No source, no stay. Tabercil (talk) 21:22, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi Tabercil. I've recently stumbled across a treasure trove of posters to the Nikkatsu Roman Porno films, and have been spending my time collecting them. I know posters are considered OK for articles on individual films-- given that the film's "notability" is established enough to justify an article. But what if I put an extra field in those yearly film tables at the Nikkatsu Roman porno article, and include those little poster images? Would I be courting disaster? (I suspect I know the answer, just want to get a second opinion, because I think poster thumbnails like these would really help the list, and would be perfectly justifiable in any reasonable project, but I doubt the image-police would stand for it here :( Dekkappai (talk) 17:33, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Sorry to butt in but this is relevant. We used to have magazine covers on the List of people in Playboy... lists. Each month had its cover pictured. They were taken down because a list was determined to not fulfill the "comment and criticism" portion of the fair use rules. Dismas|^(talk) 17:14, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Dismas. I was pretty sure the answer would be something like that, just wanted to hear it from someone without wading through policies and guidelines, with which I have very little patience... But many-- if not most-- of these films are article-worthy anyway-- major studio, directors and actors-- so the poster-collecting won't be wasted time, Wiki-wise, if we ever get articles started on them. Dekkappai (talk) 17:30, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

My pleasure. I recalled that album covers also fall under this. And as such, they can't be used in discographies. So, I checked out WP:DISCOGRAPHY under the style guidelines. That lead me to here which covers the album cover issue. Film posters would be fall under the first point. Dismas|^(talk) 17:36, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Right-- and if poster images were allowed at a list like this, they should also be allowed at filmographies of individual directors and actors... and if THAT should happened... well, I shudder to imagine the possibility-- all Hell would break loose! ;) Dekkappai (talk) 17:44, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi there! I removed the notability tag in the article Pâmela Butt. I think her mainstream media appearances make her notable enough. However, I don't think of acting 'pushy' on this. I created the article because she's a prominent porn star in Brazil and an article 'parallel' to the one present in the Portuguese Wikipedia would simply be supplementary. Best regards. Behemoth (talk) 15:17, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Judd Winick and Nightscream have take ownership of the Pedro Zamora article. There is no balance. Like him or not, Brian Quintana was a friend of Pedro's for five years and ran The Pedro Zamora Foundation for five more. He knows Pedro and his story better than any non-family member. Winick lived in a house with him for twenty weeks and cashed in on his relationship big time. Pedro was friends with Winick's partner Pam Ling. He considered Winick phony and did not care for him much. I do know Quintana so I will no longer edit this page, Quintana clearly has his supporters and critics. If you are going to mention the criticism then you should attempt to balance it by mentioning that Winick and Ling were once his biggest supporters. Yesy Alonso who knew Zamora since grade school is still a supporter and the Zamora family and he have since reconciled. Nightscream acknowledges that the Advocate took the story off their website. The reason they did was to settle a libel suit. I'm sure you can find that case number. Naturally Wikimedia does not want to expose itself to a libel action. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Michaeledean (talk • contribs) 23:45, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

We have to go by what is verifiable - that's what Wikipedia:Verifiability refers to. From the policy: "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth" (emphasis original), and since this is one of the three core policies behind Wikipedia it's not optional. The information about Judd Winick is clearly sourced, the information about Brian Quintana is much less so. If you can find a reliable source for the information about Brian and Pedro, then you can add it. Tabercil (talk) 15:43, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

• Not sure ifyou remember me, but I wanted to add my two cents worth.. I knew Pedro and I still am friends with his family. I was assisted in bringing over Pedro's family from Cuba. And was close to all of them. Brian and the family have not made up. Brian is a manipular of circumstances and is out for only himself. Yes Judd has made money from Pedro but he has done lots of good, and he does not need the money, and does not do it for the money (pam is a doctor). I agree with you, as long as everything has references it can go in. I personally would prefer to have all of the Brian stuff taken out of the article, but since its referenced I have left it alone. My comments probably don't really have any influence, but I just wanted to share my knowledge on the article. Callelinea (talk) 17:46, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Oh I do remember you... and thank you for your two cents worth, as you're uncontestably one of the people who actually knew Pedro in real life. And thank you again for the photos you contributed to Pedro's article. <G> Tabercil (talk) 03:39, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Tabercil. 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.