User talk:Tabercil/archive3

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.

Greetings Tabercil, sorry to bother you but seeing as it appears that you've had a decent amount of contact with this user I thought you should be aware of this post about him. You might like to add any pertinent information that could assist Wikipedia adminstrators in properly examining this user's editing on the Wiki. Thanks. (→Netscott) 05:25, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

You added a final warning to Jcurtis' user page. He continues to blank links and add POV commentary. His edits to sports related articles seem to be fine though he continues to make bad edits to articles about adult models and such. I've put a notice up at WP:ANI though nothing has been done. Could something be done to this user to make him stop the blanking and POV edits? Thanks, Dismas|^(talk) 21:02, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

• I listed him once on the Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism page. At the time, the reply was ":Hasn't vandalized since last warning. Leaving on list a little longer.". I'll list him again; see if this causes things to happen. Tabercil 01:32, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

• • Thanks, I appreciate your help. Though, judging by the message below this one, it looks like Jcurtis has to be babysat for the foreseeable future.... Dismas|^(talk) 04:58, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
    • Hey, I'm headed to work in a couple minutes but I wanted to point out that Jcurtis is at it again. I fixed one of the articles when I checked my watchlist really quick before leaving. Could you check the rest of his edits from today? I probably won't have any time to sit down at work for the next few hours at least and I thought you might be online during that time. Thanks, Dismas|^(talk) 22:43, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

• • • I took a look at his edits, and he's been back since the 4th. So far only two of his edits have been about the adult scene: the Jenna Jameson article, and the Joey Yale article. The first you knew about, the second was his classic link removal job and had already been reverted. All his other edits have been to sundry athlete articles, where he seems to be adding details about their high school years which is okay by my book... Tabercil 01:45, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
      • Ah, okay, thanks. I just saw the one Jenna Jameson edit and then saw that the had a number of edits today. I really didn't have time to check into it further. I really wish there was more we could do... Dismas|^(talk) 02:41, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for contacting me. In fact, it looks a bit awkward to have a test4 warning followed by another one, as if we were just threatening but did nothing about it. We do block, but there are many factors that we have to bear in mind:

• if a user has not vandalized/was not warned recently, we usually don't block immediately, as it might be another person (doesn't apply to this particular case though as it's a registered user, not an IP).
• if a user has made good edits, not just vandalism, then we usually block only if the user has gone out of his mind (vandalizing while ignoring warnings).
• last but not least, we usually don't block users that are reported long after they last vandalized. If they appear to have stopped, there's no need to report. Blocks are not that much of a punishment but rather ways to promptly stop active vandals.

I hope this helped. Keep up the good work. Regards.--Húsönd 04:34, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Writing as an admin interested in the area, and especially the Jenna Jameson article - what Husond says is exactly right. I'll block if he keeps doing it despite warnings, but since he has been making constructive edits otherwise, I'll leave him unblocked for now. Frankly, Jenna Jameson gets vandalized several times per day - as you know, since you're one of the many excellent people regularly reverting it. Thank you very, very much for that. AnonEMouse ^(squeak) 03:00, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Thought you should get a heads up here about User:Juror 8. Cheers. (→Netscott) 04:47, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Update: This has been dealt with. Cheers. (→Netscott) 05:03, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Jeez. That was fast. And it looks like Mactabbed will be a persistent head-ache, given that he's got a category already of his own. Tabercil 07:39, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

You have added a substantial amount of unsourced and potentially defamatory to the Ron Jeremy article in violation of the BLP policy. Please do not do this again. Frise 22:34, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

• You say there's information in the Ron Jeremy article that's unsourced and defamatory. Please define what it is. As it stands now, your actions border on vandalism. Tabercil 22:35, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

• • Here is a sample of some of the information you added to the article:

• • "He has gained some notoriety, both for his exceptionally short and stocky penis, alleged to be 3.25 inches"

• • "Despite being short, out of shape, overweight, and relatively unattractive, he has appeared in nearly 2,000 shorts"

• • "For some of these films, Jeremy paid his own airfare and other expenses just to get 45 seconds time[citation needed]"

• • "As further indication of his cross-over celebrity status, Jeremy has posed in an advertisement for PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) to raise awareness of the over-population of domesticated animals. In the poster Ron lies partially nude on a bed, a pair of handcuffs around his wrist."

• • "Jeremy has also participated in debates on pornography at colleges around the US. One of these noted debates was against Susan Cole of NOW about the effects of porn on society at Middle Tennessee State University's (MTSU) campus. Jeremy was met with a couple of hundred protesters outside of the venue where the debate took place. Apparently there were rumors and confusion about his activities during the debate as some of the protesters thought he was going to be filming a pornographic movie on campus. The University also placed very tight restrictions on Jeremy's activities while at MTSU. He was not allowed any media interviews on campus, nor was he allowed to sign autographs or any other non-debate related activity at MTSU. The campus police escorted him onto campus two minutes prior to the debate, and escorted him off campus immediately following the debate thus limiting any interaction with students while on campus. In a local news interview prior to the event Jeremy remarked "this is by far the most restrictive University that I have spoken at yet"

• • Removing unsourced and potentially defamatory information is never vandalism. Please read the policies on BLP and Vandalism and do not re-add unsourced material to the article. Frise 22:43, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

• • • Fine. Then use a scalpel and excise the specific material in question. Wholesale blanking such as what you are doing is vandalism. Tabercil 22:46, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Removal of potentially libelous material per BLP is exempt from 3RR. Please read and understand the policy before issuing warnings, and certainly before restoring. Frise 23:04, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

• Perhaps, but as I said, use a scalpel not a sledgehammer here. While some of the information may be incorrect, there is much that is correct. For instance, are you saying the picture is not of Ron? That the links to IMDB and IAFD are not valid? Again, wholesale removal under the guise of "removing potentially libelious material" is a disingenuous cover for your actions, which properly constitute vandalism. Tabercil 23:11, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. At any rate please do not do more than three reverts in a 24h period. Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you.-Localzuk^(talk) 23:08, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

• You're right... my bad. Given that this has reached admin attention, I'm content with things as they are now. Tabercil 23:15, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, I was mistaken, it was a merge proposal, not an AFD. However, each of the women's articles had been previously brought up for deletion, sometimes multiple times, usually with bare keeps or the always-helpful "no consensus". I would suggest you bring up a demerge for discussion before doing it, as demerging will just cause repeated AFDs again. At least this way, they're "safe". --Golbez 00:42, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

How is it you determine what is notable or not? I'm refering in particular to your flagging of Cherry Potter. For what purpose? She has several adult films in her portfolio but also a plethera of other materials under a variety of stage names. Why have you not flagged Peter North or Ron Jeremy for example? You found their performances to be more notable? More heartfelt? Is there no inherent value to having a wide array of visible performers listed? Cheapcheap 21:02, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Since you have edited articles about adult models before, I was wondering if you would add your view to this AFD discussion. Thanks, Dismas|^(talk) 21:05, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm just looking for a sanity check here on the external link that ALLtheTrue wants to include in Kelle Marie. It seems to fall into the category of "Links to avoid" from WP:EL. Further, the site in question appears to be run by ALLtheTrue [1], which would make for CoI site promotion. Please give me your opinion. Valrith 22:49, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Hello Tabercil, this person came back again and was blocked today as User:Made of people. There is an editor pushing for this user's banning to be lifted over here and I was wondering if you might want to chime in on your own experience and based upon that whether you think his ban should be lifted. Thanks. (→Netscott) 05:11, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

The following was moved from my archive page to this one, for sake of making it easy to follow-up with.

Just thought I'd alert you to the same site (ravenrileyweb.com) cropping up again - already reverted twice in the last 24 hours - (with it either being linked directly or to an "about" page which seems to be a copyvio of Raven's trivia from her own site as well as a biography from another reference [2]). This time from a different IP although the edits are masked by a user who adds content after the link addition. Also there seems to be a number of ravenriley___.com sites that are frequently added that all seem to be commercial although I don't know if these are done by the same people or not.Steve355 02:26, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

I would like to know why it is ok to list someone’s MySpace profile but not a profile on another community. Especially when our community confirms that the people who create a "star" profile are the people they say they are. And since our site does not charge for anything. (We are a news and community site) I do not think calling our links "Spam" is right. Would it help if I got Nikki to contact you personally on this matter?

-Alan Hawkins

Managing Director Xfanz —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jeebee25 (talk • contribs) 15:43, 22 December 2006 (UTC).

A simple question, but one that opens a nice can of worms <g>. Wikipedia's policy with regards to external links can be found here. The key items with regards to your site lie within the "Links normally to be avoided" section:

10. Links to social networking sites (such as MySpace), discussion forums or USENET.

11. Links to blogs and personal web pages, except those written by a recognized authority.

Usually MySpace links within the various articles get purged out by various editors on those basis. However, MySpace and related sites are increasingly being used as the basis for official homepages for entertainers and movies, and there's a rich debate occuring in various sections of Wikipedia about how to handle this situation - for instance, here is one old debate I know off-hand. Thus the current "written by a recognized authority" exception to rule #11 to allow those performers pages.

If the Xfanz web page is indeed written by the performer, then it's easy to retain it on that basis. And from your comments, it looks like that might just be the case. You might want to confirm that there is something present in quick order on the page which proves that the page in question is uncontestably the work of the performer; that'll it make it easier to keep the link in the article.

Now if you're offering to have Nikki contact me, please do... among other things, I'd like to get a picture from her of herself with a more Wikipedia-friendly license. (Hint: have her email me) Tabercil 20:35, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

In regards to Nikki, yes I will. If you contact us with a list of stars you need info from and what documents you need with them we will be glad to help. alan / xfanz.com

I have an idea that many performers do not even know they have a wiki page. In regards to the social networking debate it is a tricky subject. For example Ron Jeremy does run his own myspace page and uses it to promote his events and get in touch with fans. My friend Lisa Ann on the other hand uses her myspace for the exact same reasons and posts no nudity but MySpace has twice now deleted her profile. So as many social networks are taking down adult star profiles we are trying to make a safe and useful place for them. Although building a community is no small feat we are trying.

My Executive Editor and I really want to work with and help grow wikipedia. We are not trying to spam it. Just be more involved XFANZ is a site dedicated to the fans while helpping the stars have a safe and positive site that they can use to promote themselves.

Thank you for responding. -Alan

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.187.238.252 (talk • contribs) 17:21, December 23, 2006 (UTC)

Hello Tabercil,

you uploaded this picture as a Luke Ford picture. Please note that it is not a picture of Luke, but comes "courtesy of Jay Cummings", as can be seen here. This means it can't be used under Luke's permission, as it is not his picture. If you want to keep it, it will have to be as fair use, I think. Regards --Rosenzweig 11:09, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

• Ah bugger. Didn't spot that.. thanks. I'll drop Luke a line after Boxing Day to see if he can put me in touch with Jay, so I can sweet-talk him into putting his stuff under CC. Tabercil 23:52, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

I listed you as an involved party in 2006-12-24 ALLtheTrue mediation cabal case. Please see the page for more details. - Tutmosis 04:14, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

• Thank you. If I had thought of bringing it to the Mediation Cabal earlier, I'd've done so. So far the arguments, I've seen by Guy & Joe Beaudoin have pretty much mirrored my own thoughts. Just the same I've added that page to my watch list to follow what is/is not said. Tabercil 21:27, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, Tabercil! You have now been added to the list of authorized users, so if you haven't already, simply download and install VandalProof from our main page. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or any other moderator, or you can post a message on the discussion page. Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 17:06, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Nice work rewriting this from scratch! I came across the page and was initially surprised to see the copyvio was missing, before I realized what happened. Thought you'd like to know your efforts are appreciated. -SpuriousQ 15:40, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

First, thanks for helping with that! I ran across that while doing a Google search for FOXE award winners, and Google still had the deleted article in its cache. (It had been successfully WP:PROD'ded, and I used my mystical mop powers.)

Second, when I found it, it was called Leena_La_Bianca_Kathleen_Mazzotta, and I decided to pick a name out of the two. I now suspect I picked the wrong one, given that she apparently acted more as Kathleen Mazzotta and as Leena than as Leena La Bianca, and Leena is too short to be unambiguous. I think it should be at Kathleen Mazzotta, with redirects from the other two. What do you think?

Third - on a completely different topic - anything you think missing from Jenna Jameson? I'm almost out of things to tweak (FOXE was a red link, which I stubbed in, and looking for links to it is what led me to Leena), and getting close to nominating it for FA. When that's done, win or lose, I will start work on Ron Jeremy, I promise! AnonEMouse ^(squeak) 22:33, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

No probs with the article. I'm about to do something similar myself - the Calli Cox article got speedy'd a couple of weeks back and I'm going to take a stab at recreating some form of stub with proper citations to all the statements & such. Odd thing is I think I might have to do some work on the Shane's World article first as Calli was involved in the Shane's World 32 controversy - she was their spokesperson at the time so I might use that status as part of her proof of notability.

As for name, Kathleen Mazzotta would seem good. As you said, it looks like most of her work was done mainstream even if her notability lies in the adult side - kinda like Traci Lords eh? And I'll take a look at Jenna later tonite to see what's more to do. It's already at GA status... but you're itching for it to hit feature, right? Kinda like what I'm hoping to do with Ron - including renting Porn Star: The Legend of Ron Jeremy to see what I can add, and buying his autobio when it hits the stands in February. Tabercil 22:46, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi, Tabercil. I noticed you removed the "explicit material" warnings at the external links on the Ami Ayukawa article. I don't know the official Wiki policy on this sort of warning, but I do agree with your edit summary that Wikipedia is not (and should not be) censored. But what's wrong with warning a user about potentially offensive material? I don't see this as censorship, but as a simple courtesy. I won't revert them though-- either way is fine with me. Just something to think about. Dekkappai 23:20, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

• The official policy is found at WP:NOT#CENSORED, and it's generally held that just as the contents of the article can be offensive the links present on the page can be equally offensive. Given that the article in question is about someone who was notable as a porn star, it would be reasonable to assume that any external links present in the article would likely contain pornographic content. Tabercil 02:11, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
  • All true enough. But a warning is not censorship-- no material is banned. Some of the links at these articles are just informative text listings of vital statistics and filmographies, while some contain material that may offend the easily-offended. (Though what are they doing at an article on an adult performer? I don't know, but they do go to these articles and put articles up for AfD.) There is also a policy that Wikipedia is not intentionally offensive (someone pointed me at it once). I know the Japanese wikipedia puts an "Over 18" warning on all the porn-related articles. Again, this censors nothing, but just provides a warning to the user. Just thought I'd mention it-- either way is fine with me. Dekkappai 02:33, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
    • Why not raise the issue at the WP:P* project talk page? They'll be able to answer better than me. Tabercil 04:42, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
      • Will do. Thanks, Tabercil. Dekkappai 17:32, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

yeah the page i made for brandy is crap. but she didnt even have a page, and im not a "page maker", im suprised i was able to even make one that good. :P, my point is she needs a page! ive made one, i thought if a page was crap you can "snub" it or somthing, "stub" or "snub" im not sure. but i was under impression wiki didnt delete a page simply cos its "Crap", i guess quality is important... but i figured somthing is better than nothing. i suppose the info is a little "stupid" and not accurate, i just wanted to create a place for ppl to edit the right info... i dono. anyways she should have a page, shes not as obscure as a lot of others with pages. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Armageddon Expert (talk • contribs) 18:54, January 7, 2007 (UTC)

I was thinking of adding some European adult industry awards to the list of awards demonstrating the notability of a porn actor. I wanted to give you a chance to weigh in before making this change. Discussion here. – Iamcuriousblue 03:48, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Mo's part it may be small ,but it shows she tried to make it mainstream acting .Now she is a porn goddess. but i think still she would have been a good actress in tv or film. Jrman

Hello I noticed you removed the picture of Miko Lee. I have also noticed that you're the guy that was using the lukeisback.com website. I scoured that site for a Miko pic, but to no avail. :( I really really really think there should be a pic of her up on Wikipedia, please contribute to Talk:Miko Lee if you have any ideas! Thanx! ^^ Vivid Requiem 11:19, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks a bunch for your help. I had no such luck with Flickr or that Dirty Bob site (there was a pic of her but courtesy of Sin City, not Dirty Bob). I suppose that's why no one else has added one yet! ^^ The pictures are listed as publicity shots however, so I dunno if they'd still be applicable. If you have any ideas, feel free to tell me. Also, I had already tried the other sites from Luke Ford and Bruce Howie. Otherwise, thanks for your help. Vivid Requiem 01:17, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

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

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 16:52, 20 January 2007 (UTC)