Jump to content

User talk:Benjiboi/Archive 39

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 35←Archive 37Archive 38Archive 39Archive 40Archive 41→Archive 45

recreation of File:Fruit machine.jpg

Benjiboi, this image was deleted per a deletion discussion. If you dispute the decision you need to come to the deleting admin (me) and convince me to change my decision, or take the issue to deletion review. - Peripitus (Talk) 21:37, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

I'll be right over. -- Banjeboi 21:39, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
moved from Peripitus's talkpage
Hi, the nom never notified me that the image was up for deletion. The logic was faulty and there was little input. I recreated the whole thing from scratch so please undelete the newest version. I believe I covered the policy issues that cover such an image. Thank you. -- Banjeboi 21:41, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
You need to address the WP:NFCC reason's both used for deletion and all of the other criteria. Specifically two people agreed that the image was, where used, replaceable by a free alternative. As far as I can see a Fruit machine and Fruit (slang) clearly can be illustrated with a created free image, as can Gaydar. This is the point that needs addressing (also the other 9 non-free content criteria - Peripitus (Talk) 21:53, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
You may be reading a different discussion than I. "No possible fair-use claim as we don't have an article on the club. Replaceable non-free image." and the second person simply agreed. There actually is likely no replaceble free image as this was created nearly 20 years ago as a disposable flyer art. The noms rationale seems to feel that since we don't have an article on the club - we actually do - that it therefore should be deleted. We presently have no images of a gaydar or fruit machines. This covers both and it well illustrates fruit (slang). This also seems to be fine under all the other NFCC criteria. Perhaps IAR applies a bit here unless there is policies regarding club flyers that would help guide this more? Also there may be a glitch as I was never notified of the deletion discussion, if I had likely the delete discussion could have worked this out. -- Banjeboi 22:02, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

March 2009

Please do not remove maintenance templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to J.P. Sloane, without resolving the problem that the template refers to, or giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your removal of this template does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Thank you. HrafnTalkStalk(P) 03:55, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

WP:DTTR please and avoid wp:bitey incivility. These don't help. -- Banjeboi 04:07, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm sure you guys are going to stop edit warring over the tags, aren't you? Kevin (talk) 04:28, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

I was simply stunned they were re-added but ... there you go. I'm sure I've learned something but it may be along the lines of how sausages are made. -- Banjeboi 10:36, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Request from Stevencgold to review my new article

HI. I would like you (or someone you would recommend) to review the article I just wrote that is in my user page (Stevencgold). The article is in economics and is titled "EXAMPLES OF MONOPOLISTIC COMPETITION USING AN ECONOMICS SIMULATION GAME FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING". I would like to publish it as part of another article, either a section in the article on "Simulation and games in economics education" or a section in the article "Monopolistic Competition". WHAT DO YOU THINK? I would prefer a reply right in my discussion section, but will check back here as well. THANKS.

done. -- Banjeboi 16:09, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of SDF-1 Macross

SDF-1 Macross has been nominated for deletion and you were involved in a previous AfD about a different article involving the same cartoon series. You are invited to comment on the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SDF-1 Macross. Thank you.--Sloane (talk) 00:43, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, based on my previous interactions with you I think I'll be better off avoiding this unique opportunity for now. -- Banjeboi 00:49, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi

How did I attack anyone? I was merely offering some constructive criticism, which if he has any sense he will take on board. 86.40.217.125 (talk) 14:33, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

This has already been addressed by others on your talkpage, I don't think it needs to be elaborated on further. -- Banjeboi 10:48, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your great work

I just wanted to thank you for going the extra mile to improve Faith in Place. I am highly impressed with your dedication to preserving worthy articles and to standing up to negative commentary in the AfD debates. Pastor Theo (talk) 21:42, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

I second that motion! You do so much to improve the quality of articles and i see how you help a lot of the complicated mergers and contentious debates with such aplomb, i think you set an example of editor skills which is just marvelous! ~ Teledildonix314 ~ Talk ~ 4-1-1 ~ 03:24, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
Very much appreciated, I do what I can! -- Banjeboi 11:13, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost — 9 March 2009

This week, the Wikipedia Signpost published volume 5, issue 10, which includes these articles:

Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 22:49, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Re Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Faith in Place

Just a note that an article whose AfD you commented in is now the topic of a Deletion for Review discussion. Deor (talk) 02:55, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

I've responded there. -- Banjeboi 14:55, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

File:Frontiers Aug 1 2006 cover.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Frontiers Aug 1 2006 cover.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Calliopejen1 (talk) 14:38, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

I've responded there. -- Banjeboi 14:56, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Hello

Staffwaterboy has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. {{subst:if||| {{{message}}} ||subst=subst:}} To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

Enjoy Staffwaterboy Critique Me Guestbook Hate Comments 17:41, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Well thank you! -- Banjeboi 23:09, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Everything Is Under Control

FWIW I can now confirm Everything Is Under Control as a source for Campus Crusade for Cthulhu (page 100, in case you're wondering). However that's just the one RS, so it's probably not worth going to deletion review or anything. Artw (talk) 05:06, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Lol! No problem. Thank you for looking into it. -- Banjeboi 18:14, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

{{ARS Welcome}}

Thanks for the info. I edited the template you posted on my talk - I assumed you wanted the "Added to watchlist" result to include a blue link to the page just watchlisted, not the unclickable red link that was displaying. (There were double "Wikipedia:"s ) Hope that's ok. Tvoz/talk 18:02, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for that, I'm such the wrong person on so many technical things! -- Banjeboi 18:15, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
Trust me - you know more than I do. Tvoz/talk 18:37, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
Lol! That may be a bet you'd lose! -- Banjeboi 18:41, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

ARS Welcome

Thanks! Ikip beat you to the punch; but at least it was a nice template! ☭   мдснєтє тдлкЅТЦФФ 18:17, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

You're very welcome. That's the new project welcoem template inspired by Ikip's, hope it comes in handy and welcome aboard! -- Banjeboi 18:23, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Re: your message about re- (or de-) tagging of Steve Cruz

Hi, just letting you know that I posted a question at WT:LGBT requesting clarification on tagging of these articles, in case you want to cmt. Will not remove any other tags unless consensus actually is there for it. Thx, Outsider80 (talk) 20:52, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Have rsponded there, thankx!

Josh cantspellsurname

Not really, I had a look, I cleaned out the puff so that people can assess it as an article that at least meets our minimum standards from a prose point of view. If there aren't sources for the things that I've fact-tagged - well what's left to construct an article from?--Cameron Scott (talk) 14:00, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

The point is that it's beating a dead horse. It makes you, and by association, Wikipedia look like a bully and I doubt that's what you were aiming for. -- Banjeboi 14:03, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
<shrug>. --Cameron Scott (talk) 14:12, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

"these are fine as refs, unclear why deleted"

FAG has been routinely described as inappropriate as an external link on the EL talk page, but it certainly does not count as a WP:RS, as it is edited by people off the street.

The NYTBlog was spam. It's not owned by the NYT, links to is were mass added, and it's content is almost primarily stolen from other sites without permission.

I hope that clears up any confusion. 21:15, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

I was more concerned about the Find-a-grave which is perfected acceptable. -- Banjeboi 11:19, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Non-monogamous opposite-sex marriage

can you please help expand the article Non-monogamous opposite-sex marriage. Thank you. : ]--cooljuno411 [sign my contact archive] 22:28, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Another noble attempt, at what I'm not sure but it does seem to be more confusing than clarifying and more convoluted than clear. I don't really see a route to cleaning this up, sorry. -- Banjeboi 11:19, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

test for ARS

Hello, Benjiboi. You have been invited to join the Article Rescue Squadron, a collaborative effort to rescue articles from deletion if they can be improved through regular editing. For more information, please visit the project page, where you can >> join << and help rescue articles tagged for deletion and rescue. -- Banjeboi 21:46, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

-- Banjeboi 16:16, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

I just wanted to thank you for providing the source links in Talk:Family Gay. You really went out of your way to do so, and I really appreciate it. Thanks. --Odie5533 (talk) 16:24, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

You're very welcome. There seems to be an effort to hack away at some of those articles so adding sourcing always seems to help and many of those can cite other aspects of the article. -- Banjeboi 00:37, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

TomCat4680 (talk) has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

Yummy! thank you. -- Banjeboi 00:38, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Image source

You know, OTRS tickets are always available if people don't wish to directly admit authorship of images. The process is simple, I think. ▫ JohnnyMrNinja 20:21, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

I hear you but unfortunately I've had some less than ideal experiences with OTRS folks. I won't discourage others from utilizing the resource but I'm less keen on going that route myself. -- Banjeboi 02:40, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Signpost 16 March 2009


The Wikipedia Signpost  — 16 March 2009

Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 22:05, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Math 55

Thanks for adding the link to the AfD discussion on the talk page, I have no idea how to do that. However, along with deleting the AfD which I copied over, you also deleted my additional comments, which were pretty clearly labeled separately. Just wanted to let you know that. Oh, and I posted the above here because I wanted to be sure you saw I had replied to your comment, so sorry if you thought it was bad form. 129.105.34.127 (talk) 14:30, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

No problem, I did see your replies but it's all somewhat moot as the discussion closed. Hopefully more sources will be added so it's readily apparent to all that the article is suitable. If you stick around, may I suggest signing up for an account? It makes communicating a bit easier. -- Banjeboi 14:41, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Happy Saint Patrick’s Day!

On behalf of the Wikipedia:Kindness Campaign, we just want to spread Wikipedia:WikiLove by wishing you a Happy Saint Patrick’s Day! Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 15:28, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you so much! A pint of the green to ye as well! -- Banjeboi 02:50, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

The Motley Moose

THANK you for that Speedy Delete removal. Good God, I don't know what was up that guy's butt! Much wikilove showered in your direction. Ks64q2 (talk) 03:55, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

No problem, if it happens again post to WP:ANI and ask for some more eyes on the situation. -- Banjeboi 03:56, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
Perhaps I could use your help after all, sir. I noticed your voice of support on the AfD page, which I appreciate. But it seems now things are getting out of hand. That same user, Sloane, has now joined several others (most notably "Bali Ultimate") in pouring through other pages I've done, as well as of user "PeterJukes", and I noticed they also went through and completely trashed the main page of The Motley Moose, obstensibly to make it "better" though they removed several of the citations even some of the deletion-voting people found notable- take a look at the history. This is getting completely out of hand. It seems to have escape any semblance of people working for the better of Wikipedia, and it's getting hard for me to stay cool. I created and saved this page, or tried to, in it's first incarnation through my work at WP:BLOG, and I just don't have any clue why there are so many people bound and determined to see it gone, when I've got a backlog of 200+ blog articles I never saw them help us get worked through. For Christ's sake, the entire WP:BLOG backlog could have been done with the amount of time and energy spent on this project- but I asked some of the people to actually contribute, but they declined; apparently, they'd rather than spending hours doing all this crap editing and petty BS If you know a way to get ahold of an admin to perhaps figure out a way to mediate all of this, I don't know. Certainly, there's a better way than this. Any suggestions you can give me on this would be great. Thanks. Ks64q2 (talk) 18:59, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
Sadly I think the assessment that you and or the blog articles are being targeted seems accurate. I would simply userfy any articles likely to be deleted and simply keep improving them until they are better sourced. Likely there are magazine articles already but they would need to be hunted down. Likewise I suggest going slow launching new articles until they are reasonably sourced and assert notability. Whatever their motivations there does seem to be some troubling behaviour regarding removal of content and generally disparaging editors. It's looking more likely than not at least some of this is being coordinated offsite but really even of they didn't someone would likely raise the same concern sooner or later. -- Banjeboi 11:02, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
Sigh. I just don't understand why people are so motivated to work so hard to kill this article. Is there anything else we can do? These people aren't even hiding their biases. For instance, they've loved telling people I reverted the Speedy Delete, without noting that it was two days into the AfD discussion, etc. Disingenuity at it's best; there is absolutely no doubt they are working in bad faith. They went through and edited out specific items that most of the "Keep" people notated, and are trying to focus me in as bad a light as possible to try and kill this, rather than on the merits of the arguments. Ks64q2 (talk) 13:25, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
Yes, it's pretty sad but don't take it personally, even if it seems obviously so. The article can be recreated and relaunched. Just like in life choose how to use your energies. There's some saying too about not wrestling with pigs because you just get dirty and the pig enjoys the battle. In other words it's simply not worth engaging in their battles. Just do work and improve the articles the best you can. Their actions will eventually catch up to them. -- Banjeboi 01:52, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
The Barnstar of Integrity
For consistently displaying integrity above and beyond the call of duty in the line of duty as a Wikipedia editor, and especially for challenging those who espouse disingenuity and employ rhetoric, smoke and mirrors, and personal attacks to further their own aims, I hereby award you this Barnstar of Integrity. Keep up the good work! Ks64sq2 (talk) 04:00, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
OMG! Thank you very much I quite appreciate this! FWIW, we aren't writing and creating for ourselves but for (and who doesn't luv a butfor?) our readers worldwide who deserve the best articles possible. We will diligently strive to offer this in the context of consensus which isn't always pretty! Thank you! -- Banjeboi 09:36, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Francis Lucille

Thank you so much for the valuable guidance. I tried to rewrite the section and also suggested if we can categorize the section under the spiritual teachers [I have added the category to the page]. Thank you again. Appreciate all your help. Amarhindustani (talk) 02:47, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Let's see how the AfD rolls out. Categories need to be supported by sourced content. If you haven't seen WP:Citations yet I encourage you to look at converting any remaining general cites to sourcing specific content. The goal here isn'y just to get past AfD but to wriet a good article for all our readers. This is still possible. -- Banjeboi 09:39, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Benjiboi/Archive_39&oldid=1087862559"