User talk:Benjiboi/Archive 42

Archive 35

←

Archive 40

Archive 41

Archive 42

Archive 43

Archive 44

Archive 45

MSM

A 2007 study reported that two large population surveys found "the majority of gay men had similar numbers of unprotected sexual partners annually as straight men and women." -- Banjeboi

Added. -- Banjeboi 20:23, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Frank

bright, articulate and productive, effective etc. -- Banjeboi

Moved. -- Banjeboi 20:47, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Message prodder

Hello, Benjiboi. You have new messages at Wikipedia talk:Biographies of living persons.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

I've replied there and will try to watch daily even if other drama wells and swells. -- Banjeboi 20:54, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Bindel and the Bisexual Community

Much respect. I am aware of the guidelines but feel that in many cases they unduely peanalize less wealthy Charitable and Advocacy Groups since they allow the same articles when they are simply transfered to a different software medioum. Bialogue is a well-repsected group and I will take this issue to the appropriate committee to plead it's case. In the meantime could I please ask you to see coments at Bindel and the Bisexual Community until then. Thank you CyntWorkStuff (talk) 01:02, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

I understand your view and have commented there. -- Banjeboi 01:19, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

ARS

Yo. I've noticed that the conversations in ARS have been causing you some stress (they've cause me some stress as well). Regardless of what people say there or what happens, I want you to know that I value you as a Wikipedia editor. I've checked out a good amount of your work and I hope that anything that may happen on Wikipedia, doesn't discourage you from continuing to work on the project. I know I need a pick-me-up sometimes and it seems like you might need one right now. I hope this helps. :-) OlYeller^Talktome 03:35, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

I appreciate yes. It's quite mean, IMHO, to visit a wikiproject solely to spread bad faith accusations and spite. I shouldn't take it personally but it does hurt to witness fellow humans acting out like that. -- Banjeboi 20:56, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

A deletion review discussion you may wish to contribute to.

Hi. I've listed two deleted articles at Wikipedia:Deletion_review, following the discussion on "lists of unusual things" which took place earlier in the year. As a contributor to that discussion, you might be interested in expressing an opinion on whether the two deleted articles should be restored. SP-KP (talk) 15:40, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, I've replied there. -- Banjeboi 21:18, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Quote/Unquote

Love me some Colbert. From here:

“ Why can't we go back to the good old days when our government upheld the traditional definition of marriage as being between a man, a woman and a hooker? - Stephen Colbert ”

Indeed sir, indeed. - ℅ ✰ALLST☆R✰ ^echo 20:29, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Brill! -- Banjeboi 21:20, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Not sure where to put this

		The BLP Barnstar
		For all your work on getting to a 'fair' Julie Bindel Biography - Mish

Thank you, if we're lucky we'll also expose a sock farm! -- Banjeboi 21:20, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Julie Bindel

WP:DTTR, or this would be a templated warning, but your repeated edits of the Julie Bindel article are disruptive and very clearly against the consensus when there is an ongoing discussion on the talk page. If you still believe policy is being misinterpreted, please take it to the appropriate noticeboard for further intervention - otherwise, please desist from editing this article until a consensus is reached. ~Zoe O'Connell~ (talk) 22:26, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

As you wish, I'll see what some admins think since you refuse to comply with policies without their intervention. -- Banjeboi 22:29, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Just popping in...

I noticed from the message on AN/I and now the messages on your talk page that you were busy so i wanted to let you know the convo about the Barney Frank lede has started up again and your input would be appreciated. Thank you. Soxwon (talk) 23:22, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

I hope this includes some sourcing ... -- Banjeboi 23:25, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

It doesn't need sourcing, inserting and keeping material is what requires sourcing: WP:BURDEN. Soxwon (talk) 23:28, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

And, lo and behold it has sourcing. In fact each time we find more sources they support what we have while you have provided no sourcing to contradict what is there. Does this sound like a broken record? It should as this has been explained many times. -- Banjeboi 23:31, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

I should mention that I have read and reread your sources, they don't mention the lines taken out. The other two have the objections listed and if you want to talk about it further I'll do it on the page. Soxwon (talk) 23:47, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Well you do have a problem then, a group of editors had no issue coming to consensus that not only were those quotes accurate but also were fairly pulled from each source in question. The consensus discussion handily presents each paragraph from which they came and the quotes themselves are bolded so it's easier to see them in the text. Hope that helps. -- Banjeboi 00:48, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

"in the news"

This story mentions Wone's article, AfD, etc. Do you think it should be added to the talk page? APK is ready for the tourists to leave 11:59, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Definitely. There's a template at WT:ARS and talk:Anderson Cooper that can be used, I'll do it if no one beats me there. -- Banjeboi 20:57, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

I added it, but the layout isn't the same as Talk:Anderson Cooper. I can't figure out what's wrong and APK has been cussing like a motherfuckin, goddamn, son of a faggot bitch after each "preview" attempt. APK is irritated. Can you tell? Maybe you can figure out my copy & paste error. APK is ready for the tourists to leave 21:41, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

This is fixed I believe. -- Banjeboi 23:56, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Good faith on Barney Frank

You and the other editor have each tonight accused the other of stonewalling. Please, I am asking you both to refain from disparaging the other. LadyofShalott 03:50, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Lol! I will try, even in the unbalanced evidence otherwise I will look to the light. Thank you for the reminder. -- Banjeboi 09:55, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

In looking further I clarified my comment. I didn't mean Soxwon was stonewalling, he's claimed myself and others are. For clarity I do think they're arguing and wikilawyering (badly) but have tried to be compassionate in my ongoing frustartion with this "help". -- Banjeboi 11:28, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

The point is that terms like stonewalling, wikilawyering, etc. are not helpful (whether true or not). Using them naturally makes the other party angry but does not advance the article. LadyofShalott 13:13, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Duly noted however there is a point where we should be clear and direct. This editor's behaviours there, in the footsteps of ChildofMidnight - there also a Nicholas.Tan (spelling?) - give every impression of enmity against Frank and a lack of willingness to offer anything to dispute what we have. I've even found more sources to support what is there but I chose those quotes a while ago as being pretty clear why he is respected and rather neutral - a leader on civil rights issues isn't terribly outlandish. -- Banjeboi 00:06, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Regarding this revert of yours, it wasn't under the "Early life" section. It was under the "Career" section, which IMHO, that's where it should be instead of the lede because it does basically speak about his career. - ℅ ✰ALLST☆R✰ ^echo 10:38, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, my summary edit page put that under "Early life". I stand by the assertion that information was sought out and added by me to help assert his notability in the lede and still see that content as addressing his notability. In theory we could strip the entire lede and put all of it in the career section but we have a lede for a reason and should aim to get to the point why someone is notable. The lede should be a greatest hits of sorts to tempt the reader into digging deeper. I'm opposed to all efforts to neutering this information. The more I read about Frank the more impressed I am. I am proid to have anyone as smart and adept as him helping the US dig out of major problems and wish all politicians could be as talented and self-sacrificing. -- Banjeboi 11:05, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Re: Talk:Julie Bindel

I have replied at my talk page. CIreland (talk) 14:05, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

I've responded there as well. -- Banjeboi 00:11, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Fun times

My first edit on a foreign Wikipedia.. the Arabic Wikipedia - on the Homosexuality article. Fun times! - ℅ ✰ALLST☆R✰ ^echo 07:11, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Oh my, perhaps now you'll be insulted in even more languages! LOL! We do have that list for gay in other languages - it may help. -- Banjeboi 00:20, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

New version Barney Frank

Alright, how about we try to compromise? I've worked on the wording a bit. Could you at least give it a chance? Soxwon (talk) 13:30, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

I appreciate your eagerness to change what we have but agree with the other editor that this was a step in the wrong direction, for instance, replacing brightest and most energetic defenders of civil rights issues with has emerged as one of the nation's top defenders of gay and civil rights is misleading and only serves to paint him as a gay rights activist which is false, he does much more than that. First gay rights are civil rights so that's poor gramatically, secondly it would be LGBT civil rights which are, after all, still civil rights. It would also be unsurprising that he was a leader in LGBT rights since we earlier spoke of his being one of teh few out LGBT Representatives. If he were a major opponent of LGBT rights - that would be interesting and may belong in the lede. -- Banjeboi 00:41, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

RE David Archuleta AI Chart

I asked you a question on that discussion page but since I don't know if you are going back there I will ask here and the question was "do you think people can just check the AI page if they are interested in knowing if a contestant was safe or in the bottom three?" Garynine (talk) 15:26, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

I'll respond there to keep the discussion with the article. -- Banjeboi 00:42, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

RfC Collect

Could you give your impressions of Collect at his RfC based on your interaction with him at Rick Warren (include other if there is any thnx). The RfC is here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Collect Soxwon (talk) 16:06, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Yikes. Too much for me to offer anything new there I'm afraid. From my limited experience, they have been problematic but not a lot more than some of the other folks who share a US-centric conservative POV. I'm not sure what would "fix" anything except awarning to avoid the apperance of incivility and gaming knowing they are tap-dancing on the line and Wikipedia is not a battleground. -- Banjeboi 01:13, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost: 20 April 2009

• Book reviews: Reviews of The Wikipedia Revolution
• Wikipedia by numbers: Wikipedia's coverage and conflicts quantified
• News and notes: New program officer, survey results, and more
• Dispatches: Valued pictures
• WikiProject report: WikiProject Film
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe

Delivered by SoxBot II (talk) at 18:07, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Re: your DYK idea at WT:ARS#Please save Jim Brandstatter

Hi about that DYK idea you had yesterday about Jim Brandstatter, I'd really appreciate your input on my latest post at the above thread. Thanks. TomCat4680 (talk) 20:58, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

It's already been addressed and posted at DYK - woo hoo! -- Banjeboi 00:18, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi what do you mean by it may need to be moved though? TomCat4680 (talk) 11:10, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

I've put a note at the DYK nom and those folks know the ins and outs, because it was in AfD it may need to be moved to 19 April. No worries though. -- Banjeboi 15:15, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Male prostitution

Benji, see this addition. I don't think this qualifies as prostitution, since there is no contact, rather it seems to be pornography. Models appear on webcam "private shows" (often collecting funds via Paypal) as well as through websites that collect fees. Thoughts? — Becksguy (talk) 11:03, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

It's a different form but still in the prostitution arena although legally it varies and arguably is seen as a gateway to contact. It is still engaging in sexual activity for compensation and is becoming much more sophisticated and varied with webcams being so prolific and user-friendly. Eventually everything on the internet is used for sex so if a girl's gotta pay rent there's a sugar daddy to help. -- Banjeboi 15:25, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Watchmen on the Walls

User:LadyofShalott and I spent some time using the talkpage to achieve consensus on changes that were made. Please use the same method.  EJNOGARB  00:41, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

"I will delete ____ in X days unless someone stops me" is an odd way of building anything including consensus. And WP:BRD is also consensus. You were bold and deleted and i essentially reverted although I addressed the concern that it was an undue quote - mainly, IMHO because it didn't need to be a lengthy quote. That SPLC article, by the way, pulls from many other sources and has more to offer that the little that we are currently using. -- Banjeboi 00:45, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Consensus was built by the slow process of suggestion and acceptance. Please use the talkpage to discuss such changes, as others have done.  EJNOGARB  00:48, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Your interpretation of events is indeed interesting, I could rudely term it revisionistic or mythologizing but let's just agree we disagree. Within hours of expressing the interest in deleting the material you state here "Let's at least delete the quote, then." Less than an hour later you do so. I'm fine with your desire to remove content you don't like but please don't act on it and pretend there was more of a discussion/consensus or agreement to do so then there was. Soft-peddling hate groups does a disservice to them, those they hate and the Christians who don't want to be associated with them. Everyone is better off if we are clear who these extremists are and what they are about. Personally I may have wanted to lob a bag of excrement at quite a few folks whom I disagree with but I never have but these upstanding folks did. -- Banjeboi 01:33, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Big Pimpin'

		ALLST☆Recho's Spinner/Big Pimpin' Barnstar
		I hereby award you the Spinner/Big Pimpin' Barnstar for the awesome edit you made to the Troll (gay slang) article! - ℅ ✰ALLST☆R✰ echo 01:22, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Lol! And the cute troll is smiling too! Thank you so much! I've seen your COM drama and just amaze at it all. Keep the faith and the good work going - you're a machine after all! -- Banjeboi 01:35, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Epitaph

That Matlovich epitaph is brilliant. Did he, in contemplation of his own death, pen it?Ordinary Person (talk) 06:51, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Actually I think it was a part of his coming out and dealing with what he saw as hypocrisy with the Don't Ask Don't Tell policies against openly LGB members serving in the military. -- Banjeboi 06:58, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Mid-April flup - Igor Kurchatov

Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Military_history#Igor_Kurchatov. -- Banjeboi

done. -- Banjeboi 00:17, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Talk:Polari

clean-up, archive,etc. -- Banjeboi

Done. -- Banjeboi 00:29, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Igor Kurchatov

Hey, cheers for the reminder. I have an MA essay to finish writing today (such a pain) then I'll see what I can do! Skinny87 (talk) 09:33, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

no rush, no worries, just a poke reminder! -- Banjeboi 02:17, 24 April 2009 (UTC)