Jump to content

User talk:Tabercil/Archive 16

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


The Signpost: 22 November 2010

Restoration of Breanne Benson

I would like to ask to to move that article from my user space back to main article space. Morbidthoughts has apparently recreated it already by copy/paste but I see no point to lose the history here especially to prevent to re-do some mistakes and since that was the reason to actually userfy it. I don't think he wouldn't mind and already informated him on his talk page. The actress is now nominated for two awards for 2011 the nomination of 2005. Moreover she is will be Penthouse Pet of the Month (January) so I think that is enough to confirm notability. Or has that article to be taken to a DRV? Testales (talk) 05:49, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Well, the net effect is the same either way - her article is now present again. The only difference I can see if that he's (rightly I think) knocked the information from the Hustler article out. I'll make the same change in yours then move it. Tabercil (talk) 15:15, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
While you're at it, can you unsalt and restore Rachel Roxxx's article since she's added 3 more AVN noms this year? Morbidthoughts (talk) 15:22, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
Done as well. Tabercil (talk) 15:24, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
Well, I had her read over the article initially and she confirmed the now removed facts also in several live chats even though they may not serve as good source. So this information was correct, there was no risk to falsely claim something critical about the subject and therefore I had let it where it was. The actual main point here (beside the advantages of a complete history) was frankly Morbidthoughts blatant ignorance of the work that I had put into that article and his action to simply to re-create it by copy/paste is furthermore clearly contrary to the policies and procedures of Wikipedia, as can be read here "Do not move or rename a page by copying/pasting its content, because doing so fragments the edit history. (Wikipedia's copyright license requires acknowledgement of all contributors, and editors continue to hold copyright on their contributions unless they specifically give up this right. Hence it is required that edit histories be preserved for all major contributions until the normal copyright expires.). So thank you very much again for fixing that. Moreover let me add that you know that for WP:P* BLPs it is especially difficult to find sources that everbody would accept as reliable, even the AVN site gets regulary attacked as beeing promotional and therefore not acceptable as RS (just recently again, just see the discussions arround Rachel Roxxx and the related notability talk page). Let me also - without any specific implications - mention that Morbidthoughts actually has far more options to verify some facts than me if he only wants to since he is working for a known secondary source (IAFD). So I hope you can understand my point of view to this. Testales (talk) 16:49, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
Well toss up the links to those live chats where she makes mention of the information and we can judge how reliable the sources are.
If you mean that really serious, what I remember right now is that she confirmed it in the recorded live chats on Naughty America, I think it was either in Nurse3 or Gym3, I could check that out exactly but unfortunately I doubt that this accepted as source on Wikipedia, isn't it? Anyway, just for clarification, her usual chats there were like 30 minutes chat, mainly answering questions plus some teasing/flashing and only like 10 minutes full sexual activity. They are also only available in the members section. Nevertheless Naughty America seems to be notable enough to deserve an own article on Wikipedia. Testales (talk) 17:21, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
Hey Testales, sorry about the destruction of the article history. I did not know that I could have just moved your article from its userspace. About the Hustler article, I assume that you have the issue and all assertions of her early life came from there. However, as others have pointed out, many of the pictorials have fictitious biographies. We can not go and try to verify on a case by case basis with the subject whether it's true or not. If we have to do that, then the source does not have a reputation for fact checking. Yes, the reliability of a source is sometimes gauged in the context of how it is used; like using the howard stern site to demonstrate that someone appeared on the howard stern show. However using a magazine that has a history of fictional biographies for its pictorial models is not appropriate to establish biographical information about the model. Morbidthoughts (talk) 17:56, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
I can hardly believe that you don't know what the intention of userfication is, you are an experienced editor and there was also no reason for such haste. You did that hours if not minutes after that nominations appeared on their site. Moreover I think it's a matter of principle to give at least some credit when using the work of others, even if nobody "owns" an article. That was what made me really somewhat upset. I can not "fight" over what you have removed, the argument of the pictorials beeing not really a reliable source is not easy to defeat and that was also one reason that I had in mind when I wrote my little request on your talk page. But even if the rules are stronger when it comes to claims on BLPs, I don't think it was that critical that it had to be removed at all costs, especially as I made sure that this is alright. In the end you can always claim that a source has promotional interessts or that the listed fact is not really important and seen from a extreme position that is even correct. But in this case we would only have stubs at WP:P* and finally it's actually some additional background information that makes an article interessting, I just mention the changes in visual appearance here which are actually indeed of interesst for recognition purposes. I have already some more prepared, just not included yet. We might discuss that later if you really have a constructive interesst here. So far I can only thank Tabercil again who guided my through userfication, helped like when it came to the G4's and even answered questions via email. Testales (talk) 18:32, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
Why would you assume that I knew what the intention of userfication beyond the obvious keeping a copy of the article so that a person can continue working on it? I do not have any experience with it since I'm not an admin to userfy a deleted article nor have I had to improve an article in my personal space to meet notability guidelines. My experience has been creating articles from scratch, using appropriate sources on the fly and not worrying about gaps in the article when there are a lack of sources. Pornography is an industry covered by few independent reliable sources, but we don't compromise standards to be completists. So I don't appreciate that your insinuation that my contributions/interests are not constructive. Morbidthoughts (talk) 19:28, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
Ok, let's stop that here, it leads to nothing good, though I wonder how you would have felt in my situation, what impression you may have gotten. I'll try to contribute the one or other detail in the next time and we will see how it turns out. I would be glad if you do the same (adding) instead of only removing, whether it may appropriate or not, as the first one is much more diffcult and you proably have much better means to get information due to the contacts you seem to have. Testales (talk) 21:27, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Agreed. Let's chalk this up to miscommunication on both sides and leave it at that. Please. As for the live chats you mentioned in Nurse3 or such, pass the links along just the same... I can take a look and figure out their context to see if they might be considered useful. Tabercil (talk) 02:29, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Hitomi Kobayashi

Note that not only has the fair use image in the BLP infobox been removed (currently approved practice, I believe, though the image adhered to "policy" when it was originally uploaded), now fair use images of film posters/video covers in sections on those films/videos have been removed as "decorative", even though they still fit current "policy" (or at least "policy" last I checked). Unless all film posters are removed from all articles on films, this is a biased removal. Not that I give a fuck, of course, because I've seen this kind of shit go on and on and on here, and it is one of the reasons I have come to the realisation that it is a complete waste of time to contribute content here. Wikipedia is only a place to chat and troll. I just mention this to you because you seem to be one of the few Admins who does seem to give a fuck, occasionally. Dekkappai (talk) 01:55, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

I do think we're too strict in terms of when we can use fair use material, but I also know I can stick a finger in the air and get a clear sense of where the larger consensus is going. Tabercil (talk) 13:32, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 November 2010

The Signpost: 6 December 2010

Natasha Yi

Actually, the user you reverted and warned was undoing yet another attempt by an IP to change her birthday to 1981. The "ask men" reference states 1979. You may want to remove the warning. AniMate 00:26, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

You're right and done. Thanks for the catch. Tabercil (talk) 00:37, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
The only reason I caught it was because I almost did the exact same thing, but decided to check because that's back and forth has been going on for so long. Next time it happens, I'll either semi-protect the article or add it to pending changes. AniMate 01:00, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Your email

I've only just seen it because I was in bed when you sent it, but I've just replied if you still need a hand. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:00, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Re:

Sorry, ok!--Johnny Freak (talk) 23:32, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

It's just that not every image change you've made has been a good one - for instance, WTF were you thinking when you did the Tiffany Mynx one just now?? Tabercil (talk) 23:36, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
I wanted to remove only the nudity with another pic more suitable.--Johnny Freak (talk) 23:43, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
"Nudity"?? The Tiffany Mynx image is her wearing a bustier - there's skin, but no nudity. Tabercil (talk) 03:30, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Tabercil, you can't go mark his opinion as what is a better picture as vandalism. [1] I agree with some of his choices like Tory Lane and Ashton Moore. Morbidthoughts (talk) 00:39, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

The difference in quality between the two images is stark, and in my opinion constitutes a definite degradation. Tabercil (talk) 03:30, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
Y'know what, on second thought, I've had it with all this image shuffling and screwing around. We've lost Toglenn over it - he sent me an email saying that he's not gonna contribute anymore if his images are removed (and they're used beyond the porn star sections, e.g. Hayden Panettiere). So I'm just gonna walk away from the P* stuff as well. There are other sections and topics on Wikipedia I'm interested in. Tabercil (talk) 03:36, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
No loss to me if he takes his ball and goes home. His actions had a deterrent effect on other users with the same rationale. Why would anyone donate a "non-revocable" license (for everyone) to an image only for someone else to replace it with his own image? He's a primadona in person so I don't take his threat seriously. Morbidthoughts (talk) 08:22, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
Well at least he's contributing images to Wikipedia - I checked and he's got at least 500 images on Commons. Should I do the same to see how many there which you've contributed Morbid?? Tabercil (talk) 12:19, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
Let me apparently be the first to tell you that wikipedia is not just about images. I'm not going to go placate his ego. Morbidthoughts (talk) 15:59, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
Let me expand on this. You may remember that I once had a standing offer to donate any image from my Flickr on my profile, but all I kept getting were requests to replace images that I felt were perfectly adequate on wikipedia, especially just for identification purposes in an infobox. I could easily go and make it a point to replace every image of his that I felt was inferior to mine, but I recognise the disruptive impact it would have on the project. Morbidthoughts (talk) 16:17, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
Well you'll probably have to step up for any new articles then, as I'm not aware of any source offhand. Remember, Toglenn's out and I'm not aware of anyone on Flickr who now routinely uploads with Wiki-friendly licensing from the get-go (Jimi has changed his license for the most recent images, and I'm not about to chase on that). Tabercil (talk) 16:24, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
Since I am on friendly terms with Jimi, I'll ask him about the change although I suspect he wasn't happy with essentially giving a license to everyone to do as they please with his images. Anime Nut (Alan from Chicago) has always been gracious to donate images when asked. Morbidthoughts (talk) 16:34, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
Jimi has reset his flickr license to the appropriate CC settings. Morbidthoughts (talk) 17:33, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Gabriella Wilde

Hi, I undid your undoing of my correction to the Gabriella Wilde page; as my previous comment to the image removal stated, the person pictured is not Gabriella Wilde. That's why the file was renamed on Commons as well. (All this has been done per OTRS - personally, I have no knowledge about the subject.) Asav (talk) 01:20, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 13 December 2010

Danica Dillan page

Hi Tabercil.My english is bad.I saw page Dana Vespoli. Help me please to make Danica Dillan page -http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danica_Dillan To me don't allow to place a photo.I can't correctly issue the license on Photo. Here the reference-http://www.flickr.com/photos/punkla/4988126133/ or http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4087/4988126133_1a13f5fa4a_z.jpg Or on your discretionI will be grateful.Please help.Thx. Johnsmith877 (talk) 22:32, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Well you have two problems... the first is that the actress in question may not be notable by Wikipedia standards. You would be well advised to read WP:BIO for more information on that topic. The other problem is the image you're wanting to add to it is tagged as being copyrighted on Flickr and we don't allow those images on to Wikipedia. You'd either have to ask the Flickr account holder to change the license, or find a different image which does have Wiki-friendly licensing. Tabercil (talk) 21:54, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
Thanks you Tabercil.I got it...I will try to make in Russian Dana Vespoli...

And after a while and Danica.Good luck.Thx.Johnsmith877 (talk) 11:32, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Robin Bain images

Dear Tabercil,

Please accept my apologies for the misunderstanding regarding Robin Bain images.

I have gone through the proper channels and have obtained a “declaration of consent” from the photographer of the photo I would like to post for Ms. Bain. The license would be: Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported license. I am emailing the declaration to: permissions-commonswikimedia.org in order to post this more recent and representative photo of Robin Bain with OTRS consent.

I wanted to make you aware before I posted the photo and I can also forward the email from the photographer directly to you to confirm authenticity as I am making every effort to do this correctly and not run into any additional issues.

Can you please advise me if I am doing this right this time around?

Thank you in advance for your help and guidance in this situation.

Sincerely. Jhillx01 (talk) 21:26, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

If it's been kicked along to OTRS, then it's up to them to process and approve. Once that happens I have no problems with changing the lead image. Tabercil (talk) 04:08, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your quick response. I'm going to post the new photo in the commons area today and label with OTRS pending, until it is approved. Jhillx01 (talk) 18:07, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Please see this link for uploaded file. An "permissions" email was sent to OTRS today. Can you let me know if everything looks to be okay so far? Thanks for your help. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Robin-Bain-photos.png Jhillx01 (talk) 23:59, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Offhand, I think you should've uploaded it to Commons, and send the email to the OTRS queue for there... that way the image can be used on all languages and not just English. As it is, I'm going to wait for the OTRS ticket to get attached to it before adding it to Robin's article. Tabercil (talk) 00:02, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

The OTRS ticket has been attached and the photo was uploaded to Commons. Thank you for your help and patience with this. Jhillx01 (talk) 15:52, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Danica Dillan(2) page

Hello again Tabercil. Excuse for troubling. The "demon" Morbidthoughts:) wants to remove page of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danica_Dillan Look please at my arguments http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Danica_Dillan and If it probably tell to steam of words in Page protection Danica Dillan. In advance thanks for the help.Johnsmith877 (talk) 22:33, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Actually, I kinda agree with Morbidthoughts on this... as I said before, Danica has notability issues. Tabercil (talk) 22:56, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

I've got it.Ths.Johnsmith877 (talk) 09:14, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 December 2010

Cathy Barry

The reason I keep changing her birthday to 1967 is that is when she was born. I have listed my source and if you bothered to look at the screengrab you will see that she is a director of Pumpkin Films. Do your seriously believe there are two Cathy Barrys who are directors of Pumpkin Films? One born in 1967 and one in 1973???

I have explained what Companies House is. I am surprised no amazed that anyone who would claim to be an "editor" or authority to change other's edits would be unaware of this organisation.

The sites for Companies House and 192.com which lists every company director are both subscription-based, which is why I took a screengrab to use.

Finally, who on earth would want to fake a tiff from an information-based website and why? What possible benefit would there to me????

(----) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shylocksboy (talk • contribs) 01:13, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Go to www.192.com (https://corporate.192.com/trace/index.cfm#); pay the subscription fee and then search for "Cathy Barry Bristol" and you will find her details. It's illegal to provide misleading information regarding company directors. It's not a porn site which is the so-called "verifiable" source that you are using. I can't sign this using tildes cos I don't have any on my keyboard.Only 1-0, A-Z and the following characters ¡€#¢∞§¶•ªºº–≠œ∑´®†¥¨^øπ“‘åß∂ƒ©˙∆˚¬…æ«Ω`≈ç√∫~µ≤≥÷ Shylocksboy — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shylocksboy (talk • contribs) 01:41, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Hmm... behind a paywall - that explains things. Kinda breaks WP:V but I think we can use it as an alternate statement. Can you post as much of the full page as possible, in JPG format? Tabercil (talk) 02:53, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

I certainly can but it will reveal her home address. That's why I cropped the page... Shylocksboy — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shylocksboy (talk • contribs) 03:17, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

k. Tabercil (talk) 03:43, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Hello I have done a screengrab of the entire 192.com page which I can post if you wish. My reluctance to do so is that it contains her home address and names of her husband (not a problem as such since he produces most of her films) but her sons' names as well. I leave it to your discretion. --Shylocksboy (talk) 18:25, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Toss it to me via email - I can redact prior to posting. Tabercil (talk) 20:55, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, just seen this. What's your email? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shylocksboy (talk • contribs) 19:31, 28 December 2010 (UTC) Just look to the left - you'll see "Email this user". Just click through and you'll be able to send me one... Tabercil (talk) 01:04, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 December 2010


Victoria Silvstedt 27 December 2010

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Victoria_Silvstedt

Dear Tabercil, I'm glad an administrator take part to this controversy.

Actually, I'm a french author currently writing about the reliabilty of the infortion on the web (I would be pleased to provide you with more detail out of this forum if necessary). I've recently came on this page promoting a false allegation (please read the details http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Victoria_Silvstedt and the history of the page).

Actually this seems to be a typical case of bombing a false vanity news on many sites, tring to build an usurpated fame. This way is mre and more used by people magazine and web fan club.

The best evidence I can provide You with the actual facts are the files of the official ski federation who never ever recorded any facts about the person cocerned.

Maybe this person deserve her fame for other remarkable facts, but we really ust be carefull not to promote false information

Wishing you the best arbitration

With Kind regards Jean--92.138.235.203 (talk) 16:47, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 3 January 2011

Error on page?

File:TwoWomenTiedTogether.png The photo was not at the address as listed in the File history: (move approved by: User:Tabercil This image was moved from File:LesbiansTiedTogether.png {{Information |Description= Two women tied to each other |Source= dsc_0936.jpg |Date=June 05, 2008 at). I found it here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/sparr0/2898091900/.

I didn't know how else to send this note and even if it matters, so I hope I'm on the right track. I included my email for Tabercil's eyes only "dsorge AT cal DOT net" Please remove it if you post this and if there is another way to comment can you tell me how? Thanks David David at Wiki (talk) 08:52, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure what the original question was... the image is located at said Flickr webpage, the move information stated is simply because there was no indication given anywhere that the two women were indeed lesbians. What's you concern??

Nomination of Rebecca Cardon for deletion

The article Rebecca Cardon is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rebecca Cardon (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 20:38, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Good work

Thanks for tracking down the copyvio on the crime scene photos. Kelly hi! 22:08, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

As I said, I'd been looking through trying to find stuff for the article so I recognized them instantly. I'd written to a couple of the accounts asking for license changes to some of the relevant crime scene images, so with luck we'll get similar for use on the article. Tabercil (talk) 22:11, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 10 January 2011

Undeletion request

A random request...could you please restore Constitutive criminology?Smallman12q (talk) 13:45, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Actually on checking the deleted article, there's nothing there. It's just an unsourced sentence with BLP issues. You'd probably be best off recreating from scratch. Tabercil (talk) 16:50, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
Just wanted to make sure. Thanks.Smallman12q (talk) 13:08, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

User Fark65464

Who is Martin H

Tabercil block User Gohe007 reason vandalism —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.236.131.120 (talk) 19:46, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Martin H is an admin on Commons, same as me. If you've tangled with him, take it up with him. As for Gohe007, ummm... no. Read WP:OWN for why. Tabercil (talk) 19:54, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
And having realized you're THAT Fark, from this report, I'm not about to touch your request with a 10 foot pole. You're blocked there for a reason dude. Tabercil (talk) 20:16, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 17 January 2011

User : Pritsindhar

User:Pritsindhar is reverting it again and again on Sunny Leone page, I have already revrted it 2 times, hope u can do it now.Winston786 (talk) 13:59, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Reverted and dropped a 3RR warning on him. If he reverts again, report him at WP:AIV. I'm at work now but I'll try and keep an eye on the article... Tabercil (talk) 14:19, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for File:Linda_Wong.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Linda_Wong.jpg. Unfortunately, I think that you have not provided a proper rationale for using this image under "fair use". Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page. Note that the image description page must include the exact name or a link to each article the image is used in and a separate rationale for each one. (If a link is used, automated processes may improperly add the related tag to the image. Please change the fair use template to refer to the exact name, if you see this warning.)

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted after seven days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. Thank you. Closedmouth (talk) 08:03, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 January 2011

The Signpost: 31 January 2011

Steve Grooby

Thanks for the info - I was wondering about the change and definitely can't see you involved in indiscriminate editing. :) Cherryblossom1982 (talk) 19:23, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 21 February 2011

The Signpost: 28 February 2011

Start12113213

User Start 1213213 hello Tabercil are you admins from commos Start12113213 (talk) 11:18, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Yes I am... what's your question? Tabercil (talk) 22:33, 2 March 2011 (UTC)


user Start 1213213 Please Tabercil Stop Blocked My 94.236.131.36 (talk) 08:18, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

?? I need more details than that before I can see if I can do anything... What's the blocked account name? Tabercil (talk) 17:40, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

User Start12113213 User Orangesms blocked reason —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.236.131.36 (talk) 19:22, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

User:Orangesms on EN does not show as blocked... Tabercil (talk) 19:46, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
Ah sorry... looked in the wrong spot. You're blocked on Commons and with good cause as someone who's been uploading images that were copyright violations (sockpuppet of Fark). Tabercil (talk) 21:44, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 7 March 2011

Blocked since december for images upload

Hello,

I am forbidden to upload pictures since December 2010. Could it be that you remove the blockage.

I did not quite use this feature of wikipedia because I'm French and I do not understand how to use the image loading. I'll be careful next time.

I contribute regularly to wikipedia, I need to reuse this function again.

My ID is # 44927.

Thank you - — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jimmy Peters (talk • contribs) 05:49, March 11, 2011

I'll unblock you per your request, but I do suggest you read Commons:FAQ before you start uploading again. Any sign of further uploads of copyrighted materials will simply get you reblocked permanently. And if you have any questions about whether something can be uploaded, ask first. Tabercil (talk) 13:49, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 14 March 2011

The Signpost: 21 March 2011

Service award level

There has been a major revision of the the Service Awards: the edit requirements for the higher levels have been greatly reduced, to make them reasonably attainable.

Because of this, your Service Award level has been changed, and you are now eligible for a higher level. I have taken the liberty of updating your award on your user page.

Herostratus (talk) 16:31, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Actuall, you use Template:service awards which automatically shows the correct level based on input of start time and number of edits. But while I was here updating people, I took the liberty of updating your edit count param of this template based on this, and so you bump up to the next level. Herostratus (talk) 16:31, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Ah, thank you for that. <G> Tabercil (talk) 22:24, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Asia Carrera

Hi. Thanks for pointing that out to me. However, now, when I click on that ref, I get a 404 message. Any ideas? Nightscream (talk) 02:26, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

There's a stray character in the URL - I've removed it and it should now work. Tabercil (talk) 12:34, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 March 2011

The Signpost: 4 April 2011

The Signpost: 11 April 2011

Talk:Demi Lovato

I noticed your recent edit there. I went through and cleaned out more of the cut-and-paste complaints about the awards. Since I'm the evil person that cleaned out the award table in the first place, I'm probably prohibited from taking action. Even if I wasn't, I'm not sure exactly what I would do, but I certainly think the whining is somewhere near disruptive, if it hasn't already crossed the line. Consider this an invite to take action if you think it is appropriate.—Kww(talk) 23:33, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

It's irritating but it's not at the point where I'd personally say it's over the line. Yet. I'll keep an eye on it and act if the whining continues... Tabercil (talk) 04:30, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Chris Brown (American entertainer)

Hello, Tabercil. As someone who edits/looks after articles of musical artists, would you mind weighing in on the Talk:Chris Brown (American singer)#section 1.4 needs to be reWritten : 2008–09: Graffiti album and domestic violence case discussion? It's about whether or not Brown's domestic violence case should be divided into its own section. We desperately need other editors weighing in on the matter. Flyer22 (talk) 21:07, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 April 2011

The Signpost: 25 April 2011

Nadia Almada

The problem is not the inclusion but the weight and prominence you're giving her former name. There was an agreement some time ago that the application of the BLP policy necessitated not putting former names that the person was never publicly known by in lead sections or infoboxes. Rebecca (talk) 03:38, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

So we don't place it in the infobox. It's still should be in the main text. Tabercil (talk) 04:02, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 2 May 2011

Kelly Wearstler

Just thought I'd point this out to you: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard#Kelly Wearstler. --Dismas|(talk) 18:02, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks... chiming in now. Tabercil (talk) 19:58, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 9 May 2011

Notable / Non-notable??

Noob question... I noticed you deleted the entry for a pornographic actress by the name of Cody Lane. There are countless entries for pornographic actresses. What determines whether or not they are "notable"? 70.125.141.51 (talk) 01:51, 12 May 2011 (UTC) Sasquatch

Sorry for butting in but there are a number of guidelines a person can qualify as "notable" under such as WP:GNG but for porn stars, there is WP:PORNBIO. Dismas|(talk) 03:25, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Question

Is User:TabercilPorn related to you? If not, then something odd is going on over at my talk page; someone is using the names User:TabercilPorn and User:Mike south atlanta, and I note that Mike South was created by you a long time back. --Floquenbeam (talk) 04:59, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Nope - I have no other ID on Wikipedia. In fact Tabercil is (as far as I know) a unique word that specifically points to me, as I've never found any Google results for "Tabercil" that weren't about me. I'm personally tempted to block TabercilPorn on impersonation grounds alone... Tabercil (talk) 12:21, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
I was leaning that direction myself; I too couldn't find anything on Google that wasn't either a WMF page related to you, or a mirror/content scraper/etc. If Tabercil isn't a company, and you basically created the word, then considering your editing area I don't see how that name can be anything other than an impersonation or a troll. Since he's moved on to another name, I'm going to block User:TabercilPorn for username issues. Which brings me to his other username, User:Mike south atlanta, a problematic username when the user is trying to convince me that Mike South's blog is a reliable source. Would you agree that this is also pretty much a different type of "impersonation", even if he says he isn't actually named Mike South? Add to that the "I use three accounts to protect my privacy" comment, and I think we have a potential problem. I'm glad to see you're taking a look at Monika Star; I know basically nothing about porn star article standards, and couldn't find anything obviously wrong with it (unlike his first, now deleted, article). So I can't tell if this is more a username issue, or a trolling issue, or a competence issue. --Floquenbeam (talk) 12:55, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
I'd say he is intending to trade in Mike South's profile within the porn biz to add heft to his own edits, so he needs to choose a new name. I mean, if his handle was "Mike Smith Fan" or such that'd be a different story but "Mike Smith Atlanta" is too close to the existing person for comfort given the probable area of editing. As for Monika Star... the key thing I'd want to do is to double-check the noms to make sure that she was indeed up for those awards as they'd qualify her under WP:PORNBIO and WP:ANYBIO guidelines. I'll drop a note on User:Dismas's talk page asking if he can't verify the noms (I'm at work right now so that's not possible). Tabercil (talk) 14:09, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Monika Star

I've put it up for AFD. Dismas|(talk) 21:02, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Elizabeth Mitchell Picture

I am not very good with Wikipedia and I know you have much more experience than me. The picture of Elizabeth Mitchell is very unflattering and I see you have discussed her picture before some time ago. I was wondering if you had time to perhaps change the picture to a photo from Music Fashion Magazine because I believe they are more accurate photos of her. Thank you Minilost27. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Minilost27 (talk • contribs) 08:07, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

We can only use photos that are free use - I strongly suspect the Music Fashion Magazine image is copyrighted and thus not usable. Tabercil (talk) 03:53, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 May 2011

The Signpost: 23 May 2011

Fark

User Fark333 hi tabercil look this image http://www.flickr.com/photos/animenut/2598474640/ Fark333333 (talk) 21:37, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Sorry - license for that image is not Wikipedia friendly. Tabercil (talk) 22:28, 27 May 2011 (UTC)


User fark33333 hi tabercil look this page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011–12_Premier_League — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fark333333 (talk • contribs) 17:48, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Umm... why? Tabercil (talk) 21:33, 30 May 2011 (UTC)


Hello tabercil what is this If you do not provide suitable license and source information, your upload will be deleted without further notice. Thank you for your understanding. Upload warning: You cannot edit because your account is locked Fark333333 (talk) 16:17, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

It means you can't make any uploads to Wikipedia, and you saw that message when you were blocked by Courcelles for uploading images which we can't host. Read this for a better understanding and do take heed of it. Next time you're blocked (which will likely happen if you don't get a clue), it'll likely be permanent. And a side note: that block will be against the person behind the account, not the account proper. Tabercil (talk) 16:33, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

USERFARK333 tabercil one question what is this

  • Start of block: 13:58, 15 November 2010
   * Expiry of block: infinite
   * Intended blockee: Fark333333  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fark333333 (talk • contribs) 16:39, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

As I said, you've blocked - permanently. Goodbye. Tabercil (talk) 22:11, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 May 2011

Talkback

Hello, Tabercil. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:ABG1997.
Message added 10:30, 1 June 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

FYI - just in case you come across any more of his socks ;) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:30, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 6 June 2011

Hello, Tabercil

What do you mean by having sourcing issue in Nanchang J-12? How can I get a picture of this jet without sourcing issue? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Infinty 0 (talk • contribs) 04:09, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

I mean, you can't take any old image found on the Net and upload it to Commons, then turn around and use it on EN. It has to be free use to be able to be put on Commons, and right now both of what you uploaded are highly doubtful that they are in that category. Tabercil (talk) 04:13, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 13 June 2011

The Signpost: 20 June 2011

The Signpost: 27 June 2011

The Signpost: 4 July 2011

Pro forma ANI notice

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. I have raised matters concerning User:RoadHouse, including a nonfree image which you reduced in size and he has altered subsequently altered the licensing tag and size, etc. You may wish to comment. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 22:28, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Norma Stitz

The appropriate note is the visual of the Venus of Willendorf.68.173.91.55 (talk) 12:33, 8 July 2011 (UTC)SLY111

That counts as original research and as such we can't use it. Tabercil (talk) 17:25, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

NORMA STITZ

I hear you! I'm attempting to portray her as a fertility goddess, and that defines original research. I'll research researches on her or the female image in contemporary (or ancient) porn.68.173.91.55 (talk) 04:27, 9 July 2011 (UTC)SLY111

The Signpost: 11 July 2011

The Signpost: 18 July 2011

3RRN discussion notice

In a 3RR violation notice i filed today regarding User:Mikefitzsimmons, I've cited comments you made July 2 in an edit summary at the article involved.[2] You are not otherwise involved in the dispute, but since I mentioned your comment I feel I should alert you to the matter. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 15:49, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Already on it - I'd been contacted by the account on the other side via email. (Said account was who sent me the new picture that's on Axel's article) Tabercil (talk) 21:04, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Avril Lavigne's ADHD

Well, to me the source seemed reliable, and there's actually a lot of sources for that on the web (harder to find on google because of tags, adhd lists and youtube videos), but well, is the information important enough and encyclopedic? If yes, I'll find a better source for it. -- Vokkare (talk) 14:33, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

If you can nail down a reliable source for it, then yes you can readd the information. Problem is finding that source... Tabercil (talk) 17:16, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

@ Vokkare, you did the same thing about Diane Kruger. Your source is not reliable, please stop. thank you 70.143.85.112 (talk) 19:34, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 July 2011

Diane Kruger

Dear Tabercil

Could you please keep a watch over the page Diane Kruger. There is a user, he keeps posting that she had a ADHD disease, and he uses a very unreliable reference. Obviosly the information is not true and the reference is not strong to prove it. Could you please keep an eye on that page. Because I get the feeling as if that user just wants to make Diane look bad and that is why he keeps posting that Diane had ADHD, could you please look into it. Many thanks in advance. Middle-king (talk) 06:11, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, I'll watch it - same source was used to say the same thing for Avril Lavigne who was already on my watchlist... Tabercil (talk) 12:28, 29 July 2011 (UTC)


Dear Tabercil Thank you very much with all my heart. Middle-king (talk) 18:46, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Dear Tabercil, please explain me what's wrong with this source, since it has already been accepted by other Wikipedia Administrators on pages such as List of people diagnosed with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, by the time the page required approval. Thank you.

By the way, I'm not the only user who reverted you, Middle-king; I don't want to "make Diane look bad" like you said, I just wanna contribute with the informations I have. And why is the information "obviously not true"? You also said it was biaised on Diane Kruger's page, how is it biaised? I have a strong feeling that you have trouble dealing with the fact, and that you're trying to revert it for some reasons. ~ ~ Vokkare (talk) 21:56, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

I don't consider it to be a reliable source as I can't find any clear information about who is behind the site. 741.com is just a webhosting service, and the only author information given is "© 2011 ADHD women life" which is essentially the website name. In that absense, it's treated as a self-published source and as such can only be used as a source about itself. Making a statement about a third party (i.e. Diane Kruger, Avril Lavigne, etc.) is verboten. Tabercil (talk) 22:07, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Upload question

UserAsdfgtre4532 Hello Tabercil what is this upload file 94.236.133.163 (talk) 13:09, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I need more details. What file are you asking about?? Tabercil (talk) 15:19, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

UserAsdfgtre4532 Hello Tabercil please look this Where is the work from? (Click on the appropriate link)

It is entirely my own work It is someone else's work from Flickr (more information on uploading Flickr images) It is a derivative work of one or several files from Commons It is from another Wikimedia project (Wikipedia, Wikibooks, Wikinews, etc.) It is from a US federal government source It is a free software screenshot It is from somewhere else It is a non-free fair use image (Non-free logo, cover, screenshot, artwork etc.) I don't know who the author is, or I don't know what license applies I need help with the upload form, figuring out what the license is, or with other issues

System notice: There is currently a problem with thumbnail generation when images are replaced/updated, a solution is being worked on.


Not logged inFrom Wikimedia Commons Jump to: navigation, search You must be logged in to upload files.

Return to Main Page.

Retrieved from "http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Upload" what is this Hfghfhgf5646456 (talk) 15:26, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Ah, okay. That's asking you what the image source is - where did you get it? Is it a photograph you took yourself? So what is the picture you're trying to upload?? Tabercil (talk) 15:34, 31 July 2011 (UTC)



UserAsdfgtre4532 Hello Tabercil This image http://www.flickr.com/photos/calibre68/2445070492/ 94.236.133.163 (talk) 15:44, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

You can't upload it - the image is tagged as "All Rights Reserved" on Flickr. Tabercil (talk) 16:02, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

how do I email you?

In regards to personal bio information, how do I contact you privately? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kaliparker (talk • contribs) 20:40, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Look on the left side of the page - under the "Toolbox" is a link called "E-mail this user". Hit that link. Tabercil (talk) 02:16, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Image check

UserName33432 Hello Tabercil please look this image http://www.flickr.com/photos/65871153@N04/5998170586/ Name33432 (talk) 17:08, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

I can't - it's set as a private photo and thus not viewable by the public. Tabercil (talk) 17:09, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

UserName33432 Hello Tabercil look this image http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Alexis_Amore_2010.jpg this image is a copy from this site http://my.wn.com/media/images/Alexis_Amore_2010.jpg 94.236.140.84 (talk) 17:29, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

That's a valid upload to Commons - the other site took it from us. Tabercil (talk) 17:30, 1 August 2011 (UTC)


UserName33432 Hello Tabercil who is User Gohe007 administrator yes or no 94.236.140.84 (talk) 17:34, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Not an admin, but someone I trust. Why?? Tabercil (talk) 17:41, 1 August 2011 (UTC)


UserName33432 Hello Tabercil look this image http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Alexis_Amore_at_Alexis_Amore_Party_2.jpg this image was a upload from Gohe007 94.236.140.84 (talk) 18:03, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Taken from the Luke Ford collection, which we have consent to use. I know because I arranged it. Any other questions about the obvious?? Tabercil (talk) 18:30, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 01 August 2011

dialog despite your extremism

You confused alternativeness of desires with logic (or you could confused me with fans), logic comes to light as a result of analysis, so scientific logic can be only one, I conscientiously use scientific logic. I think, typical Americans from tea party can not know the book of Michael Bulgakov the "Master and Margaret", but I will quote - "That is a fact. And fact is the most stubborn thing in the world!" So you can ignore logic and facts if dislike, but you can not ignore surprises (now many characters found out it in the real world).Sergeispb-10 (talk) 15:22, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

- What, I must to think, that has zero relevance (in relation to your report) to you? Sense of actions and public declarations of any known person have relevance direct to him!Sergeispb-10 (talk) 15:43, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

And that's one of the things Wikipedia is not - a soapbox. Tabercil (talk) 16:25, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
And he's back again. I've raised the matter at ANI, since there's also a possible NLT violation on his talk page. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 15:11, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Admin status

User UserName33432one question how much contribution do I need to become an administrator so my question is 94.236.128.220 (talk) 16:49, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

A hell of a lot more than you've shown so far. For starters, you have to edit consistently from a registered name. Also, from what you've said so far I'd guess English is not your native language. I'd suggest working on the Wikipedia that's is in your native language first to get more experience and a better feel for what's needed before trying out for admin status. There's complete list of the various versions of Wikipedia here. Tabercil (talk) 23:04, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Dear Tabercil

Dear Tabercil

I truly want to thank you for your hard work for Wikipedia. It is because of people such as yourself, that wikipedia is truly a better place, and it is always evolving to the next level. I think globally, everyone have to thank Wikipedia and people like you for making it possible to have a better and accurate source of information. I just wanted to make a small request; I know you are very busy, but it seems to me that, the individual who was told to stop putting the ADHD on Diane Kruger's page is very defiant to keep replacing back that same information into the page. I did not wanted to keep editing it because I thought he will just reverse my edits, so there was no point for me to do that. However I leave it in your hands and judgment. Would you please keep a permanent watch on Diane Kruger page to make sure the page remains accurate. I would really appreciate it. thank you. Middle-king (talk) 19:54, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Tabercil/Archive_16&oldid=1080303863"