| Revision as of 21:43, 22 March 2007 editGeorge Leung (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users3,217 edits rv; restore valid criticism.← Previous edit | Revision as of 22:18, 22 March 2007 edit undoEpbr123 (talk | contribs)291,700 edits mind your own business, nutjobNext edit → | ||
| Line 79: | Line 79: | ||
| This is an automated notice by ]. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at ]. 19:10, 11 November 2006 (UTC) | This is an automated notice by ]. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at ]. 19:10, 11 November 2006 (UTC) | ||
| :If you are sure that you uploaded and took the photo '''yourself''', I have tagged it with {{tl|PD-self}}, which means You, the creator of the image, release it irrevocably into the public domain. That should keep your image from being deleted. Take care — ]<font color="green">]</font>]<sup><font color="purple">]</font></sup> 23:32, 11 November 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ==Mellie D== | |||
| ] Welcome to Misplaced Pages and thank you for your contributions. Unfortunately, an article you recently created{{{{{subst|}}}#if:Mellie D|, ],}} doesn't conform to some of Misplaced Pages's ] for new articles so it will shortly be ], if it hasn't been already. Please use the ] for any tests you may want to do and please read our ] to learn more about contributing. {{{2|Thank you.}}}<!-- {{uw-creation1}} --> —] (]) 21:02, 11 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| * Unfortunately, I don't believe that a large YouTube following alone ] for an article. —] (]) 22:31, 14 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ==Editing guidelines== | |||
| Hello, I thought I would remind you of a few article editing guidelines: | |||
| * Please use an edit summary when making edits. This is useful for other editors to see at a glance what were the changes you made. | |||
| * If you make minor edits, please check the "Minor Edit" checkbox right above the Save Page button. | |||
| * Please use the Preview button (right beside the Save Page button) when making changes, so that you don't have to make numerous minor edits one right after another. This keeps the history smaller and allows other editors to see more easily what changes you made. | |||
| Thanks and happy editing, ] 11:18, 15 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == recommendation == | |||
| i saw you making many contributions to articles about busty models. do you know about the project? you might be interested in checking it out, if you are not aware of it already. --] 03:59, 15 March 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ==Sharday== | |||
| A tag has been placed on ], requesting that it be speedily deleted from Misplaced Pages. This has been done because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a {{#if:{{{2|}}}|discussion at ]|], such as ]}}. If you can indicate how Sharday is different from the previously posted material, or if you can indicate why this article should not be deleted, I advise you to place the template {{tl|hangon}} '''underneath''' the other template on the article, and also put a note on ] saying why this article should stay. An admin should check for such edits before deleting the article. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Please read our ], particularly item 4 under General criteria. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. We welcome your help in trying to improve Misplaced Pages, and we ask you to follow these instructions.{{{3|}}} <!-- Template: Uw-repost --> <font face="Verdana">]<sub>'']''</sub></font> 03:43, 16 March 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == Are your recent AFDs a ]? == | |||
| I had noticed that you seems to be deleting every single big bust porn star pages on Misplaced Pages, including but not limited to ]. However, looking at your page of Sharday, it seems that you may actually like many big bust models, but due to your anger that Sharday got deleted, but not the others, you may as well as go nuts literally. In that case, you may have violated ]. If you have to say about ], then every big bust porn star is non notable, even Minka; porn star's life span is real short, and the only one I see can fit notability and ] is ], as she is the onyl one with extensive behind the scene biography. Hopefully, instead of violating <s>deletionist</s> ] and being a deletionist, we will try to think of ways to include more big bust porn stars info. ] 20:07, 16 March 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *I do feel there is a bias against porn stars on Misplaced Pages but what I care about most is consistency. If Sharday shouldn't have stayed, then so shouldn't a lot of the other models. I was not trying to make a point, I was just applying the knowledge I had gained in the Sharday discussion about who is defined as notable. ] 20:22, 16 March 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == In regarding to WP policy and Japan culture == | |||
| Let's take out the clutter from the Yulia Nova AFD. | |||
| First, while I am going to believe in my keep vote, I am nto here to persuade you. rather, I want to discuss in regards of Misplaced Pages policy and items of other geographical location, particularly, those in Japan. | |||
| I guess the problem is that in Japan, Pornstars stay out of non-porn items, which may cause independent problems regard to this. As much as we like to believe that Japanese are very free, the truth is that it's not really. Hentai may be crossed over (made into anime, which by itself, I think, is notable), but very rarely would real life porn, if at all. Based on this, except for one porn star in Japan (which actually do additional modeling), there will basically be no asian porn stars... we may as well as chuck that category. Yulia Nova is an additional problem since she's a caucasian porn star that is only popular in Japan. | |||
| Furthermore, with the way that modern Japanese goes through their idols, porn stars, graveure models, anime and etc like an ADHD children, I am even surprise Gundam can still be as popular as it was before. | |||
| With today's AFD, and the AFD on Gundam that I had participated, I am beginning to wonder about how many Japanese culture articles that is easily violated with WP:N and WP policy... and the answer is a lot. Famistu gaming magazine, despite being the most popular gaming magazine in Japan and have very tough standards, is still exposed as nothing more then an advertising magazine, which makes their source less creditable. I am also certain that, should I have to, I can nominate Tokimeki Memorial, since let's be honest, it's not notable here, and Japanese sources are hard to verify. | |||
| I guess WP:N also need an overhaul, mainly on clarifying what constitute as Notability. The problem with WP:N is that it assumes all countries follow the same rule, which is obviously not the case. If they stated "Notable in English speaking countries", this may improve a bit. as for worldview, i think that was lost long ago, with color vs. colour. | |||
| Just use our talk page, so we can keep the AFD On topic. ] 22:29, 16 March 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *I think it would be a good idea if you made these points on the discussion page of ]. A discussion there would have more influence in getting the rules changed. ] 22:37, 16 March 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == Deletion review == | |||
| Hi, Epbr123. If you feel an article was unjustifiably deleted, the correct procedure is to speak your piece at ]. I was successful in getting a wrongly deleted article reinstated this way once. I don't know enough about the Sharday case to do so. However, disrupting Misplaced Pages through mass ] AfDs is not a contructive way to respond to what you feel is a wrongful deletion. Hope this helps. Regards. ] 00:10, 18 March 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :Also, Epbr123, if you feel the deletion review is not handled properly, I have been told that we are free to save articles in our userspace, where we can work on them, improve them, improve the evidence of notability, and eventually give them another shot at Misplaced Pages. In any case, there are lots of alternatives to ]-inspired AfDs, which are counter-productive for us all. ] 17:15, 19 March 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ::I'm afraid these aren't ]-inspired AfDs. If articles don't pass ], I think they should either go or be improved. ] 17:23, 19 March 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ::: Fair enough. So here's one for you to improve: ]. Note I've just put a tag on it so that someone can actually take the time to improve it, rather than nominating it for AfD without warning. ] 19:55, 19 March 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ::::The AVN award is enough to prevent it being deleted. The article actually mentions something noteworthy rather than meaningless POVs.] 20:00, 19 March 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :::::Not if it's unsourced it isn't. What's the proof she won this AVN award? Your say-so? ] 20:03, 19 March 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::AVN award winners are already listed on Misplaced Pages with sources so this article doesn't have to cite the source. ] 20:06, 19 March 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :::::::Thanks for sourcing the article, Epbr123. Unfortunately the source you provide is a porn source, and, so you claim, 'unreliable.' However I won't make a ] of insisting on a secondary source. Glad to have cleared this up. Regards. ] 20:33, 19 March 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ==] case== | |||
| {| align="left" | |||
| || ] | |||
| |} | |||
| You have been accused of ]. Please refer to ] for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with ] before editing the evidence page. | |||
| ] 22:08, 19 March 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == In regard to your string of AFD == | |||
| There's one more note that I just want to say. i do not expect you to respond, and I am ]. However, there's a idiom in many cultures, be it Chinese, Japanese, and even bible. I do nto remember what's the exact quote, but it's basically: "Do not apply what you do not want upon others". If you truly believe that all these pornbio does violate notability, that's fine. However, you do have to remember that for example, in Japan, Gundam is search more than Star wars, and if Ms. Smith had not recently died, she is very unnotable. Locality can refer to ], and as example, you probably never heard of Kunio Okawara, but he's famous in Japan. On the other hand, Gears of War, as shown by the , is unheard of. Also, refering to ], ], ] ... and since you use the argument from Sharday, ]. Lastly, you assumed that a white woman must be famous in North America, and if only in Japan then she's not matter... that, I would say, is slightly racist by itself. ] 01:40, 20 March 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == Restoring deleted text == | |||
| Hi, Epbr123. ] say at talk pages, so I've restored the deleted text on your talk page. Regards. ] 23:19, 21 March 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == Please slow down. == | == Please slow down. == | ||
Revision as of 22:18, 22 March 2007
|
Wikipediarules2221 21:02, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
The Scream
I thought it was interesting you noted the similarity to the Monster in My Pocket Ghost figure, even though that one's head is actually separate from the body. Is it just something you happened to know, or can you help me get the MIMP page up to GA standards? --Scottandrewhutchins 04:34, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
License tagging for Image:PB090004.JPG
Thanks for uploading Image:PB090004.JPG. Misplaced Pages gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Misplaced Pages, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Misplaced Pages:Media copyright questions. 19:10, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
Please slow down.
You've seen the discussion at your AfDs, but let me refer you to something you may have missed, a section on my talk page: User_talk:AnonEMouse#Deleting_sections_from_user_pages. On it, I try to convince a fairly experienced and very dedicated editor that you are well meaning, and not just acting out of spite. Please help me in this by your actions. You have had several articles you wrote deleted. It hurt, I know. It hurts when you do your best to contribute, and your contribution is judged unworthy. That is a shame. But it is not a reason to try to make others feel the same pain. Please try to consider that when you try to get articles deleted. A large fraction of your nominations are not only failing, but causing a backlash against you personally from experienced editors because of the way you are going about them. You are not giving the impression that you are trying to work with others to improve the encyclopedia, but rather that you are specifically trying to test the boundaries of the way it works. Please don't. The whole Misplaced Pages is based on the assumption that people are able to work together, and not against each other. That means - just for example - that when a couple of experienced editors try to tell you at Talk:Candy Manson, that a given article isn't suitable for speedy deletion, that you consider their words carefully, and give strong weight to the possibility that they may well be right. That doesn't mean that you need to shut up, not at all, instead it means that you talk to them and try to express your concerns, and try to reach a solution that the whole community can agree to. For example, you could have mentioned the reasons you thought the article was not suitable and listened to their arguments in the other direction, and come to a reasoned agreement. Trying to do things by sticking to the letter of process, rather than its spirit, breeds hostility. The spirit of all our processes here is discussion and community consensus, rather than rules lawyering; when you have the chance to discuss and reach consensus without dropping tags on articles, you should try to do so. Please. I still think your heart is in the right place, and you mean well, and want to make the encyclopedia better. Am I right? --AnonEMouse 19:56, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
- How do we judge who is notable and who isn't if we don't stick to the letter of process? A lot of these Afd arguments would have been prevented if WP:PORNBIO wasn't so ambiguous. The WP:PORNBIO talk page should be the place to discuss who counts as notable, not at AfD discussions. Epbr123 20:35, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
- For almost all of our processes, the default is to avoid hurting people's feelings. That sounds insipid, but it's true. We're a volunteer project, we depend on the good will of our contributors. For articles for deletion, if you're in doubt, don't nominate it. Really. AfDs are going to cause hurt feelings, try to avoid hurting feelings if you can. Nominate something only if you are quite sure you know what you are doing, don't nominate as a way to test what WP:PORNBIO actually means. It's ambiguous because it's a guideline, and the way guidelines are made is by noticing what normally happens, then writing it down. Unfortunately AfD isn't like a Physics experiment, we can't nominate 500 articles that meet criterion 2 and see whether any ever get deleted: first it's a human process, sometimes people really will vote because of the argument they had with their spouse that morning, not because of the facts of the argument; and second because it's expensive - it distracts people from writing articles, sometimes to the extent of quitting the Misplaced Pages altogether if people's feelings get hurt. Here, if some article really is under your skin, but you're not sure, ask someone else. Me, or Dismas, or Tabercil, or Joe Beaudoin, or even Dekkapai (if you think he doesn't consider you the Antichrist yet) :-). Tab or Joe have no qualms nominating substandard articles. I often do, but for this case will agree to bite the bullet and do it for you if you want. We've all got thick enough skins and enough time here that we won't get "bad press", or let it get to us if we do. Not sure about Dek or Dis, but I have seen them !vote each way on articles. --AnonEMouse 20:51, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
- Fine. By the way, I am actually an experienced editor myself. Epbr123 21:22, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
- For almost all of our processes, the default is to avoid hurting people's feelings. That sounds insipid, but it's true. We're a volunteer project, we depend on the good will of our contributors. For articles for deletion, if you're in doubt, don't nominate it. Really. AfDs are going to cause hurt feelings, try to avoid hurting feelings if you can. Nominate something only if you are quite sure you know what you are doing, don't nominate as a way to test what WP:PORNBIO actually means. It's ambiguous because it's a guideline, and the way guidelines are made is by noticing what normally happens, then writing it down. Unfortunately AfD isn't like a Physics experiment, we can't nominate 500 articles that meet criterion 2 and see whether any ever get deleted: first it's a human process, sometimes people really will vote because of the argument they had with their spouse that morning, not because of the facts of the argument; and second because it's expensive - it distracts people from writing articles, sometimes to the extent of quitting the Misplaced Pages altogether if people's feelings get hurt. Here, if some article really is under your skin, but you're not sure, ask someone else. Me, or Dismas, or Tabercil, or Joe Beaudoin, or even Dekkapai (if you think he doesn't consider you the Antichrist yet) :-). Tab or Joe have no qualms nominating substandard articles. I often do, but for this case will agree to bite the bullet and do it for you if you want. We've all got thick enough skins and enough time here that we won't get "bad press", or let it get to us if we do. Not sure about Dek or Dis, but I have seen them !vote each way on articles. --AnonEMouse 20:51, 22 March 2007 (UTC)