Misplaced Pages

User talk:-Ril

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Violetriga (talk | contribs) at 12:37, 17 August 2005 (→Blocked). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 12:37, 17 August 2005 by Violetriga (talk | contribs) (→Blocked)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Comments about my signature go here

I have split my talk page into 3 sections. Please respect the sections as I will ignore and delete anything not respecting them. Thanks, ~~~~

To read/edit the 3 sections individually, please use the following links

This page, nor any of the subsections, is not to be used for the preservation of articles, or talk pages, about to be deleted in accordance with a vote on VfD.

PLEASE DO NOT COMMENT ON THIS PAGE, USE THE LINKS ABOVE
unless you are blocking me, in which case it is the only page on which I can respond

Blocked

I'm sorry to do this but I've blocked you for 24 hours for vandalism, violation of WP:POINT and edit warring. This is due to your edits in relation to Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Wikipedians for Decency. violet/riga (t) 11:38, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

How is that vandalism? Those images are entirely suited to the Wikiproject. One must be aware of what it is that the project is discussing, just referring to "indecency" abstractly is too vague, illustrative examples are required.

The project is discussing "indecency" and those are images some would consider "indecent". They exist in Misplaced Pages, and are already used elsewhere, so I fail to see how adding them constitutes vandalism. ~~~~ ( ! | ? | * ) 11:58, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

If anyone is reading this, and wondering what is being referred to, see this version.

The images in question are:

"Early indecency" - to introduce the project together with
File:Lisa Lipps.jpg
"Modern indecency" (an image chosen to be specifically similar to the art piece marked as "early indecency") - also to introduce the project
"For example, this could go in Bedroom" - to illustrate how pornographic imagery could be used in non-pornography-related articles
File:JenniferRoveroAndSydneyMoon.jpg
"An image that could be added to Lesbian" - again an illustration of useful usage of an image in an ordinary article


File:Artful nude.jpg
"This image would be an excellent example for Shadow" - a third example - you have to admit it is an excellent demonstration of shadows
File:Eyes wide shut.jpg
"Full frontal nudity" - an extremely tasteful example (from the film "Eyes wide shut") to illustrate a section discussing full frontal nudity
Image for the project template - much more suitable as it hints at pornography without being indecent (the size is important - clicking on the image demonstrates how pornographic imagery can be used in a tasteful way by changing things such as the size, shading, etc.)


Oh, on a related issue, how is this edit followed immediately by this edit (note the edit summary) not a violation of WP:POINT ? ~~~~ ( ! | ? | * ) 12:08, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

It is primarily a WP:POINT, but I would classify it as vandalism, yes. The images are obviously not needed there and you are just trying to disrupt the project. Just wait until the VfD is over. As for Noitall, that really couldn't be called "disruption". violet/riga (t) 12:26, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

Why are they "obviously" not needed. I feel that they "obviously" are. But that is a content dispute, not vandalism. Regarding someone else's opinion over content disputes as "vandalism" is explicitely considered a personal attack (according to WP:NPA). This simply does not qualify as vandalism under any of Misplaced Pages's vandalism policies. I would like to see you produce the policy that allows you to block me for adding such images to location where they are in context. ~~~~ ( ! | ? | * ) 12:30, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

I call "Childish vandalism", "Attention-seeking vandalism" and "Image vandalism". I also call WP:POINT, as explained above. violet/riga (t) 12:37, 17 August 2005 (UTC)