![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Did I get this right? Looked thru the Format and Boilerplate pages and couldn't find a good shortcut to link "(diff)" in page history, tho I've seen it done on pages I cannot otherwise remember. Would also like to know if just generally I'm doing more good that harm with this. I do realise the user of that IP address will probably never read that page. edgarde 12:28, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
Your request for semiprotection for phone sex was declined, because there is not enough activity in that page to require semiprotection (which, by our Semiprotection Policy is a last resort). I've put that page on my watchlist, though, and I suggest that you do too. Thanks! Borisblue 21:45, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for bringing this to my attention, because I had actually made a little mistake. There are two "sex moves" type categories: Category:Sexual acts (or established positions, etc.) and Category:Sex moves (the raunchier category that has some sexual urban legends). Anyway, I was reading the article in German and Sexual acts is the category that's used there. What I meant to add was Category:Sexual acts. Phone sex is an act, and it's sexual, wouldn't you agree? Category:Human sexuality seems rather general, and it's such a big category; that's why I recategorized. - GilliamJF 06:30, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
Hi, I'm sorry if I didn't really explain properly on the page why I've done this. The reason I did this was that several bands (such as Vib Gyor) release demo EP's under these names before they actually release an album under a real name and once the bands become successful people may want to create a page with these names to create a full history of the bands discography, I haven't got around to it yet but I do intent to create pages for the Vib Gyor EPs and will add links to these pages in due course when I have got round to creating the pages. Unfortunately also due to the way in which wiki works the pages can't be moved back straight off without the intervention of an administrator as the pages simply labeled EP without the bands name in brackets after must first be deleted before the page and its history, and talk page and history are moved back, also I have re-directed all of the links on other pages to the new pages so these will have to be altered back if the page is moved back. I hate edit wars myself and don't want to get involved in one. If you feel that the work I have done really does need reverting then please contact an administrator and if they feel the revert needs to take place then I will fully accept their decision. -- Chappy84 16:31, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
Edgarde, This is Daniel who you've been corrisponding with regarding the Sex tourism page. In case you haven't noticed by now, I'm new at Wikipedia. :-) I just read through the guidelines and the processes of despute resolution. Thank you for making that RfC link for us, and introducing it on the talk page of Sex tourism.
I made a change to the end of the Sex tourism definition, and I wanted to know if this is acceptable to you?
Daniel E. Knodel, M.A. 06:00, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
This discussion is reverted on User_talk:KyndFellow
![]() |
The Barnstar of Diligence | |
The Barnstar of Diligence is hereby awarded for dedication and commitment to ensuring that article content is encyclopedic.
Awarded by Addhoc |
awarded 2006-11-21T21:02:40, moved to User page 2006-12-18T18:52:47, restored here 05:29, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
Edgarde, do you still want to do attribution? If so, I was thinking it would be helpful to the reviewing committee if we could specify specific content (e.g. phrases and links) that we respectively want or do not want in the article in a final section of the discussion page before we hand it over to them. I'll need some help filing the application and making preparations, please, as I have never done attribution before.
Congratulations on your award, by the way.
Daniel E. Knodel, M.A. 20:55, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
I will refraim from editing the sex toursim page till you feel clear about my identity. The timing of your inquiry is a bit ironic, since your reply to the proposed split of sex tourism and child sex tourism pretty much had me convinced.
Devalover
20:36, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
Edgarde, I think that declining mediation might reflect badly on you.
The ArbCom prefers not to involve itself in content dispute, but in serious breach of policies. Normally they deal with things such as of sockpuppets, misuse of administrator tools, users who have no wish to make useful contributions, etc.
You said It's illogical to accept mediation when I know in advance that Mr. Knodel will not abide by any agreement that requires him to not enter his spam link.
You should be aware that, from what I can tell, you are the only one to oppose the link to Sly Traveler? So how can we know it is spam? Maybe you are the one who is at wrong.
If Mr. Knodel did use sockpuppet to promote his wish, it would be a serious problem. But if he didn't, then that shows that other users -- unrelated to Mr. Knodel for all we know -- support Mr. Knodel's version.
Fred- Chess 11:18, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
Endgard, would you be willing work with a mediatior to help resolve the dispute?— Preceding unsigned comment added by KyndFellow ( talk • contribs)
Have your mediator contact me. Not committing yes or no until I speak to the person you want to bring in. — edgarde 07:09, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
{helpme} I'm told "obvious violations of WP:COI should be handled by the Corps of Administrators". What a jolly bunch they must be. Where are these people and how do I submit a complaint to them? — edgarde 04:09, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
Hello,
An Arbitration case involving you has been opened: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Sex tourism. Please add any evidence you may wish the arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Sex tourism/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Sex tourism/Workshop.
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, -- Srikeit 19:26, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
Edgarde, I didn't know that you called the 'editing and contibutions' of destinations -a 'definition wars' ^:-). I just added more individual cities and particular major Red-light Districts because I am living in Europe. I already know that the major destinations for sex tourism worldwide is in Amsterdam and Germany. You just need to add few other major destinations like in New York and in London (latest news of the prostitute killings - http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/europe/12/14/uk.prostitute.reut/index.html, http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/europe/12/14/prostitute.timeline/index.html), besides other major cities in Asia and Africa which you overlooked, your missing the point.
I will edit it again and it is up to WIKI's arbiter then, and I will rest my case.
John —The preceding unsigned comment was added by MrJohn 1234 ( talk • contribs) 18:14, 14 December 2006 (UTC).
I'm sorry if this bothers you (it bothers me too), I had to take the image issue to the administrator's notice board WP:AN. It seems only fair to tell you that your name might come up there. NinaEliza ( talk • contribs • count • logs • email) 04:54, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
Edgarde, it is my belief that the thing is permanently handled. NinaEliza ( talk • contribs • count • logs • email) 01:46, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the response regarding the Eva Peron article. I have decided to abandon the article, however. I just don't have time or energy to deal with the constant bickering in that article. I suppose there are some topics that are very controversial and that attract constant bickering. This article seems to be the case. I can't deal with it anymore. Thanks for the response, though. Andrew Parodi 06:12, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
Hi Edgarde,
Ed, if you want to back out, feel free. In my excitement and haste, I didn't read all of what you wrote. This moist topic I can certainly handle myself (insert dry chuckle here). By all means, follow your heart:). NinaEliza ( talk • contribs • logs) 20:50, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
You start with a little insult and move straight on to the most facile and almost always ironic one of all: 'trolling'. No worries, mate. Since I was new to the whole wikipedia thing, my approach to misandry was patterned on misogyny, and while both are certainly different 'things', both deserve the same level of editorial scrutiny. There seems to be a rather unnecessary (and tautological?) distinction you are drawing between incredibly blatant examples of quote bias and, presumably, less incredibly blatant ones. Jgda 02:49, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
Ed, gently, you're drifting away a bit from NPOV. It's not Wikipedia's mission or place to assess what is and isn't pornography, or voyeuristic, or merely erotic or adult. The best example I can think of to describe what I'm talking about is to use an analogy with the article on Cults. If you read the article, it's extremely objective.
I value your contributions - in fact, I just realized you set up a straw poll. I'm wondering if you realize that there really aren't too many other people around doing any editing of this article. It's pretty much up to us to decide what to do with it. Please don't take the observation above harshly. Sincerely,Nina NinaEliza ( talk • contribs • logs) 07:08, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Did I get this right? Looked thru the Format and Boilerplate pages and couldn't find a good shortcut to link "(diff)" in page history, tho I've seen it done on pages I cannot otherwise remember. Would also like to know if just generally I'm doing more good that harm with this. I do realise the user of that IP address will probably never read that page. edgarde 12:28, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
Your request for semiprotection for phone sex was declined, because there is not enough activity in that page to require semiprotection (which, by our Semiprotection Policy is a last resort). I've put that page on my watchlist, though, and I suggest that you do too. Thanks! Borisblue 21:45, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for bringing this to my attention, because I had actually made a little mistake. There are two "sex moves" type categories: Category:Sexual acts (or established positions, etc.) and Category:Sex moves (the raunchier category that has some sexual urban legends). Anyway, I was reading the article in German and Sexual acts is the category that's used there. What I meant to add was Category:Sexual acts. Phone sex is an act, and it's sexual, wouldn't you agree? Category:Human sexuality seems rather general, and it's such a big category; that's why I recategorized. - GilliamJF 06:30, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
Hi, I'm sorry if I didn't really explain properly on the page why I've done this. The reason I did this was that several bands (such as Vib Gyor) release demo EP's under these names before they actually release an album under a real name and once the bands become successful people may want to create a page with these names to create a full history of the bands discography, I haven't got around to it yet but I do intent to create pages for the Vib Gyor EPs and will add links to these pages in due course when I have got round to creating the pages. Unfortunately also due to the way in which wiki works the pages can't be moved back straight off without the intervention of an administrator as the pages simply labeled EP without the bands name in brackets after must first be deleted before the page and its history, and talk page and history are moved back, also I have re-directed all of the links on other pages to the new pages so these will have to be altered back if the page is moved back. I hate edit wars myself and don't want to get involved in one. If you feel that the work I have done really does need reverting then please contact an administrator and if they feel the revert needs to take place then I will fully accept their decision. -- Chappy84 16:31, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
Edgarde, This is Daniel who you've been corrisponding with regarding the Sex tourism page. In case you haven't noticed by now, I'm new at Wikipedia. :-) I just read through the guidelines and the processes of despute resolution. Thank you for making that RfC link for us, and introducing it on the talk page of Sex tourism.
I made a change to the end of the Sex tourism definition, and I wanted to know if this is acceptable to you?
Daniel E. Knodel, M.A. 06:00, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
This discussion is reverted on User_talk:KyndFellow
![]() |
The Barnstar of Diligence | |
The Barnstar of Diligence is hereby awarded for dedication and commitment to ensuring that article content is encyclopedic.
Awarded by Addhoc |
awarded 2006-11-21T21:02:40, moved to User page 2006-12-18T18:52:47, restored here 05:29, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
Edgarde, do you still want to do attribution? If so, I was thinking it would be helpful to the reviewing committee if we could specify specific content (e.g. phrases and links) that we respectively want or do not want in the article in a final section of the discussion page before we hand it over to them. I'll need some help filing the application and making preparations, please, as I have never done attribution before.
Congratulations on your award, by the way.
Daniel E. Knodel, M.A. 20:55, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
I will refraim from editing the sex toursim page till you feel clear about my identity. The timing of your inquiry is a bit ironic, since your reply to the proposed split of sex tourism and child sex tourism pretty much had me convinced.
Devalover
20:36, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
Edgarde, I think that declining mediation might reflect badly on you.
The ArbCom prefers not to involve itself in content dispute, but in serious breach of policies. Normally they deal with things such as of sockpuppets, misuse of administrator tools, users who have no wish to make useful contributions, etc.
You said It's illogical to accept mediation when I know in advance that Mr. Knodel will not abide by any agreement that requires him to not enter his spam link.
You should be aware that, from what I can tell, you are the only one to oppose the link to Sly Traveler? So how can we know it is spam? Maybe you are the one who is at wrong.
If Mr. Knodel did use sockpuppet to promote his wish, it would be a serious problem. But if he didn't, then that shows that other users -- unrelated to Mr. Knodel for all we know -- support Mr. Knodel's version.
Fred- Chess 11:18, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
Endgard, would you be willing work with a mediatior to help resolve the dispute?— Preceding unsigned comment added by KyndFellow ( talk • contribs)
Have your mediator contact me. Not committing yes or no until I speak to the person you want to bring in. — edgarde 07:09, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
{helpme} I'm told "obvious violations of WP:COI should be handled by the Corps of Administrators". What a jolly bunch they must be. Where are these people and how do I submit a complaint to them? — edgarde 04:09, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
Hello,
An Arbitration case involving you has been opened: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Sex tourism. Please add any evidence you may wish the arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Sex tourism/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Sex tourism/Workshop.
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, -- Srikeit 19:26, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
Edgarde, I didn't know that you called the 'editing and contibutions' of destinations -a 'definition wars' ^:-). I just added more individual cities and particular major Red-light Districts because I am living in Europe. I already know that the major destinations for sex tourism worldwide is in Amsterdam and Germany. You just need to add few other major destinations like in New York and in London (latest news of the prostitute killings - http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/europe/12/14/uk.prostitute.reut/index.html, http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/europe/12/14/prostitute.timeline/index.html), besides other major cities in Asia and Africa which you overlooked, your missing the point.
I will edit it again and it is up to WIKI's arbiter then, and I will rest my case.
John —The preceding unsigned comment was added by MrJohn 1234 ( talk • contribs) 18:14, 14 December 2006 (UTC).
I'm sorry if this bothers you (it bothers me too), I had to take the image issue to the administrator's notice board WP:AN. It seems only fair to tell you that your name might come up there. NinaEliza ( talk • contribs • count • logs • email) 04:54, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
Edgarde, it is my belief that the thing is permanently handled. NinaEliza ( talk • contribs • count • logs • email) 01:46, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the response regarding the Eva Peron article. I have decided to abandon the article, however. I just don't have time or energy to deal with the constant bickering in that article. I suppose there are some topics that are very controversial and that attract constant bickering. This article seems to be the case. I can't deal with it anymore. Thanks for the response, though. Andrew Parodi 06:12, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
Hi Edgarde,
Ed, if you want to back out, feel free. In my excitement and haste, I didn't read all of what you wrote. This moist topic I can certainly handle myself (insert dry chuckle here). By all means, follow your heart:). NinaEliza ( talk • contribs • logs) 20:50, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
You start with a little insult and move straight on to the most facile and almost always ironic one of all: 'trolling'. No worries, mate. Since I was new to the whole wikipedia thing, my approach to misandry was patterned on misogyny, and while both are certainly different 'things', both deserve the same level of editorial scrutiny. There seems to be a rather unnecessary (and tautological?) distinction you are drawing between incredibly blatant examples of quote bias and, presumably, less incredibly blatant ones. Jgda 02:49, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
Ed, gently, you're drifting away a bit from NPOV. It's not Wikipedia's mission or place to assess what is and isn't pornography, or voyeuristic, or merely erotic or adult. The best example I can think of to describe what I'm talking about is to use an analogy with the article on Cults. If you read the article, it's extremely objective.
I value your contributions - in fact, I just realized you set up a straw poll. I'm wondering if you realize that there really aren't too many other people around doing any editing of this article. It's pretty much up to us to decide what to do with it. Please don't take the observation above harshly. Sincerely,Nina NinaEliza ( talk • contribs • logs) 07:08, 27 December 2006 (UTC)