User talk:Asarelah/archive 2

CfR withdrawn
I withdrew my CfR on Category:Female wartime crossdressers. Please see the Category talk page for discussion. Whistling42 (talk) 12:16, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Clean-up on Frances Clalin
I have cleaned up your article you created around August 2007. I see you've been active since then. Comments?-- RyRy5 ( talk  ♠  wikify ) 05:41, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Alice Bag
A tag has been placed on Alice Bag requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Tigerclaw81 (talk) 01:14, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVI (April 2008)
The April 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:28, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Re: Wetman on Wikiquette Alerts
I don't think we can do anything, sadly. My recent experience with a very similar user, looked upon as an expert in writing wikipedia articles about architecture, tells me that it will rebound upon us all if we attempt to take it further. In the recent case (on WT:CHES), I questioned the first response from this editor on his talk page (which was was that we had the "attention span of gnats") when I asked why he had asked for infoboxes not to be added to an article. The amount of fallacious reasoning and borderline incivility that I got for that, followed up by insinuations that I was a vexatious complainant when I tried to take the matter further has made me think that there is a privileged group of editors who are seen to be highly valued contributors, and that administrators and bureaucrats are loathe to take any normal action against them for breaches in the rules, just because their contributions are looked upon as being good. Very disheartening. DDStretch   (talk)  09:52, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

The current reaction seems to back up my own previous comments: there is a small group of editors, and the ones I have mainly come across are those concerned with (classical) architecture and painting, who make very good contributions, and are often told that they do so. This has the effect of boosting their own sense of self-importance which is further strengthened by other editors who almost become their acolytes. Wikipedia strenthen this (on one occasion, I saw an article which made it to the featured article on the Main Page being described as "your article" to one of these privilleged editors, when we are supposed to rise above such ownership issues, and that editor was but one of a number of contributors to the article.) They thus become to think that they are above the rest of us, and that they need not pay too much attention to "the rabble". Wetman's methods of expression suggest this has happened with him, though no doubt I will be accused of having "sour grapes" if I ever made that more public. (I can use similar language if I want to, but the situation rarely justifies it other than when one wishes oneself to appear pompous or obscure) Group think, and in particular Group think seems a useful articel to review. (I speak as a psychologist for many years, researching also into methods of debate and argument.) It is all very sad, and I don't think much can be done about it without over-turning too many applecarts on wikipedia now. DDStretch   (talk)  12:30, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Many many thanks for the barnstar. I don't seem to get many of those, and yours was the second one I received. I think the point was made on the wikiquette page, and we will just have to see what will happen next. I don't think much will change, pessimistically, as I think he thinks we are beneath him, so why should he bother? Still, once again, many thanks. DDStretch   (talk)  23:10, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Angli Cado Primoris
Hi, I read what you wrote on my pages history and I just wanted to say that I did not purposely, if at all, add my page to the article categories. However, I do agree that it dose not belong thier. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Angli Cado Primoris (talk • contribs) 01:01, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the template. Angli Cado Primoris (talk) 03:37, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

List of criminals by nickname
This article is interesting, but needs much more references for verification. Can you please use some more references for this article?  Otolemur crassicaudatus  (talk) 03:41, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVII (May 2008)
The May 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:32, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Rock singer Madonna
Why do you say the word "rock n roll" applies to any music? None of our articles named rock n roll say this meaning. Ultra! 05:21, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Please ensure you dont breach 3RR on the madonna article. Cheers. --— Realist 2  ( Come Speak To Me ) 05:52, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Susan Tedeschi
I added her back please do not delete again. Or do you not know the origins of Rock n roll. Blues is very much a style of rock. Please refer to http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&sql=73:20 a list of rock styles and all he variation there of. Also even though i stayed out of it Madonna should be on the list. Just ask the rock n roll hall of fame. The term rock is not difned by your own interpretation otherwise it is not a NPOV. So please refer to list before you think about editting it to how you see fit. If the page doesn't load right simple click the category ROCKSwampfire (talk) 22:18, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Blues is a style of rock, refer to the list provided. and not something from your own judgement. Because you are referring to your own personal POV and not a NPOV. Susan will be added back. Would also like to mention that the list does not belong to you solely with you views being the only one that decides what rock is. So refer to the list because articles on wikipedia cannot be used as a basis, or don't you know that.Swampfire (talk) 14:39, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
 * In fact, even at the top of the page it states this " This is a list of female rock singers, including all genres of rock". Here is what ot DOES NOT say "This is a list of female rock singers, that Asarelah says are rock"Swampfire (talk) 14:52, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Let me guess, If there was a list of rock acts on it you would try and delete, Eric Clapton, Fleetwood Mac, The Rolling Stones, The Yardbirds, Cream, Janis Joplin, The Allman Brothers Band, Led Zeppelin, Stevie Ray Vaughn, ZZ Top, The White Stripes, Bob Dylan and even Elvis Presley from the list. And I would be there to add them back.Swampfire (talk) 15:42, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Would like to point out, I did not say anything with an angry tone. I am merely to the point. If you took anything as agry it wasn't. Also it doesnt have to have the word ROCK in it to be rock.Swampfire (talk) 16:28, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
 * The only RFC that should be placed there. Is on the basis for including people. Or better yet go to the link i provided earlier and see if they fall under and styles of rock.Swampfire (talk) 17:36, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Image:Playingfox.jpg
A tag has been placed on Image:Playingfox.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image is a redundant copy (all pixels the same or scaled down) of an image in the same file format, which is on Wikipedia (not on Commons), and all inward links have been updated.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on  explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. BlueAzure (talk) 20:33, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough, but...
I saw you removed the question I added on the Kurt Cobain discussion page. Fair enough, even though there is discussion on many talk pages that goes off of simple article issues. So, care to give me your opinion on the photo? (Or did you not even look?) The reason I did not ask on some forum is because any that aren't populated almost exclusively by 14 year old kids who think Cobain was murdered by Courtney Love are extremely elitest in nature and would most likely disregard my question without even taking the time to at least look at the photograph and being objective about it like most wikipedians are. I'm not an idiot, this photo is quite convincing.OnTheMantle (talk) 03:15, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Eleonore Prochaska
Three red links that might be of interest. They all have articles on German wikipedia. Neddyseagoon - talk 13:16, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVIII (June 2008)
The June 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 17:30, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Image source problem with Image:AMcgillvray.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:AMcgillvray.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 19:30, 16 July 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. OsamaK 19:30, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Orgasm
I think articles need images to reach FA status. The Wednesday Island (talk) 04:36, 23 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Do articles need images for featured article status? I've never heard of that being a criterion. Besides, I hardly think that picture is relevant. It isn't clear if she's having an orgasm, and even if it was, we have no way of knowing if it was a genuine orgasm or not, and it is especially dubious given that it was taken from a documentary about pornography. Asarelah (talk) 04:48, 23 July 2008 (UTC)


 * WP:FACR point 3, but "where appropriate". But yes, not a wonderful picture. The Wednesday Island (talk) 04:55, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

CfD nomination of Category:Mononymous porn actors
Category:Mononymous porn actors, which you created, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Good Ol’factory (talk) 05:19, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

breasts
It's 1:00 am in the morning (France) so I go sleeping. 'Talk to you later about the shape variations. you can erase this message. Cheers — STAR TREK Man&#91;Space, the final frontier...&#93; 23:19, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXIX (July 2008)
The July 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:28, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Breast leading image
Just in case you missed its appearance... there's a survey that requires your thoughts. Redblueball (talk) 14:49, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

British transgender people
Hi, Asarelah! I'm very concerned about the Category:British transgender people. For one thing, it's improperly named - it should be "Transgender and transsexual people from England", shouldn't it? For another, it's redundant to the Category:LGBT people from England. And third, we have no other categories that are similar intersections of "Transgender" and "Country". I am planning on CfDing the category, but would like to hear your thoughts. Thanks! -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 16:42, 7 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi, Asarelah! I still have a bit of an issue with the "British transgender people".  I'm wondering what you think about the situation, since all our other T categories are in the format "Transgender and transsexual people from Country".  This one sticks out as being different - see Category:Transgender and transsexual people.  Thoughts? -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 15:36, 19 August 2008 (UTC)


 * The transgender people by country category is a subcat of Category:Transgender and transsexual people. You'll find other parent categories also organize articles between occupation and country. Asarelah (talk) 15:48, 19 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Actually, what I'm talking about is the fact that this particular cat is only "transgender people", while all the other cats are "transgender and transsexual people". This particular category doesn't follow any of the current categories, so it's confusing and un-helpful.  If we had other "Transgender and transsexual people from Country" categories, I'd be fine, but we don't.  We *do* have "LGBT people from Country" categories, which would be a super-set.  Furthermore, none of our other cats are "British" - they all refer to either "United Kingdom" or specific countries like "England".  Help me out here - let's work out how to categorize people in a way that makes sense :) You can reply here - I've got this page watchlisted. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 16:08, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm not quite sure what to do. I suggest that you go to the LGBT wikiproject page, they'd be able to help you better than I would. Asarelah (talk) 16:11, 19 August 2008 (UTC)


 * The LGBT WikiProject seems very .. quiet. I'm trying to pull interested parties into a discussion about revamping the LGBT categories, with almost no success so far :)  I've moved the two people from the British category to the super-cat Category:LGBT people from England.  I hope that's okay. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 16:21, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Did you try to do a CFD? Asarelah (talk) 19:21, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Image source problem with Image:Blackkettle.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Blackkettle.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 13:14, 11 August 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Wakkubox (talk) 13:14, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Re: This
Good job. Scarian Call me Pat!  23:52, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

thought you should know how long that lede has been on the article
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Breast&diff=61460821&oldid=61460816

The image has been on there for 2+ years now, and it would seem Atom and Dreadstar are preventing or at least slowing down a new consensus. Yami (talk) 19:44, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Speedy recovery!
Wishing you a speedy recovery from your surgery... Dreadstar †  17:00, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

I also wish you a speedy recovery. Hang in there. Look at it as an opportunity to improve the Gall Bladder article! Atom (talk) 17:40, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks guys. =)Asarelah (talk) 20:21, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Nominations for the Military history WikiProject coordinator election
The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are aiming to elect nine coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 (UTC) on September 14! This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:28, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXX (August 2008)
The August 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:23, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject coordinator election
The September 2008 Military history WikiProject coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting nine coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of fourteen candidates. Please vote here by September 30! This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:12, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

D&D articles for Wikipedia 0.7
Hi there! :)

As someone who's worked on D&D and/or RPG articles before, I'm inviting you to participate in our goal to both improve articles that have been selected to be placed in the next Wikipedia DVD release, as well as nominate more to be selected for this project. Please see the WikiProject D&D talk page for more details. :) BOZ (talk) 18:08, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

tannerite article
I noticed that you were an early contributor to this article. Recently, I added a series of pictures showing the results of a standard target cannister of the stuff on an automobile. Unfortunately, I have attracted a vandal with a personal grudge and he deleted the images. I replaced them but anticipate that he will be along again. If you have any interest, you might want to watch the page. --Mcumpston (talk) 18:28, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I have raised the matter of these personal attacks at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 20:39, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXI (September 2008)
The September 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:52, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Varg Vikernes
Hello. I didn't know if you have noticed, but the Varg Vikernes page is mess up again. I was looking through the page history and saw you. Will you help me, I'm new and just trying to keep things accurate. 172.163.184.165 (talk) 06:17, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Lilith Astaroth
An article that you have been involved in editing, Lilith Astaroth, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/Lilith Astaroth. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice?

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXII (October 2008)
The October 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:24, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Bresonik
You misinterpret the guidelines. It is enough that she acknowledges her relationships with men and women. If a woman says "my relationships are with women", she doesn't have to use the word "lesbian". A man doesn't have to use the word "gay" about himself. There are many ways of identifying. You are adding more than is there in the guidelines. It is relevant that she discusses her relationships in interviews and is someone who has brought these issues into the public realm. Your attitude is insulting. She is part of LGBT history in Germany in particular. Anyone researching "bisexuality in sport 1900-present" would want to know. Religious affiliation (as it is understood in the West) is measured by present assent to "credal" propositions, not mere observance of certain outward forms, sexuality, objectively considered, is about stated desire and actual practice. It is red herring to compare them; it is a common position of bigots to do so. Relax. Linda Bresonik is perfectly happy to talk about her relationships to the press. Your anxiety seems, feels, to me like a nasty trace of historical homophobia (although unintended on your part I know). You should try to rid yourself of it. I think the vast majority of LGBT people would feel better if you treated them as normal. I presume you are bisexual yourself so don't you think being more relaxed about sexuality would be better? What are you trying to achieve anyway? JenAW (talk) 15:11, 19 November 2008 (UTC)