User talk:Bookkeeperoftheoccult/Archive 1

re:Batgirl pic
It's not the cover per se that's a problem, it's the use of a scan that has been photoshopped to remove the comic book logo, company logo, CCA sticker, and date/price info that was there when the book was published.

You have a point that the original cover is a better choice than Bolland's re-work of it. But it either needs to be the artwork only, unlikely given when the book was published, or the full cover as published. - J Greb 21:49, 10 September 2007 (UTC)


 * About the other points you bring up:
 * The Killing Joke cover: There are concerns about using covers in conjunction with article points. Generally, there has to be a good reason and the use of the character on the cover. Most of the comic book covers currently in the article do both of those things. The Killing Joke though doesn't illustrate Batgirl. At best, the image should be in the article for The Killing Joke with a link to that article in the Barbara Gordon article.
 * WP:CITE is a good place to start. There are templates and examples at Citation templates. Basically what you should be reliable and verifiable secondary sources.
 * While it is a good goal to get the article to Featured Article status, it might be better to start by getting it to Good Article status first. Good Article examples can be found here: Category:GA-Class Comics articles, and Featured Article examples here: Category:FA-Class Comics articles.
 * One thing that needs to bee done with the article is that the information is going to need to be broken down into a "Publication history" as well as the Fictional Character Bio. Basically, the PH, which should precede the FCB, needs to deal the hows and whys of the character being created, DC use of the character (not the bio, but did the promote the character, market it, shelve it, abuse it, that sort of thing), the whys of the change in The Killing Joke, again how DC promoted the character, and how and why various writers have used the character.
 * I wouldn't pull images from another open wiki, which is what the DC Database Project is. However, the site it lists as a source is a good place to find non-watermarked covers. That would be the Grand Comic Book Database. The cover looks to be from here. It would need to be pulled into PhotoShop and have the size reduced to 300px across at 72ppi, but it should work.
 * Hope that helps, - J Greb 23:40, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

About Image:Batgirlbykevinnowlan.jpg
Where, exactly, is this from? What book was it published in, and, it it's cover art, where did you find the image?

Thanks - J Greb 11:39, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

ref 82
My mistake, it's reference 82 that links to an image. I'll pass the article, but fix this. Good work!Yamanbaiia 23:31, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Importance ratings on articles
Generally, if you feel an article's listed importance is out of line with the subjects importance in the overall scheme of the project, you can just change it. Citing why either in the edit summary or on the /Comments page. The later is a better option since it also shows up on the work lists linked to the WikiProject Comics/Article Classification page. As a side note... as far as I understand it, the GA checklist/review doesn't get moved to there, you may want to check that with the reviewer though.

As for your reasoning...

Age is a tricky tool to use. There have been arguments with other articles where it's been the major point. An editor argued that golden age character articles, where the character is in modern use, should have a "Mid" or "High", even though the characters have a very spotty publication history. Barbara Gordon falls into a similar field. Yes, the character was created 40 years ago, but:
 * She was a secondary sidekick - 3rd fiddle if you will to Robin.
 * She didn't see the continuous use that Robin did. Nor was it extremely high profile. This is both in and out of comics.
 * The same can be said for the reinvention into Oracle. It hasn't been until the last few years that she has become a "glue" character, having weight through out the DCU.

Looking at how the character has been used, and the type of touchstone it's become, both from fan reactions and the types of creative talent it's pulled, "Low" is, well, low. It's a good starting point, but that's it. I can see "Mid". With the current use of Oracle in the comics, the attempted BoP TV series, and the reversal of order in The Batman, there is a lot of weight, but not on the order of Grayson or Luthor.

Also keep in mind that GA and FA are not tide to importance. Those are statements about the quality of the writing of the article, the reliability of the sources, and the structure of the article. Right now the Comics project has an article cross-watched with Television which is an FA, but the subject is of "Low" importance (Aquaman (TV program)). And there are two other "Low" importance GAs (Anarky and Hugo Danner).

- J Greb 02:10, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

comment
The comment section is for me or other people to say what is missing or, you know, just comment. There's no need of copying my review everywhere. I'm happy to see that you still want to improve the article, i bet you'll make it FA in no time :)  -Yamanbaiia 14:59, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Hi! for the article milestone thing you should take a look at Template:ArticleHistory, here it's Barbar G. GA review:

you should add before this when it was nominated and peer reviews, if you have any. It's always the same 5 "action#" and the codes ( like GAR- Good article review) are in the template i linked you. cheers! Yamanbaiia 18:31, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Your Good Article nomination of Batwoman
Just a reminder, I have placed this article on hold for minor improvements. Please see the review for details, and remember that you have only one week's time to complete these changes. Thank you for your work so far, Van Tucky  Talk 23:55, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Your Good Article Nomination of Supergirl (Kara Zor-El)
I have reviewed your Good Article Nomination of Supergirl (Kara Zor-El) and put it on hold, with comments on the article's talk page. You have one week from now to address the issues raised. I will check back on the article in two days. Please ask if you have questions - nice job so far, but some more work is needed to get to GA status. Take care, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 01:26, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the notice. Captain Marvel is a comic FA and may be useful as a model article. I will take one last look at Supergirl (Kara Zor-El) and make final comments on the talk page (updating the GA checklist). You might also like the essay "Man of Steel, Woman of Kleenex" by Larry Niven, which mentions Kara. Keep up the good work, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 05:28, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Barbara Gordon
Truth is, i really do think the article is a GA, and i've reviewed quite a few articles since BG. It makes sense that the article focuses on the last four years or whatever since, like you said, information about her in the early years is probably impossible to find, besides for what i read in the article, she wasn't really that important back then. Anyway i think that in this case User:Phil Sandifer is one of those really annoying Wikipedians that loves to point out problems but won't help fix them, unfortunately he seems to be gone. I was waiting for someone to review the other articles you nominated (Batwoman and Supergirl (Kara Zor-El)) so as to see if my first review was accurate, and both of the reviewers have pointed out pretty much the same things i pointd out at BG, and catwotman resembles a lot to BG...i'm pretty annoyed by this whole thing, i don't like having articles in GAR, i'm really sorry. - Yamanbaiia (talk) 12:55, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
 * You've probably had it with the article, but now that you've changed it so much i see some minors, like the fact that there are too many one sentence paragraphs, just eliminate the space between them, merge them, it looks awfull and if any GA reviewer see that they'll vote for a delist at GAR. Also the powers and abilities section should either be one paragraph or you should expand each section, 3 level headlines can't be used for one sentence only. I'll comment at GAR later on, although it'll probably be archieved as a no consensus.Yamanbaiia 09:10, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

re: The blog threads
The general rule is "If the cite/quote is from a blog, don't include it."

IMO, that is grounded in not wanting to cite hard facts to blogs. For example, "Gail Simon will be writing Wonder Woman." should, at the time, have been source to a Newsarama article or DC press release instead of "BlogX", even if it can be demonstrated that it is her own blog. And I can agree with that.

I can also see that using blogs, especially those that are strongly identified as being written by professionals in the comics industry or critics, to show reactions, from both the public and the industry, is an attractive idea. But the caveats, and latter headaches, abound. Just looking at this example:
 * Only one of the blogs directly IDs the purported author. The other leaves oblique refs for you to infer who the writer is.
 * These are only two voices. Granted they are good examples of the extreme POVs, but it's still only two voices. This leads to:
 * "Why this and not that?" questions about choosing these two blogs; and worse
 * "Two's a start, but to be more NPOV, we need 'X' more."
 * Skimming the threads, it looks like there is a... friction is the politest word,... between the two bloggers. This also play into those two questions and adds "Is 'X' really stating their own opinion, or are they saying that just to be contrary to 'Y'?"

I'd suggest 2 things:
 * 1) Run it by the project talk page, being very clear about why you feel these examples need to be included in the BG article.
 * 2) Actively be on the look out for articles in non-blog reliable sources, be they from webzines, magazines, books, taped interviews, whatever, that dissect this aspect of The Killing Joke. If those refer back to the blogs, it's a bonus.

As for my personal 2¢, that point of friction in the character's publishing history is one of the more important things, and should be in the article.

- J Greb (talk) 00:49, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Top Ten Intelligent characters
You've gone around to talk pages stating that this character has been named one of the top ten intelligent characters. What exactly is your point of doing that? If you think it should go in the article, I encourage you to be bold and put it in the articles. Anakinjmt (talk) 15:12, 9 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I didn't say it was completely objective. I said it was more objective. They are just guesswork, especially the one on intelligence. For them to rank Batman as high in intelligence as they do indicates that they don't know nearly enough about other comic book characters to be making that judgment. And nobody goes to Business Week for psychometric rankings. Doczilla (talk) 01:45, 10 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Oh, gosh, no, I wasn't offended. I was concerned, though. In October, someone actually accused me of edit warring over a mere two reverts, so I've gotten cautious when it comes to anybody throwing that phrase around. I realize people vary in how they use words. But in case somebody only glances at the comments and edits, I don't want them getting the idea any of us have been involved in edit warring. So it mainly was for the benefit of passersby that I felt the need to say hey, that's no edit war. Don't worry about it. Doczilla (talk) 10:17, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Blackcanaryoracle.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Blackcanaryoracle.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot (talk) 20:31, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Barbara Gordon FA review
I've pointed out where some claims needed sources. The article still has terms like formidable which invoke POV. I'm concerned that the use of so many quotes, especially that many block quotes, won't be seen as consistent with WP:QUOTE. And then I'm just skeptical that an article that so recently came close to losing its GA status could now get FA status. Nevertheless, I think it's worth pursuing. At the very least, even if it fails FA this time, we should get useful feedback that will give some guidance to help it reach that status in the future. Overall, it's a very readable and interesting article. Doczilla (talk) 16:29, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Although citations in the article may support the remarks in the lead, I don't feel the wording of the associated text for each clearly supports each of those statements in the lead. If you think it's all clear enough, then don't worry about it. Doczilla (talk) 01:23, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I've given the opening paragraphs less in-universe wording. See what you think. One problem is that there's some in-universe language in the publication history section. Barbara's origin is not her publication history. I just remember why we say fictional character biography instead of fictional character history: It helps distinguish even better from the publication history and says that the character's whole life (bio) is fictional. Another problem is that past tense has crept into some of the fiction. Doczilla (talk) 11:43, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Supergirlsunstones.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Supergirlsunstones.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 19:53, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

BG's creator
I see numerous sources that name Fox as a creator too. They're not great sources, but they are sources and there are a lot of them. I'd say name him too until we can find a source that says who DC considers to be the creator. Doczilla (talk) 07:12, 4 January 2008 (UTC)


 * The article may not have been promoted, but you certainly shouldn't feel like all that work was for nothing. It's definitely a stronger article now, very safe from any more attempts to remove its GA status, and some things have been learned that could help with a future FA nomination. Fine work. Doczilla (talk) 07:57, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:SupermanBatman8.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:SupermanBatman8.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at 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 Fair 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.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Phil Sandifer (talk) 02:40, 28 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm skeptical - her appearance on the cover is heavily shrouded and it barely illustrates her. I agree that the issue is historically significant, but I don't see what the cover itself illustrates - it does not seem to me to give any insight or added context. An interior panel might, but the shrouded cover appearance just doesn't seem to me to say much. Phil Sandifer (talk) 03:58, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi
Thank you very much. I've been typing more than I should, so that hand aches more than it ought to by now, so I shouldn't say more. I really appreciate the greeting. Doczilla (talk) 04:43, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

good job
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although no person is welcome to make unconstructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits appears to be constructive and has been smiled about or lauded. Please use every article for any great edits you would like to make, and take a look at the page for cool editors to learn more about contributing awesomely to this encyclopedia. Colleenthegreat (talk) 06:37, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

thanks for the note
Re: I'm happy you became an administrator :)Bookkeeperoftheoccult (talk) 08:33, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
 * If you're happy, I'm happy. Thanks for dropping me the note. I really appreciate it. Doczilla  RAWR! 08:55, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Excellent work
Excellent work with the Batgirl article. I hope it successfully attains GA status. D1Puck1T (talk) 01:54, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Alternate versions of Barbara Gordon
Personally I'm not a fan of "Alternate versions of ______" articles. While there are distinctions in the stories between what is "in continuity" and what is not, from a real world perspective they are just different takes a publisher has produced with its trademarks. The way I see it, all relevant, verifiable information belongs on the specific pages dedicated to the story that that alternate version of said character appeared in (ie. information about Batgirl in Thrillkiller should be in the Thrillkiller article, if an article on that particular story has enough notability to exist). If an out-of-continuity story is quite notable regarding a character (like Batman and The Dark Knight Returns), mention it in the character's article. Personally, I'd suggest you focus on the individual Barbara Gordon/Batgirl stories you are interested in, and work on those pages. WesleyDodds (talk) 11:54, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

JACKSON'S RIAA
It is not fair to add Jackson's RIAA list according to Billboard 4 of her albums have scanned more than the RIAA has them certified for. Including "Janet." and "Design of a Decade" each over 2 million copies under certified. So it's not an adequate list for JacksonDam!ta (talk) 15:16, 11 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I have reverted damitas edit back to yours telling him/her that they are more than welcome to add their own information on sales along side it and let the reader reach the decision. Realist2 (talk) 15:21, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

http://www.mtv.com/music/artist/jackson_janet/artist.jhtml#bio

Orphaned non-free media (Image:BatgirlAlexRoss.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:BatgirlAlexRoss.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 06:36, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Janet Jackson
The lead looks much better. Also, you'll want to combine the early life, career, and personal life sections; it should all be straight biography. Separate sections are best used on artist bios for musical style, influences, legacy, music videos, tours, and so forth. Look at John Frusciante and John Mayer for two really good solo musical artist FAs to use as templates. WesleyDodds (talk) 10:12, 12 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Hey regarding the personal life section for JJ, she is infact a strong supporter of michaels, when they appered at an award show together she wore a tshirt saying "Pervert 2" and she reguarly attended his trial. The article suggests that at very best she was reluctant to be associated with him, i dont think this is accurate.Realist2 (talk) 13:15, 12 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Professionally yes she has distanced herself, but she has been very supportive, ill keep a watch on it.

reat work on the article by the way. You should nominatee it for GA. Realist2 (talk) 15:04, 12 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Well link me to the nomination when you make it and ill be happy to give my vote. Realist2 (talk) 15:13, 12 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Also pay attention to the edits made by Damita. To many pov statements are being used and it will damage the prospects of a GA statues. I have reverted edits a number of times ands im beinging to feel bad about it lol. Realist2 (talk) 21:07, 12 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Lol, the nomination process is backlogged, this could take ages. Realist2 (talk) 15:26, 13 March 2008 (UTC)


 * You should sort out this list here. its too long imo. Realist2 (talk) 20:37, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Is this an album or singles chart? Im sure its a singles chart as the single title comes before the album title. A user keeps saying its an album chart and keeps inserting it into the discipline album. Realist2 (talk) 01:29, 16 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Thats what i put in the edit summary but he reverted my edit back to his. Would you mind leaving a message on his talk page informing him of his mistake. otherwise he`ll keep adding it. Realist2 (talk) 01:36, 16 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Also is This really the 4th single from Discipline? Hes created it and included it to the singles trajectory. Realist2 (talk) 01:41, 16 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Look at the top album by Leona Lewis. The album is "spirit" ok. Well I know for a fact that the lead single from "spirit" is Bleeding Love. So the lead single theory is out? Realist2 (talk) 01:48, 16 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Also thats not the lead sing from Amy Winehouses album. I think the lead single theory isnt here. Realist2 (talk) 01:53, 16 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Yes on the balance of probability the evidence is not strong enough to include it on the album chart. Would you mind passing this on to the editor, he alreadt hates me about this 4th single business (as i dont think it should be up yet). Realist2 (talk) 01:56, 16 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanx, i think its really stupid wikipedia has named the first 4 singles when the second music video has only just been released. Realist2 (talk) 02:25, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

I think more recent audio samples are needed. The last one is from 2001. Also im not sure what wiki`s policy on it is but the #1 singles section has 2 many varieties imo. Isnt the list of HOT 100 and R&B #1's enough? Realist2 (talk) 22:26, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Sure your call on the charts, ill look into audio samples although ive never done any before. Realist2 (talk) 23:11, 16 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Add these. I cant do it lol. Realist2 (talk) 23:43, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Great now all we need is songs from her last 2 albums. Realist2 (talk) 01:12, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi again, noticed you havent edited much today. I think the Janet & Velvet rope era AND Damita Jo & 20YO era need spliting, thereby giving each album an era. This is because it they look like huge paragraphs, i think the further splits will make it easier on the reader. Additionally im not even sure they should be called eras at all. That word was removed on the michael jackson article a while back. either way i think a split is needed, it just looks neater that way imo ar least. YoursRealist2 (talk) 21:39, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Sure, i`ll think the whole era thing over, it probably doesnt make that much difference. keep up the good work. Realist2 (talk) 13:23, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Hum im afraid to say we are going to have to reasses the content of the discipline info. Unfortunately it is set to be her lowest selling album to date (bar those pre 1986). This needs to be addressed in the main article. In three weeks of US sales it still has not reached the FIRST week sales of 20 YO. Realist2 (talk) 02:05, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Films coordinator elections
The WikiProject Films coordinator selection process is starting. We are aiming to elect five coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by March 28! Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 10:30, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Michael Jackson
Cheers for that on the michael jackson page, so many haters in the world, nice to see some support. Check out the conversation on the bottom of my talk page, i think its disgusting how ppl are. Realist2 (talk) 21:48, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanx
Hey thanx very much ive copy and pasted it to my sandbox, i will pick up some steam and use it. I want to do it for the thriller album to ensure it will get GA. If you not busy and your not doing as much with JJ, would you help formatt them? Realist2 (talk) 22:47, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

JJ
Go for it, lol you put JJ up before i put the Thriller album up but they are starting to look at the album already. They should do they in order so its fair. Realist2 (talk) 03:21, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Pictures
Hi again I noticed some of your work with the JJ pictures, i copied the scream picture accross to the michael jackson article it was so good. Ive tried doing pictures in the past but they always get removed as they dont meet wiki rational. I was wondering if you could get some pictures for the michael jackson article. It only has a lead picture and 4 others (1 of which is a jackson 5 picture). We idealy need a "off the wall" era picture (1979-1981) and/or a "Dangerous" era picture 1991-1993. A lot of people have suggested his superbowl performance (1993). If you could help on this it would be most appreciated. YoursRealist2 (talk) 14:16, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Also here is a quick copy and paste of the scream info on the michael jackson page :

" The first single released from HIStory was "Scream", sung and performed with his sister Janet Jackson. The single had the best ever debut at #5 on the Billboard Hot 100 and had a Grammy nomination for "Best Pop Collaboration With Vocals" . The music video for "Scream" is one of his most critically acclaimed winning three MTV awards in 1995 and a Grammy in 1996. "Scream" is currently the most expensive music video ever made. "

If you find anything there interesting just pick up the sources from the michael jackson article. Realist2 (talk) 14:28, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Cheers, well if you do come across anything it would be appreciated. Realist2 (talk) 23:07, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Warnings
Hey their Janet is nearly at the top of the nomination page!!!!!!!!!! Please remember to warn users who vandalise, i know its frustrating but its worth it in the long run. Cheers my friend. Realist2 (talk) 03:23, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

LEAD
Hey do you think the JJ lead might be a little too long? Realist2 (talk) 20:23, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Oh cant argue with that. Someone told me the other day the michael jackson lead was too long, ha i have evidence to proof otherwise now. Realist2 (talk) 20:42, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

JJ
I just have to finish a review of an article but i can help you with that JJ stuff when im finished if you like? Realist2 (talk) 08:22, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Oh crap, i just had an edit conflict and had managed to remove every bloody "Also" off the list. Realist2 (talk) 10:10, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Welldone
Hey not a problem, WELL DESERVED!!!!!!! Realist2 (talk) 23:02, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

What are you going to do now? FA or something else? Realist2 (talk) 23:03, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Ill be happy to help as always. Realist2 (talk) 23:05, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Cheers, i replied at my talk page. ;-) Realist2 (talk) 09:53, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Janet Jackson
Hey. I've not got a clue why he was claiming copyvio. He probably just liked the original image better. It might be in one of his edit summaries somewhere but other than that, I don't know. Sorry! Save-Me-Oprah (talk) 20:51, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Loving the new JJ picture!!!!!! Take a look at the Thriller album, its really coming along. Realist2 (talk) 23:50, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah, really. It amazes me how people like Britney Spears and Janet, who are constantly surrounded by a flock of photogs, don't have more photos in PD or Creative Commons... I guess people would rather sell them :( Save-Me-Oprah (talk)  02:31, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Thriller
Thriller is now GA thanx for all your help. Realist2 (talk) 23:30, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Cheers, ill be hanging around until Thriller becomes FA, i pulled the nomination off for now and will put it through a peer review, Realist2 (talk) 21:39, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Would you mind setting up a peer review 4 me, to look at spelling, grammer and prose, i cant do it. Realist2 (talk) 21:48, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Cheers please do ill appreciate it, and send me the link when its set up, im still watching the JJ page making sure everything runs smoothly. Realist2 (talk) 21:58, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Janet Jackson FAC
If you look at the other FACs up, you'll see that I've been investigating all the candidates sources, not just yours. While I'd love to have time to devote to every candidate and do a full review of the prose and other aspects, I just don't have the time. It has been a failing of FAs for a while that no one was investigating the sources and commenting on the reliablity or non-reliability of them for quite a while, and I've tried to step up and help with that. Others at FAC specialize in other areas, User:Tony1 does MOS issues and prose, User:Elcobbola does a lot of work on pictures and fair use. I put my comments under "comments" so that folks don't think that I've done a full review, and I won't support or oppose unless I have time to do a full review of everything in the article.

I hope this helps explain things to you. I know you're anxious for supports, and they will come, things move a their own pace at FAC. There are some good suggestions here about dealing with the FAC process. Ealdgyth - Talk 21:23, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I have not forgotten your request anand have some suggestions for improvement and hope to weigh in with them in the next day or so - have been busy IRL and her, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 13:00, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Current pic
Thanx for taking an interest, i know for sure you cant use magazine covers on wikipedia no matter what its rational, but im not sure about inside content. Also its poor quality, notice how the magazine isnt centered. Realist2 (talk) 22:33, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Janet Jackson
I'll review the article later today. WesleyDodds (talk) 21:49, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
 * By the way, I've been somewhat following the whole Thriller business. Honestly, it's not just the Thriller 25 information that needs to be addressed before it goes back to FAC; a lot needs to be done. Given this is one of the most important albums of all time, more sources need to be perused. For example, I've been working on Nevermind, arguably the most important album of the 1990s, for over a year, and it's still not ready for even GA, largely because there's a lot of sources I need to go through. As someone who really likes Thriller (although I think "Billie Jean" is overrated compared to some of the other songs on the record), I might end up helping, but probably not anytime soon (quite busy outside of Wikipedia). WesleyDodds (talk) 23:52, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Keep at it with JJ your doing great, Wesleydodds the Thriller 25 issue has been resolved, at least thats something, if you ever want to chip in please do. Realist2 (talk) 09:48, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Start with her vocal style. Are they any notable vocal tics? Does she have any recurrign lyrical themes? I'm sorry I haven't had time to review the article yet, but I'll try to give the article a copyedit soon. WesleyDodds (talk) 09:00, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

League of copyeditors.
Hey i like that copy think you done for JJ. Could you do one for MJ, he's on FA currently. Cheers v much. Realist2 (talk) 08:43, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Janet jackson good times.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Janet jackson good times.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. NotifyBot (talk) 14:43, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Whydidigetmarried.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Whydidigetmarried.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. NotifyBot (talk) 14:44, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Nuttyprofessor2.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Nuttyprofessor2.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. NotifyBot (talk) 14:44, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Poeticjustice Janet.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Poeticjustice Janet.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. NotifyBot (talk) 14:45, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Michaeljanetscream.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Michaeljanetscream.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. NotifyBot (talk) 14:45, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

MJ
Hi there i put the Michael Jackson article up for FA, ive resolved everyones issues to date. Would you mind putting your input/advise/opposition/ensorsement. Realist2 (talk) 18:51, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

No i agree completely when it becomes FA i want it on good merit not because all my friends were on the bench. What im really trying to do is keep the confersation rolling as there hasnt been any movement on it in two days. Ill take your advise on the small sections though. Cheers. Realist2 (talk) 22:46, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Hey look, ive had a facelift!!!!!!! Realist 2 ( 'Come Speak To Me' ) 22:06, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

I made it even better. -- Realist 2 ( 'Come Speak To Me' ) 23:05, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Janet Jackson
No problem, I've been doing it for Realist 2  for a few of his GA/FA-hopeful articles too. Glad I could be of some help. Cheers,  Kodster  (Willis) (Look what I can do) 03:15, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Ive had that whole madonna 7th #1 album problem over at the discipline album. You should get a further source for madonna update if your going to mention it in the JJ article. Otherwise the sources wont match the text. Im so tired, ;-) Realist 2  ( 'Come Speak To Me' ) 04:20, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Disipline is GA!!! Realist 2 ( 'Come Speak To Me' ) 23:54, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

JJ has been semi protected... for ever. Thanx to me. Annoying vandals!! -- Realist 2 ( 'Come Speak To Me' ) 20:42, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Is this fake. Control The Nation With Discipline Tour. Cheers Realist 2  ( 'Come Speak To Me' ) 02:30, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
 * OK, im taking it out of the Janet article, ill look into having it desolved. Realist 2  ( Come Speak To Me ) 04:19, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Lol, i reported it, because the editer was doing a lot of sneaky stuff. Realist 2  ( Come Speak To Me ) 04:34, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I reported it to the admin that delt with the last incident. Realist 2  ( Come Speak To Me ) 19:55, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Thats what i thought lol. Realist 2 ( Come Speak To Me ) 05:19, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

I dont really have time to build up the tour article, ill stick it on my watch list to remove unsourced edits etc, but other than that im just so over streched on wikipedia right now. Realist 2 ( Come Speak To Me ) 05:34, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Something that might interest you
Take a lookie here. -- Realist 2 ( 'Come Speak To Me' ) 20:44, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Cheers, someone else already added it to the article, thanx for looking out tho. Some good news for MJ. ;-) Realist 2  ( 'Come Speak To Me' ) 06:54, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Signature
No problem, like your sig. Im gonna improve my banner at some point. Realist 2 ( 'Come Speak To Me' ) 19:42, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Back atcha
I, on the other hand, got extremely busy in real life right after I made admin (what timing!), so I haven't done much around here for the last couple of months.

Thanks for the hello. Doczilla STOMP! 08:31, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I'm glad you happened to spot that. I had resisted the temptation to use that remark in the close itself, but then felt compelled to say it in the edit summary. Doczilla  STOMP! 07:12, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Janet Jackson WikiProject
Do you want to make a Janet Jackson wikiproject? God damn it Kylie has one!!!!!!! -- Realist 2 ( Come Speak To Me ) 16:55, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Madonna
Personally I'd go with the latter part of your statement. Pop music is in a sense a catch-all term to describe non-classical music. Madonna isn't necessarily a rock artist, but certain people use "rock" very broadly, to the point where it means "all popular music since the rise of rock 'n roll" (I instantly think of Rolling Stone "Best rock ______ of all time" lists which invariably include pop, hip-hop, and R&B). WesleyDodds (talk) 09:43, 14 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Ive spoken to a few people about having the madonna article re reviewed, im not sure its longer worth a GA states. -- Realist 2 ( 'Come Speak To Me' ) 02:58, 16 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Its miles of the quality of the MJ or JJ article, its overly long 106k bytes!, the lead still needs work but (i can tell that incivil people havent helped you out), sources are poor and many arent formatted. That was just a quick scan without actually reading it. Realist 2  ( 'Come Speak To Me' ) 03:05, 16 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Add your thoughts here if you wish. Cheers. -- Realist 2 ( 'Come Speak To Me' ) 17:59, 16 May 2008 (UTC)


 * I was going to buy it the other day, i picked it off the shelf then put it back, the cover was off putting enough and the lead single just didnt excite me. If later singles are better i might channge my mind. Realist 2  ( Come Speak To Me ) 21:05, 21 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Hmm, im quite a fan of somber songs actually, maybe i will give it a twirl. I miss confessions. Realist 2  ( Come Speak To Me ) 21:15, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

On a different topic, the madonna reassessment, the editer has made a good attempt. However they have marked some of my comments as DONE when they still need improvement. I added comments saying that it wasnt sufficient. Ive left comments there, im considering going through it myself removing crappy sources/dead links and adding Fact tags. Also i might add fact tags to sections that need sourcing point blank. Leave your thoughts regarding this at the madonna review. Cheers. Realist 2 ( Come Speak To Me ) 19:18, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Age issue
I'm no help. Both sides of the discussion make sense to me. With no clear preference of my own, I'd defer to that WikiProject's regulars. It looks like the majority will rule on that one. Doczilla STOMP! 18:04, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

CadenS
Yesterday i logged a complaint against CadenS on your behalf as well as that of the LGBT community, seen here. Just after i logged the complaint my internet connection went down for 15 hours and i was unable to inform you of its progress. Im sorry that in between CadenS found out and accused you of starting a Hate campaign, if I was available i would have set the record straight sooner. CadenS has since been officially warned. I have left a message on the E.O. School shooting talk page. All past comments made by CadenS on that talk page should be removed if they breach BLP policy (some of them do). Any further comments like that should also be reverted. If CadenS continues to soapbox, forum rant, or act with incivility let me know. Realist 2 ( Come Speak To Me ) 19:00, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Reply
-- RyRy5 ( talk ) 00:09, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Your user page design
✅ Any comments? -- RyRy5 ( talk ) 07:30, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I fixed that. Personally, I liked it better when the userboxes were on the side. It makes it look more formal. -- RyRy5 ( talk ) 00:24, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't know how to do that. The template at the bottom is pre-made. Is it okay the way it is?-- RyRy5 ( talk ) 03:36, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Your welcome. -- RyRy5 ( talk ) 04:30, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Madonna reassessment
Hey, take another look, imtrying to get everyone back in to sum up their thoughts. --— Realist 2  ( Come Speak To Me ) 04:10, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Realist2 gives you the evil eye of doom. --— Realist 2  ( Come Speak To Me ) 00:52, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

You know me too well. — Realist 2  ( Come Speak To Me ) 01:06, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

This might make you laugh. Also ive warned the "Rock" editer about 3RR on the madonna article. --— Realist 2  ( Come Speak To Me ) 05:53, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Janet Jackson's Rhythm Nation 1814
Depends on what you want to cite. What is it? WesleyDodds (talk) 23:06, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I would say it's trivial. If you do want to include it, just say, "In the album's liner notes, Jackson dedicated the album to her mother". You don't need an inline cite. WesleyDodds (talk) 23:18, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Macpamanderson.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Macpamanderson.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:07, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Barbara Gordon Batgirl Batwoman
I can look at them in the next few days. I've been meaning to do a copyedit of Barbara Gordon as well, since that is the last thing I feel needs to be taken care of before another FAC pass.
 * I'm sorry, I got caught up running into brick walls at The Beatles and trying to finally finish up Nevermind for a GA nom. I'll get to them tonight. WesleyDodds (talk) 23:58, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I've commented at the Batgirl peer review now. WesleyDodds (talk) 04:48, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * No, sorry. I only have the first trade. I was buying single issues at the time whenever I could find them (no comic shop in the area), so I was confused when I first read a comic with the Cassandra Cain Batgirl, wondering who this dark-haired girl who couldn't talk was. WesleyDodds (talk) 07:07, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I would recommend cutting down on the coverage given to Huntress and Misfit, especially since they were only "temporary" Batgirls. Some more real-world sources would be needed for them. I remember during the "No Man's Land" storyline the new Batgirl was introduced as an intentional mystery by the Batman editorial team; I remember reading in Wizard about how they wanted people to guess who it was, and of course, Wizard started making guesses. If possible, try and find some information as to why they decided to introduce a new Batgirl, and why they created Cassandra Cain to replace Huntress. I'll review the Batwoman article in a bit, but for starters you can probably just retitle "Batwoman in other media" to "Mystery of the Batwoman" and throw in a "main article" link to the DVD, since that is the only appearance the character has made outside of comics. No need for a broad section title. WesleyDodds (talk) 02:41, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

UP & RUNNING!!!
Glad to see all the enthusiasm, all further questions should now be delt with at the Project talk page here where we will discuss our first tasks. Put the project on your watchlist, add the badge to your user page by pasting .Then add your name on the user project page here. — Realist 2  ( Come Speak To Me ) 00:22, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi, what do you think? Leave your comments/ideas there. Cheers. — Realist 2  ( Come Speak To Me ) 00:49, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Janet Jackson/Barnstar Workshop - Take a look. :-) — Realist 2  ( Come Speak To Me ) 02:36, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

LGBT WikiProject Newsletter
{| class="navbox collapsible collapsed" style="text-align: left; border: 0px; margin-top: 0.2em;" ! style="background-color: #CC9966; text-align: center;" |The LGBT studies WikiProject Newsletter  {| The LGBT studies WikiProject Newsletter! Issue XV: June 11, 2008
 * style="border: solid 1px purple;"|
 * style="border: solid 1px purple;"|
 * colspan="2" valign="middle" style="width: 60%; border: 1px purple solid; padding: 1em; background: #ffe4e1" |
 * valign="top" style="border: 1px purple solid; padding: 1em; width: 75%; " |
 * valign="top" style="border: 1px purple solid; padding: 1em; width: 75%; " |

Hello, members and friends of WP:LGBT! I'm not one to be writing newsletters, but I miss our cruise director, Miss Julie, and our project is drifting along with a few leaking plugs in the bottom of the boat. Hey, it happens. Every group we join goes through changes. If Wikipedia weren't so interesting it wouldn't also be so frustrating sometimes. And vice versa. More than one Wikiproject has tumbleweeds blowing through it, but this is one that can't afford to let that happen. Even if you pop in to the talk page of the project, you can let us know you're still around.

{| style="font-size: 90%;"
 * valign="top" |
 * valign="top" |

WP:LGBT's Role in HIV / AIDS articles
It wouldn't be a proper gay community without a li'l bit o' drama! That's right. If we aren't arguing about something, then we should be asking if we're still queer. Maybe that's for the best, since we know we're still kicking. Our most recent topic is how far the role of our project should go in dipping our toes into HIV/AIDS articles. The main AIDS article was delisted as a Featured Article last month, sadly. (Sending a swift kick to WP:Medicine.) A spirited discussion is available for your entertainment on the WP:LGBT talk page about just how much of HIV and AIDS should we take on. As ever, we'll take your opinions under advisement. We're going to have to, because it doesn't seem to have been settled.

Is Pride POV?
We have a pretty cool sidebar that identifies core LGBT articles. Its symbol is the iconic gay pride flag, much like other Wikiprojects have iconic symbols denoting the topic is a core subject in a series of articles. However, a question recently arose asking if the symbol itself is not neutral. Should a pride flag show up at the top of the article on Conversion therapy? How else would anyone know the article is about queer issues? Is there another symbol that is as widely recognized and that includes all our many splintered facets? At what point do we stop asking ourselves all these questions and just go have a mint julep on the verandah and stop caring?

Harvey Milk and Jim Jones
For the love of all that is holy, no Kool Aid jokes. However, an editor involved in pioneering San Francisco Supervisor Harvey Milk's article has included a section about the late supervisor's support of Jim Jones and the People's Temple. While it may be accurate, there is a Request for Comment regarding how much emphasis the section places on Milk's support in light of his overall political influence on the city, and indeed the rest of the United States. Milk's article is a sad one in more ways than one. It lacks the detail and heart that honors its subject. Anyone want to do a barter with me? I'll bring Harvey Milk to featured status (give me a month or two so I can read stuff), if you do something of equal value to WP:LGBT?? Make me an offer...

Queer Studies is offensive!
The established branch of study known as Queer studies was brought up as an category for deletion because an editor was offended by the use of "queer" in the title. It was overwhelmingly rejected mostly by the usernames I see here on our Wikiproject page. (A clue that I know you are out there, hiding...biding your time...) So, I wish I could congratulate you, but now I'm all confused by my sympathy for the editor who was offended. So, if you're reading this, Moni has a short memory and can't remember your username. Don't be put off by our demonstrative pushiness. Join us. We can always use involved editors.

Lambda Literary Awards
What can you do to help the project out? Be a wiki-fairy, on many levels. There are all kinds of articles that need help. Why, just this morning I removed those ugly wikify and cleanup tags from four articles at random. If you can put  around stuff, you can clean up articles. There's a list of articles that need attention at the top of the WP:LGBT talk page. Or you can start with the Lambda Literary Awards, where the goddess of my altar received a pioneering award, and was "reduced to rubble" by Katherine V. Forrest's wonderful speech. The 20th ceremony of the Lambda Literary Awards, which celebrates LGBT literature, took place in West Hollywood on May 29th. The page needs to be updated with the new winners, to be found on the official website.


 * valign="top" |

Yeshayahu Leibowitz, Arthur C. Clarke and Bernard Montgomery
Why on earth would someone want to delete material about homosexuality? 'Tis truly a mystery. But these embattled articles have some random evil gnomes removing information that places these folks under our queer umbrella. Help us keep an eye out for the deletions. Take a peek at the articles, familiarize yourselves with the info, and be handy with the undo function in the article history. If tempers flare, take it to the Hall monitors and let them sort it out. Best solution is to make sure your sources are immaculate.

This month's Wiki stars
This is what I get for opening my big fat mouth and suggesting the newsletter should be revived. Here I am writing it. So, to pat self on back (*cough*) Mulholland Dr. became a featured article in May. This is A Good Thing since it is my personal declaration that there is no such thing as lesbian porn. I don't care what Benjiboi says about the video collection at goodvibes. Instead, we have hot women who connect on a deep, personal, soul-touching level, so this film should qualify as some of the skankiest porn available for lesbians. Plus, it's completely confusing and surreal! D'you think Laura Harring would care that the article is featured? I don't think so either... (Call me, Laura!)

Compulsive hoarding of templates
Once I saw a harrowing episode of Animal Planet's Animal Cops where this guy had, like, 250 cats in his house and it freaked me right out. I'm drawing a parallel between 250 cats and, well...three, really, templates in articles involving LGBT issues. Can we stick to one, maybe? In the aforementioned Harvey Milk's article there's a core LGBT template, a link to the LGBT portal, and a sidebar for LGBT rights. Jiminy! You'd think we weren't the folk to set industrial grey carpeting and track lighting in vogue. An LGBT footer was designed to link to articles of interest that aren't the aforementioned core articles. What do you think, can we have either an LGBT template for core articles, a footer for LGBT articles that are high profile but not core, or an LGBT rights template? As ever, anything's up for discussion on the WP:LGBT talk page.

The Violet Quill and magazines
Zigzig20s suggests we create an article on The Violet Quill, as it seems such a milestone in the advancement of gay/queer literature. Members of the Quill all have pages of their own (Edmund White, Christopher Cox, Robert Ferro, Michael Grumley, Andrew Holleran, Felice Picano, and George Whitmore). We need to find more info on the Quill per se to reference the page that we create. Perhaps Google Books - and libraries? - can help.

A number of magazines also need articles, perhaps most notably QW, LGNY, and Lesbian Feminist Liberation.

Mom's nagging for Pride Month
It's June, Pride month. Wear sunscreen, stay hydrated, get a designated driver, then go half-dressed in the streets find a girlfriend or boyfriend, or some homo who's standing there looking lonely and kiss 'em up real good. Remember, it all started 39 years ago when a bunch of drag queens just got fed the f*ck up by the cops raiding the bar and dragging them all out to the pokey again. Rock on, queens! Enjoy your celebrations. My town's is in October, and 200 people attend. I miss Denver.

Fresh faces to brighten our pages
Hey, I've seen you around! Sorry there seem to be so many—it's been a while. But we welcome you all: Cheezisyum21, Taineyah, Dustihowe, Avesta69, RachelSummers77, Vivekgopinathan, AMK1211, Staffwaterboy, Ted Ted, Joe5150, Leahtwosaints, Robapalooza, Arthomure, Confusionball, Affinity likely, PrinceOfCanada, Yobmod, Npd2983, Neagley, Bvlax2005, Bvlax2005, Rhullsf, Textorus, Kieran.casey, Tyciol, Meojive, Sappho'd, Bookkeeperoftheoccult,  Gaywarrior, Aujourd'hui, maman est morte, and Balin42632003.

It looks like we've picked up a lot of talent lately. We have no doubt you'll be making your indelible mark on LGBT knowledge as we know it, here at Wikipedia.

- In the immortal words of Miss Julie, "May all your Wiki days be bright, and may your Love Boat never turn into a Poseidon."
 * }

We miss you, Miss Julie, as well as all the others who have graced our project and are on wiki-breaks or just got fed up with all the nuttiness and went to live their lives. Get your stupid houses built and hurry up and come back. --Moni3 (talk) 16:52, 9 June 2008 (UTC) To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please let us know here. If you have any news or any announcements to be broadcast, do let Moni3 know.
 * valign="top" colspan="2" style="padding: 0.5em; text-align: right; font-size: 85%; " |
 * valign="top" colspan="2" style="padding: 0.5em; text-align: right; font-size: 85%; " |
 * }
 * }

This newsletter was delivered by §hepBot around 16:02, 11 June 2008 (UTC). ShepBot (talk) 16:11, 11 June 2008 (UTC)