User talk:Bouncehoper

/Archive 1

Frankie Valli
First, some of your edits were fine. Though I believe some of your word choices were just that - choices, neither better or worse (for example, the use of "debut" and "sophomore" in reference to Frankie's album releases, or, the word 'scored' in reference to his number one hits).

The group was known as The 4 Seasons until the Motown period in 1971-1972. The entry for "The Four Seasons" is in error by not referencing that. It's a shame really because the numeric '4' looked pretty cool on all their releases in the sixties. Also, at the same time, the numeric '4' was used in all of their publicity, etc.

As far as reading the album titles, they look fine to me. They offer pretty good information as to product number, mono or stereo, and content. The titles are taken directly from the albums themselves.Bbrownlie (talk) 20:15, 17 September 2009 (UTC)bbrownlie

I apologize for mis-spelling your user ID. I'm usually pretty good at getting them right. The message from eyes to my brain didn't quite work on this one.

I wouldn't call the naming of books, movies, album titles incorrect grammar. As titles, they are made to call attention to the consumer in various ways. They are in and of themselves attractive (or even off-putting unattractive) because of their uniqueness, which sometimes may be in the form of bad grammar. Bbrownlie (talk) 17:36, 18 September 2009 (UTC)bbrownlie

Amor Prohibido
Hey, the Japanese page of Amor Prohibido states that the album went gold. If so, don't you think the information should be edited on the English version? User: AJona1992 —Preceding undated comment added 00:28, 24 January 2010 (UTC).
 * Whatever. I don't know Japanese. Does it have a citation?
 * Bouncehoper (talk) 12:27, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Your message on my talk page.
Your edits make me laugh, you try to come across as a some form of hardcore English language authority, however your page is littered with your own grammatical mistakes. I corrected them, so don't start crying just because I pointed out that your English is not quite as good as you thought it was. 119.173.81.176 (talk) 04:33, 14 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Hmm, let's see now. "Your edits make me laugh [change comma to semi-colon] you try to come across as [delete the word "a"] some form of hardcore English language authority [change comma to period and capitalize the "h" in "however" to begin a new sentence]owever your page is littered with your own grammatical mistakes. I corrected them, so don't start crying just because I pointed out that your English is not quite as good as you thought it was."
 * Also, you're apparently too chicken to bother with actually identifying yourself; otherwise, you too!!!! could have a userpage someone could vandalize. (And yes, I know those exclamation points are "incorrect"; it's called "voice" in writing. It's fun, try it!)
 * Bouncehoper (talk) 22:06, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh dearie me again, I noticed you apparently like to frequently edit under your IP instead of your actual name. Forgive me for the slight, if you would be so very kind.
 * (Hey, do you know what that's called? It's "sarcasm"; it is also quite enjoyable.)
 * Bouncehoper (talk) 22:10, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Non-free images
Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. We always appreciate when users upload new images. However, it appears that one or more of the images you have recently uploaded or added to an article may fail our non-free image policy. Most often, this involves editors uploading or using a copyrighted image of a living person. For other possible reasons, please read up on our Non-free image criteria. Please note that we take very seriously our criteria on non-free image uploads and users who repeatedly upload or misuse non-free images may be blocked from editing. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. --194.176.105.49 (talk) 07:33, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh, poop. Someone had done something very similar on Jujubee (drag queen), and I thought it was ok. That's my bad. Sorry!
 * Bouncehoper (talk) 01:53, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Sophomore v Second
Please don't change the manual of style as you did here without discussing it on the relevant talk page first. Especially as you appear to have changed to support your point of view. Thanks --194.176.105.40 (talk) 07:37, 15 April 2011 (UTC)


 * I only did that because I checked the history, and that silly little blurb was added for no apparent reason, nor after any discussion. It was also poorly written, and some random user took it upon themselves to go around on a crusade after noticing that one little sentence. It's dumb to bother with on its own (all that without even a quick proofread on these pages?!?!), and really, unless there are giant complaints, there's no point in going through and editing every single instance.
 * Please bother to log in before you waste your time defacing my page. Thanks.
 * Bouncehoper (talk) 01:46, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
 * The silly little blurb as you call it has been in Wikipedia's manual of style since June 2009 when it was added by User:Stifle, who happens to be an administrator. As it has been there so long it has consensus. Do not change it or articles without gaining consensus to do so on the talk page there. If you continue to make the changes without consensus, it will be considered vandalism and you may be blocked from editing. --194.176.105.54 (talk) 08:09, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
 * So if I posted that the Queen of England was a man, and it stayed on the page for 2 years, then it wouldn't be allowed to be removed, because it has consensus? Please. Your argument is invalid. :::Did Mr./Ms. Stifle bother to ask anyone about this? No, there is nothing to evidence this on the talk page. Kind of defeats the purpose of being an admin if you're just randomly putting things in to fit your own agenda. Also, again, POORLY written. If one is to attempt to make policy, one should at least know how to write well. Guess I'll have to fix it.
 * This, again, coming from someone too chicken to identify themselves. And I'll just bet you went through every one of my edits and "fixed" them, because it's very easy for you to see what I've done, but I can't possibly see what you've done, because "YOU" are not an entity. Great job, very winning.
 * Also, your accounts have been blocked multiple times for poor choices. I find it very hard to trust the opinion of someone who has been such a terrible Wiki participant.
 * Bouncehoper (talk) 22:24, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Please stop making edits which are against Wikipedia's Manual of Style. If you continue to do so, you are likely to be blocked from editing. With regards to my use of an IP address for editing, please can you read WP:AGF and you may want to look in to the fact that an IP address can be used by more than one person. I have never vandalised Wikipedia in the 5+ years I've edited here ... again WP:AGF is relevant. --194.176.105.47 (talk) 09:14, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
 * All the IPs you are using geolocate to Manchester, England. I suggest you stop following this editor around and harassing them because it looks like a pretty narrow range to block. I picked up on what you are doing when one of your IPs just made this edit to Jack the Ripper. Since they gave the first "warning" and you gave the second, it doesn't take a genius to figure out that you are the same editor. Edits to Proof (2005 film) make it even more obvious. Register an account, stop IP-hopping and stop editing unconstructively. Doc   talk  09:31, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
 * P.S. - Bouncehoper, you seem to have a pattern of reverting other editors as well. This is getting more interesting, I must say... Doc   talk  09:55, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi Doc, thanks for the support. I'm not bothering with reverting anymore, as this person will just re-revert (is that a word?), and I don't have that kind of time to go back constantly. I saw a vague consensus on the page, but again, frankly, I don't have the time nor energy to fight.
 * Bouncehoper (talk) 11:31, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Random
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at 2gether: Again, you may be blocked from editing. --194.176.105.56 (talk) 11:25, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
 * PLEASE STOP FOLLOWING ME.
 * Bouncehoper (talk) 11:31, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

This is your last warning; the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at 2gether: Again, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. --194.176.105.56 (talk) 11:54, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
 * His edit was not vandalism, and AIV would not be the place to go. Trust me: I've taken many editors there and know who will get blocked for vandalism and who will not. This is probably going to wind up at AN/I, and it's probably not going to end well for the IP user. The level of hounding is pretty bad, and a block of the cluster of IPs would be pretty easy to do. Doc   talk  12:15, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
 * You know what else I love about you, Mr./Ms. Anon? The fact that since you're reverting from different IPs means you can violate 3RR (as you've done today) and not get dinged for it because you're not signed in and can't be tracked the same way. Very clever, you know. I could do the same thing (edit under IPs at work/home/whatever), but I won't since it's wrong. Just sayin'...
 * Thanks again for the support, Doc.
 * Bouncehoper (talk) 17:07, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
 * No problem. Your "pal" has switched to another network, but the harassing continues. IP-hopping to continue edit-stalking is one of the most cowardly things I've encountered on this project, and there are remedies for it. Cheers... Doc   talk  06:28, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I noticed. And suddenly he/she, once not on work time, has an attitude...hmmm...
 * Bouncehoper (talk) 11:24, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi, Bouncehoper. Thanks to Doc9871's alertness to this problem, I have calculated some range blocks we can use if the harrassment continues. Keep in touch. Sorry about the pics. -- Diannaa (Talk) 05:55, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks a bunch, really appreciate it. Will let you know if Mr./Ms. Anon returns.
 * Bouncehoper (talk) 03:14, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Jessica Wild
Thanks for your message on pronouns. Legally, since Jessica Wild is a fictional persona, the article is mainly about the person who entertains in that persona. Jose Sierra is legally a man, and the article is about his life, not Jessica (it talks about his birth and his personal life). Transsexuals such as Amanda Lepore and Alexis Arquette can use the female pronoun because they are legally (on paper and after surgery) now females. Please notice that at the very beginning of the Jessica Wild article, Jose Sierra's complete name starts the article. Therefore male pronouns should be used. A contestant on that season of Rupaul's Drag Race (Sonique) announced he was undergoing a sex change process. Until his process is complete and is publicly ackonwledged, than the male pronouns are used. Chaz Bono's article saw this change when she legally became a man. --XLR8TION (talk) 00:48, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I am inclined to agree. However, other pages differ as well-- Sahara's has "she", and Raven's and Morgan McMichaels's have "she" and "he". So perhaps, "he" for the actual person and his background, "she" for their performance?
 * Bouncehoper (talk) 18:05, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Drag Queen pronouns
As on RuPaul's Drag Race, the queens I know in real life use "she" in drag and sometimes out of drag. However, there may be a cultural difference as Jessica Wild is from Puerto Rico; also, this season on Drag Race some of the other queens from PR occasionally said "he." Hope I could help.  &mdash; AM K 1211 t a lk! 01:39, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Additionally, it ultimately comes down to an individual's preference, so I don't think we need to come to a consensus on pronoun usage for all drag queens. Some prefer she, some prefer he, some don't have a preference.  &mdash; AM K 1211 t a lk! 01:41, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, but your edit contained the summary- "On the show and in actuality, drag queens are regularly referred to using feminine pronouns, despite their biological male sex." I am more inclined to agree with XLR8TION, that since they are not in fact female, they should be referred to as male. However, other pages differ as well-- Sahara's has "she", and Raven's and Morgan McMichaels's have "she" and "he". So perhaps, "he" for the actual person and his background, "she" for their performance?
 * Bouncehoper (talk) 18:03, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

FYI
It's been like that for a while now, studio albums are supposed be seperated from the compilations or "other" albums which is what the Christmas albums are. Live and Die 4 Hip Hop (talk) 04:29, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, but where is the guideline for that?
 * Thanks!
 * Bouncehoper (talk) 11:11, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Wary of IPs
Please don't be, or at least not significantly more so than named accounts. I guess some of my comments are based on a view I have as an IP where many times there is a view which paints those editing "anonymously" as generally where all "bad" behaviour comes from, or assumes that an IP who gets involved in strong debates must have something to hide. My IP was the same for a couple of years and just changed, prior to the current IP I've been accused of being socks of more people (including various admins) than I care to remember. Whereas (ignoring low level vandalism), there are huge numbers of banned users who registered in order to actually make themselves more anonymous, creating accounts isn't too tough and those IP hopping (if they are aware of the change) could easily just create an account or two per IP. Good luck in your future editing and hope things settle down now. --82.7.44.178 (talk) 06:56, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm only currently, since the crazy anon went postal on me. No worries; most IPs mean well.
 * Bouncehoper (talk) 11:32, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Second
It doesn't seem redundant to me. Tony  (talk)  04:02, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi there,
 * "Avoid referring to an artist's second album or single". The preferred word is already in the guidelines, so the second sentence is unnecessary.
 * Thanks,
 * Bouncehoper (talk) 11:33, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:17, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of David López (actor)


The article David López (actor) has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * nn former child actor

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on |the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. H.dryad (talk) 20:40, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Tram-Anh Tran


The article Tram-Anh Tran has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * nn former child actor

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on |the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. H.dryad (talk) 20:44, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Mayteana Morales


The article Mayteana Morales has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * nn former child actor

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on |the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. H.dryad (talk) 20:44, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Openbookdatruth.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Openbookdatruth.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:56, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Mchhnsync.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Mchhnsync.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:52, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Tedashiikingdompeople.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Tedashiikingdompeople.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:50, 4 May 2021 (UTC)