User talk:Morbidthoughts/Archive 1

Sasha Knox
I'm aware that films can be delayed in release, however that isn't the case here. She's had 30+ films released since June, and most of them aren't flagged as compilations in IAFD. Porn companies aren't known for sitting on films for 10 months which would have to be the case for some of these release dates. Additionally, she's shown up on website press releases over 6 months after her stated retirement date and put her myspace back up. Horrorshowj 23:04, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Image:Aliciaalighatti-avn2006.jpg
Hi did you take this pic?Genisock2 19:40, 4 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Yes. Yes, I did. Vinh1313 (talk) 21:20, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * thankyou for letting me know.Genisock2 (talk) 01:03, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Image:SG01.jpg
Actually, since the image is a Commons image and not a Wikipedia image, you should make your deletion request here. The page also has instructions for Commons speedy deletion procedures and copyvio reporting. Videmus Omnia Talk  16:55, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Also, the list of OTRS folks can be found here - "permissions" is the list that would apply to photo copyrights. I personally have found User:Riana and User:Deskana to be very helpful. Videmus Omnia Talk  16:59, 16 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks and done. I find the deletion request procedure to be overly complicated though. Vinh1313 (talk) 17:36, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
 * No argument here, it can take a while to get images deleted on Commons. Videmus Omnia Talk  17:42, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Do you know the copyright holder of the image? Any chance of his releasing it, or any of his other great photos, under a free license? Videmus Omnia Talk  17:53, 16 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Yes. Leyden is my friend and colleague. I'll forward the request for you, but you can always ask him directly on flickr. I also have a substantial library myself beyond my flickr account. I am willing to donate images to fill any gaps in pornproject. However, I don't like to grant CC licenses through flickr itself and would rather upload the picture directly to wikipedia. All you have to do is ask. Vinh1313 (talk) 18:06, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I deleted the photo at Commons for now, if your friend would like to donate his photo a copy can be re-uploaded later. Sometime soon I'll look through his photos at Commons and put together a request. In the meantime, would you mind contributing a photo of Olivia O'Lovely? The current photo there is a possible copyvio. Take care... Videmus Omnia Talk  04:01, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
 * New Pic is up. Vinh1313 (talk) 04:16, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
 * It looks great, thanks! I hope you don't mind - I copied that photo to the Commons, along with the other photos you uploaded. The Caylian Curtis photo, especially, was fantastic. Videmus Omnia Talk  05:19, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Dana DeArmond
i have a written contract with dana dearmond. her official site is danadearmond.com where would you like me to send you a copy of our contract so that you may verify this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.225.230.183 (talk) 01:39, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Your contract is simply irrelevant to whether we consider it official. Is she continuing to provide any new materials for it? Is she continuing to endorse it? She says no. If she says it's not official, then it's not official. Your contract is with her not us. If she's contracted to endorse your website, then enforce the contract with her. Wikipedia is not the forum to arbitrate these issues. Vinh1313 (talk) 04:48, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

bobbi starr
Vinh, commenting on your post at Bobbi's Myspace: I am not "pissed", heh. We just had a disagreement. I wanted there to be an article on Bobbi Starr because I like her video's and I wanted to do something back in return (unlike some other guys I am not a pathetic loser who adores pornstars seeing them as a sort of ideal, imaginary girlfriend, going to pornmeetings, corresponding and wanting to know all about their personal life, etc; there is not much to admire about having sex for money, let's be honest). The main point is that she has an article with good information. So my goal is achieved. It's up to others to expand it. In the discussion section I added some more missing but relevant information. For the present I think I have spend enough time on this.Cometappears (talk) 00:24, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Ashlynn Brooke permission
Hey VinH1313...

I am trying to figure out how to respond to you. I apologize for the delay. I'm new to adding things here. So with these comments I hope they make it to you. I appreciate your comments. Uploading a photo is far more tougher than one would think. I do have permission to use the photo, and already sent the e-mail of agreement to Permissions [permissions-at-wikimedia-org]. I am not sure how to place a link with the pic, to the e-mail I received. Thanks for any help you might give.

From:

Ashlynn B.. myspace.com/ashlynn_brooke Date: Dec 31, 2007 7:50 PM Flag as Spam or Report Abuse [ ? ] Subject: RE: Hi again Body: yeah sure use any pic ya want!! thanks again.. and my bday is aug. 14 not 13! thanks hun! Ash

Ms. Ashlynn Brooke,

I found your MySpace page while doing research for the free online encyclopedia Wikipedia, and thought your a couple of your images might be appropriate for inclusion in our articles concerning your bio.

I am specifically seeking your permission to use this image: http://i131.photobucket.com/albums/p288/aallen77/picsfromcha d436.jpg

I would like to include your image in these articles: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashlynn_Brooke

Wikipedia (http://www.wikipedia.org/) is a free encyclopedia that is collaboratively edited by volunteers from around the world. Our goal is to create a comprehensive knowledge base that may be freely distributed and available at no charge.

Normally we ask permission for material to be used under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License...... (presented he license text in full) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Michaeltm99 (talk • contribs) 01:17, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I put the picture back in and noted that you forwarded the permission to otrs. They may have some further instructions for you with the picture. Sorry for the mixup. Vinh1313 (talk) 01:20, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

No problem... I don't want to mess with the system, and want to do it correct. Again, thanks for your help! MichaelTM99 (talk), 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Slow up
In regards to your mass "Speedy" and AfD nominations. Slow up. If you have legitimate concerns over each of these articles, you can submit them individually. By mass-nominating, you prevent concerned editors from giving each article due consideration, and you prevent concerned editors from having the time to sufficiently research and find sourcing for each article. Again, slow up. Regards. Dekkappai (talk) 17:37, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I am reviewing and submitting the speedy and AfD nomination individually (on a case by case basis). If it's too fast for you, that's not my problem. What surprises me is that the notability of renominated articles still have not been established with proper sources after contentious discussion. Vinh1313 (talk) 17:45, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Given the sheer volume of material which you've put up, I'd say there is decent risk of you being in violation of WP:POINT. To reiterate, slow up. Please. Tabercil (talk) 18:14, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
 * The only point I'm trying to make is that I don't think the articles I've nominated are notable for inclusion into Wikipedia. Some of the speedies that were defended, I didn't afd later because I hadn't recognised their proposed notability. The others I afd'd. So what's supposed to be the going rate for this process? 2 a day? 4 a day? Vinh1313 (talk) 18:18, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi. I noticed these AFDs because I've been editing some Japan-related pages and watching some Japanese Wikipedians talk pages. It seems apparent that you are missing a very important cultural detail. In Japan, AV stars often appear on mainstream Japanese television. This is quite different than in countries like the United States, where pornographic actors do not, except for some unusual reason. So it's pretty easy for me to believe that if your nominated actresses sell many videos, they would appear many times on mainstream Japanese TV. I don't know if the WP:Bio guideline needs to be changed to reflect this difference; however, as the guideline stands, these appearances would be enough. So what you are doing is somewhat unfair. Anybody with knowledge of Japan would know selling many videos means multiple appearance on mainstream Japanese TV. But to pinpoint these appearances (because there are so many by AV stars in general), one would need like a TV guide and be frequently watching Japanese TV, jotting down these details. I don't expect there are many such people doing this, especially not for the purpose of saving articles on English Wikipedia from deletion. --C S (talk) 12:31, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I realise some of those articles were written before the wp:bio were set as it is but I can't just presume that Japanese stars are on mainstream TV simply from the number of videos they did. If there was any mention of mainstreaming in article, I wouldn't have afd'd it. I looked at many Japanese articles from A-H and only felt the need to speedy/afd two of them so it's not that I'm unfairly targeting them based on flawed guidelines. Vinh1313 (talk) 14:20, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

I'd just like to say that I totally agree with your recent AfD activity, but I wouldn't want to see something like this happen to you. Epbr123 (talk) 01:50, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Removing Self-Promotional Links and References
Please do not remove relevant citations for XC content. The links aren't spam, and not all of them have been placed by us. IE IB.Gkleinman (talk) 20:19, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm removing the ones you and your proxies placed in violation of wp:soap. Vinh1313 (talk) 20:21, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
 * They are legitimate citations! Gkleinman (talk) 21:07, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
 * It doesn't matter. You can't be the one that's putting them in. Someone else (besides one of your proxies) has to put it in.Vinh1313 (talk) 21:08, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
 * WP:Truce OK lets work together here so that legit citations exist where they should, ok? Gkleinman (talk) 21:54, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Truce will only be achieved when you stop inserting links and references to your websites directly into unrelated articles. If you feel they are legit, then you propose them indirectly through the article discussion page. Vinh1313 (talk) 21:59, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
 * How about this. Rather than purge us from all the pages. I'll agree to propose future links through the discussion page. I feel this is a fare compromise here. Again my intent here is to have valid citations where appropriate. And I respect that you're trying to do the same. Are you agreeable to this? Gkleinman (talk) 22:01, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
 * A true starting over requires a purge of any of your links that you inserted. Vinh1313 (talk) 22:10, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Well i can't win either way. I added info into the Digital Playground talk page http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Digital_Playground&action=history

and it got removed by another editor. Gkleinman (talk) 22:13, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I put them back in the discussion. However, those blogs may be more appropriate in the performer's pages if they exist. Vinh1313 (talk) 22:19, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I've let the reversions of Digital Playground and AVN Expo stand. I removed the link on IAFD and have apologized as I honestly didn't recall making that edit. I'm going to put suggested links on the talk pages going forward. I believe that's a very fair and reasonable way to proceed. OK? Gkleinman (talk) 22:21, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

comment Thank you for your constructive guidance and help. Again wasn't intending to sully WP. Will definitely add only to discussion any XC links. Appreciate your help. Gkleinman (talk) 00:46, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

You may want to weigh in on this discussion as it's being proposed again that the XC WP be deleted. as promised I've agreed not to make any edits to the article and only suggest contributions on talk pages Gkleinman (talk) 17:43, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Assume good faith
Regarding THIS EDIT, I believe that my edit history shows that I have shown far more interest in the quality of articles on the Japanese erotic cinema than yours has. You recently attempted to Speedy Delete THIS ARTICLE which had a "Best Actress" award plainly mentioned at the time. I have helped delete articles in this area in the past, and will continue to do so. Please assume good faith from others, and please be more careful in nominating for deletion articles on subjects about which you have demonstrated no knowledge or interest. Dekkappai (talk) 21:23, 8 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I am assuming good faith when talking about your guideline nullification defense. It's a comparison to the concept of jury nullification (made famous through johnny cochran and made fun of by south park). As for Hasegawa, the "Best Actress" award was not "plainly" mentioned when couched as Erotic Cinderella (especially when you clarified it in a later edit. I interpreted it as a role. Tell you what. Since you are the expert in Japanese porn, anytime I feel there's a notability issue in article, I'll just tag it with the notability tag, and then inform you in a message. That way you won't have to do the cultural bias guideline nullification when you have already shown that you can strengthen the article in a way that satisfy the guidelines (according to the past afds). Vinh1313 (talk) 09:34, 9 January 2008 (UTC)


 * You are not assuming good faith when you continue to call my defense a "guideline nullification defense." The guidelines clearly say, right at the top for added emphasis, that they are to be taken "with common sense and the occasional exception." I advocate following that statement and interpreting these rules which must be applied to a very diverse set of articles. The WP:PORNBIO rules in particular are very Anglo- and U.S.-centric, and probably inevitably so. Putting a special-exception clause for Japanese subjects into the rules seems rather absurd when all we have to do is follow the rules as they stand-- "with common sense and the occasional exception." These rules can be reasonably interpreted to accomodate a wide diversity of subjects, as long as the letter of the rule is not followed literally to the point of extremism. To interpret my advocating treating these rules with common sense, as stated in the guidelines themelves, as intentionally dazzling the jury with bullshit or advocating nullifying the guidelines is incorrect, and, I feel, an accusation of bad faith.
 * Given the linguistic, cultural, geographical, etc. difficulties in finding appropriate sourcing for these subjects, I think tagging for Notability is a much better and more honest approach to the problem. Certainly better than "Speedy"ing without notification. I do have other interests in life, and in editing here, and I do try to step away from the subject of Japanese porn occasionally. It seems that whenever I do, however, a new case of deletion-madness breaks out. A "Notability" tag will give me time to work on articles which are by no means easy subjects, and also give me time to determine which are not notable. I've voted to delete articles which my efforts to source have shown to be not notable, and I will continue to do this. But more often, I've strengthened the articles in the category, and I will continue trying to upgrade the others as well. Dekkappai (talk)

21:43, 9 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I am assuming good faith on your part in that you don't think the guidelines apply in the scenario when you assert your defense. Jury nullification just means arguing for the jury to ignore the law in order to achieve a certain goal or end. Chewbacca defense was just a pop culture reference/joke for epbr123. Vinh1313 (talk) 00:03, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
 * OK, this is getting absurd. I think the guidelines apply. The guidelines state that they "should be treated with common sense and the occasional exception." Dekkappai (talk) 00:10, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

P-star photos
Hello, I noticed that you have your own rights to the photos on flickr (you took them yourself), if so then could you upload the 'Rebeca Linares' one you have and the 'Nadia Styles' many thanks...i also noticed that some of the photos have been requested for deletion by other users thinking that you do not have the rights to the photos...in you have full rights then maybe it would be good to put alittle more info in self made line description section...thanks! Britannic1 (talk) 17:25, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm actually out taking pictures right now since it's AVN Expo week. I'll get back next week and will work on your request. You have to be more specific if you want a certain picture. Vinh1313 (talk) 07:12, 11 January 2008 (UTC)


 * What is wrong with the current Rebeca Linares picture? Vinh1313 (talk) 17:32, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Ohh..well its beens there for quite awhile and other photos are used in other wikiedia language versions. and wiki commons has many photos of the same peson eg: carmen Luvana etc...but to be honest ive had a flick through your photos and they all/are the best ive seen in terms of clarity! and are very professional which is why i thought the ones i chose were some of the best. Hope you agree to some of them.Britannic1 (talk) 20:34, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Would it possible to change and put some of these photo on wiki too? Please??...the ones already up are cut amateur photos. Just click the links - "Rebeca Linares," or R-Linares 2 "Lela star" and "Avy lee roth" ..ThankYou Much appreaciated!! 81.159.137.28 (talk) 10:19, 24 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I am not replacing the Rebeca Linares picture. It is sufficiently adequate. Vinh1313 (talk) 05:23, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Britney Rears
I saw that you had participated in the discussion and argued for "Merge per Epbr123". I've been rewriting the article, and Epbr switched his position to "Weak Keep". If you have time, would you mind reviewing the article to see if you feel it has improved enough for an independent article? Horrorshowj (talk) 04:07, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
 * This is a bad week for me since it's AVN Expo week. Sorry. Vinh1313 (talk) 07:28, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
 * No worries. Hope the expo goes well for you. Horrorshowj (talk) 21:49, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Micky Yanai
Well, I promise not to get anywhere near as emotionally involved over a Micky Yanai speedy as a Shoko Goto speedy ;) Honestly, I don't know if I've never seen the guy. I've heard of him, he's probably one of the only one or two well-known male stars in the Japan AV industry. Because the Japanese industry is so female-centric (which is one reason I prefer it to the U.S.), all I could find are pictures of the women he's twirled. The only two pictures of the Helicopter Man himself I could find are: and  Looks like the same guy to me. Who's this though? Looks like someone I know... Dekkappai (talk) 01:58, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't know. She had a box cover of hers that identified her as just Junko. I also saw Mirai Haneda but didn't know if she was notable. There were five or six JAV girls running around but I haven't really hung out with one since Fujiko Kano. Vinh1313 (talk) 02:56, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

CSDs
Hi there. A quick note: CSD/A7 is for articles that do not assert why they're important-- not for people who are arguably not-notable. If you believe that an article falls under the latter category, please use proposed deletion or articles for deletion. Thanks for helping out, and cheers. =) -- slakr \ talk / 07:09, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Asian p-star photo
Hi there, is it possible to add one of the photos you have of this actress to her wikipedia article..& help any other asian stars without photosPriya Rai Please..Thankyou. Bluesky26 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 18:00, 7 February 2008 (UTC)


 * I'll refrain since the article is being considered for deletion currently. Vinh1313 (talk) 19:29, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

XCritic
morbidthoughts. I need your help. I know we got off on the wrong foot, but my hope is after you spent time talking to Don Houston you realize that I have good intent and respect for WP and the key editors (like yourself) who contribute. I posted the issue in Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Pornography I'd really appreciate your help. Also I'm more than happy to address any concerns you have with me so whatever issues there may be can get addressed. Thanks Gkleinman (talk) 18:37, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Give it a couple of more month so that your website becomes more prominent among published reliable secondary sources. Wikipedia is a tertiary publication so it's forced to rely on those sources. Meanwhile you can do your part by putting your name out there with those secondary sources. It's more difficult to access mainstream media with xcritic than dvdtalk due to the subject matter but in time XCritic will satisfy wikipedia's notability requirement. Vinh1313 (talk) 21:12, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

S-Pic
Hi, I just wandered if it would be possible to post a photo on the Lusious Lopez article...Lousious Lopez- Red Dress./Many thanks. Britannic1 (talk) 13:08, 27 February 2008 (UTC)


 * It's done. Vinh1313 (talk) 22:07, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Censorship
I do not know about that! Wikipedia is incorporated in USA so it is bound by USA constitution and laws. If Wikipedia knowledgably and by intent suprasses an unpopular point of view and goes against its own notability policy it could be determined as censorship and a violation of the First Amendment - The Freedom of Speech! May need to be taken to Supreme Court to decide this one, not in AFD..:) Igor Berger (talk) 03:25, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * No, the First Amendment protects people from the actions of the American government; not private foundations. That is established. Vinh1313 (talk) 04:24, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Realy? That is interesting. So private foundations can subvert and social engineer society as much as they want? Sounds like a carta blank for the goverment to exploit. US goverment can use a foundation as a proxy to influence and control the behavior of the masses. I find this hard to believe. I would think the First Amendment applies to all US entities and citizens. "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." US Bill of Rights Igor Berger (talk) 05:55, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Meetup/Montreal
I see you are a user located in Montréal, you may be interested in: Meetup/Montreal. Please add your name to the "Interested" or to the "Not interested" list. Date is set for May 3rd 2008 and Buffet La Stanza is the proposed location. If you have another idea for the location; propose away! Please pass on to any Montreal Wikis you maybe aware of and who are not yet listed as interested, may be interested, or not interested. Pro bug catcher (talk • contribs). 05:04, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Monica Sweet
Thanks for constructive feedback and suggestions, I really should have read them before recreating the article on Monica Sweet. However, I strongly disagree on she not being notably enough. According to IMDB, she has starred in more than 70 movies - including the famous Pink Velvet trilogy - outnumbering, for example, Sophie Moone and Peaches (Judit Rusznyák). Besides, according to Viv Thomas, Monica Sweet (who is known as Jo nowadays) has been one of his most popular models over the years. No wonder she has been awarded VT Babe of the month twice and Babe of the year once - a record no other VT girl can match!

So, could you please return her wikipedia site that was deleted in July 2007, IIRC? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Narrycheni (talk • contribs) 23:02, 19 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia needs more proof than just IMDB to establish notability. The number of pornographic movies she is in is actually not important. What is more important is if mainstream media like newspapers and magazines (not porno), have written about her. I don't mean photoshoots. I mean actual biographical articles about her. She may have won awards but Viv Thomas awards are not very well known and are the opinion of someone that may not even be notable. Vinh1313 (talk) 23:35, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

I agree that notability of Viv Thomas awards is arguable, but no one can deny the notability of being a Hustler centerfold. Monica Sweet was the centerfold in November 2005 and this fact can be easily verified on the Official website of Hustler. Actually, they have a small bio about her there too, but I'm not linking it here, as it contains adult material.

Besides of that, IAFD recognizes her as well, and so does NationMaster encyclopedia. Especially the latter qualifies as a non-porno, reliable source.

Monica Sweet on IAFD

Monica Sweet on NationMaster


 * Sorry, Monica Sweet was decided by a consensus of editors not to be notable enough for Wikipedia. They even addressed the Hustler issue.Vinh1313 (talk) 02:26, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

The consensus was based partly on false information. The editors for deleting justified their opinion on lack of independent, reliable sources. That's not true, as NationMaster has an article about her. As for the Hustler issue, even an editor for deleting admitted that in Monica's case, it helps her notability a bit. Besides, she has done a lot more than that.--Narrycheni (talk) 14:13, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
 * The Nationmasters encyclopedia is NOT a reliable source for notability. The article there is an older copy of the wikipedia article. IAFD is not a source to establish notability either. Vinh1313 (talk) 14:46, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Silvia Lancome
Hello. Just wanted to point out that there are some vandals on that article removing sourced content. If you could please keep an eye on it that would be great. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.93.219.52 (talk) 18:14, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure what the edit war is about but it seems more like a case of stubbornness over disputed content than vandalism. Could you explain the dispute to me as some of the changes that keep reverting back and forth seem rather minor? I've reported this incident to the administrator's noticeboard. Vinh1313 (talk) 18:46, 21 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Basically every single edit by 65.93.219.52 should reverted per Banning_policy because it's the indefinitely blocked User:Beh-nam openly flouting their ban. - dwc lr (talk) 19:16, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

No removing or deleting other people legitimate messages
Please stop changing my legitimate messages on Talk:Silvia Lancome. There are rules that you should not be tampering with other people messages.--mCtOOls 19:16, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Actually I have that right under WP:BLP Vinh1313 (talk) 19:21, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

user: McTools on Silvia Lancome is a sockpuppet
Hello. Just to let you know user: McTools has actually been confirmed as a sockpuppet of the banned user: NisarKand (an extreme Afghan-nationalist and self declared Taliban supporter). A checkuser has been done on him confirming him as his sock but he just hasn't been tagged and blocked yet.

See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser/Case/NisarKand

Thanks.

Images by Kamui Sendoh
Can you do me a favour and look through the images in the photostream by this user for stuff that you've taken? I've seen some of them uploaded elsewhere to Commons and thus onto Wikipedia such as Image:Ewa Sonnet 2.jpg, and something about the license for them all just doesn't smell right. I've found one image in there which was taken from WireImage, and I'm curious what other images have been lifted from other sources. I'm just nervous that the entire stream is one giant copyvio and Wikipedia could end up being in danger as a result. Tabercil (talk) 20:05, 23 March 2008 (UTC)


 * None are mine but I think some of the older convention pictures were lifted from IAFD.com (the link is long dead). They were taken by Peter Van Aarle but he's no longer with us in the metaphysical sense. I'm pretty sure the entire photostream is non-original. Vinh1313 (talk) 20:13, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Hmm... IAFD eh? I remember asking for and getting their consent for some of their Flickr photos earlier... and a quick check of my history on Commons reveals this is the link in question to their Flickr site. So I reckon I should do a troll through there. And on looking over the Kamui list again, I spotted at least one photo from Luke: this image is the same as this one. Tabercil (talk) 22:23, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Not all of the van aarle pictures were posted on Flickr. Maybe eventually. Vinh1313 (talk) 22:25, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Heh. It looks like someone's already on the case about Kamui... here and here. Which brings me to a new question for you: we know none of Kamui's images are from your site, but do you have images of the women taken from Kamui? Here is where you can see what's been taken from Kamui... and of the ones listed, there are already images present on Commons of Sunrise Adams, Wendy Whoppers and Miriam Gonzalez. So I guess my question of you is: do you know if you have images of Catalina Cruz, Laura Lion or Lucy Pinder? Tabercil (talk) 23:43, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I have my biases when taking pictures and it seems like Kamui doesn't share my biases. His seem to be plastic inflatable women so no. Vinh1313 (talk) 23:51, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
 * LOL... straight forward. :) Tabercil (talk) 00:03, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Quartz Hill High School
An editor has nominated Quartz Hill High School, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 08:59, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Luscious Lopez
I've protected the article down so only admins can edit it as a result of this three-way edit war. Let's take thing to the talk page for the article, okay? Tabercil (talk) 20:32, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Got it. Vinh1313 (talk) 20:33, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

List of pornographic film series
Hi, Vinh1313. I noticed the new "WikiProject Pornography/List of pornographic film series". Not sure exactly what this is, but possibly the List of Nikkatsu Roman Porno films fits in here somewhere? Either as an entry or as a "See also?" Dekkappai (talk) 21:26, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Also, there are several sub-series under the large "Roman Porno"-- Angel Guts for one, Apartment Wife is another major one... Dekkappai (talk) 21:30, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Well it's just a list of movie series that people may want to work on. If you want to throw in the Japanese series in there, be my guest. Vinh1313 (talk) 21:47, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Ah, it's a list of articles to be added? Probably no need then. Thanks. Dekkappai (talk) 21:49, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Maria Ozawa image
Hi Vinh. You seem to be an image-of-living-people guy (I gave up even trying to learn the ever-changing rules of that game long ago), and maybe can help here. Image:Maria Ozawa.jpg has been red-Xed, and is probably a goner. If you look at THE PERMISSION of the owner, he implies that he's willing to parrot whatever words Wiki wants at the moment to allow an image to be used. Apparently the particular words he parroted at that particular time were not or are not now, the correct words. I left a note at the uploader's talk page last month, but he has not responded. Care to help? Regards. Dekkappai (talk) 21:40, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
 * There's a very important distinction here between what wikipedia wants and what he granted. He placed a non-commercial condition on the license to his pictures which is frowned upon by wikipedia (which encourages sharing without conditions). The license he needs to grant is a "Creative Commons Attribution Share-Alike" license (either 2.0 or 3.0). Those exact words followed by the number 2.0 or 3.0. The problem is that the commercial/non-commercial distinction is very important to some people because they don't want anyone to profit from their work so he may be doing this intentionally. Vinh1313 (talk) 22:30, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
 * OK-- thanks for looking into it. Dekkappai (talk) 22:35, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Photo request
Hello, Would it be possible to have the photos of Dee (cloudy images), and August,Daisy marie & Jada Fire to put on to their article gallery from your flickr page please, and maybe add some here wiki/Hispanic_porn_stars kind Regards 217.42.142.194 (talk) 17:39, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Okay, the multiple edits by the multiple ips has got to stop since it is confusing. If you are just one person, create an account on here and stick to it. Vinh1313 (talk) 18:36, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Hello, I apologise to you for the confusing edit, yes it was made by the same person..and i'll stop the extra edit i added. Regards.. 217.42.139.56 (talk) 19:18, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Sylvia Lancome
Hello. Actually I did not take this picture. I just got permission to use it. However, now I have learned more about image licensing on Wikipedia and have realized that I can't do this. So I will delete this image and maybe ask the owner of the image to upload it. KyleSmithX (talk) 03:29, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Pstar-Photo
Hi, Can you place a photo of Jasmine Tame on her article please, I think you have a couple of photos. Many thanks! Britannic1 (talk) 18:36, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm going to wait until the results of the AFD on the article. I'm guessing that you were the one who removed the notability tag from her article. Vinh1313 (talk) 19:06, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Photos
Heya... spotted a couple of articles which can use photos and you seem to have ones on your Flickr account so... 


 * Jane Darling (my suggestion from your photos)
 * Diana Doll (yours)
 * Bobbi Eden (yours)
 * Alexis Love (yours)
 * April Flowers (yours)
 * (Heather Gables (yours)

TIA! Tabercil (talk) 04:09, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Question
Hi, I help out with KurtLockwood and I just have a question about 2 references you used. I am questioning the use of lukeisback.com and gram ponante.com as sources since they are blogs and not actual news sights. I thought references had to be valid news sources. Lukeisback was added once before and the Wiki bots removed it. So I was just curious about that. Thanks Countrypaula (talk) 19:40, 1 May 2008 (UTC)


 * The problem with porn journalism is that the majority don't exactly have a reputation for fact checking and accuracy, and this includes even AVN. Most reputable news media shy away from the topic and the porn trade journals are just shills for the industry so we cite what we can. WP:BLP only demands that contentious topics require reliable sources. I don't think the fact that Kurt Lockwood is now shooting bisexual and tranny scenes scenes is contentious or disputable when the products are now on the market and there's video evidence (as seen on the lukeisback site) backing it up. Vinh1313 (talk) 20:35, 1 May 2008 (UTC)


 * No problem. I just wondered,since someone had added links to luke before and it got deleted. But,it was as an external link,not a reference. So,that may be why it was removed. Thanks for the explanation. Countrypaula (talk) 02:56, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Your message
I saw your message on my talk page. Could you please point me to the diff you are referring to? I was unaware that I was reverting anything more than vandalism, if this be the case. &mdash; scetoaux (T|C)  02:11, 7 May 2008 (UTC)


 * These reversions and these warnings Vinh1313 (talk) 02:17, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Per his change here it appears to me simply that he is attempting to incite further controversy by editing the page. Changing the part "without proof" to "with proof", yet not properly sourcing the statement, appears more to be a push for his own agenda and a possible personal attack against Christian XXX.  I made the reverts accordingly.&mdash;  scetoaux (T|C)  02:22, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Neither the Donny Long blog nor adultfyi (a porn gossip site) are reliable sources. Anything that is contentious and unadequately sourced should not have been reinstated. I have reported this edit war to WP:BLP/N so that it does not get out of hand. Vinh1313 (talk) 02:28, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
 * (edit conflict) I brought the topic up at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents &mdash; scetoaux (T|C)  02:29, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you for pointing out his probable BLP violation to me. Vinh1313 (talk) 02:39, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Please explain to me how Donny Long's own web page is an inappropriate source for the man's own words. James W. Ballantine (talk) 02:47, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
 * It's simply not considered reliable by Wikipedia standards. You said yourself that Donny has a habit of rewriting his blog entries when called on it. Vinh1313 (talk) 02:51, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

True, but by that logic, one would not be able to write about any subject in the blogosphere. But, for my part, I'm happy to let the Admins handle it. Thanks. James W. Ballantine (talk) 03:06, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Christian XXX
Just a clarification on Christian XXX. The Memphis Monroe harassment claim was made on her myspace blog, I've read it personally, however her mypace is set to private, and unable to be linked. It has also been posted on several forums. The part I linked to was a story on the aftermath. I'm also interested that lukeisback, (a notorious cut and past merchant) can be cited at references for Kurt Lockwood, yet adultfyi, using the same methods is not considered unreliable. You a member of the xxxporntalk Christian cheersquad/Lockwood bash squad? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thebigwoofa (talk • contribs) 08:17, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
 * As I answered the question two sections above, contentious issues require reliable sources. Luke ford and adultfyi are not considered reliable sources as they are porn gossipists. However, the kurt lockwood tranny scenes are well established by products on the market and the luke ford citation points to vidcaps from one of those products. If you feel it is still not adequate, you can remove the Luke Ford citation and discuss the reasons on the lockwood talk page. Vinh1313 (talk) 14:35, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

More photos
Heya... thanks for the earlier contributions. I'm slowly going through all the various articles in the Category:Female porn stars checking for glaring problems... and as you can guess I've found a couple more which don't have photos which I'm hoping you can help correct. 


 * Crystal Ray - yours
 * Stacy Silver - yours
 * Sonia Baby - yours
 * Kelly Stafford - yours

TIA! Tabercil (talk) 20:46, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Stop edit war
KyleSmithX and DuvarnGreen are in fact the banned editor User:Beh-nam. See Requests for checkuser/Case/Beh-nam You should first see if he is telling the truth or not, before you say he falsely accused a user (DuvarnGreen) to be Behnam. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.30.73.32 (talk) 19:53, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
 * You want to explain this edit by one of your sockpuppets? Vinh1313 (talk) 19:57, 11 May 2008 (UTC)