User talk:Rentaferret/Archive 2007-03

Porn stars
I don't know how much you work on individual porn star articles, but the Wikimedia Foundation has had a couple of emails recently from individuals whose pages contain way too much personal information, including real name, where they're living, what they're doing, family information etc. Some of this was copied from imdb.com and some of it is just making its way into the articles.

I'm asking you, as a person involved in porn articles, if you come across any personal details on any male porn stars that have no relevance to the article, to please see that it gets removed or notify me. Note: I'm not too worried about people like Jeff Stryker, for instance, who keep up with their own websites and actively trade off of their names.

As an example, we don't need real life names for nearly all of these men and women in the context of the article. This is generally non-notable information and breaches on our Biography of Living Persons policy. The article is about a porn star, not about the minute details of their presently mundane lives :) Bastiq ▼ e demandez 18:36, 14 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I haven't had the time to look at individual articles for quite some time—I can't even keep up with the List of male performers in gay porn films anymore; the rules keep changing.


 * That being said, I have been known to delete exactly the sort of information that you're referring to from articles; I even got into quite a ruckus with one user who kept insisting on adding someone's supposedly "real" name to an article. It didn't belong in the article to start with and was completely unsourced; it took getting an administrator involved to settle the issue.


 * I'll keep my eyes open as I can. Have good days. &mdash; Chidom   talk   20:53, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Bot and Film
Actually, that was me &lt;sheepish grin&gt;. I've been putting the banner on LGBT-related articles (using the SatyrBot account) for the past couple months - those were all done on Feb 3 when I was going through the Category:Gay porn stars. I think I got confused about when Film or WikiProjectFilm should be used - and whether or not pornstars should be. I'll check my logs for that day (and a couple on either side) and see if I did any more like that. Sorry! -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 04:32, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Ugh. 128 articles.  I've removed the project banner - sorry for the mixup! -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs)  05:39, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Invitation
A request for mediation has been filed with the Mediation Committee that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request at Requests for mediation/List_of_male_performers_in_gay_porn_films, and indicate whether you agree or refuse to mediate. If you are unfamiliar with mediation, please refer to Mediation. There are only seven days for everyone to agree, so please check as soon as possible.

Request for Mediation
This message delivered: 04:16, 22 March 2007 (UTC).

Kudos!
You're doing a great (and often unthanked) job on List of male performers in gay porn films! Thanks for your hard work! -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 05:49, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you. &mdash; Chidom   talk   06:00, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

CFDs
Hi Chidom

I will try to unravel this, but if you want to withdraw a nomination, you should say clearly nomination withdrawn. I didn't see any such withdrawal, so I closed the new one.

I you want the old one withdrawn, then please clearly mark it as nomination withdrawn. ("Speedy close" is a request to close on procedural grounds, which is a different process.)

I am very uncomfortable about what has happened here. You opened a new CFD before the first one was closed, and you removed the original CFD notice while that discussion was still live. I'm sure that you acted with the best of intentions, but I hope that with the benefit of hindsight you can see why that was a process likely to cause confusion.

If you still want the new CFD re-opened, then I think that I may be able to do so once you have properly withdrawn the old one. (I don't know whether it is actually appropriate to reopen a CFD once closed, and will try to find out).

However, I hope you will consider that there must now be a degree of confusion about the two proposals, both of which seem to have encountered some fundamental opposition ... so I would like to suggest that the best thing would be to discuss the options at Category talk:Gay porn stars, and see if you  and other interested parties can clarify the options before returning to CFD. Could you let me know what you think of that idea? --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 20:28, 25 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Sorry, I only read this after I re-listed the nomination with a note.
 * Yes, I was acting in good faith. Because I changed the template on the category page earlier, the tag on the category page points to the right discussion. I'd be in favor of leaving it alone; but if it has to be deleted because of procedure, so be it.
 * As far as the talk page idea? No thanks. Here's what happens: one set of people show up to participate in the discussion on the talk page. Once the cfr tag is added to the category page, a whole new set of people show up for that discussion, requiring arguments to be restated several times in several different places. Doing it with the nomination eliminates that possibility.
 * I promise I'm done with the nomination. Other than (possibly) responding with comments to other's recommendations, this nomination won't change as a result of anything I do.
 * Thanks—and sorry for the confusion. &mdash; Chidom   talk   21:33, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Re: RFMF Template
I went ahead and removed it. After the case has been filed, we remove the notices. It's not a huge thing on my priority list, so I usually only go through and clean them out about once a week. In the future, you could go ahead and remove it, if it was a case in which you were involved and it was declined. Don't ever be afraid to be bold. Thanks, ^ demon [omg plz] 04:02, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

list of male...
So the first one (alphabetically) always gets the full videographies? I was assuming it was the name under which they worked the most - sorry :) Thanks for fixing it! -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs)  18:22, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Opt-in
I agree to the edit counter opt-in terms (posted March 31, 2007)