User talk:White hotel

Deletion of Kersal Massive
Yes, Kersal Massive qualifies for deletion. Please see this page for the guidelines pertaining to whether this article qualifies for deletion or not. In fact, this page qualifies for speedy deletion because it was previously deleted. See Criteria for speedy deletion. Andrew_pmk | Talk 02:48, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Invitation
Hello, I saw your edits to Bisexuality and would like to invite you to join WikiProject LGBT studies We'd be delighted to have you on board! Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 01:36, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

LGBT WikiProject Newsletter
I am stressed for many reasons, but our disagreement is not one of them. :) My recent efforts at Marriage and with Cyberanth have taken its toll, and if it weren't for these Co-ordinator elections I'd take a wikibreak to recuperate. I won't even get started on my off-wiki life. I appreciate your concerns, even if I believe they are groundless. I think the scope needs shaking up anyway, so this discussion is probably beneficial and I thank you for it. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 16:22, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Bjork
Hi. Yes, it is rude, however sometimes when I'm using the AutoWikiBrowser, a few user pages slip through the cracks. I try to stay on top of things and make sure I'm only editing pages in the main namespace. Sorry. Evan Reyes 20:06, 7 February 2007 (UTC) {| width=100% cellpadding=10px 10px 5px 5px;
 * style='border: 2px solid #9B75AD; background-color: #EED8EE;' |

WP:LGBT Coordinator Election Notice
This is just a quick, automated note to let you know that there is an election being conducted over the next 7 days for the position of &quot;Coordinator&quot; for the LGBT WikiProject. Your participation is requested. --
 * }

your recent edits to the Courtney Love page
Whatever your beef with mistertruffles, way to make it kurt fans vs courtney fans. That's really going to help both pages.

I'm not going to RV your edits, because they make that ridiculous paragraph shorter, but by your own logic, maybe you should. If people's relationships to KC and opinions on whether he was suicidal or not are relevant on the KC page, then perhaps they're relevant here. This has really swayed me towards feeling I'd rather all of this nonsense was taken to a separate page, where perhaps it may stop provoking you and others into childish shows of force on the pages of two reasonably interesting and influential artists. White hotel 12:56, 22 February 2007 (UTC)


 * I genuinely do not appreciate your characterization. If it was ever "kurt fans vs courtney fans", it was certainly the case before I made those edits.  I had not even read the paragraph in Love's article until just before I made those edits - it was not in the article the last time I read it.


 * I did not remove those statements because I disagreed them or as a "show of force" - I removed them because they specifically fail Wikipedia's three main guidelines: WP:V, WP:RS, and WP:OR


 * The absence of family members questioning suicide cannot be used as proof that he committed suicide. It's a drawn conclusion based on non-existent statements.  We cannot assume any position that Cobain's family takes without their specific statements (or a reliable source compiling them).  Most of Cobain's direct family are not on record saying anything about his death.  That doesn't mean that they think he committed suicide or that he was murdered.  (Without a source, we can't even prove that they've ever been asked for their opinion.)


 * The statement about Harrison and Grant never having met Cobain is also unsourced and irrelevant. If someone had to meet a victim in order to believe that they were murdered, police officers would have a very difficult time doing their jobs.  If Harrison and Grant's character needs to be challenged, it should be done using citeable statements from verifiable sources, not on the grounds that they never met Cobain.


 * What was there did not conform to Wikipedia guidelines. That's the only position I was taking. -- ChrisB 06:46, 23 February 2007 (UTC)


 * I don't believe you. It seems obvious to me that you went to the Courtney page as a response to mistertruffles' criticism of the conspiracy part of the KC page. You've done that repeatedly. If you've done so because it frustrates you that two pages referring to the same conspiracy are so different, I can see that that's reasonable, and again I think that it points clearly to a separate page where the differences can be resolved, since the two pages don't seem able to agree what (in content, in tone, and in intention) constitutes NPOV on this one.


 * As for 'the absence of family members questioning suicide cannot be used as proof that he committed suicide' - it has never read as any kind of gesture at 'proof' to me. The conspiracy theory as a whole is there because it's notable - because many people believe it or don't. Speculating as to KC's family's beliefs is OR; stating that they've never challenged the official verdict is reasonable.


 * 'If Harrison and Grant's character needs to be challenged, it should be done using citeable statements from verifiable sources, not on the grounds that they never met Cobain.' Right - because the Kim Gordon quote is thrown in on the KC page just as an aside. White hotel 13:21, 23 February 2007 (UTC)


 * "Repeatedly"? I can count my edits on Love's article with one hand.


 * The problem is that we don't know that they've never challenged it. For the most part, Cobain's family have not been given the opportunity to comment publicly.  The only available quotes (that I'm aware of) are from his grandfather, who suggests that Kurt may have been murdered, and his cousin, who believes his depression led to suicide.  The member of his family that Kurt was closest to was his mother, and she initially challenged suicide before backing down - her subsequent views are unclear.  The only reasonable and verfiable summary one can draw is: "Apart from Cobain's grandfather and cousin, Cobain's family have not commented publicly."  And, personally, I would even challenge the notability of that statement, given that Cobain was not close to his family - most of them would not be in a knowledgable position to challenge the offical verdict, since they would not be able to base their opinion on first-hand information.


 * We have the same problem with Grohl and Novoselic. They've been intentionally silent.  Novoselic's statements seem to suggest that he's accepted the official verdict.  Grohl's statements have basically suggested that he didn't feel he was close enough to Cobain to judge either way.  But, without verifiable statements one way or the other, drawing a conclusion is original research.  The best we can do is simply point out that they've been silent.


 * Here's the problem: one person can assume that silence means they agree with the verdict. Another person can assume that silence means that they believe he was murdered but don't want to get into a confrontation with Love.  Another person can assume that silence means they feel they don't have enough information to judge either way - none of Cobain's immediate friends or family saw him after his return to Seattle from rehab, so they would not be in a position to have first-hand knowledge about him or his state of mind in the days leading up to his death.  Their opinions would be based on what they've heard from Love, Grant, or other third parties.  We can't assume anything - we can only use their statements.  Cobain's family, Grohl, and Novoselic have not offered them, so we can't assume what their views are.


 * Which is precisely why the Kim Gordon is notable. Gordon was a friend of Cobain's, and is on record with the opinion that she believes he was murdered.  Her statement is sourced, verifiable, and relevant.  I've subsequently added statements from other friends, including Carlson, who believe that the murder theory is junk, as a way to balance her statement. -- ChrisB 17:40, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

LGBT WikiProject newsletter
SatyrBot 05:24, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

LGBT WikiProject newsletter
This month's project newsletter (hand delivered as SatyrTN and Dev920 are away). Best wishes, WjBscribe 03:25, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Notice of Inactivity
In trying to deliver the LGBT Project newsletter, SatyrBot detected a period of three months of inactivity from this account. You have been placed in our "Inactive Members" section. If this has been done in error, please let my bot owner know and change your status in he project. Thanks! SatyrBot 17:06, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Pride!
 You are invited to participate in Wiki Loves Pride!


 * What? Wiki Loves Pride, a campaign to document and photograph LGBT culture and history, including pride events
 * When? June 2015
 * How can you help?
 * 1.) Create or improve LGBT-related articles and showcase the results of your work here
 * 2.) Upload photographs or other media related to LGBT culture and history, including pride events, and add images to relevant Wikipedia articles; feel free to create a subpage with a gallery of your images (see examples from last year)
 * 3.) Contribute to an LGBT-related task force at another Wikimedia project (Wikidata, Wikimedia Commons, Wikivoyage, etc.)

Or, view or update the current list of Tasks. This campaign is supported by the Wikimedia LGBT+ User Group, an officially recognized affiliate of the Wikimedia Foundation. Visit the group's page at Meta-Wiki for more information, or follow Wikimedia LGBT+ on Facebook. Remember, Wiki Loves Pride is about creating and improving LGBT-related content at Wikimedia projects, and content should have a neutral point of view. One does not need to identify as LGBT or any other gender or sexual minority to participate. This campaign is about adding accurate, reliable information to Wikipedia, plain and simple, and all are welcome!

If you have any questions, please leave a message on the campaign's main talk page.

Thanks, and happy editing!

User:Another Believer and User:OR drohowa

Wiki Loves Pride 2016
As a participant of WikiProject LGBT studies, you are invited to participate in the third annual Wiki Loves Pride campaign, which runs through the month of June. The purpose of the campaign is to create and improve content related to LGBT culture and history. How can you help?
 * Create or improve LGBT-related Wikipedia pages and showcase the results of your work here
 * Document local LGBT culture and history by taking pictures at pride events and uploading your images to Wikimedia Commons
 * Contribute to an LGBT-related task force at another Wikimedia project (Wikidata, Wikimedia Commons, Wikivoyage, etc.)

Looking for topics? The Tasks page, which you are welcome to update, offers some ideas and wanted articles.

This campaign is supported by the Wikimedia LGBT+ User Group, an officially recognized affiliate of the Wikimedia Foundation. The group's mission is to develop LGBT-related content across all Wikimedia projects, in all languages. Visit the affiliate's page at Meta-Wiki for more information, or follow Wikimedia LGBT+ on Facebook. Remember, Wiki Loves Pride is about creating and improving LGBT-related content at Wikimedia projects, and content should have a neutral point of view. One does not need to identify as LGBT or any other gender or sexual minority to participate. This campaign is about adding accurate, reliable information to Wikipedia, plain and simple, and all are welcome! If you have any questions, please leave a message on the campaign's talk page.

Thanks, and happy editing! --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 21:08, 30 May 2016 (UTC)