Misplaced Pages

Playing card symbols

Trying to insert card suit symbols into The Cincinnati Kid and it's not working. I used the notation in the article Yoshio Nakano as my guide and I thought I did it right, but apparently not. Otto4711 02:10, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Looks like you need the semicolons: ♣ ♥ ♦ ♠ (or, ♣ ♥ ♦ ♠). =D Luna Santin 02:19, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

The Heap

Good comics history, man! Kudos on your edits here! -- Tenebrae 04:48, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Comments

Otto4711-

1. Thanks for the work on Male prostitution in the arts.
2. I noticed that you removed comments on a few films... why?
3. Please remember to use edit summaries.

Thanks and keep up the good work- NYArtsnWords 22:23, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Smile!

Flutefluteflute has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Smile at others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Happy editing!

Wel done on your recent edits to the Wicked article - I think there's still a lot to be done though!-- Flutefluteflute 13:24, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

comment of the day (uhh, my awards review process takes a week, see)

"Because only a jackass..." aaaaaahhhahahahaahaha you slayed me, Otto. It's a good thing I wasn't sipping my coffee when I read that. — coelacan talk — 06:58, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Death By Gluten Afd

Death By Google - what a classic, by far the best Afd quote I have ever seen!! Keep it up ;-) RyanPostlethwaite 23:42, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

CFDs

Hey Otto4711 - We sometimes disagree on the CFDs but I wanted to say I appreciate you persistently making relevant points on the current LGBT-related CFDs. I'm really going to stay out of it as much as possible because I feel, strongly, that the CFDs are getting bogged down with a lot of people making nominations to make a point, or to implement their personal philosophies about the significance of particular identities. Nevertheless, even though I'm feeling frustrated with wikipedia process right now, I had resolved previously to give props to people when I could. Best, lquilter 04:32, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

It's Time For Regis!

Otto, aside from Be Bold, there are stips to not remove the AfD banner from the page. Should I just redirect and nuke the AfD, or let it go? --Dennisthe2 20:53, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

You are not a vandal.

Otto4711, you didn't vandalize at all; I never said you did. All I said in my summaries was that you didn't discuss the change on the talk pages first. I was always taught that major changes should be discussed first. If you thought that I called you a vandal, I'm sorry. You are not a vandal. Acalamari 16:42, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

I responded with: Listen, I'm sorry if I've been incivil. It wasn't my intention. I hope in the future we can work peacefully. I made a mess of the situation that just happened. I am sorry.

I should also add: I should have been more specific. I was foolish in making that error. Acalamari 17:30, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Smile!

You are decimating Misplaced Pages

Hello...I'd just like to let you know that you are decimating Misplaced Pages by nominating any and all categories that you can find for deletion. You and 2-3 people end up deleting hundreds of categories that many people have worked on for a long time, not in the least limited to many of the TV show and family categories. I'd advise you to please end your deletion-mania. --172.164.242.170 13:08, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

TPIR pricing games

What I was hoping to accomplish is to get people actually working towards something instead of just talking. AfD can have that effect: it's a debate, everyone debates, but often people are overly hesitant to take action. I agree, there was some discussion of a retired vs. non-retired solution but that didn't have consensus either, clearly. Hopefully if a discussion can be had where the point is how best to organize the articles, then that can be properly addressed. But none of the hoping for merging will go anywhere if no one actually puts together the more general articles. IMO, that can be done, at first, without redirecting the individual game articles. (BTW, I don't, myself, think the retired vs. non-retired idea is the best. Why wouldn't a simple break-up alphabetically be the best idea? Eg List of The Price is Right pricing games (A-H), et cetera.) Mangojuice 19:30, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

One thought: some of the games seem to have changed over time, whereas others have "retired version" and "unretired version"s. To me, that distinction seems a little arbitrary. So there might be some overlap among the lists. Good luck. Mangojuice 20:09, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

I think Mangojuice is getting confused over Bullseye and Balance Game...there are actually two pricing games with each of these titles, none of which have anything to do with one another.

By the way, nice work combining all the retired games into one page. I think it looks good. -TPIRFanSteve 18:04, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Chasing down CFDs

Thanks for listing so many connected categories after I nominated the Sean Connery one. I'm impressed with your thoroughness - you nominated all of the ones that I thought were suspect. --GargoyleMT 00:31, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

I love the...

Thank you so much for taking care of the I love the... mergers. I planned on doing that eventually but don't have a lot of time. You're a wikisaint. Ƶ§œš¹ 18:10, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

I never thought I'd see the day...

...that you and I were on the same side of an argument. Where are these intellectuals when the subject is "Running jokes in Friends"? Best wishes Mandsford 00:07, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

if you mean Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/1949-1950 United States network television schedule (weekday), I just agreed with both of you. The world may indeed be changing. DGG (talk) 01:24, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

I don't know why you both sound so surprised. Even a blind pig finds the occasional truffle so of course y'all are going to get an AFD right eventually.  ;-) Otto4711 03:32, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Index of deleted categories ...

You may find this useful at some point ... User:ProveIt/index. Feel free to add stuff you think is appropriate... It came out of a discussion I had with Sam at the last meetup. -- Prove It 20:02, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Relocated comment

Otto4711 I am trying to figure out how to communicate with you regarding your reporting me to spam and the deletion of my edits. Please see the facts I list are valid and I have links to the source. As well the usage of the word "Gay" is used on my page in description of movies and is appropriate for the subject Ryan Idol. Not all information listed is flattering to myself nor should the facts be hidden from the reader to make a image appear something he or it is not. These are Gay Movies he is in and his name is known in the gay adult movies not heterosexual. Please contact me at charles@charlespeyton.com or through the wikipedia site. I am sorry if this is no the proper way to get you a message but I have tried many other ways and have received no communication back. thanks charlespeyton —Preceding unsigned comment added by Charlespeyton (talk • contribs) 23:08, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Priceless!

your addition of material to Friend of Dorothy gave my partner and me a wonderful laugh this evening. Thanks for such good editing! Jeffpw (talk) 22:26, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Transamerican Love Story

Thanks for all your excellent work on this article! For additional references, you can find a list of published reviews and articles on the series here. Jokestress (talk) 19:55, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Happy First Day of Spring!

Just wishing you a wonderful First Day of Spring {{subst:CURRENTYEAR}}! ~~~~

Congratulations

on GA status for Boys in the Sand. - Dan Dank55 (talk)(mistakes) 21:59, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! Otto4711 (talk) 22:01, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, Otto

Thanks for catching Category:Disputed convictions leading to execution as a re-creation under another name. Sometimes it's tricky to catch those when editors have changed the wording... Good Ol’factory 22:36, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

• Yes, those pesky editors can be a wily bunch. Otto4711 (talk) 22:52, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Kudos

Good work on additions to José Sarria, authoring Black Cat Bar, et cetera. Keep up the good work. - House of Scandal (talk) 21:30, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

• Thanks. It's been a pleasure learning more about them. Otto4711 (talk) 22:45, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

José Sarria

Hi,

Thanks for picking up the removal of the accent at José Sarria. I have reported this as a bug with a section of the AWB code. You also made a comment bare years should not be wikified but you wikified the years. Can you clarify the mismatch between your statement and your edit? Thanks. Lightmouse (talk) 08:54, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

• Oh, who knows, I was probably drunk at the time. Otto4711 (talk) 12:36, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Drunken editing is a fine tradition amongst Wikipedians. I have taken the liberty of delinking the years again. I hope that is how you like it, if not just revert it again, I won't mind. Keep up the good work (and the good living!). Lightmouse (talk) 12:46, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

DEFAULTSORT must be used without accent for sorting. Please read instructions in template's page. -- Magioladitis (talk) 10:50, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Just copying: Letters with accents or diacritics should generally be avoided in sort keys, because they are sorted incorrectly by the Mediawiki software. For example, the software sorts "á" after "z", which is not correct in any language. For this reason, articles with accented characters in the title will almost certainly require an explicit sort key instead of relying on the default "sort by article title" behavior. For example, the article about the Hungarian town of Ács uses Acs as its sort key. Remember that sort keys are not displayed, so the article title will still show up with the correct spelling in the category page. -- Magioladitis (talk) 11:01, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

• You asked about the photo of Jose being used. I have full permission to use it. Not sure how to address this since the link you left me talks about me wanting to submit a photo, not provide additional documentation on the photo itself. Should I go and add additional information attached to the photo itself? Jose is in New York now and will be at the Fourth Street Theatre Workshop on Monday, September 29th for the Imperial Court of New York's NOATG DVD party. She will be performing a few numbers and having a talk with many of us. I could reconfirm that I have full rights then as well as check with the person who provided me the photo Panzi who is now the President of the International Court System and handles many of Jose's affairs due to Jose's age. C. Williams (talk) 02:08, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Column widths

{{helpme}} I am trying to get List of Judy Garland awards and honors promoted to Featured List and the current stumbling block is that reviewers want the various tables to be the same width. I don't know how to change column widths. Any instruction would be most appreciated. Thanks. Otto4711 (talk) 22:28, 6 July 2008 (UTC) ! width="xx"|Header text instead of just !Header text . I think. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • 22:31, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

I went ahead and worked some work on it. The widths I used look okay to me, but of course may need to be tweaked; if nothing else, the formatting should be pretty obvious for now. Was also looking for an "inducted" template, similar to {{won}} and {{nom}}, and found {{included}}, which I'll add in a moment. – Luna Santin (talk) 22:53, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks so very much!

Thanks very much for the barnstar - it is always quite nice to know that my work is both noticed and appreciated. Keep up the good work, Ruhrfisch _><>° 18:30, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Calpernia Addams Article

Hello,

As someone involved in reverting my article, I'm sure you're aware that I am unhappy about my Misplaced Pages article and have been for a long time. I've found that no one at Misplaced Pages is interested in responding to my rationale for wanting my article pared down to the bare bones minimum in accordance with Misplaced Pages's own policy at http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons and no one seems to care about my concerns or wishes whatsoever. This is not a game to me. Your hobby is impacting my life. I won't bother putting that in all caps, or bold, because there is no internet typeface that can convey this. I have to rely on your ability to empathize and weigh the triviality of my article's value to Misplaced Pages vs. the impact on my life. The fact that I am at the mercy of strangers is infuriating.

I sincerely hope that none of you are ever in a position remotely similar to mine, in which your core identity is challenged daily in every arena, from the public street to the highest courts. In which your life is chased by a tragic event that everyone is determined to have follow you to your own grave.

Again, I ask, please leave me alone. Please, leave me alone.

Calpernia Addams Calperniaaddams (talk) 05:09, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

• I'm queer. My core identity gets challenged on a daily basis too, so the "my oppression is worse than your oppression" game cuts no ice with me. It is to say the least disingenuous for you to claim that you are harmed by an article that merely collects things that you yourself have freely said in interviews. WP:BLP says in relevant part, "When in doubt, biographies should be pared back to a version that is completely sourced, neutral, and on-topic." Nothing included in your article is unsourced, nothing in it is not neutral and nothing in it is off-topic. Otto4711 (talk) 06:03, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Images, for 6 year olds

This is how I find images for my articles.

1. Find who the copyright owner is. Email the place you found it. Email the subject. Email the best authority on who took the picture, and email the photographer. 99% of the time the photographer will be the copyright holder. If the photographer is dead, it may pass to the subject. It may pass to a library or archives if the photographer took a lot of images.
2. Once you get a solid answer on who owns the copyright, send them a very, very nice email that explains who you are and what you are doing, and why you need their permission. I have many emails I have sent to various photographers, libraries, subjects, etc., asking them for permission to use their photos (if you want a copy I can send one to you). The following is the release Misplaced Pages gives for editors to send: I own the copyright to the images attached. I grant permission to copy, distribute and/or modify these documents under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation; with no Invariant Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover Texts. By placing their name at the bottom of that statement, they agree that you can put the image on Misplaced Pages. Be nice in your email. I can't stress that enough. Some photographers will consider what you're asking. Some will ask their lawyers. Some will turn you down. That's how much fun this is. If they turn you down, find another image. You will not be able to use their image, even if it's already in the article. You will have to put the image up for speedy deletion. Respect their artistic rights and all.
3. If they grant you permission, thank them profusely. Then send an email to permissions@wikipedia.org with the release statement in italics above and the name and contact information of the copyright holder. Attach the image(s) in question to the email to Misplaced Pages. You will get a response in 24 hours with a ticket number. A sysop who has access to the OTRS system will update the image file with the OTRS ticket. --Moni3 (talk) 15:29, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

• Thanks for the advice but I'm not sure if it's going to work. The image in question is already supposedly released to the PD and is already on WIkipedia but it's supposedly released by an organization. I'm trying to backtrack through the person who uploaded it but he's as confused about this image stuff as I am. Imagery is the effin' worst part of Misplaced Pages. Otto4711 (talk) 15:38, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

• Imagery, yes, drives me nuts. If the image came on board a couple of years ago or before, that may have been before image policy was so strict. The image may have been uploaded from a scan in some book or magazine, and from the appearance of it, does not look like it is from a Public Domain source. Have you contacted Sarria himself? Can Sarria or whoever is interested in promoting his legacy provide you with the answer? Does the San Francisco Public Library have archives on Sarria? How about the SF GLBT Historical Society? The answers exist, you just have to poke around to find them. I make lots of calls too. --Moni3 (talk) 15:47, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

• It was uploaded in 2007, after the big crackdown. I think it's a publicity/glamour shot perhaps intended for press kits and the like. The guy who uploaded it is working on tracking down who actually took the photo and re-confirming the rights and is going to be meeting with Jose next week. I'll pass along the licensing info to him and hope that he can locate the copyright holder and have them email him or me with it. Otto4711 (talk) 16:27, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Hey, I have to tell you something about what you're doing in that "Saw" AfD discussion...

...and that something is: "You're great!" I don't agree with your argument, of course, but I am enjoying your contribution to the discussion. It is wonderful to have an intelligent conversation with articulate and spirited individuals, and I just wanted to say that you're an asset to AfD. Keep up the great work! Ecoleetage (talk) 21:22, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Ecoleetage (talk) has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Cheers, and Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Re: Help with image licensing

Hi, the easiest way to do this is to have a spokesperson from the ICS e-mailing us at permissions-en AT wikimedia DOT org explaining the situation. In clear, they need to state that the photographer (it would be nice to have his name btw, in order to give proper credits) and copyright owner gave the complete rights of the photography to the organization, and that they are entitled to release all these rights into the public domain, for all purposes. I don't think more proof would be needed, as long as the statement is credible and comes from a verifiable e-mail address (we obviously are very wary of gmail addresses ;). I am able to read and act upon the emails coming to this mailbox, so if they wish you can email me their email address so I can have a look. -- lucasbfr 17:02, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Happy TG, Otto

I've been working on something that might be of interest to you: User:Good Olfactory/CFD. A rip-off from ProveIt's, but I want to make it more comprehensive and up-to-date. (Of course it's not yet complete as far as back-dating goes.) I thought you might find it useful or interesting at least.

Happy TG (—I assume you are an American, though I don't think I've ever heard you say for sure.) Best wishes, Good Ol’factory 05:08, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

USS Iowa turret explosion

Thank you for the helpful edits to this article. Cla68 (talk) 01:08, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

My pleasure. Let me know if there's anything else that you think might be helpful. Otto4711 (talk) 01:19, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

CBS Reports: The Homosexuals article

I have to say, that is a wonderful article that you've worked on! I would love to help provide any information that I can on it, is there anything in particular that you're looking for, information or reference wise? Have a nice day! CarpetCrawler (talk) 03:17, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, that's a problem, isn't it? It's always expensive when you're looking for it. I have the same problem with comic book and music articles. Anyway, I will go and look through newspaper archives -- the local community college campus here has a decent archive of New York Times and Newsday articles, maybe I can find something over there? I'll take a look at the other CBS Reports episode as soon as possible! Have a nice day! CarpetCrawler (talk) 16:00, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Hot Tub

Hi Otto,

I have been having a discussion with another user who believes that "Hot Tub" (Drawn Together) is a notable article because it is about a television series pilot which was reviewed by USA Today and The New York Times. I had originally redirected the article to the list of Drawn Together episodes, but I recreated the article with citations from the reviews. You have since reverted the recreation of the article due to a lack of notability. Do you believe the two reviews to be insufficient in establishing notability?

Neelix (talk) 18:55, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

• Wow, I don't even remember doing that. I must have checked the close of the AFD and done it on that basis. Anyway, in looking at the article history and reading the proffered sources I have to say that I would not support an independent article for the episode. I don't believe that they are substantively about the episode in specific (although I can't read the LA Times article in its entirety) but instead are about the series in general There are elements about the pilot in each of the articles that I could read in their entirety but I just don't think that there's as yet sufficient material for the article to pass notability guidelines. Compare those sources to the sources available for other TV episode articles like Sugar & Spice (Picket Fences) or The Puppy Episode or some of the episodes in Category:GA-Class The Simpsons articles. Given that Drawn Together is completely unsourced, I suggest using the material that's been turned up and concentrate on improving that article. Then if the pilot or any other episode should attract future attention an article can be spun out. It may be beneficial to have a broader community discussion before going to work on it, but I don't know what the best forum for that would be. Otto4711 (talk) 19:17, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Category:Accidental Killers

i find it amazing that even with all the discussion, the creator of the category (me) was never informed of the cfd. for what it's worth, i might have been that third vote. i'm wondering if it's perhaps a significant enought flaw to one again re-open the discussion. --emerson7 21:32, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Iowa Turret explosion

I just noticed that the article was promoted to FA. Congratulations! It's obvious the incredible amount of work and detail you went into on this article. Thanks for the kudos in the FA discussion also. Glad I was able to help. Otto4711 (talk) 11:10, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for the help with the article. Cla68 (talk) 07:30, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Re LGBT TV eps PR

The peer review pages are transcluded by a bot, once an hour or so. Since I dleted the second PR and reopened the first, the bot had to relist the first, which took some time. I read most of the article and will make some comments. Is the 4711 from Koelnisch Wasser (the original Eau de Cologne)? Ruhrfisch _><>° 21:08, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

• Indirectly. The 4711 is from a tattoo found on Frank-N-Furter's leg in The Rocky Horror Picture Show, and that is from the cologne. Otto4711 (talk) 21:15, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

• Well, you learn something new every day. I've watched that many times and never noticed a tattoo. --Kbdank71 21:36, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

• It's on his right thigh and is most visible during "Sweet Transvestite" as Frank is singing the line "Well you got caught with a flat!" Also of interest is how his "BOSS" tattoo fades in and out during "I'm Going Home". Oh no...being drawn...inexorably...to DVD rack... Otto4711 (talk) 22:14, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

• Thanks - curious minds want(ed) to know (and now I am humming the Time Warp as I type - thanks) Ruhrfisch _><>° 22:02, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Great job!!

Great job on Remember Last Night which I've passed for GA-status! I'm a big fan of James Whale so it's good to see a lot of hard work being put into films of his which aren't even on VHS or DVD. Keep up the great Work. (Do The Old Dark House next! ;) ) Andrzejbanas (talk) 03:18, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Same here. I have the DVD as well and I'll try to help if you do. Cheers! Andrzejbanas (talk) 03:56, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Touché!

Well-played, sir! TJRC (talk) 00:05, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

PR and FAC

Sorry about the LGBT television shows lists woes. They wouldn't work with even one lead fair use image? I thought the FLC requirements required an image. Anyway, I can't do much about those, but figured I could weigh in on the Bride FAC. The article looks good and most of my comments are questions / ideas more than "must do" items. Ruhrfisch _><>° 04:58, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

BTW, there is no requirements for images in FLs just like there are no requirements for images in FAs. Dabomb87 (talk) 04:58, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification, Dabomb. I always understood MOS:IMAGES Start an article with a right-aligned lead image or InfoBox. to mean articles should have at least one image. If I were picking just one fair use image for the Pre-Stonewall list it would be File:Cbshomo2.jpg - black and white, shows the man in shadows, seems to typify the era. For the 1970s I like the File:1975 Barney Miller2.jpg image, but that might just be that I liked the show and those characters. I changed my FAC comments to support as I felt they had been substantially addressed. Nice job on the Bride, Ruhrfisch _><>° 15:47, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

PS Thanks too for the idea of the "thanks for not being a jerk" barnstar - I am smiling as the bass line intro to the Barney Miller theme runs through my head. Ruhrfisch _><>° 15:52, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

I like the notes added to See also for Bride of Frankenstein. Not sure why there has been no other activity or response. I hope I did not somehow offend you in my comments there - if I did cause offense, I apologize. Hope all is well with you, Ruhrfisch _><>° 01:08, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

No offense whatsoever, sorry you got that impression. Otto4711 (talk) 01:28, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

OK, good to know. Take care, Ruhrfisch _><>° 04:10, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Congratulations!

I just saw that Bride of Frankenstein is FA now! Congratulations! Ruhrfisch _><>° 02:12, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Congratulations on this, Otto! Well done. --Moni3 (talk) 22:50, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, both of you. Otto4711 (talk) 22:50, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Noel Coward

Noel Coward has been promoted to FA. Thank you for all your help along the way. Your efforts have really helped us improve it! All the best, -- Ssilvers (talk) 14:12, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

~ richly deserved ~

~_{Teledildonix314}~~_4-1-1~ 04:50, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

BROMANCE

i'm trying to find who wrote the etymology section to "bromance." ultimately i'm looking for the specific big brother issue it was originally used in. any help is appreciated, thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Advicedrain (talk • contribs) 21:42, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

• I wrote the section. The source doesn't specify in what issue the word first appeared. Otto4711 (talk) 21:48, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

so did you yourself read "bromance" in big brother, or did you get that from somewhere else? this is dave carnie, btw, and i'm just trying to track down the actual article it was in. i'm being interviewed by OUT magazine. thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Advicedrain (talk • contribs) 21:51, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

• If you check the article you'll see that the fact is sourced with a note. The note at the bottom of the article links to the source I used. I've never read big brother magazine. Otto4711 (talk) 21:55, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

after i posted that last question, i went, "oh duh!" (i'm new to this backstage area on wiki.) yeah, i'm already trying to track down "tim elliot," the fellow who wrote that article. thanks otto. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Advicedrain (talk • contribs) 21:58, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Gad

Gad. I don't think there's anything left to say (wink). It's funny, but it would be a lot funnier if it weren't so—what's the word in English? Oh yeah, "lame". Good Ol’factory 10:32, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Jewish cats

Thank you for nominating these ridiculous categories already. Don't be discouraged by people like Epeefleche and Wassermann, who, I can attest, after dealing with them on numerous AfDs/CfDs, are terribly insecure about their backgrounds and toss around accusations like rice at a wedding. Bulldog123 20:26, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm currently admonishing User:Epeefleche here about his tone toward you in the Jewish categories discussion. I am specifically concerned about his thinly veiled allegations of anti-Semitic bias on your part. He is responding in part with an "Otto called me paranoid" defense, which is attempt to deflect the charge. That said, it really doesn't help anyone when you do that, because now you've given him the high ground. So I'll once again ask you to moderate your tone when dealing with people like that. An "I'm not going to respond to baiting" is a lot better than leveling an equally incendiary charge in response.--Mike Selinker (talk) 19:30, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Hello. You may remember me from such prior edits as Category:Jewish Fraudsters. I realised that what I was doing could be considered against WP:POINT and was not getting through to people. I am discussing matters with some other editors. If you refer to my talk page you will see that I am campaigning against the unfair labelling of ethnically Jewish individuals who may or may not be religious or part of the community as "Jewish" in the first sentence of their ledes. Ironically the one place I think it may be appropriate, (for the affinity fraud), is Bernard Madoff and they won't let me mention it there.

Anyway, I am campaigning also to have some categories deleted where they needlessly group people by religion or ethnicity - including Jewish chess players. I used Jewish Fraudsters to make a point, and am trying to have categories such as Scottish Criminals and Italian Fraudsters removed also. Please visit my talk page for more information. Thanks. Beganlocal (talk) 19:13, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

I realise now that this is perhaps not the best way to achieve change on WP. I thank you for your guidance, and take heart from the fact that you were successful in having several of these labelling categories deleted. I shall not persist further in attempting to have these categories removed at the present time. Beganlocal (talk) 23:49, 18 July 2009 (UTC) 23:49, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Carl McIntire

I didn't remove the Stonewall citation, just moved it to a footnote where it belongs. McIntire was the sort of fellow who talked about rebuilding the Ark and floating it off his Cape May hotel. You can't take his off-the-cuff quotations too seriously. If you're interested in pursuing the subject, let's get the primary source for the quotation instead of a secondary one.--John Foxe (talk) 20:57, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

TV series CFDs

Would a listing of eponymous categories for TV series be a welcome addition to your list? Lemme know and I'll add them as I find them. Otto4711 (talk) 06:17, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Sure, it can't hurt. The ones I included were just the ones I had the energy to compile. I avoided doing most of the eponymous ones b/c there were so many. If you add them remember to add the "keep" and "no consensus" ones too so I don't get accused of maintaining a biased list. That page is getting rather long—I may need to break off some of the larger sections into separate pages soon. Good Ol’factory 21:52, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Alternative text for images in film articles

Hello, since the guidelines to add alternative text for images is being proliferated, I would like to ensure that the Good and Featured Articles under WikiProject Films have such text. Since you are a primary contributor to the articles listed below, I ask you to review the guidelines to add text to images in the body. For the image in the infobox, please add alt= above caption= and include alternative text in this field. For an example, see the text for Fight Club (film): alt. Here are your articles and a tool assessing them for alternative text:

• Bride of Frankenstein alt
• List of awards and honors received by Judy Garland alt
• Remember Last Night? alt
• Dracula's Daughter alt
• The Hustler (film) alt
• Skin & Bone (film) alt
• Fighting Tommy Riley alt
• Every Sunday alt
• Zero Patience alt
• The Cincinnati Kid alt

If you have any questions or would like a hand collaborating on alternative text, please let me know! —Erik (talk • contrib) 17:59, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Trying to get the mote out of the black pot's eye while simultaneously throwing stones in a glass house that is being roosted in by chickens, or something like that

Shocked—yes, SHOCKED—am I that a user would deign to make CfD a forum for humor and lightmindedness! It is so clear to me that the broken and dysfunctional IHATEIT/CfD system needs to be swept clean with the disinfectant of mixed metaphors and haughty self-righteousness. Good Ol’factory 22:53, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

08/13/2009

It's obsessive control freaks like you that make Misplaced Pages a wretched place. --71.225.231.155 (talk) 02:47, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Yeah! Good Ol’factory 02:57, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

I do what I can... Otto4711 (talk) 09:58, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

I go away for awhile and Otto turns into an OCF? When did this happen? --Kbdank71 13:40, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

DYK vandalism

What was this about? Binksternet (talk) 23:46, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

I don't know what it was about. I didn't do it and when I saw it I fixed it. Thanks for the assumption of good faith with the vandalism accusation. Otto4711 (talk) 23:53, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

No sweat, I'm not hitting the big red button. Cheers! Binksternet (talk) 00:03, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Where do you come off moving a page without discussion?

Who are you? Opposition to same-sex marriage is clearly POV. The denial of 'traditional marriage' is POV. Its in the dictionary. Go make your own page. Mrdthree (talk) 01:24, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

• First off, I have moved your comment to my talk page. As the name suggests, the talk page is for talking. Second, watch your tone. Third, I "come off" moving a page from the clearly POV title "traditional marriage" to a POV-neutral title that matches the companion Supporters of same-sex marriage in the United States. Anyone with the slightest critical reading skills recognizes that, even if "traditional marriage" is in some unspecified dictionary somewhere, the phrase is used as propaganda by the people who oppose SSM. Fourth, I am free to move the page and I am under no obligation to discuss it with you or anyone else. The existing page is "my own page", as much as it is anyone else's, since articles are not owned by editors. Finally, none of this really matters since it seems apparent that this article is going to be deleted at AFD anyway. Otto4711 (talk) 01:53, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

It is referenced in Websters Dictionary as a common use term. The page you mention is actually titled Supporters of marriage equality in the United States. If you want a neologism to go after, try 'marriage equality'. Traditional marriage, whether you like it or not, whether you beleive it is a common usage term or not, is in fact the self-identifying term used in the political debate. Your editing out the term is an argument you have with the supporters of traditional marriage, not myself. Edit the editor, not the facts. Its uncivil to move a page without participating in debate. My tone was in response to that. Sorry about the user page. I thought it was a discussion page. Mrdthree (talk) 01:24, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

It is most certainly not uncivil to move a page without discussing it first and even if it were it doesn't entitle you to be a jerk in response. It does not matter whether dictionaries include the term "traditional marriage". The term is still POV and it is still used as propaganda. That the supporters article is also named in a POV fashion does not excuse naming another article in a non-POV manner. Otto4711 (talk) 02:11, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

This move bordered on vandalism when there was obviously no consensus to do so. The previously existing (more accurate) title, moreover, seems to have broader support. I am tempted to seek sanction against this user for what is very bad Misplaced Pages behavior (but user RfC's or WP:ANI's are lots of work, so I hesitate). LotLE×talk 07:45, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Pa-lease, this was not vandalism by a long stretch but a rather bold edit which is now being discussed. Please leave it at that and trust that even those we disagree with are likely trying to improve articles. Discuss that actual merits at the talkpage and leave it at that. -- Banjeboi 11:22, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

List of 1980s American television episodes with LGBT themes

I'm sorry, but I was only helping out of unlinking a red link since there is no article to it. I think what you did was an accident. I can assure you I mean no harm to articles. --98.230.163.246 (talk) 16:37, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Your response, please? --98.230.163.246 (talk) 16:52, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

• Redlinks are fine if there is a potential for articles to be written. Otto4711 (talk) 16:56, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Oh. Well, what's the difference if I've before seen some other registered users on a few other articles remove some redlinks, and you on the List of 1980s American television episodes with LGBT themes article don't think so? Is there a specific appropriate time in which there can be some and some not or something? --98.230.163.246 (talk) 17:42, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

• See WP:BUILD. There's no specific rule that I know of but I go by what I think the likelihood is that someone might write an article. If I'm including the name of, say, a small-town doctor then I won't link it since it's not likely he'll ever have an article. If it's an actor the likelihood is much higher. Otto4711 (talk) 18:42, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Category:MC Lyte DRV

Re. your latest comments - just a quick heads up that you got your % wrong - forgot to multiply by 100. Actual % is 0.67 not 0.0067. I changed it for you, that ok? --Xdamr 20:50, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

And by the look of things it's not over yet - . What's next, Rfc? Ha... --Xdamr 20:26, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

I found it

I think: see CfD. Good Ol’factory 22:29, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

User:Andrew Darby

You might check who this user is--and you should have notified him when you prodded two of his articles. They' were written in 06 but he's continues to be very active here, thank goodness, because he's the best person we have for medieval literature. -- JohnBod deprodded, while I was about to do the same. DGG ( talk ) 01:50, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Sourced name changes

Hi Otto, I just found your relevant discussion here ... sorry I didn't see it before I reverted. I don't have any feelings about this change one way or the other, and if you want to try a discussion again, that's fine, but there should be a pointer to the discussion from the talk page of Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion/Speedy; those two lists shouldn't get out of sync. (Watching) - Dank (push to talk) 14:19, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Bilateral relations

Well it doesn't really. One or two editors have queried this close - I've pretty much explained things from my end a couple of threads up on my talk page. Nothing really excuses the fact that all in all it was a rather inept closure, which, joking aside, I feel quite a little foolish over. I'd understand if anyone wanted to DRV it, but, either way, these categories are going to have to be reconsidered in the not-too-distant future when a conclusion is reached at WT:CFD. While my intent was to avoid the whole DASH issue and instead implement the elements of renaming which enjoyed almost unanimous support, I ended up blundering into a situation which pleases no one. Hmm.

Best wishes, Xdamr 21:44, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Can you please send me a link that explains Project OCAT?

Hello,

Can you please send me a link that explains Project OCAT? I noticed that you deleted some of my contributions to a category about "The Wizard of Oz" (1939 film). This is fine, but I would like to learn about Project OCAT for future reference. I can not find anything about it.

Thanks so much! I ♥ Misplaced Pages. JGKlein (talk) 19:39, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

• OCAT is shorthand for WP:Overcategorization. It's a set of guidelines for when categories should not be used. One of those guidelines is that performers are not categorized on the basis of the films, TV series, plays, etc. in which they've appeared. This consensus is the result of discussions that took place a couple of years ago, out of concern that prolific actors would end up in dozens or hundreds of unhelpful categories. Otto4711 (talk) 19:50, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

• OK, thanks! I will avoid performers in the future. JGKlein (talk) 21:31, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Zap and Guerlilla Queer Bar connction

From the article zap (action) Queer Nation members were known for entering social spaces like straight bars and clubs and engaging in straight-identified behaviour like playing spin the bottle to make the point that most public spaces were straight spaces. QN would stage "kiss-ins" in public places like shopping malls or sidewalks, both as a shock tactic directed at heterosexuals and to point out that LGBT people should be able to engage in the same public behaviours as straight people.

I think its quite related and helps to build the web. Scarykitty (talk) 04:17, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Katamari Damacy

this is not an article about a fictional ball. it is an article about a real video game. categories for fictional items do not belong on real things.

• From the introduction of the article: "This is achieved by rolling a magical, highly adhesive ball called a katamari around various locations...". Clearly, it is an article about a real video game featuring a fictional ball as its key element. Your argument is equivalent to saying that Golden Snitch shouldn't be in the category, since Harry Potter is a real book. Pburka (talk) 02:44, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

• No, it's the equivalent of saying that Harry Potter should not be in the category because Harry Potter is a real book and not a fictional ball. Categorizing real items by the elements contained within their fiction is untenable. Accepting your argument would mean that every baseball video game would be categorized as a fictional ball because it has a fictional ball in it. Otto4711 (talk) 02:54, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

• So would you support including Katamari in the category, since it clearly is a fictional ball? I'm only reluctant to do this because it seems a bit odd to put a redirect article in a category, but that's exactly what Golden Snitch is. Pburka (talk) 03:01, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

• I am opposed to categorizing most redirects on general principle but if this one were placed in the category I would not remove it. Otto4711 (talk) 03:35, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

SDs

I'm usually happy to do speedy deletions of re-created categories when nothing has changed. You can let me know of any you find, either by my talk page or via email. Good Ol’factory 03:35, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

GA review on article.

Thank you for contacting me, I have provided a full explanation via here. Just for the record, do not think I am being discriminative due to the subject matter of the article, I am in no ways being like that, as I am gay myself. I followed guidance, and as the article didn't have sufficient context for those who aren't aware of the subject giving broad aspects to the subject at hand, it left no other option but to fail the review, and reclassify the article to a "start" class for now, although it is boarder-line to a B class (to which you may change it to B if you wish). My suggestion would be to include more in-depth details into the organization, so that readers who know nothing about the subject get to learn more. Pr3st0n (talk) 10:20, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

• You have provided nothing. No explanation, no justification, nothing. You have offered no guidance, no reason, no nothing. Try reviewing the article according to the actual criteria. Otto4711 (talk) 11:57, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Guidance is only offered if the article review has mixed fails, and passes on the criteria. As there isn't sufficient context to give more details on the subject to those unfamiliar with it, then it is a straight forward fail. If you view any article that currently has GA awards, you will see that they are broader in context, whereas the article to which I reviewed, didn't hold a broad prospectus of the main subject at hand, I knew more about the founder after reading it, than I did about the main organization. I have now asked for another user to conduct a 2nd opinion, and we will see what their outcome is. If their review is similar to the one I did, then more work would need to be carried out on the article. Not every article gets a pass on its first nomination, only the few. I've known of some articles that have been nominated time and time again, and still fail as there is insufficient context in them. I don't wish to discourage you on your good work, I'n only offering sound and reasonable advice. Pr3st0n (talk) 14:49, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Friendly note

Please avoid notes like this, which are not focusing on the content. I understand your frustration and agree with your position, but please use a more collegial approach. We'll get much further around here if we stick to policy. You may also want to have a look at this discussion for some background. Let me know if I can help out.  Frank  |  talk  13:01, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

3RR Warning

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Travis Bickle. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing.