User talk:Morbidthoughts

Adminship

Hi. This is just a note to say that if you ever feel you'd like to be an admin, I'd be happy to nominate you, as you're clearly qualified. Regards. Epbr123 (talk) 16:31, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for the compliment, but I think I need to diversify my editing portfolio before attempting adminship. Vinh1313 (talk) 17:06, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Just sing out if/when you do decide to go for it... I'll support you 100%. Tabercil (talk) 23:05, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

With both of your support and a year of experience behind me, I would be honoured to be nominated for adminship. Morbidthoughts (talk) 19:15, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi. I've created your nomination page. The instructions on what to do after you've answered the questions are at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship. Good luck. Epbr123 (talk) 19:04, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm surprised there is already discussion at the nomination page when it hasn't been published in the general Requests for adminship page. Morbidthoughts (talk) 03:27, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Joanna Angel

Birth name had already been removed per OTRS Ticket#: 2006111610017251 as a BLP issue. Birth names, real or alleged, for porn performers with stage names are always considered contentious unless the performer has publicly acknowledged that is accurate. This is due to potential for post-industry discrimination, embarrassment to their families and fears for their safety. I've seen OTRS types repeatedly remove the info when it's formally submitted.

The source you sited was apparently what initiated the OTRS complaint. Some IP address had put the information into the WP article with false attribution several months previously, and nobody ever checked it. She's never shown up with anything other than her stage name in any subsequent article, so it looks like wikipedia is the actual source for the information. Since the subject has said in interviews her family strongly disapproves of her career, I think it's a safe conclusion she hasn't publicly released her real name.

Reading through the edit history on the article, somebody apparently also uploaded her yearbook photos at one point. I'm really getting sick of stalkers, although I suppose I should be relieved it wasn't her driver's license this time. Horrorshowj (talk) 13:26, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

There's a ongoing heated discussion about porn birth names (and what to do with them) at WP:BLPN. You should give your input there. As for Joanna's last name, if a more reputable newssource publishes her name like the Associated Press or Reuters, it's going to be fair game. It's hard to prove it's due to a wikipedia feedback loop in these instances. Easy to speculate. Hard to prove. Morbidthoughts (talk) 14:43, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Jenna Haze's real name

According to imdb.com www.imdb.com/name/nm1040252/ Jenna haze's real name is *redacted*. Also in an interview with Luke Ford she says her name is Jennifer www.lukeisback.com/stars/stars/jenna_haze.htm —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tepiii3 (talk • contribs) 03:59, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Neither of them are reliable sources. IMDB is a tertiary publication that relies on user contribution. Luke Ford is a self-published porn gossipist. Morbidthoughts (talk) 04:07, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

If you read the Article She is "quoted" as saying her name is Jennifer.

and that is all. Morbidthoughts (talk) 04:12, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

--Tepiii3 (talk) 04:41, 30 August 2008 (UTC)== Shyla Stylez's Real Name ==

www.ocweekly.com/2005-05-26/features/internal-affairs/   Did you even read the article. Right on the bottom of the first page it says  "Amanda  Frieland is an internationally famous porn star. GRAND JURY records says Frieland uses the stage name Shyla Stylez"   What other reference do you need that that.  Is the Grand Jury not credible? I mean this was a pretty public story.  Do you need more reference than that.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tepiii3 (talk • contribs) 04:27, 30 August 2008 (UTC)   Tepiii3 (talk) 04:36, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Apology

Didn't realize she changed her name after marrage. I see you point of no real reference of her birth name —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tepiii3 (talk • contribs) 04:33, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

--Tepiii3 (talk) 05:03, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Joanna Angels name

New York Observer wrote an article about Joanna in which she participated in. It states her name. Is this a credible source for you? www.observer.com/2007/she-s-no-angel-punk-princess-porn--Tepiii3 (talk) 05:05, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

I didn't have an issue about it but another user alerted me to a previous problem about that source. See two sections above this. Morbidthoughts (talk) 05:10, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

What does OTRS complaint and BLP issue mean?--Tepiii3 (talk) 05:18, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

WP:BLP and WP:OTRS Morbidthoughts (talk) 05:22, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Re: Chewbacca

Thanks, Morbidthoughts. I do appreciate that note, and don't wish you ill in your career here. I probably over-reacted to the "Chewbacca" thing, and it's stuck in my craw for a long time. You couldn't have known that I loathe South Park... and, as if to rub salt in the wound, I learned the meaning and origin of the phrase by reading the phrase's own extensive Wikipedia article... while here I was, fighting tooth-and-nail for the existence of articles on major-- in their field-- Japanese subjects, and articles on award-winning, internationally-shown Korean and Hindi TV series were being put up on the AfD chopping-block.

I believe whole-heartedly in citing one's information. If you check my history, I think you'll notice that my contributions of text nearly always contain citations. I believe that any unsourced statement at a Wiki article is, at the very best, just useless hearsay. I am of the opinion, however, that the nature of the subject determines the nature of the sourcing. Authors of articles for peer-reviewed scholarly journals generally don't write about Japanese porn... or, if they do, they don't submit those articles for publication ;-)

Anyway, my retirement was probably inevitable due to basic philosophical differences I have with the Wikipedia structure, and had absolutely nothing to do with either you or Chewbacca. I've been butting my head against the "notability" brick wall, and a few others, ever since I came here-- as well as becoming more and more fed up with the needless bickering, power-gaming, politic-playing, rule-making, and other sorts of time-wasting drama... I was lured here by the "sum of all human knowledge" bluff. I came in thinking I could write an article on pretty much anything or anybody, as long as it was all sourced, public, not a hoax, not a vanity page... Instead I find Wikipedia wants to be sort of a free, anonymously-written Encyclopedia Brittanica, without the images, with every article starting "so-and-so is notable because...", and with lots of extra articles on current U.S. pop culture, because, well, that's what the editors here think is cool. I find working at a specialty Wiki suits my philosophy better. There we cover one topic just as thoroughly as we possibly can.

Anyway, as for your work here, the adult entertainment subject area is a challenging and difficult one, and needs good editors and Admins. First-time RfAs are typically learning experiences. If Adminship is what you're after, don't give up the ship if this one fails. Follow Epbr's example if you have to-- avoid anything controversial (and interesting) for a few months. Do Admin-ish things like mechanically copy-editing and reverting simple vandalism by the hundreds, nominate admins for a couple months, pal around with the right people, make sure you type "reply" in the edit summary, etc. It works ;-) Regards. Dekkappai (talk) 00:25, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm still amazed that the Japanese don't archive their news online like in America (or exclude all the sex stuff from the archives). I wish they made your endeavours easier. I thought that being admin would be good to support wikiproject porn and am more concerned about how my bumpy process may reflect badly on the people who nominated and supported me. Morbidthoughts (talk) 01:22, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Yep, I forgot to type "reply" again. Morbidthoughts (talk) 01:23, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

The Japanese thing-- it's partly "face-saving". I know from personal experience that South Korea has a healthy adult entertainment genre also, but you'll find no articles on it here, because it's such a closely-guarded secret. Anything I could add would be banned as "OR"... Your RfA really surprised me-- I fully expected you to pass, the only disagreements I've had with you have been over things with which I disagree with Wikipedia in general. The "cooldown block" opposes and especially the "anti-print-sourcing" opposes are just absurd. In the first one you didn't parrot Wiki-policy quite exactly, in the second one... well, you did nothing, but someone mis-read you, and a few lemmings jumped off that cliff with him... Oh well... Get more experience (particularly RfA, vandal-fighting, policy chit-chat, and other Admin-ish things) and you'll succeed easily next time. Regards. Dekkappai (talk) 18:24, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Duplicate RfA question

Sorry about the duplicate question. I'm just really drowsy right now. XD Autumn Fall 02:29, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

No problem. This entire process has been a learning experience for me and I take the underlying issue of your question as important to evaluate. Morbidthoughts (talk) 08:15, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Your RFA

Best wishes for your RFA -- Tinu Cherian - 12:01, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much. Morbidthoughts (talk) 04:01, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Chris Musni

Thanks for commenting on my article. Unfortunately, you suggested it to be deleted. You said that Chris does not have significant coverage in reliable sources. However, that is only the test for "presumed notability". The person can still be notable and fail that test under WP:BIO. Such as if the person has a cult following. Agree? Would you please reconsider your comment? Thanks Gchuva (talk) 23:25, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

I agree with your notability premise, but I would like a reliable source, even trivially, confirming that the person has a cult following. Morbidthoughts (talk) 23:32, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

I will see what I can do to find a source that shows he has a cult following. What about the unique contribution route to notability also mentioned in WP:BIO? Would that be something you could consider? I added another comment in response to your latest one. Thanks again for the feedback.Gchuva (talk) 00:49, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks again for your interest in my article. I have added one new statement to help establish notability. Who knows if you will agree. But I appreciate how much time you have spent discussing the article. Gchuva (talk) 23:15, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Cytherea

It's her. I watched the film. The sources only confirm. Why should we hide it? Arrentino (talk) 04:46, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

I've already pointed you to the underlying policies why those sources can't be used. Please also review WP:V. As long as a reliable secondary source doesn't report on Cytherea's name, it shouldn't be in the article. You can't rely on the movie itself since it's a primary source. Morbidthoughts (talk) 04:50, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

stockley & wakelin article

hi Regarding deleteing this article as being not notable. Hi Regarding deleting this article as being not notable. the company was founded in 1824 and was an important ant horn comb manufacturer before the advent of plastics -- it exported combs from England to America and the company was then very well known an ordinary thing like a comb used to be expensive as it was made of horn. The company Stockley and Wakelin does not trade any more so there is no commercial pourpose. There is another delete tag that that the article violates copyright as the material is elsewhere on the net. There is no copyright violation as the text elsewhere on the internet is my own. I am selling a Comb from made by Stokely and Wakelin on e bay and decided to do a write-up on Stockely and wakely - The comb is being sold for six pounds - so my intention to write the article on the company could hardly be for the purpose of flogging the one ccomb. Rather a comb was and is an important article of everyday use. There are no articles on horn combs which were used before plastics on Wikipedia and I was only trying to fill a gap by writing a article and improving on horn combs about what we used before plastics. Any way the article can be undeleted so that I and other wikipedians may improve on it and contribute to the knowledge of horn combs. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jopling100 (talk • contribs) 05:18, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Yes, you can ask one of these admins to see if he can save you a copy of the deleted article. Morbidthoughts (talk) 05:34, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Morbidthoughts

Jopling100 (talk) 05:53, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Old man willy of shepshed

Hi. Good work with the speedy tagging, but I'm just letting you know that hoax articles like this are better to be tagged as "vandalism" rather than "nonsense", as "nonsense" is only meant for unsalvageably incoherent content. This is something that sometimes comes up during RfAs. Regards. Epbr123 (talk) 15:29, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Understood. Morbidthoughts (talk) 16:17, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Clair Newell

Good call. What do you type in for an ADF? Czolgolz (talk) 20:44, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

WP:AFD Morbidthoughts (talk) 20:47, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Meetinghouse Partners

Sorry for any difficulties. I should have been in sand box while I was practicing building info boxes. I accidentally saved the page and caused all the trouble. THANK YOU FOR THE COOKIES!! Dunning22 (talk) 13:37, 10 September 2008 (UTC)Dunning22

I object

The SNES game maker was posted, twice by me but the first time it had to be posted by Jordan William Johnson himself. Give him 30 days, if he has not shown himself after 30 days then delete it. I won't repost it, but someone else will once the first beta version of his software is released so face it, either way, you loose.

Unknown Creature, The(2005 Movie) in my opinion should not have been deleted. You violated the order of Copyright owner, Andrew McGee. If you want proof of it's existance call up the US copyright and ask them to refrence certificate number PAu2-984-041 and after it is confirmed. Repost it yourself.
Roberttheman2008 my talk