User talk:Benjiboi/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

→

Archive 10

WP:LGBT Random Picture

Ready for your magic touch

Pictures! Just go to User:Allstarecho/LGBTPics, then edit this page tab and add away! It appears all the design bugs are worked out and it's looking good on my user page. -- ALLSTAR ECHO 22:37, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Bleh, ok, run into a problem here. We can't use nonfree images because for every nonfree image, there has to be a fair-use rationale and that's just not possible with this kind of script.. So if you add any images, they have to be free. fun. -- ALLSTAR ECHO 23:54, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

OK, NOW it's ready. All images currently in there are nonfree and ready for more to be added. -- ALLSTAR ECHO 05:26, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Batman and Robin

I had to remove your Batman and Robin entry because it wasn't a free image. If there's any sort of copyright notice on the image's own page, we can't use it. It has to be free of copyright or under GFDL license, (templates removed for space) Basically as long as it has the copyright C with a line through it or that moose/ox head, it's free and clear to use. Watch though as some might have the copyright C and/or moose/ox head but still have a note in it that to be able to use it free and clear you have to attribute the owner (see this image: - read the light blue box under the Licensing section) -- ALLSTAR ECHO 12:36, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Once you've read the above, feel free to remove it because it's placing your talk page in all those crazy categories at the bottom. Just noticed that. -- ALLSTAR ECHO 20:55, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

So, what do ya think?

<center>{{User:Allstarecho/pic}}</center> gets you this:

<center>{{User:Allstarecho/pic}}</center>

Of course, if you didn't want it centered, you'd just remove the center tags.. And it won't show the little blue edit tag in the title box when placed on namespace as seen on mine. -- ALLSTAR ECHO 20:53, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

First off, fab! I would remove the second rainbow flag icon and maybe shrink the first a bit. Benjiboi 21:07, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Done. Better. -- ALLSTAR ECHO 21:47, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Also the formatting when the text is longer seems wonky. Rather than a long item I'd rather the image and text be side by side if the image isn't a lovely wide one. Benjiboi 22:35, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

I couldn't even begin to figure out how to do that, I'm not that advanced. I'm sure it has something to do with tables or div layers but ack! Hrmm. -- ALLSTAR ECHO 23:05, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

OK, per your suggestions

Look at User:Allstarecho/LGBTrandompic. I'm having an issue in that it's outputting, as you can see, every image in the list but once I find that bug and fix it, it'll look like that except just one box instead of 12 or 60. ---- ALLSTAR ECHO 02:31, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Yay! I'm still looking for images that are free and all. Benjiboi 02:35, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

yay!

<center>{{User:Allstarecho/LGBTrandompic}}</center> gives you:

User:Allstarecho/LGBTrandompic

Now we can fill it out with more images/articles/descriptions, and that's done at User:Allstarecho/LGBTrandompic. Once we get it to 60 entries, it'll be ready for WP:LGBT. Finally.

And on another note, you really should move the LGBT newsletter below off page. It's causing issues with using the little blue edit links on each of your sections and subsections. It did it to my page as well and I just created a newsletters archive linked from my archive box, then moved the LGBT newsletter there. Now, no problems on my page with the edit links. -- ALLSTAR ECHO 04:43, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

I don't like to delete it so I moved it up above as to mitigate the formatting issues. I will quest again for photos. Benjiboi 10:25, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Starting draft page

User:Benjiboi/LGBT image quest for current pile. Benjiboi 12:25, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Done and in place at Portal:LGBT

This project is complete and has been implemented into Portal:LGBT, now showing on the main page!

Use {{Portal:LGBT/Pics}} or alternatively <center>{{Portal:LGBT/Pics}}</center> if you want it centered on userspace.

To add pictures, do so at Portal:LGBT/Pics.

Happy happy, joy joy! -- ALLSTAR ECHO 20:46, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Personally and formatting wise, I would add the photo to the top of the listings since its a nice square. Benjiboi 20:50, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Thankyou

Thankyou for the barnstar, and sorry for not saying so sooner.. Been busy in real life (too many assignments to mark). Fosnez 20:21, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

You're so welcome and I think it was my very first one. You certainly deserve a virtual pat on the back so happy to offer one. Benjiboi 20:25, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your help. Re: U.B. Funkeys AfD

Thank you for your help on adding the proper rescue tag for the U.B. Funkeys page, it needs rescuing because someone keeps deleting two-thirds of the page then saying it should be deleted for being too short. --JRTyner 06:44, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

You're very welcome. Benjiboi 14:45, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

jpeg compression Re: Dyke March image

Hi Benjiboi,

Just a quick note on jpegs: The original Dyke March jpeg was 1 MB, but if you just take the file and save it as a jpeg with quality on 80%, you will not be able to see any decrease in image quality, but suddenly the file has shrunk to 222 kB. --Slashme 08:59, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Umm, I have no idea what that means. Is that good or did I do something wrong or am I suppose to do something? Benjiboi 09:59, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, let me explain more clearly: When a jpeg file is saved, a "quality" parameter is used. Quality and file size are the trade-off here. A digital camera always saves files with the quality parameter set quite high, to avoid losing detail. When you upload a jpeg, it is a good idea to open it with a photo editor (like the GIMP, Adobe Photoshop or Microsoft Photo Editor) and then save it, but this time use "advanced options" or some such, and set the "quality" a bit lower. I know the GIMP has a setting where you can see a preview of the image while you tweak the quality. Basically, you decrease the quality until you start seeing the image degrade, and then increase it a bit above that. You can usually reduce the size of a photo about five times just by doing this.

Let me know if you want to know more ;] --Slashme 12:42, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Lol. So I do know a bit more but ... the picture seems fine and all right? It's on the article and looks great (thank you again!) so mission accomplished. Benjiboi 14:47, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Yep, all good now. --Slashme 16:12, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Dates (re:St Stephen's House, Oxford)

See WP:MOSDATE#Autoformatting and linking, particularly, "Wikipedia has articles on days of the year, years, decades, centuries and millennia. Link to one of these pages only if it is likely to deepen readers' understanding of a topic. Piped links to pages that are more focused on a topic are possible ([[1997 in South African sport|1997]]), but cannot be used in full dates, where they break the date-linking function."

I really don't thnk that in this case linking the years added anything else to readers' understanding. David Underdown 17:09, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Well, we can certainly agree to disagree. I'm happy to defer to your knowledge on the subject and what is needed to make the article work best. Benjiboi 20:50, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Re: Gay and lesbian retirement

I just put it up for review. See Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2007 October 16 ---- ALLSTAR ECHO 03:52, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you! I was very disheartened to see it deleted but I'm so not into fighting about AfD beyond a stress limit. The subject is certainaly notable so if nothing else I'd like to get the material myself to work on writing it up. Benjiboi 14:49, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Reposted for editing

User:Allstarecho/gay and lesbian retirement Benjiboi

Have at it. I'll help as time allows. Got a lot of irons in the fire so to speak but I won't leave you hanging by yourself. Bearean should also help since he originally wrote it. :) -- ALLSTAR ECHO 22:37, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm letting my anger subside for the moment and will fluff when the moment is right. Benjiboi 22:40, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

np. I'm trying to resurrect WikiProject Mississippi and right now that means finding every single Mississippi related article and tagging it or if they already have a tag, giving them a class and importance since WP Mississippi has never had that capability before. Just give a shout if you need something. -- ALLSTAR ECHO 22:49, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

lol. Good luck with all that! You know there is a google search specific to wp? Maybe starting with all major cities? You might also suss out who were key editors and search some of their edit histories. Benjiboi 22:51, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Ya, I've installed the script in my monobook.js that gives me a Google web or Google WP Only search box right under the regular WP search box over there in the left. It's soooo handy. The ratings implementation has also cut out alot of work as its bot has finally stared building a log and ratings lists which at least gives me articles that already have a Mississippi tag but that need class and importance ratings. It'll probably take me a year instead of 2 thanks to that. haha :) -- ALLSTAR ECHO 22:56, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Please stop removing discussion material - it is vandalism (re: Talk:List of gay, lesbian or bisexual people)

62.64.201.170 16:03, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

It's not vandalism to remove clutter which doesn't help improve the article and this is one massive spam farm although it does seem to be LGBT-focussed. Please make specific suggestions rather than telling people to check out the website that is littered with all manner of banners, links and rainbow-related ... stuff. rather than stating "someone should follow up these names" simply list the names and any non-commercial links about them. Benjiboi 16:53, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Lonnie Frisbee

I was trying to REMOVE pov.

The article was blaming Christians for his inability to overcome the sin of homosexuality.

Are you claiming the church has no right to expect that it's leaders refrain from homosexual practices.

The article as it's currently written, is biased in favor of people who hate the church because of their pro-homosexual activity stand.

My edits will make sure the article is balanced which is DESPERATELY needed in Wikipedia in general and this article in particular.

Please DO NOT revert my edits carte blanche. That's what the talk section is for.

Your actions reflect anything but a nPOV and are utterly unconstructive.

Thank you very much! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.238.68.127 (talk) 14:51, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Labeling homosexuality as a sin and claiming people hate the church because of their pro-homosexual activity speaks clearly to your POV problems but I'm happy to work with you to remove POV-pushing from both perceived sides. Benjiboi 20:20, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

One more thing...

Anyone that has a snarky LGBT quote featured prominently on his page is hardly a dispassionately objective repository of information on this case.

You CLEARLY have a bias and I am asking you nicely NOT TO TOUCH my edits which are there to REMOVE the bias you injected into this article because you disagree with the church on homosexuality.

thanks again :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.238.68.127 (talk) 14:53, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

If you have an issue with any of the LGBT quotes feel free to document which one and we can investigate if it's not appropriate. Everyone has bias and it's important to work with other editors on this wiki to make better articles. You'd have to pick a particular church and point in time to sort out wether I agree with its stance on homosexuality but many churches respect all humans without judgment so without knowing which church in particular I have to assume you're displaying your predisposition to discriminate against LGBT people and perhaps editing articles on people you would freely label as sinful isn't a good proposition for wikipedia.

I will freely edit and remove anything that flies in the face of the article's neutrality, asking nicely for anyone not to edit actually comes off, in this case, as passive-aggressive homophobia. Benjiboi 20:27, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Warning! You are in danger of VIOLATING the 3r rule (Re: Lonnie Frisbee)

DO NOT REVERT my edits which BALANCE your LGBT tainted views

The fact that he was molested as a young boy and lost his father are RELEVANT facts that you are trying to suppress from an Encyclopedic article.

Do not continue to engage in this EDITING WAR that you have initiated.

Thank you! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.238.68.127 (talk) 04:52, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

"tainted" views?? WP:ATTACK and WP:CIVIL much? -- ALLSTAR ECHO 05:38, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Interesting. You seem to have a reasonable command of some policies and wp lingo yet disregard core pillar of WP:NPOV. I have been extremely communicative on this subject with you and prefer you act civilized and concisely bring up these concerns on the talk page of the article itself. Benjiboi 22:23, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Drag queen

Hey - I think this is a good discussion for the Talk page, and in the end should lead to some better citation in the article as to what is and is not a drag queen. A lot of people, including drag queens, don't believe that trannies qualify. Also, a customer who is paying for a drag queen is often not wanting to pay for a tranny. It's an issue for drag artists: if they go the full route, it makes them less a sell. Let's raise these arguments on the Talk page and flesh out the discussion more, and try to get some citation to social researchers on the issue. --David Shankbone 11:49, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Go for it! Benjiboi 11:50, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Sure, but it will have to wait until I have time --David Shankbone 12:03, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Same here, no rush. Benjiboi 12:11, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Sisters.jpg

Image was replaced by someone else so I've reloaded original image with rationale and fixed tagging on all related articles. (adding sig file for archiving purposes) Benjiboi 16:21, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Need help with vandalism from 81.145.240.106

I listed on Admin vandal noticeboard. Benjiboi 22:55, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Homosexuality in women's sports

Reply on my page please. Check the 'what links here' and you'll see its barely anything save for 'wikipedia articles needed attention' and talk pages etc etc. The article is basicly orphaned. Cornell Rockey 02:53, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Homosexuality in women's sports

Reply to your comment on the AfD, and please reply on my talk page. I don't have the first clue how to fix it, and I doubt it can be fixed. Popular opinion says otherwise, so if it can be fixed, as I said, knock yourself out. Also, read WP:AGF before accusing me of abuse. Cornell Rockey 02:56, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

(reply posted on Cornell Rockey talk page)

Hi, The orphan tag is not appropriate as speaks to the wikilinks which are internal to WP. I've added over a dozen myself so I know that it's no longer an orphan. I wasn't accusing you of abusing the AfD process you were stating it. The AfD process is for hopeless articles which can't be improved through regular editing, many do abused the AfD process so please avoid doing it. Many articles do need improving but doing so by use of AfDing doesn't bring the inspired and enlightening editing that makes truly great WP articles, IMO. No one seems to disagree with you that the article is poorly written and needs work but it's not a hopeless or unencyclopedic article just one that needs work and can be greatly improved with regular editing. Benjiboi 13:21, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Your query at WP:AIV

See at dispute resolution Raymond Arritt 16:55, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

On a related note, I have protected the page from editing until September 1. I will end it earlier if an agreement can be reached on the talkpage. The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 16:56, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, I was just about to ask for protection, however this editor seems to surface every few days and reverts everything; they deleted 27 refs down to three (I think absolutely everything I did) as well as a further reading section which I find hard to believe they were readily familiar with. It's hard for me t o assume good faith in this instance. Benjiboi 16:59, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Twinkie defense

Hey Benjiboi, I want to let you know that User:192.250.34.161 has written to me on my talk page about the Twinkie defense article & the content issues there. I've read through the sources & have concerns, though unlike 192.250.34.161 I'm all for WP:AGF, particularly inasmuch as you & I have had good if passing acquaintance before. In any case, I've decided to go ahead & start up an article RfC, which I'm in the process of preparing. My object is to be as neutral as possible in stating the main issues of the RfC; everyone can speak for themselves after that. I have a lot of concerns about civility issues; I hope that 192.250.34.161 & other parties can remain civil in the RfC. --Yksin 23:26, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Personally I'd like to first simply move the content that is more appropriate to other articles although from User:192.250.34.161's posts that would seem all of it. Like many conflicts I think there is a good solution somewhere in the middle and User:192.250.34.161's mass deletions seem to fly in the face of consensus building or playing nice in the sandbox. As for the Solomon sources it seems like either the ones that were there have been removed or they were switched somewhere in an edit, in either case I'm not in the mood to trek to the library and dig through court transcripts just to reinsert a ref. I'm simply not into conflict and User:192.250.34.161's actions make me pause as to the value of my work here. Benjiboi 23:58, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Sorry I didn't write back sooner, I had no time after posting the RfC until just now. I agree that there's a solution somewhere in the middle -- I hope the RfC will help to find that way. Meantime, I have a low tolerance for incivility & personal attacks whether they're made on me or on someone else, & I really doubt the dispute would have gotten this far if 192.etc. had explained with as much civility to you as s/he did with me what his/her issues with the article were. Which is part of what I'm about to say in my "Outside statement" in the RfC. I see that you've gone on break; I hope you will at least check in with the RfC. And remember that no matter what 192 accused you of, you're one of the good guys. Don't let it get you down. --Yksin 02:36, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Twinkie defense RfC initiated

Please see Talk:Twinkie defense#Request for comment: Twinkie defense content dispute. This article RfC is was initiated per the Dispute resolution process. Please see WP:RFC, particularly the section on Request comment on articles, for information about this process. Thanks. --Yksin 01:26, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

LGBT WikiProject Newsletter

Delivered on 16:00, 6 July 2007 (UTC).

Break template, hopefully not needed again

Break!

I've found some of my experience here quite stressful and have been accused of some quite unpleasant things so...I'm taking a break.

Benjiboi 22:13, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Welcome back!

You've been sorely missed. I hope you're feeling somewhat less stressed (though I see you've having to interact with Lulu lotus on the Genderfuck article, which is never a pleasant experience, in my experience), and if I can be of any assistance, I'm only a holler away. Jeffpw 05:33, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Thank you! And I appreciate your support through it all, I guess anonymity does have a downside. Benjiboi 00:28, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Gay Pride

...has been semi-protected for one week. Let me know if it continues, and I'll make it longer.  :-) - Philippe | Talk 02:15, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, I'm quite sure it will be vandalized as soon as protection is removed but even a small break is a good one! Benjiboi 05:09, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Homosexuality in animals - Hyena mounting dispute

Please don't just re-add that section. We should not let this devolve into an edit war. Please let the discussion decide the outcome before more edits take place. That's how it's supposed to be. (Please respond to me in that article's discussion, or my talk page, thanks.) -Freak104 16:26, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

This section states that both male and female hyenes mount members of the same sex, what else do you need to see? I responded on the article talk page before re-adding the section by the way. Benjiboi 16:28, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Your one comment does not count as a full discussion. Other editors have to put in their opinion. And I responded to your comment about play mounting. -Freak104 16:30, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

I have seen nothing that the mounting researchers documented was considered play and, in fact, believe that they would have quickly (and more readily) categorized the mountings as such. Please stop deleting the entire section and instead find a reference that supports that all the mounting exhibited by hyenas is exclusively "play mounting" and that "play mounting" cannot be considered homosexual activity. Benjiboi 16:36, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Just letting you know that I'm going to continue this discussion in the discussion section for the article, so I won't be checking here. Please let other editors express their opinion. -Freak104 16:39, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Sounds fine to me. I look forward to any research that supports the statements either way. Benjiboi 16:45, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Hello

Hello Benjiboi, Becksguy 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. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing! — Hope you feel better and are less stressed. Nice to see you back. — Becksguy 00:44, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Cheers. thank you! Benjiboi 02:28, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

I like your careful and courteous editing. Down is not what you should be, please be up and strong. Soczyczi 19:19, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

I really appreciate that! I don't believe in a world where everyone agrees with everyone else but there is a part of me that yearns for the polite manners that beckons finger bowls and gloves! Benjiboi 22:15, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Wolf Hudson

I wanted to say thanks for working with this editor and for spending your time cleaning up the requirements of PORNBIO that I excerpted on the talk page, and for the lesson I learned from this. I'm feeling guilty about this because I went a certain distance -- found the requirements and copied them to the talk page -- but didn't go the whole way and help the guy work out just what he should have done and how he could have done it. I have to confess, when I first saw the page, I didn't think he had a snowball's chance of qualifying under PORNBIO so I rather thought that copying the requirements for his reference was enough of a good deed, but you've made me see that, yes, I could have spent more time with the guy so he would have understood what was happening and why it was happening. I think what I've learned here is that "don't bite the newbies" may mean I had an obligation to help him instead of just refraining from biting him. So, thanks, I've learned something -- in the future, I will be doing less new page patrol and speedying, but trying to make the few that I do do not leave a bad taste in the mouth of the person who created the article. So if there's a barnstar for "wake-up call", you get it. Cheers, Accounting4Taste 20:22, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

lol! Yes, I think a lot of new and potentially promising editors have been sent packing because they tried a good-faith effort to contribute in a bewildering new arena and then were told by some faceless voice that the work they had just done was essential worthless and their judgment poor at best. It's like screaming at a pre-school child that their finger-painting "SUCKS!!!" and then we wonder why we spend so much time dealing with vandals and drive-bys while lamenting the lack of talented editors and admins. here's to supporting new talent and being just a little more nice even if it's for selfish reasons like recruiting new editors who will do work we don't want to! Benjiboi 20:40, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

German O.S.P.I.

dear benjiboi,

i would like to understand why you revert true and proovable information which i gave in the article on the sisters of perpetual indulgence today regarding the german houses.

the two incorporations about which we talk here have been founded by two expelled members of the order here, one is excommunicated, the other has not vene finished his noviciate. as the berlin motherouse has been exsequated as sole authority for the sisters in germany i would, as spokesperson for this motherhouse, ask to understand our point of view and not allow these people to misuse wikipedia for their personal battle against the berlin motherhouse, which exists since 1991.

it is sad, that such people, copyists, thiefs of names, ex-members who have prooven before a collective of more than 70 people that they are unable to fulfill even the least little standards of the order and where therefore expelled by consensu of the group of fpm's and members are allowed to broaden themselves here. i am shocked and extremely sad.

nonetheless i understand your point of view and appreciate your way of keeping to the standards of the wiki.

greetings from germany

archmother johanna, foundress of the german sisters, berlin --Erzmutter 22:35, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Greetings. As I wrote previously but will also provide a link so you can hopefully read up - the standard for inclusion is verifiability, not truth. What you state very well might be true but it also has to be verifiable to Wikipedia standards. If SPI has an absolute registry of official or authorized houses then that would do it. If not then somehow proof that those houses are not a part of the oprganization should be found and verified. Benjiboi 01:07, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Twinkie defense RfC and possible new home for content

Hey Benjiboi,

I noticed you were back several days ago, & saw your statement in the RfC on Talk:Twinkie defense, & quite frankly felt awkward... not knowing what to say, given that I basically agreed with 192 on content issues -- but certainly not with his incivility & personal attacks on you.

Well, let me be awkward then, as I belatedly welcome you back, though with many regrets about how things turned out, esp. as the RfC was my idea. I know how hard you worked on all the info you added to the article, & I know you did it in good faith, & I don't want your work to be lost -- if it's not in that article, it most definitely is relevant & has a place in others. Not just Moscone-Milk assassinations & Dan White either -- why shouldn't there be an article on People v. Dan White -- which, with a different scope than Twinkie defense leaves much more room for the full account of the trial & its aftermath both legally speaking & in terms of its impact on gays & lesbians. (I remember so well the very first issue I ever bought of Boston's Gay Community News, when I was a college sophomore in my early & very scared coming-out period: the cover story was on the White Night riots.)

Anyway, I understand if you have feelings about me based on how things turned out -- if there are, can we work it out? In any case, I wish you all the best, & I'm very glad you're back actively on Wikipedia. --Yksin 23:56, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

I have absolutely no hard feelings at all towards you and appreciate what you tried to do - I simply was regretting being involved and chose to put my energy elsewhere until I felt I could return with a good spirit to volunteering my time here.

If you think there is a good place for that work by all means please find a good home for it. Filing under Dan White would make sense as much of it speaks to his life and experience and he is known for the assassinations and the resulting trial/twinkie defense. At this point I feel I just have to avoid 192 for a while and leave the Twinkie defense article alone. It's also good for me to remember that anonymous and even folks just not dealing face-to-face people are a little bit more free to be...mean, and generally less conscious of their impact on others so I'm trying to use the whole lesson to be fair and reasonably open-minded about content disagreements. When several editors with sharply different viewpoints churn the same information sometimes some brilliant writing that is far better than anything I would have written comes out. If you do more the information and want help once it's moved to a new article fell free to give me a heads up. And thank you for all your work to try to resolve an unpleasant time for me. Benjiboi 01:05, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for you reply Benjiboi. I frankly don't know why it's so hard for some people to be civil in disagreement, esp. since incivility usually ends up turning a situation into one of polarity & enmity, which kinda shoots the whole idea of cooperation in the foot. Anyway, yes... especially given I've actually got (on interlibrary loan) a book that contains most of the trial transcript, I think it would be very possible to make use of the work you did re: background of the trial in a People v. Dan White article, as well as adding relevant material to the other articles about the assassination, riots, & on White himself. And since this aspect of American LGBT history is important to you, it might well be an article you can feel comfortable in working on, assuming 192 will stay away from it. I must run now, but I feel a lot better knowing that we appear to be on good ground with one another. Best wishes. --Yksin 01:21, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Anytime. Benjiboi 01:23, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Hey Benjiboi, I haven't forgotten my commitment to an article on the trial itself. Especially after having read a good ways through the book that has the trial transcript in it -- I think it can be constructed as a combination of a sort of play by play of the trial (brief summaries of trial testimony by various witnesses) with the kind of background & aftermath info you worked on as a frame for it. But I realized that I've stacked up a few commitments to various articles, & I'm confusing myself. So... I'm in the process both of organizing my work & then working on the various articles I've made a commitment to on Wikipedia. Right now I'm more actively working on Battle of Washita River, as those commitments are of longest standing; but I will be back with this idea as soon as I can be, & will be back in touch then. Best wishes. --Yksin 02:21, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

No worries, all is well. Benjiboi 11:45, 16 September 2007 (UTC)