User talk:Robapalooza

Hello Robapalooza, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!  -- KHM03 21:22, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I don't generally support the use of polling data in Wikipedia articles, but I wanted to compliment you on your graphic and methodology regardless. Very glad to see some editors understand that the primaries are not a first-past-the-post process. Italiavivi 22:45, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There are a couple problems with your chart. First, you state that Clinton's lead expanded form six points to ten, whereas you chart clearly shows her lead at starting at 45-42 and expanding to 48-43. This is a growth from three to five, not six to ten. Second, I was always taught to start numbering at zero. Your graph begins at 35%, artificially exaggerating the difference between to two data sets. - SigmaEpsilon → ΣΕ 00:50, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your input. In early versions of the chart in question (head-to-head charts of hypothetical matchups between Clinton and Thompson, for example), I used a different Y-axis scale, and I misjudged the differences between candidates. I've since updated all charts to use a simplified Y-axis that more clearly shows point differences. As an engineer, I understand that charts should start from zero, but as a practical matter, it makes the information difficult to read. I think readers will clearly understand that the races are still relatively close. --Robapalooza 14:44, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was quite impressed with the charts. I was disappointed to see them go. But, as you said, they would involve a lot of work to maintain.

Just curious, which software tools did you use to construct the charts? Dogru144 11:40, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I just use Excel and a program that prints the output as a PDF. I cut and paste the image into Paint and save as a JPG. There's probably an easier way of creating JPGs, but I haven't found one yet. Time permitting, I may bring back the Clinton v. Giuliani type charts. I've replaced them with charts of candidates' progress in the first few "key" states, i.e. IA, NH, NV and will add FL, SC if possible. --Robapalooza 14:39, 19 August 2007 (UTC)--Robapalooza 14:39, 19 August 2007 (UTC)--Robapalooza 14:39, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am loving what you did with the proportional representation on the Dem Prim page, I'm wondering, could you recalculate it with the new poll for California (showing Barack Obama ahead).--Mh10190 19:53, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd love to except polls on Obama have not shown him in the lead in California. Opinion_polling_for_the_Democratic_Party_(United_States)_presidential_primaries,_2008#California. --Robapalooza 19:43, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I just updated the Dem Primary page. It was unattended for a while. Ill fix up the the map, can you please update the proportional graphs, they are really great.

		The Special Barnstar
		Great work on the charts and graphs you added to show the polling information. Your efforts are appreciated and have earned you this special barnstar Southern Texas 18:05, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for making the chart with all the candidates. I do see what you mean about it being hard to read. I think that adding a "undecided" and "other" category would help, but even more so if "other" and "undecided" were kept separate. I am also not sure if a linear graph is a good way to model the data, although I can't think of any other way to do it. Mathnsci 00:11, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Linear regressions are not that informative. Do you have the ability to do something besides straight lines on the poll data? -- Yellowdesk 15:32, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not familiar with next-order regression, but I'll look into it. Right now, I'm using openoffice.org Calc program which is a simplistic version of Microsoft Excel. I'm limited to linear, power, exponential regressions. I can also display the mean, but I don't think the mean is helpful at all. If possible, I'll look into moving averages and getting a better program with better statistical packages.--Robapalooza 01:25, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To address the concerns some of you have over the use of linear regressions, I've added links to sites that summarize polling data in a similar manner, but use different methods for plotting averages. I will keep maintaining the charts on this site, since it includes more data than the images in the attached links. Thoughts, questions, suggestions, etc. are welcome. This example is from the Republican California primary section, but similar links appear on this page. [1] --Robapalooza 00:47, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, you recently added a paragraph to each of the main presidential contenders. For example, you added a paragraph to the Fred Thompson article that mentions other candidates like Romney and Giuliani. However, Romney and Giuliani had not previously been mentioned in the Fred Thompson article, and are not wikilinked. I will try to fix the paragraph you added to the Fred Thompson article, but please try to be more careful. Thanks.Ferrylodge —Preceding signed but undated comment was added at 14:15, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I admire your work with game predictions, but I have several concerns with it. First and foremost, Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. We don't speculate about the future - we only write what has happened or is certain to happen. A game will be played this Saturday, but speculating on the winner is outside our scope. Secondly, Sagarin's calculations may be protected by copyright or other intellectual property law. I'm not a lawyer, so I don't know, but if it is protected, copying his entire ranking scheme is probably not a fair use. Lastly, it is a maintenance nightmare. Instead of just having to update records weekly, images have to be redone.

I would suggest bringing this up at WT:CFB before spending any more time on it. --B 19:36, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your comments. Although the analysis is forward-looking, the statistics are compiled weekly and are, therefore, current. That is, Sagarin's statistical analysis and my separate analysis have already happened. Also, I have included these charts on sites that are dedicated to this season of college football for the various teams. These teams carry an appropriate current event tag, so I think the charts are appropriate for such pages. Sagarin's webpage is protected by copyright, which means you can't copy his content without permission. The charts do not copy his content. Rather, my analysis in an independent analysis of his statistics, and, I believe, is properly attributed. The chart is entirely my own work. If you look at his statistics page, it's merely a list of numbers and he suggests that you can "predict" the outcome of a future game by comparing numbers, but he does not perform such calculation for the reader. I've merely picked up where he left off and applied it to the ACC teams and South Carolina. Maintenance doesn't bother me. I run this analysis every week regardless. The images are easily updated using Wikipedia's tools. I'm happy to discuss this matter further in a forum, if it is deemed necessary to do so.--Robapalooza 19:52, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If he were running a publicly available formula (eg the RPI), there wouldn't be a copyright issue. Although I suppose that the charts just for ACC schools is probably sufficiently transformative to get around it.

I'd still suggest taking it to WT:CFB though. Even though it's a formula (as opposed to someone's swag) I still think that's too much of a crystal ball. I can raise the issue and start the conversation there if you like.

A few other random thoughts if you do continue doing it: (1) Can you make the images SVG? SVG allows the charts to be scaled to any resolution with no loss of quality and so it's much more reusable. If not, PNG is the second choice ... there actually is (or was) a bot going around converting all gifs to PNG. (2) Unless there is a compelling reason not to, freely licensed images should generally be uploaded to Commons. Free images are gradually being checked (to make sure they are legitimately free) and moved. (3) Citations and wikilinks in section headers are bad. You may want to change it to something like I did in 2007_Virginia_Tech_Hokies_football_team#Future_game_Sagarin_predictions where the section header is small and the citation is a small note below the table. --B 20:07, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again. Time permitting, I'll edit the section headers. Also, per your suggestion, I've added a section to WT:CFB inviting input on this topic.--Robapalooza 20:22, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Robapalooza. Very interesting work. I'm still looking forward to other people's comments. In the meantime, I'd really like to see the predictions for Texas. Any chance of you either adding them in or e-mailing me your spreadsheet so I can play with it? My e-mail is set on Wikipedia so if you decide to do that you can go to my page and then click "E-mail this user" in the toolbox on the left. Thanks for showing us this interesting analysis. Best, Johntex\^talk 00:18, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Robapalooza: As I've asked before, please discontinue placing this graphic or anything pertaining to Sagarin predictions from 2007 Miami Hurricanes football team. I appreciate your efforts, but my objections stand: "While interesting, I am not convinced the table is particularly encyclopedic. (WP:CBALL, WP:IINFO)." I don't think it belongs in any article - the betting line is enough - but since I edit the Miami Hurricanes, I'd rather not have to keep removing it. --mc machete 00:41, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I respect your right to remove the chart, but I also have a right to include such charts. I respectfully submit that the charts are not a "crystal ball" at all. Rather, the charts are simply summaries of statistical information about the strength of each team based on past performance as compared to the statistical strength of future opponents. I also respectfully disagree that the charts are merely indiscriminate collections of information. Still further, out of 13 articles that include this kind of graphic, you're the only one to object. In any event, I hope you guys beat Boston College.  :-) --Robapalooza 18:40, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Sample Gameknot profile page.png. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI 04:52, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done--Robapalooza 05:04, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As one Clemson alumni to another, welcome to Wikipedia! Chris 15:08, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I edited the Clemson Tigers article per your request, putting all of the references in the reference list. While I graduated from Clemson, I normally don't edit Clemson articles because that is not my interest. Sorry about that. Chris 23:49, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your calling my attention to the Clemson Tigers article via my talk page. I edit the Clemson University article, but generally stay away from the athletics article, so it is unlikely that I would have seen the discussion. I did have an opinion on the matter, and posted it on the talk page. Mescad 00:53, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

i agree that the polls should add up to 100% and i will most likely add an "other" category, however i would like to keep the undecided voters separate from the others given that undecided voters will move to one of the other candidates by the primary (or not vote) and candidates who support other voters will most likely continue to support those through the primary. Thanks for the suggestion Perpetualization 02:08, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So far, i had been using Microsoft Excel, but recently, i just recently installed Windows Vista on a new hard drive, disconnecting the one that i was using before, having believe that i copied all the important files over. I later realized that i forgot the information for those graphs. I will send it to you once i get my hard drive up and running, but i can explain the relatively simple process i use.
I copy the data into a spreadsheet, using the last date of a poll for the x axis and each candidates data as the y axis. Because this process is time consuming, i have only copied Iowa, California, and Florida to my computer. The graphs involve circle data points, one larger than the default for all canidates (so they may be easily seen). The 6 months poll is created simply by looking at which polls are less than 6 months in the past and only including them. I included undecided whenever it was listed in the polling data, and i computed other (100-(canidates+undecided)), but if any of the candidates or the undecided value was missing, i did not put an other data point. This is to avoid weird inflation of other data if a poll does not include Huckabee as happened several times (especially in California). The trend lines are simple lines of best fit. The font for the axis was changed because the default became unreadable once uploaded. Some changes i plan to make once my computer begins running are:

adding a last updated date which is displayed on the graph

adding Ron Paul to the graphs

If you are interested in helping with the page, i would advise you that graphing is probably not the most helpful way. California, Florida, and Iowa are the states with the most polls and other states, which do not have nearly as many polls, do not benifit from a graph and trendline that displays few data points. The most helpful way would be to make sure polling data stays up to date, which it is not. This can be as simple as going to realclearpolitics.com and taking any polls that they have, that wikipedia does not, verifying them, and adding them. Perpetualization (talk) 04:28, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, i've gotten my computer working again, and i am now using excel 2007. Ron Paul has been added to all the graphs as you can see, and i have added some additional graphs. Looking at the page though, i am hesitant to add more graphs, especially last 6 months graphs because many states do not have enough data to warrant graphs, and they take up a lot of space on the page without really displaying much useful information that one cannot see from the numbers. Your thoughts? Perpetualization (talk) 04:50, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

		The Graphic Designer's Barnstar
		I've really like following the polling data graphs, and I like that you've kept them up to date! I find them a better source of information than many others out there. Patrick Ѻ 00:34, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I forgot to tell you this earlier, but there are two other Clemson CEs who also got law degrees: Tracy Zlock (Fall 1993 - JD from Georgetown) and John Eric Fulda (Spring 1995 - JD from South Carolina). i am trying to think if I knew you from classes at Clemson, but my mind keeps drawing a blank right now. What were you involved with at Clemson? Belated Happy birthday though. Chris (talk) 23:30, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An article that you have been involved in editing, Opinion polling for the United States presidential election, 2008, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Opinion polling for the United States presidential election, 2008. Thank you. --BJBot (talk) 21:00, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Clemson University football recruiting scandal has been nominated for deletion per WP:AFD. Please participate in the debate here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Clemson University football recruiting scandal, if possible. Thanks. Thör ^hammer 09:39, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Robapalooza! I'd like to call your attention to the WikiProject Germany and the German-speaking Wikipedians' notice board. I hope their links, sub-projects and discussions are interesting and even helpful to you. If not, I hope that new ones will be. Wikipedia:WikiProject Germany | finger on pulse Wikipedia:German-speaking Wikipedians' notice board | finger on pulse

--Zeitgespenst (talk) 14:14, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I saw your article on Rogers. I would be prepared to monitor it because it will probably be the subject of an article for deletion question at one point. If you need help with this, just let me know. Remember (talk) 00:12, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Great job beefing up the Rogers article. Looks much better now. Remember (talk) 12:35, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think with Satyr on board, I am not needed. Good article. :) Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 19:56, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have deleted the mention of the same sex marriage again. It is still not properly sourced. I know this may anger you so I decided I should contact you personaly about it. Edit...not to anger you, but to give you an honest heads up on what I did.--Amadscientist (talk) 21:13, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah that was me. I always seem to forget that I am not logged in automaticaly like at other sites and start making comments and even forget to sign with tiddles. I try to go back when I realise what I am doing, but you cant resign on an edit.

Thank you for your patiance. Not something you see at Wiki much anymore.--Amadscientist (talk) 05:18, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Rob:

Regarding: "In June 2006, Rogers provided the opening prayer for a same-sex wedding ceremony. Rogers reportedly expressed "an intensely deep loneliness that stemmed from his inability to have both a [same-sex] relationship ... and the military career he also loved so much."

This is very personal stuff. Too much so, in my opinion, for an encyclopedia. If you were writing an essay or a book about Alan Rogers, this would be appropriate. You would be able to expand these thoughts. Here I don't think you can.

That's one opinion. Best wishes, Wanderer57 (talk) 01:14, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article GALLA, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? R00m c (talk) 20:51, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The LGBT studies WikiProject Newsletter

The LGBT studies WikiProject Newsletter! Issue XV: June 11, 2008 Hello, members and friends of WP:LGBT! I'm not one to be writing newsletters, but I miss our cruise director, Miss Julie, and our project is drifting along with a few leaking plugs in the bottom of the boat. Hey, it happens. Every group we join goes through changes. If Wikipedia weren't so interesting it wouldn't also be so frustrating sometimes. And vice versa. More than one Wikiproject has tumbleweeds blowing through it, but this is one that can't afford to let that happen. Even if you pop in to the talk page of the project, you can let us know you're still around. WP:LGBT's Role in HIV / AIDS articles It wouldn't be a proper gay community without a li'l bit o' drama! That's right. If we aren't arguing about something, then we should be asking if we're still queer. Maybe that's for the best, since we know we're still kicking. Our most recent topic is how far the role of our project should go in dipping our toes into HIV/AIDS articles. The main AIDS article was delisted as a Featured Article last month, sadly. (Sending a swift kick to WP:Medicine.) A spirited discussion is available for your entertainment on the WP:LGBT talk page about just how much of HIV and AIDS should we take on. As ever, we'll take your opinions under advisement. We're going to have to, because it doesn't seem to have been settled. Is Pride POV? We have a pretty cool sidebar that identifies core LGBT articles. Its symbol is the iconic gay pride flag, much like other Wikiprojects have iconic symbols denoting the topic is a core subject in a series of articles. However, a question recently arose asking if the symbol itself is not neutral. Should a pride flag show up at the top of the article on Conversion therapy? How else would anyone know the article is about queer issues? Is there another symbol that is as widely recognized and that includes all our many splintered facets? At what point do we stop asking ourselves all these questions and just go have a mint julep on the verandah and stop caring? Harvey Milk and Jim Jones For the love of all that is holy, no Kool Aid jokes. However, an editor involved in pioneering San Francisco Supervisor Harvey Milk's article has included a section about the late supervisor's support of Jim Jones and the People's Temple. While it may be accurate, there is a Request for Comment regarding how much emphasis the section places on Milk's support in light of his overall political influence on the city, and indeed the rest of the United States. Milk's article is a sad one in more ways than one. It lacks the detail and heart that honors its subject. Anyone want to do a barter with me? I'll bring Harvey Milk to featured status (give me a month or two so I can read stuff), if you do something of equal value to WP:LGBT?? Make me an offer... Queer Studies is offensive! The established branch of study known as Queer studies was brought up as an category for deletion because an editor was offended by the use of "queer" in the title. It was overwhelmingly rejected mostly by the usernames I see here on our Wikiproject page. (A clue that I know you are out there, hiding...biding your time...) So, I wish I could congratulate you, but now I'm all confused by my sympathy for the editor who was offended. So, if you're reading this, Moni has a short memory and can't remember your username. Don't be put off by our demonstrative pushiness. Join us. We can always use involved editors. Lambda Literary Awards What can you do to help the project out? Be a wiki-fairy, on many levels. There are all kinds of articles that need help. Why, just this morning I removed those ugly wikify and cleanup tags from four articles at random. If you can put [[ ]] around stuff, you can clean up articles. There's a list of articles that need attention at the top of the WP:LGBT talk page. Or you can start with the Lambda Literary Awards, where the goddess of my altar received a pioneering award, and was "reduced to rubble" by Katherine V. Forrest's wonderful speech. The 20th ceremony of the Lambda Literary Awards, which celebrates LGBT literature, took place in West Hollywood on May 29th [2]. The page needs to be updated with the new winners, to be found on the official website [3]. Yeshayahu Leibowitz, Arthur C. Clarke and Bernard Montgomery Why on earth would someone want to delete material about homosexuality? 'Tis truly a mystery. But these embattled articles have some random evil gnomes removing information that places these folks under our queer umbrella. Help us keep an eye out for the deletions. Take a peek at the articles, familiarize yourselves with the info, and be handy with the undo function in the article history. If tempers flare, take it to the Hall monitors and let them sort it out. Best solution is to make sure your sources are immaculate. This month's Wiki stars This is what I get for opening my big fat mouth and suggesting the newsletter should be revived. Here I am writing it. So, to pat self on back (*cough*) Mulholland Dr. became a featured article in May. This is A Good Thing since it is my personal declaration that there is no such thing as lesbian porn. I don't care what Benjiboi says about the video collection at goodvibes. Instead, we have hot women who connect on a deep, personal, soul-touching level, so this film should qualify as some of the skankiest porn available for lesbians. Plus, it's completely confusing and surreal! D'you think Laura Harring would care that the article is featured? I don't think so either... (Call me, Laura!) Compulsive hoarding of templates Once I saw a harrowing episode of Animal Planet's Animal Cops where this guy had, like, 250 cats in his house and it freaked me right out. I'm drawing a parallel between 250 cats and, well...three, really, templates in articles involving LGBT issues. Can we stick to one, maybe? In the aforementioned Harvey Milk's article there's a core LGBT template, a link to the LGBT portal, and a sidebar for LGBT rights. Jiminy! You'd think we weren't the folk to set industrial grey carpeting and track lighting in vogue. An LGBT footer was designed to link to articles of interest that aren't the aforementioned core articles. What do you think, can we have either an LGBT template for core articles, a footer for LGBT articles that are high profile but not core, or an LGBT rights template? As ever, anything's up for discussion on the WP:LGBT talk page. The Violet Quill and magazines Zigzig20s suggests we create an article on The Violet Quill, as it seems such a milestone in the advancement of gay/queer literature. Members of the Quill all have pages of their own (Edmund White, Christopher Cox, Robert Ferro, Michael Grumley, Andrew Holleran, Felice Picano, and George Whitmore). We need to find more info on the Quill per se to reference the page that we create. Perhaps Google Books - and libraries? - can help. A number of magazines also need articles, perhaps most notably QW, LGNY, and Lesbian Feminist Liberation. Mom's nagging for Pride Month It's June, Pride month. Wear sunscreen, stay hydrated, get a designated driver, then go half-dressed in the streets find a girlfriend or boyfriend, or some homo who's standing there looking lonely and kiss 'em up real good. Remember, it all started 39 years ago when a bunch of drag queens just got fed the f*ck up by the cops raiding the bar and dragging them all out to the pokey again. Rock on, queens! Enjoy your celebrations. My town's is in October, and 200 people attend. I miss Denver. Fresh faces to brighten our pages Hey, I've seen you around! Sorry there seem to be so many—it's been a while. But we welcome you all: Cheezisyum21, Taineyah, Dustihowe, Avesta69, RachelSummers77, Vivekgopinathan, AMK1211, Staffwaterboy , Ted Ted, Joe5150, Leahtwosaints, Robapalooza, Arthomure, Confusionball, Affinity likely, PrinceOfCanada, Yobmod, Npd2983, Neagley, Bvlax2005, Bvlax2005, Rhullsf, Textorus, Kieran.casey, Tyciol, Meojive, Sappho'd, Bookkeeperoftheoccult, Gaywarrior, Aujourd'hui, maman est morte, and Balin42632003. It looks like we've picked up a lot of talent lately. We have no doubt you'll be making your indelible mark on LGBT knowledge as we know it, here at Wikipedia. In the immortal words of Miss Julie, "May all your Wiki days be bright, and may your Love Boat never turn into a Poseidon." We miss you, Miss Julie, as well as all the others who have graced our project and are on wiki-breaks or just got fed up with all the nuttiness and went to live their lives. Get your stupid houses built and hurry up and come back. --Moni3 (talk) 16:52, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply] To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please let us know here. If you have any news or any announcements to be broadcast, do let Moni3 know.

This newsletter was delivered by §hepBot around 16:02, 11 June 2008 (UTC). ShepBot (talk) 16:22, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Rob, thanks for creating a test version of the polling data in response to my concerns; I like it, I think it addresses most of my concerns quite well. (I'm not sure how others will respond to it, but I hope for the best.) I won't be able to respond to the discussion in the coming days, though, because I'll be off on holiday. Sorry! I hope you and the other contributors find some mutually agreeable solution. Good luck! Geuiwogbil (Talk) 21:19, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The LGBT studies WikiProject Newsletter

The LGBT studies WikiProject Newsletter! Issue XVI: July 23, 2008 Hello, members and friends of WP:LGBT! Updates about our latest happenings in the gayest corner of Wikipedia. Project News Homosexuality at Good Article Review! An unfortunate effect of a group less active than in the past is that our articles lose integrity. This one is at Good Article Review for that reason. The talk page is quite active as a result. You have the opportunity to help. This is the corest of our core articles, and it needs some attention because it gets a lot of controversial input from many sides. If you can spare any time to edit the article, please do what you can. Paragraph 175 is at Featured Article Review! Soon after we were informed that Homosexuality is being scrutinized, we heard the same for one of our few Featured Articles. As a participant of the Featured Article process, I think this is actually a good thing. The standards for Featured Articles are getting higher with time. But as a member of this project, that means that a few of ours may be de-listed unless someone can swoop in and save them. This one has to do with the designation of homosexuality as a crime in Germany. Most of this article's sources are in German. If anyone has any particular skill in this area, please lend a hand! Gay bathhouse is at Good Article Review! Wtf is going on? I know you folks think I have much experience in a gay bathhouse, and I hate to disappoint you, but I actually do not. I seem like the sort of person who likes to stroll about in a towel. Shocking, no? It appears that Ashleyvh is single-handedly addressing all the problems with this article at its GA Review. While that's pretty impressive, it's also no doubt exhausting. Can anyone help out there? Two GAs and a nominee! In what I hope will counter the jolt of re-evaluating three Good or Featured Articles, José Sarria and Janet Jackson as gay icon passed as Good Articles, and Black Cat Bar (famous San Francisco oft-raided gay bar) is nominated, all by Otto4711. Rock on, man. You're a machine. Good luck with your nominations. What is it about women that make them gay icons? And are there lesbian icons that aren't lesbians? How about bisexual icons? Am I the only lesbian who reacts with soul-trembling fear at the sight of Angelina Jolie? LGBT articles for deletion New WP:LGBT studies member Pinkkeith has done this cool thing. If you click on that link, you'll see all the articles, categories, templates, and miscellany up for deletion. They're usually there because they're not considered to be not notable. That can be a relative concept, and sometimes it has to be argued that topics pertaining to gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender issues are notable. Completely naked women! Ha! Made you look! Even the guys are looking. Gay pioneers Kay Lahusen's and Barbara Gittings' collection of photographs are up at the New York Public Library. Want to see images of the first Pride march in 1970 in New York City? How about Sylvia Rivera, drag queen extraordinaire, and Stonewall Riots participant? Or the contact sheet for The Ladder that showed full-face lesbians in print for the first time in US history? Ok I did mention naked women, and it's true. I found naked pictures of Barbara Gittings. But I scrolled through all of them and you'll have to as well. I'm not that mean, though. Here she is in the shower. How cute is she? Tagging articles It seems a recurring issue which articles to tag, and what to say about a topic that's tagged. Certainly, because an article falls under our scope doesn't necessarily make the person gay. Florida Governor Charlie Crist has been rumored to be gay in some newspaper accounts. Although we all know Fred Phelps is supergay, he won't admit it so instead he does the absolutely awfulest anti-gay things on the planet to deflect suspicion. NAMBLA, the red headed stepchild of the LGBT world, is tagged with an explanation we have yet to decide if we'll keep. Member Spotlight: Benjiboi In the lurking I do around and about on Wiki, I've long been astounded at the forbearance Benjiboi has for the utterly insane. Perhaps not so much, since the message on Benji's talk page notes frequent absences due to homophobia and transphobia. But it takes some kind of ... something that I don't have to face the constant anti-gay POV Benji does. Benjiboi is a a bit of a WikiFaerie, a WikiGnome and also a member of the Article Rescue Squadron in addition to being a LGBT project member. A few of Benjiboi's favorite links for making the wikiverse more fab are: Manual of style, a must for anyone redecorating an article. Reliable sources in content review processes, a wonderful and fully linked essay about sourcing and why we need more and better sources. Google scholar, which also searches Google books, is a great help in finding reliable sources. Member Spotlight: Becksguy Becksguy didn’t start actively editing until May 2007. His most frequent tasks on Wiki include reverting vandalism to LGBT articles and creating new project-related articles. He comes from New York state, and to prove not all of us are teenagers (ha! I am so totally 15!) he's in his 60s and retired. Becksguy considers his biggest triumph on Wikipedia so far was a DYK in December 2007 for the first-ever newspaper report on what became AIDS, in the New York Native. He's also helped save several project-related articles from deletion. His lowest moment here was getting involved in the discussion on a particular terrorism related article, thinking he could help calm the roiled waters on an extremely contentious subject with multiple edit wars and passionate editors. Here at WP:LGBT, he creates and improves articles that present notable LGBT related subjects in a fair and balanced way, and tries to include more of the significant alternative sexuality related subjects without being an activist, and works to better source project-related articles. On Wikipedia as a whole, he says, "I think we need to learn better what processes work for a massive collaborative project. Some of what worked well for a more informal small project doesn’t scale up well. Process is not as important when the participants know each other. We need to get more of the current members to be more active. If more members were energized, the project would be able to accomplish more. We should be, in effect, the smaller and included Wikipedia for LGBT related subjects. Overall, I wish we could focus more on content creation and improvement, and less on vandal fighting." Fresh faces to brighten our pages Welcome to all of our new members!: Balin42632003, supposedlydisposable, Axiomdragon, antcjone, Jamesgregg76, Taulapapa, Mushii, Pinkkeith, Gr8lyknow, EricV89, Varnent, Ged_UK, Richie wright1980, Auriel If you have a question about anything, drop your question on our talk page. We'll do our best to answer. "A Supreme Court decision in 1958 reversed a 1956 ruling by a federal district court that U.S. postal authorities were correct in prohibiting the mailing of the Mattachine Society's ONE magazine. The lower court had ruled that ONE was not protected by the First Amendment because the magazine's contents 'may be vulgar, offensive, and indecent even though not regarded as such by a particular group ... because their own social or moral standards are far below those of the general community ... Social standards are fixed by and for the great majority and not by and for a hardened or weakened minority.'" - Michael Bronski in Pulp Friction, 2003 Thanks for being weak and having lowered standards with me. --Moni3 (talk) 00:10, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply] To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please let us know here. If you have any news or any announcements to be broadcast, do let Moni3 know.

• Newsletter delivery by xenobot 13:19, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Any further thoughts? Enigma ^message 21:54, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Miss Julie Memorial LGBT studies WikiProject Newsletter

The LGBT studies WikiProject Newsletter! Issue XVII: November 12, 2008 Wake up WP:LGBT! It's time to kick in gear and get some things done! Project News Wake up! I say this to myself as much as I say it to all of us. I work a lot by myself or with individual editors who spend time at Featured Article Candidates. It seems on November 5 a fog was lifted off my brain that helped me realize that we have massive potential in this project to get things done. Take this allegory, for instance: On Wednesday, Nov. 5, 1980, my 10th-grade American history teacher started class by unfurling The New York Times. She pointed to its triple banner headline: “Reagan Easily Beats Carter; Republicans Gain in Congress; D’Amato and Dodd are Victors.” “Save this paper,” she told us. “This is the start of a whole new era.” Judith Warner from The New York Times It definitely seems a start to a whole new era now. If planets align correctly to remind us that whatever advances we may have made in electing what appears to be an extraordinary president in the US, the moons that revolve around those planets also serve to illustrate it's not that simple. Florida, Arizona, and California all appear to have banned same sex marriage. As someone who was married in California and lives in Florida, this is particularly poignant. We seem to be at the juncture of two converging paths. If we maximize our efforts and take the right ones, we might just be able to affect some change for ourselves. The power of Wikipedia and California Proposition 8 (2008) Though what we do is an interesting hobby for some, we have the power to make a difference. California's ballot initiative to ban gay marriage was a fierce fight. It's being challenged right now, but just look at how Wikipedia played a role in that: in October 2008, 360,238 people read its article. On November 5, an astounding 467,000 people read it. I commend the editors who work on that article—both those who support and oppose it. A look at the talk page shows a concerted effort to keep it civil and accurate. What can we do? How do you fight ignorance? With information. That's what Wikipedia is for. This project is overwhelming with 8,576 articles in its scope. We can continue to work piecemeal as we have in the past, or we can focus on goals. These are examples of areas we can concentrate on. Current political events LGBT Media and Literature LGBT History Sex and sexuality Articles about political issues in the US and around the world that have been especially relevant within the past 5 years Depictions of LGBT people and issues on television, film, newspapers, magazines Topics about gay rights activism and the opposition to it Articles relating to sex and sexuality Florida Amendment 2 (2008), California Proposition 8 (2008), E.O. Green School shooting, etc. The Advocate, Curve (magazine), Washington Blade, Milk (film), Brokeback Mountain, etc. Moral Majority, ACT UP, Queer Nation, Mattachine Society, Jesse Helms, Jerry Falwell, Mathew Shepard, etc. Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgender, sexual and gender expression, etc. There are more than 8,000 articles to work on. Can we build a list of priorities? Can we build enough enthusiasm to work on these? What if we had editors who oversaw progress in these areas and reported to the talk page or in the newsletter? Surely someone here wants to report on the progress of sex articles. Tony Perkins (irony) from the conservative Family Research Council was heartened by the recent passages of gay marriage bans. The Republican Party is without direction. What's going to take the place of a moderate voice will not be pleasant to our ears. Watching and improving articles of subjects that have opposed gay rights in the past will be of vital importance very soon, I predict. But WP:LGBT is not a very active project All we can do is start somewhere. The first step is answering this newsletter on the project talk page. Join in the discussion. More things we can do Give out more barnstars, and let each other know that what they're doing is valued. Create a guide to stave off burnout, because editors in this project get burned out faster than others. There are many hills to climb. Bring back the monthly collaboration project. Participate in LGBT Peer reviews. Get familiar with the characteristics of Good Articles and get our top priority articles to WP:GA. Keep our project page and open tasks template updated. Use the Newsletter, Moni3! You can suggest what to send out in the newsletter, too! Offer research materials, copy editing, ideas, and support to your fellow editors. Keep the project talk page informed of problems and discussions we should know about. Proposal: Put Importance Levels on articles If this was decided long before I was a member, maybe it's time to revisit it. Other WikiProjects, such as WP:Novels determine that some subjects have an importance category: Top, High, Mid, Low, or None (undetermined). If we decide that our most core articles, it might help to organize which articles to address first. Top importance, for example, would be Gay, Homosexual, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgender, Sappho, Oscar Wilde, Stonewall riots, for example. High importance would be Homosexuality and psychology, Harvey Milk, Mattachine Society, Harry Hay, or Daughters of Bilitis, and so on. This can be a matter of discussion, or perhaps we could have someone in charge of determining these levels for all the articles we have tagged. So, like Slim Whitman, "I'm Calling You" The editors I have admired in the past, who have done great things alone, and who I think can help us all do extraordinary things now: SatyrTN, Dev920, Aleta, Becksguy, Otto4711, BelovedFreak, Benjiboi, Bookkeeper of the Occult, Queerudite, FisherQueen (I will marry you), PaulB, APK, ZigZig20s, AllStarEcho (I know you're out there), Raystorm, and my very own copy editor, Dank55. These are the editors I've seen working (and I know I'm forgetting a few). There's more of you out there I haven't seen. Some of you are new. We need all of you. Please help. Miami, January 18, 1977 after the gay rights ordinance was passed: While Bryant and the others were creating the beginnings of the repeal effort, (gay activists) Basker, Campbell, Kunst, and the other (gay rights) ordinance supporters congratulated themselves on their success and then quickly disbanded... There was no organized recognition or celebration of the victory. As one activist remembered, "We just went home." They had little idea of the battle that was before them. - Fred Fejes in Gay Rights and Moral Panic, 2008 Don't go home yet, please. --Moni3 (talk) 00:10, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply] To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please let us know here. If you have any news or any announcements to be broadcast, do let Moni3 know.

This newsletter was sent by §hepBot (Disable) at 21:24, 12 November 2008 (UTC) by the request of Moni3 (talk)[reply]

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Opinion polling for the United States presidential election, 2008, Democratic and Republican Candidates, Hillary Clinton Fred Thompson.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. JaGa^talk 23:25, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Image:Opinion polling for the United States presidential election, 2008, Democratic and Republican Candidates, Hillary Clinton John McCain.png requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image is an unused redundant copy (all pixels the same or scaled down) of an image in the same file format, which is on Wikipedia (not on Commons), and all inward links have been updated.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on [[ Talk:Image:Opinion polling for the United States presidential election, 2008, Democratic and Republican Candidates, Hillary Clinton John McCain.png|the talk page]] explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. JaGa^talk 23:26, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Image:Opinion polling for the United States presidential election, 2008, Democratic and Republican Candidates, Hillary Clinton Fred Thompson.png requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image is an unused redundant copy (all pixels the same or scaled down) of an image in the same file format, which is on Wikipedia (not on Commons), and all inward links have been updated.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on [[ Talk:Image:Opinion polling for the United States presidential election, 2008, Democratic and Republican Candidates, Hillary Clinton Fred Thompson.png|the talk page]] explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. JaGa^talk 23:28, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]