User talk:Tabercil/archive4

Avena Lee

I can show you proof of my statements if you want. Meanhombre 22:10, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

• If you watch this movie

http://www.bangbros.com/t1/pps=bbonet/free_movies_pictures_bangbros/es2268.html You will see Avena Lee saying she is Thai, German, Scottish, Irish, and French.

If you look at this website you can see how fat she's gotten

http://www.myasiansweets.com/Avena_Lee2/index.html

Meanhombre 00:06, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Look at the trivia on William Hung:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Hung#Trivia

It says "William has gained a great deal of weight since his initial rise to fame, and photos of the much heftier William can be seen on his website." Why can't there be something like this on Avena Lee? Appearance is more relevant to her career than it is to his. The way things are going she might start getting typecast into "big women" roles. Meanhombre 22:09, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Asia Carrera

It does Asia no good to post the Susan Russell case or her comments. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Billpick (talk • contribs) 23:17, 21 January 2007 (UTC).

How? As I pointed out on the Talk page, Asia herself pointed out the article. Tabercil 23:20, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Episode#402 of Totally Busted

PLAYBOY'S episode #402 has MONIQUE ALEXANDER IN IT .AND MANY MORE EPISODES IN 2006. DO YOU WANT ME TO SEND YOU A COPY DVD OR VHS . OR ASK PLAYBOY ABOUT EPISODE #402. THE EPISODE WAS CALLED , A MOUSE IN THE WHORE HOUSE. john toth 03:01, 23 January 2007 (UTC) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by JRMAN (talk • contribs) 22:01, January 22, 2007 (UTC)

Oh I don't doubt that, and I'll take your word for it. My concern is that we're slowly creeping into listing every appearance of Monique. That's why I clear it out. Tabercil 04:20, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Nina Arsenault web.jpg

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Nina Arsenault web.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. When you use a generic fair use tag such as {{fair use}} or {{fair use in|article name}}, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with 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 fair use images 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. NAHID 11:27, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:Nina Arsenault web.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Nina Arsenault web.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 11:30, 23 January 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. NAHID 11:30, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Pictures

Cheers. Thanks for telling. --  oakster  TALK  18:12, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Image:Jayna hefford cbc.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Jayna hefford cbc.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives 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. Yamla 17:53, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Talk:The Real World: San Francisco

Hi. It seems we have a possible edit war on the The Real World: San Francisco article. If you could respond to the post I made on its talk page, it would be appreciated. Btw, are you an administrator? If so, then I could use one on this. And if not, can you recommend any? Thanks. Nightscream 05:06, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Jo Guest image

Hi, I've restored a much-further cropped-down image of Jo Guest from the cover fo Club International. I'm quite confident that this use of this portion of the image constitutes a fair use, as it is for educational purposes, being provided at no charge, is a small portion of the work in question (just enough to convey the information as to what, exactly, Jo Guest looks like), and can not possibly diminish the commercial value of the work, as this cover is freely available on multiple websites where the sale of this issue is advertised. There is no requirement that the image be for purposes of criticism or commentary on the magazine itself - this would also be a good fair use rationale, but this is quite firmly in the fair use camp as is. If you have an alternate view, please contact me to discuss. Cheers! bd2412 T 03:01, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for adding the image for Jo Guest, but it still fails the first criteria of the fair use criteria:

"1. No free equivalent is available or could be created that would adequately give the same information.... (I)f the subject of the photograph still exists, a freely-licensed photograph could be taken."

As a result, it'll get pulled out eventually... just not by me. Nice try though. Tabercil 06:06, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

That may be a Wikipedia guideline, but no U.S. law that imposes such a requirement. I doubt that an image can be found that we can confirm to be a "free equivalent" since every photo is owned by the photographer unless they've released it into the public domain, or it's an official U.S. government product (unlikely) or the author has been dead for 70 years (impossible in this case). Also, the fact that a freely licensed photo could be taken does not mean that the subject in this case would allow one to be taken. But I also see that someone has already replaced my shoddily cropped image. So it goes. bd2412 T 16:17, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Jenna Jameson

Thanks again for all your help - please keep it up! :-) I also took the liberty of moving one of your comments closer to the point it addresses, and I hope that is all right with you. AnonEMouse ^(squeak) 21:42, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Playboy models and fair use

Sorry, I've restated the "fair use disputed" on several of the images you added rationales to. I feel these justifications are not sufficient, especially since the articles don't really live up to what you claim the images are meant to do. Seems we'll have to hack this out at WP:IFD then? Cheers, --Fut.Perf. ☼ 08:18, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Listed now at Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2007 February 15/Images, wasn't quite sure what the right venue is for these types of debates. By the way, you might want to see User:Future Perfect at Sunrise/Fair use for the background of my fight against windmills here. Fut.Perf. ☼ 08:30, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Chronology of adult videos in Japan

Thanks for pointing that out, Tabercil. I'll change the name format as soon as I get a chance. Alphabetization should still be by family name, I assume? Dekkappai 16:45, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Image:196504 Sue Williams 00.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:196504 Sue Williams 00.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 48 hours after this notification, per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Bob 18:44, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Image:196504 Sue Williams 00.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:196504 Sue Williams 00.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 48 hours after this notification, per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Bob 18:44, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Image:Brittany stryker.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Brittany stryker.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 48 hours after this notification, per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Bob 18:46, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Image:Gina kingsbury.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Gina kingsbury.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 48 hours after this notification, per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Bob 18:47, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Image:Irina Voronina.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Irina Voronina.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 48 hours after this notification, per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Bob 18:48, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Image:Delaney-collins.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Delaney-collins.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 48 hours after this notification, per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Bob 18:50, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Talk:Chelsea Charms, Talk:Maxi Mounds

Your help would be appreciated! The IP reverts to the pixel-laden versions have continued. Thanks! Joie de Vivre 01:05, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

They're back

I have seen the porn link spam vandal around lately. Just ran into them again though and thought you might like to know. [1] Dismas|^(talk) 14:14, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks for the heads-up. I have a large chunk of the American porn stars already on my watchlist from prior vandalism fixes and I've spotted a couple more. I'll take a proper hunt through later today, and I'll also start issuing inappropriate link warnings at that time to the ones I reverted just now. You wouldn't happen to remember which ones other that Courtney were hit earlier? Tabercil 18:01, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
  • I didn't have much time this a.m. to really look through my watchlist. Courtney was the only one I happened to see at the time. And I don't suspect I'll have much time this weekend (I work an odd shift so today is my Friday) with all the stuff there is to do around the house. Sorry. Dismas|^(talk) 21:27, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
    • Just to let you know, I've had to revert several articles in the last two days due to this. Dismas|^(talk) 15:45, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Wikiproject Pornography

Hi –

I'm contacting you because you're listed as an active member of WikiProject Porn stars. I'm interested in creating a WikiProject Pornography and have started a poll to see whether WikiProject Porn stars should be merged into that project or remain separate. I'm fine with either. Please weigh in at: Wikipedia talk: WikiProject Porn stars: Proposal: WikiProject Pornography

Thanks – Iamcuriousblue 21:48, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Relish Links to MIchelle Barrett et al

Thanks for wiping the links I put into the pages on Michelle Barrett, Alicia Rhodes et al. I can see that you think it is spam but it isnt as the girls are financially involved with the sites hence the exclusive content.

I can tbe bothered to put them back in now. I just thought I would say thanks for wiping them for me.

Krome007 21:57, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

• Oh, no problems. Glad to be of service. Especially when from your comments the links in the articles for Michelle Barrett, Alicia Rhodes and the others seem to violate a number of points of WP:EL - namely points 3 and 6 of "links normally to be avoided" plus also the "Advertising and conflicts of interest" section. Tabercil 22:03, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

User:Tabercil/Luke_Ford_permission

Could you please submit this email exchange you had with Luke Ford to permissions@wikimedia.org along with a list of the images on commons that use that permission so the permission can be logged in the OTRS system? Thanks, Yonatan (contribs/talk) 22:01, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Somebody on commons could probably run a search for all photos containing Luke Ford, lukeisback.com and lukeford.com (or whatever other keywords you think of) and make a list and then run a bot to automatically append the OTRS permission to all of them. Please make a request on the commons village pump and I'm sure someone could help you out. Thanks, Yonatan (contribs/talk) 10:13, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Just wondering if you sent the permission with at least one image page (or the category). When it's received and approved by OTRS, I'll find someone to take care of adding the permission to all the photos. ;) Thanks, Yonatan (contribs/talk) 08:59, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Submitted. Tabercil 23:26, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Care to weigh in on this?

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Liz Stewart. Dismas|^(talk) 17:45, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Adminship?

You want it? You've got the experience, you're more active and probably tougher with vandals than I am, you helped a lot with the Jenna Jameson article for those people concerned with WP:1FA, and, of course, the Luke Ford license has probably brought more images to the Wikipedia than any other single image permission request. I've also never seen you involved in any controversy except against unquestionable vandals and spammers, and you were quite tough on them. In short I will gladly nominate and support you if you want it. Think about it until Monday, I probably won't be active until then. --AnonEMouse (squeak) 22:37, 23 March 2007 (UTC) Wow. I'm very much flattered. I'll be largely AFK until Monday myself - heading off to see my Dad to do his taxes (which'll be a load of fun). But you've given me something to think about over the weekend. Tabercil 22:44, 23 March 2007 (UTC) So, what's it going to be? Read the image there; it's a slight overstatement of the hurdles you have to get over, and the wonderful prize awaiting you at the end ... but not by much. :-) --AnonEMouse (squeak) 15:10, 26 March 2007 (UTC) Well, as I said, I'm rather flattered at the offer. For now, I'll pass on going for admin status. I personally feel there's still more to learn about the behind-the-scenes stuff about Wikipedia before I'd make a good admin. For instance, I only discovered Wikipedia:WikiProject on open proxies after a IP-based linkspammer I issued a warning to was blocked as being an open proxy and I think an admin should know those things because others will be asking the him/her/it(?) about them. Tabercil 23:31, 22 April 2007 (UTC) EVH Photo This image was provided to my website by another contributing photographer. I was wrong to authorize it being added to Commons as I am not the true copyright holder. He has not authorized it's use by Wikipedia in anyway and it needs to be removed promptly from any and all usage other we shall both initiate litigation promptly.Dannyg3332 19:49, 26 March 2007 (UTC) Porn linkspammer That warms my heart, indeed! Thank you! This last batch just a little while ago, I reverted while here at work and I hate having to go to those articles while at work. So, when they come up with another half dozen spam sites, do we just go through the same process? Wait till they get reverted 4-5 times then post it up over at the meta site? Thanks again, Dismas|(talk) 04:57, 27 March 2007 (UTC) Hate to say it but you're probably right. But next time should go faster; for one thing we know how to craft the post to best get the attentions of the admins. Also we can point out the similarities between the linkspammer's actions in the future and what happened just the past week or two. Tabercil 05:13, 27 March 2007 (UTC) Aurora Snow Great job on the page. Nice to know someone is actually taking the time to find sources rather than just outright deleting the info. --† Ðy§ep§ion † Speak your mind 22:41, 30 March 2007 (UTC) I just got back on Wiki today after a long time and I was looking for sources but I guess you beat me to it. Based on the talk page, even though Valrith is right he, along with CelticJobber should've looked for sources to avoid an edit war. --† Ðy§ep§ion † Speak your mind 22:50, 30 March 2007 (UTC) Can you explain to me why you (and apparently others) feel the "birthname" should be removed from this article? IMDb is the only source we have, but it is a source... I can't find any justification for this in policy. Valrith 15:05, 31 March 2007 (UTC) Open proxies I was away most of last week and busy most of this weekend, so there wasn't much Wikipedia time. So, I didn't catch any spammers at all lately. But that leads me to my question for you. How do you tell if an IP is an open proxy? Dismas|(talk) 05:10, 9 April 2007 (UTC) Template:pnc nominated for deletion See Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Template:pnc for the discussion, which will certainly spill over into larger issues. Your thoughts would be appreciated. --Kevin Murray 23:21, 16 April 2007 (UTC) Linkspam? Is that link you keep removing from Wifey's World really linkspam? It seems fairly relevant to the article, and I think it is helpful in describing the site better. On the other hand, if this is a site that is adding links all over Wikipedia, then I suppose they should be all removed, on principle. Brianyoumans 22:12, 18 April 2007 (UTC) I'm quite certain I've seen it added to other website pages before... just can't seem to immediately point to any specific examples. Tabercil 22:22, 18 April 2007 (UTC) Hope you don't mind me butting into the conversation but I have your talk page on my watchlist from past discussions so I was curious when I saw the heading of this section. To expand on the link spammer thing, the same site has been added to several pages: Justine Joli, Heather Harmon, Nikki Dial, Erica Campbell, and many others. Dismas|(talk) 23:18, 18 April 2007 (UTC) Be my guest, Dismas. Here's four examples of pornylittledevil being spammed: Justine Joli, Nikki Dial, Erica Campbell and Devin DeVasquez. Tabercil 00:26, 19 April 2007 (UTC) Saundra Edwards Thanks for expanding my "shotgun blast to the heart" reference under "Sandra Edwards" today; it was late and I was tired when I threw that one in last night. By the way, I think somebody should change the spelling of her first name from "Sandra" to "Saundra" in the article's title in order to conform with imdb.com and most of her screen credits. Skymasterson 06:56, 19 April 2007 (UTC) Danuta Lato It's very hard to cite sources (that don't contain nudity and therefore their links would get censored) about Danuta Lato, so maybe you can help. More linkspam links From 209.59.43.242, Brooke Biggs - [2] Alexis Fire - [3] Anita Blond - [4] Angelica Bella - [5] Angela D'Angelo - [6] Autumn Haze - [7] Paizley Adams - [8] Krisztina Sereny - [9] Dismas|(talk) 20:08, 22 April 2007 (UTC) Jeez, go away for the weekend and all the fun occurs. <G> I can see that there are other links besids those ones that have been spammed. I'll see about gathering the full list and getting them added them to the filter. Tabercil 21:58, 22 April 2007 (UTC) I'm glad you got that latest batch just a few minutes ago. I saw them on my watchlist but didn't want to go to the articles since I'm at work. Before I could say something I got pulled away from the computer... stupid work...  :-) From the message below this one, it seems like there may be another way to defend against this stuff though. Dismas|(talk) 05:11, 23 April 2007 (UTC) Porn links Please join #wikipedia-spam-t on the freenode.net nework. There is an IRC bot that can detect these things... if we know what links they are. —— Eagle101 Need help? 05:08, 23 April 2007 (UTC) Yep chatzilla (note that is a link to the extension download page). Just set the server to connect to as irc.freenode.net and then click connect. Following that you will want to type /join #wikipedia-spam-t. Cheers! (feel free to ask for help) —— Eagle101 Need help? 05:18, 23 April 2007 (UTC) "Feel free to ask for help". Famous last words, chum. <G> Tabercil 05:23, 23 April 2007 (UTC) Heh, :) I mean them though, if you have any problems getting on I will help you. —— Eagle101 Need help? 05:36, 23 April 2007 (UTC) Stacy Rucker I have added a "{{prod}}" template to the article Stacy Rucker, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest 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. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. 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. You seem to be the only other contributor aside from the article's author having added a small section from Dean's planet to her article and he doesn't appear to have been active in over a year. - Optigan13 06:02, 24 April 2007 (UTC) Sara Jay Twinkle messed it up a bit. I was removing red links myself, and it somehow changed it to where it reverted your edit. Chrishyman 22:39, 27 April 2007 (UTC) Ah... that's what occurred. I was wondering... in anycase I pulled the redlinks out as well as the dupe link to the homepage. Tabercil 22:42, 27 April 2007 (UTC) Aimee Sweet What would constitue a proper source to cite? The Cranston High School East 1992 yearbook? You can find Kaite Lee/Aimee Sweet and all the members of the band Katie Lee Hooker ( as listed here http://www.providencephoenix.com/archive/music/02/08/22/local.html ) in there. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.107.240.215 (talk) 00:52, 3 May 2007 (UTC). That may well constitute a reliable source, but you've run into a different problem now: Wikipedia's policy against original research. If you could find a newspaper article or interview where the band Katie Lee Hooker said that Aimee's real name was the source of the band's name, then you could add it to the Aimee Sweet article. The key here is that it has to pretty much be from the band's own mouth. And sorry, blogs and MySpace pages are severely frowned upon by Wikipedia as "reliable sources". Tabercil 03:27, 3 May 2007 (UTC) A new brand of spam An anon ip, of course, has been adding a new brand of spam and I just thought I'd draw your attention to it if you hadn't already seen it. So far they seem to be concentrating on Playboy models and such and not porn stars, so I didn't know how much you would have seen of it. Dismas|(talk) 15:14, 4 May 2007 (UTC)