User talk:Glowimperial

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions.

You might find these pages useful:

How to edit a page

How to write a great article

Article naming conventions

Wikipedia's Manual of Style

You can always experiment in the sandbox.

If you like, you can introduce yourself at the new user log, or write something about yourself on your user page.

One more thing: if you leave a note on any kind of discussion page it's always helpful to sign your post with four tildes (~~~~), which is automatically converted to your username and the date and time. Don't do this in articles themselves though as they are not 'owned' by any particular contributor.

If you have any questions, see help, leave a question at the help desk, or feel free to drop me a line on my talk page.

Thanks again and happy editing!

— Trilobite (Talk) 00:46, 25 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Questions to the User

Question about Body Modification Edits

Dear Sir,

As body modfication is in no way part of my core interests (history and institutions; but we Flemish intellectuals are somewhat of the uomo universale type, as a medieval Latin professor literally called me), while you seem to be an expert, I am delighted to read you find at least some of my contribution worthwile, and even contunued my experiment of suscinct definitions with typology links- I find them usefull, as many laymen probably will.

Since I am in no hurry to return to the subject, I suggest you go ahead soon with any additions and even restructuring if worthwile. I'm afraid I'm not familiar with the NPOV abbreviation (I started my account ths week, most of my already numerous contributions since april were anonymous on an IP) so I'm at a loss what you mean there, while redundancy can of course be tackled with my approval in principle - even though nobody needs approval, I appreciate your courtesy.

As I started re-examining the article, I formulate these remarks :

you linked to "stretching", deleting my few lines on the subject, but there was nothing on body modification there - I made an attempt and linked it to your article (surprisingly the word neck links to Padaung, a usefull link though, which a quick google allowed me to elaborate a bit on too)
why has the reference to needle heals been eliminated?
I dare hope you find a way to include the distinction whether a body modification is reversible
may I suggest you elaborate the Sources & References section, listing your treasure trove, as only the expert can be expected to be able to? This naturally goes for all valuable articles (In confess I don't allways do so myself, but then I do intend to return to the subject later and better my ways).

Sincerely, Fastifex

Dear Fastifex:

I realise that I am going to make some changes to your text that may not make sense to you. Some of them are due to language differences (that's minor stuff) and some are due to information that is largely innacurate.

- About stretching. I didn't realise where the link was going. Stretching, as a body modification practice, probably needs it's own page, as it has nothing to do with the exercise of stretching. I need to get on that. The Padaung neck rings are so distinctive as to be their own category, but I don't see the practice as needing it's own page, as the page on the people themselves is probably the best resource, for now.
- I saw the sentence on needle heals as a little irrelevant and because people heal differently, I'm trying to remove a lot of "advice" that describes healing processess or results in a general way. It also did not make very much sense to native English speakers.
- Contrary to people's belief, there are few body modifications that are reversible. All have lasting effects, either permanent alterations to the body, scarring or long term health effects. People shouldn't have the idea that they can do something serious to their body on a whim and not have long term effects from it. Example: wearing a corset once slims a person down, and shapes their torso, Corsetry as a body modification practice actually alters the position and shape of the spine and ribcage, as well as internal organs, permanently. There should be some text about reversiblity, possibly being more specific about degrees of reversiblitly
- I'm a little new here too, and I need to add links to texts and internet resources that more accurately descrime the source of information in the article. Compiling those will take a while. Most of my data comes both from long term activity in the body modification community and written texts, some which are not publicly available, or are long out of print. I intend to include many references to those materials when I do "the big re-write". I will probably be finished making notes by this weekend.

The NPOV abbreviation means "neutral point of view". Basically it's the removal of materials that are non-objective (opinions, rumors, urban legends, etc...) and the effort to maintain objectivity. The body modification area of Wikipedia is packed with this kind of material, and my main effort in being here is to bring it more in line with both Wikipedia's policy and actual knowledge regarding the field.

Sincerely, Glowimperial 13:13, 2 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for revising the article Corset piercing to how it should be. I have a question on if there are any books or such you would know about for Corset piercing/Surface piercings you think someone in AR/TX could find and pick up. User:NekoD 12:13 AM, September 2, 2005 (GMT-06:00)

In response to your last edit of the Body Piercing page: Why did you remove the scrotal piercing reference? Just curious :) kvidell 08:51, August 30, 2005 (UTC)

Technically a hafada is what is referred to as a scrotal piercing. Although a transscrotal piercing is also technically a scrotal piercing, it is not what is commonly referred to when a person or practicioner says "scrotal piercing". Perhaps the line for hafada should read "hafada or scrotal piercing"? It was part of addressing an issue where a user had merged hafada and transscrotal piercing, which are too way different procedures, one being essentially a minor surgical procedure. I un-merged the two articles and expanded both, and made some small edits on the body piercing page as part of the cleanup. I am planning on doing a major re-design of the body piercing page in the near future (don't worry, I'm not moving or deleting your photo, it's a good one), as soon as my research is complete (I own a small library of rare and mass market books on the subject of body modification and piercing, and have access to information and resources, especially historical ones, that most wikipedians don't). Glowimperial 12:52, 30 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Good deal :) I was just curious. It's good/cool/(other non-descript word like those) that we have people with knowledge on the subject here. There's a _lot_ of myths surrounding it (Like... oh what's my favourite... Ah yes.. Your face will go paralyzed for life if you get your eyebrow done). Cheers! kvidell 17:19, August 30, 2005 (UTC)

I had a question just come up and you seemed like a good person to ask. I may be getting a job that will "politely request" I remove my lip ring while I'm working... Just out of curiosity, how long on average can a lip ring be removed before the hole closes to a point that is not easily re-usable without repiercing? Thanks! kvidell 08:02, September 2, 2005 (UTC)

I'm not really sure on that. I'd consult a professional piercer, but I'd say a lot depends on how long you've had the piercing. I have a tongue piercing I retired about 7 years ago and I can still put 8ga jewelry in it. A lot depends on you. In other words do some trial and error, and see how your body reacts. If it's not fully healed, I'd just remove the piercing. Glowimperial 12:15, 2 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

- Piercing Related Articles Reply -

It took be about 20 minutes to realise you didn't actually message me myself but posted in my talk page *smacks self* lol. First off I'm delighted to see a nother user taking notice to how messy that whole section of wikipedia has gotten. Iv been slowly looking over the whole thing, and iv been wanting to redo it for some time. Im actually quite a novice at this whole wikipedia editing, although I have admired the site for some time now. I also agree with you on the tongue piercing page, although im gonna have to upload a good picture of a healed tongue piercing lol. Also thank you for pointing out your migration page. I agree, we should merge the rejection and migration page. While they can have slight differences, they are mostly one and the same and would fit rather nicly on one simple page. I appologize for my sloppyness on some of my articles lol, while I have the professional knowledge of piercings and such, I am not much for proper grammer lol. I would love to exchange some messages with you about redoing as much of the pages as we can. I would love to see the piercing page itself redone, as well as all sub-articles related to it. Adios for now.--Azslande 04:32, 6 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Body Modification Mass Stubbing

Well, yes it was a bit of hasty work from me.In fact,I did not read all the articles in the category of body piercing.However,by the size of the articles, it seemed that they may need more information.And categorizing as stubs always grabs the attention of more contributors who might add more stuffs to enrich the article,though not always!Who knows,with more elaoborate contributions,one of these articles (most of which have been started by you) might feature as a featured article one day. Anyway,I am sorry if it seems that I have derogated your great works by categorizing them as stubs.You are ofcourse free to change the status of the articles.Thank you. --Dwaipayanc 12:06, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Request for your comments

Hey, just wondering if you might be interested in joining the latest conversation at Talk:List of the longest movies in history. Would love to hear your thoughts! Thanks, Girolamo Savonarola 23:05, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

.

certainly he has, but i can't possibly think why you'd want to put him in especially as he only admits 3 ops.--Manboobies 02:36, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Request for your comments

I'm sorry for Pere Serafis' link in Sam Doumit article. I'm not Sam Doumit, and I don't have any relation with her, and Pere Serafi's blog wasn't my webpage, it just a friend's page where there a lot of references about her and I read that in the instructions that was interesting to citing all the sources. I can assure that my mistake wasn't intentionally and was my first article in wikipedia.I'm sorry for all he incovienences.

Shotokan

Hey fellow Martial Arts Project member, I reall need help at the Shotokan page, in brief:

User CapJ put a story in about the “shoto” in shotokan meaning short sword. When corrected about its meaning by user Matt (who included a verifiable source), he still stated that it should be included. When I transliterated the Japanese, which I read/write, he accepted the fact but still wanted something about that story in there. Now he has changed it so that he believes we should include it because it is a homonym. I feel that he just wants this info on the page without it needing to be there. Though no other editor agrees with him, he puts it back each time we edit it. I am stalled on progress by this user and feel that he is vandalizing the page. I cannot, by the incorrect information he includes, believe that this is not a joke on his part. Any assistance you can provide would be grand. ron 18:25, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Good response

Well put, here. --Kickstart70-T-C 22:26, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. For some reason I've been encountering a tremendous number of autobiographical editors lately. Glowimperial 22:39, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm seeing an increase as well. More notably, since I am often watching users with a known history of bad edits and pages very often vandalized I'm seeing a general upswell of people with bad intentions. My ability to assume good faith is being stretched. --Kickstart70-T-C 22:45, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What I've observed is two trends in autobiographical edits. First are people who have discovered Wikipedia and asssume that it's a place to promote their or another person's "good works". They are often completely unwilling to pay any heed to the policies and practices here, do not use or communicate via talk pages, including their own, and in general may simply lack the capacity to participate in Wikipedia.

The second trend, is related to pages about websites or their authors. I find it puzzling, but there seems to be a significant population of "tech savvy" individuals who are wholly ignorant of the nature of the editing process here or simply don't think the rules apply to them. I think part of this has to do with the appalling lack of "conflict of interest" awareness in the internet community, as well as a suprising lack of knowledge about how much work goes on at the "back end" of Wikipedia that holds all of this "anyone can edit" chaos together.

Outside of the commercial linkspam guys (those jerks are relentless), I don't think that most of these editors have bad intentions, but many of them seem to have not only a chip on their shoulder, but a bad attitude as well. Part of it may be that "notable persons" have some difficulty understanding that their objectivity is capable of being comprimised by their closeness to the subject of an article. Glowimperial 23:09, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unlike any other time in history we each have the capacity for culture-wide self-promotion. Some have done well enough at it that they've made a living doing that almost exclusively. I think it might eventually even be considered a bit of a sickness, like gambling addiction has become. There's so little negative consequences to promoting oneself, and such a potential positive (certainly better than playing the lottery) that I don't doubt the spread of this will continue. Whether the impact on Wikipedia grows to a level where the project becomes untenable, I'm not sure (I hope not). I think what we really need is better tools to combat it, though I don't really have any ideas for what form those tools will take. --Kickstart70-T-C 23:34, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Linking personal websites to Wikopedia

I want to thank you for telling one editor I saw that he cannot link his personal websites to Wikopedia article. I have had continued problems with that same editor, making wholesale changes without comment or discussion - even after several editors (and admins) have requested that major changes be discussed first on this particular article. Did you have a chance to read his blog and what he said about Wikopedia and who should be 'qualified' to edit? Evidently, only himself, on those articles on which he believes himself to be an expert. Interestingly, he painted me as being an 'activist' (read loony). In addition to my personal experience with the subject, I also have a background in science and law - both which are pertinent to the subject discussed. molly bloom 03:05, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Xeni Jardin

Thanks for the note on my talk page re. above and my participation under RfC. I hope that a gap of a few days might help to take some of the heat out of this, and also some more outside comment, if that is forthcoming. If you have any suggestions, I'd be pleased to hear them on my talk page. Tyrenius 16:54, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Watching Tattoo?

Not sure if you've kept an eye on it recently. A little flare out with a new editor trying to insert some anti-tattoo spin into the "health risks" section; not anything wildly false, but just at the level of "undue weight" and negative connotation. The editor, User:Doug rosenberg, has pissed me off a little bit, but it probably means I react too impatiently. So maybe I could borrow your wisdom, since you've made good edits there in the past. LotLE×talk 22:12, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject_Martial_Arts

You are listed as a participant in this Wikiproject, which appears to have ground to a halt - I'm contacting all participants to try to get things rolling again... hope you can help! -- Medains 08:51, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Buck Angel

I removed Buck's real name at the request of the subject, Buck, who contacted me directly about it. Please contact me by E-mail at marshall@marshallastor.com so that I can explain the situation as Buck has explained it to me. I believe that the removal of his real name is not in conflict with policy under the circumstances. Glowimperial 22:46, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Buck Angel's real name is a matter of legal record per Title 18, section 2257. Therefore this information is public record and should remain in the article. If Buck has an issue with that he should bring it up with the Wikimedia office. Or Buck can directly email the office at info-en-q@wikimedia.org ALKIVAR™ ☢ 00:04, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm aware that his name is a matter of legal record. I've advised Buck that his best course of action would to kick this upstairs, as this sort of issue has been worked out satisfactorily (for the subject) in the past through "management intervention". Based upon what I've heard from Buck, he has good reason to ask for the removal, but I'm not in a position to be the final arbiter of that. Glowimperial 00:47, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Blood and Shock Rock

There can be no question that from their initiation, in 1980 and the recording of Such Fun and Meglomania the following year, that The Blood were using Shock Rock tactics to get their ideas accross. Now in 2007 they are once again using Shock Rock tactics to deliver the fight against Human Trafficking. The Blood are a strategic musical concept of Shock Rock that are active in the 21st Century. The Blood recognize the theatre of entertainment as a guerrilla environment for challenging the unchallengeable:

Independent proposal for WP:CAL and WP:SOCAL tags

User Spamreporter1 has made a proposal for the tagging issue. He was not previously involved with either project before seeing this discussion, and I belive that his opinion therefore is NPOV. The suggestion is that articles that have no state-wide scope be tagged only locally. Please go to this section on the SoCal page to provide input. —Scouter Sig 18:45, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Could you help me write this article?

Hello,

I was wondering if you would be willing to help me write either Seikichi_Iha or Shorin-ryu_Shido-kan. Tkjazzer 21:48, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Wikipedia Loves Art

First off, I apologize for the spam. You are receiving this message because you have indicated that you are in Southern California or interested in Southern California topics (either via category or WikiProject).

I would like to invite you to the Los Angeles edition of Wikipedia:Wikipedia Loves Art, a photography scavenger hunt to be held at the Los Angeles County Museum of Art (LACMA) on Saturday, February 28, 2009, from 1:00 to 7:00 PM. All photos are intended for use in Wikipedia articles or on Wikimedia Commons. There will be a prize available for the person who gets the most photos on the list.

If you don't like art, why not come just to meet your fellow Wikipedians. Apparently, we haven't had a meetup in this area since June 2006!

If you are interested in attending, please add your name to Wikipedia:Wikipedia Loves Art#Los Angeles County Museum of Art. Please make a note if you are traveling to the area (train or plane) and need transportation, which can probably be arranged via carpool, but we need time to coordinate. Lodging is as of right now out of scope, but we could discuss that if enough people are interested.

Thank you and I hope to see you there! howcheng {chat} 23:55, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thumbs not displaying

Hello, could someone please help me, I have edited the BMEZINE article on genital beading, [1] inserting a thumb, however it will not display? the link opens fine but the box just displays a message "passthru() has been disabled for security reasons" Ive tried asking on the IAM forums but my membership has still not been authorised... Ive been told it may be an error in the programme? any ideas anyone, I'm trumped.

(DannyTheLaird (talk) 13:37, 22 March 2009 (UTC))[reply]

WikiProject Body Modification

Hey, I noticed you've started a lot of articles on body modification so I thought I would ask if you would like to be part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Body Modification. ScarTissueBloodBlister (talk) 01:54, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I Need Your Help

G'day, Mr. Astor. I'm a user from Armenian Wikipedia. I create the articles about Murdock Stadium (Torrance, California, USA) and 1985 CONCACAF Championship but i can't upload the image of the stadium (9x16 or 3x4) because of the non-free licence. If You have the one that's Your own work, please upload to the WikiCommons and tell me about it. Prethanks... -- Vahe 15:56, 16 January2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vahe (talk • contribs)

Invitation to participate at Stalking Cat

Hello, I'm Just Tidying Up. I'm commenting because, at some point in the past, you contributed to the Stalking Cat article or talk page. I recently performed a major rewrite of Stalking Cat, and I am interested to increase further expansion and improvement of the article, with other editors. If you are interested in this topic, please join us at Talk:Stalking_Cat#Major_rewrite. Thank you. Just Tidying Up (talk) 15:05, 7 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of BROODWORK for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article BROODWORK is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/BROODWORK until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. RadioFan (talk) 03:47, 2 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Elayne Angel for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Elayne Angel is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Elayne Angel until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. KDS4444^Talk 12:42, 23 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:51, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Elayne Angel for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Elayne Angel is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Elayne Angel (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 03:53, 20 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Uvula piercing for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Uvula piercing is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Uvula piercing until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. I am Quibilia. (talk) 03:14, 29 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 13

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Naginata, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Obi. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:58, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Glowimperial. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. Mdann52 (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Glowimperial. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Broodwork for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Broodwork, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Broodwork until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:03, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]