User talk:Zebruh
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Welcome!
Hello Zebruh, 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 05:09, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] LS Studio
Hi Zebruh. I added the "neutrality disputed" tag in response to your note on the article talk page about the article being "obviously biased, as-is." That way, in case you didn't have a chance to go back and fix it, hopefully another editor would go in and rework the article. I'm not sure if there's a formal procedure for deciding when something is sufficiently neutral, but I'll leave that up to your judgment. The main thing is that all claims should be verifiable and not sound too much like advertising. By the way, congrats on your first article! --Alan Au 01:53, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Thanks
Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my user page. :) --Buchanan-Hermit™..CONTRIBS..SPEAK! 19:35, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
- You're very welcome. And thanks for doing the same for the LS Studio article earlier today. ;) Zebruh 21:48, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Wayback links
Please do not post links to content described in LS Studio. This includes wayback links as pictures are archived in those subsites as well. In some places, having those types of images on one's computer is illegal, and we do not want to put any of our users in risk of coming into contact with those types of pictures through our forums or articles. Do not post such links again, and cease trolling the LS Studio article and the talk page, as directed by Jimbo Wales. Your neutral contributions are valued, but further occurances of any of this may lead to blocking. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 05:44, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
- No problem. I agree that those links are not a good idea here. And I removed a few more that you didn't catch.Zebruh 06:06, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Ls Magazine LS Studios
I went to the article on LS Magazine, clicked on the page's history and seen some of your work on the article which is quite brilliant because of the facts which some people object to. These facts would add up as some of the titles like LS-Fantasy or Natural Angels, whether people believe these are true or not, they are TRUE! Trust me, I've looked around on wikipedia, and there is a lot of unverifiable facts. But I'm not going to be the analyzing **** who goes around and requests that all the information to be took off wikipedia.
I was wondering why LS Magazine doesn't have an official article, at least one that isn't labled something like Ukrainian Child porn ring raids, under the Arts category in photography. It would be highly unreasonable for anyone to delete or file a complaint for that, seeing that LS Magazine was and still isn't considered pornography. The only reason why it recieves the title Child Pornography is because of some photos contain sights of minor's genitalia. It still must be considered art, reasons why: 1. There are plenty of ancient Greek vases that contain child nudity and or molestation, which counts as illegal (EVEN IF IT ISN'T A REAL PICTURE). Therefore why not destroy all the ancient pieces of art? Because it is art. 2. There are actually many LS pictures that exlude nudity, and any artist or photographer can plainly see artistic values in them. You can look the laws up yourself that showing one of these pictures (one that excludes nudity) on Wikipedia is not illegal because for it to be illegal it would have to show genitals or portray the minor having suggestive actions with sexuallity. 3. And what really happened to all those pictures? Maybe the government is doing "extra investigation".
[edit] LS-Magazine
The LS-Magazine article can be located [[1]] there. This is a new look at what the article should have been like, but is now. Nothing has been touched so far and it is categorized under Photo Graphic studios. [[2]] Feel free to add or adjust anything, just don't say the word porn or you might get anti-artist excited. I think it is good enough as is, until anymore press release comes out, which most likely won't happen, seeing that the guy who owned the business is already buying himself out of trouble.
