This is an archive of past discussions with User:John B123. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Hi John, Very intriguing new article. I was wondering if the article may need to be renamed to "Murdered female sex workers in the UK" or if it should actually be expanded to include male, transsexual and transgender sex workers, which would probably be in the spirit of the intention of the article - to show the violence against all sex workers? pseudonymJake Brockmantalk09:19, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
Hi Jake. The intention was to include all sex workers irrespective of gender. There are a few TGs included (Andrea Waddell & Robyn Browne for example). Most of the entries, or at least most latter murders, are taken of news media. I don't know if the media doesn't see the murder of male sex workers as newsworthy and is less likely to report it?
Ok, good. I found a couple of rent boys murdered. Not sure if they are being under-reported or maybe fall into the category of "gay murders" with the exchange of money being unknown. It seems, though, that there are a lot of search results of rent boys killing their Johns. pseudonymJake Brockmantalk10:19, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
I think that is part of the problem in reporting, unless the news article actually mentions the victim is a sex worker it isn't obvious. Thanks for adding to the article. John B123 (talk) 11:05, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for your hard work on this article. I have removed some of the references, as tabloids such as the Sun, Mirror, Mail and Daily Star aren't accepted reliable sources per WP:BLPSOURCES, mainly because they do often print inaccurate informaation. I have added citation needed tags to some of the statements. Thanks, Boleyn (talk) 05:31, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
Hi John, I don't think there is a good, clear list. WP:BLPSOURCES and WP:NOTRS mention we shouldn't use tabloids generally, but within that there is sometimes debate about whether a certain newspaper is a tabloid - Metro, Evening Standard etc are grey areas, The Sun, Mirror, Star, Express and Mail are clear tabloids. WP:V and WP:RS have a bit more, but not a list. The Daily Mail was the subject of a RfC [1] and as far as I know it is the only source to have had this sort of specific, blanket 'ban' on it being used. A list would be useful, but would be a nightmare to get agreement on. Best wishes, Boleyn (talk) 13:04, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
@Boleyn: Hi. Thanks for your reply and the info. I didn't think about it, but you're right, a list would be a list would be a nightmare to compile. The UK tabloids are pretty obvious, it was non-UK sources (for articles about other countries) that I was trying to find if there was a list, or if any were frowned on. The German WP article on tabloids de:Boulevardzeitung does list some titles. (Other language versions of the page either give no examples or give the UK publications as examples). --John B123 (talk) 13:51, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
I'll have a look. Obviously it's a lot easier if there are readily available sources online. I'm working on Prostitution in the Central African Republic at the moment. On a side note, my personal experience of the Dominican Republic is that a lot of women will offer sex for money as a sideline, for example if you go into a shop and don't buy anything, you'll often be offered sex as you go to leave. --John B123 (talk) 11:25, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
Impressive
I think the improvement on the sex work articles is impressive I must say I wish I were as skilled as you in that regards.Dwanyewest (talk) 22:17, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
I have tried my best with what I know with subjects I write about. I then try and put reliable third person sources in articles where ever possible but nevertheless I honestly think your work is excellent and will enjoy watching your improvements as they are quite informative. Dwanyewest (talk) 23:00, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
You had recently expressed support for new additions to the Webcam Model article.
A new appropriate photo (Elements for Camming Session) for the article has been recently proposed upon the article's talk page.
If you get a chance please consider weighing in on that talk page's discussion on the photo, so that we can achieve a consensus and move forward with an engaging photo for that refurbished article. James Carroll (talk) 19:06, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
I will help if I can
Your article improvements are amazing as usual. I am willing to help you in anyway if you think I would be of any use. Keep up the good work, I envy the way you able to improve so many articles in such a short time. Dwanyewest (talk) 23:56, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
@Dwanyewest: Hi. Thanks. I notice quite a few of the 'Prostitution in ....' articles I've expanded were started by you, or you had a lot of input early on. You could start a few new articles for the countries that haven't got an existing article. John B123 (talk) 16:58, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
Prostitution in Oceania
Please provide a reliable source for your claim that pimping is legal in New Zealand. What law are you referring to? What, specifically, are you claiming is legal? As I stated in my previous edit, your first source does not back up that claim at all, and your second was not a reliable source - it was an advocacy group which was inaccurate about a number of other countries. I don't see why you've revert-warred with me here - as opposed to in the Australian cases, where you corrected the article to accurately reflect what the law actually says. The Drover's Wife (talk) 18:24, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
Agreed. I'll continue to add some content from time to time. I've created a Northern Ireland section as only GB was covered up till now. I think that Lap dancing has probably disappeared from NI but I can't find any reliable sources that say so. - Polly Tunnel (talk) 13:40, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
I've lowered the protection level to EC 30/500 for three months after a CU flushed out the socks, which is what I anticipated he would find. Dennis Brown - 2¢00:40, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
Hello, I moved the article to the draft space, so that it can be worked on until it is ready to be an article. Please move any improvements to that location. Thanks! ‡ Єl Cid of ᐺalenciaᐐT₳LKᐬ18:22, 5 March 2018 (UTC)
@El cid, el campeador: Your actions were a bit premature. I added the In creation template and categories and then a minute later when I tried to add the content, I got an edit conflict as you had moved the start of the article to draft. I do not use draft on any of the pages I create, as it can take a month to get them moved back to the page. (I made that mistake on the first couple of articles I created). The page had the Template:In creation on it it, which is: "Its intended use is for editors who have made an article and will be adding content within a matter minutes or hours." John B123 (talk) 18:46, 5 March 2018 (UTC)
@El cid, el campeador: Indeed, but then you can't attribute content as you would in article summaries, unless you also move sandbox/talk. This is not practical if you are working on other projects at the same time. You are right in general times about empty articles, however the Template:In creation indicates this is only temporary. If you are saying this is not an acceptable way of creating article, then why has Template:In creation not been deleted? I would fully support you moving the article into draft after several hours, but within a minute? John B123 (talk) 19:25, 5 March 2018 (UTC)
Wanted to let you know I removed your edit on the The Love Ranch page. The Love Ranch (aka Love Ranch North) was not shut down in Feb 2018. The Love Ranch Vegas (aka Love Ranch South), another Hof property, was closed by Nye County. The names are confusing, there is a disambiguation paragraph at the top of the page, perhaps someone could improve it, I'm a neophyte.
Here is your original edit, in case you wanted to add it to Love Ranch Vegas.
"
The licence for the brothel was suspended in February 2018 over planning issues,[1] it reopened in April 2018.[2]
"
Thanks for uploading File:Prostitution in Africa2.PNG. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time after the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
Hey, John B123. I know that you often save references by replacing dead links, but be more careful in cases such as this one, and keep in mind that, per WP:Dead links, a dead link does not necessarily need removing. In some cases, one option is to remove the URL and continue to use the source. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 05:00, 30 May 2018 (UTC)
In the page you specifically linked to, you reverted my changes with the edit summary "Not dead. See the first link within the reference", and the link is indeed active. (I must admit, I just assumed the link would be dead as it was tagged as such and didn't actually check). As the link as active then shouldn't the dead link tag be removed? Cheers John B123 (talk) 18:46, 30 May 2018 (UTC)
That WikiProject is pretty much dead. Either way, if the reference can't be recovered at Internet Archive or elsewhere, then I don't much mind when it's removed. But I think it's better to leave the dead link there if there is a chance it can be recovered, or per whatever else the WP:Dead links page states. As for the dead link tag of the aforementioned reference, perhaps it was there because one of links in the reference was dead. But, yeah, that tag should now be removed. Just remember that a URL isn't always needed to cite a source. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 06:14, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
@Flyer22 Reborn: - Hi. Thanks for your advice and guidance which is most useful. Whilst the Sexology and Sexuality project may be nearly dead, the sub-group Sex Work Task Force, which I'm a member of, is still active. Unfortunately I don't think it's possible to generate a Cleanup Listing for a sub-group. Cheers John B123 (talk) 15:15, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
Hi. From Wikipedia:Featured articles: "Featured articles are considered to be some of the best articles Wikipedia has to offer, as determined by Wikipedia's editors. They are used by editors as examples for writing other articles. Before being listed here, articles are reviewed as featured article candidates for accuracy, neutrality, completeness, and style." I though all the time and effort you have put into making this article deserved some recognition. John B123 (talk) 13:21, 2 June 2018 (UTC)
