User talk:TatiVogue

I'm User:Naraht. As a additional comment on my suggestion about where to put starter articles for queens, While Draft:Jorgeous is one choice, another is User:TatiVogue/Jorgeous (You can have as many sandboxes as you want (I'd stay under 1000 for now. :) )) I'm not a fan of Calibri font on your user page, but that's my problem not yours. :) I've been editing since 2006, and my other area of interest is Collegiate Fraternities and Sororities. Feel free to ask questions on the WikiProject page. I've gotten my share of edits reverted as well, the key is to be willing to discuss if someone has an opposite opinion than you do within the rules of Wikipedia. I like that you are experimenting with making a fake season in your sandboxes.Naraht (talk) 19:15, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the tips! I'm relatively new to editing so for someone as experienced as you, this really helps. I'm going to probably make drafts on the final 5, & compare it to official articles. I do appreciate these suggestions/tips! TatiVogue (talk) 20:45, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

NP. A few other notes. Bosco (drag queen) only needs the dab term (drag queen) because there is already a Bosco article (in this case that page is a disambiguation page) but Jorgeous will not. In some cases like Raven, the drag queen will *never* be the primary article. As far as I can tell all of the queens where there is a dab term, they use (drag queen), but a *few* (I'm thinking Willam), might have a different one, if needed. Also, one of the first things when a Season comes out is that all of the queens get created as redirects to their season. so Jorgeous should just redirect to Season 14. Just assume when you have a draft article that gets thumbs up at the WikiProject that you'll get information on how it can be brought in. Also, please know that the editor User:Onel5969 who changed Jorgeous back from an article to a redirect by deleting the contents is an very experienced editor who hold no dislike for drag or RPDR, and frankly, he was right. :)Naraht (talk) 14:34, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your change to add Lady Camden's birthday, what's the source? I saw that on the fandom wiki that there is a link to her instagram about the birthday wishes, but nothing referenced on the year of her birth (we can't really use the fandom wiki as a source, we need something more, and the sites that include August 9, 1990, I can't find any that are Reliable Sources.) Something more reliable should be found. Ideas?Naraht (talk) 14:49, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I actually came here to ask the same thing. Please review

WP:DOB. For subjects whose birthdays have not been widely published in RS, we do not include them. --Kbabej (talk) 15:51, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

I was going off of what the wiki said, but I didn't know that it wasn't allowed to be a source. I think Lady Camden might have tweeted or something about her birthday but I don't know if that counts. I'll try to find more creditable sources on her birthdate. TatiVogue (talk) 16:06, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Other wikis generally aren't good sources for things like that (they generally have the ability to have anyone edit them, so they shouldn't be trusted (just like Wikipedia shouldn't be trusted :). However they do reference a lot of things, so following their sources (and referencing the *sources* for wikipedia) can be quite useful. Naraht (talk) 18:49, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Similar for Kerri Colby. The date and month are pretty solid from her IG, the question is do we have a Reliable Source for the year. I found a more Reliable source for being a drag daughter and did some other cleanup.Naraht (talk) 18:44, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I didn't completely check the source, I just did a quick read of it but I mainly added it because it was what the Wiki used. TatiVogue (talk) 19:12, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

And now you know. BTW, you are better with cite web than I am. :) Naraht (talk) 19:20, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the compliment! But in all reality, I don't think I'm that good at citing tbh. I usually just do a quick read of the first thing that comes up and use that as a cite.. TatiVogue (talk) 19:24, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

True, But I'll just shove everything into <ref>[blah-blah-url title of article]</ref> :).

I realize that I may be just putting lao and lgbt together, but LGBT rights in Laos definitely needs some Tender Loving Care. *ANY* ideas you have on resources for additional information would be welcome. I can't find anything that even comes close to covering this on the lao wikipedia (which frankly is *tiny*, about 4000 articles) Naraht (talk) 19:53, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have any ideas, because even in Laos there is a small LGBT+ community which is barely recognized. There isn't that much discrimination against LGBT+ people in Laos & the article is mainly factual. A lot of people in the country don't actually know that a sexuality other than straight exists because the government does censor certain LGBT-specific websites, but other than that there is little to no LGBT discrimination/prevalence in Laos. TatiVogue (talk) 19:59, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

In *general* Wikipedians as a whole represent what you would expect out of the average tech-savvy editor whose first language is English. While a majority of English speaking people live in nations without Marriage Equality (India outweighs everyone), once you balance to Wikipedia editors it goes the other way. For example, take a look at

No one has said anything ant-LGBT things to me, but I've just been taking props from other talk/user pages and adding them. Also, when I use pronouns on drag queens pages I usually use she/her if they're cisgender, they/them if they're non binary/genderfluid, or he/him in the case of Gottmik! TatiVogue (talk) 21:13, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Plus, when people do say anti-LGBT things to me, I usually do shrug it off because it's not like I can change someone's opinion over Wikipedia. Also, especially when they're from non-western countries, because they do have a conservative mindset mostly (and I know that from experience!), so in this case I would just ignore + delete! TatiVogue (talk) 21:13, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not the finale being today... -hopes for lady camden or bosco to win- TatiVogue (talk) 16:44, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

BOSCO IS LOOSING NOOOOOOOOOO

I HOPE LADY CAMDEN WINSSSSS

WE DONT NEED ANOTHER WINNER WITH ONE WIN 😭 TatiVogue (talk) 01:21, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Bats eyelashes blank stare TatiVogue (talk) 11:47, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A friendly reminder to not add birthdays to biographies of living persons without a reliable source. Please review

👍 TatiVogue (talk) 12:34, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's a user page! I'm not passing anything off as real. It says CUSTOM in my user page. TatiVogue (talk) 15:27, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Les Roches-l'Évêque. Bbb23 (talk) 19:36, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi TatiVogue! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.

• The Wikipedia Adventure Start Page
• The Wikipedia Adventure Lounge
• The Teahouse new editor help space
• Wikipedia Help pages

-- 17:26, Wednesday, May 4, 2022 (

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by KylieTastic were:

This submission is not adequately supported by

guidelines on the notability of films). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid

when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Faglarna and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Faglarna, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

KylieTastic (talk) 19:56, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, TatiVogue! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! KylieTastic (talk) 19:56, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Do not copyedit another editor's userpage. Cullen328 (talk) 20:42, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't? I was just improving their grammar TatiVogue (talk) 21:14, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"improving their grammar" is a copyedit. But I'll make it simpler: don't edit other user's userpages at all.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:44, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

OK. TatiVogue (talk) 12:31, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I see you've had some disappointing situations over the last couple of weeks. Just checking in to see if you want to talk about any of them.Naraht (talk) 13:39, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi TatiVogue! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, My Wikipedia Subpages, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still read the archived discussion. If you have follow-up questions, please create a new thread. See also the help page about the archival process. The archival was done by Lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by Muninnbot, both talk) 19:01, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply ]

Hi TatiVogue! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, Sandbox Question, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still read the archived discussion. If you have follow-up questions, please create a new thread. See also the help page about the archival process. The archival was done by Lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by Muninnbot, both talk) 19:01, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply ]

ເຮພສ ິນີພຳ ັ ້ຈເ ດັະ ຫສັເໃ ຮ ສຮາຳ ຶນິຫ ແ້ັຮືຳກ ີຍ ັືກ ໄ້ຮຍຍຳກໃ ັືກ ໄ້ຳື ຮ ທຳັື ຶນິຫ ຮ ທຳັື ິນີືເ ຶນິຫໃ ຮທ ຢູູໃ ຮ ່ີຫະ ະີພືຳກ ຢູ ສັຫະ ໄຳຳາໃ ຮ ະ້ຮືາໃ

Hi TatiVogue (talk) 00:07, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Classist Queen and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 May 25#Classist Queen until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 17:21, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Bbb23 (talk) 17:42, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

not me getting blocked... #rebel era TatiVogue (talk) 01:29, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

TatiVogue (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I personally believe I deserve to be blocked (just not indefinitely), and these are my reasons: The few "disruptive edits" I made were highly inappropriate, but were made due to immaturity. I'm not using my age as an excuse to block my disruptive edits, but I can say that majority of the things I've done were in good faith. As you can see in my edit logs, I have made several contributive edits, and added good information & sources. Also, majority of the disruptive edits I made were on my own pages/talk pages/user pages, so I was not aware of how editing my own pages could disrupt others. I do believe that I have a lot to contribute and I feel like at the least if my block could be limited down. If so, I promise that I will no longer make disruptive edits (even on my own pages). Whether or not I get unblocked or not, I'm sure it's the right decision. (again, not blaming my actions on my age/maturity, but I do feel like some reasons can apply to that). Also, I do not have a history of prior blocks! Thank you 👍

  TatiVogue (talk) 01:31, 25 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You've evaded your block. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:39, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

You were blocked on April 15, 2022, for 24 hours.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:42, 25 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It was a page block I believe.. TatiVogue (talk) 01:51, 25 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your statement that you had no prior blocks was untrue; a "page block" is a block, and it's used, like all blocks, because of some kind of disruptive conduct. More generally, you created this account in February of this year. You have made 206 edits to article space, whereas you have made roughly 600+ edits in your userspace (including deleted edits), many of which were disruptive, and most of which were a waste of time. Editors are expected to improve the encyclopedia, not to play around in their userspace. Although you sort of say your age should not be used as an excuse, I think you have hit the nail on the head. You are too immature to edit here constructively. I suggest you wait before requesting an unblock. How long? I can't say because I don't know when you will be mature enough, but I suspect at least a year. Certainly you are not ready now.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:06, 25 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Understandable 🤷‍♂️. TatiVogue (talk) 13:52, 25 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

so can i make a new account orrrr cuz thats what it says TatiVogue (talk) 18:54, 9 October 2022 (UTC) ID ignore it, the declines telling you to create another account are socking long term abusers impersonating admins. Lavalizard101 (talk) 19:20, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I wish that I had been able to give some guidance.Naraht (talk) 17:17, 7 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

dw I was just in a silly goofy mood 🤪 TatiVogue (talk) 20:16, 7 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Should TatiVogue choose to make an appeal of the block, a commitment to no longer create fantasy pages in usertalk *must* be a *significant* part of it. The rest seems small potatoes, though perhaps something with the page block should be mentioned, I'm not sure. As a note, succinctness is a definite good thing here. Naraht (talk) 17:05, 8 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

sure, i already gave up on that... i dont like talking abt it its really embarrassing for me TatiVogue (talk) 22:03, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on your user page,

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. SmokeyJoe (talk) 23:24, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You are not permitted to remove declined unblock requests from this page. If you do it again, I will revoke Talk page access.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:48, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]