Talk:Dudesnude

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

ref improv[edit]

what needs to be verified or improved?Hemanetwork (talk) 19:59, 20 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article is not well sourced. The sources are only brief mentions of the site that may prove its existence, but are not adequate secondary sources to support the article. ttonyb (talk) 20:06, 20 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
So i added a lot more sources.Hemanetwork (talk) 09:41, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

More to follow[edit]

I (Adagio67) am the administrator of dudesnude.com. We were not aware there was a Wikipedia article on the site. There are a number of omissions and errors which I would like to discuss with the site owner before correcting. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Adagio67 (talk • contribs) 10:32, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As you have a declared interest, please take some time to have a look at Conflict of interest. The easiest way of avoiding issues is to suggest changes and corrections on this talk page rather than making them directly to the article. Thanks, Fæ (talk) 10:35, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The most important errors are on ownership and income, which are simply wrong. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adagio67 (talk • contribs) 10:47, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you post here what the right ownership and income is and can provide a link to an appropriate source (like a sub-page of the Dudesnude website or a newspaper article) then I would be happy to verify and make the corrections for you. If information is unsourced in the article and you believe it to be wrong, then we can just delete it, please point out which text you object to.
(update) I can see you went ahead and fixed things. As you have a declared commercial COI you might want to let others fix errors for you, however the edit seems factual and should not be an issue apart from a format problem which I have fixed. Thanks, Fæ (talk) 11:57, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Adagio67 (talk) 22:34, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I have never before worked with Fæ but I have seen that user's work and Fæ is a great reviewer. I also am here to help; I wrote to dudesnude.com by email a few weeks ago asking for published information about the site, and someone responded without providing sources. If you know of any published information about the site then direct the Wikipedia community to it through this talk page. Thanks for your attention. Blue Rasberry 00:51, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sources[edit]

There are some gay magazine sources which are not just advertising but can be hard to track down, an early-ish example is from QX magazine Nov 2005 which has a section on dudesnude describing the site. See http://www.qxmagazine.com/pdf/backissues/qx562.pdf page 20. Fæ (talk) 05:34, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I pulled the part of this where the reviewer stated that the search function on the site is good. There is a paragraph here, but it is not a long review. Still I am glad to have another source. Blue Rasberry 01:48, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cosmetic edit required[edit]

I have just added a line to the "site popularity and review' section, Adagio67 (talk) 09:28, 30 April 2011 (UTC)acknowledging the award of Boyz Magazine Scene award. I was able to link to the correct page for Boyz on wikipedia, but my skills (you see how I'm not blaming the interface ;) do not extend to making it look right.[reply]

Unfortunately the Boys magazine 'website' is little more than an online reader for the latest version, so I could not add the reference to the awardAdagio67 (talk) 09:28, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I just looked at the issue which is posted right now and I was unable to confirm any award. If you can give me the issue month and the page number for the award then I can make a proper citation.
Also I fixed the format of your link as you wanted. Thanks. Blue Rasberry (talk) 09:58, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia really needs a better editing interface! (but you already know that ;) ) I have not been able to find a list of the 2011 Boyz scene awards. the issue number was #1022 but other than there being copies on sale on ebay I can't find a decent citation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Adagio67 (talk • contribs) 11:58, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If you ever have problems on Wikipedia then there are lots of ways to get help, and sometimes the help desk is a good place to start.
Wikipedia operates on an "assume good faith" model so your citation is sufficient. Everyone assumes that if you say it is in a magazine which is published but not online, then you are contributing honestly. I made a citation saying that the information you gave was published in Boyz Magazine in April 2011 in issue #1022. Blue Rasberry (talk) 14:02, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

'interface' section edited[edit]

There was mention that one of the criteria members can choose is HIV status. This is incorrect. There is a group for HIV+ members but it's not policed and anyone can join and leave as they wish. This is not like height or age, which are selectable criteria.Adagio67 (talk) 22:43, 30 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the information because it was not in the sources cited. Blue Rasberry (talk) 16:35, 1 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

References section needs an addition, please help[edit]

dudesnude was recently reviewed in Time Out New York http://newyork.timeout.com/sex-dating/1998013/beyond-craigslist-digital-resources but I can't work out how to add this to the references section. has it changed? I'm sure I've done this before.Adagio67 (talk) 09:02, 1 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The system has not changed; read about it Wikipedia:Citing sources here if you like. Otherwise in the future just post references here on the talk page and I or someone else will format it. I added the reference to a statement. The citation now appears in the references. Blue Rasberry (talk) 16:37, 1 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
thank you Adagio67 (talk) 10:46, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I have just noticed something odd. There are a lot of new references since I last took a look at the page. I havn't had a chance to check them all out, but I did notice that ref 18 if for the siterail page of gay.com, which is unrelated to dudesnude. ref 20 is to dudesnude's page Adagio67 (talk) 10:58, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
http://www.qindonline.com/article_1040_being+entrepreneur_part+I+-+dudesnude+with+phil+anderson and http://www.qindonline.com/article_1042_part+II+-+dudesnude+and+phil+anderson are all about dudesnude too and could be added instead — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adagio67 (talk • contribs) 11:01, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You gave me two links to two parts of an interview, but I only used the first link as a reference because at the end of it there is a link to the second part. Other than that, I made the change you recommended. Those links to siterail are not as good at all, and certainly not as what you provided. Thanks. Blue Rasberry (talk) 14:46, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
thanks Adagio67 (talk) 12:28, 9 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Misrepresentation of a reference.[edit]

I've never been particularly comfortable with the assertion in the public health section that dudesnude (for whom I work, thus I don't want to do this edit myself) has been criticised for te options allowable in the 'condon use' section on our site. My boss has now been made aware of this by a friend who thought it unfair. Below if the email exchange I've just had with him. (i'm Robert, he's Phil)


That seems perfectly reasonable. I've not actually looked at the page in a while.

It is customary in such situations to discuss this in the talk for the entry and have someone else do the actual edit. I'll do this now.

regards, -- robert

On 6 Aug 2012, at 11:09, phil anderson wrote:

it seems the wikipedia assertion is factually incorrect. the article it cites is an opinion piece:

http://www.ebar.com/arts/art_article.php?sec=karrnal&article=29

here's the paragraph in question:

"I've been using my new computer to visit a fun website called Dudesnude.com, where real people post jpgs and even video of themselves. But I'm absolutely flabbergasted by the response to one section of the men's Personal Profiles. It asks, Practice Safer Sex? To which a whole lot of guys respond, When Appropriate. I thought Always was the appropriate time to practice safer sex. It's not something you do when you're in the mood, fellas, or when your trick tells you he's negative. Please, keep yourself alive and practice safer sex appropriately. "


so in objective fact, he's not "criticizing dudesnude for allowing" the selection, he is "criticizing some DN members for making" the selection.

he's being factually mis-represented by wikipedia when they assert he is criticizing dudesnude website.


i'm not sure if it's worth reacting to this, it feels to me that our interests in the position do somewhat disqualify us from making edits to wikipedia that could reasonably be assumed to be impartial. is there any other way to challenge it, other than simply editing it?

a more reasonable factual assertion to replace it might be:

"some dudesnude members have been criticized for selecting a condom preference of "when appropriate", this has been described as inconsistent with safer sex practices"

-- philip anderson invades limited

To be honest though I would go further in that I would disagree with the actual article. "When appropriate' is a perfectly acceptable selection. If a couple have an open relationship, they may always use a condom with third parties but not with each other. Adagio67 (talk) 10:32, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia, like any other encyclopedia, is supposed to report what other sources say. I feel that the source which is reporting this neither matches what is currently there nor what you are proposing. For now I am just going to remove it. Blue Rasberry (talk) 23:23, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Dudesnude. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 04:17, 1 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Dudesnude. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:43, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Dudesnude. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:09, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Dudesnude&oldid=1207048992"