Talk:Michael Brandon (porn star)/Archive 1

Archive 1

pic

I think we need a pic, if one is available. 69.138.18.241 15:07, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Tried to email his website regarding a pic, but the e-mail link was broken. Also, a bud of mine who used to live in Florida hooked up with him once years ago, and said he was 10 inches long...the biggest he's ever taken, but far from the 15" claim. I believe the largest cock ever measured (from the top to the base) is 13 inches. Whoever put in the 15 inches had best reference that measurement. Thegreatdr 15:30, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Penis Measurements

I have reverted this to the original 10 inches long and 6.5 inches in girth. Michael Brandon has stated this size himself, originally in a sean cody video. I think it is also obvious he is big but cannot be that big. unless there is a citation (and even then this would be conflicting) this should not be changed. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.40.50.234 (talk) 13:17, 15 February 2007 (UTC).

Vandalous edits by Robin Redford and Roz Lipschitz

New comments posted like those above under the last heading do not belong there, they need a new heading. The two editors listed under this heading are vandalous and make nonsense edits and rampant nonsense tagging of articles, here and elsewhere. Their activity is totally unproductive. --72.68.122.19 02:37, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Au Contraire! The tagging of articles is VERY PRODUCTIVE as these articles with no citations, references or footnotes which covers nearly every article written about a gay porn star need to be brought up to meet Wikipedia's standards! Also, so many people are using Wikipedia to clearly advertise illegal sex services! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.86.105.146 (talk) 02:49, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

I'v eremoved the Notability tag as he meets the porn bio guidelines with the awards. I've also removed the disputed tag as being too vague to actual be helpful. Please tag specific statements that a reasonable person would question or, if an entire section is contested add a section tag. Also, I'm not seeing Brandon as advertising sexual services here so either specifically address that concern on these talk pages or take it to the articles you are talking about.Benjiboi 05:40, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

I for one am not a Vandalous editor! I put real comments on the talk page about the tags and citations needed and I use the edit summary. Many of these gay porn stars make very bold statements in their articles and for months at a time they fail to come up with one reliable source! This is nuts and needs to be cleaned-up -- SIMPLE! Robin Redford 23:35, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Agreed that calling someone a vandal is serious and should be retracted if not appropriate. Disagree that article was created or maintained by Brandon himself, in fact, I rather doubt it as his bio, body of work and community activism taken together or even separately would dwarf this article as it is now. Let's not assume this article, or any other for that matter, is written by the subject of the article (and just for kicks I'll "admit" that I'm not Brandon) and claims should be addressed on each article rather than general venting concerns here. If you have constructive criticism to make this a better article then please share them. The article isn't going away so maybe making peace with that and making a better article would be a better use of energy. Failing that consider instead editing articles on subjects you do approve of so those articles become better in the process. Benjiboi 05:40, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

I am not Vandalous! I cannot undersand why I am accused of this! Also this article has improved immensely though is still somewhat opinionated. Roz Lipschitz (talk) 12:17, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Citing Reliable Sources

• The subject merits this article but there should be some valid sources. Sources definitely are needed where it says 'citation needed' in the text. This article can be improved. I found a few copies of intereviews Michael Brandon did. As soon as I get the ISSN numbers of the publications I will be able to incorporate. Rednath 23:51, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

I've already added sources to cover those statements. If you do find anything useful please add it as the article can use much more improving.Benjiboi 01:15, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

The sources now cited here, though they do verify the text, are unfortunately SELF-published sources by the subject... so this article needs to be "tagged" appropriatelyFuzzyred 15:17, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

It's hardly problematic for an autobiographical reference to be used on the assertions they are verifying. They were added in direct response to some editor's fact tags. Now that references are provided they aren't good enough. Can't seem to get a break here. Benjiboi 15:58, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

INDEED the sources are truly not sources as all citations must be from reliable third party sources. Surely, with all the awards the subject has won, he has done interviews. Also, Brandon co-won the GRABBY with Chad Hunt in 2002 (not 2001) and was put onto the Wall of Fame in 2003 (the same year he tied the GAYVN with Colton Ford). Fuzzyred 20:02, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Please feel free to make those changes. Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit almost any article by simply following the Edit this page link at the top. The Wikipedia community encourages you to be bold in updating pages. Benjiboi 02:48, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

I have been afraid of making those changes because there is this WP-Police patrol who desperately attacks any new editor who edits gay porn star articles... I have heard horrific stories about how visciously people have been treated. WP says to be bold and makes edits but when you do you get attacked! I am making the above changes today though... Fuzzyred 21:33, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

People can be uncivil at times and they should know better per WP:Civil part of which is don't hurt the newbies. Regardless I'd rather have an accurate article than a vigilant porn police patrol any day. the gay porn articles will keep growing and some will rightfully be deleted as non-notable. This one won't, he's a veteran actor and producer. Benjiboi 23:55, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

A Big porn veteran and produce with NO RELIABLE 3rd party source at all... What a shame... Fuzzyred 02:36, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

So go for it and add some. Benjiboi 02:47, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Race question

Here Brandon is listed as caucasian but in numerous interviews he states he is 50% Native American. Than would make him mixed and not caucasian. Fuzzyred 16:59, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

please cite one of the reliable numerous interviews and change it. Benjiboi 21:15, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

I am actually pushing for this article to be deleted for lack of notability and non-expansion + self-published / non-reliable sources. It is the job of those who want to kp it (and benjiboi seems to be the only one who cares) to find sources and cite properly! Fuzzyred (talk) 16:19, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome to try to delete it but WP:SNOW comes into play as this guy is notable, the article is just not that good yet. Benjiboi 03:25, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Vandalous Edits from Rainbowrabbit and Benjiboi

these two unwelcomed editors are trying to down-play the SERIOUSNESS of the heinous crimes Michael Brandon has committed! They are also trying to falsely glamorize his porn career. They constantly are changing the version of this EXTREMELY ACCURATE article to their fan site! They may not admit to their fansite but this is what they are doing! It is clear that they are craving 'Monster' up inside them! Dream on he's locked up for a VERY LONG TIME! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.37.169.170 (talk)

What you said about me was in fact sexual harassment. There was nothing threatening about me stating it. Stop vandalizing the page.--Rainbowrabbit (talk) 20:58, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

//BLP violation removed//

(threatening remark removed)

• Comment. Actually, compromising articles to inject WP:Soapboxing and POV material is the vandalism here. It has been repeatedly reverted, as is policy to do so. This is not a blog or a tabloid, it's an encyclopedia and we have to adhere to guidelines on how we present our content. No one has suggested that this content can't be used, it's the volume and writing that is currently the problem. We have identified a very good source that discusses the context and content and that can be the foundation for introducing the material. Unless whatever is added is done so in a NPOV and well sourced manner that article can plod along blissfully without it. -- Banjeboi 20:36, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

That is what I have been saying. Adding information on the drug addiction isn't the problem. It's the fact that it is filled with inaccuracies and propaganda. I figured that I would resolve this by requesting semi-protection for the page. I managed to do that, but it has been locked with the lies intact on the current article. I believe the drug references shouldn't be on the page until we can come up with an unbiased way of presenting the details.--Rainbowrabbit (talk) 22:02, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

I'll work to get a non-BLP version restored. Sorry you were attacked. -- Banjeboi 00:11, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

This may not be a blog or a tabloid but as an encyclopedia it needs to be truthful! This article is not truthful! 1st it is writte in present tense i.e.: "Michael Brandon is a porn star..." This is not the case - - HE IS AN INMATE! Monster Bang has been abolished and he is no longer performing nor is he directing or an owner at Raging Stallion any longer! These freaks who only dream of 'Monster' being up inside them need to get over it and tell the facts! This article is a lie! 24.43.212.203 (talk) 07:44, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Goodness! You know what, I've said everything I had to say on the matter of the article and I am not going to keep repeating myself like a broken record. I probably shouldn't say this. But since you and another Wikipedia user have felt the need to publicly humiliate me and sexually harass me with vulgar remarks, I am going to have my say. You think I should "get over" my fantasy of sleeping with Michael? Well this advice goes both ways. You and everyone who has taken part in posting defamatory details on an individual should "get over" the fact that you lost this battle. I spotted lies on the main page and I am partly responsible for having the article locked to prevent further abuse. If this upsets anyone, then "get over" it. I am not trying to be rude. But I can only put up with the harassment for so long.--Rainbowrabbit (talk) 21:33, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

I have to agree to a point here. In short, it's better to leave off information that is completely problematic and let someone think, OMG, that Brandon is still producing porn. I don't care that much but attacking other editors and edit-warring certainly isn't the way to win anyone over. If you have a reliable source that Brandon is an inmate then please post it here so others can look it over. The rule on wiipedia is that we go by verifiability, not truth. -- Banjeboi 00:21, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Michael isn't an inmate. His partner Marcos Monzon stated in a comment here that Michael is currently in rehab. Not only that, SF Weekly had a followup article on the situation confirming that he is in rehab. Unlike what most people are doing, I am including sources. Also, Michael is being allowed to go home for a few hours on Fridays and has used some of his time to email fans to keep them updated on his recovery. And I can offer print screen evidence of this just in case anyone tries to doubt me. If he is emailing people, then he can't possibly be in jail right now.--Rainbowrabbit (talk) 04:28, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Emails don't prove someone isn't an inmate but reliable sources do help. Thank you for looking into adding sourced content. -- Banjeboi 00:05, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

It proves that he's not currently in prison. Anyway, I also wanted to point out that Monster Bang has not been "abolished" like it's been previously stated. The Monster Bang films are still being made, but they are now directed by Tony Dimarco. In fact, there's a new one called Rear Deliveries.--Rainbowrabbit (talk) 06:58, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

For our purposes here emails alone are not proof. We need reliable sources to state he was in prison, and once we have those, we need ones to prove he has been released. Since no NPOV content with sourcing has been presented either way, it can all stay off presently. -- Banjeboi 18:46, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Outdent. To the anon editor who posted, we don't solicit and post faxes or emails as such. Find a reliable source to bac up your assertion and we can go from there. -- Banjeboi 07:18, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

I have removed false and unproven information posted by an anonymous user. --Rainbowrabbit (talk) 00:20, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

I've decided to remove another comment since it contained an insult. The arguing has finally stopped and I felt this could trigger it again.--Rainbowrabbit (talk) 11:33, 2 March 2009 (UTC)