User talk:Rambone

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents


  • Thanks for the tips. I created an account with the user name "Rambone". I understand your point about new people still getting used to Wikipedia. I've been using it for a few months now and I'm just now taking editing articles seriously. BTW, how do I get it to say "(talk)" next to my name. Rambone 10:49, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Hi again !. To get the (talk) after your name

Go to "My preferences" at the top right
Paste [[User:Rambone|Rambone]] [[User talk:Rambone|(Talk)]] into the Nickname field
Check the Raw signiture box and Press save
- Happy editing - Peripitus (Talk) 00:38, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 50 Cent

Hi, in response to your query. This is a common issue on wikipedia. Articles like this that have editors with strong opinions are often the site of battles over content. I've readded the section, left a note on the article talk page and on the removing editors talk page. If he removes it again the place to talk this out is on the article talk page where all editors can participate and (hopefully) reach Consensus. We need to avoid edit wars as they just annoy everyone and don't result in a better article. The trick is to use the Talk pages to convince other editors of your position as soon as it's clear there's a conflict- Peripitus (Talk) 07:05, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

--I removed this Political Views once again User:Rambone/ User:24.35.15.107‎. You have continued to post weasel words in the article. We are trying to keep neutral in this article. You choice to add your opinion and your support of the GOP to every article and vandalize other articles that feature those you don't agree with. Your recent history includes: Reparations for slavery, Elvis Presley, John Murtha, Betty Williams, and also many others.[1][2]. Your actions will be not tolerated. This will also appear on your 50 Cent talk page also. Remember you have to keep a to keep articles neutral, you are not to attack others and myself, and need to provide accurate and present sources. Please try to work creatively when working edits on Wikipedia. Please do not show your bias towards any article. Therefore, if you choose to continue the behavior, you will be reported to administrators for your actions and therefore be blocked from editing Wikipedia. LILVOKA 18:20, 30 July 2006 (UTC)


  • You keep on saying that I'm using weasel words yet you never articulate what those words are. You also keep giving me crap about presenting sources yet I provide 3 credible and independent links to back the text. Thirdly, there is a immense precedent for citing the political views of non-politicians and even musicians/rappers. I placed it in the "controversy" section because it is obviously controversial. Your argument just doesn't hold water. As I've siad before...the only reason that you keep deleting it is because you hate Bush and you CHOOSE to be denial about 50 Cent's comments. --Rambone (Talk) 18:34, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:LILVOKA"

--Please stay neutral when addressing the article. LILVOKA 18:37, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

  • How about explaining how the article is not neutral? I will not take you seriously until you give me ONE example. --Rambone (Talk) 18:38, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

50 Cent has expressed !!consistent!! support for U.S. President George W. Bush. If the rapper's felony conviction didn't prevent him from voting, 50 Cent said he would have voted for Bush. !!50 Cent supported the President!! when he was being criticised for his slow response in helping the victims of Hurricane Katrina, and also in response to the controversy over perceived racial bias after the hurricane.[11] 50 Cent was reported by MTV as telling GQ magazine that Bush is:

!!incredible ... a gangsta.!! I wanna meet George Bush, just shake his hand and tell him how much of me I see in him

Words like consistent and many others also create opinion and affect neutrality of the article. LILVOKA 18:42, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

  • OK...I'll fix it. --Rambone (Talk) 18:42, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks LILVOKA 18:45, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

  • I changed it...let me know what you think. I think that it's neutral. --Rambone (Talk) 18:49, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

It's perfect. All I do is watch the pages for spamming, open opinion and neutrality and other things that follow that WP:NOT. Thanks again LILVOKA 01:58, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Dimebag's killer

It's an exaggeration to say Nathan Gale became "a very notable figure". He's nothing, and is only notable because of the murder. Looking through his article, all paragraphs are about the murder, with 1 paragraph about his non-notable background and 1 paragraph at the end with some non-notable speculation about him. He doesn't merit an article. Here's an illustration of why: in Dimebag's article, a line says he "was shot and killed onstage by Nathan Gale." So the reader says: Hm, the guy was notable enough to have a blue underline, let's check it out. Checking out, the reader gets zero additional information, because, guess what, there's absolutely nothing notable about him that doesn't already belong in Dimebag's article. A difference with Mark David Chapman is that other details came out during and after his trial that generated some interest in his psychological state, blah blah blah. Chapman wouldn't deserve an article either if his name hadn't been a household word. Tempshill 05:00, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

  • What you're conveniently ignoring is that Gale's case IS unique. He was a mentally disturbed, former Marine who was kicked out of the Marines for a Section 8. He also supposedly killed Darrell because he blamed him for Pantera's break-up. You also can't ignore the fact that it was also a killing spree that claimed several lives besides Dimebag's. Those are pretty unique circumstances, in my book. I think almost all Pantera fans and heavy metal fans, in general, would agree with me. He's become a huge household name for heavy metal fans, plain and simple. You could ask almost any heavy metal fan who Nathan Gale is and they would say "he's that whacko who killed Dimebag". Whether he deserves it or not is besides the point---HE IS DEFINTELY A NOTABLE FIGURE. I guarantee if we put it to a vote, you would be on the losing side. Rambone (Talk) 13:28, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
You are confusing "notable figure" and "household name". My point is not whether Nathan Gale is a household name in some circles. He is, undoubtedly. My point is whether the insignificant little bastard deserves his own Wikipedia article. IMO, the way to treat the matter is that the Dimebag article should say something like "Dimebag was killed onstage, blah blah, by Nathan Gale, a mentally disturbed man who had been kicked out of the Marines on a Section 8..." then talk about the details, and maybe add something like "Gale's precise motive is unknown, though during the shooting he was heard shouting that he blamed Dimebag for the breakup of Pantera. Gale was shot dead on the scene by the police." There - you have now summed up 100% of what anyone will ever want to know about Nathan Gale. The Nathan Gale article can be changed into a redirect to the shooting portion of the Dimebag article.
Does an "ordinary" murderer get a Wikipedia article because he kills a father of four? No. Should this murderer get a Wikipedia article because he killed a musical celebrity? I don't think so. Tempshill 15:46, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Nathan Gale should have his own article, plain and simple. He isn't being idolized or lauded as an important figure...he's just simply a NOTABLE FIGURE. If you think that his bio should be taken down then, on that same basis, you should lobby for every serial killer's and every obsessed psycho's articles taken down as well. The Columbine killers, Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold killed people, in part, to be remembered and talked about after their deaths...why not take down their bios as well? My point is that your logic for deletion is hollow, at best. -- Rambone (Talk) 05:16, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Michael Savage

A copy of the tape isn't necessary, but you must at least provide a citation. "He said this the other day" is not sufficient. But the exact date of the program would be. Gamaliel 04:19, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Answer to question

I'm only asking you because you've been very helpful to me in the past. My question is...where can I find a list of icons that I can place on my homepage. For example...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Rambone, I copy and pasted one of them from someone elses page. I have no idea how many different icons there are. I figure there's a list of them somewhere but I can't find it. Thanks. --Rambone (Talk) 14:18, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi again Rambone. What you've got there is a userbox and, for those who like them, there are a lot to chose from. Have a look through Wikipedia:Userboxes. You can group the userboxes together using {{Userboxtop}} and {{Userboxbottom}} above and below them to get this sort of effect. Good to see you still here and having fun....happy editing - Peripitus (Talk) 01:30, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mary Jane Kelly

Please stop removing the photo until we have finished discussing it and agreed on a course of action. Just making a comment and going ahead and removing it, is not what I would consider discussing and reaching an agreement. Please try to analyse and respond to my comments, in the same way that I did to yours. All you did was tell me that I was missing the point. Thanks TigerShark 22:52, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Have you seen the issues surrounding the Connecticut Senator Joe Lieberman against Ned Lamont?

What's your opinion on the situation between Lieberman and Lamont? I did some research on them both and they both seem like they are extremely rich. But the difference is that the media is playing the fiddle of using the tags of "liberal" and "conservative". I'm not too sure on what Lamont is about (other than a cable television mogul), but I have been watching the issue with Lieberman. Lieberman is a rap critic! He's the reason for the black warning signs on the bottom of the DVDs, video games, and music. I don't know what's the deal with Lamont, other than being an anti-war critic. They both faced a bitter campaigning challenge. Will CNN support Lieberman or Lamont? I already see Fox News support Lieberman. Is there any input in the matter? LILVOKA 18:11, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

  • Your questions are all over the place so I'll just give you my over-arching opinion about the whole thing... My opinion is that Lieberman will win the general election as an independent. I don't agree with him 90% of the time but I like him because he's a honest politician. (one of the few in America) As for Lamont, I see him as Howard Dean II. Sure, the left-wing loves him but when it gets closer to the election, centrist democrats and independents will vote for someone else. I have no idea what CNN will do though I have a strong feeling that they would LIKE to support Lamont. Personally, I can't stand anti-war candidates in this era because most of them don't want to use the military AT ALL. That being said, I'm not blindly pro-war, either. I want to use force when it's neccessary. I supported the reasons for the war in Iraq (and still do) but I'm totally pissed off about how Bush has waged the war. It's as if Bush wants to lose or pass the problem to the next president. Rambone (Talk) 02:28, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../r/a/m/User_talk%7ERambone_2cca.html"