User talk:Robertb-dc

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

Welcome to the 'pedia! Nice article on Happy fun ball.  :)

Hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you need any questions answered about the project then check out Wikipedia:Help or add a question to the Village pump. - Hephaestos 18:07 24 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Hello. We'd be interested to hear your thoughts on the "as of" business to Wikipedia talk:As of? Thanks! -- Oliver P. 20:42, 26 Aug 2003 (UTC)

If you want your name associated with edits you made while not logged in, you can make the request at Wikipedia:Changing attribution for an edit and it will probably happen.168... 04:21, 13 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Please list all redirects for deletion at wikipedia:redirects for deletion. I moved an entry for you. --Jiang 05:48, 6 May 2004 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Article Licensing

Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 2000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

Option 1
I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:
{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

OR

Option 2
I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:
{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" with "{{MultiLicensePD}}". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (comment| talk)

Thank you for your message, and for the detailed explanation of the problem and proposed solution. While I think I understand the issue, I see this as more of a problem with the existing GFDL license. Klugeing a workaround will only allow the problem to continue. For the moment, I prefer to stick with the existing licensing arrangement, though I would be open to changing my mind if the Wikipedia standard for new contributions (including those from anonymous authors) includes both licenses by default. -- Robertb-dc 18:57, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Actually, we are pushing for a change to the GFDL, but not in this manner. I spoke with Jimbo in NYC this weekend and he confirmed that he is actively working with members of the FSF to improve the GFDL to make a GFDL 2.0 that is more Wikipedia friendly. Hopefully this can happen relatively soon. But even if and when this happens, we all acknowledge that the problem exists that Wikipedia's content is still free only to the extent that the GFDL is used. So the CC-by-sa drive will still matter even after the GFDL is improved, just so the reach of Wikipedia will be farther. I may sometime soon pursue the idea of some sort of wording in the copyright agreement that gets anonymous edits to agree to more than one license by default, or something similar to that. – Ram-Man (comment) (talk)[[]] 19:04, Dec 14, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] List of bannered U.S. Highways

Actually, in theory, and usually in practice, AASHTO has to approve them all. The vast majority are signed by the state. [1] has a list of most of them (as well as some that were probably never signed). --SPUI (talk) 17:55, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Johnny Paycheck

Hi Robert. I saw your note in the edit summary about Johnny Paycheck changing the spelling of his name to "studly caps" during the 90s sometime. Do you have a source for that? I can't find any primary sources that show that change. I see it some on CNN reports about his death, but nothing more authoritative than that. The DJ at one of XM Radio's C&W channels hadn't heard of it, either. Joyous 18:33, Mar 17, 2005 (UTC)

(From my talk page):Thanks for the note about Johnny Paycheck (after growing up with his music, I find it hard to use CamelCase).

I think I'll have to stick with the unsophisticated spelling, too. I hope he didn't think that would really give his career a boost. Joyous 02:43, Apr 7, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] US hwy wp

Thanks for your comment on the WP talk page... just so you know the {{U.S. Highway WikiProject}} goes on the talk page of the article, not on the article itself. A {{UShighway-stub}} is used to mark stub articles... I still have to go through all the articles and add these two tags though. Thanks! --Rschen7754 01:19, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] List of U.S. Highways

Hi, Robert.

Regarding your removing US-789 from the U.S. Highway List, there are others that were proposed, but not commissioned, that are listed, so I don't understand why US-789 cannot be listed as an (ns) listing, too. Take care. (posted 18:17, 17 January 2006 by Igo4U)

This route, however, was never even really proposed, but just bounced around a bit. AASHTO said "nyet", probably in no small part because it would have been an awful violation of the numbering standards (since there were no child routes numbered 289 through 689). Of course, numbering standards are pretty loose these days -- how on earth did they come up with the new 400 + x/8 numbering system that has given us 400, 412.5 (rounded to 412), and 425? The next one would be what, US 437.5? And will they round down to 437, or up this time to 438?
Anyway, welcome to Wikipedia! Please remember not to indent your paragraphs, and please sign your entries on talk pages. You sign by typing --~~~~ at the end of your message -- Wiki does the rest, and it looks like this: --Robertb-dc 21:01, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] DART

I'm glad you liked the map, and thanks for the correction re the T&P. Now that I think about it, I've caught the Eagle to Austin and back many a time, always from the ITC, of course, yet I have no idea why I put the T&P on the map as the FW Amtrak terminal. Weird. I'll redraw the map to suit reality.

It's entirely possible I have the colors wrong. The sources I used for them are listed in the lower right corner of the map, but they don't really agree and to be honest I'm no longer sure which lines are what colors myself. As a daily TRE commuter, I hope the TRE remains the Green Line (in fact, they ought to just name it the Green Line; as a name for a train line, "TRE" is weak. Maybe NCTCOG can prevail upon them to change it.) In any case, if you'll supply me with the latest version of the many colors of the DART rainbow I'll be hapy to change the map to match.

Also, if you and your friends will keep me up to date on the latest news, I'll generate updated map versions in the future reflecting the future growth of our regional rail net. I want this map to be complete and correct so that folks can get some real use out of it. (Speaking of completeness, I was tempted to put the Tarantula Railroad and the Runaway Mine Train on there, but settled for the SkyLink 8 as a consolation prize.)

Of course the biggie will be when TXDOT tells us where the link to the TTC-35 high-speed rail line will be! -- Bchan 00:41, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

  • Reply on Bchan's talk page. --Robertb-dc 21:19, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
  • System Map V2,0 is up on the DART page. Sorry for the delay. Please inform me of any errors you might find. -- Bchan 02:33, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Kaufman UFOs???

Answered you message on my talk page as did another Texan.--Dakota ~ ° 04:00, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Hello Robert, anwers to you question on my talk page.--Dakota 18:35, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
Robert, I listed the article on AfD. You can contribute to the discussion here. Joyous | Talk 23:09, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re.:Kaufman UFOs

The info. came from UFO Casebook, Jeff Rense's website, a local TV station's website, which is www.KLTV.com, other people's videotape and still pixes that are on the 'net. Why people has not notified Mufon and/or The National UFO Center surprised me. The local TV station even has pixes of these things as well. One online video I've seen is one in which one is teleporting as it is moving. Martial Law 02:24, 16 March 2006 (UTC) :o

I've been trying to find a local who can explain this matter. I do apologise if I have been offensive, etc. to you. Martial Law 02:26, 16 March 2006 (UTC) :)

  • Not so much offensive to me as much as to what I think Wikipedia is supposed to be about. However, I'm not one of the Cabal (or perhaps There Is No Cabal), so I can't really claim to know What Wikipedia Is. So I'll let the community decide. Thanks for not being overly upset with me for my action... if the aliens pay me a visit some day, I'll put in a good word for you. --Robertb-dc 17:59, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
Not upset at all. Wikipedia strives to be accurate in presenting the facts. This is why I'm trying to find out what is going on. All of the pixes, incl. the videotapes(I'll give you the link to more of these tapes in a sec.) show that the area has a aerial show of sorts going on. Some of the tapes may have language issues, and some, pending your terminal's format, may not play at all. Stand by for that link. Martial Law 20:27, 16 March 2006 (UTC) :)

The tapes presented may incl. some tapes from your area. Note that some may have language issues. UFO Casebook's 2005 videos. Martial Law 20:32, 16 March 2006 (UTC) :)

Two of the tapes presented are from your area. These are: Kaufman,Co.,TX. 3-12-05 and 7-17-05. Martial Law 20:35, 16 March 2006 (UTC) :)

I have came accross a incident in which ultralights had been used to simulate a LARGE UFO in some kind of hoax. As stated, just trying to find a local who can tell me what is going on. I've investigated the famous UFO and paranormal matters and the not so famous paranormal and UFO related matters. Some were hoaxes, while some were not. Martial Law 21:52, 16 March 2006 (UTC) :)

On the TV station link, find 4 video camera shaped icons. These are more tapes of what has been going on. Some of these may have language issues, after all you don't see a UFO every day of the week, even if you're at Area - 51 or Phoenix, Arizona. Martial Law 22:29, 16 March 2006 (UTC) :)

  • Thanks for the info. At the very least, I'll know what rumors to be listening for. Meanwhile, a suggestion: the term "pixes" drives me just a bit nuts. It smacks of laziness, as though it would kill you to type the three extra characters in the word "pictures". I suspect it's part of the UFO community's vernacular, but when you're outside the community, you'll be taken more seriously if you avoid jargon and use a more standard notation. Plus, I keep reading it as "pixies", which I'm sure doesn't help. Just had to get that off my chest. --Robertb-dc 17:11, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

The word "pixes and "pics" are not from the "UFO community" at all. This may have came from the press, maybe the "tabloid press" at large. Point taken about the word "Pix" and "Pics". Allegedly, it is to save space, so that more content can be inserted while indicating the said content, especially if the article is surrounded by a LOT of Advertising. The newspaper is like that sometimes, and I've first seen this trend in the tabloid print media, so they can allegedly fit in more advertising, such as the "psychic hotlines". The word "pictures" is 8 letters, while the word "pix" and "pic" are only 3 letters in composition, means the same, and the advertisement or another article has more room in the print media. Hope this helps. Martial Law 18:07, 17 March 2006 (UTC) :)

[edit] Hoax

If there is a hoax going on, let the police handle the hoaxers. Some of the pictures look like they're done with the latest Photoshop program. Those that used ultralights in the mentioned hoax are allegedly doing time. Martial Law 19:01, 17 March 2006 (UTC) :)

  • Suggestion: less "allegedly", more "verifiably". The cops I know couldn't care less about some crackpot pointing at the sky and saying "look! aliens!". They're too busy dealing with terrestrial issues, most notably those involving unauthorized chemical manufacturing. --Robertb-dc 16:14, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
Point taken. Martial Law 06:35, 21 March 2006 (UTC) :)

[edit] NEW UFO Picture

Here's a NEW picture submitted. It was shot on 3-14-06, almost a week ago ! The link is NEW PICTURE. Hope this helps. Martial Law 18:48, 17 March 2006 (UTC) :)

Find on the photograph a copyright by a LAWWALK. Most, if not all of those submitted to UFO Casebook, has this designation on or near them. Hope this helps. Martial Law 09:57, 18 March 2006 (UTC) :)
Unlike the others found, this one looks like some kind of Black Ops craft, maybe like one of those "Flying Triangles" caught head on as it was flying by the photographer. Dallas used to have military bases in the area. Any still active ? One theory is that these things, well some of them, may be secret military experiments, like the F-117 and the B-2 was at one time. See UFO to see the known theories on this matter. Martial Law 06:45, 21 March 2006 (UTC) :)
Can you tell me what this thing is ? It was photographed with two cameras in two locations. To me, it looks like the Shuttle, but that bird has not been up recently since Columbia was destroyed upon re-entry. Martial Law 06:59, 21 March 2006 (UTC) :)


[edit] DART criticism

I've created a subsection on the DART discussion page for you to specifically list what about the DART criticism section is POVish or vandalism... so that you don't have to just delete facts you find inconvenient. TexasDawg 00:58, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Link criteria

Hey Robert :)

I tried to reach you through an e-mail account I found on your DC site, but it turned out to be unvalid.

It might have been a bit bold of me to add my site to the list of fansites, but it just didn't cross my mind that it would be considered inappropriate as I'm concerned promoting the girls and not myself. I guess you are a devoted fan contributing all that stuff to wikipedia about them and if you don't think the link is appropriate I guess I'll just have to deal with it.

I did read the linking rules: Request to add a link to your site from a Wikipedia article The content of Wikipedia pages, including external links, is determined entirely by our volunteers rather than any official editorial team. You may wish to read our guidelines on external links.

But I do see your point with my site being brand new and not offering as much content as some of the other sites. I wanted to let you know I have contacted the various DC sites like you suggested and I'll wait like everyone else to get my site listed at some search engine so fans can access it from there. I never intended to be inappropriate and I'm sorry for my bad grammar. ^^

Ann Irene


"Botilda 11:20, 18 May 2006 (UTC)"

  • Moving discussion to the Dixie Chicks talk page so that all views can be heard. --Robertb-dc 13:59, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs
Interstate 65
U.S. Route 36
Route 138 (New Jersey)
U.S. Route 74
U.S. Route 34
Manitoba Provincial Highway 29
Interstate 81
U.S. Route 83
U.S. Route 259
U.S. Route 15
U.S. Route 54
Hidden route
Interstate 77
U.S. Route 62
U.S. Route 29
Interstate 71
U.S. Route 13
U.S. Route 64
Interstate 37
Cleanup
Interstate 26
U.S. Route 24
U.S. Route 97
Merge
Interstate 595 (Maryland)
Georgia State Route 404
U.S. Route 92
Add Sources
Corridor A (Appalachian Development Highway System)
Wynn Stewart
Virginia State Highway 193
Wikify
Myositis ossificans
Hotel Metropol
Swingstock
Expand
Quebec route 321
Tulsa Race Riot
Saturday Night Live animal sketches

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 21:31, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:SH34_1938.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:SH34_1938.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. 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 in the next seven days. 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:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 08:16, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re:Picture on U.S. Route 175

I just looked at the article and picture. I see nothing wrong with the picture, but I still think it needs another. That picture is just a picture of the shield, which can be seen in the infobox. If you could take a picture of the roadway that would be helpful. That way someone can get a feel of what the roadway looks like, what the area looks like, ect.. It makes it easier to say, oh it's a rural two-lane highway through West Texas vs. an 8-lane freeway through Dallas. --Holderca1 20:06, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Carole Keeton Strayhorn

There are really two issues here. I'm looking at the edits from a policy POV, and you are looking at them from a content POV. Both views have importance. For me though, I'm really not that concerned about the content issue. I understand what you have said about the edits being silly, etc, but that's really not that big of a deal to me. For me, the important issue is following the WP:BLP policy. If the anon can somehow manage to find a source for his edits that meets WP:RS, then I would stop reverting it out. Honestly, I am doubtful that such a source exists, and so that may be an impossible chore for him.

As to his most recent edit, it made a silly, but likely good faith effort to source things. (with a dictionary link)

As for blocking him, it's not really come to that point, yet. He's been warned, and his one edit to the page since then was at least an effort at sourcing, silly or not. There have been no edits out of him in the couple of days since.

One thing I *am* ready to do, if vandalism and POV pushing ramps up in the coming weeks, is place semi-protection on the pages of all four gubenatorial (however that's spelled :)) candidates. - TexasAndroid 17:21, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Heyyyy Robert

Whats up? .. (this is Drummy). .. which you'll see with my signature..

anyway, you may have already come across it, but there's an up and running WikiProject Dallas if you're interested in joining.

Holla. By the way do you plan to see the new Dixie Chicks movie? I can't help but think you will. drumguy8800 C T 09:37, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

  • I got pretty well burned out on official WikiProjects after being told, basically, to p*** off when I suggested that the members of the List of United States Numbered Highways were just fine as "highways" (U.S. Highway 75) and didn't need to be changed to "routes" (U.S. Route 75). I'd just as soon play with the articles in my Watchlist, and leave the WikiPolitics to folks who have the energy to don their Asbestos Suits on a regular basis. However, I do enjoy a trip to Uncyclopedia now and then! --Robertb-dc 15:31, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] You're welcome

I did actually use the method you outlined in the message you sent me,it just happens the version I reverted to wasn't as 'clean' as I thought.Also,someone edited my version of the article to make it look like I was the one vandalizing,and then reverted it to conceal his/her identity. Ishikawa Minoru 18:25, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../r/o/b/User_talk%7ERobertb-dc_ffac.html"