User talk:RomaC
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Welcome to RomaC's Talk page!
If you post something here I will (eventually) respond on this page, so check back please. Just start at the bottom, write something interesting/informative/amusing and then sign your post by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ).
--->
!Thank you for your open mind, that's all. Ok.
- Alright Mr or Ms Anon, you're welcome. I wish I knew what this was about, though!
- RomaC 23:22, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Arbcom candidate userbox
Greetings. I've made a new userbox for arbcom candidates to show on their userpages so that visiters will know they're running.
- {{User arbcom nom}}
If you'd like to place it on your userpage, feel free. Regards, – Quadell (talk) (bounties) 02:29, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Doylestown
Thanks for deleting the band-cruft. *Zero* Google hits tells the tale. Robert A.West (Talk) 14:55, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Request for a third opinion
- Gregbrown You are listed on the 'third opinions' page, and I chose your name at random. Thank you in advance for considering this. Last week, I placed, onto the Jack Benny biography page, an External Link entitled 'Jack Benny Audio history free MP3 book.' http://www.geocities.com/jackbennyhistory Minutes after I put the link up, an Administrator took the link down. I looked at my online traffic checker (Statcounter.com), and it is almost certain that this Administrator did not even click on the link -- seeing what was on the site -- before he took the link down. If this is the case, all of the later explanations given about why he took down the link are for naught (in my opinion), because all he knew about the link were the words on the External Link: 'Jack Benny Audio History free MP3 book'
My question is how much consideration an Administrator should give to an External Link before acting upon it. Relatedly, what is the procedure an Administrator should follow when acting upon an External Link.
There is discussion about this on my talk page, and I went to the Cabal prior to coming to you. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Mediation_Cabal/Cases/2007-02-13_Easy_question_for_mediators A person on the Cabal suggested bringing in a third opinion. Thank you.
Gregbrown 00:47, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
- Hello Greg, I don't have a lot of time right now but my gut feeling is that the link was perceived as advertising/spam and deleted for that reason. If that is the case, my concern would be with determining whether that might have been a hasty and/or incorrect conclusion based on the name of the link alone. I assume you're arguing that the link is not advertising/spam. I'll look at the discussion pages later and comment there. RomaC 02:06, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
- Gregbrown Thank you very much. I truly hope that this can be resolved to everyone's satisfaction.
Thanks again I appreciate your help here. My note to you a few hours ago (it was in this spot) said that I was trying to find the third party comment. Now, I see that you put your comment into my Talk page(I thought that all comments went to the bottom of a page), so I thank you for giving a reply. I will make more progress, and I appreciate your help. Gregbrown 23:04, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
