User talk:Rmcsamson

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Welcome! 2 "....by Wikipedia" 3 Bongbong marcos 4 Copyright violations 5 Man 6 CEU article 7 re: UP 8 Regarding the Green Archers section 9 fidel v. ramos 10 Merry Christmas. 11 Ateneo logotype 12 PAASCU article 13 La Salle-FEU MBA-JD Program 14 Addressing Unconstructive Remarks consistently made by User:Rmcsamson 15 A tool for leaving warning messages 16 The Bedan 17 The Bedan 18 Aquila Legis 19 Tagalog Wikipedia 20 April 2008

[edit] Welcome!

Better late than never... Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 19:15, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] "....by Wikipedia"

Why do you keep saying "Edited by Wikipedia" or "Revised by Wikipedia" in your edit summaries? It's not necessary. Obviously all the edits to articles are by Wikipedia. TheCoffee 15:20, 30 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Bongbong marcos

studied in La Salle . He was the classmate of my boss at Pepsi, Robert Marquez. --Jondel 06:57, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Copyright violations

Hi, the instructions at Wikipedia:Copyright problems say you should simply revert the page to a non-copyrighted version if you can, rather than using the {{copyvio}} tag. Coffee 21:56, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Man

I need an explanation why a school hymn is unencyclopedic. Pls. Reply on my talk page. Justox dizaola 10:44, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

I am convinced. I will try to get facts about the school hymn, and try to improve what i have done to make it up to encyclopedia and Wikipedean Standards. Thanks for making me realizing ma'h error and have a nice day.

God Bless You.

Justox dizaola 14:17, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] CEU article

Thank you for the proof reading on the CEU article. --Glenncando 07:50, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] re: UP

Hi, thank you very much for being generous in editing the entry on U.P. But I would like to point out that the 70,000 UPCAT examinees mark is not baseless and unsubstantiated. The Inquirer has reported on it early last week. And I asked the President of U.P. (a former professor of mine). And she also said that more than 70,000 examinees took the UPCAT this year. I would appreciate if you will not allow your Ateneo bias to get in the way. The 70,000 mark is therefore not uncited and baseless. We are not inflating figures here. 70,394 examinees this year is a fact.

Congratulations for your many wonderful contributions to Wikipedia. Thanks for your kindness and consideration. - 7258 05:34, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

70,000 HS seniors take UP entrance test By DJ Yap Inquirer Last updated 03:31am (Mla time) 08/06/2006

Published on page A18 of the August 6, 2006 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer

IT was hard to tell who was more nervous: the high school seniors taking the entrance exam to the University of the Philippines, or the parents waiting for them at the gates.

One woman spent hours praying the rosary for her daughter to perform well. A man tutored his daughter for several nights using review books borrowed from friends.

A candidate for valedictorian was even willing to trade her medal for a passing grade.

Half of more than 70,000 students flocked to UP campuses and test centers nationwide yesterday to take the UP College Admission Test (UPCAT), the penultimate exam that would decide whether or not they make it to arguably the best university in the country.

The grueling five-hour test covering Mathematics, Science, language proficiency and reading comprehension is administered in two batches (yesterday and today), and divided into morning and afternoon shifts.

Though official figures were not immediately available from the Admissions Office, UP president Emerlinda Roman said this year’s batch may be the biggest number of UPCAT examinees ever.

As of the latest count last Friday, the applicants numbered 70,394, according to professor Gerald Franco, assistant director for test administration.“If there’s not much disparity between the number of applications and the actual test takers, then this may be the highest number,” Roman said.

“To my recollection, the number of applicants in the last six years just hovers between 64,000 and 66,000,” she added.

As early as 5 a.m., many students began gathering around the test centers in clumps. Some of them were chatting with classmates while others were quietly conversing with their parents.

A few were taking last-minute peeks into review booklets and modules.

At a time when tuition rates are rising in many private colleges, the UPCAT represents, for many people, a ticket to excellent but cheap schooling.

http://newsinfo.inq7.net/inquirerheadlines/metro/view_article.php?article_id=13685

[edit] Regarding the Green Archers section

That content was moved to the De La Salle Green Archers article where it is more appropriate. -- Mithril Cloud 04:46, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] fidel v. ramos

Donmar who obviously is an staunch supporter of FVR delected my additions under Criticism, including the references I put down. His loooong enumeration of medals, awards, etc. is the one that makes the article too long, yet he complains that my additions make the article too long. UNFAIR!

[edit] Merry Christmas.

In the spirit of the Reason for the season, may I take privilege of offering a simple greeting: Merry Christmas. :) { PMGOMEZ } 16:12, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ateneo logotype

I don't get it. The logotype of the official basketball team, seen on international TV, shouldn't be added on the article. Can you explain? --Howard the Duck 08:26, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

There's no "official" logotype. "Blue Eagles" is a general monicker for Ateneo sports teams, with specialized names for other teams such as "Blue Booters" for football. There are variations of how the name "Ateneo" is rendered on different jerseys and athletic materials, accross different units of the university. There's no settled and official "Ateneo logotype." How it is used in the one instance you cite does not establish an "official" logotype. Nor is the fact that this is seen on national and international TV of any relevance, since this does not make anything "official." It will be prudent to know, however, that there are ongoing attempts to settle on a proper "Ateneo logotype" which will be used across the university for all Ateneo communications materials and collaterals.Rmcsamson 08:34, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

It doesn't matter if it's official or not, the official name of the Knicks is New York Knickerbockers, but it's at New York Knicks, and with the basketball (volleyball seems to have the same logotype as well) as the most prominent among the basketball teams, the logotype can be displayed in the article. If you'd want, you can create the other logotypes of other teams, historical logotypes, etc. --Howard the Duck 14:50, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

It matters if it's official or not. Otherwise, it will be misleading, if not outright false. I advise you to find an official source backing up your particular use of the Ateneo logotype. Until then, expect reversions. Rmcsamson 06:49, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

I'll send this to WP:RFC. --Howard the Duck 11:41, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] PAASCU article

I've removed the copyrighted text you insist on placing in the PAASCU article. The text you have placed is merely lifted from PAASCU's website. This is a violation of Wikipedia policy. Further insistence in placing the copyrighted text will be met with reversion. Rmcsamson 14:40, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

For the record, the text I 'insist' on placing in the PAASCU article is not 'merely lifted' from PAASCU's website. It was sourced from a PAASCU Accreditation Primer; my only sin is the failure to properly cite that tome. However, if such failure on my part disturbs your delicate sensibilities, I shall refrain from reverting it again, for the moment. =) -- Kguirnela 16:36, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

The problem is not citation, but copyright violation. The same text you insist on restoring is available in www.paascu.org.ph. The primer you are talking about can be accessed via the website. In any case, the text you insist on placing is exactly the same text in the website. It appears that since you say it's from a primer, then the text you insist on placing was also merely lifted from that source as well. This is a violation of WP:C. My sensibilities, delicate or otherwise, are of no relevance to this. The reckless violation of Wikipedia policy on copyrights is.Rmcsamson 18:05, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Well you seem to assume that the Primer I was referring to is the primer available for download on the website - it is not; it was an actual primer in book form, which I assume was also used by the web developers in building the organization's web presence. The egg came before the chicken; is it still a copyvio just because the items in the book and in soft copy are exactly the same? Am I to assume that I have the right to rephrase these official policies set forth by PAASCU? Wouldn't that be "reckless"? -- Kguirnela 08:17, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

The form is irrelevant. The content is substantially identical. Thus, the copyright violation still subsists. Yes, rephrasing is allowed, because there is at least an attempt to avoid recklessly placing the exact copyrighted text. What would be preferred, however, is a discussion of the contents of the primer, with possible elaboration on, say, which schools, colleges, and universities have already achieved certain levels of accreditation, criticisms faced by PAASCU's accreditation process, etc. Rmcsamson 15:00, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Cool. Well taken. -- Kguirnela 02:34, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] La Salle-FEU MBA-JD Program

Princeton does not have a JD or an MBA. But it offers an MPA. Princeton MPA partnered with Columbia Law to offer a joint MPA-JD. La Salle, like Princeton, does not have a Law program. So it partnered with FEU to offer a joint MBA-JD. Simple logic. And that's what Deans Juico and Bautista said in national dailies, law classes, and orientation programs.

Congratulations for a good job as Wikipedia editor. I hope you can write new articles or expand existing ones. You can really CONTRIBUTE by ADDING new information, not just editing and maligning (or at least making accusations of being a liar) Wikipedians with sincere and actual efforts to contribute to Wikipedia.

Please leave notes in a COURTEOUS manner. As a fellow Wikipedian, I see no reason why you failed to accord me the slightest respect in your language. I may not have written perfect articles, but I will never make strong accusations, conceited statements, or offensive remarks.

With much respect and hopeful that you'd change your ways... Miketedting 22:00, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Addressing Unconstructive Remarks consistently made by User:Rmcsamson

While I thank every Wikipedian who, through constructive criticism, has helped me improve my work here at Wikipedia, I must address unconstructive remarks, unwelcoming statements, and highly conceited language addressed by experienced Wikipedians to new contributors like me.

I make this explanation in the spirit of justice, fair play, and equal dealing.

• To address your recent concern:

The specific "national dailies" were mentioned in the footnotes. The interviews need not be conducted by User:Miketedting, they were published in the "national dailies" already noted in the article.

Does an article violate the "non-NPOV" policy just because it was written by someone personally involved in the topic? Not necessarily.

An expert or authority attains "expertise" in a subject matter through academic study, empirical study, observation, or experience. The more an author is "involved" with a topic, the more opportunity for him to gain "knowldege" or "expertise" in that field. More often, extensive and intensive article creations and edits are made by Wikipedians closely "involved" in their topics of interest (i.e. Rmcsamson, an Ateneo Law student, expanding articles on Ateneo School of Law, Ateneo de Manila University, tagging articles of other schools as unreferenced, etc.). Hence,we expect helpful, current, and comprehensive information not usually found in conventional encyclopedia like Britannica and Colliers. The fact of "non-NPOV" is something which must be proven and not assumed.

• To explain my role in Wikipedia (for whatever its worth):

I joined Wikipedia with the sincere intention of contributing and expanding articles especially those relating to the Philippines. My objective is to make these articles as comprehensive, accurate, and correct as those topics relating to the United States and other industrialized nations. There is a dearth of information on the Philippines. Hardly is there any Philippine encyclopedia or almanac of recent publication.

I have created new articles, expanded existing articles, and made modifications to suit "encyclopedic" requirements of Wikipedia. In several occasions, I have rectified factual, grammatical, or technical errors to reflect the truth in every statement made in every subject matter.

I have made every effort to cite legitimate sources, citations, and factual trivia to support and fortify the legitimacy of information in every article I have created or expanded.

• To address your NEGATIVE accusations, DISCOURAGING remarks, and UNCONSTRUCTIVE criticisms:

I have never insulted, maligned, or intimidated a fellow Wikipedian.

RESPECT is a concept that is universally accepted, understood, and practiced by individuals who know good morals and right conduct. Ask any seven-year-old kid and he probably knows and adheres to the concept too.

At Wikipedia, the basic rules for editing and leaving messages are:

• Do not bite newcomers.
• Be polite.
• Assume good faith.
• No personal attacks.
• Be welcoming.

On separate occasions, you made the following statements which so clearly violate all basic rules of Wikipedia ethics:

• That statement is either an outright lie, or badly researched. I am removing it within the next 48 hours.Rmcsamson 22:41, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

• I also have no idea what degree of courtesy is required. I have no sympathy for false statements, or those which are placed indiscriminately.Rmcsamson 15:35, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

• To make a closure on this matter:

I am offended by your statements. Your problems could have been resolved in a civil and polite manner.

I rest my case.

Rmcsamson, do what makes you happy. Have a nice life.

Miketedting 08:41, 24 May 2007 (UTC)Miketedting

Your recent edit to Ateneo School of Law (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // MartinBot 16:15, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] A tool for leaving warning messages

Hi. I noticed that you actively revert vandalism to articles. Thanks!! I also noticed that in at least one case (Society of Jesus) you didn't leave a warning message on the vandal's talk page. I think it's important to leave messages in almost every instance of even the most minor inappropriate edits for these (and probably other) reasons:

• People just test-editing can be directed to the sandbox where they won't corrupt real articles.
• Mischievious newcomers may stop if their first edits result in a polite request to behave.
• Sysops can more quickly ban more serious vandals if they've already been warned a few times.

Leaving lots of messages can be tedious, even with the templates documented at Wikipedia:Vandalism. So I've made some vandal-warning tools that are explained at User:Kbh3rd/Vandal_warning_toolbox. A list of warnings can be added to that toolbox menu on the left whenever a user talk page is being edited so that the proper warning message is only a click away. You're welcome to try it out.

Regardless, thanks again for your help! --Kbh3^rdtalk 15:57, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Bedan

[edit] The Bedan

A {{prod}} template has been added to the article The Bedan, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Jorvik 15:26, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Aquila Legis

I suggest you petition the page to be semi-protected (WP:RFPP). Anons usually talk when the article is protected. --Howard the Duck 16:26, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Tagalog Wikipedia

---

Finally, Wikipedia is the 7^th most visited site in the Philippines. Then why is it that the Tagalog Wikipedia, the Wikipedia in your own language remains unknown to most of the Filipinos? The mission of this campaign is to change that. Will you join us?

---

[edit] April 2008

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Adamson University. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. CIreland (talk) 16:26, 4 April 2008 (UTC)