User talk:Ronbo76

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

  • Kinda like the secret handshake I wish someone had given me when I first edited an article, I just learned last night about the Wikipedia:Trifecta. I am trying to get there, one day at a time. . . Ronbo76 20:51, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] polar bear

recommend reconsideration of protecting the polar bear page, unfortunately it seems there have been repeated cases of vandalism again, if it continues dont waste your and other editors time by repeated reverts, just protect it again.83.79.170.72 13:56, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

It was only unprotected recently. The present level of vandalism does not warrant re-protection at this time. Ronbo76 14:01, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
In regards to reverting of my edit in Polar Bear, What is your problem?? What I wrote is not unsourced, Click Here for the image of the chip and click here for the announcement that Casino Windsor is changing to Caesars Windsor. I am reverting your edits and next time post your concerns in the article's talk page not my talk page. They call me Mr. Pibb 16:49, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
Please be civil on other talkpages. At the time of your edit, it was unsourced; hence the standard message template. Ronbo76 16:56, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
What is your fucking problem?? I added the reference sources, If it is anyone who is going to get pinched for a 3RR violation it's you not me so just FUCKING COOL OUT! I am trying to be a good contributor but you are trying my patience! They call me Mr. Pibb 18:57, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
You know what go ahead and block me, This is my third or four register username anyway, you can keep blocking till your hearts content but I will keep register a new username and start posting again. They call me Mr. Pibb 19:01, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Talk page

Thank you for pointing that out. --Gray PorpoiseYour wish is my command! 14:22, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ketchup chips

Hi there. I posted a reply to your comment at Talk:Ketchup chips. Regards, Flyguy649talkcontribs 18:22, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Obama comments

RE Obama, nothing deleted was done with evil intent but I'll talk about it more in the future, okay? On the other hand, normal stuff (nothing derogatory or vandalism) that I put up was deleted by others with no discussion. That's a double standard.Dereks1x 20:30, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

No double standard involved. Your deletions are throwing off the POV of the article. You need to discuss your intentions fully on the talkpage before deleting cited material. If need be, introduce a new paragraph that is a counterpoint with citations. Ronbo76 20:34, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 3RR Warning issued in retaliation by another user

Yesterday, Dereks1x issued a 3RR warning on my userpage (diffs) because on the basis of his disruptive edits to Barak Obama (please see diffs) and my warnings to him on his talkpage (please see diffs.

The warnings were issued to Dereks1x because he began to delete material to Obama's article in based upon what he deemed non-important. His actions seem to stem from the Obama talkpage discussion about his attendance at a high school (please see Dereks1x assertion of notability).

This point becomes important because after his deletions to Obama's article he inserted a POV statement about Punahou HS (please see Punahou School fact diffs).

My actions were as Recent Changes Patrol editor who has Obama's article on my Watchlist because it receives lots of vandalism. When Dereks1x 14th edit/deletion to this article was made (please see 14th edit diffs, I contacted him on his talkpage (please see Last edit to Barack Obama deleted cited material diffs) asking him not to delete cited material and to seek consensus on that article's talkpage.

When he continued to delete cited material based upon his interpretation of importance I reverted him twice and issued him a Level One Delete template message diffs followed by a advice to discuss on talkpage intentions diffs.

After the first revert, I went to Obama's talkpage to discuss the basis of my revert diffs. When Dereks1x replied on that talkpage diffs with no edit summary {as well as a break-up of the header because of this user's inexperience in placing a sig on a talkpage}, I realized that he was on an edit war and that my subsequent reversion/title=User_talk:Dereks1x&diff=next&oldid=115859674 Level two message diffs to him was not going to sway him.

When Dereks1x continued to delete material, I issued him a 3RR Warning.

At this point, I wrote on Obama's talkpage that I would not engage in an edit war with this user (please see recommend another editor review today's deletions diffs).

After attending to one other item on my Watchlist, I walked away from my computer to observe Wikipedia:Staying cool when the editing gets hot. Upon logging in today, March 18, 2007, I noticed that Dereks1x had used my userpage for the second page as a place to issue a 3RR warning to me (please see diffs {again with no edit summary}.

I am fully cognizant with 3RR and my revert actions on Obama's article Obama history as of March 18, 2007/rv deleted paragraph with citations make it relevant - pls discuss on talkpage diffs to my third and last revert (please see rv deletion without discussion cited material - pls see talkpage diffs indicate that I had ceased further edit wars.

Dereks1x performed nine more edits after my 3RR warning only to have his final edit/deletion reverted by another editor (please see rv: disruptive editing diffs).

After posting this message to my talkpage, I will revert the obvious retaliation message issued to my userpage by this user. Ronbo76 15:09, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Noob seeking advice

Hello, I dont know if i am doing this right or not or what, but i am interested in making pages for wikipedia/whatever it is you people do and i thought a good way to start would be to write a page about my appartment building. it could be useful, after all, and i dont think it is advertising. Bakerstmd 03:35, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Notability requirements

I would recommend that you look at the welcome message and click the highlighted wikilink to How to write a great article. Not every article written for Wikipedia is notable. Please see Wikipedia:Notability and then perhaps a subheader for buildings.

Since you are from Illinois, I recommend you see how an article about a famous building is written. Please see the Sears Tower. One recommendation I would further make is you look at its talkpage (Talk:Sears Tower). It is supported by the Wikipedia:WikiProject Chicago. Most projects have a backload of articles that either need attention or creation.

In fact, I am also familar with the Wikipedia:WikiProject Illinois as a member from that project has requested my aid on several articles. One article I helped that project was with the Chana School.

Looking at your userpage, I noticed you are asking for some user to adopt you. I recommend signing up at the project of your choice by reading the main project page; signing up where indicated and then introducing yourself on the project talkpage. I am sure the Wikipedia:WikiProject Illinois would love to have a new member who wants to develop articles.

You could even mention there that you have developed your article and need help with it. Somethere there can give you more aid than me. Ronbo76 03:49, 19 March 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Benjamin D. Wilson declared Start-icle

I was a little surprised to see the Wilson article declared a Start. This article pretty much says all that there is to be said of Wilson. Do you think or know something is missing?--Magi Media 04:04, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

I have rated a number of articles for various projects to include the WP:CAL, bio tags, every project tag on my userpage and even been WP:BOLD.

Typically, I put articles on my Watchlist and when they receive an edit, I will revisit them and see if there is some kind of article improvement I can do. In Wilson's case there was not much, but I did rate it for the WP:CAL. I was surprised that someone rated the bio tag so high. Typically the classes differ by the length, quality and other factors that comprise the article.

Your statement about Wilson says pretty much why I rated it Start Class, This article pretty much says all that there is to be said of Wilson. It is short article. While he has a nice infobox and the content is good, it is definely not a B Class article as outlined by one of the former heads of the WP:CAL project. When I began rating articles, I was given a definite standard to rate our articles. Typically a B Class has length, quality, refernces etc. that given the Class B status with Mid importance should be included on the Wikipedia CD. Wilson, unfortunately does not make that cut.

Contrast that article with Leland Stanford, which I found along my Wiki travels and added to our project. I also rated inline with the other projects. Hope this helps. Cheers. Ronbo76 04:16, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Anna Roosevelt, Jr. (Anna Roosevelt Halsted)

It is/was well-known that Anna Roosevelt's nickname was "Sis" growing up. Since both she and her mother were named Anna Eleanor Roosevelt and ER went by her full-name officially, Sis was a reasonable distinction. That can be found in most of the listed sources. This didn't take rocket science to figure out. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.254.33.116 (talk • contribs) THX 01:46, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Reason for deleting citation was that it was modified and was no longer correct

Hello,

Thanks for your concern with my recent changes to the Don Quixote article. There may have been a bit of misunderstanding as to why I deleted the citation. I put in the quote from the Raffel translation a few weeks back (see previous version) and hadn't checked the page until now, but someone changed the cited source to fit the previous paragraph's claim better. In other words, someone else modified the citation and thus the citation was no longer valid. I wasn't sure what to do in this case, but we can't cite it as Raffel's translation since it is not his translation of the first sentence. What should be done in this case? Thanks again, and sorry for the confusion--

Bewtros 21:50, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

I have watched all the translations/edits. Part of the problem is that when the novel was written, Spanish was truly a Romance language with poetic if not literary alliterations. With the evolution of English and even Spanish, any one word can be translated almost 10 different ways at a minimum. I would suggest since someone else modified your original citation, to please discuss what the original statement was. For example, if I had put in a translation saying Los dias tiene calor meant The days are hot with a properly cited source, I would create say exactly that:
The translation said Los dias tiene calor meant The days are hot and was properly cited. I recommend the change be over-turned and restored to its original sentence.
Almost no one could argue with you on that point and would break it out just like this example so every editor can easily see what is the change. Ronbo76 22:09, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
I see what you're saying. However, the problem remains that we are misquoting the translation, which reads "In a village in La Mancha (I don't want to bother you with its name) there lived, not very long ago, one of those gentlemen who keep a lance in the lance-rack, an ancient shield, a skinny old horse, and a fast greyhound" (p.13) and not "In a village in La Mancha (whose name I do not care to recall) there lived, not very long ago, one of those gentlemen who keep a lance in the lance-rack, an ancient shield, a skinny old horse, and a fast greyhound." That is, the problem is not with the translation or the Spanish original but rather with the modifications to the translation--what the article quotes does not in fact exist on p.13 of Raffel's translation. Might it be better to say something like "modified from Raffel's translation" if we insist on doing this and put that in the reference? Bewtros 22:28, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
I have seen both references and actually took a class on this in college. Again, your best bet is to re-inforce on the article talkpage the direct translation. If you are unwilling to do that, then make the recommendation that the direct citation (not talking about the paragragh's words) be deleted. I *highly* recommend the first method because edit wars will commence on the translation. Ronbo76 22:37, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
I'll wait to see what other users say as to what translation we'll use. Let me make sure I understand, however--the article as it stands cites text that does not exist in any particular translation and should remain that way without letting readers know that the translation was modified by a user. I'm just worried that people will think Raffel translated the first sentence thusly when he in fact did not. Just making sure here--thanks for your help. Bewtros 22:49, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
One more time for comprehension. I would place a comment on the talkpage directly stating what the original citation said. Then I am fairly certain someone will back a revert to what was said. Ronbo76 22:51, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
Done! Thanks--Bewtros 22:59, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] ICP

I wanted to protest the change you made to my change on the Insane Clown Posse page. I simply added the factual adjective "gay" before "American horrorcore band." You call it vandalism, I call it truth. Disputing this? Gather me some evidence that proves that they are not gay and I will withdraw my protest.

As I remember the post, it was unsourced by an anonymous IP. This article has the WikiProject Biography tag on meaning that this article falls under the scope of WP:BLP. WP:BLP's second paragraph reads:
  • Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material — whether negative, positive, or just highly questionable — about living persons should be removed immediately and without discussion from Wikipedia articles, talk pages, user pages, and project space. (WP:BLP emphasis - not mine)

This means that if someone were to contend an allegation like yours, it must be sourced or it will be removed immediately.

Additionally, since your talkpage is red on my screen presently, that means that I did not leave a warning on your talkpage. Ergo, since you posted this as message with your username, why are you posting as an anonymous IP? Ronbo76 13:26, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

My allegation is that your change is in itself an allegation. You are denying that they are gay without any valid evidence. I believe that you should cite a source that proves that they are straight if you are going to delete my factual changes. Delapena_J

Negative, does not work that way. Your POV comment is unsourced. Unsourced comments or allegations as you suggest are not allowed in WP:BLP. Ronbo76 18:57, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: comment placed on my userpage

regarding your entry on my user page, my edit to the national register of hisric places was correct. Neither the Golden Bough Playhouse, nor the Forest Theater are on the actual register.Smatprt 05:59, 20 March 2007 (UTC

Will examine. Ronbo76 17:31, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
Did a search on the NRR site, National Register of Historic Places. Neither exists. However, I am aware of a concern about its supposed demolition because I had seen a TV report about it being a historic site. Here is one reference to that Golden Bough theatre may be demolished. I think I now know why someone may have editted them into the California list of Historic Landmarks. In the paragraph entitled, A dramatic memorial, an engineer used the term, "significant" which is "a designation defined by the National Register of historic resources".
Part of the problem was your deletion without an edit summary or more importantly a discussion on the List of Registered Historic Places in California talkpage which I now see took place. I will do an interim save to read what is going on there as I am playing catch now.
(Finishing comments) If I am a new visitor to a page, I generally discuss whatever changes or deletions I feel are necessary on its talkpage. If I am acting as a Recent changes editor, I do not always have that luxury as I may matching wits with vandals. This page has been on my Watchlist for a while and other senior WP:CAL editors have not removed the entries perhaps for the same reason as me - it may have been inserted and no one caught the error. Me, being fat, dumb and happy knew just enough to be dangerous and danger caught up to me in the form of an error on my part. Sometimes I do make errors and this one seems to be that case.
I do apologize to you and will remove the message template by overstriking my comments. Ronbo76 17:50, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Backmasking

Ronbo, I'm impatient to clear up the original research and neutrality issues with the Satanic messages section, so I would appreciate it it you could detail your specific complaints on the talk page.

I would also ask you to reconsider your assumption that my desire to promote the article qualifies as ownership-type behavior. Perhaps I was over-hasty in nominating it to be a GA while there were still unaddressed objections, but my ratings were based on the objective standards described on the Rational Skepticism assessment page, not on any desire to inflate the article's worth.

Thanks, Λυδαcιτγ 00:21, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Bakersfield

Hi there. Unfortunately, I don't know much about Bakersfield. However, the issues with the crime details gets back to WP:V and WP:RS. Especially when there is stuff in the article like "According someone..." Mike Dillon 03:55, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

I took a first swing at cleaning up the article after all the anon changes. It's not perfect, but it's better. I'll keep an eye on the article for the next few days, hopefully catching the POV edits before he gets another dozen revisions in. Brien ClarkTalk 07:22, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks, I appreciate that. Most of the stuff had wikilinks which made it difficult to over-ride. For me to do a copyedit would be difficult as I am only semi-knowledgeable about Bakersfield. Ronbo76 12:16, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism

Hi there. IPs should have final warnings within an hour or two of recent activity. Many of your reports to WP:AIV are invalid because the IPs have not vandalized after a recent final warning. Thanks. --Wafulz 17:39, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Thanks for the quick revert of the vandalism to my userpage. It's much appreciated. Kafziel Talk 17:50, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome. I still have your page on watch because I learned so much from you about geolinks. I, in turn, have taught to others. I kind of wish all userpages could be semi-protected that only admins and its user could effect changes/writes to it. Ronbo76 12:15, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mapia

Anyway I could get you to include those external links with the satellite views on Ogle County Courthouse and DeKalb County Courthouse (Illinois)? IvoShandor 07:37, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Done. Ronbo76 16:41, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
Thank you sire. : )IvoShandor 18:49, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
Sorry just saw that comment. well, its further to the left, I have coordinates, 42° 00' 49.73"N; 89° 20' 03.77"W. IvoShandor 08:31, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
I have a feeling "the park" you are referencing is it. The crosshairs are currently about a block and half east of the courthouse. The courthouse square has the greenery and the building is in the middle, it's hard to see at first but easy to catch if you zoom in a bit. IvoShandor 12:34, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks again, it's greatly appreciated. It is one of my three good article candidates, Rock Springs Massacre could use the links to Rock Springs, Wyoming, if you ever have time. Thanks again. And, man, you have several barnstars on here. I'd slap those up on my user page. IvoShandor 12:41, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
That's pretty dang close. The crosshair is on the northeast corner of the building, probably good enough. Thanks again Ronbo. Much appreciated. IvoShandor 12:56, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
Sounds good, thanks for doing Rock Springs Massacre. You fly? As in pilot. Rock Springs in a robotic voice, nice. Like Small Wonder only not nearly as creepy. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by IvoShandor (talk • contribs) 13:06, 5 April 2007 (UTC).
I concur. Sorry, just saw this message. IvoShandor 09:45, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
Sounds good. What is the name of the depot again? It seems Camp Point Butte no longer exists.... IvoShandor 16:07, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
I think I'll do that, but I will probably just paraphrase it. Thanks for the help again. Btw, Ogle County Courthouse was promoted to GA last nite. : ) IvoShandor 17:02, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
So you were Navy? Is that correct. I am an Army vet myself. : ) IvoShandor 17:03, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
Roger that. The pattern is full. Will do. IvoShandor 17:08, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
Negative, tower. Ghostrider out. (Mav, I don't think this is a good idea.) Ronbo76 17:10, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
Oh I know Top Gun. I know Top Gun. When I was young, my dad played that movie a thousand times . . . I think its lasting impression comes from a couple of lines, the whole flyby thing...the pattern is full....and the way Kilmer (Iceman--right?) snaps his teeth together at Maverick. As if that was what a tough guy, fly boy would do! hahahaha. The 80s were fun, I was young though, maybe 7 when that movie came out.IvoShandor 17:10, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
"Mav, the bet is carnal knowledge. . .on the premises. . .with a female. . ." Ronbo76 17:13, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
Oh and per your edit summary. I think Maverick has gone batsh@t insane. See Oprah show and Scientology. : ) IvoShandor 17:13, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
And that would be Kelly McGillis. Hot. At least then, haven't seen her lately. Heh. IvoShandor 17:15, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
Ah I see, very cool. I don't know about Wolfman, but "Jester's dead . . ." (not really). IvoShandor 17:24, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
"Mav, if you don't get your RIO (when you get back to the ship), I'll fly with ya."
Ah, what fun. : ) I think you are referring to this building, which is directly across the street and the only significant structure to the west of the courthouse. It is the new "judicial center," I believe it was built in 2004 or 5. IvoShandor 17:58, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] BAKERSFIELD

PLEASE GO BACK AND LOOK AT WHAT I CONTRIBUTED TO BAKERSFIELD'S PAGE AND TELL ME WHAT I SAID THAT WAS BIASED. I DIDN'T SAVE IT OR REMEMBER WHAT I WROTE WORD FOR WORD. I AM ASKING BECAUSE I GOT A MESSAGE FROM YOU SAYING THAT MY VIEWPIONT WASN'T NEUTRAL. I SUPPORTED WHAT WAS ALREADY ON THE PAGE AND ADDED MORE INFORMATION THAT I BACKED UP WITH A RELIABLE SOURCE. IF YOU HAVE A SOURCE, AND WHAT YOU ARE CONTRIBUTING TO THE PAGE IS NOT YOUR OWN OPINION, THEN WHAT IS THE PROBLEM? ALSO, WHO IS TO SAY THAT WHAT I PUT IS NOT TRUE AND DELETE IT? PLEASE GET BACK TO ME. THANKS. Cdubbz1 15:47, 27 March 2007 (UTC)CRAIG

First off, putting words in caps is shouting and does not impress me. Second, while I sometimes miss the mark, I did not with this edit. There are several WP:CAL members who have this article on their Watchlist. If one of us makes an error, another would have reversed it. Nice try, though. Ronbo76 15:50, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
First of all, so you know, I am new to this whole Wikipedia thing and didn't know that capital letters meant I was "shouting at you." Secondly, I know very little about how this site works as I have only been a actual member for a few days. Other than that, I would just use Wikipedia for school and work research. I was under the impression that you changed the contribution I made and spent time researching to ensure its accuracy, since your username was at the bottom of the message I received. Sorry for thinking it was you, but YOU can start off by not trying to dog people to sound more intelligent and come across little nicer. But then again, you probably assumed I had been a regular contributor to this site for a while. Overall, it was a little misunderstanding and ignorance on my part due to my lack of experience here. Time to put it behind us my friend. Late.

-Craig —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cdubbz1 (talk • contribs)

[edit] San Diego

I'm curious as to why you thought to delete the message I put on the edit page regarding the reference to Anchorman: Ron Burgundy on the San Diego page. My intent was to get people to realize they didn't have to be funny and add that dumb line about San Diego from that movie. I know there will always be dumb people who will try to add it into the article anyway, but I thought that by pointing it out, maybe some would actually think twice before adding it in. I got the idea from the article Diversity which also has a Ron Burgundy line that gets added to that page. Someone there added the same tag about not editing the same thing again and again. If someone thinks its better not to include the line on the San Diego article, I'm not going to worry about it, but I'm just curious about the reasons why we shouldn't include that line. It wasn't showing up in the article, since it was tagged as hidden. --Eric Bekins 17:04, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Most vandals ignore messages like that. Seeing what you put might actually encourage them. There are enough users who watch the page/make regular contributions to the page who can revert that type vandalization. BTW, no one to the best of my knowledge has used the movie reference you provided to translate San Diego. Ronbo76 17:09, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
Additionally, my revert record is average enough that other users/state projects have enlisted me to put pages on my Watchlist. Check my contribs and you will see what I mean. Ronbo76 17:13, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
OK, I'll defer on this. But what do you mean, no one has used the movie reference? Only six edits ago someone blanked the entire San Diego page and put in place the movie reference. It happens all the time. But there are people reverting the edits, so life goes on. --Eric Bekins 17:25, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
My mistake. But, the BOT reversed it in the same minute. Additionally, I reverted two unsourced changes prior to your edit. I think I know what I am saying is true: enough users plus BOTs protect the page. Ronbo76 17:30, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
BTW, another user followed up that vandal's edit and placed a level four message on its talkpage. Ronbo76 17:33, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Regarding edits to Spy vs. Spy

Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia, Ronbo76! However, your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove spam from Wikipedia. If you were trying to insert a good link, please accept my creator's apologies, but note that the link you added, matching rule \bangelfire\.com\/, is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. Please read Wikipedia's external links policy for more information. If the link was to an image, please read Wikipedia's image tutorial on how to use a more appropriate method to insert the image into an article. If your link was intended to promote a site you own, are affiliated with, or will make money from inclusion in Wikipedia, please note that inserting spam into Wikipedia is against policy. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! Shadowbot 00:42, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Please see diff. I am a Recent Pages Patroller who reversed an edit.
I do not appreciate receiving a Spam message on my talkpage when I am doing a reversal that was reversed by your Bot. Please correct. Ronbo76 00:47, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] California Star

The California Star
For continuing exemplary contributions way way above the call of duty - and for being continuously positive and cheerful about it all! -User:NorCalHistory.

NorCalHistory 01:23, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Shucks! Is this good for a discount at the state fair? Ronbo76 01:37, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] CSD G4

Just a reminder that this criteria only applies to articles that have been deleted as a result of an AfD discussion, not articles that were prodded or speedily deleted for any reason. If you still think Skywynd meets a CSD criteria, please retag. Natalie 03:59, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

I have seen it used for reposts. I will re-tag it. Ronbo76 04:00, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Trocky

Well, I've blocked the user and his IP. I hope that'll be enough. DS 04:31, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Hopefully. I have seen other users and anon IPs recreate for friends or to get their kicks. Ronbo76 04:32, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Jacking

I've declined the speedy deletion of the above article because I feel it asserts notability in a reasonable way. It was pretty popular for a while, and although the article lacks sources I don't feel comfortable deleting it without discussion. So if you still feel it's not notable enough for an article, you may want to list it at AFD instead. Thanks! Kafziel Talk 12:32, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

I put it up for PROD. Ronbo76 12:34, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Deletion of The Mutaytor

There are 15 articles on Wikipedia referring to The Mutaytor. Seems like they're fairly notable to me. I guess I logged in and saw the notice of speedy deletion too late to do anything about it, though, and the article has already been deleted. Is your stance hard and I should go through and change any of the articles that cross-linked to The Mutaytor page to instead link to their website, or are you willing to reconsider? Dan Harkless 23:32, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

You will need to contact the admin who deleted it. Ronbo76 12:19, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Snidely Whiplash

Can you show me an image of the original Snidely that looks like Image:Villianc.svg? Basically, if it's close enough that it's accurate for the Whiplash article, it's too close for Commons. --NE2 16:57, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

None of those look close enough to say that our image is Snidely. --NE2 17:53, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
I replied to that on Talk:Snidely Whiplash - I'd bet that those sites took the image from us, assuming it is Snidely. --NE2 17:57, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Reporting 3RR

Please do not report 3RR at WP:AIV next time. Send it to WP:AN3 instead. Thanks. --  Netsnipe  ►  14:58, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WP:AIV

Thank you for making a report about 216.204.255.58 (talk · contribs · block log) on Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. Reporting and removing vandalism is vital to the functioning of Wikipedia and all users are encouraged to revert, warn, and report vandalism. However, administrators are generally only able to block users if they have received a recent final warning (one that mentions that the user may be blocked) and they have recently vandalized after that warning was given. The reported user has not yet been blocked because it appears this has not occurred yet. If this user continues to vandalize even after their final warning, please report them to the AIV noticeboard again. (Last edit: 14:22 UTC, final warning given: 14:44 UTC) -- Waggers 15:24, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Here is the Apr 4th diff where the vandal IP was given the final warning prior to my warning for today's vandalization. Then on that same day, Martin bot reversed an edit by this IP.

My analysis of this IP is that it is a persistent vandal which has been blocked twice in the past. A majority of its edits are being reverted. Sorry you don't share this view. Ronbo76 15:32, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your response. Nevertheless, WP:AIV makes it clear that vandals should only be reported there if (and I quote): "The vandal is active now, has received a proper set of warnings, and has vandalized after a recent last warning, except in unusual circumstances." While I accept that the IP in question has a history of vandalism, quite often a final warning is enough to stop a vandal from making further edits and so no administrator intervention is required. Indeed, this appears to be the case this time as, at the time of writing, they still have not made any further edits after your final warning was given.-- Waggers 15:40, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
Let's think about this: it was given a final warning on April 4. It was again active on that day as per Martin bot's warning. It received another warning today from me. Maybe they should get a barnstar instead. Ronbo76 15:43, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
Well, first of all, if they've only edited once today, why would you issue a warning and report them to AIV? It's not much of a warning if you say "don't do that," and then immediately punish them anyway without giving them a chance to stop (which they did).
The problem is assuming that this IP (or any IP) is a single person. It could be several different people, and after a day or more has passed there is no reason to assume that it's the same vandal. Sometimes it's clear that it's the same person, when the same articles are vandalized in the same way across a number of days, but even then we can't even be certain that the warning was received; if more than one person uses that IP, then someone else may have gotten the "you have new messages" box and looked at their talk page. Eventually, our need to curb the vandalism may outweigh our desire to be fair, and we will block them. But IPs need a bit more patience than registered users, and a warning issued a couple of days ago is usually considered a bit too old.
Considering that this IP has only edited once today, and the edit was to an article it has never edited before, there's no reason to suppose it's the same person or that they will ignore our warnings. It doesn't hurt to issue a new one. At worst, if they ignore the latest warning, you'll have to revert their vandalism one or two extra times before they get blocked. Kafziel Talk 15:47, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
Absolutely correct. It merits a barnstar.
Perhaps it does. May I suggest "Tireless Contributor"? :) Kafziel Talk 15:58, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
That's the one!!!

[edit] Valrith2

He's not engaged in an edit war, he's engaged in a blanking war. The Evil Clown my contributions 14:47, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

3RR. He's done three edits/deletions in last 24 hours. Ronbo76 14:49, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Reply

I put it back up at AIV to get a second opinion, he just seems upset to me. John Reaves (talk) 19:16, 8 April 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Vandalism

Please stop adding nonsense or vandalism to articles, as you did to Collis Huntington. Toa Mario 19:21, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

NOTE: This user received a 3RR notice earlier this morning and has been reverting back to his own edition despite other posts on the article talkpage and his own talkpage concerning the date is disputed and entered correctly. Ronbo76 19:24, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

I did not break 3RR. April 16 is the only birthdate. The Huntington Family is the most reliable soruce for birthdate. Toa Mario 19:29, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] re: Mario

I am not sure he really understands how to behave on Wikipedia. Most editors catch on that a second revert is not a good thing and that the other editor/reverter is probably serious. He has removed tags to an article I too nominated for CSD. Ronbo76 20:57, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

You may well be right. But since the conduct occured before i issued any warning, i am not quite ready to block. I have been clear to him that he shapes up promptly or gets blocked. DES (talk) 21:02, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] User:Toa Mario

I have now blocked User:Toa Mario and both of his obvious sock puppets (for 48 hours) for disruption and trying to game the 3RR. Perhaps that will let him cool down. DES (talk) 22:53, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Blocked

I've blocked you for 24 hours for your repeated reverts on User talk:Scotts33. Mangojuicetalk 04:01, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

This blocked user (block log | autoblocks | rangeblocks | unblock | contribs | deleted contribs) has asked to be unblocked, but an administrator has reviewed and declined this request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy). Do not remove this unblock request while you are blocked.

Request reason: "Please unblock me. I am Recent Change Patroller. This user was reverted by others because he has been erasing warnings on his talkpage after his final warning. This list also includes this diff from an administrator who reverted back to my revision."

Decline reason: "There is no exemption to the 3RR rule for people doing RC Patrol, nor does removing warnings from your own talk page constitute vandalism. If he removed the warning, clearly he'd read it. If he continued just add another warning. If you agree to not edit war over talk pages in the future add another unblock request and you can probably be unblocked. pgk 17:26, 9 April 2007 (UTC)"

Please make any further unblock requests by using the {{unblock}} template. However, abuse of the template may result in your talk page being protected.

Ronbo76 04:08, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] San Diego

UMM NO.. I DID NOT TAKE SHIT OFF SAN DIEGO. I WAS FIXING THE REFERENCE THAT DOESN't WORK BECAUSE YOU CAN't ADD REFERENCE ON TO TEMPLATEs SO DON't TRY TALKing DOWN TO ME LIKE YOU KNOW IT ALL... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Cooljuno411 (talk • contribs) 03:14, 11 April 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Deletion

You didnt want my page, fair enough. Wasnt harming anyone, and Im pretty sure it wasnt vandalism as I had just made the page, but again, fair enough. Prick.

OmegaWogan 14:15, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Bomb Town

I'd suggest an AfD on this one... there is at least an assertion of meeting WP:MUSIC (touring) in the article.--Isotope23 19:33, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your 3RR report

The edits that IP was making to Cesar Chavez were simple vandalism, so your report would have been better placed at WP:AIV. I haven't blocked, since the last vandalism was three hours ago, but I will if the IP starts up again. Thanks. Heimstern Läufer 21:12, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Last time I reported 3RR

I got this message still on my talkpage (Reporting 3RR). Ronbo76 21:14, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

BTW, at the time of my submission, I would be willing to bet WP:ANI would not have accepted the report because the warning would have been considered too current. Ronbo76 21:19, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
I don't know the situation behind the report Netsnipe was referring to, but I assume it was a case in which it was a content dispute rather than vandalism. In this case, you must go to WP:AN3RR. But if the user is blatantly defacing the page, as the IP in question today was, you can just use WP:AIV. You may want to read WP:VAND, especially the section "What vandalism is not"; that may help you know when a report is suitable for AIV and when it's not. Cheers! Heimstern Läufer 21:23, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
No, it was almost identical. Ronbo76 21:25, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
I don't know, then. But anyway, I'm sure in this case it was just vandalism. Don't worry about it for now, as the IP has stopped, but if he/she starts again, head for AIV. Thanks! Heimstern Läufer 21:29, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Cameron Esposito

Thanks for the note, and for having nominated the article for deletion. I'll keep it on watch. Korg (talk) 23:45, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Deletion of external Link to www.whoisyoursponsor.com

Ronbo, I'm not really sure why you removed the external link. The data that the website provides is not any different than the type of data that IMdb provides. I've noticed a double standard by people on Wiki who say that links shouldn't be placed to promote commercial websites; what do you think IMDB is?? I don't think that Amazon.com paid $230M for IMDB because it was a nice non-profit site. The information provided on www.whoisyoursponsor.com is interesting information that can only be found on our site. I think that Wiki readers will benefit from the information, regardless of whether or not it is a "commercial" website. My guess is that Wiki is somehow getting compensation from IMdb.com because almost everyone listed on Wikipedia has a link to that site. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.99.131.143 (talk • contribs)

If you are unsure, then read the wikilinks provided in the message provided. There is a direct difference in sites. To a certain extent, every website will have a certain amount of paid advertising or links for the reader to follow which will generate revenue for the site. Wikipedia tries to balance which sites are added based upon the information provided by the link. Unfortunately, whoisyoursponsor is a direct commercial link not recommended by WP:EL.Ronbo76 03:06, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Ronbo, did you look at the information provided on www.whoisyoursponsor.com? It is good solid information. Please tell me where you think the site is generating revenue differently than an IMdb.com or similar sites. So if whoisyoursponsor is not recommended by the Wikipedia editing gods, how does can it become so? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.99.131.143 (talk) 15:06, 12 April 2007 (UTC).
BTW, this discussion has already taken place on Talk:Eva Longoria#Exernal Link Request. Ronbo76 16:30, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Brian Hubble Artist

Ronbo Thank you for your comment. I certainly do not want to violate any rules and am more than happy to comply. Please forgive me, it was unintentional, and my knowledge on creating a page is (obviously) ignorant. I'm trying to figure out what needs to be done to keep this artist on this site. Any suggestion is more than welcomed. I have added several references/external links supporting why this young artist is deserving of a page on Wikipedia. He is recognized internationally as one of America's most important young illustrators. Please let me know any concern you might have. I also have a great amount of information on this artist through books and magazine that I would like to add, but some of this information is not found online. Would it be ok to add this? Please let me know! I have a lot more information I would like to add about this artist. Please allow me to proceed. Thank you so much.

[edit] Jan scully

Thank you for declining that. She is a DA of a major county of over 1 mil people, thank you, thank you Alamar2001 05:40, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

When a DA participates in the Unabomber case, they are fairly noteworthy. Ronbo76 05:42, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Speedy Deletion of MODE Magazine article

I didn't have an opportunity to make an argument against the deletion of the the MODE Magazine article. It being tagged for speedy deletion gives me the impression that a discussion on the topic should be avoided and I feel that this was wrong judgement in practice. What further cements this assumption for me is the reason given for speedy deletion. It was a valid reason for the article to be deleted but I do not feel that it warrants deletion to be speedy. If it had been tagged as a "vanity page" I would have understood but the manner by which this was dealt currently frustrates me personally.Light Bulb 07:41, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Your concern is noted and appreciated. Permit me to explain the Speedy Delete process and my role in in it. In the process, this is a good faith attempt meant not to offend.
  1. The Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion (CSD) exist to nominate an article for Speedy Delete based upon Wikipedia:Notability.
  2. The process involves the nominator and a reviewing admin to make the decision to keep or delete.
  3. My process was as a Wikipedia:New pages patrol editor who nominated the article for CSD.
  4. I have also contributed to this article and as also serve as a Wikipedia:Recent changes patrol editor (to alleviate any concern about a bias).
  5. Contrary to public belief, I nominate solely based upon my role as a New pages patrol editor and not because "it feels good" or "I get a kick from it". In reviewing articles I use the CSD criteria based upon WP:N as my guide.
  6. I cannot remember where I saw this article created. Since I spend a lot of time on the Special:Recentchanges or Special:Contributions/newbies pages, it was probably one of those places.
  7. Vanity is not a preferred criteria choice as it implies a hurtful feeling towards contributors.
  8. CSD is a contentious process. Because two {{hangon}} tags were placed on this article after the CSD nomination, it was most likely reviewed by several admins.
  9. "Speedy Delete" contrary to belief is not all that instaneous. Admins have to balance the Wikipedian standards against their track record. Because article deletion is contentious, no admin in his/her right mind would make a hasty decision because it would leave them subject to review. Most articles, with obvious exceptions, are not deleted post haste.
  10. Additionally because of the hangon tags, this CSD went most likely into an admin review log where it drew review before the admin who took action made a decision.
  11. Before this becomes a debate upon me, permit me to say that as New pages editor I have over 1,000 articles on my Watchlist. About 100 of those articles are personal. The next 300 or so come from the various projects I belong to. The other 1,453 (I just peeked at my total) are articles I have picked up to watch as a Recent changes patrol editor. Of that 1,453 articles there are an unknown number that I have chosen to save or contributed to because they were stubs or on edge of deletion.
  12. The decision to nominate this article for CSD was not driven against you. It was basely solely upon what I saw upon reviewing the list of articles and then upon the above criteria.
Again, I take no joy in nominating an article for deletion. If I did, I would sooner take myself out of the Wikipedia process because I have to face myself in the mirror. Please accept my explanation as one not meant to offend. Ronbo76 14:47, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for replying. I appreciate you giving me a detailed account of your role in the article's speedy deletion. Nonetheless I continue to not understand why the article was deleted, whether it be speedy or not. I still do not know what all arguments were raised for or against deletion in the open discussion.
Furthermore, the article was as "notable" as Dunder Mifflin. In fact, both read very much the same and it confuses me how one was deleted and the other not. I want to create a page on MODE Magazine with very much the same content but more expansive in order to avoid deletion. Am I correct in understanding that this is where the article lacked "notability"? I do not want this to repeat itself so I would like for you to give me any advice you have on what would merit the article not being deleted. Once again thank you.Light Bulb 08:57, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] I Would Like An Apology

I didn't delete anything from Ca$his' deletion article. I was trying to explain that Ca$his was featured on "You Don't Know", the single from The Re-Up that has received major national airplay (at least as far as I'm aware). Thus he passes criteria #10 on WP:MUSIC. Maybe I didn't edit that the right way, but that's no call whatsoever for you to accuse me of vandalism. I'd like an apology, and I'd like it on my talk page, please. Maybe I don't know how to properly edit a deletion template, but your accusations of vandalism are unfounded and do damage to my online reputation, as my intent was simply to improve the article. Faseidman 00:34, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Here is the diff of your deletion. You deleted the asterisk which caused an error in the page format. You have a level one message on your talkpage. You were issued a level two by me. Ronbo76 00:44, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
Would you like to explain what a "level one" or a "level two" is? I didn't mean to delete anything useful - the asterisk looked like an error to me. I apologize if it was not, but I shouldn't be getting in serious trouble for this. Or if so, you need to tell me why I should be. Faseidman 00:57, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sorry about the apparent vandalism

In addition to being user KyleJBritt my IP address is 24.53.198.245 you left two messages about vandalism on the talk page there. I just wanted to apologize for your trouble, I left wikipedia open and my younger brother took it upon himself to edit California and his current high school and my alma matter, Braulio Alonso High School. Don't worry, you won't see any real trouble from me, thanks for helping keep wikipedia's usefullness and validity in check! Kyle —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.53.198.245 (talk) 05:17, 17 April 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Question/request

Thanks for all your help with Rock Springs, hopefully it gets GA. Anyway, hate to bother you but . . .

I was wondering if you might be willing to help me out by providing a fresh and unaffiliated pair of eyes to the article National Register of Historic Places, current GA nom, as part of my attempt to bring it all the way from little stubby start class thing to FA. There have been some concerns raised on the current peer review page which could use some outside assistance. They include:

  • Thorough copy edit for grammar, typos and most importantly flow. (I fixed one mistake provided as an example on the review page)
  • The lead was confusing.
  • Look for minor POV, "Most important" other unnecessary descriptors
  • Get rid of redundancies, reviewer referenced this page: [[1]]

Thats about it. If you have any time to assist your help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance, feel free to chime in at the peer review as well. IvoShandor 04:30, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

As always there is never a rush on anything on Wikipedia! : ) Relax my good man. IvoShandor 11:50, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
Boo, Hiss! to that. Ack. Ah well, the road leads somewhere, probably to my edit summary. : ) Have a fine day senor.IvoShandor 11:55, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Backmasking

Glad you're back, as I've cleaned up Backmasking and I'm waiting to hear your opinion on its sourcing and on the Satanic messages section. Λυδαcιτγ 22:22, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Rock Springs Massacre redux

Hello Ronbo, since you have commented on and assisted with editing Rock Springs Massacre in the past, I thought I would notify you that the article reached Good article status recently, (if you didn't already know that). Since then I have undertaken a significant expansion/overhaul/source verification mission which has resulted in a new version of the article. Soon, I hope to take it to Featured Article candidates. What it needs now is some outside input and copy editing. Anything you can offer in the area would be helpful. You may want to start by taking a look at the talk page first, I have been updating my progress on the article there regularly. Thanks ahead of time for your help. IvoShandor 08:19, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] User:Donreed - What to do?

User:Donreed made changes [[2]] to Lauda Air, accusing them of organizing child sex tourism. There's neither proof nor source for that, and I consider it vandalism. You've warned him several times - what can we do about his? -- C. Deelmann 13:01, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Data Hierarchy - Seeking your views

Hi Ronbo, I wrote the article on Data Hierarchy which now has a 'Need Cleanup' notice. I would like to revise the article but am not sure what is it about the article that needs improvement. Could you plse let me know? Thanks! JeffTan

[edit] What happened?

Where did you go? IvoShandor 09:39, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Woo hoo! Was wondering if things were well. IvoShandor 20:37, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Question re: Spoken Word comment

You have a comment under the spoken word article that says:

On most articles I follow, red wikilinks are usually only allowed if sourced or really notable. Otherwise, red wikilinks without a Wikipedian article are removed. Seek consensus on removing red wikilinks.

So on one hand you are saying that they should be removed, and on the other that consensus should be sought first. So I am unclear as to what you are trying to say in this instance. I would personally opt for the former, and in the past I have removed said links. I fact with that article am proposing that the source of most of the red linked items (the list of performance poetry artists) be removed and that a wikilink to the performance poetry article be added instead. Am hoping I can solicit your thoughts on this. Cheers! Captmondo 16:33, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Commons

Go to the commons ... --evrik (talk) 15:21, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

About the last message that was undid: don't think so, but thanks for stopping by.