User talk:Robertbcole

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

AMA Alert posted: There are 4 cases that need Advocacy. Remember to close old cases. Suggest topics for the forthcoming meeting here.

Welcome!

Hello, Robertbcole, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 14:04, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the warm welcome. -b o b b y 16:17, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] good faith

Thanks for bringing that to my attention on the AFD article! Speedy was a little to harsh, I should have assumed good faith and at least looked a little closer at the users page! We could all learn a little from you. Chris Kreider 17:39, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Please don't reformat my comments.

I deliberately have not been bolding the "Keep" or "Delete" or similar single word summaries of my opinion because the single word summaries are unworthy of the emphasis. They are not votes. The sentence following the single word is my true contribution to the discussion, and that is the part that should be bolded, if any. Thanks! Un focused 17:20, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

My bad. A lot of editors do not know that it is Wikietiquette to bold the recommended course of action so the closing admin (and other interested parties) can get a quick sense for how a discussion unfolded. When I leave my comments, I tend to try and unify the preceding discussion for ease of reading. In the future I will avoid doing so with your contributions. I should add that most (I hope!) editors do read all of the comments on the AfD pages and not just the boldtext. Nonetheless, your postings are your own, and I will leave them alone in the future. -bobby

Very kind reply; I'm glad you didn't try to push the Wikietiquette at me as if it were formal policy. Lately, I've been thinking a lot about the value of modesty of presentation and doing a lot more anonymous posting. If the content presented is valid and worthy (and in articles, properly referenced where applicable), it will be fine without any special formatting or reputation of the poster attached to it. This is the reason behind my recent actions. I am not trying to make the closing admin's job more difficult. Un focused 17:53, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Just out of curiosity, do you really think "spank the nominator" is a helpful contribution? I don't mind leaving your suggested action unbolded, but from your above comment I kind of figured your edit (which I had trivialised) went a bit deeper than it actually does. Just a thought... -bobby

In the case of the age-old schools debate, it was my rather flippant return to this issue. In hindsight, a more direct reference to corporal punishment or the principal's office would have helped express my view. I do, however, think spanking the nominator of this school deletion debate might be an action that would be help Wikipedia in the long term. Or maybe not. I refuse to be completely serious about this. Un focused 17:53, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Fair enough. I just went back to the change I made to change it back to the previous format (which I may have forgotten about incidentally) and was surprised to see your relatively short and terse reply. After reviewing your other AfD contribs, I see that you always (with this exception) supply a well thought out comment which adds to the debate. For the record, I agree that we should spank the nominator :) -bobby

The rationales and the discussion are the important things. There are several editors who, like Unfocused here, focus upon the rationales and the discussion in our AFD contributions. Geogre does. I do. Jayron32 (talk • contribs) wrote on my talk page a while back:

"I merely hope to add some substance to the discussion. I think it does the administrators no good to simply read a series of comments that just say delete per nom. Having a bunch of people concurring without adding anything to the discussion does not help admins make any decision. It's my goal in my AfD comments to add something to the table that will help the admins make a decision one way or the other."

Several editors, including myself, share that goal, too. Uncle G 22:36, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

I agree with you guys and share that goal. As you can see from my contributions, I try and write well thought out replies that are not merely votes. I think of the bold text as my thesis, and everything that follows as the supporting argument. I hope this format works for editors reading my comments, and I'm always open to suggestions from folks who have been here longer than the 2 weeks I have under my belt as a registered editor. -bobby

[edit] Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Carmen Gray

I think that the references on Carmen Gray now are enough to prove notability. Even if you can't read Finnish, the reference pages are recognizable reviews of the band's album. Could you please take anotehr look at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Carmen Gray? --TruthbringerToronto (Talk | contribs) 18:02, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

I reviewed the new citations and changed my vote in accordance with WP:Music: "Has been placed in rotation nationally by any major radio network." I don't know if any other criteria are satisfied, but one is all they need. -bobby

[edit] Your vote in AfD/Salad Fingers

I have taken the liberty of correcting the link in your vote from Wyvern's history to Salad Fingers' history. Hope that's okay with you. --Releeshan 19:20, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Blerg bye-bye

Hi, Robert. Welcome to the club!

I protected the page from editing. What you're seeing is a template that alerts anyone who tries to recreate it that it's been, well, nuked. Only an admin or a bureaucrat can unlock it, so your average run-of-the-mill vandal can't touch it. :) - Lucky 6.9 19:22, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Order of the Briefs

Can you please take this to Deletion Review for me, Bobby, the closing admin was abusing his powers, it's nothing to do with briefsism. Ta, --Llloydfrancer 21:23, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you!

Hi Bobby, thank you for the very kind comments and offer of help you made on the AfD for Music of South Florida! I see why you earned your "random acts of kindness" barnstar! I don't know why I'm so attached to that article, especially since I know nothing about the rap music scene - I guess the whole "donk" concept kinda grabbed my interest. Thanks again! Dreadlocke ☥ 17:31, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

The article is growing! Hopefully it will be enough to at least delay deletion for now! Dreadlocke ☥ 00:08, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Gosworth High AfD / WP:SCHOOLS

You're completely right about my usage of the word "stupid". I feel that I have completely valid arguments, and using words such as "stupid", while they are not particularly harsh, don't add anything positive to the discussion. As far as the proposed guidelines for inclusion of schools, I've made my arguments on its talk page multiple times about why I think the proposal is a terrible idea (again, in this case, saying "it's a terrible idea" doesn't really do much, but at least I have noted why I feel that way multiple times). -- Kicking222 22:46, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adams Ranch

Could you please take another look at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adams Ranch? I added sources to Adams Ranch. --TruthbringerToronto (Talk | contribs) 00:11, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Speedy keep mistake

I noticed that you mistakenly speedily kept Jason Pierce. I reverted that because that was improper. Please do not speedy keep any pages unless one of the guidelines at Wikipedia:Speedy keep are met. Jesse Viviano 22:46, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Actually, guideline 1 of WP:SPEEDY is met:

"1. No-one other than the nominator recommends that the page be deleted, and the nominator either withdraws the nomination, or wishes the page to be moved, merged, or have something else done to it other than deletion. Also, there are some cases where the nominator specifies they are nominating for the sake of process, for someone else, or some other reason but are not stating an opinion themselves."

Also, please see WP:SNOW, specifically:

"If an issue doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell of getting an unexpected outcome from a certain process, then there is no need to run it through that process."

This is clearly the case here, as there is still no support for deletion. I will let the debate run its course this time, but in the future please do not second guess my decisions. I know my edit history on this account goes back little more than a week, but I've been an editor on Wikipedia for the last 4 years and do know a thing or two about the various processes. I would never close a debate early if not supported in my decision by the guidelines. Thanks for your concern, and have a wonderful day. →Bobby← 12:13, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

This looks like an implied delete to me in the nomination, so guideline 1 does not apply. Nominations are taken as an implied deletion vote unless they explicitly state that they are being nominated for process, for someone else, or explicitly state that they are not expressing an opinion one way or the other in the nomination. Jesse Viviano 14:59, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

I can see how this may have been an implied deletion "vote". I have contacted the nominator to try and get him to expand on his reasons for the proposed deletion, or withdraw his nomination. I would still point to the Snowball Clause in this instance, which is often used as a reason for speedy keeps. →Bobby←

[edit] G11 on Sudanese doctors

Hello, why did you put a speedy-delete tag on Sudanese doctors citing G11 as the criteria? I had already prodded it because I did not think it met any of the speedy criteria, although it definately needs to go because it is clear that the contributer does not understand that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and not a social networking site. Anyway, why do you think it meets G11? ~ ONUnicorn (Talk / Contribs) 16:35, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

From the article:

"The main aim of this page is to give all Sudanese doctors, around the world, the opportunity of getting in touch with one another."

And from the criteria for speedy deletion section on spam:

"Pages that exist only to promote a company, product, or service."

It seems clear to me that the page is blatently promoting the service I cited above. If you disagree, by all means send it to AfD after a decent PROD period. I think it easily qualifies for speedy though. Cheers! →Bobby←

I agree that the article should be speedied, but disagree that it meets the G11 criteria (or any criteria at that)... It doesn't seem to be advertising a "service" to me... but maybe I'm being nit-picky. I don't know... Go ahead and replace the speedy tag if you want. It's just an... odd little page that doesn't quite fit any of the nice little boxes in the speedy criteria. ~ ONUnicorn (Talk / Contribs)

It seemed to be promoting the service to me. I'm perfectly happy to let the debate run its course however. We'll see if the prod tag gets any response, and if it doesn't the article can be nominated for deletion. I'm sure it will go down over there (since I tend to check in on those pages frequently) and in the meantime it's not doing any harm. Thanks for the conversation to break up my new page patrol! And now, back into the void. →Bobby←

[edit] Jason Pierce AfD

Sure. Obviously, I made a mistake. If this guy is so great and famous it would seem all his supporters would write a decent article. I think the current one is pitiful, but I don't really care about the guy. -Regards Nv8200p talk 03:20, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! I don't know too much about him, but I'm going to try and clean up the article a bit myself. →Bobby←

[edit] Demolition Man (film)

On the point of contention, I'm not sure much can be done. I may resign this issue as it's consumming too much time.

Here it is. There is one point of trivia on both Demolition Man (film) and Scott Peterson. Namely, his name appears in the 1993 movie, Demolition Man (film). The name appears for less than 5 seconds on the screen (I think more like two seconds). I have a VHS copy of this movie and I added the information after another had added the entry by an annoymous editor. There are no printed movie guides to this movie as it was a real loser at the box office. The only way to know about this small point of trivia is to describe it at length. I have done as much.

Unfortunately three (3) editors now are complaining that the entry is too long. 1 editor might be a sockpuppet, but that real makes not difference.

I tend to agree with them that the entry is a bit too long, but I'm getting no help from them as to how to shorten it. Hence, one (1) editor has repeatedly removed it and I have reverted as many times. Any suggestions welcome. --meatclerk 07:44, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

I've opened a brainstorm session at the bottom of the Demolition Man (film) talk page. Let's try to reach some sort of agreement there and get this matter sorted out. →Bobby←

[edit] Music of South Florida AfD

Just FYI, the Music of South Florida article has been expanded and is still growing. Let me know if it's being cleaned up to your expectations as you indicated in the Articles for deletion/Music of South Florida request. Thanks! Dreadlocke ☥ 17:24, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

And the result is keep!. Thank you for your help, Bobby! Dreadlocke ☥ 17:24, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bobby I need your help

Thanks so much for helping out with the South Florida Music article, I think we whipped that one into shape. I just finished editing an article for Country Gospel and have put it up for discussion to merge it with Christian country music. I did a huge amount of work on the country gospel article to bring it up to wiki standards as it was a real mess and people were just vandalizing it like crazy. Could you please look at the article and respond to the issue of merging it into the later article. They are both the same genre and I think it would serve better to have them put together. I contacted an admin about it and he agrees with me. I feel we need to just use the name Christian country music and totally wipe out its contents since it is mostly the same data and keep the data for Country Gospel. Could you look at it and weigh in on the merging issue? Thanks Junebug52 3:22, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Welcome to the AMA!

Hello Robertbcole, I see that you have decided to join the AMA. I'll be the first to say welcome! We're always in need of more advocates, especially since were backlogged most of the time. Just a few pointers for what we do. We communicate by putting a template on our talk page. The template is {{AMA alerts}} (which you already have). The AMA also has it's own IRC channel which reports new cases to us, and also new alerts. If you'd like to jump right into a case, you are free to check out WP:AMARQ, which is our new request for advocacy system. The instructions for how the technical part works is on it's talk page. You can also use the AMA userboxes that appear under here. If you have anymore questions about the organization, just ping any advocates talk page, including our coordinator, Steve Caruso. Again, welcome to the AMA! -Royalguard11(Talk·Desk·Review Me!) 22:51, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks for helping out with my mediation case

You can find most of the beginnings of the debate at User_talk:Plasticbadge#Ruckus and at Talk:Ruckus_Network. We're currently mediating at Talk:Ruckus_Network/Mediation. Basically, an edit war erupted over Ruckus Network between User:Plasticbadge and User:Nroseszu. Nroseszu is an employee of Ruckus, and Plasticbadge is a self-described corporate watchdog who keeps an eye on edits to corporation wiki articles. In any case, the debate has mostly died down and is centered now on making improvements to the article. I suggested a revamp of the entire article at Talk:Ruckus_Network/Mediation which was agreed to by both parties. I operate in another time zone than the two of them, so a flurry of activity often happens when I'm asleep. Nroseszu wanted another mediator there when they were editing, although Plasticbadge thought it was unnecessary. I was hoping you might be able to step in if things get heated while I'm asleep or if the two have a specific dispute that needs to be resolved. Thanks so much, again! Gzkn 01:38, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Are you the advocate for Ramsquire ?

I saw that you might have agreed to advocate a case for Ramsquire against me. He is already in a group led by an administrator named Gamaliel who want me banned from Wikipedia. Since this is probably the most severe sanction that can be sought, I was wondering whether I should have an advocate?

I also found out that there is something called a "cabal" that is going to be involved, and apparantly the cabal and Ramsquire are going to handle me "discreetly." Are you going to be the advocate in this discreet undertaking?

Are this types of actions normal?

Thank you in advance for any help and direction that you can supply.RPJ 10:43, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

I have agreed to advocate for Ramsquire. Obviously, I can't say anything beyond that. I would definitely recomend getting an advocate to help explain various WP processes to you. The Cabal in question is a form of informal mediation used to try and control a situation before it gets out of control. You can obtain an advocate by requesting one through the AMA. Regards, →Bobby← 14:44, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Hey there. You asked me to leave information on the RfC about possibly resolving the dispute your client is involved in. I'm afraid I don't have any constructive ideas - my involvement was limited to responding to a WP:PAIN report. Per later discussion, RPJ seems to feel that everyone who has warned or blocked him is in collusion with those he has a dispute with - I've been unable to persuade him that this is not the case. Best of luck. Shell ^babelfish 18:17, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] cfr

Hi! I just renominated the category rename at Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_November_16#Category:Finland-Swedish --Espoo 16:56, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Checkuser list

Hi, just wanted to point out, in the event that it was an oversight, that you missed adding the ip 67.190.61.6 to your checkuser request. I have never really paid attention to checkuser prodcedure, so I don't know if it's too late or bad form for you add that IP now.--67.101.67.107 20:49, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. The case hasn't opened yet so I'll add it now. →Bobby← 21:09, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../r/o/b/User_talk%7ERobertbcole_d850.html"