User:Ronbo76/Archives1

• Kinda like the secret handshake I wish some oneone had given me when I first editted 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)

• Number of articles on my Watchlist: 528
• I am an anti-vandal patriot - Please see my userpage for the articles for deletion I have successfully nominated.
• Please see my userpage for the articles for deletion noms successfully deleted - 18 as of today's date. Ronbo76 17:54, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
• FYI Advocacy and mercy are also mine. Adocavy Save(s) - ten
• Ronbo76 19:15, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia!!!

Hello Ronbo76! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. If you decide that you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. You may also push the signature button located above the edit window. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. This is considered an important guideline in Wikipedia. Even a short summary is better than no summary. Below are some recommended guidelines to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! -- Chavatshimshon 04:23, 3 December 2006 (UTC) Getting Started Wikipedia Tutorial How to edit a page The five pillars of Wikipedia Manual of Style Be bold in editing How to write a great article WikiProjects Getting your info out there Cite your sources Neutral Point of View Point of View Verifiability Uploading images Image use policy Getting more Wikipedia rules Policy Library Getting Help New contributors' help page Where to ask a question Help Desk Frequently Asked Questions Getting along Wikiquette Civility Sign your posts Wikipedians Conflict resolution Getting technical Cleaning up vandalism Pages needing attention Peer review Utilities Village pump

Please be more careful with your taggings. While those in your first week seem to be fine, several of those in the last day or two have been highly problematic. Politicians serving in national or state legislatures, national league sports teams and very prominent retail brands are all considered universally notable for Wikipedia purposes, and should not be hit with notability tags or such. Rebecca 04:40, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Wickey Selpub Factor

Wickey Selpub Factor (n. pna How do I self Wiki-publish Factor) - The Wickey Selpub Factor (WSF) is defined as what some people will do to get themselves listed on something other than a blank wall (grafiti), MySpuce dot com or their other fantasy isle location where they are king. The WSF is usually closely followed by an editor who has a big black dog (The Fast Eddy Wheelie Theory) to take care of their vandal edits. Typos in the WSF help because they usually become a searchable factor on the Interfet SEarch Engene of your choice and why this editar included as an exampill in this sentence.

Seriously, if you leave this on your talkpage, I believe in a week or less it will become a searchable term. ;) Ronbo76 09:55, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

While notable. . .

. . .there should be a way for a user to see valid links or references to further material that is veriable. Here in America and even Mexico, we have "national sport clubs" that compete on the same level as the articles I have referenced. If their data cannot be verified or is even noteworthy, than the article does not belong. I would be willing to submit all my edits to an arbitration committee.

The appropriate course of action in such cases is to use the {{unsourced}} tag, not to use {{importance}} or trying to merge them. You're also being overzealous in your use of {{npov}}, {{likeresume}} and {{advert}}. Rebecca 06:43, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrator_intervention_against_vandalism

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrator_intervention_against_vandalism

helpme

Hello, a user changed some data on one of my Watchlist pages, Thalía. If you will check the history on that article, you will see that I reversed that IP's changes. It also changed data on another page. I believe this user/IP is re-writing articles just for the fun of it. I placed one of the first warning templates on that IP's talk page. What else if anything can be done?

I have blocked the IP. If it is a continuing problem from this range of IPs, the range may be blocked temporarily, and if it continues protecting the article may be in order, see WP:RFPP. --Centrx→talk • 06:36, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Best to have some reliable, easy-to-check sources for the dates and numbers, and stick to them assiduously. --Centrx→talk • 06:45, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Last night another user helped me with an article that is getting a lot of edits from unknown IPs. That article is Thalía. It appears that fans of that singer and another article/singer, Paulina Rubio, are taking editorial liberties with the pages without citing sources and in some cases defacing the articles with graffitti. Both singers are very popular and a general amount of competition exists between them that is perhaps causing sockpuppets to do some of the edits. The other user, [Centrx] sent me a message about protecting the pages but I am not sure if I understand fully how to do it. If I read the protection page correctly, I believe both articles should receive semi-protected status from unknown IPs. In the past week, both articles have seen a number of edits from unknown IPs. Some edits have been helpful while most have changed data without citing sources. In several cases, the IPs have done malicious edits as seen last night. Originally I had just Thalía on my Watchlist because I had noticed several edits going on that were inappropriate. Last night after seeing the "competition" edits between different IPs on those two articles leads me to believe that both pages need protection. Hopefully protection will slow down some of these edits. Both articles have already received edits this morning from an unknown IP.

Submit a request for semi-protection on all three pages at Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection. It sounds like you have grounds for that. Good luck. Xiner (talk, email) 14:06, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Helpme request

Need Administrator help with several pages that receiving lots of edits from unknown IPs.

I submitted Thalía and Paulina Rubio as per another user's advice and am already seeing edits from a new IP, 213.60.228.225 on the Thalía article. It appears from a quick glance that this unknown IP is changing articles on a whim. I believe this IP needs to be blocked. I submitted both pages for protection.

This unknown IP, 213.60.228.225, is a perfect example of someone who appears to edit album data without citations. From a rapid glance at several pages, this IP has changed numbers and then reposted data. On some edits the IP may have helped an article but on articles like Laura Pausini, Edurne etal, numbers are getting lowered. This IP's number of edits do not suggest someone who is looking an article up, backing it with verifable data (as in perusing, proofing etc) and then posting meaningful edits to all articles.

I include the following to give you an idea of what I am seeing on the other pages:

Last night another user helped me with an article that is getting a lot of edits from unknown IPs. That article is Thalía. It appears that fans of that singer and another article/singer, Paulina Rubio, are taking editorial liberties with the pages without citing sources and in some cases defacing the articles with graffitti. Both singers are very popular and a general amount of competition exists between them that is perhaps causing sockpuppets to do some of the edits. The other user, [Centrx] sent me a message about protecting the pages but I am not sure if I understand fully how to do it. If I read the protection page correctly, I believe both articles should receive semi-protected status from unknown IPs. In the past week, both articles have seen a number of edits from unknown IPs. Some edits have been helpful while most have changed data without citing sources. In several cases, the IPs have done malicious edits as seen last night. Originally I had just Thalía on my Watchlist because I had noticed several edits going on that were inappropriate. Last night after seeing the "competition" edits between different IPs on those two articles leads me to believe that both pages need protection. Hopefully protection will slow down some of these edits. Both articles have already received edits this morning from an unknown IP.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Ronbo76 (talk • contribs)

I noticed your comments about two pages, you will probably have to protect the Thalia and Paulina Rubio pages if you want to stop the editing. I only edit those pages to remove the occasional link spam, but two main users with changing IP addresses have been going at it for as long as I can remember, editing each other's sales figures and specifying which of the two is Mexico's biggest pop artist. The POV stuff shouldn't be on there anyway ("Mexico's most famous singer"), but I don't know what the accurate sales figures are. It makes no difference to me personally if you protect the pages are not, but that's probably the only way you'll get them to stop editing each other's stuff.

Hi there,

Protecting pages is a drastic step not taken lightly. I will investigate the offending IP, User:213.60.228.225. Cheers! Yuser31415 (Review me!) 20:18, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Right, I'll interpret the situation as I see it.

• Thalía and Paulina Rubio are having unreliable information inserted by anon IPs. Among those IPs is User:213.60.228.225. You are undoing their changes.
• You want to have those pages protected.

Am I correct? Yuser31415 (Review me!) 20:32, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I've referred you to the administrator's noticeboard. You will get help soon. Cheers! Yuser31415 (Review me!) 20:55, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for all your help! The edits are almost next to nil now with the comp edits gone! Ronbo76 15:03, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

helpme

There is a user who has defaced three articles with graffitti. I have Nick Johnson on my Watchlist where I found his first set of graffiti. I do not have time to undo the others he did. Please correct and deal with user as appropiate: [Giantsguy46]

I'll take a look. In the future, if there's a user that is consistently vandalising, and has been warned with the appropriate templates, you can let an admin know at WP:AIV so that the user can be blocked from editing. —Keakealani 02:07, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

I can't seem to find any vandalism in that user's contributions; granted, I'm not familiar with the articles he edited, but there at least isn't any blatant vandalism that I can see. —Keakealani 02:09, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

{{helpme}}

Please take a look at this article, That Guy Gary. It reads like a bogus article. There are no references to it on Yahoo or Google search engines. I became suspicious of because it reads, "this guy" as if written by an amateur. I believe it should be deleted. Thanks. Ronbo76 02:15, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

If you want to nominate an article for deletion, you can follow the steps at WP:VFD or just place {{prod}} in it :) Bjelleklang - talk 02:35, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

{{helpme}}

Hello, I was doing a random article check, when I came across this article, Kevin Kite. I did a Yahoo and Google search on this individual's name. I only came across two articles that mention his claims to the newspaper cited in his article. Looking at the wiki article on Covenant House, there is no mention of this article. An internet search on the terms, "Covenant House financial impropriety" found multiple articles stating the organization found no impropriety. I have no stake in this matter other than I was perusing random articles. I submit that the article on Keving Kite may contain unsubstaniated allegations that may leave Wikipedia liable for its claims. Please review this article and mark appropriately - if necessary refer it to the proper administrative level for revision. Ronbo76 04:52, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for checking veracity of articles, always a useful and important task. In this case I think the article is good as it is. An important point to remember is that the article reports on others' charges instead of making the charges itself. I did a search using the terms "Covenant house" "Franciscan Charitable Trust" and found sites that confirmed the information that we have in the article. For instance, in The Role of State Attorneys General in Relation to Troubled Nonprofits, they record "In 1990, AG investigated improper loans, fiscal mismanagement, & other problems. 1991 agreement with AG formally restructured corporation, improves financial & administrative oversight, bars severance pay to Father Ritter, former executive director. The agreement clarifies board membership & responsibilities, loans, contracts, charitable contributions, auditing procedures and hiring practices. Father Ritter agreed to pay interest on loan, & never to serve as charitable trustee." It looks like this was just one of those cases of the information being available, but finding it was a matter of using slightly different search terms. SWAdair | Talk 05:11, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

After seeing some of the edits, I put in a couple of citations to provide more POV. Ronbo76 13:48, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Are song lyrics considered copyrighted?

Hello, several days ago the lyrics to an article, (Everything I Do) I Do It for You I watch was deleted because the editor said that lyrics are copyrighted. Is that correct? If so, someone just re-editted that article several times today to replace the lyrics. Please advise and correct the article if needed. Ronbo76 00:10, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

In the time it took me to finish an edit, see the RSS on the edits and get my fat fingers to type in the above message, the anonymous IP deleted the lyrics. Still would like to know if lyrics are considered copyrighted and if they can or cannot be included in articles.

Lyrics are copyrighted unless they have been specifically put in the public domain. The same goes for music, and all creative works. There need be no specific notice, and the material may be either published or unpublished. Please see US copyright basics from the US Copyright Office. WP editors should memorize the contents. (smile)DGG 02:45, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Need help on another article Palana New Airport

Hello, I came across this article, Palana New Airport that was vandalized by a user. I tried to restore it but it is beyond my limited editting skills. Could someone please fix it? Ronbo76 01:01, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

It's restored now (the vandal is also warned). To restore a article to a previous good version, click "history" and then click the date of the good version. Then edit and save the page. AQu01rius (User • Talk) 01:52, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

blanking Shellster

When you proposed the article for deletion, you also blanked it. That's confusing, because people then have to look in the history to see if the article was worth keeping or not. See WP:BLANK. NickelShoe (Talk) 20:35, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I did not know about blanking. I now know after reading your warning to leave the page as I found it but to place proper tags. Ronbo76 13:50, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

{{helpme}}

Hello, several days ago the lyrics to an article, (Everything I Do) I Do It for You I watch was deleted because the editor said that lyrics are copyrighted. Is that correct? If so, there is another article, Fuck the Police in which questionable lyrics appear. Please advise and correct the article if needed.

Lyrics are copyrighted and should not be used in articles. That doesn't mean the article needs to be deleted though (just the lyrics).

There are exceptions, of course; lyrics in the public domain are ok, and portions of copyrighted lyrics may be used in certain cases under fair use.

If you see the lyrics for and entire song pasted into an article go ahead and remove them. If you see portions of lyrics reproduced for discussion, it may be ok under the fair use policy. In general, copyrighted lyrics should not be used.

It looks like the example you cite in Fuck the Police might be acceptable under fair-use, but others may disagree. --Duk 05:26, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

I don't know the song but it appears the main part (better than half the song) appears in the article. I could citing one chorus but four choruses seem to be a bit much and a stretch of fair use. Ronbo76 05:35, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

By all means, evaluate fair-use in that article and act accordingly. It's a matter of judgement. Be sure to read through fair use. --Duk 05:41, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Also, read the article talk page, there has been previous discussion on fair use of those lyrics. --Duk 05:45, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

. . .even prior to your help. Usually when I ask for help, via helpme, I prefer a senior editor or admin type look at the page and edit appropriately. Since you said you can see both sides, maybe you could reestablish my helpme and ask for a second opinion on my talkpage. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ronbo76 (talk • contribs) 05:46, 31 December 2006 (UTC).

OK, per your request I put a new helpme note up. Also, you can request a fair-use review at Wikipedia:Requested copyright examinations. Happy editing. --Duk 05:53, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

---

Editor would like a second opinion on fair use at Fuck the Police (see discussion above)

I think it's within the limits of fair use, but more substantive explanations of the quoted lyrics (especially in the first section) would make the article better, and keep the fair use police at bay. Happy New Year, Tangotango 08:12, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

---

Noted

Noted about the vandalism to Christopher Columbus. I suggest you warn him again. S h a r k f a c e 2 1 7 02:48, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		For all your work with vandalism tonight (New Years Eve), I, Sharkface217, hereby award you with this barnstar. That one guy who was vandalizing the Christopher Columbus page wouldn't have been taken down without your vandal-fighting skills. Good job!S h a r k f a c e 2 1 7 03:29, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Lol, I'm sorry your games got ruined. The things we do to preserve knowledge... S h a r k f a c e 2 1 7 03:59, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Christopher Columbus

If those keep being vandalized by floating IPs, they will have to be semi-protected. Amazing what a waste of time that is, eh? —Wknight94 (talk) 04:31, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Haha, yeah life sure can be a party. S h a r k f a c e 2 1 7 06:25, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Lol, she's a looker! And yes, thanks for the Happy New Years greetings.

Wishing you a Happy New Year
from S h a r k f a c e 2 1 7 04:25, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Other things to note: You should create a user page. Really. Contact between yourself and other users (like me) would be much easier.

And on another note.... I would be honored if you reviewed me as a Wikipedian at my Editor Review, found here. Thanks! S h a r k f a c e 2 1 7 06:34, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Dj Disco Wiz

Yeah, it looks like the author just reposted it. Don't worry, it happens all the time. It is proposed for deletion now. Thanks for the heads up. GhostPirate 22:24, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

It has now been Proposed for deletion. This is the same as speedy deletion, except not so speedy! It will probably be taken down soon. Thanks for your vigilance in this matter, Wikipedia needs more editors like you who are willing to follow through on things like this. GhostPirate 22:30, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for keeping an eye on things _SUBWAYguy 03:27, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for giving me an editor review. Your comparison to a military situation (jets in a dogfight) was really entertaining. If you ever need help with anything, drop me a line. S h a r k f a c e 2 1 7 02:02, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

This message is for Ronbo76 and friends. I have noticed that you and your friends have been nominating my page for deletion. I am not sure what your reasons are for these actions. I am mentioned in Wikipedia in several places, including Grand Master Caz, Hip-Hop History, Latin Hip-Hop and felt that I should have my own page. If you had done any reseach you would have found out who I am. You are obviouly not doing your job, if in fact it is your job. I hope that this will be the last time I have to contact you. The next time you interrupt my page, I will personally report you to Wikipedia and my lawyers for slander and defamation of character. If you do not know your history you have no business writing or editing for any historical facts. History has written who I am, not me. So, learn your history and leave me alone!

-Dj Disco Wiz

www.theoriginators.com www.emplive.org www.hiphopfederation.net www.joeconzo.com www.bom5.com www.myspace.com/djdiscowiz www.hiphopgame.com www.scriptedlingo.com/writersblock.html

Chillax, man

Battling vandals, although necessary, is usually a long and tedious process. We just got lucky yesterday because the guy kept vandalizing pages so that we could properly warn him over t4 to get him blocked. Let those articles be deleted; if they are created, warn them again. I already got DJDWIZ up to t2, but he needs to get above t4 for just a short block. Wikipedia, by its nature, is very leniant with vandals (provisional blocks are very rare). I did all I could, but it will be a while before these guys get the gavel. S h a r k f a c e 2 1 7 02:20, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Each day, there are literally thousands of self-promotion articles created. Due to the size and popularity of Wikipedia, most will slip through the cracks. What you should do is report his sockpuppet to WP:SSP. Fighting vandalism on your own is an arduous task. In fact, because you are so dedicated to vandal fighting, I suggest you ask Canadian-Bacon on just how to properly fight vandals. He's probably the best and most experienced vandal fighter I have regular contact with. He's much more experienced than me in these matters. I only do my real vandal fighting on holidays (when there is going to be a huge number of vandals) or when the Wikipedia DefCon level goes above to 2. In fact, with last night, me showing up there was purely by chance: I was only reviewing the recent changes page and I stumbled across his edit. S h a r k f a c e 2 1 7 02:36, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Main Page

Also, if you don't mind, I'm going to add some helpful things to your main page in order to help you with fighing vandalism. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sharkface217 (talk • contribs) 02:51, 2 January 2007 (UTC).

Whoops, forgot to sign. S h a r k f a c e 2 1 7 02:51, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, the admins will now take care of the issue of his sockpuppetry (eventually). I added the WikiDefcon. If you can see that, then notice that the Warning Bar has a "hide" button all the way to the right side (it's blue and hard to see). Click it and there should be a huge popdown list. To warn somebody, just enter their username next to the talk and you can warn them. Note that you can't just go to warning 4.... you have to start at the first one and work your way up. S h a r k f a c e 2 1 7 03:07, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Congrats man. Enjoy the liquor. S h a r k f a c e 2 1 7 06:48, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

{{helpme}}

An article Maria duval was just created that is similar to an article that was deleted in my watchlist. If you read this article on Maria, it reads like nonsense with links to her blogs and bogus sites. How should the article be marked? Ronbo76 07:22, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

AFD it! Bjelleklang - talk 07:24, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

That's one of the fine things with Wikipedia :)

Just go to WP:AFD and follow the instructions. Bjelleklang - talk 07:28, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Don't worry, it has already been speedily deleted as blatant advertising. SWAdair | Talk 07:29, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Oh, and yes, anyone can nominate an article for either speedy deletion (if it matches the speedy deletion criteria), or for AFD if it doesn't. You may want to familiarize yourself with the Wikipedia:Deletion policy so you'll know what types of articles fall into those two categories and which should be improved rather than nominated for deletion. Happy editing! SWAdair | Talk 07:33, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Angus purdy

Wow, you figured out the AfD process that quickly?! You're good. It usually takes people several attempts to get the process right. Well, you now know how to nominate an article for AfD. In this particular case, the article matches one of the Speedy Deletion criteria, in that it fails to assert notability for the subject of the article. I've tagged the article with {{db-bio}}, which places it into the speedy deletion category. When you get a chance, review the links I gave above. (I noticed that we cross-posted -- apparently I posted those links just as you were posting to my talk page.) Once you understand the different categories you'll know the best way to handle the articles you happen across. It looks like you're learning very quickly. Welcome aboard. SWAdair | Talk 07:40, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Ah, wait. It looks like the AfD nomination wasn't completed. There are three steps to the process. They can get a little tricky. That's why I was surprised that you had it down the first time. Okay, I'll check later and see if I can complete it for you. I've got to run now, though. Work calls. SWAdair | Talk 07:45, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Hehe, cross-posted again. It seems you're looking for tips in all the right places. Keep up the good work. I'll drop you a note later when I get a chance. SWAdair | Talk 07:47, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I finished the AfD nomination for you. The article has been speedily deleted. As for the Curtis Newart article, I don't know enough about independent record label notability to make an informed judgement, so I leave them for others who can. Oh, and you might be interested in perusing Wikipedia:Notability and the sub-pages (linked on the right-hand side of the page). Those are the established guidelines for notability, broken down by subject. SWAdair | Talk 08:36, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for all your help. I intend to do some "book study today" ;) Ronbo76 15:28, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

{{helpme}}

Could someone take a look at this userpage User:Amie Gislason. I got up to check something and came across this page. Please deal with it appropriately as I have to go to bed. Ronbo76 11:02, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

What's wrong with that ? ≈Tulkolahten≈^≈talk≈ 11:25, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

I must have misread or interpreted how a user page should be designed. My interpretation of this page was that the user was attempting to make an article about itself. Now having re-read the user page article, I can see where this might be interpreted as this person's sandbox. Ronbo76 13:47, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Black Child

I've removed the {{wikify}}, as there's nothing that seems to need doing; I wikified it myself not long ago. I also removed the multiple {{fact}} templates, as there seemd no obvious reason for them. Note also:

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Before saving your changes to an article, please provide an edit summary for your edits. Doing so helps everyone to understand the intention of your edit (and prevents legitimate edits from being mistaken for vandalism). It is also helpful to users reading the edit history of the page. Thank you. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 11:26, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

1. Spelling errors aren't a matter for wikification, but for copy-editing. Which do you have in mind?
2. Random characters: which? (Again, though, if there were any, that's not a wikification matter, but copy-editing.
3. Facts: again, not a matter of wikification. Do you have grounds to doubt any of the claims? If so, which and why? Talk:Black Child would probably be the best place to continue this discussion. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 11:34, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

When leaving messages on Talk pages, don't make your first sentence into a new-section header; it makes discussions messy and difficult to follow, as well as taking up a lot of space. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 11:37, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

You are absolutely right and the article does look much better considering it "did not need work" and has a style more common to a wiki article. Ronbo76 14:54, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

RE:Jason Mizell

Hello. I'm not sure what exactly to review about the article. I'm also not familiar with the subject. If specific details look dubious to you, you can always tag it with a {{fact}} tag to request a source (or provide one yourself). If you know a claim to be false, feel free to remove it (state why in the edit summary). Cheers, Gzkn 11:30, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, but I'm going have to agree with Mel here. Spelling errors in Black Child don't merit a {{wikify}} tag. The filmography section can be easily sourced to http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1794909/. Instead of tagging each one with {{fact}}, just add the reference. Oh, and any editor can remove a db tag as Mel did to mine if s/he disagrees with the rationale. Gzkn 11:41, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

You are absolutely right. Ronbo76 13:13, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Arno Political Consultants

I have added references to the article Arno Political Consultants, removed some overly promotional text and removed the prod tag. I think that the article is now acceptable, but if you disagree you may want to send the article to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. --Eastmain 20:05, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Wickey Selpub Factor

WTF? Are you advertising it or something? Just wondering. S h a r k f a c e 2 1 7 20:29, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Since someone asked, I am an anti-vandal patriot. The WSF is a theory I have developed that concerns the self-publication of articles on Wikipedia. Basically, someone seeking more glory than just the self-postulates put up on private pages that do not get reviews will seek to find a legitimate place where their grandiose will last forever. Wikipedia is that place because it means they have arrived so to speak. If the stuff they post here sticks to the wall, the post becomes a searchable and citeable item. In researching self-posts, I have noticed that Wikipedia is usually the first place or hit someone seeking notable status gets besides dubious hits on answer dot com and then my space. One such spammer only had three internet search hits in this order: Wikipedia, answer.com and myspace. No, I am not advertising for anything. I just want to snuff out self-publishing vandals with my big black dog truth edits. Ronbo76 21:36, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Okies, just checking. S h a r k f a c e 2 1 7 21:04, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

It can be tough. Which is why I tend to spend less time patrolling and more time improving Wikipedia. Again, I suggest you go to User:Canadian-Bacon for advice on this matter. S h a r k f a c e 2 1 7 00:02, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

My concern lies with it being a self-published article. Fails - WP:Auto and WP:COI. Ronbo76 03:01, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Re.:Hi

Oh, thanks. Hadn't realized that. It's fixed now. Cheers, The Raven's Apprentice ^{(Talk|Contribs)} 03:54, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Complimentification AfD

Hi there. I didn't add anything other than plain text and my signature to the AfD, and it looks OK here. If there's a problem with it, it looks like it's at your end. Tevildo 05:34, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Re: Wikidefcon Levels

You can do it yourself- just click the Edit link on it and follow the instructions on screen. Cheers! Nwwaew (Talk Page) (Contribs) (E-mail me) 13:32, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

{{helpme}}

Hello, I just nominated an article for deletion, Bjornar Simonsen because its creator has indicated on the article talkpage he now believes the article should be considered for deletion. When I tried to load the debate, I got a messaged edit that this article had been previously considered for delete and that I would have to go through a lengthy process to renominate it. As an editor I do not have all the skills to do this. But, as an editor, I have successfully nominated other AfD. Could someone help me complete the nomination? Ronbo76 16:09, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

I've fixed the links for you; follow the link to the debate and you should be able to add a nom reason now. --ais523 16:39, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

I changed the template on that page to a speedy deletion template, since deletion was requested by the author. This eliminates the need for an AFD page. —P^urpleRA^IN 16:44, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

I've edited the page to have both a speedy tag and an AfD tag, as the AfD tag shouldn't be removed just because a speedy tag is added (sorry for the confusion there)... As for the 'editor review' link you requested, I don't have an entry on Editor Review at the moment, but I'm happy to listen to any comments you might have (my talk page is a reasonable place to put them). --ais523 17:00, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

I've speedied it as per the creator's request. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 17:32, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

WP:CSD etc.

Hey no problem. It takes a while to get your head round all the options. If you haven't seen it yet, also read proposed deletion which is sort of halfway between a speedy delete and a full AfD. Best, Gwernol 19:01, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Re. Thank you for protecting JFK

You're welcome, keep up the good work! I'm not from Iceland, I'm from Portugal. I just adopted an Icelandic username. Regards,--Húsönd 19:54, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Even better. One of these days I will go to Portugal and Spain to visit Our Lady. I am of Spanish descent. Ronbo76 19:57, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm

This is interesting. How does this tie in with self publishing?

Like, say if I had a book called "ZYZZYSDDS and Friends". How would I use your theory to..... do what, exactly? S h a r k f a c e 2 1 7 20:05, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm, maybe I'll do that when I publish a book (lol, kidding). This is very good work. I suggest you put it up at the Village Pump, found at WP:PUMP. Feel free to list me as a collaborator for this project (lol, leeching onto Ronbo for fame ^_~). S h a r k f a c e 2 1 7 20:24, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

AHHH! You did it wrong. Hold on, I'll try to fix it. S h a r k f a c e 2 1 7 20:37, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Ok, what I suggest you do is..... hmmmm. Well, I got rid of it for a bit. You shouldn't directly copy and paste that as you did because you created multiple topics. I'll work something out and repost it with a link to your page. S h a r k f a c e 2 1 7 20:40, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Posted it here with some minor corrections, although I have yet to make some fixes. Enjoy. S h a r k f a c e 2 1 7 21:00, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

I also started you a new page. Yes, you can start new user pages by going into the address bar (when you're looking at your own user page) and then typing in /whatever (whatever can be replaced by any word). Your kill page is here. I suggest you clean up your user page (preferably, to end up like AndonicO's) with all your information on different pages. It's much cleaner that way. S h a r k f a c e 2 1 7 21:06, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

aboutJiaozi and Jiaozi (Money)

I am chinese,I am sure they are not the same things.--Ksyrie 21:27, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

It's ok,they just appeared too similar in spelling.thans for your source.--Ksyrie 21:44, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

you are really a kind one,for the disambiguity page,I will try to make it.I wish you a happy good new year.--Ksyrie 21:55, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

You speaks spanish?Great!I am totally pleased that you touched up this article.--Ksyrie 22:18, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Wickey Selpub

I find this interesting, but I'm not really involved much with AfD, and I haven't even read the guidelines about vanity articles very thoroughly. I don't think self-publishing on Wikipedia is much of a concern -- editors here seem to be pretty thorough when researching AfD's, and don't tend to let things stick that shouldn't. Glad I could help with your AfD problem (although it seems I goofed a little in removing the AfD tag, which was corrected). —P^urpleRA^IN 01:32, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

{{helpme}}

How do I appeal a speedy delete? I came across an article earlier this evening (just after it was created). I considered nominating it for AfD but when I saw the quality Yahoo hits he got, I put on the talkpage to put in some good quality third party references besides the one blog and his own website. It did not appear to me this was self-published. I noticed on my watchpage the nom for Speedy Delete and went to the page and put hangon. I went to talkpage and entered the following (the article is gone but I have not closed the talkpage I editted and saved):

Talk:Rob Tornoe

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search

Non-cur speedy delete. This cartoonist gets a lot of quality hits on Yahoo's searth engine. This is a political cartoonist who seems to be noteworthy - otherwise, I would have AfD'ed the article when I first visited the page (CfA). I do not know this individual and my POV is neutral - other than I enjoy cartoons. Ronbo76 05:13, 5 January 2007 (UTC) (Please check my contribution log to confirm).

I had planned on building one reference source with a good hit I got for him, which is the first Yahoo internet search hit for Rob Tornoe cartoonist. The first hit is: AAEC - Cartoonist Profile Rob Tornoe. That page, which is the The Association of American Editorial Cartoonists with a date of 2005. It has a good pic of him and much of the info that was in his article Rob tornoe (built with a "small T".

Trust me: if I had even a doubt about this cartoonist, I would have AfD'ed the article. Take a look at the top of my Talkpage and userpage if you have any doubts about me. Someone was too quick on the Speedy Delete as it came after I put the hangon and finished the article talkpage for the second time. How do I appeal this one???

BTW in the type it took to type in this the talkpage in the preview window went red indicating it got deleted too. I still have that window open (as posted above). Please help me as this guy seems deserving of an entry. Ronbo76 05:28, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

The deletion log shows the article was deleted according to CSD A7, meaning that the article "does not assert the importance or significance of its subject." In other words, it wasn't deleted because the person was non-notable, but because the article did not assert notability. There is a distinction there that is very important. Any article that does not assert notability (per established guidelines) is a candidate for speedy deletion. Rather than trying to dispute the speedy deletion, it might be easier to write a short article (stub) yourself, including an assertion of notability that meets WP:BIO. If you believe the article did assert notability before it was deleted, you may want to discuss it with the admin who deleted the article, or else list it at Deletion review. SWAdair | Talk 05:39, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Hehe... it is good that you seek out vandalism and take the necessary steps to fix it, but adding content is also important. This will be a good opportunity for you to do that. You might want to work on the stub in your personal sandbox before creating it in the article space. That way you can be sure that it meets standards before putting it out there. When you have it ready, let me know and I'll take a look at it. It would also be helpful if you add a reference or two to the article so that it has reliable sources. SWAdair | Talk 05:53, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

P.S. I'm about to go on patrol, so I'm going to be away from a computer for the next two hours. SWAdair | Talk 05:56, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

I know what you mean. I have several things I want to eventually get around to, but I need uninterrupted computer time to do them, and I can never count on that. I end up spending most of my time on vandalism patrol because frequent (real life) interruptions don't matter there. Occasionally I stop to help out on an article, making small "wikignome" edits. Trying to juggle everything and research/write/source an article is quite a challenge. You did a good job. SWAdair | Talk 08:24, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Lol oh man

Lol, you monitor my contribs? Gotta add you to my list of Wiki-stalkers (lol, kidding). Ummmm, I'm not on patrol, as it's 1 AM and I got school in 5 hours. Just doing some quick voting for FPCs before I hop off. I'm rarely on vandal patrol if it's below a 2. If you notice (by going through my contribs), I actually prefer to spend time creating and improving articles rather than rving some pre-pubescent's vandalism. But for you, I'll be on vandal patrol for 10 mins or so. Starting now. S h a r k f a c e 2 1 7 06:08, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

I'll see what I can do. S h a r k f a c e 2 1 7 06:13, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

He's done the same hack job on the nom for his name Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Curtis Newart. The pages look like sandbox entries. Ronbo76 06:15, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

*drum roll*

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		For your service to Wikipedia by fighting a large amount of vandals in your short time here as an active user and for your dedication to ensuring that Wikipedia is a source of accurate knowledge, I, S h a r k f a c e 2 1 7 , hereby award you with the RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar. Good job.S h a r k f a c e 2 1 7 06:34, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

You've earned it. And I'm off for the night. Toodles. S h a r k f a c e 2 1 7 06:34, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Ronbo76 09:23, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

You're quite welcome. S h a r k f a c e 2 1 7 20:39, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Photo of politicians

hi, these photos have no copyright - therefore must be removed from article203.213.98.16 09:37, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

no need for help as I've deleted all links to the images breaching copyright done by Scorpio80 who has now been blocked for breaching his/her acts. Therefore I clean the mess 203.213.98.16 09:43, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Inclined to agree

Yes, it looks like an ad, and the claims of the book being a "best-seller" seem dubious at best. Also, RHaworth is someone whose judgement I generally respect, so that's another point against it. Fan-1967 20:23, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Vacation

Hope your Wiki-vacation goes well. S h a r k f a c e 2 1 7 20:40, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Vandals

Hello, while on vandal patrol two of the pages I watch were tagged with blogs containing pictures of the articles. I have been following some of the discussion on the Village Pump about blogs and the reluctance to use them. On a past patrol I came across one blog link that had semi-nude pix. Blogs with pix are notorious for being spam linkers and infected with viruses. Here is the user contributions I am working right now: User contributions. I took care of the women who host Primer Impacto. I do not have time to undo the others. Ronbo76 21:46, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

There's a redlink there. I'd note that Wikipedia is not censored and blogs are not automatically disallowed, although I can see your concerns. Do you have a valid link to the edits in question? Xiner (talk, email) 21:53, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

How many times has the person inserted such links, especially after your warning? Keep in mind WP:AGF. You should argue on the grounds of copyrights violation, rather than the nudity in the images, which again Wikipedia does not censor. Xiner (talk, email) 22:05, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, in that case the person needs to be careful about posting any more of the same. Yeah, use the right templates. Xiner (talk, email) 22:13, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Ok, it seems like the copyright template doesn't include links to other sites (maybe you can ask someone to write that up), so I ended up continuing your line of argument after all. Please note that you should always substitute warning templates; that is, type {{subst:welcome}} rather than {{welcome}}. Xiner (talk, email) 22:34, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes, that's the same line of reasoning being used on that IP. Xiner (talk, email) 22:52, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Question

Regarding your military lingo, did you ever serve in any branches of the US military? Just wondering. S h a r k f a c e 2 1 7 21:56, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

US Navy Slang

I'm pretty sure it is going to be deleted. Although it is useful, it has already been transwiki'd to Wiktionary. What probably will happen is that the page will redirect to Wiktionary. S h a r k f a c e 2 1 7 22:51, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Roger, observed your vampire behind my goes away. AfD in sight will engage again. ronbo76, out Ronbo76 23:00, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

What I suggest is that you move away from vandal fighting and more towards imrpoving articles. I'll try to get help from other Wikipedians who are ex-military or do lots of work with military articles (like Balloonman). S h a r k f a c e 2 1 7 01:06, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

lawsuit

Hello, a user just posted a lawsuit threat against in the following message that appears in line 452 of mytalk page:

This message is for Ronbo76 and friends. I have noticed that you and your friends have been nominating my page for deletion. I am not sure what your reasons are for these actions. I am mentioned in Wikipedia in several places, including Grand Master Caz, Hip-Hop History, Latin Hip-Hop and felt that I should have my own page. If you had done any reseach you would have found out who I am. You are obviouly not doing your job, if in fact it is your job. I hope that this will be the last time I have to contact you. The next time you interrupt my page, I will personally report you to Wikipedia and my lawyers for slander and defamation of character. If you do not know your history you have no business writing or editing for any historical facts. History has written who I am, not me. So, learn your history and leave me alone!

What should be done about this? Ronbo76 01:06, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Can you provide the diff? Xiner (talk, email) 01:17, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

See under heading 18. Leave a message at his talkpage with a link to Wikipedia:No legal threats. Bjelleklang - talk 01:19, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

The Diff can be found here, as it was removed previously by another wikipedia user. I suggest you just ignore it/ tell him the wikipedia policy on legal threats. S h a r k f a c e 2 1 7 01:23, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Have a good night, Ronbo. S h a r k f a c e 2 1 7 01:28, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Hey, Ronbo, don't worry about it. He put the same thing on my page. I guess we're part of the cabal now! I left him a long comment on his talk page. He can't sue us, and he will be sorted out soon enough. GhostPirate 01:35, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

His IP has been blocked for making legal threats. But, I've got a feeling we haven't seen the last of DJ Disco Wiz. GhostPirate 01:45, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Published!

Woohoo! Now if I ever plan to publish a book, I'll just throw up the name of it here on Wikipedia a few times and it shall appear. Yay! S h a r k f a c e 2 1 7 19:47, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Nadir

Hi --- this page used to discuss an astronomical concept (opposite of Zenith); User:Nadironline hijacked it to discuss the non-notable singer with the myspace page, so I've reverted back to the last version before he edited. Cheers, cab 05:59, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Nadir promo6.jpg

You just had the [ ] misbalanced! I had to look 2x before I figured that out (thought it was the {} )! SkierRMH 06:48, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Please, please make that picture disappear!! You can erase the help tag too! SkierRMH 06:54, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Believe it or not, I wasn't replying to the 'Helpme', I was looking thru some ifd's and saw this one was having problems!!SkierRMH 07:01, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

helpme

File:Nadir promo6 this will knock out file .jpg is being used to hijack Nadir (please that article's edit history). This picture may be copyrighted. Recommend deletion. I tried to tag it db but the tag will not stick. Ronbo76 06:43, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, I must be getting tired. Think I should delete that picture off my talkpage? I've seen enough of it on the [[Nadir] hijacks! I have both on my watchlist. I bet the two users build a Nadironline article next. Ronbo76 06:54, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

I've deleted both the image and the article now. In future, if you want to link to an image, put a colon before the link (e.g., [[:Image:Nadir promo6.jpg]]) to avoid a great big image from appearing on your user talk page. ;) Cheers, Tangotango (talk) 06:57, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Re.Thank you

You're welcome ^^. I'm just beggining to plank those vandal. Do you know any way to revert vandalism faster ? I'm using the java rc monitor right now. Is there something better ? Esurnir 15:11, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Edit war

There seems to be a war of edits going in this article KTVX. Someone just blanked a section that looked okay to me because it is properly cited. Looking at the discussion page, a war is going on over that paragraph. This might require some type of admin intervention. It is beyond my humble editting skills to revert the passage. Ronbo76 20:15, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

I'll throw my head into the ring...btw, I think your userbox belongs to your user page. Just my nitpick. Xiner (talk, email) 20:24, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Mark Lund

Well, it won't be deleted as vanity under Speedy Deletion Criteria, but if you want, you can bring it up for AfD. I think that is the best thing to do right now. I don't know about his notability, but the fact that he made his own article seems a bit odd. Nishkid64 00:03, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, I semi-protected it because there was heavy vandalism to the article. I wouldn't mind an AfD. I'm actually interested to see what others have to say about the article. You can start one up if you want. Nishkid64 00:10, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, remove the prod messages from the page and leave an edit summary saying that you're taking it to AfD. Then create the AfD page, and place a message on the page, accordingly. Thanks. Nishkid64 00:19, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

{helpme}

I was about to put a prod2 on Basketball Jesus when I noticed what looks like an embedded template within the article that could be used to mass generate articles here on Wikipedia. Could a senior editor or admin type look at this template? Ronbo76 05:23, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

I think it just contained info from the Wikipedia:Articles for creation page. It is deleted now, so everything is fine.--Commander Keane 05:32, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

o.O I didn't know you could do that

I noticed you just {{prod2}}'d a speedy deletion nomination. I'm new to the whole new page patrol deal, but I've been doing a lot of speedy nominations, and I hadn't realised you could do such a thing (I thought it was only with prods), and I was wondering if you could lend some pointers as to what you can do... Happy editing! —Keakealani·?·!·@ 05:46, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Warning

Don't use {{prod2}} for speedy deletions, it is only used for proposed deletions John Reaves 05:48, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Just thought I'd let you know that that instead of typing "minor", you can click the minor edit button below the word preview under the edit summary box. To see what a minor edit looks like in a list of recent changes, look at the history of this page - I've marked this edit as minor. Also, I thought I'd let you know about Special:Newpages. I noticed on another talk page that you could only find new pages through the recent changes page. If you'd like, I can give you a script that puts a "New Pages" link in your navigation sidebar (the same place as the recent changes link). John Reaves 06:41, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

I noticed that you still aren't using the minor edit function. Is there a reason for this? John Reaves 22:56, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Are you going to continue to ignore me? John Reaves 02:56, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

I've merely offered you some useful advice and tried to help you. I'd like a reply. John Reaves 05:18, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zeta Tau Chapter of Beta Theta Pi

Hey Ronbo76, at this AFD your comment seems to end abruptly. Your last sentence says "Decision changed with" and that's where it ends. Could you explain what you meant by it? Also, would you mind reexamining your reason behind keeping it? One of your thoughts was that there are other articles on chapters from this fraternity existing, so they should all stay or all go. The other two chapters from this frat on Wikipedia are up for deletion here. Thanks, Metros232 14:02, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't think changing or adding to my opinion will sway the delete count. If anything, if you as the nominator see a reason for the save, remove the nomination. Ronbo76 14:27, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

COMMENT - Nominator wants to debate this on his talkpage which I firmly believe is the wrong place for this conversation. If he has doubts or wants to call for comment, it should be on the AfD nom or the frat page. Ronbo76 14:33, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

AfD was closed at 15:25Z with the article Deleted. Ronbo76 15:37, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Mark Lund's AfD

Well, Mangojuice (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) closed the AfD four days premature as a consensus of delete. I'm not so sure that he was entirely following procedure here, or if he made an honest mistake, so I have messaged him requesting he restore the AfD and let it run its course or provide reasons for closing it early. Nishkid64 22:00, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Okay, he responded saying, "Ah, whoops, didn't realize that was an early close. Will reopen.". We'll get a final consensus in four days. Nishkid64 22:04, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Ralph Alvarez - WP:SNOW

Gotta remember this one!!!! Ronbo76 05:03, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

What's your problem?

So I may be a new user, but why are you targeting me? I did not add nonsense or vandalise anything as you claim. In the Amusic article, I was simply trying to add factual content, and I simply posted a question on the talk page to see if anyone could help me do that. Byxbee 06:57, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

An admin type will review your work. Your title on my talkpage is considered an "attacking style" An admin will review your edits. Basically when you add words or incorrect verb tenses, you call you work into question. Denise HO? Ronbo76 07:01, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Denise Ho is the real name an actual singer. Go see for youself. I'm sorry, but I was just trying to contribute. Byxbee 07:12, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

CSD

Have you seen WP:CSD? This page list many templates you can use for speedy deletion. They're more specific than {{db|Reason}}. John Reaves 07:03, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Try to remain civil. I'm just trying to help you improve your editing and make you familiar with the way Wikipedia works. John Reaves 07:08, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

== Please stay off my talkpage ==

I have no desire for advice from you or conversation. Thanks. Ronbo76 07:04, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Please note: I did use please and thanks which in my old school book is being very civil. I suggest this user not troll mark up my talkpage. Ronbo76 18:24, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't think you know what a minor edit is. John Reaves 17:30, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Might I suggest that you don't refer to those who give you advice as trolls? He was merely pointing out that there are templates you can use in the place of typing out a reason. Many people prefer to use those templates because it clearly explains the policy reasons behind deleting the article for those who might not be familiar with the policies. His actions are far from trolling and I suggest you refrain from such personal attacks and incivility, Metros232 18:41, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

== About your post ==

He has been following all my posts and crtitiquing me. When I asked him nicely to stop because I did not want his advice, he continued. I wonder where he learned about Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mark Lund? It is the post below his and he joined in the debate. As an AfD nominator, I have never seen him on those pages. I apologize to you if you think troll is hard word but I have seen other mentors use it. Ronbo76 18:50, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

BTW, how did you find out my post? He brought another user to my talkpage who commented on my post. Respectfully to you, if you read my talkpage, there have been others who are guiding me along that I trust for advice. I do not trust him and that is the basis for my request. I respectfully ask he honor my wishes. Ronbo76 18:53, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

I found your post because I have your talk page on my watchlist. And it's not that I find troll to be a "hard word" it's that our civility guidelines find it a "hard word" (see the examples it provides). And he has have every right to go !vote in that AFD if he so pleases regardless of how he discovered the discussion. Metros232 19:00, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

On what basis do you not trust me? I have been watching your edits because they are very questionable, that's how I found the AfD. I have voted on plenty of AfDs, remember WP:OWN. There's nothing wrong with admitting that your doing things wrong. John Reaves 19:48, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Mark Lund

FYI, I have completely rewritten the Mark Lund article from external published sources. You may want to reconsider the AfD. Dr.frog 15:09, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

• "Self-published"? I wrote the current version of the article. I am not Mark Lund. I have no business or personal connection to Mark Lund. Dr.frog 15:16, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

I nominated this article solely based on the number of self-edits I observed going on. When I asked another editor about the page and it being self-created, he suggested going the AfD route. I nominate solely on the basis of WP:BIO and let the debate settle the AfD. Ronbo76 18:27, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

{{talkheader}} usage

Just a heads-up, this quote is from the template's page :

"This template should be used only when needed. Acculturation can't be forced, and it can be overdone. If the message is on every talk page, its impact will be reduced."

I figured I'd let you delete it so that you wouldn't accuse me of trolling again. John Reaves 23:51, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Did you not get my message? Don't use this on talk pages that don't need it, especially empty ones. John Reaves 05:42, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Talk:Leyna Nguyen edit summaries

15:43, January 11, 2007 John Reaves Talk contribs m (moved talkheader to top -(not stalking you Ron, found this on my own, saw your name in the history)) Ronbo76 07:21, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

14:34, January 11, 2007 Ronbo76 (Talk contribs) (Minor: add tags) - (Please note time difference in post by two different editors - 51 minutes difference) Ronbo76 07:28, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

You've falsely accused me of trolling before, I just wanted to clarify so you didn't slander me again. John Reaves 07:25, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Please see edit summaries by another user and the subsequent follow-up. Ronbo76 07:06, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

How is any of this relevant? Why do you refuse to address me?John Reaves 07:32, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Iren Marik edit summaries. BTW, if the follow-up editor had read the article, he would have known Iren is a she. Ronbo76 07:12, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

22:45, January 11, 2007 John Reaves (Talk contribs) (he's dead; rate) (my emphasis on what the other editor placed on the summary) Ronbo76 07:24, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Okay, what does that prove? I realized it should be deleted and then deleted it. So what? When was gender mentioned? John Reaves 07:14, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I see. Different article. Still not relevant.added 07:20, 12 January 2007 (UTC) John Reaves 07:18, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Please note - That as I trying to fill out this review, the other editor has jumped all over it. (almost in real-time edits) Ronbo76 07:32, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Your page is on my watchlist, nothing wrong with that. If your trying to get an outside comment, try request for third opinion or request for comment. John Reaves 07:37, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

I'd appreciate a reply. John Reaves 00:41, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Hello? Why are you ignoring me? John Reaves 06:47, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

WP:CAL

Welcome to the California WikiProject.

The articles on California certainly do need some work, so your help is greatly welcomed. I'm not sure how far back in California history you like to go. If you like early California history, you might want to look at the articles/people listed in List of pre-statehood governors of California , List of Original Signers of the 1849 Constitution, List of people associated with the California Gold Rush and List of California Historical Landmarks. The are several major articles on California history listed at WP:CAL#Major review articles on California, and a much larger list at List of California-related topics#History of California. The Californio article is one of the articles on California history that needs plenty of work. Almost none of the California ranchos have articles on them, which is a shame (see Alta California#Ranchos of California). Have suggestions helped at all? ^BlankVerse 12:27, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

image description

All of the options available for placing an image into a Wikipedia article can look quite confusing when you look at a page like Wikipedia:Extended image syntax. In practice, however, it can be very simple. The default is to use the thumbnail parameter, place the image on the right, and not to specify the image size unless there are specific reasons to do so (for example, a very wide, but not very tall panorama photo would be a meaningless horizontal line using the default image size).

For Image:Theodore Judah plaque.jpg, which you uploaded, you would use:

[[Image:Theodore Judah plaque.jpg|thumb|right|image description]]

You would place that wikicode just above the paragraph where you wanted the image to go, and the image will then display to the right of that paragraph. For a better flow of the text, it is best to place an image near the top of a section (usually right below the ==Section header== line). Putting two or three images in a row, or putting images on both the left and right side of the page in a section, can often result in a cramped ugly layout, expecially when someone is viewing the page at 800x600 screen resolution.

The biggest problem that you can get into is when the placement of the image conflicts with a template, such as an infobox. There are tricks around that problem, but usually its easier just to move the image to a different place in the article. If you upload a logo, often you will use the frame parameter instead of the thumb parameter. Does that help you? ^BlankVerse 07:18, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

California State Capitol building

A comment about your image uploads: Since you are either dual-licensing the images under the GFDL and Creative Commons licenses, or releasing them into the public domain, you don't need to mention a "fair use rationale". You would only need to do that if the primary subject of the photo was something that was copyrighted, such as a sculpture or wall mural. In those cases, you would have to be more specific and detailed about the fair use rationale by following the guidelines at Wikipedia:Fair use. For those two examples, you can use the {{statue}} or {{art}} templates respectively. Especially for the wall mural, I'd also only upload a smaller image (less than 800x600) and lower resolution (usually 72 dpi) to keep within the requirements for fair use. You can use a program like IrfanView to create the smaller, lower resolution image before you upload it.

I liked your photo of the state capitol, Image:California State Capitol.jpg. You should probably mention on the page for the image that the flags are at half staff for President Ford.

Also, since you are using standard copyleft licenses, or releasing the images into the public domain, you should consider getting an account on the Wikimedia Commons so that any of the images that you upload can then be easily used by any of the Wikimedia projects, such as other Wikipedias, Wikibooks, etc. There is even a tool, [CommonsHelper], that will help you move your images to the Wikimedia Commons. ^BlankVerse 07:54, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

California ranchos

I was excited yesterday when I discovered that someone had written an article on one of the Southern California ranchos, Rancho San Pedro, until I figured out that it was a copy-and-paste copyright violation by a n00b. :-(

Other local ranchos (for me) that need articles include Rancho Los Alamitos and Rancho Los Cerritos. There are bits and pieces of the histories for those two ranchos in some of the articles on local cities, so a basic start might be be to just copy the info into the new rancho articles. Then all the info would need to be verified. ^BlankVerse 03:59, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

A term paper is a good analogy. An overview article in a scientific journal would be another example. The facts aren't copyrightable, just the individual presentation of the facts.

The policy on fair use is getting much stricter on the English-language Wikipedia (most Wikipedias in other languages don't use fair use images at all because fair use is specific to US Copyright law). I have a feeling that eventually fair use will be restricted to 'iconic' images, such as the flag raising at Iwo Jima, company logos, and book and album covers.

Since you're interested in history stuff, fair use can be less of a problem for you. Almost anything older than 1923 that's been published is out-of-copyright, and therefore in the public domain. There was a Wikipedia editor who recently went through and added a bunch of nice historical photos to the articles on older cities in Southern California using the LA County Library website and the Library of Congress website to find the images. The LOC website, especially, does a very good job of providing information on the copyright status of an image. I've uploaded a few images from the LOC myself (e.g. Signal Hill, California where I used a crop of a panorama photo). ^BlankVerse 04:22, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

UC Berkeley Map Collection possible source of old maps for CA Rancho project. Ronbo76 03:30, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

• Ranchos of California - The best of rancho project info on UC site!!!

AIV

Thanks for your recent report of IMAC001 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). I've removed the report, because simply blanking a talk page is not a blockable offense. It's considered incivil, but, to date, no consensus has been reached about it being inappropriate. Regards, alphachimp 23:42, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Wikibreak

Hey Ronbo,

Just leaving a message to tell you that I will be on an extended Wikibreak. I will visit here periodically, but I shall be taking on a lessened workload. I have too much stuff I have to deal with in real life that this is one of the activities that I need to spend less time on. Goodl luck with all the vandals, and I hope you're able to find a new wingman and squadron to fly with.

Happy Flying,

S h a r k f a c e 2 1 7 21:35, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

What's wrong with flagging deadlinks--should everyone have to click them to find out they're dead? And how will Uncle G's rescue team know which ones need to have the content recovered?

I also fix numerous other problems while I'm there. 71.231.107.188 23:10, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

I am following the suggestion at Wikipedia:Citing_sources#What_to_do_when_a_reference_link_.22goes_dead.22 "...do not remove the inactive reference, but rather record the date that the original link was found to be inactive...", and given how many aren't flagged I don't see how anyone can argue that it's already being taken care of. 71.231.107.188 23:18, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Cesar Chavez

To be fair, when an item asked about on Talk is still there a year later, one wonders if anyone is watching the article, especially with a two-month gap in the discussion further down. I figured it was better done than not done, especially by someone without any sort of vested interest. MSJapan 22:04, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Those were the discussions I was referring to. The latest date on any of them is mid-November, and it's now mid-January. I'm simply explaining my rationale, and there's no need to get into an argument over this. People are either going to like the edit, or they're not. MSJapan 22:19, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

== Copyedit of César Chávez ==

Hello, that was a pretty big copyedit of César Chávez's article. It might have been nice to discuss it on the talkpage as that is a major edit. Ronbo76 22:01, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

That comment may be there, yes, but there are also two comments above my current comment asking for Requests for Comments. And, yes this is other users' watchpages. Ronbo76 22:12, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

In the interests of WP:CIVIL, I am not trying to get into an argument with you. I am trying to point out to you that you could discussed the changes prior. Oct and Nov were just three months ago. Ronbo76 22:26, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Vandals

Business is good today. Hope you're on soon. S h a r k f a c e 2 1 7 00:11, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

I'll do my best to cover what I can and contain the damage.S h a r k f a c e 2 1 7 00:51, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

RE:Copernicus

I have been dealing with this user for a while on various articles, for the most part, his edits are at best disruptive. It is safe to say that 98% of his edits so far have been reverted.

--Jadger 01:05, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

He is blocked, but is evading it, once he is properly blocked we will not see him for a while hopefully

--Jadger 03:05, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Copernicus

I checked it over and there is no harm done. An easy way to do this is to go into history and click on the circle next to the last good edit you know. There should be a bullet at the top next to the current version in place, if not click on the right hand circle next to the newest edit. Click "Compare selected version" and it will show you any changes that there are in place between those two versions. if there is still a malicious edit you should remove it manually. It is kinda hard to explain but I hope it helps. Cheers, Philip Gronowski ^Contribs 01:14, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, that's what I do. But as you can see from the histories, one anon IP was over-writing/riding edits while you and I were doing reversals. I try to pick the best one looking for one by an established username. Ronbo76 01:17, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Link on Copernicus

The link was not broken - if you would attempt to check it. I only removed the chauvinistic: "Thus the child of a German family was a subject of the Polish crown." This has nothing to do with scientific considerations. Please fix the link youself if you supposes should be done better. My talk page is: [[1]], Thanks, Andrew PS. I edited the place many times since it is not easy to make it perfect at once. Is sandbox addequate place for the work? I do not think so. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 131.104.218.127 (talk) 01:22, 17 January 2007 (UTC).

This discussion is being held on other userpages where this individual has been seen to disrupt articles. Cf. the above post as a regular contributor has reviewed the article and left what this anon IP tried to edit out.

The other activity on other articles has nothing to do with the single one. And the chauvinistic: "Thus the child of a German family was a subject of the Polish crown." is still there. Please contact me at [[2]], Andrew

From the Talk:Nicolaus Copernicus

I was not too keen on the, thus a son. . ., nationality sentence either. But, this page has been on my watchlist since vandal IPs struck it a while back. When it popped up on my watchlist with edits by anonymous IPs, I reviewed the history to see what sections had been affected. And, yes, you are right that even in preview mode, it was difficult to discern what section had really been tampered with - the edits and refs were that good. In essence, I defaulted to the advice another user gave me about vandal patrol: if you can't figure out what are good edits versus bad (but do know that bad edits did occur), find a previous edition you are relatively certain about and revert to it. Then, let the white knight editors do their thing.

To get back to the nationality statement, I determined it had been there for several revisions. Suddenly it and another section were getting hit. The nationality statement should have been addressed here to potentially avoid edit wars as then users like me could discern what the general conscensus was. Unfortunately in my mind that sentence while poorly written does have a truth element to it, i.e., it would be similar to saying the U.S. was under the thumb of the King of England at one time.

I do appreciate that you approve of my humble efforts. Yesterday, the WP:WDEFCON, aka Wiki DefCon Meter, went to two late in the afternoon just as I was getting ready for a meeting. It was difficult to keep up with all my watchlist pages getting hit but I stayed in the battle as long as I could (even delaying dinner). Cheers, Ronbo76 15:15, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Nicolaus Copernicus vandal

Looks like just about every IP address or username involved in this has been blocked. I'll keep an eye on it though, just in case. --Fang Aili ^talk 14:29, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Good edit to Doomsday Clock user:24.83.34.27

Thanks for catching the vandalism I missed. Ronbo76 01:02, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Talk:Olompali State Historic Park

You don't need to put {{Talkheader}} on every article's talk page. It's usually only used on talk pages that get plenty of newbies that need a gentle reminder that the Wikipedia is a talk page and not a discussion forum, and to give them some quick pointers on talk page behavior and some links to Wikipedia policies and guidelines. See, for example, talk:Evolution.

I did it for a specific reason because I invited comment on the page but it's been removed.

To make sure that an article is part of particular WikiProject, all you need to do is add that ↔project's banner to the article's talk page, and make sure that the article itself is also in the appropriate categories. Olompali State Historic Park, for example, should be added to category:Native American tribes in California. The article should also get the banner for WikiProject National Register of Historic Places.

If an article is a stub, then you can also add the appropriate stub(s} template to the bottom of the article. WP:CAL has a list of California-specific stubs, and the Stub-sorting WikiProject has a list of all the stubs. WP:LWP is the gateway page to the lists of various WikiProjects. ^BlankVerse 03:20, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Also: Please don't inflate the importance rating of articles when you assess them in the WikiProject banners. The importance rating serves two purposes. One is to help WikiProjects know which are the most importance articles related to their particular topic. The other is to help those editors working on the creation of the Wikipedia's first CD-ROM release. Articles of Mid to Top importance, for example, would probably include most of the topics found in the one-volume 51,000 article Columbia Encyclopedia. ^BlankVerse 03:33, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

I apologize if I was overzealous. Ronbo76 03:39, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

No problem. I just don't want to see the assessment equivalent of grade inflation. The major topics and overview articles, such as the two articles on the History of California and Los Angeles, California, should get High or Top ratings. Alta California, and the Pueblos of California (when it gets written) should get High ratings. As for the individual parks and historic sites, only the most important, such as the Presidio of San Francisco and the major California missions, should be rated better than Low (IMHO). ^BlankVerse 03:53, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Article assessments

For assessing city articles, the Geography and Demographics sections were all added a few years ago by User:Rambot, a computerized bot that extracted US Census and other data to create the sections. For that reason, I completely ignore those sections when I assess an article on a city, and also when I'm deciding if a city needs a stub template on the article page.

Also: It was a different bot that added all of the WP:CAL templates to the talk pages. One thing that I've been slowly doing by hand as I assess articles is changing almost all of the Southern California articles to use {{WikiProject Southern California}} instead of the WP:CAL template. For a few major cities, such as Los Angeles, California, or major geographic features, or anything that overlaps both SoCal and NorCal, I am leave both WP banners on the article's talk page.

One thing on my list of things to do is to find a bot owner who will help do the conversions from CAL to SOCAL automatically, but I haven't done that yet. ^BlankVerse 13:39, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

I need to revisit a lot of pages that I assessed because of several minor errors I found that I wanted to source. I will recheck the assessments according. Ronbo76 14:24, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Alemany Maze

The {{orphan}} tag is NOT because the article has not been 'adopted' by a WikiProject. If you read the tag, it says that it is because there are very few inbound wikilinks to the Alemany Maze article. You can verify that by clicking the "What links here" link (Special:Whatlinkshere/Alemany_Maze). You'll see that there are currently only three Wikipedia articles that link to it: California State Route 82, U.S. Route 101 Bypass (California), and U.S. Route 101 in California. Three links is roughly the borderline for adding an orphan tag to an article (which is often added by a bot).

Looking at the article, there are at least three other article that you could have links from: Junipero Serra Freeway, Interstate 280 (California, and James Lick Freeway. If possible, it is best to integrate the info on the Alemany Maze into the main text of those articles, and not just add the Alemany Maze link to the See also section.

The See also section in the MacArthur Maze article is another natural link.

The other thing would be to look for any articles that are on Transportation in the San Francisco Bay area or Freeways in the San Francisco Bay area. (Which if they don't exist, probably need to be written. See the equivalent articles for Los Angeles (the links should be on the Los Angeles, California, Los Angeles County and/or Greater Los Angeles area articles.) ^BlankVerse 07:18, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Chávez

There are still several problems with the article: He should be referred to by his surname consistently. That "he remembers" text was a modification of something lifted from the UFW site that never got quite smoothed out. The intro mentions nothing about why he was such an important figure for the Chicano Movement--that is, the larger-than-life status he gained in the eyes of many Mexican-Americans. I always prefer to recount a biography chronologically--it just seems to flow better that way. Cesar's article could definitely use some chronologizing. The CSO should remain a redlink--and the article should be written before the article gets nominated for GA status again. Their archives are at CSUN. The article doesn't mention any of his personality traits-- a tendency toward mysticism, or his vegetarianism, for two examples. Or his faults-- nepotism in the hierarchy of the UFW. In fact, the references section doesn't look like they were used as references for the article at all, but were rather tacked on as a makeshift "Further reading" section. Finally, for GA/FA status, all citations should be in-line. This article needs a serious rewrite. A simple copyedit is not going to cut it. I appreciate your efforts to improve the article, but if you really want to do it good, read the books listed at the bottom, especially the Ross text, and start from scratch.--Rockero 23:01, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

misfile

the anti-webcomic crusade needs to stop. (I don't know if this is the proper way to message someone on here. meh) Ohemgee 06:35, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Well then something needs to change.Ohemgee 06:39, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Climate map

This map shows the BSh zone (covering most of the Baja California peninsula) barely clipping the extreme southwest tip of California. While the precipitation is only slightly less, it is enough to cross the BSh/Csa boundary (less than annual evaporation). CrazyC83 22:01, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Re: Hi, I am still working on that article

Sorry, I never knew. But I am finished editing that article. I just noticed that the article has expanded so I added some info. Thank you for the expansion of the page.M&NCenarius 03:59, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

PS: Have fun editing! :) M&NCenarius 04:12, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

An email address

Hi. No need to reply if you don't want to, but methinks you should enter an email address in your Wikipedia account. Sometimes people might want to talk privately, and I haven't seen any spam though I prominently display a link to emailing me. Just a thought. Xiner (talk, email) 04:18, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Thought about but decided no. I want to be above board. If Wikipedia wanted us to have protected pages or email capability, it would been built into the wiki software. Now, it's another thing to use Navy slang. Ronbo76 04:24, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, the email capability is built in, as evident in my link, and I've had admins contacting me that way, though I admit I feel a little strange about it too. Maybe I'll reconsider my own stance. Xiner (talk, email) 04:33, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Xiner01, copy. Wilco your transmission and review AfD. Aluminum cloud engaging.

On email, I mean a protected talkpage where one can receive messages like this but only seen by the sender and receiver. I know I can opt in with My Preferences but have chosen not to for the reason above. Ronbo76 04:48, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

In any case, the reason I wanted to email you was to ask for your honest opinion about this discussion. I was afraid a negative answer may undercut my position, but it's not like anyone's gonna read my talk page anyway. Now, I want to ask you about it because some people are claiming a "'not' categories are to be deleted" consensus, and while there's one such rule for userboxes, I'm wondering if my opposition to one for user cats has sound footings or not. You haven't been involved in the discussions and I thought you might offer a friendly but fresh perspective. Xiner (talk, email) 04:39, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, that's the kind of answer I was afraid of. I'm not worried about my "ultimate position in the Wiki community", but the keep votes, which I'm not sure will be enough for the non-smoking cat. But your answer is helpful. Thanks. Xiner (talk, email) 14:58, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm clueless. Aluminum Cloud is Tomcat-14. Other than that...Xiner (talk, email) 18:35, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Cyptic much? Xiner (talk, email) 18:46, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

lol. ok. impressive visuals, i must say. Xiner (talk, email) 19:00, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, one of the admins on that page just gave up. Looks like it'll be deleted after all. Xiner (talk, email) 14:43, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Salma Hayek edit

Hi, Hayek attended Universidad Iberoamericana, a Jesuit college. All of my edits re. Jesuit schools can be verified, many from sources linked within the respective biographies. Please review my edits and you will find this to be the case. I added the Jesuit link to various articles because it contributes to their biography, i.e. tells us something significant about their background. You may feel differently, and we may respectfully disagree, but I contend one's educational background is quite revealing. I also respectfully ask that you unblock my editing privileges —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 128.143.230.22 (talk) 07:07, 23 January 2007 (UTC).

Moncy Pothen article

This article got a prod and was deleted. He has created article in past. After tonight's prod and delete, the article was recreated again. I believe language differences may play into this. This user needs an editor to shepherd in the article creation process. I don't know if the templates for creating an article and playing in the sandbox will help. His statement on the article seemed like a cry for help if I ever saw one. Ronbo76 06:40, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

I have reviewed the entire history of the article. I have made the following conclusions:

• According to the log history of the article, it has never been deleted (if an article has been deleted and then recreated, its deletion history can be found by clicking on View logs of this page on the article's history page.
  
• The article has had the prod tag added and taken away and re-added (although 20 days apart).
  
• The user User:Bakasuprman when he removed the {{prod}} tag noted "rm prod, hes notable indo-nostalgic writer" (although this does not necessarily make him right) (So at least one advanced wikipedian believes in this articles notability -- although this must obviously be supported by correct citations)
  
• Google has ~666 hits for Moncy Pothen, and ~13400 hits for his book Beneath the Clouds and Coconut Leaves including a listing of his book on Amazon.com ^{Note that the article in question is about the author Moncy Pothen and not the book Beneath the Clouds and Coconut Leaves}
• The article has not yet been put up for deletion review (ever).
• My advice is as follows (in this order):

1. First find a decent reference to him and his book Beneath the Clouds and Coconut Leaves -- like the amazon one which is apparently commercial. Why can't we use the Amazon.com link as a reference? (Surely that doesn't count as a commercial link?) Perhaps we can find a listing of the book on the ISBN?
   
2. Check carefully if nothing has been published mentioning this author: perhaps a newspaper article reviewing his book.
   
3. Once theses above attempts have been properly made, if you still feel the article does not meet notability requirements, file for AfD (Articles for Deletion).
   

What do you think? Rfwoolf 07:08, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the tips

Yeah, a little new here, but hope to be a full fledged member eventually. Thanks! --Sacdelicious 07:18, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Response

Hey, sorry for the late response. I was having dinner, streak and rice, mmmmm. Anyway, no probs mate. You made a good decision. Good to see someone else out there fighting those vandals. Cheers, Dfrg.msc ^{1 . 2 . Editor Review} 08:53, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Oakland cemetery

Sorry 'bout that - you can tell where my head is :-) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:37, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Rohnert Park

Thanks for looking; I tend to be quite ruthless with unsourced stuff, and also with the beginnings of lists as opposed to actual written content. The fact that Brande Roderick was misspelled probably didn't help either. Anyway, if there's a good source for this I'm all for it being included! All the best, Ziggurat 21:59, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Calif Gold Rush RR link

Just so you know, I normally leave a request for suggestions up at least 24-48 hours to give everyone a chance to chime in, before I make a change. That California/RR link you suggested looks like a good one, but I will give it another day or so before making the change. NorCalHistory 00:21, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Calif Gold Rush lead section

Your comment: I would also like to see the intro shortened if possible too re your other call for action on this article. Most GA articles seem to have one or two high impact bullet statements. Moving the rest of the paragraph down to the intro or another section might prove difficult. I did not want to chime on that yet much I also did not it to appear that I am trying to dominate the discussion. If I forget to mention it in a day or two, you could prompt me for what I just wrote here. Ronbo76 00:28, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Ronbo76, welcome! Your energy, enthusiasm and hard work are very much appreciated here! The sharp eyes and kind demeanor you've shown are exactly what goes a long way here . . . About the length of the California Gold Rush lead section, a couple of thoughts.

First, you've probably noticed a small bronze star in the upper right corner of the article, you probably recognize that as Featured article - that is, California Gold Rush is one in (less than) a thousand articles here on Wikipedia that have been through an extraordinary series of reviews by dozens of very experienced editors, who examine every syllable and citation. This particular article has actually recently been through three close reviews - a "peer review," a "Good article" review and a "Featured article" review. In its current state, the article is the product of hundreds of hours of recent work, by dozens of editors.

That's not to say that it can't be improved or edited - of course it can. It is to say that any edits in a recent Featured article, especially major edits like shortening the lead section, should likely be approached very cautiously. For example, the length, content, and tone of the lead section have been recently been specifically chisled, sand-papered, and fly-specked by many experienced editors over an extended period.

About lead sections in general, you may have seen this excellent Wikipedia Guideline on lead sections (you'll find that Wikipedia is full of these hard-to-find but useful nuggets). As that Guideline suggests, long articles (over 30,000 characters), such as California Gold Rush, should have a lead section of three to four paragraphs, and the lead should try to hit all the main points covered in the article's different sections.

Based on all of the above, I think it's fair to say that a consensus has been reached by a large number of experienced editors that the present lead section is about the right length and content.

Again, a very warm welcome to Wikipedia, and may your edits be many! NorCalHistory 03:23, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Good luck on your rancho project!

Boy that sounds like a perfect project for you! I think that UCLA Library has some great old maps and resources on this (you can go there in person, or check out their on-line catalog and use inter-library loan). Also, there are a number of really good California History reference books out there in Amazon's used book sections.

Two quick examples I strongly recommend from my bookshelf include: Land in California by W.W. Robinson (U.C. Press) and Contested Eden edited by R. Gutierrez and R. Orsi (U.C. Press). Both of these have a ton of great stories and details about the California ranchos. If this is a project you really plan to do, I've found that investing some $$ in hard-copy resource materials makes all the difference in the world.

This is definitely an over-looked area, and you can really make a name for yourself here if you accomplish this project! Good luck! NorCalHistory 03:59, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

re: Category:Date of birth missing

Good evening. Per the discussion about privacy concerns expressed at Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons#Privacy of birthdays, date of birth should generally not be added to the biographies of living non-public or semi-public figures. So far, that policy has been interpreted fairly strictly with a pretty high bar being set for the definition of "public figures" who are assumed to have given up their rights to privacy.

By the same token, we should not be adding Category:Date of birth missing to articles unless we have made the case that the person meets the "public figures" threshold. Otherwise, we're just baiting new users into adding content even though the community has already said that we shouldn't include that particular data point. Category:Year of birth missing is okay but the exact date is often not. Thanks for your help. Rossami (talk) 23:42, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Hello, I was unaware of the policy until you removed and cited WP:BLP (you, er I, learn something new everday). To give you a little background on this article, it had been the subject of a WP:AfD debate (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ralph Alvarez). To tell you the truth, I was shocked that COO of a major corporation was nominated and did some cleanup to include what appears to be standard bios for other major corporations and used this article on another McD corporate employee for the lower box: Fred L. Turner. On several corporate bios I saw, the DJIA was included as they are part of the average along with the DOB. In performing cleanup after inserting his box, I then put in the missing date tag because it appears on several bios I have in my watchlist that is over 520 articles.

None of that excuses my lack of knowledge, I now know something that I will keep when I come across similar posts. Thanks, Ronbo76 00:53, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Re: Prior edit to Riverside, California

Oh, nah -- I was thinking about reverting that removal, as well, but figured taking an opinion on what looks like a content dispute, at first glance, wouldn't be very neutral on my part. You're more than free to edit as you like. :) Luna Santin 05:12, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, that was my read on the motive for the removal, as well. I didn't revert it because while it may be a questionable edit worth looking into, it wasn't blatant vandalism (which has a pretty narrow policy definition). Acting as an editor with an opinion would present a conflict of interest for me, if I planned to use any admin buttons at the page. If that makes sense. So really, don't worry too much about me, just edit like I wasn't even there. :p Luna Santin 05:24, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Boyle Heights, Los Angeles, California

Please read WP:3RR. It is only the fourth reversion in a 24 hr. period that is a violation of the 3RR rule. And if you are the only one reverting them and then you revert that fouth edit, you are both in violation of the 3RR.

Also: Do not call an edit dispute vandalism. If Bill Slayton the boxing trainer lived in Boyle Heights, you should have left him in the list of Notable residents (the list of boxers after his name were just a list of the people he had trained, to help establish his notability).

You also deleted the IPs later addition of El Tepeyac as a local landmark. Even this gringo from the Long Beach area has heard of the restaurant. It's probably not notable enough to be worthy of its own Wikipedia article, but it is a local landmark. [3] ^BlankVerse 13:47, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

I stand corrected. It won't happen again. Thank you. Ronbo76 14:19, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

A quick Google search suggest that he was a pretty well-known boxing trainer:

"Slayton, for example, was a top trainer in the 70s who brought Ken Norton to heavyweight fame. As Norton's trainer, he took in 10 percent of the champ's purses, which he used to buy Mattoya's Gym in Los Angeles." [4]

" Broadway Boxing Gym: The late, great boxing trainer Bill Slayton owned this gym for more than 20 years when he died. Once considered the premier boxing gym in Los Angeles, the place's history includes Slayton training Ken Norton, who broke Muhammad Ali's jaw in 1973, and current head trainer Shadeed Suluki helping Heavyweight Champion Lamon Brewster win his title. 10730 S. Broadway, Los Angeles | (323) 755-9016" [5]

If there were some bogus names among the list of boxers, delete those, but not the entire entry. ^BlankVerse 14:39, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Hispanics.

I have to disagree; I changed it because I read on the article about Argentina that Argentina has a European population of at least 85%. Also, Alexis Bledel's mother doesn't seem to have a very Hispanic sounding name. My edit was not vandalism, and I don't know why you reverted the edit yourself when you had already asked me to do it. I wasn't able to change it because I was asleep, not because I didn't want to. My edit now looks like it was vandalism. Please read the article on Argentina, and look at the demographics section. It clearly states about the European majority population in Argentina, who aren't Hispanic. I didn't remove the category out of spite or racism, but simply because I believed that Alexis Bledel might instead by bi-racial (and I think she has some sort of European ancestry in her because of her blue eyes and skin coloring). Thank you for brining this up, though. Acalamari 16:18, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Disagree. You made a controversial edit to her article that should have been discussed on her talkpage first. Her Mother is Mexican and her Dad from Argentina. Her first language as per the article is Spanish. Birth by Hispanic parents automatically make her Hispanic. The discussion on her talkpage backs that up. To disagree there after being presented with the fact is very questionable. Ronbo76 16:34, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

BTW, before reversing that edit, I discussed it on your talkpage. When it had not been self-reverted, I reversed it using standard revert tools. You may not think she is Hispanic, but you would be in the definite minority. Ronbo76 16:36, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Please see User talk:Acalamari#Edit to Alexis Bledel. Ronbo76 16:41, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

• Before I continue, I'd like to say that I want to settle this discussion peacfully. I really don't want an argument. Anyway, I was unable to due to revert myself because I was asleep (that's a good enough reason isn't it?). I am unavailable within the Wikipedia hours between 4:10-15:30. I suggested you look at the demographics section of the Argentina article to see why I don't think she's totally Hispanic. I agree that Alexis Bledel has Hispanic origin, but I don't believe she has enough Hispanic in her to qualify as a Hispanic-majority person. Her eye coloring (which is real, not lenses) is a dazzling blue, not an Hispanic trait. Her mother has a name which isn't Hispanic, and her father comes from a country that is at least 85% European in origin. I hope you see where I'm coming from before you outrightly call me wrong. I am not in the business of vandalizing Wikipedia or causing disruption. I just want to have a sensible discussion about this. Acalamari 17:22, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

• Hispanics have mixed with many races. They have blond, red heads, blue eyed - you name it. See Raquel Welch who has spoken on Spanish TV about being proud to be of Hispanic descent. It does matter not how Hispanic any person has in them for someone else to make that determination. To continue the discussion here is not the proper place. Please do it on her talkpage. Ronbo76 17:27, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Okay, but still, let's try to be peaceful please. Acalamari 17:30, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

In the interests of WP:CIVIL, I have done so peacefully. To refer others to my talkpage is not proper and skirting the issue. Ronbo76

I mentioned here because I posted a message here before going to the Alexis Bledel Talk Page. Please accept my apologies: I am very sorry. Acalamari 17:40, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Thalía

Well, it's up to you, maybe we have to make some genetical researches, but if the rest of the family are in that category (the surname Sodi must b Greek), she must b in that category too, because they are in the same situation. Gaudio 19:37, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

José María Estudillo

His second stint as Commandant was clearly while California was under Mexican rule, the first could have been either Mexican or Spanish depending on how California leaned in those days. In any case, I think you'll agree that his article didn't warrant {{US-bio-stub}} which is what caused me to restub it in the first place. Caerwine Caer’s whines 02:40, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Holy Crap!

You beat me from tagging Dos Amigos Show by less than 5 seconds. Arg!!! :-P S h a r k f a c e 2 1 7 05:21, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Err, acknowledged. S h a r k f a c e 2 1 7 05:23, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

I tagged him with W4. If he vandalizes again tonight report him to WP:AIV. S h a r k f a c e 2 1 7 05:28, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

It looks like this IP has gone far past W4 but since it was just tagged with W4 now.... I doubt they will recieve a block if it went to WP:AIV. S h a r k f a c e 2 1 7 05:34, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

If you're ever unsure about what some user is doing, remember than contribs can be used. For example, my contribs can be found here. If you want to find the contributions of anyone (including yourself), just replace Sharkface217 in the URL with the persons name or IP address. S h a r k f a c e 2 1 7 05:38, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Somebody who is "following" you isn't really against the rules at all. I do it all the time. Now, if they were rving all your work or vandalizing after you have left, then they should be in trouble. S h a r k f a c e 2 1 7 05:42, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Congrats. Sadly, I must head off for the night, as I have only had 10 hours sleep for the past 3 days. I'm dead tired and I think my last few RVs might be for the worse, actually (if you have time, can you check the last few from before the time this reply is timestamped?). Adios amgio. S h a r k f a c e 2 1 7 05:53, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Edits to Cheka

Please refrain from adding nonsense to Wikipedia. It is considered vandalism. Thank you.-- Ploughman 07:47, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Please note - See this user's talkpage for a warning about last night about vandalizing this article. I do not vandalize articles. This is a false warning. Ronbo76 15:03, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Edits to Carter

You reverted my edit to Jimmy Carter winning the Noble Prize, the reason stated was from the Noble Prize commitee chairman, as no one disputed my point on the discussion page I made that edit. Why did you revert? Reapor 20:12, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Re: Edits to Jimmy Carter

Your edit read, as a political statement from the Nobel commitee critcizing President Bush which is an unsourced statement. Unsourced statements of a non-neutral POV stance in a bio are usually standard reverts. You may have discussed them on the talkpage but they are not supported by anyone but you which does not indicate consensus. As you can see, another editor agrees with me and even reverted you calling it vandalism. Ronbo76 20:20, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

user:Ploughman

This is just another sockpuppet of Jacob Peters (talk · contribs). I'm very familiar with his POV pushing, vandalism, trolling, disruption and other nonsense. I've reported him, but I don't think many admins are logged in today. It may take a bit to get a block. TheQuandry 21:50, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Rating Southern California Cities

Hi! I noticed that you've edited a few Southern California cities for their quality and importance, and I commend you on your efforts in this dull task. However, I do have a few suggestions. For Southern California cities, the favored tag would be WikiProject Southern California instead of WikiProject California Also, you may want to review the importance grading scale at Wikipedia:WikiProject_California/Assessment#Importance_scale or Wikipedia:WikiProject_Southern_California/Assessment#Importance_scale, since I saw you tagged both Ontario, California and Riverside, California with being low importance. Since the cities are respectively the 128th and 62nd largest cities out of 19,429 cities in the United States, they probably deserve a higher importance rating. Thank you. Brien Clark 23:32, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

There is also some discussion of this at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Southern California#Rating California Cities. ^BlankVerse 16:13, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

I am the project member rating cities. I am involved in three other projects and scouring our cities as sources for those projects. I was given initial guidance on this matter and told not to inflate the ratings which I have attempted to do. Unless I am absolutely certain of its rating, I will not rate above a B class, Low importance to avoid overinflating. I have reviewed the guidelines for rating. In some cases upon looking at an article, I agree with its present rating; in others I disagree but do not reassess unless I feel I am on certain ground. On an article that is no longer a Stub article, that is an easy upgrade to Start. On those that had just a generic banner, I rate them. If you check my contribs for the past three days, you will see that I am on the letter D. Time flies when you rate. . .

As a result of criticisms on my talkpage and about putting this banner or that, I will only rate the Norcal articles. I had only updating articles that had the generic WP:CAL banners. I do not have the time to be opening and pasting all the banners from one window to another (I presently have eight windows open on this project). I have lived in both parts of the state (almost equal time) and visit all parts which gives me an interesting perspective on our Mason-Dixon Line. Someone in Socal can take the lead on the Grapevine going south to rate their articles and have them included in the Wiki Cities project.

I do not mind being bold. Cheers, Ronbo76 16:40, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

BTW - Having rated a number of cities that did not have a rating gives the WP:CAL basis for upgrades/downgrades as a fresh set of eyes has reviewed the article. Ronbo76 17:25, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Re: 1854 map image

I would tag it as {{PD-old}}. Make sure you don't include any of the browser itself in the screenshot, since that impacts the licensing (i.e. images of non-free browsers make the image non-free). Mike Dillon 17:40, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Marking minor edits.

See Help:Minor edit. -- Jeandré, 2007-01-28t19:49z

Thanks

Thanks for reverting the vandalism to my page. --Nlu (talk) 18:06, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

• re: protecting your talkpage

No problem. However, it appears that the user who was blocked indefinitely today has a sockpuppet who has also attacked your page. See User talk:JONNY89P who is in your history edits. User talk:JONNY99P was blocked. If I was you, I would submit some kind of report to an admin type. I have to leave in twenty minutes and have another project I am working on. Please let me know the outcome on the sockpuppet. It has had its final warning too but was not blocked. Cheers, Ronbo76 18:13, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Both of them have been blocked, and the level of vandalism right now doesn't seem to justify protection. --Nlu (talk) 18:14, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

You're right. I missed that the other had been blocked because it appeared to be old. If I were you, I would still submit a sockpuppet case. Ronbo76 18:20, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Welcome Welcome

Welcome to WikiProject Ghost towns. Glad to see you on board. In addition you can check out the preliminary article guidelines and the key open questions concerning those guidelines on the guidelines talk page. Once those questions (and any others that come up) are answered we will really heading forward.A mcmurray 07:51, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Paulina Rubio

I said it was from her mom, I didn't said her mom was French. Second, in the wikipedia article of her mom it says her dad was of French descent. That's why I put that. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Energyfreezer (talk • contribs) 14:05, 3 February 2007 (UTC). All right.

Re: Ecclesiastical Heraldry

The vandalism in that article was not added by me, I just fixed a spelling error. It was most likely done before I even edited the spelling error by an anonymous user.

-Steptrip 00:35, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Flores and Ditka

Reverted. However, I should suggest, especially with the fact that sports commentators are mentioning the three of them together, that it might not be a bad idea to mention the "double achievement" of all three on each page, especially considering that I saw what appeared to be an inconsistency, was bold, and made the change. Andy Saunders 04:54, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

The sports commentators are only mentioning them in terms of the dual achievement which is correctly listed on Dungy's article. The fact as listed on the other coaches' article is a more inclusive category or acheivement. Ronbo76 04:59, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

RPP

Sorry for messing up your Tom Flores submission at RPP, then calling it partially formed in my edit summary. I didn't see you were submitting both coaches until later.

P.S. Wow - this is a long talk page. You may want to look into archiving some of it.--Kubigula (talk) 05:20, 5 February 2007 (UTC)