User talk:Bobo192/Archive 3

Please see User talk:Bobo192 for my most recent talk page.

Welcome to my talk page. I tend to quote your messages back any time you send me, in the format as below. I will always respond to any queries you leave here on your own talk page.

On User talk:Bobo192, ABC said:
message

Talk page navigation

Archive I · (October 23, 2005 — February 2, 2006)
Archive II · (February 2, 2006 — November 10, 2006)
Archive III · (November 10, 2006 — February 19, 2007)
Archive IV · (February 19, 2007 — June 18, 2007)
Archive V · (June 18, 2007 — October 11, 2007)
Archive VI · (October 11, 2007 — January 7, 2008)
Archive VII · (January 8, 2008 - July 16, 2008)
Archive VIII · (July 16, 2008 - November 6, 2008)
Archive IX · (November 7, 2008 - October 2, 2009)
Current talk page | Purge

Chris Taylor (cricketer) and Christopher Taylor (cricketer)

Hey Bobo! Someone's just found out that you made two articles about the same guy, which obviously isn't ideal. Any idea on which should be where? I'd say the article should be at Chris (with a redirect from Christopher), I think he's usually called that even though CA insists on Christopher, but the article at Christopher is better. Thoughts? Sam Vimes | Address me 23:03, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Greg O'Halloran

Good work. It's a shame that one user created about five empty articles for every stub. --Wafulz 05:13, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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) 06:02, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The one I ran across was here. The recognition that we need to take extra precautions to protect the privacy of semi-public figures is fairly recent. But yes, it does represent a change in our intended standards.

So far, the definition of "public figure" has interpreted as people who are so famous that they are likely to have already taken extraordinary precautions to protect their own privacy. We're generally talking about people who have to hire bodyguards or extra staff whose job would include watching for identity theft against the principal - people the paparazzi chase. Bobby Ryan, on the other hand, looks like a reputable athlete but is unlikely to be employing dedicated people to protect his identity for him. Unless he's more famous than it appears from the article, we should probably not be including his exact birthdate on the article. And we should be using the "Year of birth missing" tag instead of the "Date of birth missing" tag. Thanks again. Rossami (talk) 06:55, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Steve Williams (Welsh footballer)

Hi Bobo. There were two places which listed Steve Williams' details. Football Squads.co.uk (run by the RSSSF) has only recently added an Irish squads section, and has Shelbourne's squad here. Also, the DoB is on a different part of the official site that you linked to in external links. What seems to have happened is that your google search returned the "stats section" of the site - there is also a "Shels Penpics" under the squad section. See here. There was a brief mention of him in Dundalk's history section, however I didn't see anything which confirmed when, or for how long, he was at Notts County. On loan maybe? Caledonian Place 11:03, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

Hey - I'm awarding you a (textual) barnstar for your quick action to remove the unsourced info about the supposed death of Courtney Love. We don't need Wikipedia to be the source of a hoax. Good work. Guroadrunner 13:33, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

For deletion: Ruhann Burden

A tag has been placed on Ruhann Burden, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable, that is, why an article about that subject should be included in Wikipedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert notability may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is notable, you may contest the tagging. To do this, please add {{hangon}} on the top of the page and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this.

There were not many Google hits for Ruhann Burden. Yuser31415 07:04, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers! Yuser31415 07:13, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm, you are correct, now I see what you're doing ;). I have removed both the db and holdon tags. Thanks! Yuser31415 07:18, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Timeline of the French Revolution

Thanks for reverting the page Timeline of the French Revolution. Can you forward 63.3.20.2 for deletion of account to an admin? --ProdigySportsman 18:19, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Alexandre Frota

Hi. I notice you've made edits in the past to the Alexandre Frota article. I've expressed several concerns about the article on its Talk page; please take a moment to read them and help edit the article to meet Wikipedia policies and guidelines, or it may be deleted.

(If your edits were strictly of the maintenance variety, and this information doesn't interest you, please pardon any perceived intrustion.)

Thanks.—Chidom ^talk 02:44, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

deletion of Rose R Kemeny article

I understand this is a quoteof an obituary published in the Westford Eagle. I wrote that obituary - and thought it appropriate for Wikipedia given Rose's fame.

John Kemeny, jnk27

Please review your deletion of Shampoo Effect

It seems that that you have deleted an article under CSD G1 that should not have been tagged that way. While the article is very possibly worthy of deletion under {{prod}} or AfD, I'm afraid in this case you have bitten a new user acting in very good faith to create a sourced article. Please take the time to read the article again, as well as the good-faith comment on the talk page. Thanks! Tim Shuba 03:30, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your response. I'm not an admin, so I can't restore it myself. If you restore it, I will remove the speedy tag. No problem on your actions, by the way. I understand there is a lot of material that needs to be removed, and it's easy enough to miss things. Tim Shuba 04:30, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Another Account

My sister wants to join Wikipedia, but we will be editting with the same IP address. Wouldn't this be a problem, because we will be accused of being sockpuppets, and can she join?~Bobo Bon nie ~

Re: User CSS

The CSS at User:Bobo192/monobook.css looks fine for the background-color, but there is no attribute called "text-color"; it is simply "color". You may need to bypass your cache to see the changes. Mike Dillon 07:44, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cool. Hopefully the notice for this message shows up right. Mike Dillon 16:15, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for the help, Bobo192, I'm still finding my feet around here and I could sure use some help! Pablo Cardoso ^{leave a message} 11:50, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Parana River

You reverted my change in the Parana River article? Why? Didn't you see the article had been vandalized? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.232.175.244 (talk) 04:36, 15 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Valhalla Partners

I saw that you speedied Valhalla Partners. I recreated the article with references to establish notability. Could you please restore the history of the article so that people can see who originally created the article? It wasn't me. --Eastmain 22:44, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

thanks!

Fastest CSD ever

Man, I had barely time to post the CSD alert to the editor of before you smoked it. Outstanding. We need more swift admins. :D --Elar a girl^Talk|Count 02:27, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD Nomination: Danny Graham

An article that you have been involved in editing, Danny Graham, has been listed by me at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Danny Graham. Please look there to see why this is, if you are interested in whether it should be deleted. Thank you. --Jerry lavoie 05:30, 21 January 2007 (UTC) Jerry lavoie 05:30, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

speedy watch

You mentioned to Elaragirl your Firefox bookmarks to look at speedy categories--just what did you set up?--I suspect the application of the categories is too random to be reliable, but Id like to give it a try.DGG 04:06, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I understand. It will be interesting to see how many get marked for an inappropriate category--this seems a relatively easy way to check up on that. Thanks, DGG 04:44, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My impression is that very many do, especially by overuse of notability not asserted, but I shall soon have some kind of numbers, tho the classification will obviously be a/c my criteria, and we'll see. DGG 04:54, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jamaal Anderson & Greg Olsen (Football)

Could you protect those pages to prevent recreation?Hondasaregood 08:24, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kristen McMenamy

Well, it seems a lot of us disagree of whether this meets CSD A7. I'm going to AfD to get a community consensus on the fate of the article. I think that's the best way to resolve this matter. Thanks, Nishkid 64 20:45, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

hi there Nishkid64, yes I can perfectly understand the scepticism on whether Kristen McMenamy is a "notable personality" who meets CSD A7 criteria or not. I am new here on wikipedia and I understand that diligent administrators, like yourself, want to maintain the integrity of the database. I have done my best to describe Kristen's strong points, and you are welcome to cross check her references. You can check the "favourite model" citation from Steven Meisel. McMenamy was a major player in the fashion world of the 1990s, and she has featured many times in Vogue. I have no personal relationship to her, and I am just interested in her contribution to the fashion world. The problem is, she is not a "household" name like Claudia Schiffer or Cindy Crawford, but that doesn't necessarily make her a nobody either. To be honest, I wish to expand and improve many articles for fashion personalities, but seeing my amendments constantly being reverted for no particular reason (such as SPAM) is very discouraging. All supermodels feature in advertisement campaigns, which can be viewed by looking at their external links (see Claudia Schiffer who has featured in many advertisement campaigns). But these are usually historical adverts in a historical archive, and are not an attempt at spamming wikipedia or breaking copyright regulations. Thanks for your understanding, lx 03:50, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I understand Lxhughes here, but I still want to take it to AfD. He can provide sources and such, and show how this subject meets Wikipedia notability guidelines. Nishkid 64 20:22, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please Stop

Can you please stop protecting the article on Jamaal Anderson and Greg Olsen (Football).--Bucs10 23:50, 23 January 2007 (UTC)Bucs10[reply]

I dont understand what you trying to say, about getting another external source--Bucs10 02:57, 24 January 2007 (UTC)Bucs10[reply]

Is this good enough it says:Olsen is widely regarded as one of the top tight end prospects in the draft. Heres the link:[1]

I just have one more question will it be the exact article that i created, or will i have to create it again.--Bucs10 03:28, 24 January 2007 (UTC)Bucs10[reply]

Thank you

Thank you so very much for catching the severe vandalism to the Langston Hugehs article.TonyCrew 02:02, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Brad Listermann CSD-A7

Please take another look at your deletion of Brad Listermann, Bollywood newcomer producer & returned Californian. I'd argue that the speedy is out of process, bcz writing & producing a "real" feature film is a prima facie notability claim (and this film does have 20K G-hits). Now,

- i don't like the article's content much (which is hard to ignore, tho irrelevant if reducing to a stub would be better than discarding), and

- his

287 of about 926 for "Brad Listermann"

doesn't impress me much, but

- i'd like to be better satisfied that his key role in the production doesn't outweigh the low personal G-test, before deciding against WP:Deletion review.

--Jerzy•t 05:37, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your helpful attention. I'm going to sleep on it, and, just in case, will let you know if i take any action.
--Jerzy•t 06:22, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Incidentally

_ _ Hey, i'm as sentimental as the next guy! And time sure passes, doesn't it?
_ _ As to what i wrote, sometimes i worry abt being pretentiously humble, but i think it's worth the risk -- especially after walking from the train station in Füssen to the foot of the big hill that Neuschwanstein sits on (rather than waiting for the weekend local bus), and seeing Yanks just off their tour bus there, not being able to get into the pay toilet bcz they'd lost track of which country's currency was local there, and deciding they'd tour just dinky little Hohenschwangau since their bus wouldn't take them uphill to Ludwig's dream castle. I can't claim to be much of a citizen of the world in any dramatic way, but i guess it's worth caring about rising above the most glaring stupidities that seem typical of one's own nation. And as far as i can see, that's most needed (at least among the industrialized nations) where size, geographic isolation, income, war-winning, and brevity of national experience are combined. I estimate it's most significant in holding back madness in myself, but if something like posting that mini-essay turns out to succeed in welcoming a colleague, i'm very pleased.
--Jerzy•t 07:39, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bruce McMahan

Why did you delete the article on Bruce McMahan? At worst, it only should've been rewritten. Exeunt 16:31, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

why

why did you delete my page C-force, what was wrong with it?

Greg Olsen (Football)

Why was this page deleted? The player is a top prospect for the NFL Draft and definitely passes WP:BIO. He played college football at one of the top universities and is expected to be a very high draft pick.--Thomas.macmillan 01:27, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your reasoning for deleting this article is a break in Wikipedia policy. Greg Olsen has played at the highest level of college sports. His information is all verifiable and comes from multiple sources. At the very, very least, the article should have gone to AfD, as he definitely asserts notability. He is regarded by experts in the field as one of the top prospects for the NFL in the upcoming draft, see below.

"Greg Olsen, TE Miami Projected: Late 1st round, early 2nd round Good or bad move? While not a special talent, he has good hands and enough skills to be an exciting late first round pick. He's a good athlete who did the most he could with the shaky Miami quarterback play." from www.collegefootballnews.com.

Please unprotect this article. A similar player (probably less notable than Olsen) passed AfD in October. See the discussion here.--Thomas.macmillan 06:04, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jamaal Anderson

I am glad that the right decision was made by the community per Greg Olsen. However, a similar decision needs to be made for Jamaal Anderson, which you also SALT'ed. He has similar credentials as Greg Olsen, as he played at Arkansas, a major program and dominated at that level. Not only that, he is expected to be a first round pick like Olsen. I caution you not to delete pages about players that will most likely become high draft picks. These players are notable and deserve their own pages. In conclusion, please reinstate this article and any other college football player articles that you have also SALT'ed.--Thomas.macmillan 16:05, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again. This page was nominated for deletion, as was the Greg Olsen article we previously discussed. If you would care to way in on it, please do so here for Anderson and here for Olsen. Thanks!--Thomas.macmillan 21:22, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

- You are right, it is probably best if you don't contribute to the discussions. However, could you speedy keep them? Take another look at the discussions.--Thomas.macmillan 22:14, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you ...

... for reverting the vandalism to my talk page. Is having your talk page vandalised a sign you've been doing something right? Philip Trueman 19:40, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dubious Distinction

Re this piece here:

Tillman resided at an assisted living center in East Hartford, Connecticut. Her death at age 114 years and 67 days around 10:10PM EST means that her title reign of just four days was the shortest ever, breaking the dubious distinction of 13 days held by Mitoyo Kawate of Japan. Her likely successor is Yone Minagawa, also of Japan.

Please think for a moment. First, gaining the world's oldest person title but dying shortly thereafter can be considered a 'dubious distinction'...sort of like the ephemeral reign of a monarch. These people are held up as symbols of defying death. Dying right away, then, is metaphorically embarrassing, if not to themselves then at least to their image as 'world's oldest.'

Now, point two. In time, Nov 13 2003, Emma Tillman hadn't come along yet (so far as the records were concerned). Mitoyo, held up as Japan's example of longevity, died just 13 days after gaining the title...following Kamato Hongo's 18-month reign. Her title was, therefore, dubious.

Point three. In 2007, Emma Tillman's 4-day reign 'broke' the 'shortest title' record, meaning that Emma Tillman's "world's oldest person" title now bears the dubious distinction. After all, 'breaking the record' transfers the distinction from the previous recordholder to the current one. All of this is logical and should be inferred by the sentence as worded. Capiche?→ R Young {^yakł_talk} 02:02, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I suppose the new wording is more clinically correct, though now blanched of any judgment (which is, to some, a good thing). But if I were writing a book, I'd use 'dubious' distinction for two reasons:

http://209.85.165.104/search?q=cache:f5rXzvV6RT4J:www.thefreedictionary.com/dubious+dubious%2Bdefinition&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us

ng or indicating lack of confidence or assurance;

subject to question

Obviously, if a titleholder held the title for only a week or two, their reign lacked in confidence or assurance. Also, the younger and shorter the title, the more subject to question it would be (it would be easier to find a 115-year-old that is real, than to find a real 123-year-old).

But one thing about Wikipedia is that it is the sum total of every contributor, not a personal work. Thus, I will go with your revision (although not your first version) as a compromise. The newer version is, ironically, less dubious in meaning than the old one.

Sincerely, Robert Young → R Young {^yakł_talk} 02:49, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your opinion is sought about the Frank Caliendo article

An anonymous editor keeps adding what is in my opinion, extremely trivial information to the Frank Caliendo article. I am soliciting the opinion of other editors who have edited this article about the appropriateness of this "information" to the article. Please review the details at Talk:Frank Caliendo#Consensus about inclusion of specific football predictions and if you desire, add your thoughts to this section. Thanks --rogerd 17:59, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Get down

Hi there, As an experienced Wikipedia administrator, could you take a look at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Get down? I nominated the article for deletion as a borderline case, but it seemed like a neologism to me. I am still not completely convinced, but your input would be appreaciated.--Thomas.macmillan 20:38, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your help.

Thank you for your help, --Walid HADDAD 09:49, 4 February 2007 (UTC)walidhaddad

sexual objectification

I submitted a photo to sexual objectification of women in panties heels and nothing else vacuuming; it's of a fashion show by Imitation of Christ, a well-known label. Several editors want NO images on the page, but I think this one is pretty clear: at a fashion show, these topless models vacuuming in heels shows women objectified sexually. Could you interject with your opinion please? Talk:Sexual_objectification#Request_for_Comment--DavidShankBone 04:09, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

David Shankbone

Your user page is awesome! I love the organization - I may have to pay some flattery to you and copy some of it. Just a note to say thanks for the kind words on my Talk page; always appreciated. - Dave --DavidShankBone 17:34, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Anti-Vandalism Barnstar

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		Thanks for your help with a tireless vandal! Meelosh 04:00, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Myra

Thanks for removing the vandalism on the Myra page. You apparently didn't notice, though, that the vandalism had replaced good content. It's often a good idea to revert to the previous version rather than remove the vandalism directly because vandals often do more than one piece of damage to a page.... --Macrakis 14:49, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nuclear power

Hi, Bobo192. Good work on reverting the vandalism to the nuclear power article. However, before reverting an article, I recommend that you go back to make sure that the last version was not vandalized as well. In this case, two IP addresses vandalized the article and you only reverted the changes made by the last one. My system, which need not be yours, is to keep going back through the "diffs" until I find an edit by a member with a user page (a member whose name appears blue in the article history and in the diffs), because IP addresses and new users commit the vast majority of vandalism (unfortunately, not having a user page is currently the best indicator we currently have that a member is new). In addition, once the article is reverted, vandalism is much more likely to go undetected for long periods of time. If the vandalism is a deletion of a sentence or a paragraph, it may never be detected after a reversion. Actually, I examined the last 50 edits of the nuclear power article yesterday and found that 20 out of 25 of the last IP address edits were vandalism. Some of the edits were from the same person or source, so I also counted the number of unique vandals and found that 10 out of the last 13 IP address editors were vandals (assuming one editor per IP address). Also, three out of the last four editors with no user page were vandals. The one who was not a vandal had registered a while back, but the others were all making their first edits. These numbers have almost certainly changed somewhat since then because the article gets a ton of edits. This is a very small sample and nuclear power is a controversial subject, so the figures cannot be considered representative. Still, I think that they are in the ballpark for controversial articles. I would expect the average for all articles to be a bit lower. Thanks, Kjkolb 09:31, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Thanks for reverting the vandalism to my user and talk pages. Much obliged. -Changlc 06:26, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mandopop article

Hi. Can you please explain your reason for reverting the recent set of changes I made to the Mandopop article? Thanks. Cgkm 23:05, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, that was quick. The error was mine--sorry for that! And thanks for your quick response! Cgkm 23:26, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tuscarora High School

Can you please protect the Tuscarora High School article as it has been recently prone to vandalism? I can see that you have looked at it recently and it needs to be protected from excessive vandalism. Thanks 71.176.142.218 00:57, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]