User talk:Ebnauman

Welcome!

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

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Rklawton 15:28, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please refer to Wikipedia's policy regarding verification (WP:V) before changing sourced information in an article. You may prefer the term "Canadian Goose", but the academic sources most valued here at Wikipedia all refer to it by its proper name "Canada Goose." Changing facts from valid sources to "facts" without sources is actually considered vandalism. Now that you've been advised accordingly, it will be reported as such in the future. If you have any questions about this or anything else Wikipedia related, please don't hesitate to ask. Rklawton 04:16, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In view of your repeated atacks on this article, I've imposed a 48-hour block, jimfbleak 05:51, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your opinions regarding the Canada Goose are well noted in the article's talk page. Please do not add them again to the article without providing evidence that your views have any merit. Webster's Dictionary does not recognize your opinion. Indeed, this venerable source supports only Canada Goose. If you continue adding your opinions to this article in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, I shall report your activities once again as vandalism. Rklawton 00:43, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

November 2006[edit]

This is your last warning.
The next time you vandalize a page, as you did to Canada Goose, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Gwernol 00:45, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Failure" of Rensselaer Plan?[edit]

IRS Forms 990 are public documents. They can be obtained from www.guidestar.org. The latest filing, 2005-2006 has not yet been posted on this site. I have a faxed copy. However, the information available from Guidestar is consistent with the downward trend in graduate enrollment. My statements that give numbers are strictly factual.

Hello, I would like a response to my comments on the RPI talk page. Do they include Hartford students on the tax forms? Hopefully we can work this out. Thanks, Danski14^(talk) 01:00, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure about Hartford. I think that there is a separate IRS Form 990 filed for this campus. A separate form was filled in the past. As for "faculty" as Hartford, I offer my condolences. The RPI Board of Trustee as declared that the instructors at Hartford are not "faculty."

Hm, well ok. I think I will look for someway to source your statement. Danski14^(talk) 02:12, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Edits to Selmer Bringsjord[edit]

I have a question. Who is chosen and how are they chosen to have editorial powers regarding Wikipedia articles? I can I learn about this?

Well, this is a public wiki, so anyone can edit it freely. There is no system where some users have "more power" then others. There are administrators, but they only have more power when it comes to deleting articles or protecting articles from vandalism. And they are only allowed to exercise those powers when there is consensus. For more information, I would read The Five Pillars of Wikipedia, which summarizes Wikipedia's core principals. More information is probably available at the FAQ page. Danski14^(talk) 14:44, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The words I used are direct quotes. The source is an Opinion Piece, "Only a Technology Triad Can Tame Terror" written by Selmer Bringsjord. A link to the piece is: http://kryten.mm.rpi.edu/NEWSP/Only_Technology_Can_Tame_Terror_080907.pdf _{Subscript text}

Thanks for the reference. Sorry if I seem paranoid, but there is a strict policy for living people and I want to make sure we get it right. Danski14^(talk) 14:44, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a source for your statement that he advocates "lethal robots"? If not, I'm afraid we shouldn't include it in the article. Now, I realize you are a professor, and probably know a lot more then I, but you still need someway to source an outlandish statement such as that. I can't really believe it myself, I don't know much about Bringsjord, but I have never heard that he advocates world control by robots. Danski14^(talk) 02:12, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, but you can't just continue to reinsert whatever you want, to do so repeatably is edit waring. The proper protocol is to respond to people's objections. If you continue to add the statement, it will be counted as vandalism, and you may be blocked. Danski14^(talk) 02:21, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand the problem. What I give you is factually correct as you have confirmed, although your sources are less reliable than mine. I tell the truth. Why should the truth be considered an experiment? What more do you want from me? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ebnauman (talk • contribs)

I have nothing against you: I just wanted to make sure the statement about Brinsjord was correct. The easiest way to do that is to ask you where we can attribute the information, which we did. There is a policy for living people, which states that claims that could be libelous need references; otherwise they are removed. Additionally, what worries me is there was a case with Brinsjord's page a little while ago were someone had incorrectly stated where he went to school. Someone contacted Wikipedia via email and asked it to be changed (presumably Bingsjord himself?). Now with regards to the RPI page, I could not access the IRS forms, and I am not sure if they count as a proper source for Wikipedia. I think we should stick with the web sources I have used, but if you want, I guess I don't mind changing it to the "50%" figure. Danski14^(talk) 16:47, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

August 2007[edit]

Please do not add unsourced or original content, as you did to Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. Doing so violates Wikipedia's verifiability policy. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. I moved your statement down a few lines and added a source!! Learn to check the edit history before you edit. Consider this your final warning. If you continue you will be blocked. Danski14^(talk) 13:43, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you would like to see the IRS Forms 990, I can send electronic copies of all but the most recent. That one I can fax to you. If we interact in the future, perhaps we can do it directly. Send me an email. Also, do you really want to be a physics major? Perhaps we can discuss it.

Here is another question. You said that I could be blocked if I continued to post comments that you - at that time - thought were unsubstantiated. Yet, you are not an administrator. Could you block me? By what authority? Could I block you? I think you and I have no real issues at the moment, but there could be another you in the future. I have read the 5 pillars, but I am a bit slow and would appreciate your insight.

Yeah, I guess thats not very clear. The answer is I could report you to administrators, who would then decide what to do. Assuming that you were "vandalizing" (see WP:VANDAL for more on what is vandalism) and properly warned, you would be blocked, most likely for a short period of time. Now that I think of it, you were not really "vandalizing" per say, I am not sure what administrators would have done... Danski14^(talk) 01:43, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, well sorry if I bothered you[edit]

Let me just say that I am not an administrator. I am merely a user with an interest in RPI. I wanted to make sure that statement was sourced, because otherwise people will remove it. I could not believe it myself orginally.

In addition I just wanted to let you know that you should post on the talk pages (labeled "discussion" on the tabs up top), and that you should always sign your name with four tildas (~~~~) and your name and the time will automatically be generated. Thanks, Danski14^(talk) 22:42, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

GA reassessment of Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute[edit]

I have conducted a reassessment of the above article as part of the GA Sweeps process. You are being notified as you have made a number of contributions to the article. I have found some concerns which you can see at Talk:Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute/GA1. I have placed the article on hold whilst these are fixed. Thanks. Jezhotwells (talk) 22:18, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]