| Revision as of 16:49, 13 July 2010 view sourceMiszaBot III (talk | contribs)597,462 editsm Archiving 2 thread(s) (older than 1d) to User talk:Off2riorob/Archive 8.← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 14:29, 20 February 2012 view source Nyttend (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators286,391 editsm Changed protection level of User talk:Off2riorob: User request within own user space: Requested by email; user has provided a way for others to contact him/her ( (indefinite) (indefinite)) | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{NOINDEX}} | {{NOINDEX}} | ||
| ⚫ | '''Don't post here to discuss - this account has been abandoned, please respect that.''' ] (]) 22:53, 24 November 2011 (UTC) | ||
| {{busy|]}} | |||
| <!--<table width=1200><tr><td>--> | |||
| <big>''']'''</big><br>] ''']]<!--</td><td>-->] <!--</td></tr> | |||
| <tr><td colspan=3> -->] | |||
| <gallery> | |||
| Image:Biographystar.png|'''The Biography Barnstar''' <br>Long overdue for your tireless efforts in upholding ]. – ] (]) 04:18, 18 December 2009 (UTC) | |||
| image:BLP Barnstar.png|'''The BLP Barnstar''' <br>In recognition of your work and vigilance at the ] noticeboard. it is good to see BLP issues in biographies resolved and addressed. Thank you.<font color="#0000FF">]</font><font color=" #FFBF00">]</font>''' 15:05, 21 January 2010 (UTC) | |||
| Image:Barnstar_of_Diligence.png|'''The Barnstar of Diligence''' <br>For taking on the joyless task of editing the partisan hell of political biography. ] (]) 22:34, 15 June 2009 (UTC) | |||
| File:Antiflame-barnstar.png|'''The Anti-Flame Barnstar'''<br>For taking the time to care to help cool me down when I was acting like a <font color=indigo> '''^;^''' <font color=indigo>''']'''</font> ] (]) 16:11, 2 December 2009 (UTC) <small> </small> | |||
| </gallery> | |||
| {{User:MiszaBot/config | |||
| |maxarchivesize = 250K | |||
| |counter = 8 | |||
| |algo = old(1d) | |||
| |archive = User talk:Off2riorob/Archive %(counter)d | |||
| }} | |||
| {{AutoArchivingNotice|small=yes|age=1|target=./Archive 9|dounreplied=yes|index=./Archive index|bot=MiszaBot III}} | |||
| {{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn|target=User talk:Off2riorob/Archive index|mask=User talk:Off2riorob/Archive <#>|indexhere=nein|template=User:Off2riorob/indextemplate}} | |||
| {{archives|archivelist=User talk:Off2rirob/archivelist_manual|small=yes|collapsed=yes|search=yes}} | |||
| {| align="right" style="clear:both" | |||
| |] | |||
| |} | |||
| <!-- </td></tr></table>--> | |||
| ⚫ | Making a few edits as ] - ] (]) 22:28, 26 November 2011 (UTC) | ||
| <!-- VERY IMPORTANT! READ THIS! DO NOT POST YOUR MESSAGE ABOVE THIS LINE. POST YOUR NEW MESSAGE ONLY AT THE BOTTOM OF THIS PAGE, OR USE THE "NEW SECTION" TAB AT THE TOP OF THIS WEB PAGE. CLICK ON THE "NEW SECTION" TAB NOW! :) Please post all messages AT THE BOTTOM OF THIS PAGE thanks --> | |||
| == Brittny Gastineau == | |||
| {{la| Brittny Gastineau}} | |||
| Isn't just that she (was, seemingly temporarily) famous? I'm trying pretty hard to see even what ''cited and verified'' parts of ], ] or even ] she comes under, especially considering the quality of the sources cited. Can you explain? ] (]) 09:10, 7 July 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ⚫ | |||
| ::Where's the policy for ''seemingly'' notable? Isn't it that if it can't be cited (and that article's had plenty opportunity for someone to sort it out) it's a deletion candidate? If I'm missing a policy here (rather than "I kinda think it should be there" then please let me know! ] (]) 09:17, 7 July 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ⚫ | |||
| :If it helps, I'd ''decline'' a {{tlx|db-a7}} (if there was one), as it looks like there ''should'' be ]. If this discussion wasn't taking place, I'd probably {{tlx|prod}} it - as it is, it needs more/better refs IMHO to meet ]. ] 09:31, 7 July 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ::Thanks. and good morning. I am going to vote '''keep'''. ] (]) 09:35, 7 July 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ::TFOW, discussion is taking place because Off2riorob removed my PROD! :) I could req AFD I suppose, but I'll probably back-burner this one until I can have a look for decent sources. If there are none, then I '''will''' AFD it. ] (]) 09:39, 7 July 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :::Right, my point was that I'd probably have prodded it too. Though I suspect there will be much referencing occurring to dispel us of that notion: I'd be really surprised if the article couldn't establish notability. ;-) ] 19:02, 7 July 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ::::I would also be surprised. She is a heck of a lot more notable that some playboy playmates I have seen supported with worse citations. The article does need work, perhaps I will look at it tomorrow. Thanks for the nudge. ] (]) 19:08, 7 July 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :::::No worries. Incidentally, it looked to me like she was ''generally'' notable (there ''should'' be wide-ranging media coverage, etc, based on her biog in the article) rather than ] "notable". Is the article missing a big piece of juice gossip? ] 19:13, 7 July 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::Also both her Mother and Father are notable and have articles here so deletion via prod is out of the question, the worst thing that could happen to her would be a merger..... Gastineau is the daughter of ] and former ] player ]... ] (]) 19:16, 7 July 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::::Also, mother ] was nominated for deletion and ] in January 2010. (That article was one of the those deleted in January 2010 crazy time and then reinstated.)--] (]) 19:17, 7 July 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :::::::::Thanks Milowent for the input, if you have an interest in the family any citation searching is as always ''totally appreciated''. ] (]) 19:20, 7 July 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::::::I'll try to take a look, we don't even have her birthday on it (November 6, 1983). At the moment I'm trying to ].--] (]) 19:33, 7 July 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :::::::::::Respect Milowent, that is a good project. ] (]) 19:48, 7 July 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :::::::I was just thinking her parents divorce should be cited and how-oh-how would I do it from the (curiously minimal) sources available?... when I realised both her parents are bluelinked. I'm guessing the ] is the reality TV with her mother? (Apart from that she seems to be in supporting roles - real life and ]). ] 19:23, 7 July 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::: ] applies though - and if she's not notable, there's hardly even any reason to mention her in her parents' articles, surely? ] (]) 08:12, 8 July 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::::] applies in deletion ''discussions''; it wouldn't apply for a speedy (all we want is an ''indication'' that she ''could'' be significant or important), and anything goes for a prod. It ''would'' apply in AFD: "notability of a parent entity or topic (of a parent-child "tree") does not ''always'' imply the notability of the subordinate entities". Hence my concern that we should start looking for references to establish wide-ranging media coverage. ] 09:26, 8 July 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :::::::::She is not massively notable but she is notable enough for a wiki BLP. imo. She has some limited acting work and some modeling and some celebrity coverage and ] (]) 09:36, 8 July 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::::::That is an assertion, and entirely POV, unless you can back it up with WP Notability policy that counts those things. No? ] (]) 07:04, 9 July 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :::::::::Although it is not a sign of wiki noteworthiness, her BLP here is getting about ] (]) 09:39, 8 July 2010 (UTC) | |||
| == Essays == | |||
| Hi Rob, I've written a couple of essays -- ] and ]. Would appreciate it if you could have a look through and let me know if anything is missing. --'''<font color="#0000FF">]</font><font color=" #FFBF00">]</font>''' 12:35, 8 July 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :Cool, off out for a couple of hours but I will have a good read when I return, regards. ] (]) 12:40, 8 July 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :{{tps}} I had a look, both look good to me. I ]ly added a link to ] in Hazing, didn't think it would help in the survival kit. Feel free to revert if I've overlooked it already being in there... ] 13:33, 8 July 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ::Thanks; I had forgotten about DOLT. Have added it to the survival kit as well. --'''<font color="#0000FF">]</font><font color=" #FFBF00">]</font>''' 16:08, 8 July 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :::No worries! My thinking with the survival kit was that it could possibly be too much information, and it might give the survivor something to wikilawyer about. I'm possibly not ] ;-) ] 16:11, 8 July 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ::::Looking at them they are well written and informative, perhaps they will be useful for wikipedia editors to also read when they ''bump'' into such a situation, often I have seen ''railroading'' of such issues when in fact they require a greater level of attention and respect. ] (]) 16:41, 8 July 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :::::Precisely. I am hoping that people will link to them when appropriate. There is a little discussion about the essays at ] and at ]. --'''<font color="#0000FF">]</font><font color=" #FFBF00">]</font>''' 19:17, 8 July 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ::::If we note any tendency that it's used for wikilawyering then I agree we should address it. But in my experience, people who come here are naive. It takes a while to learn wikilawyering! :) The DOLT scenario may help them understand just how big a problem they can get themselves into if they start using legal language ... --'''<font color="#0000FF">]</font><font color=" #FFBF00">]</font>''' 19:34, 8 July 2010 (UTC) | |||
| == Just to say == | |||
| thanks <span style="font-family:Papyrus">] <small>]</small></span> 16:13, 8 July 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :No worries, rudeness is a lack of civility and helps no one. ] (]) 16:31, 8 July 2010 (UTC) | |||
| == Level of involvement == | |||
| As you have commented ], could you please state your level of involvement (if any) next to your support/oppose/comment in that discussion? Although all input would/should be considered, this will help clarify a community consensus from a local consensus among involved users. Thank you, ] (]) 19:35, 12 July 2010 (UTC) | |||
| I have been asked to declare any involvement. My involvment in the issue is related to my attempting to stop the disruption and edit warring, as it has occured through this issue at multiple articles as mystified users reinserted the expression and were directed to some obscure discussion page with which a consensus claim was asserted if anyone objected. I am not involved one way or the other about the actual ] inclusion or exclusion. I have recently suggested that we allow highking to remove all instances of the ] in the hope that the disruption and warring would stop. ] (]) 19:45, 12 July 2010 (UTC) | |||
| == Eckhart Tolle == | |||
| Hi Rob, Thanks for participating on the ] article. There is still one outstanding issue still under discussion. If you would care to comment. It's here: Cheers!--<span style="font-family:Comic Sans MS,sans -serif"> — ] • ] • </span> 21:41, 12 July 2010 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 14:29, 20 February 2012
Don't post here to discuss - this account has been abandoned, please respect that. Off2riorob (talk) 22:53, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
Making a few edits as User:Youreallycan - Off2riorob (talk) 22:28, 26 November 2011 (UTC)