Loading AI tools
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:Bobak. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Reply is on my talk page. 74.36.70.137 (talk) 19:06, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
The June 2008 issue of the College football WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:14, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
Replied here, Talk:Neo Geo (console)Elizabeth BY (talk) 20:04, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
You have gone and reverted all of my edits without consulting me or understanding the gravity of WP:REVERT. You have not WP:AGF and my attempt to WP:BOLD. Please discontinue this or I will seek other remedies. Madcoverboy (talk) 16:37, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
- Sorry, while we encourage people to be bold, your actions are unacceptable as they are going completely against consensus. As I wrote on the USC talk page (and other editors on other pages you've touched), you have been using your personal dislike of the US News rankings as reason to remove the mention out of various articles despite the fact that its been well established as acceptable practice. In fact, you should have noticed that UC Riverside and Duke were both Featured Articles, which show what this community considers to be exemplary. Rankings are considered acceptable in any college and university article as long as they are presented in a reasonable manner and cited. As I mentioned elsewhere, its striking that the articles you've edited include many of the nation's top schools. Unsurprisingly, your edits were already being reverted by custodians of those other articles --I just looked at your edit history to see exactly what was going on. If you want to change Wikipedia policy, please be patient and go through the proper route. Starting at the College and Universities Wikiproject would be a good start. --Bobak (talk) 16:44, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
This block constitutes an abuse of administrator privileges. The personal changes at the CPDC and the general opinion of Mondale Hall in the legal community are valid items to include in Wikipedia and do not constitute vandalism. Both items are more relevant than the fact that a poker champion earned a j.d from the school. Items such as these are common throughout Wikipedia. Among the people who look at school pages are prospective students, who would find this information useful. It is telling that no other person has removed this information but yourself (an alum of the university). It is telling that no other administrator on the site felt that these edits constituted vandalism. You are abusing your privileges as an administrator. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.231.197.118 (talk) 23:23, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
- Please. I'm not abusing anything: the minor personnel changes fall into Wikipedia:NOT#NEWS. If you feel that something in WP policy defends your position, please cite it. The uncited goings-on of some jaded alumni and/or current students is not what Wikipedia was designed for. I have made plenty of warnings about it and since you haven't listened or responded (and I highly doubt this is more than one person), I have taken the next appropriate step after plenty of polite warnings. You may want to learn more about the project, since the page has been locked, no one has been blocked at the mooment. --Bobak (talk) 23:44, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Don't restore removed comments http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:OUTING#Posting_of_personal_information Stop posting that building online, there is no internet network there —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.231.197.118 (talk) 03:41, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
It is not private information, it's publicly available "WHOIS" information that anyone can see when they search the IP address. As policy we identify the sources of problem accounts; most of the time its a high school, elementary school, college or even major company --in this case the apartment building has registered its own IP. Good for identifying anonymous posters. --Bobak (talk) 14:26, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
France you say?! Oui oui! oh hoin. .:DavuMaya:. 21:35, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
The July 2008 issue of the College football WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:17, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
Hi ! Glad to know you. You said : "The Persian people still exist, and make up a little over 50% of modern Iran --which is a multi-ethnic country with Lors, Kurds, Azeris, Armenians, Arabs and many more." . I think because you were not in contact with Iran for many years , that may help to ask from the older ones if they call themselves "Persian" or "Esfahani" , " Sherazi " or etc. Indeed , in USA , the ethnic groups are all immigrants in origin, but in the old countries like Iran almost all of the language groups are natives with the common ancestry.I mean the difference in language of Iranians does not means they have different origins.An Azeri language Iranian is not culturally and racially a "Turk" , but a Turkophone Iranian , or an Arabophone Iranian from Khuzestan is an Arabic language Iranian ...Thank you --Alborz Fallah (talk) 20:09, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
 |
Here's to you on your birthday, Bobak/June 2008 - December 2008! From the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! |
America69 (talk) 14:53, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
| Happy Birthday | from the Birthday Committee | |
|---|---|---|
  Wishing Bobak a very happy birthday on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Don't forget to save us all a piece of cake! | ||
Idontknow610TM 19:14, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
Also, Happy 1st Edit Day!!
 |
Happy First Edit Day, Bobak/June 2008 - December 2008, from the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! |
 |
Happy First Edit Day, Bobak, from the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! User:Bobak (talk) 05:45, 25 October 2017 (UTC) |
I was wondering whether or not I could use the image of Rockne and Jones with Babe Ruth and Lou Gehrig on the Notre Dame-USC rivalry page. To me it really sums up the rivalry and camaraderie between the two schools. It's a famous picture, and since you seem to be a big picture guy I thought I'd ask if you think it would pass the fair use rationale.Tedmoseby (talk) 01:52, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
You're being abusive. A POV tag isn't an expression of "correctness," it's a flagging feature indicating a possible POV violation. You cannot remove POV tags because you disagree with it. That is against policy, and a form of vandalism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.222.149.167 (talk) 16:40, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
A-nar is a fruit, that is true. But what about Daran? Derakhts??? Mr. Bobak, are you familiar with Irani languages? Are you familiar with the history of Nardaran? I doubt.--Faikpro (talk) 19:41, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
Hello. I found your comments at the meta "Avoid copyright paranoia" discussion to be helpful. I also see that you are an administrator, so I was wondering if you could help me clear up some questions that I have about copyright v. wikipedia policies.
Let's say that a panorama image contains a copyrighted item in the photo, but the copyrighted material is not the main subject of the image. How is that to be handled? Must one write a fair use rationale for that portion of the image?
- Here's an example: Image:TheDirtyOinOakland.jpg. It seems that this image is freely licensed, even though it includes this company's logo. Common sense seems to dictate that this image does not need any kind of fair use rationale for the image, but I cannot find anything to support this in the wikipedia policy on freedom of panorama.
- Here's another example: Image:SantroumBarn.jpg. This is an image where the barn would clearly be within freedom of panorama, but the logo would not be free. Should one write a fair use rationale?
- What of street signs? (Image:BillyConnBlvdPgh.jpg). Photos of them seem to be all over wikipedia without rationales.
--TheZachMorrisExperience (talk) 04:58, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
- Hi there. When you're talking about the three examples you mentioned, there are no serious copyright concerns. For the two building photos, the subject is the building or neighborhood and the logo happens to be there; even if you were taking a photo for the purpose of identifying the hot dog store or sign on the barn, it would be acceptable (otherwise how could we take photos of things like Times Square). While the owner has IP rights (in this case both copyright and trademark), this situation is not a part of what people think about when they talk about IP enforcement and, off the top of my head, I've never heard of an IP owner even bringing it up unless the person who took the photo is clearly using it to profit off of the IP (cropping everything else out, more or less using it like a copy-machine; so be careful with paintings that are not in the public domain); this is also part of why some art galleries forbid photography. Standard public street signs are no more of an issue than taking a picture of a standard stop sign; there maybe a government IP holder, but it isn't going to come up. --Bobak (talk) 15:55, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
- You both might be interested in reading conversations I had on this topic with a law student. The gist of it is that she had all of my photos of historical roadside plaques deleted. My main argument was that keeping a photo of a plaque was equivalent to quoting the text on the plaque with attribution. Ultimately I got tired of fighting about it. Conversations are here: User talk:Appraiser/Archive5#Images, User talk:Appraiser/Archive5#derivative images, and User talk:Calliopejen1/Archive5#Derivative images. Although mine were deleted, there are still lots of roadside historical markers on Wikipedia, so obviouly not a lot of people agree with Calliopejen1.--Appraiser (talk) 17:02, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
- Roadside historical markers are different than street signs in that they're often done by state governments, local governments or historic societies and such. Those entities do have copyright. With that said, there are ways around it (like a high res photo of a house that makes a small sign legible if you were to see the whole picture at regular size). Anything written by the federal government, generally speaking (few military and other exceptions), do not have copyright (though may have trademark). Should have brought me in, brah, I am a lawyer (but none of this is legal advice, and any law student dispensing legal advice is just as potentially liable as a lawyer doing so). --Bobak (talk) 21:34, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
- You both might be interested in reading conversations I had on this topic with a law student. The gist of it is that she had all of my photos of historical roadside plaques deleted. My main argument was that keeping a photo of a plaque was equivalent to quoting the text on the plaque with attribution. Ultimately I got tired of fighting about it. Conversations are here: User talk:Appraiser/Archive5#Images, User talk:Appraiser/Archive5#derivative images, and User talk:Calliopejen1/Archive5#Derivative images. Although mine were deleted, there are still lots of roadside historical markers on Wikipedia, so obviouly not a lot of people agree with Calliopejen1.--Appraiser (talk) 17:02, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
- I have taken your advice (from above, from a few months ago), and I thank you for it. (I think I forgot to thank you earlier, and I apologize). If you do not mind, I have another legal-type question. I have two similar photos: Image:TeplitzMootCourtroominBarcoLawBuilding.JPG (a classroom with a mural in the background) & Image:VirgilCantiniTeplitzCourtroom.JPG (a photo focusing on the mural). It is my understanding that the photo of the classroom doesn't need any fair use rationale, and I may license it under CC, since the mural is merely in the background and the main focus of the photo is to show the room. The second photo does need fair use (and all that entails) since it is focused on the mural. Do I have this correct? Thanks!--TheZachMorrisExperience (talk) 23:16, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
If you could shoot a panorama of Saint Paul similar to the night photo currently there that would be awsomee. Preferably daytime or morning. .:davumaya:. 15:40, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
An article I wrote on a young man I once met named Corbin Billings was deleted. It was deleted immediately, and without the five day limit it says I am allowed. I am not Corbin Billings, but someone who worked for the publishing company he used to write under. He has written five books, and gone on national lecture tours. This young man is a national award winner, only for his writings and lecture tours, but also for the short films he has recently begun making. I could have supplied better references if I could have had the chance. I am trying to become part of the wikipedia community, but find these actions very disheartening.
Skitch1 (talk) 04:11, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
hi there, do you have any more pictures of Nijo Castle? Do you think you could upload them on the Wikimedia Commons? Thanks alot. Gryffindor 20:39, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
The August 2008 issue of the College football WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 17:22, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
Good work on 2007 USC Trojans football team! I think it's GA status-worthy, so I promoted it! Thanks for your speedy work! Intothewoods29 (talk) 22:54, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
Most of the other football articles have what college he chooses in the college section, also I think the personal section is a little bit lengthy and should be cut down--Yankees10 19:03, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
- Hi. I think recruiting an interesting situation where you have more recent players, in this day of much more intense and highly publicized (ESPN, Scout, Rivals, etc) recruiting, having many stages of the college recruiting process happen in high school with heavy publicity. Older players didn't have that so we simply jump from high school to college with little fanfare in those articles. With that said, I think some articles, like Terrelle Pryor perhaps go a bit overboard. As for the personal section: if he keeps performing at the same level and producing material, he'll soon balance out the personal section, which also explains his "Big Dad" eye blacks in the photo. I actually have another good photo of him from just last week, but I'm planning to wait until the article is long enough to add it. --Bobak (talk) 19:13, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
 |
On 18 August, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Joe Bottom, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Hello, best of luck with your FAC. I have the FAC on my watchlist. If you need any help, don't hesitate to ask. Dabomb87 (talk) 18:54, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks, I couldn't have had it at this point without your meticulous review. --Bobak (talk) 18:58, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
Congratulations! JKBrooks85 (talk) 22:22, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi there. Thank you for responding to the anon user about the reversion I made to University of Minnesota Law School - I merely reverted the blanking of a section that I thought was relevent to the article. The same individual seems to have done that twice now. Bobo. 20:48, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
Hi there! I'm currently working on prepping 2005 Sugar Bowl for FAC and was wondering if you could find the time to take a look at it with a fine-toothed magnifying glass. It's been a while since I tried to push through one of my bowl game FACs, and since you're currently going through the process, I think you're the best-qualified person to take a look at it. There's a few citation needed marks on there that I've left for myself, and since I haven't been able to find any free use photos, I'll be forced to add a few fair-use items over the next few days. Other than those two items, I'm not planning to make any major changes other than what people suggest. JKBrooks85 (talk) 07:46, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
- Well, I've submitted the FAC (Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/2005 Sugar Bowl), and any additional comments/supports/opposes would be appreciated. Thanks again! JKBrooks85 (talk) 08:13, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
- Since your FAC has now successfully completed, I was wondering if you had the time to look at any others. Any constructive criticism at all would be appreciated. JKBrooks85 (talk) 07:57, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi. I'm not sure what to make of this, it smells a bit like sockpuppetry. If you check the revision history, you'll see how Howlettb creates a nn club article and ten minutes later, a new account removes my speedy tag without any comment. De728631 (talk) 14:09, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
The September 2008 issue of the College football WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:34, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi. This picture - Image:051207-MPLS-010MillDistrict.jpg must be from one of the towers near city hall. If you still have access to that spot, could you get a new picture of the St. Anthony Falls (35W) Bridge using a long lens that would avoid the deceptive problem we currently have? Thanks.--Appraiser (talk) 15:08, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
- Hey Appraiser --sure, I still have access to that vantage point and can take a new one, but it may take up to a month because of a string of trips I'm going on (the office is my fiance's, not mine, and I have to go when I'm not at work and its quiet there --so usually weekends). I'm out of town this weekend, and gone for the next two weeks after that for a wedding. But I'm more than happy to do a photo from there. --Bobak (talk) 15:14, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi there. Call me curious, but how did you come to blocking cluebot? You can take a bit of relief in the fact that you're not the first person to do so. That honor goes to Animum. He did it in 2007. Don't worry about it too much, everyone screws up at one point. It just adds to your charatcer. :-) Looneyman (talk) 20:27, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
I was wondering if you would take a look at some deletion requests over at the commons: Commons:Deletion requests/Images of PAHistorical&MuseumCommissionMarkers & Commons:Deletion requests/Images of TheZachMorrisExperience. For some background info, I looked through my image submissions and put some under fair use User:TheZachMorrisExperience/FairUsePictures and nominated some for deletion. The discussions on the deletions are getting pretty heated (which is odd, since these are all my own pictures and are orphaned). At this point, I am in over my head in technical legal details, so I was hoping you could shed some actual real-life knowledge on the discussion. Thanks! --TheZachMorrisExperience (talk) 04:04, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
Dear Bobak, I was reading Wikipedia:Meetup/Minneapolis and I saw your image. You are a handsome guy! Have a nice day! :-) AdjustShift (talk) 18:05, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
- The above post was mainly to get you attention. :-) Let me get straight to the point: I need your help. I'm about to start an article related to the University of Southern California. I was searching for an editor who has edited articles related to USC. I found you. Can you help me? AdjustShift (talk) 18:23, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
- The article is Zilkha Neurogenetic Institute. It is a research unit of the Keck School of Medicine of USC, dedicated to research in the areas of neurological and psychiatric diseases. Do you have any idea this Institute? If we can expand it, it may qualify for the "Did you know". Have a nice day! AdjustShift (talk) 19:17, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks. I'll take a look, but I admit this isn't an area I'm as used to writing in. I can see some copyediting that I can do... --Bobak (talk) 16:25, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks. :-) AdjustShift (talk) 19:08, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks. I'll take a look, but I admit this isn't an area I'm as used to writing in. I can see some copyediting that I can do... --Bobak (talk) 16:25, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
- The article is Zilkha Neurogenetic Institute. It is a research unit of the Keck School of Medicine of USC, dedicated to research in the areas of neurological and psychiatric diseases. Do you have any idea this Institute? If we can expand it, it may qualify for the "Did you know". Have a nice day! AdjustShift (talk) 19:17, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
Town Hall Brewery maps.google.com 1430 Washington Ave S Minneapolis, MN 55454 (612) 339-8696 October 11, 2008 Saturday at 12:00 noon (midday) Meetup RSVP
Muddy Waters maps.google.com 2401 Lyndale Ave S Minneapolis, MN 55405 (612) 872-2232 October 10, 2008 Friday at 10:00 PM (at night) Alternate meetup RSVP
Just updating the calendar. Feel free to pass along these invitations. -SusanLesch (talk) 17:59, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
The October 2008 issue of the College football WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:57, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
Hello Bobak. With all due respect, I think that the block templates you have been using recently on IP talkpages are far too laden with sarcasm. In at least one case, it has elicited an equally-sarcastic unblock request and I’m concerned that you are unintentionally encouraging vandalism by angering the blocked users. Regards —Travistalk 13:39, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
- I sometimes use a sarcasm-tinged block template, but I'm careful to only leave it on the pages of blatant vandals- and I almost never leave it for ips, since they're often shared by other users. Still, I do use a similar template, so I have no room to talk. :) -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 13:52, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
- I appreciate the feedback but I'm not entirely convinced. A lot of users come back (I assume) and edit normally. If they come back and do nothing, then they have no issues from me --in fact that's great. If they come back and continue vandalism or make a hostile unblock request (which some do regardless of the tone of the block notice), then that's their problem. People who react to a legitimate blocks with the wrong attitude probably shouldn't be editing. But that's my opinion. As for the example cited, I make no apologies given the tone of the vandalism that led to the block. I'm respectful during content disputes, but vandalism is trash and should be treated as such. --Bobak (talk) 14:44, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
- Fair enough, but it seems that most vandals are quite young and/or immature so the sarcasm very well may go right over their heads. Cheers —Travistalk 14:50, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
- I realize I may receive the brunt of hostile reactions; but I've been weathered by spending 8 years as an admin on a video game forum that attracts its fair share of online idiots; I think that's shaped how I handle things here :-) --Bobak (talk) 15:06, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
- Hmmm, I missed that particular edit, which is considerably less appropriate than the ones I did notice. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 15:18, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
- I realize I may receive the brunt of hostile reactions; but I've been weathered by spending 8 years as an admin on a video game forum that attracts its fair share of online idiots; I think that's shaped how I handle things here :-) --Bobak (talk) 15:06, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
- Fair enough, but it seems that most vandals are quite young and/or immature so the sarcasm very well may go right over their heads. Cheers —Travistalk 14:50, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
- I appreciate the feedback but I'm not entirely convinced. A lot of users come back (I assume) and edit normally. If they come back and do nothing, then they have no issues from me --in fact that's great. If they come back and continue vandalism or make a hostile unblock request (which some do regardless of the tone of the block notice), then that's their problem. People who react to a legitimate blocks with the wrong attitude probably shouldn't be editing. But that's my opinion. As for the example cited, I make no apologies given the tone of the vandalism that led to the block. I'm respectful during content disputes, but vandalism is trash and should be treated as such. --Bobak (talk) 14:44, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
An article that you have been involved in editing, Law and Inequality, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Law and Inequality. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Little Red Riding Hoodtalk 22:44, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for the suggestion. It's easy for me to take pictures. I usually don't take a camera with me when I go to UCLA practices or the football/basketball games. In fact one time while taking a picture of the Wooden Center's extension, Rick Neuheisel was running around the corner in shorts, ipod. People will not see him in the picture unless pointed out. (We are friends now and he knows me.) I just don't want people to delete pictures when posted. It frustrates me and don't know all rules here. The problem for me is I don't have a long len and high pixel camera. Ucla90024 (talk) 01:11, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
Hi, Bobak. Two people came in, giving real first names. I think you sat across from them. Do they claim to be Wikipedia readers? Or editors? I don't want to say the wrong thing here, nor do I wish to ignore it. -SusanLesch (talk) 22:29, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks, that clears that up. You won best dressed! Good to see you, too. -SusanLesch (talk) 23:57, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
I'm afraid I don't quite agree with you but anyway, if the interim coach only warrants a one-line stub with no cite, at first sight it's a candidate for speedy deletion under A7. With a source, at least it's verifiable.--Boffob (talk) 19:14, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
- No hard feelings. I have issues with many sports related notability guidelines, such as WP:ATHLETE, because they allow for perma-stubs of essentially non-notable people (for example, every single person who has ever competed in the Olympic games, even with zero notable achievement or media coverage). I have no quarrel with properly sourced short bios.--Boffob (talk) 22:06, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
|
On 15 October, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Thomas Petters, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
BorgQueen (talk) 14:33, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
 |
Hello, I noticed your recent edits and thought you might want to become a member of the California State University WikiProject. We've recently revamped the project page and started a drive to improve California State University-related articles. We have a lot of articles under our project and would like assistance getting them to good article status. Hope you'll join us. Go STATE! |
|
On 20 October, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Dabo Swinney, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Keep up the good work! ~ User:Ameliorate! (with the !) (talk) 01:24, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
I'm preparing to submit 2000 Sugar Bowl to FAC, and was wondering if you could spare a moment to take a look at it before I begin the process. I'd appreciate any insights you might be able to offer. You've got experience with CFB FACs, and you've been a big help in the past. JKBrooks85 (talk) 22:43, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
- Well, it's up at FAC now. Any additional comments or suggestions there would be appreciated. Thanks! JKBrooks85 (talk) 03:30, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
|
On 21 October, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Willard L. Boyd, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
hi bobak, thanks for your pictures of Ellensburg at DE-WP. However, I would strongly suggest you introduce your pictures on the talk pages if you speak no German. There's no use of having English language caption in German articles. Also, you can not automatically rely on people translating your captions as there might be some articles nobody has on his/her watchlist. Greetings from Germany --X-Weinzar (talk) 15:47, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
- Okay, makes sense. I didn't check all your contributions, just wrote this based on Ellensburg. "Formal title, location" does work but it's not perfect since we don't have this "comma writing" like in "Seattle, Washington", "Berlin, Germany" or "Central Washington University, Ellensburg". But people will understand it so don't hesitate to do it that way. --X-Weinzar (talk) 16:10, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
Nice Kevin Ellison picture, I saw some of the others you added and I was just wandering where you got them from, did you take them yourself? there really good.--Yankees10 22:20, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
- wow, great job--Yankees10 22:29, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
- You sure like to go to all the USC games. But do you have to replace others' photos with yours? Ucla90024 (talk) 05:30, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
- I've got over 550 photos on Wikipedia right now, some aren't being used anymore (others found better photos) and I don't think they should. Where I can, I try to allow existing photos some room to co-exist (I subscribe to the thought that more can be better, esp. if different). However, when I see a photo (where article space is at a premium), where I believe I may have taken a better shot, I'll make the swap. --Bobak (talk) 15:35, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the comment on my talk page. If you believe sockpuppetry is taking place, by all means feel free to have it investigated. I took a quick look and, although sockpuppets are possible, I didn't see the kinds of edits that sockpuppets typically get involved in. Most of it deals with whether OJ should/should not be included, and that is a healthy discussion to have. My gut feeling tells me this is not sockpuppets and, even it it is, there is no harm done. Of course, the decision to investigate or not is yours. Thanks. Truthanado (talk) 22:16, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
USC HAS WON 11 NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIPS. WHY DOES ALABAMA GET CREDIT FOR 11, IF USC GETS CREDIT FOR JUST 7? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.210.3.137 (talk) 11:00, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
- Um, yeah..."ALL CAPS" check your talk page for a reply. Would suggest learning how to communicate on the internet --or in general. --Bobak (talk) 15:22, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
- Take any good pictures at game Saturday? We were in section with Peter Carroll's wife. Ucla90024 (talk) 16:35, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
- I got a couple of pics of the face-off prior to start of second half and few crowd scenes, but not much of action pics since I don't have long lens. I was surprised that Traveler was let-in. Ucla90024 (talk) 16:52, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
- Nice pictures from the game Saturday. My pictures aren't as good. New camera and I need to learn all about it. BTW SC water polo team won the national Championship. Ucla90024 (talk) 04:09, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
I apologize for calling you a "j-ass," but your advice to go read some "medical books" was equally immature and irrelevant to the dispute. The fact is that the LA Times reported that Joe McKnight had a case of jock itch this season. Their use of quotation marks and the ambiguity surrounding the situation warrants my choice of the word "mysterious" to qualify "jock itch." Your choice of the term "medical conditions" is unnecessarily vague, as I pointed out in the comments accompanying my edits.
It would behoove you engage this as a reasonable debate rather than locking down Joe's page under the dramatic pretense of "excessive vandalism." (TheWoat (talk) 00:51, 18 November 2008 (UTC))
Hi, instead of using the usual template, i see you have been creative in "rewarding" people for their nonsense on the wiki like the block notificationshere. I like it, and i think more admins should do it because it shows your human like the rest of us and can have a laugh once in a while. What other interesting block templates have you seen in your time on the wiki? I have always found this to be quite amusing :p 211.30.109.24 (talk) 09:38, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi there, Bobak. I saw some of your block messages recently and I laughed really hard. Keep up the good work! Bstone (talk) 19:12, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
I saw the wonderful work you did on the Keith Jackson article. Great job! Keith is one of my all time favorite professional sports announcers, and I think it's wonderful that someone had enough courtesy to give a great announcer like him a great article. I would love to see it get to Good Article or even Featured Article quality, and am wondering if you would like to help me out on doing so. I decided to ask you, because you were the one who made the great edits to help out the article in the first place. Have a nice day! :) CarpetCrawler (talk) 23:00, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
- OK, I'll make sure to tell you! Right now I'm going to research first. I'll look for Keith's name in various newspaper archives, and see if anything interesting comes up. Right now the article looks great, but some portions need expanding, as well as extra references. It will not be hard, but it will not be easy. I shall send you a message when I get to work! Have a nice night! :) CarpetCrawler (talk) 04:03, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
There is some controversy regarding the controversy regarding ITT Tech. I have a stated bias. (I guess maybe I should have kept that a secret.) At present the article is biased in the other direction. I would love it if you could take a look and leave a comment in the talk page.71.240.59.172 (talk) 03:27, 26 November 2008 (UTC) I forgot I wasn't logged in.Veecort (talk) 03:33, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
The December 2008 issue of the College football WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
Automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:40, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
LOL. AdjustShift (talk) 16:41, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for replying. :-) AdjustShift (talk) 16:47, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
Hi. Please don't move a page by cut&pasting the content because this method destroys the page edit history and causes copyright problems (GFDL violation - The GFDL requires acknowledgement of all contributors, and editors continue to hold copyright on their contributions unless they specifically give up this right. Hence it is required that edit histories be preserved for all major contributions until the normal copyright expires.) There is a "move" button (next to the "delete" one!) Please be careful and use it next time. Best, --PeaceNT (talk) 17:39, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
Dear Bobak, I've added your name here. Have a nice day. :-) AdjustShift (talk) 18:41, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
Since you were such a big help with the 2005 Sugar Bowl FAC, I figured I'd better let you know that 2006 Gator Bowl also has been nominated as a FAC. Any comments, criticism, or support you'd be able to add would be appreciated. Thanks! JKBrooks85 (talk) 07:59, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
- Any comments here would be helpful. :) JKBrooks85 (talk) 22:05, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
Well, 2006 Gator Bowl passed and is now an FA, but I just wanted to give you a heads-up that I've submitted a new FAC. 2003 Insight Bowl is waiting for comments when you get a chance. Thanks again! JKBrooks85 (talk) 11:56, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
Users opposing the use of College Football team logos being used in articles through out the College Football project have filed a Request for Comment trying to ban use of team logos. As I am sure you know our current standard/system of using logos legitimately with fair use rationales do not violate any wikipedia policy. It would be appreciated if you could take a moment and voice you opinion on the subject here: RFC: Use of logos on sports team pages. Thank you in advance and thank you for your contributions to the College Football Project. Rtr10 (talk) 04:27, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
- I would also request that you submit your opinion on the matter. I have noticed that some editors, especially User:Seraphimblade and User:Betacommand, have been removing images while there is still a debate on the matter. To me, this suggests that they are not honoring good-faith principles of Wikipedia and are imposing their own POV on the matter. Tedmoseby (talk) 21:13, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
- Please review my comments on this matter. I believe these editors are not following the enforcement rules. They are claiming these images can only be used once on the team's main article. But enforcement talks about articles, as in plural, more than one. Thanks, Tedmoseby (talk) 22:52, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
As the NFCC talk page was becoming difficult to navigate, I have moved the RFC to a subpage at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content/RFC on use of sports team logos. If you had the talkpage watchlisted, you may wish to add the subpage also. Best, Black Kite 11:31, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
Hi Bobak, I just spoke with Oren0, and I think it might be prudent to start identifying which athletic logos can qualify as free use, such as the Notre Dame logo. I understand the concern of some that these images are being needless attached to articles, but I can't for the life of me see where users like Black Kite, Seraphimblade and Betacommand get away with interpreting minimal to mean only 1 use for a main athletic page. I believe many logos would qualify as free under the same license as the ND logo, and I am wondering if you could lend your law expertise in helping the Football and Basketball Wikiprojects identify which logos can be exempt to reduce edit waring with some of these folks.Tedmoseby (talk) 23:01, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
MERRY CHRISTMAS (or other winter holiday) AND A HAPPY GAMEDAY
--B (talk) 20:01, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
| This is an archive of past discussions about User:Bobak. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Wikiwand in your browser!
Seamless Wikipedia browsing. On steroids.
Every time you click a link to Wikipedia, Wiktionary or Wikiquote in your browser's search results, it will show the modern Wikiwand interface.
Wikiwand extension is a five stars, simple, with minimum permission required to keep your browsing private, safe and transparent.
