User talk:Rollosmokes
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Talk Page Archive #1 covers topics discussed between January 20 and June 11, 2006.
Talk Page Archive #2 covers topics discussed between June 12 and September 8, 2006.
Talk Page Archive #3 covers topics discussed between September 9 and December 1, 2006.
Talk Page Archive #4 covers topics discussed between December 2, 2006, and February 20, 2007.
Talk Page Archive #5 covers topics discussed between February 21 and April 30, 2007.
Talk Page Archive #6 covers topics discussed between May 1 and June 14, 2007.
Talk Page Archive #7 covers topics discussed between June 15 and December 3, 2007.
Talk Page Archive #8 covers topics discussed between December 4, 2007, and May 7, 2008.
User:Rollosmokes/List of New York Yankees broadcasters (test page with new format)
For all new topics, feel free to vent NOW.
[edit] THIS GUY IS A VANDAL!
He just destroyed the WIS TV web page, many contributors spent years building. Thank god for the "undo" function. BEWARE of this guy!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.76.1.2 (talk) 21:04, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Hello from a fellow television-news enthusiast!
Please take a look at the discussion page for article "WCBS-TV" and see the entry, posted 7 May 2008, headed "Regarding Flagship Stations." That note is mine; I believe that it will clarify my rationale for making my earlier two minor edits to "WCBS-TV" and will show the validity of those insertions. Please feel free to contact me on the subject! Thanks! 67.180.135.133 (talk) 00:31, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Just to clarify my position...
Hi! I have no intention or desire to be on any other terms but collaborative and friendly with my fellow Wikipedians. But the tiny insertions I have made to article "WCBS-TV" are minor, and factual, and, as you well know, do not in any way constitute vandalism. If you feel the need to eliminate them, for whatever personal reason, then by all means do so--I really don't give much of a damn about "WCBS-TV" or any other Wikipedia article. I spend some spare time on this site as a lark, as enjoyment, as something to stretch my mind muscles. I often ultimately delete edits I make because I've decided that they lack the documentation, or lack the significance, or because I may have injected my personal feelings into the article. But I am long past the point of trying to prove anything to or display any superiority over anyone else on the Web or in the world, and article "WCBS-TV" is not going to be an exception. But it should be kept in mind that Wikipedia is a collaborative effort, and no article is under the administration and arbitration of editors who dismiss ideas other than their own as foolish, and like any other person I do not take well to such terms as "ridiculous." Discussion and debate is welcomed by all of fair mind, and no contributor wants his or her offering belittled. This is my last communication with you on the subject, and New York's Channel 2, and the rest of the universe, will go on quite handily no matter what we little Wikikpedians say about it. The ironic thing about our little set-to is that, from all I can discern, we share some common interests and might get on very well, if only vis-a-vis electronic communication. Who knows--maybe it's that East Coast vs West Coast thing. But even that great divide can actually be bridged. Respectfully, but emphatically, 67.180.135.133 (talk) 07:11, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
- Let's see...first, you ignore my original comment on why I reverted the first changes and went ahead and restored them anyway...then you label me as a vandal...and to top it all off, you're using both a registered account and an unregistered IP address to make several revertions of the same article. Basically, you're abusing your account(s), not editing in good faith, and using Wikipedia to prove a point. At this point I really don't care what you've written, because I've already written you off. I've already contacted an administrator for intervention on this dispute. And I suggest you make use of that registered name you've goten yourself and edit from that from now on. Rollosmokes (talk) 07:21, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] To reply:
Go ahead! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.180.135.133 (talk) 07:23, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Alycia Lane
Do you think the page should be protected from anon users? That would cut down on at least some of the vandalism. JTRH (talk) 16:09, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
- It's the same IP address that keeps adding the same stuff over and over again. A block on that particular IP would help, but I think protection is the way to go for a while. Rollosmokes (talk) 16:33, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Get A Life
It seems that you spend a hell of a lot of time editing. Don't you have anything better to do. There are about 2 dozen articles that you make daily changes on. 90 % of these changes are UNESSESSARY. Sometimes its over one "stupid" word. Other times its accurate information. It seems to me that you have taken a few articles and claimed them as your own. Well they are not your own. The only time you should change something is if information is not accurate, bad grammar, sloppy form, or outright vandalism. By the way editing an article repeatedly is NOT vandalism. Vandalism is putting innacurate information, cutting overwelming amounts of info for the sake of upseting someone, putting defaming information, speculative info on people mentioned in an article. Merely stating facts (redundant or not) does not constitute vandalism. Also anyone may edit an article once a day. When I last checked it was three times a day as the limit.
One thing that boggles my mind is how you have so much time to look at your 2 dozen articles and revert edits. It seems in one day you corrected about 15 artciles, several multiple times. This takes up alot of time. If I inded had the time to deal with you I would declare an outright editing war. But I have no time to do such stuff. I have more important things to deal with in life. I would think you would to. You agravate me to no end not just with correcting my edits but everyone else's as well. Even people who work at some of these places have expressed similar thoughts. I have read at least 5 or 6 other editors that have complained about your posessive attitude.
On one hand, its great you have such a passion for quality (and you do know how to write well), but you act as if your belief is the only way. You GO WAY OVERBOARD (and on TV stations you dont even watch in some cases). You have too much time on your hands. By the way the person above me has come to the same conclusion about you. And they also did not vandalise. You have managed to piss off quite a few people here. Even with your knowledge, I think we would be better off without you and your arrogance.
THATS ALL!!!!
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.48.187.157 (talk) 19:11, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
- It should be known that many of us here, including Rollosmokes, have lives of our own beyond Wikipedia; it's that there are too many neer-do-wells to police, which eat up time to do other things. Furthermore, the 3-edit rule is for reverts only -- you can edit an article as many times as you want, otherwise. -- azumanga (talk) 00:34, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
-
- I wasn't going to respond to this sour grapes comment from (just guessing) Marckd. But now I will: Marckd, once you learn to stop adding trivial and redundant detail to articles such as WTXX, then I'll take you seriously. Thanks for having my back, Azumanga. Rollosmokes (talk) 07:49, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] WRAL-TV
Hello, in regards to this edit you shouldn't remove an unreferenced template until sources have been added. Also, the link for WRAL-FM should not be removed either since readers might be looking for the radio article instead. Thanks. APK yada yada 06:41, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] I have contacted PhilKnight for mediation
I have contacted a third party on this issue. DMA are already in brackets by COL on the State lists. I do not understand the problem but I feel I have a valid argument on this and will take it up with others. Oak999 (talk) 05:19, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
- I didn't know the founder of Nike was a Wikipedia user! Anyway, how can you complain when you once again reverted back to a version of the NBC state affiliate list that contains a glaring omission, one which I recorrected thrice and you undid four times. You can't complain about someone else's work when your own house isn't in order. So if you want to go there, "Just Do It". Rollosmokes (talk) 05:29, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
If you made some other edit to the page that I reverted back other then having that "and Designated Market Area in parentheses when the COL is different then the DMA." I offer my apology. Not all stations COL are to its anchor city in DMA. As I have told you before the FCC did channel allocations back in the 50s before power boosts for TV and radio stations. Most people are not going to know where "orange park" Florida is which is the COL for WJXX. But its DMA is Jacksonville (its the anchor city). The lists on Affiliates by State already have DMA in them when the COL is different. All I have stated is that it be clear in the paragraph so people know what they are looking at. Where is the problem? Oak999 (talk) 05:45, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
- You're still missing the point -- why did you delete accurate information, specifically KPNX from the NBC list? You still haven't answered that, yet you continue to make your case for this "problem" in the state lists. There was no problem here until you created it. Rollosmokes (talk) 05:48, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
Delete KPNX from the list? I do not recall doing that and if I did it would have to be by accident. I have reverted back the NBC list to what you had it so any ifo you had or corrections will be added. I also added what I stated. Hopefully this will clear this up. Oak999 (talk) 05:51, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
I have again asked for assistance in mediation on this issue. Since you have included DMA cities the ones in brackets it needs to be clear WHAT they are at the top of the paragraph of the article for those people who may not know. If the DMAs are removed then fine. But for some people they may ask "why Jacksonville is in brackets next to WJXX when its COL is Orange Park" for just one instance of many on these affiliates by state articles. Again you have not clarified that. You say this information is not needed. I think when you put other cities OTHER then the COL on the list but do not clarify WHAT they are thats a issue. Oak999 (talk) 23:42, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] NYC Meetup: June 1, 2008
 |
New York City Meetup
|
In the afternoon, we will hold a session dedicated to meta:Wikimedia New York City activities, elect a board of directors, and hold salon-style group discussions on Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia projects (see the last meeting's minutes).
We'll also review our recent Wikipedia Takes Manhattan event, and make preparations for our exciting successor Wiki Week bonanza, being planned with Columbia University students for September or October.
In the evening, we'll share dinner and chat at a local restaurant, and (weather permitting) hold a late-night astronomy event at Columbia's telescopes.
You can add or remove your name from the New York City Meetups invite list at Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC/Invite list.
Also, check out our regional US Wikimedia chapters blog Wiki Northeast (and we're open to guest posts).
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:30, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Thank you for letting me know!
I can't imagine what I would do if I didn't have you looking out for my interests! 67.180.135.133 (talk) 06:31, 22 May 2008 (UTC)Nicky67.180.135.133 (talk) 06:31, 22 May 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.180.135.133 (talk) 06:27, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Also...
Rollosmokes, you flatter me with you continued attention! 67.180.135.133 (talk) 06:43, 22 May 2008 (UTC)Nicky67.180.135.133 (talk) 06:43, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Talk pages
Apparently you didn't know, but users, even IP users, can delete their own talk page messages. See WP:TALK#USER TALK PAGESAsher196 (talk) 12:04, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] From the Editor Formerly Known as 67.180.133.135
The message from the IP user was deleted. I will not patronize anyone who labels me as a "vandal". To the editor who's comment had previously held this space: Kindly refrain from contacting me in the future on my talk page. Thank you very much. Next...
[edit] The vandal
Kafziel has blocked him for a month, so unless that person decides to evade their block by using another IP, you won't have to worry about them for now. Acalamari 16:29, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Template:Infobox Broadcast
If you do not understand how templates work, don't edit them. You have repeatedly moved the final channel assignments for TV over top of the temporary ones. This is breaking things. --66.46.167.154 (talk) 17:09, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
- FYI, I understand how they work. I also know how discussion and consensus work, and you haven't listened to either. Don't try reverse psychology on me, because it won't work. Rollosmokes (talk) 17:53, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
[edit] WP:3RR
Just wanted to remind you to watch this while editing Template:Infobox Broadcast. I don't want to see a good editor blocked. Dusticomplain/compliment 18:11, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for that. Rollosmokes (talk) 18:13, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
I agree that WP:RPP isn't the place for discussing disputes, but there's really no reason to continue to delete the IP's comments. I'd suggest just ignoring it for now. The template will or won't be protected regardless of his input on that page. --Onorem♠Dil 18:28, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
-
- Ditto, I was getting ready to leave you another message about that. I also left a note on the IP's talk page. That could turn into another 3RR issue, and if you want Admin's to see things your way, then I would act maturley about it, instead of removing notes left by other users. Dusticomplain/compliment 18:30, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
- I agree. I'll just let the IP fall flat face-first by itself. Rollosmokes (talk) 18:31, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
[edit] DTV transition
I notice that you are continuing to engage in a revert war in order to remove information concerning the upcoming 2009 US DTV transition from hundreds of individual television station articles. If you continue, the chances are high that instead of accurate data in these pages at the end of transition, there will be wrong data or even contradictory data. I've had to repair countless pages which were displaying nonsense like "Channel analog 9 (VHF) digital 9 (VHF)" because of your repeated and unconstructive edits to {{Infobox Broadcast}} and individual station articles. You've responded by continuing revert wars and by accusing anyone who attempts to repair the damage you've done of being WP:SOCKS. I've moved the issue to RFC here and raised the issues related to WP:3RR and your repeated vandalism of userpages with unsubstantiated WP:SOCK allegations here. Please stop editing Wikipedia disruptively. --carlb (talk) 13:22, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
- Except that what you are doing has not been discussed at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Television Stations. Before you add any substantial material such as new infoboxes and categories, you must bring it up with us first. For failure to do so, you, carlb, may be the one in hot water. -- azumanga (talk) 23:19, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
[edit] WP:ANI notice
FYI, there is a thread about you at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#User:Rollosmokes. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 21:45, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
- It's been hot as heck in NYC this weekend. I don't need to deal with anymore heat, even if it's fabricated. But oh well, here we go again. Rollosmokes (talk) 03:28, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
