User talk:Eric Herboso/2007

This page maintains an archived record of all comments from my talk page made in 2007.

Aaron Sorkin article under peer review at FAC!
Come help out! See if you can help improve it a little bit before it reaches featured article status.-BiancaOfHell 07:23, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Robin Raven
You speedily deleted Robin Raven with "nn actor" as the reason given. Could you explain? The article was written in good faith, and was factual, including references to outside sources such as imdb. Thanks in advance for responding. &mdash; Eric Herboso 08:37, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
 * It was deleted because he is non-notable. Read Notability. The only two roles list him as "student" and "dancer", which practically means he was an extra. Link to IMDB proves nothing since IMDB collects info on all and every actor, most of them never notable enough to get an entry for themselves in Wikipedia. Writing style (with "life-long journeys") did not help either. Renata 13:01, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Hopefully the article has now been expanded with enough information to show how it is notable. Please note that a quick google search may not show notability in this case because of Teen Titans fan subs, but Robin does in fact pass accepted guidelines in Notability.  &mdash; Eric Herboso 04:40, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Non-notable articles
Hi, Eric! On the Robin Raven AFD page, you said, I would point out that many current entries make much less of a case for notability on wikipedia right now. -- I think it would be a great help to Wikipedia if you could help remove articles that don't meet the guidelines. Please see Articles_for_deletion/Log/Today for instructions on how you can nominate articles for deletion. Thanks! Touchdown Turnaround 19:12, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Wikilink removal
Okay, so I have a procedural question. Recently, I noticed that after deleting an article, you found what linked to that article and removed the wikilinks. My question is: why? Is it policy? If so, what is the reasoning for this policy?

I understand why red links are unsightly on introductory wikipedia pages. They falsely give an image of unproffesionalism from the standpont of non-wikipedians. But having red links is useful in many situations where it is not a high-profile page. This is because as the presence of such links accumulate, the underlying need to have an article at that page becomes much more clear. In the absence of a reply at my talk page, I plan to reinstate the wikilinks to the deleted page. Thanks for your time. &mdash; Eric Herboso 23:58, 25 March 2007 (UTC) [Originally left at Ceyockey's talk page.]
 * You did not mention what article you were referring to. Without knowing that, Eric, I cannot comment on the particulars.  If you are planning to revert all such actions on my part, though ... that is another matter altogether. (diff reference to my talk page) --User:Ceyockey ( talk to me ) 00:03, 26 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I only mentioned changing if you didn't reply because I noticed your disclaimer saying you were on 'permanent wikivacation'. I just wanted an out in case a week went by without a response.
 * I noticed your removal of wikilink to Robin Raven in The Education of Max Bickford, though you also did the same in The Third Nail. Personally, I would prefer having the red link present, even though the article it would link to has been recently deleted per consensus on AfD.  But I'm unfamiliar with Afd procedures, and so do not know if what you did is perhaps consensus, or if it just something you thought would be appropriate.  &mdash; Eric Herboso 00:11, 26 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for pointing out the specific instances (diff reference to my talk page). This isn't policy that I'm acting on, but personal style.  The reason why I have removed wikilinks like this is to help to prevent a cycle of quick re-creation/deletion/re-creation of articles that have undergone an AFD action.  I only mean this to be a speed bump and add the reference to the AFD action in a comment which is readily apparent when an editor goes to create a link.  Most editors when seeing a red-link and having some information will create a stub and won't know that the article has previously been deleted; this very often leads to frustration on the part of the editor.  If only they could see upfront that the article had been deleted and, more importantly, why it had been deleted, the new article creation could anticipate and avoid the previous characteristics that led to deletion ... or so one hopes.  It's a good faith attempt to reduce frustration on the parts of editor and administrator alike.  --User:Ceyockey ( talk to me ) 02:45, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Wheat
I really hate to have removed that 'info', as I think it would be interesting to see how long it would take before a citation needed tag was put on it. But as interesting as it may be, I simply could not let it lie any longer while knowing it was incorrect. And that, I think, is a result in itself: it shows that a user like me will fix a problem as soon as it is noticed, even in a situation such as this one. And isn't that a good sign for wikipedia all on its own? &mdash; Eric Herboso 08:58, 13 April 2007 (UTC) [Originally left at Cool Hand Luke's talk page.]


 * It is good. After all, I ought not do that in the first place.  I don't know when I would have otherwise remembered to fix it either. Cool Hand Luke 12:41, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Oh really?
I deleted it because, as far as I could tell, you are not supposed to use the Talk pages to voice your own opinion on the article's topic. All that person did was use to bad language to posit that he did not agree with the topic. Very uncessessary. But if it is your wish to go through a "rigamoroll" of processes to delete one obscene comment, then I suppose I could play along.

Just this once, for you, Eric. --le petite robot 13:46, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Question about reverting vandalism
 Physical fitness  &mdash; Eric Herboso 07:22, 10 May 2007 (UTC)  Originally left at User talk:TinyE.


 * Hi Eric, This response is in feedback to your comment on my talk page about recent revert on Thanks for your feedback on good Wikipedia etiquette in reverting vandalism. It is helpful and appreciated. However, should I also post a comment on the contributors (or presumed vandal's) talk page when they make the edit as an unregistered user? Thanks for your response. --TinyE 07:16, 11 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Users who vandalize wikipedia should always be warned. This is true even for users who are not logged in.  (Without warnings placed on talk pages, it is difficult to identify repeat offenders.)  You may want to use Article for light offenses, or Your username for welcoming new anonymous users.  If it is clear that the IP is used by multiple users, make sure the warning you give specifies that if they are not the vandal, then they may easily avoid any irrelevant messages from showing up by getting their own account.  (You may want to use Why create an account?.)  Of course, these are just suggestions.  There is nothing wrong with reverting without leaving a warning, and if you are in a hurry or otherwise would prefer not to, please feel free to not do so.  &mdash; Eric Herboso 08:59, 11 May 2007 (UTC)  Originally left at User talk:TinyE.

Mathematics CotW
Hey Eric, I am writing you to let you know that the Mathematics Collaboration of the week(soon to "of the month") is getting an overhaul of sorts and I would encourage you to participate in whatever way you can, i.e. nominate an article, contribute to an article, or sign up to be part of the project. Any help would be greatly appreciated, thanks--Cronholm144 21:19, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

fuck off
don't fuck with us —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.131.154.36 (talk • contribs).


 * You mean when I reverted your troll-like behavior at Cool Hand Luke? To be honest, I don't consider that 'f***ing with' you.  Perhaps you should calm down a bit and realize that there is little to gain from attacking others online, especially strangers that you'll never interact with in real life.  &mdash; Eric Herboso 19:45, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

starter home
Hi, I noticed that you are a real estate expert. I recently started an article on starter homes and I was hoping you would be interested in contributing to it. Right now it's just a stub article and I'd like to add more content to it. Cheers. Wl219 02:17, 22 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Sorry, but I don't generally edit real estate articles. I'm planning on publishing a book in the field at some point, and I don't particularly want to release any content concerning real estate under GFDL.  Also, I don't like mixing work with pleasure, and believe it or not, I consider Wikipedia to be one of my pleasures.  Weird, huh?  &mdash; Eric Herboso 09:50, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Wikimania in Atlanta!
Mike H. I did "That's hot" first! 06:33, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Cool Weird Clouds
Hey, I enjoyed the article you pointed out on the Talk: Mobile, Alabama page. Thanks! Altairisfar 19:16, 3 December 2007 (UTC)