User talk:Franklin J. Robinson

June 2009
Hello. The information you added to Roger Moore is likely to be considered trivial, and most users are likely to reject it. Just an FYI. - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 14:44, 24 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Also, verifiable doesn't always mean encyclopedic. - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 14:47, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Re; Roger Moore
Hi FJR -

Sorry about the climate change reference in my Roger Moore edit summary - I was joshing, and it's hard to communicate that in writing as opposed to speaking, what with vocal inflections and all.

I had "watched" the User:BillCJ page because he had been reverting some edits to the Mike Post page without regard to some sourced information and issues of appropriateness that I had raised there. He also left a rather blunt and huffy edit summary; I had replied to him on his Talk page and wanted to monitor it. It was there that I noted your remark to him about being a climate change denier. I was (surprisingly) agreeing with his edit and joking about your reference to him.

Now, as to the Moore info you added. I do believe it is "gossip-y," but that doesn't mean it doesn't belong in the article. I just don't think it belongs in "Personal Life" following the UNICEF award. I note that at the end of the article, there's a section called "Criticism." Your information might fit there, mightn't it? It could be framed as an example of Moore's insouciance, which some regard as a kind of shallowness. regards, Sensei48 (talk) 15:11, 24 June 2009 (UTC)