User talk:JasonWoof

Welcome
Hello, , and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Wikipedia Boot Camp, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type   on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: &#126;&#126;&#126;. Four tildes (&#126;&#126;&#126;&#126;) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! -- LV (Dark Mark)  22:15, 7 March 2006 (UTC) (give me a shout out if this helps thanks!!!
 * The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style

Restored Gitorious article
After asking the admin who deleted it, he didn't have any particular objections to the references and responded: "Hello again. If you feel that the article can survive online, feel free to repost it. Thanks. Pastor Theo (talk) 19:49, 22 July 2009 (UTC)", and hence I've restored the page to Gitorious. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tuxcantfly (talk • contribs)

Tuxcantfly: Awesome! I just got back from the weekend. So glad to see Gitorious back up. Thanks for all your work. That's quite an impressive set of references. - JasonWoof (talk) 18:13, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Roxxxy
I've taken the iniative and I'm revising the Roxxxy article. Apart from the points | you made back in January about Roxxxy not being a robot (I agree, as every single media reference - and they are numerous - to it being a robot came directly from the PR material), there are also the that | points I made on the discussion page.

Reading extensively about the web, I feel the original WKP article is purely promotional in tone, and all the citations are simply links to media outlets that loop round to the manufacturers own PR material. As far as I can make out, this machine does not 'hold conversations', but at present merely replays prerecorded conversations. I can't find any write-ups of anyone who has actually had any kind of interactive conversation with it. Physical interaction is also very limited.

In short, I think the Roxxxy article at the moment is a misleading PR explosion rather than a Wikipedia article, and there is no link on the page to a serious review, nor to any material examining (rather than listing the claimed) qualities of the product. Centrepull (talk) 09:01, 17 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Thank you for taking initiative! Sounds like you're being very realistic and not buying into the PR/media hype. I couldn't find any real info on the thing either, so I didn't know what to put in the page. But certainly we shouldn't just be accumulating references to all the cheap media outlets who copied the PR from the manufacturer. -- JasonWoof (talk) 22:27, 29 September 2010 (UTC)