User talk:Rogerd/Archive004

Strategic Air Command (film)
Thanks for pointing that Jimmy Stewart flew B-24's, but he ALSO flew B-17's --Woolhiser 16:15, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I had to make a change to Buckboard's edits, and there's more detail on the Talk page. I'd appreciate your input there. --Woolhiser 20:51, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I would have mentioned the B-24 on the first edit, but I was not aware of it. Thanks for bringing it up! --Woolhiser 23:25, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

TV Land Awards
Thanks for the touch-up! Staxringold 02:31, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Yours, Mine & Ours
Have you even watched the movie? In the 2005 version it's White, not North. -- Yin 08:18, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

C-130 Hercules
Where does the Falklands/Malvinas War reference should go ? Jor70 18:01, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Stolen C-130
I saw your footnote when U listed the reference page for the stolen C-130. Yup - it wuz for real, and as an Air Force brat who hung around the flightlines at Norton and Eglin Air Force Bases, I was well familiar with this notorious Hercules incident. There is a whole hotbed of chat columns on C-130 - oriented websites about this incident, including speculation that F-100s sent out to search for it may have shot it down, but as that is all speculation, I limited my incident report to the known facts.

I know of a few other notable C-130 hull losses, which I may get 'round to posting at some point.

I take it that you are one of the Big Dogs on the Wiki. I edit certain articles over here, and contribute boat loads of material on the ClemsonWiki project, my alma mater. I wrote the lead chunks for the Operation Credible Sport article, and have contributed to Twelve O' Clock High and Dr. Strangelove, amongst others.

Contributor Mark Sublette

Falls Church, Virginia —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mark Sublette (talk • contribs) 14:46, March 22, 2006 (UTC)

Re:Prasi90
Appears you are correct...good eye my man, and I appreciate it. Looks like it's time to block that IP again...let me look things over and see what I can do. I may have to wait a few hours as I am getting busy. I expected a sock account to pop up.--MONGO 05:30, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Award
No, you deserve this absolutely. You go about your business, never ruffling anyone's feathers...a model admin is what you are. Keep up the good work.--MONGO 08:37, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject Newsletter, Issue I
delivered by Loopy e 05:37, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Disamb pages - thanks for the info
Thanks for the info on disambiguation pages. The "only one blue link per entry" is updated (March 24 2006) since I last read the dab MOS; thanks for pointing that out. The piped disamb links were left from the version that I edited - I'll keep an eye out for these in the future. Thanks again for pointing out the update. &mdash;ERcheck @ 03:31, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the info on the MOS for disambiguation pages - I hadn't picked that one up yet. --Estarriol talk 09:28, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Redlink entries on disambig pages get a blue link too
I just made minor fixes a couple of your MOS:DP compliance edits. Recently, the following language got added:
 * Redlinks should usually not be the only link in a given entry; link also to an existing article, so that a reader (as opposed to a contributing editor) will have somewhere to navigate to for additional information.

Just FYI, since it's new guidance. Thanks! --TreyHarris 05:00, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the update! --rogerd 05:05, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

A moment ago . ..
. . . I saw that you had voted on the Bush Crimes Commission page, and then your vote disappeared. Did somebody remove your vote? Morton devonshire 02:29, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes, apparently User:Xtra did --rogerd 02:34, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

I have no idea how that happened. Xtra 03:21, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Closing AfDs
Please be careful when closing AfDs. You closure of Articles for deletion/Hendrix Nosepipe was incomplete as it failed to provide who deleted the article and why it was deleted. --Hetar 02:11, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the heads up. I have added text explaining why I speedy deleted it (G1:patent nonsense)  --rogerd 02:21, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Old Skool Esperanzial note
Since this isn't the result of an AC meeting, I have decided to go Old Skool. This note is to remind you that the elections are taking place now and will end at 23:50 UTC on 2006-04-29. Please vote here. Thanks. --Cel es tianpower háblame 20:42, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Infobox
There is a consensus discussion on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Aircraft on adopting a non-specifications summary infobox for aircraft articles. Your comments would be appreciated. Thanks! - Emt147 Burninate!  18:41, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

User:72.140.99.7
Why did you add that new warning? My warning occured after the vandalism had stopped anyways. JoshuaZ 04:55, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
 * You really can't block someone unless they first get something more serious than test --rogerd 04:59, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes, I know that. What does that have to do with this? He had stopped vandalzing,been given a warning and then an hour later you added another warning jumping two levels in the test-tree? JoshuaZ 05:03, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, if you don't like it, then revert it. --rogerd 05:07, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Sunday Times Golden Globe Race
Hi, I thought you might be interested to know that the Sunday Times Golden Globe Race article is up for FAC. If you like, I'd welcome your comments on the FAC review page. — Johan the Ghost seance 16:50, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Proof I'm from Montana
Now many, many years ago, when I was twenty-three, I was married to a widow who was pretty as could be. This widow had a grown-up daughter who had hair of red. My father fell in love with her, and soon they, too, were wed.

This made my dad my son-in-law and changed my very life, My daughter was my mother, cause she was my father's wife. To complicate the matter, even though it brought me joy, I soon became the father of a bouncing baby boy.

My little baby then became a brother-in-law to Dad, And so became my uncle, though it made me very sad. For if he was my uncle, then that also made him brother Of the widow's grown-up daughter, who, of course, was my stepmother.

Father's wife then had a son who kept him on the run, And he became my grandchild, for he was my daughter's son. My wife is now my mother's mother, and it makes me blue, Because, although she is my wife, she's my grandmother, too.

Now if my wife is my grandmother, then I'm her grandchild, And everytime I think of it, it nearly drives me wild, For now I have become the strangest case you ever saw As husband of my grandmother, I am my own grandpa! --MONGO 03:32, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject The Beatles Newsletter, Issue 1
Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? - It's all here

Military history WikiProject Newsletter - Issue II
The April 2006 issue of the project newsletter is now out. You may read this issue or change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you by following the link. Thanks. Kirill Lok s h in 18:55, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Thank you!
''' Thank you, dear Rogerd! ''' Your concern in my absence and your get-well wishes really mean a lot to me. Sometimes, well - life can be tough on us, but as long as good friends like you are there, I'll always have a reason to cheer up. Since you mention it, I swear I'll continue to drop by RfA as I used to... tho I don't think my contribs are so special anyway! ;) Thank you, my dear Roger!! Phædriel  ♥ tell me - 18:01, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Rationales to impeach George W. Bush (2nd nomination)
You are invited to vote at Articles for deletion/Rationales to impeach George W. Bush (2nd nomination). All this is is ramblings/blog/rants about Bush. Not encyclopedic, should've been deleted long ago. Happy editing! Morton devonshire 20:58, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

*** Important - Your input requested ASAP ***
Please see this Deletion review.

Merecat 00:35, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

"Fat Pat"
I was addressing whoever wanted to place the material in the article. Sorry about the uncelar indentation. I usually just indent sequentially, which might be ambiguous sometimes. Cheers, -Will Beback 22:56, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks on EmperorOfSevenSeas
Thanks for the block on this User talk:EmperorOfSevenSeas - I noticed one of the gibberish mathematical entries and reverted it (and one more), and wound up with the same thing added to my own talk page. I'm not sure if the edits were a person, or aided by a recursive bot. Most seemed to be the formula, but at least one was the removal of an NPOV tag (on AMC Cinemas). I'm not sure if these were the whole point of the exercise, or the targets were just drawn from "what's NPOV" as well as some other criteria. David Oberst 02:35, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Glen Edwards (pilot)
I was not aware of that. Thanks for pointing it out to me, and fixing it so I don't have to :) Cornell Rockey 04:47, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

WP:POVFORK
Shuffling off all criticism to a subarticle is blatant bowdlerizing; using POV fork to dodge WP:NPOV. As an admin, I can tell you it won't stand. I've restored a reasonable summary per WP:POVFORK. FeloniousMonk 05:17, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I am highly offended at your accusation of me trying to dodge NPOV. You have no evidence to support your blatant (your word) accusations.   Have you not heard of assume good faith?  You don't know me, you know nothing about me.  My only motivation in that edit was to eliminate some of the duplication of content between the main article and the sub-article.  I am not trying to hide anything.  After all, if anyone wants to see all 33kb of the sub-article, all they have to do is click their mouse once.  You may not like my summary, and you are free to edit it, but 3 paragraphs (it has since grown to 4 again) is not a "brief summary".  Please slow down, be civil and think a little before throwing molotov cocktails at someone with whom you have no history.  Now that I have that off my chest, have a nice day.  --rogerd 00:48, 15 May 2006 (UTC)


 * My fault for not being clear here. I'm not accusing you of dodging WP:NPOV. I'm saying that all criticism cannot be removed, doing so creates a POV fork and is a form of bowdlerism. We can argue over the size of the summary, but a proper summary is required per WP:POVFORK. 1 or 2 sentences is too short to properly summarize the issues. FeloniousMonk 04:01, 15 May 2006 (UTC)


 * One more thing here. What exactly is the meaning of "As an admin, I can tell you it won't stand."?  Is that some kind of threat?  I, too, am an admin, and I sincerely hope that you aren't throwing that kind of talk around with other users.  That kind of implied threat to use (or abuse) you admin powers on the first contact with another user certainly is not what being an admin is about.   Again, please review WP:AGF.  Thank you --rogerd 04:57, 15 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Saying "As an admin, I can tell you it won't stand." is the same thing as saying 'In my professional opinion, I can tell you it won't stand.'
 * "Is that some kind of threat?" No, it's meant qualify to my statement to a fellow admin.
 * "I sincerely hope that you aren't throwing that kind of talk around with other users." No, actually I use stern warnings when needed. They are not so ambiguious as to be causing the confusion you've been experiencing with my comment to you.
 * "That kind of implied threat to use (or abuse) you admin powers..." Who's failing to assume good faith here again?
 * Look, I think you're being a little thin-skinned here and/or failing to assume good faith on my part. Unless you have specific accusations you'd like to make, just take my comments to you at face value and let's not read any more into what I wrote to you than is actually there. FeloniousMonk 15:16, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

You are so right and everybody else is wrong?
I don't think so. I am apparently not the only one who feels the overly long and one-sided summary needs to be tightened up somewhat. All of the 3 paragraphs support the allegations of bias and use politically charged language like "neo-conservative" (whatever that means). The "see also" is also quite one sided. This article is not your personal fiefdom. --rogerd 04:02, 17 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Well, I wouldn't count on edits like Mrmiscellanious' to pass NPOV muster, much less WP:POVFORK.


 * Look, WP:POVFORK is clear and unambiguous: "the original article should contain a summary of the "Criticism of ... " article". Your idea of a "reasonable summary" is no summary of at all: It contains no mention of the specific issues found in Fox News Channel controversies and allegations of bias and tosses in the canard of having been accused of having a left-wing slant(!).


 * It's necessary for any summary to be accurate and complete, regardless of who writes it. To be complete and accurate a summary is going to have to hit the major points of the subarticle, period. FeloniousMonk 04:21, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism concerns
Your "Vandalism" heading of a user talk page warning has been edited and changed. Sandy 01:35, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject Newsletter - Issue III - May 2006
The May 2006 issue of the Military history 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. Kirill Lokshin 05:32, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

User:Phaedriel
Hello Rogerd. Was I correct to rollback the first time? The IPs edits are baffling.Blnguyen | Have your say!!! 03:51, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I would say that you did the correct thing. The IP's I think are saying that she is hurting herself more than helping with that message, but it is her page, after all, and if she wants that message there, I support her.  I am not sure what the IP's motivation is.  --rogerd 04:16, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
 * It's probably amorrow...he did the same thing with Gator1...told me less is more, etc. Also, Rogerd, thanks for the vote of confidence at AN/I...I guess it must amaze people that I can see a little angry when the fact is I almost never am...certainly not by POV pushers...this off wiki harassment is another story however. Thanks again.--MONGO 04:25, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
 * You are right. Brandt and his followers on WR are trying very hard to ruin this project, and are also trying to ruin some people's lives for no good reason.  And I don't know what we can do about it.  And it is very despressing to realize that they are winning, at least for now.  --rogerd 04:41, 1 June 2006 (UTC)