User talk:Rossgk

Hello "Rossgk" and welcome to Wikipedia. A few tips for you:


 * Peruse Welcome, newcomers and associated pages.
 * You can experiment in the Sandbox.
 * Sign talk page entries with ~, which is automatically converted to a name and date.
 * Ask questions on Village pump.
 * Happy wikipediaing, -- Infrogmation 19:46, 3 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Ottawa Wikipedia Meetup
Hey, just a quick note to let you know there is an Ottawa Wikipedia Meetup coming up this Saturday @ 2pm. If you can make it, please drop by the Meetup website and RSVP. If you can't, join up anyway, so you can find out about future Ottawa Wikipedia Meetups! --Spinboy 21:49, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)

New Wikiproject
Hi there, just a quick note to let you know that we've started a new wikiproject! WikiProject Ottawa aims to expand the amount of articles in Ottawa, and of the articles that are there, take them from stubs to something worthy of being a feature article. We hope you'll stop by and sign up! --Spinboy 03:54, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Signed up
Recently signed up on the Ottawa wiki project site. Will try to contribute at some point Rossgk

Portreath
Hi,

I added a photo an some external links, so it should be easier for you to expand the article. Even I don't know much about Portreath, I had been there for 3 hours on a bicycle tour on the Mineral Tramway 2 years ago. I took some photos and gathered the missing information for the German article from the internet.

EvaK --84.177.8.250 23:07, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Your edit to Déjà Vu (film)
Your recent contribution(s) to are very much appreciated. However, you did not provide references or sources for your information. Keeping Wikipedia accurate and verifiable is very important, and as you might be aware there is currently a drive to improve the quality of Wikipedia by encouraging editors to cite the sources they used when adding content. If sources are left unreferenced, it may count as original research, which is not allowed. Can you provide in the article specific references to any books, articles, websites or other reliable sources that will allow people to verify the content in the article? You can use a citation method listed at inline citations that best suits each article. Thanks! --Erik ( talk/contrib ) @ 21:26, 10 December 2006 (UTC)


 * You wrote, "The idea of viewing events which occurred in the past with a viewing apparatus was explored at length in Orson Scott Card's 'Pastwatch: the Redemption of Christopher Columbus'. In that novel, the same progression of events is outlined, initially watching the past, then injecting items, then finally people." I reverted because there was not a source for this information.  I wasn't looking for the title and author.  Rather, I was looking for who made the connection between the book and the film.  If you made the connection yourself, it qualifies as original research, which is against Wikipedia policy.  However, if the director of the film or someone else connected to the film said that this book served as a basis, then that would be a reliable source that could be verified by other editors by citing the origin of the information.  Hope this makes sense. --Erik ( talk/contrib ) @ 21:48, 10 December 2006 (UTC)


 * I know, and this is an issue with a lot of film articles. Editors tend to draw connections between a film and another source where there was none to be had before, usually dumping such connections in the Trivia section.  To be honest, I haven't seen the film yet, so I'm not focusing very strongly on article maintenance until I do.  Don't want to spoil it for myself, you know?  When I see the film, I will probably address the original research in the Trivia section, most likely for removal if there are no reliable sources that make the connections. --Erik ( talk/contrib ) @ 22:02, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Notice
NOTICE IS GIVEN THAT the scope of WikiProject Ottawa is being debated. Your input is requested. Thank you. GreenJoe 20:36, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Robert Boylestad
I have nominated Robert Boylestad, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/Robert Boylestad. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. BJ Talk 01:12, 12 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Oh, cool - I missed the whole debate, but looks like some good thinking on the subject. I can see the point about deletion in favour of an entry on his books.


 * I feel extra pleased that someone at least purporting to be the man himself piped up and asked for deletion. However, I put little weight on that.  If he were insignificant (like me) I'd support the individual's request for deletion. But once you do significant stuff in the public sphere, you cannot negate that, and part of the result is that people have carte blanche to talk about (dare I say celebrate) what you did, regardless of whether you like it or not.


 * It's the yin/yang of putting yourself out into the public - you take the good with the "bad". Rossgk (talk) 15:35, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:13, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

Hey
If you can show me more non-Gibson sources (as in, not written directly by him, not from interviews with him, not from his publisher) about the 'jackpot event', I'll restore it. DS (talk) 15:14, 23 September 2019 (UTC)


 * You deleted it? Nice, Thanks for that acknowledgement of my effort today. Rather hostile, jeez. It's an important concept very relevant to today, from a major work of literature. MANY people talk about it every day, and can refer to it without additional background. Yet I was surprised there wasn't a page on the topic. I did the service of creating a page to which I'm sure many would contribute more than I (I'm not a professional wikipedier).


 * It's often discussed by...
 * Prominent authors
 * In major media articles
 * Blogs
 * And constantly on twitter (Sample links I can't enter here for some reason) Rossgk (talk) 16:16, 23 September 2019 (UTC)


 * "Hostile" would be not telling you why, and not offering you conditions under which I'd restore the article. The michikokakutani tweet is a link to a Gibson interview. The Wired article is a Gibson interview. UtopiaOrDystopia mentions "Jackpot", but is not about it. You can start a page with very little information to assert notability, but not no information to assert notability. I researched it myself, and find: 1) interviews with Gibson, 2) reviews that mention it but do not discuss it in any sort of detail, and 3) uses of the term "gibson" and "jackpot" in unrelated contexts. Do you have anything else? (And nobody is a "professional wikipedier".) DS (talk) 18:04, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
 * No, no - you're right. William Gibson books are unknown and irrelevant, and nobody is interested in them. Amazon has optioned the book for a streaming series because it's uninteresting, and nobody will be looking for information on this topic. Best not to have an article. Way to go. Rossgk (talk) 18:11, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Don't be passive aggressive. My (admittedly brief) research indicates that the whole point of 'the Jackpot' is that Gibson provides very little information about it. That the best we could do would be a redirect to the article on the novel in which it appears. I did leave it in the disambiguation page for 'jackpot'. DS (talk) 18:46, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
 * You are not serving the good of Wikipedia. You are actively impeding it. A vandal with admin privileges diminishing the contributions of others.
 * I'm sorry you feel that way. I went to the trouble to not only tell you what I had done, and why, and what you would need to do in order for the article to be restored; I'm under no obligation to do any of those things, but I felt you deserved the encouragement. I do try to make inadequate articles into redirects when feasible. DS (talk) 21:58, 23 September 2019 (UTC)