User talk:Bobak
Please add new comments to the bottom of the page.
Something regarding my Photos? You're welcome to look/comment at my Photo Gallery's talk page.RfA Thanks
|
In lieu of spamming up talk pages, just want to take a moment at the top of my talk page to thank everyone who supported me on my recent, successful RfA. |
Rfa Congratulations
- Congratulations. Best of luck, Bobak! PeaceNT 11:32, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
- Congrats and good luck! Grandmaster 12:24, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
| Congratulations. Here are what pass for words of wisdom from the puppy: |
|
| DISCLAIMER: This humor does not reflect the official humor of Wikipedia, the Wikimedia Foundation, or Jimbo Wales. All rights released under GFDL. |
Congrats! VegaDark (talk) 01:12, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
- Congratulations! -- Y not? 04:25, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
I noticed you added a new picture to Mill Ruins Park, and it looks good. If you ever get a chance, would you consider taking a new picture at around the same angle as Image:Mill Ruins 009.JPG? The current picture I took there has blown-out highlights, and the contrast is just way too high for the picture to look decent. I was hoping to get down there and take a new photo, but the last time I was downtown, I forgot batteries for my camera.
Come to think of it, William Gray Purcell House by Lake of the Isles could use a new photo, as well -- it has the same problem. --Elkman (Elkspeak) 21:31, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
Light
Much better light. Thanks. Have you looked at this list?--Appraiser 16:06, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
Our Lady of Lourdes
Hi, congrats on your adminship. Didn't know you were running so count this a belated vote in favor. Yes, I think the new photo of Our Lady of Lourdes is better, thank you. The red car is fine. Whether it is better than Alfred Essa's photo (same view at Emporis by a different photographer) I suppose is debatable. I understand the limits on your time and vagaries of the weather. Thanks again. -Susanlesch 18:41, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
DYK
|
On 26 May, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article MacPhail Center for Music, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
--Aksi_great (talk) 09:43, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
Persian people infobox pic
I see, but i am the one who made that picture, and it so much on the diccsion board that i didnt get anything corect, may you please tell whats the problem with the previous image?, i may also tell you that i didnt just put pictures around without any exprience of each person, i also noticed there where something wrong with Zoroaster then why did you remove almost all of other images, thank you very much.
- the same to you. you just remove me pic and place it first with a picture of yourself then a make a new phto and just delete mine, i will not remove this picture before you give me sources for that you are saying, if so the pic will be removed within a day, and why are you threating me with blocking are you a admin?
Re: Tom Malone
That's not the point I'm trying to make. Rather, it's that no NFL player infobox is going to list which NFL Europa teams, if any, the player was on. For all intents and purposes, they're irrelevant. All of them lists which NFL teams the player has been on, and that's it. It's all fine and good to mention that the player was allocated in their article, but I think it's taking it a step too far by adding their current/past teams in the infobox for a 4-month vacation (or nightmare). Pats1 22:24, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
Village pump
Hi Bobak, I have included one of your statements at Meta:Avoid copyright paranoia to an argumentation that I just added to the village pump (policy). Please remove it if you think I misrepresented your position. Cheers! Malc82 09:55, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
Hello
Hello. I had put a category up for renaming awhile ago but it never got renamed: [1]. Could you rename it to Category:Treaties of Iran (Persia) please? That way it will conform to the title format of treaty categories.Hajji Piruz 01:43, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
- Can you put up one of those merge tags? Yea, I agree, there should be a discussion.Hajji Piruz 16:39, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
Mediation
Hi Bobak, once more congrats on your recent promotion to administration. I think the user right above (Hajji Piruz, aka Azerbaijani) is in need of mediation with me, after editing my user page without permission, obviously intimidating me, and further having courage to accuse me and even demand apology :) when I complained about his disruptive behavior to various admins and noticeboards. One of the admins suggested using CEM, so should I get even involved with this and could you be a mediator in this case. To be frank, dealing with this user is a waste of time for me, he is only after hunting and blackmailing certain users rather than contributing anything useful to the articles. Perhaps, page by page mediation of content instead would be more useful. Any suggestions? Thanks. Atabek 07:32, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
- This isnt how you get a mediator, there is a list for mediators for CEM. I have contacted two users whose job here is to mediate, I'm waiting for their response. This user is canvassing Bobak, he has gone to three previous admins in the past couple days making up false accusations. Atabek, I have told you this several times, either bring the evidence or dont make the accusations, but ofcourse, Atabek never brings the evidence. I'm thinking of either doing an RFC or re-opening the arbcom so I dont think we'll be doing CEM.Hajji Piruz 14:22, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
In response to your comment on Atabek's page... I already referred both him and Piruz to WP:CEM (a relatively recent alternative to the Mediation Committee and Cabal). A mediator is needed for that process, but a list of mediators is available on the requests page. You, of course, are not listed as one of them and so there was no reason for your help to have been enlisted (unless, of course, you want to be involved). -- tariqabjotu 17:04, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
Persian people
hi bobak, i wonder what is the "Notable features" for the Persian Men and Woman, thanks.Balu2000 04:42, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
Villa Getty
Hi, I just wish to thank you for the useful pictures you've added to the Villa Getty article which is on my watchlist on the French Wikipedia. They are awesome. Cheers. --Jibi44 07:43, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
Question
Hi Bobak. Yesterday, I requested to block a user who broke the 1rr parole yesterday. I putthe request on "Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Arbitration enforcement" page. [[2]]
I am still waiting for a feedback from an admin. Is there any way to make the process faster.--behmod talk 14:36, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
Did you know?
|
|
On 18 June, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article 2004 USC Trojans football team, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
--GeeJo (t)⁄(c) • 08:59, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
I added sources stating that CNN and CBS News covered the Edith Rodriguez case. WhisperToMe 22:25, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
DYK
|
|
Did you know? was updated. On 25 June, 2007, a fact from the article Frieda and Henry J. Neils House, which you recently nominated, was featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
--Carabinieri 21:33, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
You don't need a citation for something in the introductory sentence that is referenced later on. HTH HAND. -N 19:15, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
- Oh... Actually I think gamers *are* the only ones who use the term. Feel free to leave a note on the article's talk page about it and someone (possibly me) will look into sourcing it a little better. -N 19:22, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
Thank you
|
The Photographer's Barnstar | |
| To Bobak, on the occasion of Minneapolis, Minnesota reaching featured article. With thanks for conversations about skylines. -Susanlesch 01:14, 29 June 2007 (UTC) |
College football school page names ("American")
Thanks for reverting back the pages for Michigan, ND, and USC. However, their talk pages still include the word "American". Can you migrate those back as well?
- Talk:Michigan Wolverines American football
- Talk:Notre Dame Fighting Irish American football
- Talk:University of Southern California Trojans American football
Thanks, Jweiss11 19:45, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
Only going to say this once
I do not think your personal attacks are constructive to the goals of the project. That's all I'm going to say on that. Polite discussion would be appreciated. You've said your peace, please don't cast aspersions in my direction. I'm not going anywhere. Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat 16:54, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
- And i didn't even notice that you are an admin. Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat 16:55, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
It was not a personal attack. It was grounded observation that you had not addressed questions or conveyed your argument in a way that I found convincing. This has nothing to do with personality or other irrelevant factors. Because you have failed to gain any consensus in the WikiProject, yet continue to push as many angles as you can, you fit my interpretation of gadfly (social). --Bobak 17:00, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
So citing wiki policy and guidelines (both of which support this) is not enough for you. Okay, that's fine. But that comment has done nothing to help the situation. I'm not pushing as many angles. Someone else pointed out three wiki policies and I explained how they apply to the situation. You should know better than to make comments like that. As an admin you should be much more sensitive to these types of things and the fact that you don't shows just how low the bar is when considering adminship here. It's unfortunate, but I don't really care anymore. Your attitude toward me has been hostile and I feel no reason to be polite to you anymore. Buzz off until you can act better. And per WP:MULTI, I'm keeping this discussion here. But you'll probably ignore that too huh. Juan Miguel Fangio| ►Chat 17:08, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
- Take a breather, it's the internet. Why are you getting so wound up? --Bobak 15:54, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
I-35W Bridge collapse
I hope that you, as the editor who placed the "current event" template, will remove it in a timely manner after the "current event" status fades. The template is perfectly within Wikipedia policy, although my personal opinion is that they should be banned because most people who are eager to place the template never bother to remove it. The result is a very distracting, unsightly template at the top of the page for months after the event is no longer current. I'm not singling you out, and I trust your good faith intentions. I have placed this message on a number of talk pages. Thank you. Ward3001 01:08, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
HCMC
Hi. Thank you again for making an image of HCMC. The photo looked so dark the ambulance image went back in a while ago. I tried brightening and lightening or something in place and failed so made a copy here. Does that look all right to you? Someone who has image software and knows how to use it could surely do a better job but it looks more in tune with the article to me now. Please see what you think if you have a moment. -Susanlesch 12:27, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks. Glad you didn't mind. It looks good now and we are lucky to have it. Best wishes. -Susanlesch 02:25, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
Merge proposal
A proposal has been made to merge Replacement I-35W Mississippi River bridge into I-35W Mississippi River bridge. The matter is being discussed at Talk:Replacement I-35W Mississippi River bridge. Please feel free to comment. Thank you. Kablammo 18:29, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
University of West Los Angeles
Hi, I thought you might want to take a look at University of West Los Angeles. Were you aware that the section about the school losing its WASC accreditation in 2006 was removed from the article? I've not been able to find anything to indicate that it's been reinstated, and (surprise!) there's no mention of WASC on the UWLA website.
In case you're wondering, I'm not connected with UWLA. I'm looking into the background of Pres. Robert W. Brown, because he also sits on the board of Pacific Oaks College in Pasadena, which is in a serious crisis of its own right now, with concerned faculty & students fearing that it may be closed or sold. Cgingold 11:57, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
Did you know...
|
|
On 15 August, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Suicide Race, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
--Allen3 talk 12:38, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
Re: Question on a rating
I changed it to start. I'm fine with changing a rating from stub to start/B as anyone can de-stub an article, so whynot just change the rating too? Sorry it took me so long to reply. Good luck with getting the article to GA/FA. MECU≈talk 13:00, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
And thats the 3rd RR for our anonymous friend. I think a block is suitable at this point. I feel bad for him - he has mostly legitimate information, and I assume he is editing in good faith, but he is just not listening to what we are saying. Perhaps you or I can start a stub for the Fiesta Bowl game or the Oregon State team and point him there when his ban is lifted. - CosmicPenguin (Talk) 00:09, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
CFB
Did you notice that there are a few other CFB related articles up for AfD besides the one on Appalachia State vs. Michigan? I am curious what your thoughts are on the other articles. Johntex\talk 18:33, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
- I agree with you. I think that all bowl games are clearly notable. As to regular season games, I think many of them are also notable if a record was set or if it was a rivalry game. As a UT fan, I would love to be able to read a full game summary of some of the great games from 1963 or 1970 or 1885 for that matter. It is too bad Wikipedia did not exist then.
- I'm not going to rush out to create 2007 TCU vs. Baylor football game or even 1988 Baylor vs. Texas football game, but if someone wants to take the time to create a good article on one of those games I see no harm at all in it. The more comprehensive we can be, the better, in my opinion. It gives a more balanced understanding vs. just focusing on the biggest and the best. Johntex\talk 18:46, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
Mark Sanchez arrest section
I do not believe this conversation was privileged under any rules of Wikipedia (in good faith), so I am writing my own comments (not those of others) here for the sake of record (but not including the other editor's comments since he believes otherwise):
Original Comment First off all, thank you for updating the infobox, I threw it up pretty quickly. Here's my concern over the 2006 arrest: it's much to overblown for the actual weight, and I think the section is a marked example of (now old) Recentism. It's no longer mentioned on ESPN, SI, LA Times, Daily News or anywhere whenever they talk about Sanchez (which does happen, esp. pre-season), only to say that he got in vague trouble. Why? Because he was accused and the charges were dropped --and, although the legal wording has developed a popular assumption of implied guilt, having charges dropped for a "lack of evidence" does not imply that he raped a 19 yo but they couldn't make it stick. Alas the way its written comes close to that (and I'm not implying you intend it to be that way), but extra details make the section more sensational than any recent evidence warrants. So you can probably understand why I have trouble with how much sway this section is getting. If you run a general google search ""Mark Sanchez" USC arrest" you only get articles from the month surrounding the arrest; if you do a google news (past several months) search on "Mark Sanchez USC" you get 7 pages, ""Mark Sanchez" USC arrest" you get 1 hit which is not actually about his arrest a year earlier. What hurt this article was that previous "debate" on this issue was actually a very hostile group of sockpuppets who were following both the Mustain and Sanchez article and countering every edit I made, they even followed me to my RfA where other admins smelled them out and they were all revealed to be the sock puppets of RPrinter (all of them were banned, since it was one troll, now banned) --let me be clear I'm not saying that you are a part of that nonsense, or that you would ever risk getting in similar trouble for disagreeing with me (I just realized it might come off that way), its just that the entire side dedicated to writing an extended, overwrought version (which resulted in the still overdone "middle ground" it was until my edit today) was the result of a banned troll, and I think the version I propose includes all the controversy with cites that can take an interested reader to sources where the charges are detailed. Frankly, this section could be further condensed into a several sentences within his college career, instead of the Recentism trend that created it its own section --as though it's been a scar on his career like, say, OJ's brush with the law. --Bobak 02:21, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
- Second Comment The issues of Mark Chavez' arrest are not equal to the somewhat odd activities (alleged emails from the USC Athletic Department ordering Wikipedia to strike sourced information that has not been countered in the media by any official USC statement) surrounding Mitch Mustain, and I cannot treat them the same: this arrest reeks of recentism and I believe my opinion has every right to stay in the public discourse on the Sanchez article, as the current version, I believe, makes him out to be a criminal who "got away from justice". That is not what Wikipedia stands for. If these kids don't commit any serious crimes (Sanchez has not committed any such crime) and go pro, no one will care about more than a sentence on the subject --or even a footnote in that particular year. An Athletic Department should not have sway over Wikipedia for the very reason a corporation should not: there are two extremes here: the Mustain article was about removing information that might put him into a negative light, here we are seeing the addition of information that puts Sanchez into a worse light. Very odd indeed. --Bobak 14:49, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
- Third Comment Further "talking to myself" (my point adapted from emails): My position on the Sanchez article is not based on the thought that he is being merely "picked on", this is professional resentment: I hate when legal wording like "lack of evidence" is used in context to imply that a kid raped a girl and got away. Why not simply turn the section, the story that never developed, and put it into a shorter blurb in the inevitable 2006 season section? The situation now is everything that's wrong with Recentism, and I haven't heard an adequate argument otherwise. --Bobak 18:50, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
Re: Nice Heisman photo
Thanks. I dunno. I only got the Heisman because they had it on display at the game. I'm sure they do if I could manage to get time to go visit during the day in the off-season. I think they have a whole display case. I'll try and worry about that in the off season. MECU≈talk 13:20, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
AP / Coaches poll?
On the UCLA football page, I saw that you switched from listing the AP poll rankings to using the Coaches poll. Any particular reason for that? I generally think the AP poll is the standard when people refer to "the rankings," so it seems like that would be the preferred one to list if there are no other reasons.
Meetup RSVP
