User talk:Off2riorob

Welcome to Off2riorob's talkpage. If you are unable to post here follow this link to post at my unprotected talkpage.

This is Off2riorob's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Archives

Archive 1

This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by .

(Manual archive list)

Complete ness

Hey. Browse through categories on all the other wikipedias, particularly German, French, Spanish and Polish . visiting Wikipedia:Missing articles and related lists!!, User:Dr. Blofeld/Missing politicians etc... 3.5 million is just the beginning..... Regards♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:44, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey glad to see you are feeling better today and not running of with your ball (as they say). I may well have been wrong about that the wiki is already written claim, (thanks for the link) which means it is good that you are still here, take it easy dude, best wishes. Off2riorob (talk) 14:49, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks mate. I have emailed you by the way. If I was still blocked the retired notice would still ring true, luckily I've not yet reached that point where a block has gone its full duration, as they usually tend to be controversial ones. Well you know how things escalate on wiki. Sometimes it astounds me how the worse case scenarrio tends to happen and there are several editors who relish such a circus show and playing law enforcer. But at the end of the day we are an encyclopedia and the sooner the nonsnese that is clearly avoidable is stamped out and we focus on what is important the better...♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:19, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the mail, I agree we all need to get on as best as possible, thats the way the wiki works best. I always think lowering of civility standards is or would be very detrimental to the project, we would never get anything done and users would flee in droves. Best is never to say anything attacking even when heated up, and remember such comments are blockable, I would wait for a block if I said something similar, so better avoided. Best. Off2riorob (talk) 16:16, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Kumar

Hi,we had Kumar on pending protection if you look back a couple of months or so and it working real well, helped a lot, the article is constantly nibbled at, why not request the protection be replaced? Off2riorob (talk) 15:45, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Off2riorob! I agree, the article should definitely be protected. However, I'm quite sure an admin would decline the request citing a lack of major recent activity. Shahid • ^Talk2me 15:48, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well I can see fifty posts this month alone, half of which are detrimental in nature and the other half to correct them, I have asked the last protecting admin to re-protect. here. It get tedious and disrupts our article and all the mirrors around the world. Regards. Off2riorob (talk) 16:08, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, friend. Shahid • ^Talk2me 16:01, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pleasure. Off2riorob (talk) 16:08, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah! Rob

Saw your self nomination, We need a person like you with common sense. The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 19:27, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cool, thanks for that. Off2riorob (talk) 19:30, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the elections!

Dear Off2riorob, thank you for nominating yourself as a candidate in the 2010 Arbitration Committee elections. On behalf of the coordinators, allow me to welcome you to the election and make a few suggestions to help you get set up. By now, you ought to have written your nomination statement, which should be no more than 400 words and declare any alternate or former user accounts you have contributed under (or, in the case of privacy concerns, a declaration that you have disclosed them to the Arbitration Committee). Although there are no fixed guidelines for how to write a statement, note that many candidates treat this as an opportunity, in their own way, to put a cogent case as to why editors should vote for them—highlighting the strengths they would bring to the job, and convincing the community they would cope with the workload and responsibilities of being an arbitrator.

You should at this point have your own questions subpage; feel free to begin answering the questions as you please. Together, the nomination statement and questions subpage should be transcluded to your candidate profile, whose talkpage will serve as the central location for discussion of your candidacy. If you experience any difficulty setting up these pages, please follow the links in the footer below. If you need assistance, on this or any other matter (including objectionable questions or commentary by others on your candidate pages), please notify the coordinators at their talkpage. If you have followed these instructions correctly, congratulations, you are now officially a candidate for the Arbitration Committee. Good luck! Skomorokh 19:30, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitration Committee Election 2019 candidate: Off2riorob

- Thanks Skomorokh - Off2riorob (talk) 19:43, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Good Luck Rob. You'll get my vote Hell In A Bucket (talk) 17:05, 20 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, hello my old friend, good to see you are well, many thanks for the support. Off2riorob (talk) 17:15, 20 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Request

Rob, if you wouldn't mind adding language to your nomination statement to the effect of "I have never edited Wikipedia with an account other than those listed here", or whatever is appropriate to your situation? It also isn't exactly clear if User:Diamond days and User:Tomas Jennings are the two test accounts you are referring to or if those are extra. I am asking all the candidates to make sure their account disclosure is full and categorical. Thanks, Skomorokh 12:24, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done - thanks. Off2riorob (talk) 12:33, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers Rob, just what I had in mind. Skomorokh 12:48, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Questions from Lar

Hi. Best of luck in your upcoming trial by fire. As in previous years I have a series of questions I ask candidates. This year there are restrictions on the length and number of questions on the "official" page for questions, restrictions which I do not agree with, but which I will abide by. I nevertheless think my questions are important and relevant (and I am not the only person to think so, in previous years they have drawn favorable comment from many, including in at least one case indepth analysis of candidates answers to them by third parties). You are invited to answer them if you so choose. I suggest that the talk page of your questions page is a good place to put them and I will do so with your acquiescence (for example, SirFozzie's page already has them, as do the majority of other candidates). Your answers, (or non-answers should you decide not to answer them), that will be a factor in my evaluation of your candidacy. Please let me know as soon as practical what your wish is. Thanks and best of luck. (please answer here, I'll see it, and it keeps things together better) ++Lar: t/c 04:13, 20 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thaks Lar, feel free to add them and I will attempt to answer them as best I can. 11:26, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Excellent! Thanks and done. ++Lar: t/c 18:15, 20 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Coffee

		A coffee on me!
		You certainly spend a lot of time on Wikipedia and doubtless you could use a cup. Good luck with the Arbitration Committee election.ElijahBosley ^{(talk ☞)} 20:16, 20 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much Elijah. Coffee - usually only one a day, fresh one, strong and large, in the morning. Off2riorob (talk) 20:21, 20 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Time of year to give Thanks

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		To: Off2riorob to let you know you are appreciated for all your hard work and amazing contributions to Wikipedia. You help make this a place people want to be. Thanks. :) Malke 2010 (talk) 02:09, 21 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

- Malke, you are so easily pleased, many thanks indeed. Off2riorob (talk) 11:12, 21 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Imran Farooq

okay, my bad. it seems the source was not there. Sure i did add it at some point either to the article or the talk page but it got lost in the melee. Ive now found 3 sources with some mention thereof, one of which explicitly points out.

Ive also taken out the content pending the discussion thereof.Lihaas (talk) 02:28, 21 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Linaas, ah good, I will have a look later, bit busy at the moment, if you now have it well cited, be bold and add it. Off2riorob (talk) 11:14, 21 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom

Hi there, just thought I'd say thanks for answering my question and good on you for running. IMHO we could use some non-admins on ArbCom and I think you would make a great arbitrator. Jenks24 (talk) 11:02, 21 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well said Jenks, and thanks for the encouragement, best regards. Off2riorob (talk) 11:17, 21 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Some articles

Can you add Barkha Dutt, Vir Sanghvi, Nira Radia, A. Raja and possibly some of the BLP links from them. The telecom scandal is heavily in the news now and there are some questionable edits and I don't have the time to keep at them over the next couple of days. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 18:00, 21 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, im watching Dutt and I noticed the recent heightened activity, I am also otherwise active, if I have free time I will have a little look, semi protect if needed. 18:04, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Note: Nice work on Nira Radia! - Amog | ^{Talk • contribs} 18:41, 21 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, trim the chaff and the POV and this is the worst one, created just for this single issue. Be bold in trimming back any BLP issues and uncited pov, regards. Off2riorob (talk) 18:50, 21 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Kate Middleton

I'm wondering which category to add her too?

Middleton's Mother's surname is Goldsmith, and Julie Burchill of The Independent has spoken of Middleton's "Jewish Blood"[1]. The Forward, has announced wedding dress is to be designed by the Jewish designer, Elizabeth Emanue [2]. (See also [3], and the endorsement of the Wedding by President Shimon Peres [[4]]).

Will Category:British people of Jewish descent do, or shall we go for Category:Jewish Princesses? ;)- -Scott Mac 01:05, 22 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To add her to a Jewish Princess cat would be false representation imo, she is not a princess but the wife to be of a prince and she has a single grandparent that has a Jewish sounding name, even if that grandparent is cited to be Jewish it doesn't make her Jewish, at least not in the eyes of the vast majority of the world. she appears to be more Scottish genetically than anything else. I think around this issue more cats could use creation, to be more specific. Category:British people with one Jewish grandparent, would be what she actually is if you can cite the Goldsmith connection. Edith Chandler who was her great grandmother on the goldsmith side is a early medieval English name with no apparent Jewish connections or connotations as he also only has one parent of genetic Jewish descent. This makes the Goldsmith grandfather possibly only genetically single quarter Jewish and Kate only one sixteenth genetically descended from Jewish people. David Cameron is one sixteenth descended from Jewish people and although there was effort to include him in Jewish categories, the connection is far too minor to warrant inclusion. Off2riorob (talk) 13:20, 22 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Agh, sorry, I was being ironic ;) --Scott Mac 12:59, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I did sense a bit of irony but felt it worth answering anyways. Off2riorob (talk) 13:02, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Where's LM?

Obviously, RL drags us away from Wikipedia. But jeepers, 2 brief appearance over these 2.5 days? while possibly facing either an SPI or Duck test? The timeing stinks. GoodDay (talk) 19:29, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As I have seen, users contribute and when excessive officialdom and attacking type reports against them occur, they usually take a look out of their window and go do something that results in more positive feedback, this is not imo a reflection of assumed guilty action. If LM has any sense at all he will be doing something much more constructive elsewhere. Off2riorob (talk) 19:35, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's just that, he's sorta dissappeared around the same time as LevenBoy. The timeing of it 'might' create the wrong impression. I wish they'd return & defend themselves. GoodDay (talk) 19:40, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GoodDay, what's your game then? I haven't "disappeared" as you put it. I made a single edit yesterday. Have I got to keep up a steady stream or something? As for "disappearing" around the same time as LevenBoy - you want to get a grip of your imagination! Regarding the AN/I; I'm making no further comment there, just in case you're interested, because every point I try and make is rubbished by one of the admins. The debate serves no useful purpose from my point-of-view and just provides a forum for some editors to gloat. However, I do thank those who have stood up for me in the debate (Off2RioRob and others). LemonMonday Talk 21:15, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ah ha, run! lemonMonday, thanks for the thanks. Off2riorob (talk) 21:18, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I reckon I woke up the dead. GoodDay (talk) 21:44, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ah ha, you did GoodDay, and that is the place the project and its contributors should aim for. Off2riorob (talk) 21:46, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My clairvoyance tells me that the BISE will be facing a review before the year is out. GoodDay (talk) 21:50, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

AN3

Just to let you know that a user has reported you to WP:AN3. GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 20:27, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Off2riorob (talk) 20:29, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Worthless thirteen min block from user Courcelles

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 12 hours for your disruption caused by edit warring by violation of the three-revert rule at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2010/Candidates/Off2riorob/Questions. During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} below this notice, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Courcelles 20:41, 23 November 2010 (UTC)Template:Z10[reply]

Made it 12 hours to match the other party, as you both made this mess. I'll unblock you if you agree to no further removal of any content from your questions page- leave that to the coordinators. Courcelles 20:43, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Consensus is going against the block. Hopefully it will serve as a wake-up call, though. What you did was a clear violation of the 3RR, that it was done on a questions page does not excuse this, however the general feeling is that this block serves no purpose going forward. You are unblocked. Courcelles 20:57, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

- This was a bad block of the type that is highlighted all too often recently and overturned in the blink of an eye. In thirteen mins the user Courcelles had blocked my account, and then reduced the block to half, and then unblocked my account, all in thirteen mins, what a joke... three unnecessary stamps on my edit history, because, not because there was any benefit or threat to the project but because he can, because he can. It was a bad faith attack by a user that was previously blocked for exactly the same actions on my talkpage, in early 2010. I requested confirmation from Skomorakh, and I was right, the user shouldn't have been repeatedly questioning like that. If users support me, when such issues arise I will look to address such poor unnecessary Administrative actions and issues such as this where a worthless block has been imposed on a good faith contributor without any necessity to protect the project. Off2riorob (talk) 21:03, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]