User talk:Plasticbadge

Ruckus

The Partner School list on the main page is NOT current and cannot be updated at this time. Partner school list is highly relevant.

If a company cannot keep a list of partners current, it is hardly Wikipedia's place to keep a more accurate list than they themselves have. This confusion only proves that such a list has no place in Wikipedia. -Plasticbadge 16:11, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Irregardless of the comapny's inability to post the school list in real time -- Wikipedia is the perfect place for this to be available. The list details the only users who can gain access to the service. It is crucial and necessary for the service.

"Irregardless" isn't a real word moron. Take this convo to the Ruckus article talk. - Plasticbadge 16:18, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently you are more into name calling than maintaining factual information.

Apparently you are more into turning Wikipedia into free company server space than using proper vocabulary. - Plasticbadge 16:24, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hopefully I can help you shed some accurate light on your debate ;) -Nroseszu 16:57, 8 November 2006 (EST)

Does that mean you work for Ruckus? Please clarify. - Plasticbadge 23:11, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I do. I've been monitoring all the prior squabbles and changes and wanted to intervene so that factual, non-adspeak, information was accurately presented on the Ruckus page. Please let me know if I can be of any assistance in any future confusion regarding the service. -Nroseszu 18:21, 8 November 2006 (EST)

Please excuse my skepticism, then, when someone with a personal interest in the article's outcome begins making mass edits that effect the style of the wording. Please continue this convo under the Ruckus Network talk page so that there can be a full record there in case of arbitration. You corporate types never learn that Wikipedia isn't your full playground. - Plasticbadge 23:27, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would love to discuss this in real-time versus the web -- too much to write. Would you be willing to do this? Btw, the image you deleted -- I just watched my graphic designer make it specifically for this wikipedia page. -Nroseszu 18:31, 8 November 2006 (EST)

The image you had created needs to be formally released for use on Wikipedia. Period. There is a protocol for this, but until you follow it I will have to continue to remove it. Continue this discussion on the Ruckus Talk where it belongs. - Plasticbadge 23:35, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is not a discussion of Ruckus Talk, this a a discussion about your practices on Wikipedia. You feel it necessary to act as the sole administrator of all things factual with respect to any/all changes I have just made. Instead of calmly editing my posting (in which I attempted to be 100% factual and accurate -- going so far as to elaborate on some of Ruckus' weaknesses), you opted to blanket revert the page back to your own message. Effectively, you have taken out all open community and communication on the matter and instead declared that you've spent far too long ridding this article of adspeak to let it go back to that sad state. If you would've looked at my edits closely, you would realize that they were entirely void of such verbage. I am merely asking for an open dialogue -- I am not your enemy, please do not treat me as such. -Nroseszu 6:42, 8 November 2006 (EST)

The article has few regular editors, so I am am usually left as a watchdog against corporate whitewashing. I understand nobody is fully objective, but if you can't understand my problem with you making edits to the article from in your office with your graphic designer at your side, you have no concept of how Wikipedia works. - Plasticbadge 23:51, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It would seem that you have completely ignored my request for open dialogue and only further propagated your unwillingness to work with those offering any form of dissenting views. My graphic designer is not by my side -- he was 20 feet from me and I asked him to make a graphic for the Wikipedia page to replace the outdated image that you is currently being used; which is not even our correct logo. However, such topics are purely semantics. The greater issue at hand is that you have a problem with others updating the page even if they are in full accordance with Wikipedia policy. Why delete the external links section? Countless other company's have this: Zune, Rhapsody, etc.

I have said twice now that I am very willing to help in the process to put up accurate edits - and have only stepped in after seeing you squabble with other users edits. You must understand my frustration in having my edits blanket reverted when I took time and effort to update in accordance with ad-speak and factual information. However, I respect and admire the fact you are so committed to your participation and the purity of Wikipedia -- please allow me to work with you and not against you in this matter. -Nroseszu 7:03, 8 November 2006 (EST)

I have no ignored any request for dialogue - that is what the article talkpage is for. It ensures a public record. If you want me to join you on a private IRC channel or on an instant messenger service I will not comply for that reason. By all means update the page, but I have been at this game for too long to not know adspeak tweaks when I see them. Again, if you want to speak I'll be watching the Ruckus talk page. - Plasticbadge 00:10, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's obvious that you have a personal vendetta either against Ruckus or for an employee of a company trying to use Wikipedia in general. I give up and will just have to file a request for mediation from Wikipedia. Anything I have posted, no matter how accurate it may be, is changed by you because you have annointed yourself the arbitor of all things Ruckus on Wikipedia. Far be it for me, an employee of Ruckus with direct knowledge of information to attempt to correct your innacuracies. -Nroseszu 7:23, 8 November 2006 (EST)

I have no such vendetta - you will see I was just as aggressive against corporate intervention by your rival CDigix. To suggest I have singled your company out is a joke. I fight corporate intervention wherever I see it. I welcome admin involvemnet - in fact I was about to request as much myself. I think you'll find them less than sympathetic to many of your edits. - Plasticbadge 00:29, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Can you help me with the company logo? I'm very confused as to what I need to do in order to post the appropriate graphic. Thanks -Nroseszu 8:16, 8 November 2006 (EST)

I don't have personal experience with uploading images, but from what I understand the process of verification is fairly straightforward. If you have problems you might want to seek out an admin familiar with uploading and verifying images. - Plasticbadge 01:19, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mediation

Hello. I am the mediator for this case, as requested on mediation page. I would like to continue this discussion on the article's talk page so as not to clutter up Plasticbadge's talk page and so that others will have a better chance to comment. I will be posting my comments there shortly, as I am still in the process of reviewing the edit histories. Regards, Gzkn 03:42, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The cavalry has come at last.

Correct, to help those that are oppressed by the Wiki self-righteous :)

Self-righteous? Only someone paid to modify Wikis would describe what I do as that. - Plasticbadge 04:39, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently the Wikipedia article on humor was removed? Notice the smiley face, It's a joke, take a deep breath, I'm trying to lighten the mood here.

You'll find I'm quite humorless when it comes to corporate pages I'm afraid. I take it easy on novice users, but you are being paid overtime to modify your company's article. If you can't see why I might find that threatening to the ideals of this website, you might need to read up on Wikipedia. I've requested admin intervention in similar cases in the past, and I'm quite sure that they will be equally suspicious of your motives. Factual errors are one thing, but when you begin massaging the wording of the "criticism" section I get very antsy. - Plasticbadge 04:48, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"You are being paid overtime to modify your company's article." It would appear your assumptions are just that: assumptions. Ha, there is no "overtime pay" in our line of work. As I said before, just as you have a vested and personal interest in maintaining the purity, sanctity and ideals of Wikipedia, I am doing the same about the inaccurate statements about Ruckus that are being posted as fact. And I'm sure you're aware, in this instance, I was the one who requested the admin intervention because of your benevolent actions.

To quote Samuel Johnson, "Suspicion is not less an enemy to virtue than to happiness; he that is already corrupt is naturally suspicious, and he that becomes suspicious will quickly become corrupt." - Nroseszu

You act as if I'm a crazy old man collecting bottle caps for the apocalypse. I have very real reasons to suspect your motives. You're paid by the very people the article is trying to be objective about. True objectivity is impossible, but your situation puts you about as far from the ideal as possible. - Plasticbadge 05:13, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'll trade you a rare 1972 Dr. Pepper bottle cap for your snazzy Coca-Cola one? Ha, now that is a Joke. Please, laugh, smile, be happy. - Nroseszu

You're not going to get me to laugh off paid corporate influence in Wikipedia. I once stayed awake for four days working on a paper and occasionally watching Wikipedia for corporate interventionist scum. I have a jobs now, but my resolve is just as steady. I check on my computer very often, so I promise you you will not succeed in slipping edits past me. The folks at Cdigix tried the same crap as you a few months ago, and after two weeks of dealing with me 20 hours of the day they stopped entirely. I already told you I'm not opposed to your contributing, but please keep your nose out of the criticism section and the wording of the article. - Plasticbadge 05:32, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

United States Mens National Team

I've readded the famous players that you deleted earlier. These players are ALL former World Cup players or players who had achieved many caps with the national team. Just because you have not heard of them does not mean that they are not famous past players. Many of the ones you deleted also appeared and achieved fame in MLS and other leagues around the world. Batman2005 23:52, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The list is bloated. Many no-names make world cup rosters, but are never famous. I absolutely disagree. Plasticbadge 00:15, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that many world cup players make rosters but are never famous, I have not included those in the list. The list consists of those players who either played in world cups significantly, or played with the national team regularly and achieved fame elsewhere. This fits, as it doesn't specify that all members had to have achieved fame with the national team. Roy Wegerle for instance...two time world cup player, played professionally for Chelsea and Blackburn. Mike Burns..olympian and two time world cup player, captain of his major league soccer team for 5 years and currently Director of Soccer Operations for New England. Brian Maisonneuve, won the Herman Trophy in college, played with the crew for 8 years and started every game of the 98 world cup. Preki, one of the all-time MLS best XI and scored the lone goal in the historic 1-0 win over Brazil, I assure you, any Brazilian fan watching the game that day still remembers the name Preki. Jovan Kirovski, first American to ever sign with Manchester United, first american to score in the Champions League with Borussia Dortmund. Fernando Clavijo, long time national team member and indoor soccer prodigy, key played on the 94 team as well as coaching in MLS and internationally. Your argument that some of the people on the list aren't famous outside the United States is logical. However, on virtually EVERY list of "famous former players" in wikipedia you'll find a national bias. I've been an adent supporter of soccer in the united states for the better part of 20 years and was suprised to see some of the most famous names in american soccer omitted from the list. As soccer in america grows and matures, names like Donovan, Howard, Johnson, Onyewu and Keller will push some of these older names like Wynalda, Sommer and others off the list. I will remove Carlos Llamosa and Chris Henderson though, as their fame is more centered around MLS than their contributions to the national team. Batman2005 03:33, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I removed David Regis too, as his fame was confined to about a 3 year span during his fight for American citizenship and his stint as a left back with the team. Let me know who else you think bloats the list and we'll discuss them. Batman2005 03:35, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. I'm glad we could discuss it sensibly.Plasticbadge 03:43, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I pride myself on being a sensible guy. Batman2005 10:55, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Response to AMA request

I've looked into the posting histories of the articles in question, and in my opinion you seem to be the one on the side of WP policy in this case. However, the situation seems to call for more of a policing action than an advocacy request, as bmoney has not attempted to state any sort of rationale for his action of repeatedly removing content. I suggest placing appropriate notice on the offender's user page and then listing the account here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrator_intervention_against_vandalism

Best,--Amerique 01:58, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

__ Tank you for your speedy response.Plasticbadge 05:00, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Seymour High School

Hey Badge, in the name of WP:DBTN let's let them bumble a little more... this teacher is educating/recruiting the whole class in wikipedianism... surely we should enforce WP standards but also allow for a positive first experience in WP editing. MPS 22:08, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It kills me but you might be right. What bothered me most was the notion that I - a veteran of several nasty revert wars against nasty corporate puppets - was "hijacking" "their" article. I tried to convey the concept that Wikipedia isn't anyone's personal playground. I'll give them some time, but nothing is scared on Wikipedia, and I will hold thier edits up to the standard that I would expect of any entry. Please put their article on watch and help me keep an eye on the situation. I'm rather busy this week. Thanks, Plasticbadge 22:14, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'll keep my eyes peeled... and thanks for your work in maintaining wikipedia's standards. MPS 13:53, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate it. - Plasticbadge 14:03, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

dude your [personal attack removed] hes not teaching the whole class though wikipedia hes just using it, we dont do everything through this damn site dont you have anything better to, like why do you care if a class is using the site, what does it matter .

"Dude", I do have better things to do - I have a demanding college schedule. That's why it bothers me so much that I have to play shepherd for your class. Wikipedia is a community site, and I don't mind your class contributing, but remember it is not your site. I have no obligation to let anything stand on this site that runs contradictory to the standards and policies of Wikipedia, and that includes your class contributions. Still, I have no problem giving you some time to learn the site. Just don't expect me to leave your posts unedited. It is the way Wikipedia works, and if you want to learn the site you can;t make up your own rules. - Plasticbadge 14:42, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

.:Don't bite the newcomers[[BrandtSchneider 16:02, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, listen. I deleted the comments from the pages within 90 seconds and you keep putting them back. The students were disciplined and that should be the end of the story. I think it was in everybody's best interest to delete the comments. If you keep them up I am not sure your point is valid.BrandtSchneider 15:39, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Discipline is beside the point. The talk page should be a complete document of the makings of the page regardless of how you feel. Please do not delete content from talkpages and other user's pages in the future. You do not dictate how Wikipedia is run. - Plasticbadge 16:55, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep doing your job, Plasticbadge. Start slapping people with WP:NOT when they fail to realize that WP:DBTN != letting people vandalize talk pages.--In ur base, killing ur dorfs 15:46, 26 October 2006 (UTC) , who often forgets to sign..[reply]

I always forget to sign to ;) - Plasticbadge 15:52, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

have added lesson 3 to the talk page ... I think this article is progressing too slowly and rather than edit it myself I added stub and cleanup templates to attract assistance. We shall see the effect. MPS 14:38, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I like how you think. I'll continue to keep an eye on it. - Plasticbadge 16:15, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]