User talk:Bob9999999

If you want to comment on any changes I have made or pages I have started, be free to comment below, by clicking on the plus next to "Edit this page"(above). Sincerely, Bob9999999

April 2010[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Inukshuk. When removing text, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the text has been restored, as you can see from the page history. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. something lame from CBW 10:42, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bob9999999's Reply to "April 2010"[edit]

I doubt that you will return to my page later, but if you do (Mr. Cambridgebayweather), I would like to apologize if I angered you by my changing of the page. The part I changed was the rote of a link, not deleting parts of the article. In the contex of the Inukshuk,the article was saying where Canadian Inukshuks were brought to other countries as a means of a gift. One of these places was to Washington D.C.. Rather than the link for D.C. to go to the D.C. page, I thought it more fit to redirect the link to go to the Canadian Embassy in D.C., where the actual statue is located. I did not delete any of the actual words on the article, as you wrote that I did on the Inukshuk history page. Again, sorry for any inconveniences. Alos, please be more specific with your concern of what I did wrong next time. Thanks

                                                                                                          -Bob9999999

Sorry I must have forgotten to come and mention what the problem was. Here's the edit you made. It's actually easier to see without the page comparison. What happened was that in updating the Washington link the section titled Modern usage was duplicated, the first one links to the embassy and the second one links to the capital. At the same time the first "Modern usage" section accidentally overwrote the Inukshuk#Name section. It's one of those editing mishaps that sometimes happens and I should have come and explained it to you rather than just leaving a templated message. something lame from CBW 05:32, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

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) 13:41, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message[edit]

Hello, Bob9999999. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Danbury page[edit]

Hi there! I don't have too much time right now, but I did notice you added the John Oliver story to Danbury's wikipedia page - if you look at the history of the page, those sections have been created and reverted multiple times. I'd look over which edits got reverted and make sure you're not doing the same thing. Thanks! OfficerCow (talk) 22:10, 14 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Yes, I did notice the previous edits - in those instances I think they were rightfully removed; they included way too much unnecessary information (who said what, awards John Oliver has won, details about the sewage plant, etc) and were flagged for being "irrelevant". In my edit I focused on the unique relationship between Danbury and Oliver. I think it can be reasonably accepted that the reference overall is meaningful and noteworthy using the the bulleted guidelines from here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:%22In_popular_culture%22_content

1) Has [John Oliver] acknowledged the existence of the reference? Yes, in multiple segments of his show, and in interviews after he received an Emmy.
2) Have multiple reliable sources pointed out the reference? Yes, including major news networks and the mayor of Danbury.
3) Did any real-world event occur because of the cultural element covered by the reference? Yes, $55,000 in charitable donations and a sewage plant renaming.
4) Did the referencing material significantly depend on the specific subject? Yes, Oliver was very explicit when talking about Danbury.

Bob9999999 (talk) 00:49, 16 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely! That seems like a fine edit to put in. What I'd say is that relying on secondary sources for comedy shows like Last Week Tonight and/or The Late Show is usually just a restatement of the primary source - a "journalist" strapped for articles knows it'll get clicks but nobody wants to actually read it. Other than that, perfect! OfficerCow (talk) 03:00, 16 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:39, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Small comment(s)[edit]

Per MOS:FILMCAST, do NOT add actors' names in parentheses in the plot section (that is what #Cast is for).

Also, do NOT use MOS:CONTRACTIONS. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 03:20, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Good to know, thank you! Bob9999999 (talk) 03:26, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:25, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:43, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]