User talk:Rodneyloughjr

Welcome!

Hello, Rodneyloughjr, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Gears of War 2 15:45, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Potential legal threat

You recently posted a comment (viewable here) which could possibly be perceived as a legal threat. If so this would breach the No legal threats policy of Wikipedia.

Wikipedia has numerous dispute resolution avenues which can be pursued in the event of a content dispute. It is recommended that you examine those before attempting legal action.

If you DO intend to pursue legal action, then (as noted in the policy above) we will block your Wikipedia account until the legal matter is resolved. For the moment I shall assume your statement did not constitute a concrete intention to pursue legal action. If I am mistaken, please inform me so that I can commence the administrative requirements. Sincerely Manning (Wikipedia Administrator) (talk) 11:03, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

... and of course, if it wasn't a threat, merely a request, you will find contact info for the "legal department" on that same page. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 11:20, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I simply want to know how to resolve such a conflict. I have far too many things to deal with than this stuff. however, whenever & where ever, my name gets used across the www i want to ensure that it is accurate - especially in such a place as this. Many items have been removed from the mutually agreed upon 'neutral' post from back in April, why? - mostly because "citations" are needed/often required, or because of some made up personal vendetta (my perception of course)? Yet, when I ask how to best do this, the way is never clear. When I offer to make myself available to ensure that a COI is not perceived, so that the information will be entirely accurate, no one steps up (steps on - yes, steps up - no.) A few of the "citations" are only able to be verified via a photograph of the award or certificate or citation or whatever one might want to call it; as an example the certificate of appreciation from the United Nations for contributions to the World Environment Days held in SF, is perhaps the smallest piece of paper ever given to me but is one of the most important on my wall (who gets certificates of appreciation from the UN? - not many.) Add to this the number and quantity of awards from say the PPA - I have emails from the PPA themselves explaining their position (see below); how does one cite that as a reference? My point here is very simple, and has I believe been made more than one time, if the article is suppose to be a bio, then let it be that - BUT LET IT BE THE TRUTH and not someone's version of the truth who doesn't know and more over doesn't care to find out.

Rodney, For the most part, you are correct. Each image accepted for the General Collection receives one merit. If accepted for the Loan collection when judged by another panel, the image receives an additonal merit. Theoretically, you could receive 8 merits in one year...

You asked about the 2007 award winners. I assume you meant 2009. The list of accepted images is available at PPA.com.>Competitions>International but there is no way to view the images unless you come to IUSA in January to see the exhibit. If indeed your question was about 2007, that list is no longer available.

Let me know if I can help with anything else. Hope to see you at IUSA. Jim

Jim Dingwell PEC Administrator 8053 Palmilla Ln Lincoln, NE 68516

Original Message -----

From: "Rodney Lough Jr." Sent: Friday, August 28, 2009 9:51 AM Subject: International Print Awards

> Hello Jim, > > Quick question...... > > There seems to be some confusion over just how many merits are given to > Merit and Loan award winners. > > Am I right to say that each award winning image first receives a merit, > for > the General Collection judging, and are then eligible for another round of > judging for the Loan Collection? Then if selected through that next round > of judging into the Loan Collection that the winning images selected into > the Loan Collection receive another merit award? > > As an example, in 2009, three images were selected - two of which were > also > selected into the Loan Collection. Did we therefore get five total merit > awards? And would it be fair to say that we received Three Merit Awards > and Two Loan Awards? > > One other last question..... > > Do you have a link on the ppa site where we can see the 2007 award > winners? > We're trying to source it. > > Thanks Jim, I know you have far more important issues to deal with than > these silly questions, but we are trying to demonstrate a point to someone > on these exact issues. > > Until next time, take care and I'll.... > > See Ya on the Trail! > Rodney Lough Jr. > > The Lough Road, Inc. > 13215 SE Valemont Lane > Happy Valley, OR 97236 > 866.456.7623 > 503.654.8410 (direct) > 503.654.8592 (fax) > http://www.TheLoughRoad.com > > Rodney is currently listed on Yahoo's Master of Photography list and > is one of Fuji Films' Professional Lecture Series Talent Team Members, > shown in the Smithsonian in Washington D.C. > > - Think GREEN. Please consider the environment before printing this email.

Rodneyloughjr (talk) 16:42, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Per above thread, you are being discussed on the admin incidents board

Please see this. Thank you, --98.182.55.163 (talk) 13:48, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

September 2009

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Rodney Lough, Jr.. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing. NeilN ^{talk ♦ contribs} 22:35, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

what you call an edit war, we call telling the truth. it seems to us that you guys are simply in a mindset that whatever you want to say about rodney lough is OK, well it is not. you site rule after rule after rule, but then when rules are followed (citation needed as an example) you ignore them or say that YOU don't think there a valid source and then site another rule. really, piss off NeilN. No other photographer that we can see has had this amount of content edit by you editors (and most of it has been wrong!), why is it that this page has gotten so much attention? Oh, please site some more of your rules for us.....We have asked for help in editing the page so that it can be accurate on numerous occasions but do not get any offers to do that - instead you spend your time figuring out which 'rules' you plan on enforcing today. Wiki is in a lot of press of late because it does not seem to be stating fact within the articles, simply opinion - so why is it you think your opinion is worth so much more than that of the horses mouth? here's an example - removing a statement about getting a camera at the age of 12 because it cannot be 'citation needed' is absurd. petty, you are all very very petty. And when you don't like hearing what we think you send veiled threats to have us blocked? OH watch out wiki is going to block us - really that's sooooo intimidating. BTW it appears that you have edited the article more than 4 times w/in a 24 hour period as well, consider this your warning as well - look in the mirror first next time, before you cast the stone! 32.177.4.111 (talk) 14:02, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

1) Almost everything in the article has been sourced so everything is verifiable. No inaccuracies have been pointed out. 2) Editing the article 4 times in 24 hours is perfectly fine. Reverting or re-adding removed material 4 times in 24 hours is not. --NeilN ^{talk ♦ contribs} 15:36, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I was the editor that removed the reference to receiving a camera at age 12 because it is not notable and was uncited. Loads of people that have a biography on wiki received stuff when they were 12, but it isn't mentioned in their biography. Also, wiki has not had a lot of press 'of late' regarding content, it's had a lot of press since January 15, 2001! I would also like to advise you to be civil when dealing with other editors. Thanks, RaseaC (talk) 16:17, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Investigation

You are suspected of sockpuppetry, which means that someone suspects you of using multiple Wikipedia accounts for prohibited purposes. Please make yourself familiar with the notes for the suspect, then respond to the evidence at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Rodneyloughjr. Thank you. RaseaC (talk) 16:09, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Warning about creating alternate accounts

Don't do it again. It is clear that you were using multiple IP addresses to engage in abuse, especially through disruptive edit summaries. If you come back, please stick to your main account. If not, you may find that you will not be welcome in the community anymore. Regards, MuZemike 04:11, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have just returned from being in the field for the past 4 weeks. Primarily I was in Idaho, British Columbia and Alberta during that time. While away I did not log into WP, with my own account or any other. Seriously you guys. Guilt by press release, is that it? I'm not afraid to log into my account and tell you folks how I feel about stuff - or isn't that evident? Rodneyloughjr (talk) 23:11, 8 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

March 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Rodney Lough Jr. may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

*"Wilderness Forever". [[Smithsonian Museum of Natural History]] (2014–2015)<ref>[https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.689892377718073.1073741831.183201768387139&type=1 at [

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 18:52, 10 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]