User talk:RobSmith

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Useful links

Welcome!

Hello, RobSmith, and welcome to Conservapedia!

We're glad you are here to edit. We ask that you read our Editor's Guide before you edit.

At the right are some useful links for you. You can include these links on your user page by putting "{{Useful links}}" on the page. Any questions--ask!

Thanks for reading, RobSmith!


quick note

The Conservapedia article on the Soviet Union ranks pretty well at the the search engines of Google, Yahoo and Bing. I spruced up the Soviet Union article via some pictures and now it ranks #5 at Google for the search term Soviet Union as can be seen HERE

Bottom line: Your Soviet Union and communism related material plus any future material you create in that genre will now have a bigger audience.

Lastly, I think it is best if we put aside our past differences and work more cooperatively in the future. Best wishes on your future editing. Conservative 16:45, 15 November 2011 (EST)

Hey!

Nice to see you back--CamilleT 19:27, 15 November 2011 (EST)

Thanks! Rob Smith 15:59, 21 November 2011 (EST)

So, are you trying to whitewash Gingrich and his personal history? He's an adulterer several times over. --SharonW 18:58, 22 January 2012 (EST) Edited to add - every bit of what I added to the article was referenced. I thought we didn't censor truth? --SharonW 18:59, 22 January 2012 (EST)

No. Information needs to carefully vetted. There's a lot of lies and misinformation out there about Newt, his first wife being served with divorce papers on her deathbed being for instance. This material needs to be handles carefully. Rob Smith 19:01, 22 January 2012 (EST)
I didn't add anything to the article about "deathbed" papers. However you deleted everything - looks like a whitewash to me. --SharonW 19:05, 22 January 2012 (EST)
In fact - you were the one to add something in about the deathbed papers. SharonW 19:06, 22 January 2012 (EST)
You're right -- and the message is proceed with caution. For decades now liberals and MSM have published blatant lies about Gingrich. You need to show credentials your intentions are not the same. Rob Smith 19:09, 22 January 2012 (EST)
I need to show credentials? What kind of credentials are you looking for, Rob? --SharonW 19:18, 22 January 2012 (EST)
That you're not a God-hating commie out to destroy Newt Gingrich. Rob Smith 19:31, 22 January 2012 (EST)
Gingrich did that pretty well on his own, as far as I'm concerned. Everyone has hot buttons - Andy's is abortion, yours is communism, mine is adultery. Gingrich is a creep, and what he does in his personal life tells me a lot about him. --SharonW 19:35, 22 January 2012 (EST)

Also, quick question - why is it important to add that the Clintons had an "open" marriage but not to add that Gingrich had at least 2 affairs, and forced his first ex-wife to appeal to the courts for money in order to support their two children? Both are very telling about the individuals. --SharonW 19:24, 22 January 2012 (EST)

Should we include allegations Hilary is a lesbian? her formal and public denial during the 2008 Presidential contest doesn't mean it's necessarily untrue. Especially given the Clinton's record in matters of sex. Where should we draw the line? Rob Smith 19:31, 22 January 2012 (EST)
Court records aren't allegations, Rob, they're public records. Mrs. Gingrich filed for support because Gingrich didn't pay. What does that tell you about him? --SharonW 19:35, 22 January 2012 (EST)
I don't know, that she's vindictive? that she and her lawyer tried to embarrass and blackmail Gingrich? What do Gingric's daughters, for whom the support is intended, say about it now? Rob Smith 19:45, 22 January 2012 (EST)
Oh, good one, Rob. The soon-to-be-ex-wife is vindictive when her bills were two to three months past due because Gingrich didn't pay any support. What did the judge think - oh, wait, he agreed with her. So I can only think you approve of adultery. --SharonW 19:49, 22 January 2012 (EST)


Gingrich

No more edit-warring. Please provide evidence that what has been added is false before removing it. Thank you, babe. --SharonW 22:14, 22 January 2012 (EST)

Rugby World Cup comparison to Superbowl

User:ScottDG informed me that, according to you, a comparison to the Superbowl is important for the Rugby World Cup page. I think it's inaccurate and slightly misleading, but I'm unaware of the reasoning as to why it is important. Here's the discussion. Cheers.

Mugshot

I uploaded the poser pic at Conservapedia:Image_upload_requests --Jpatt 23:10, 27 January 2012 (EST)

Fine

Working hard? --Joaquín Martínez 19:12, 28 January 2012 (EST)

Yes. Thank you. Good to hear from you. Rob Smith 19:18, 28 January 2012 (EST)

Insults

Your gratuitous insulting behaviour might be tolerated on other sites, but lets keep the conversations civil here. You do not see me going around insulting your country do you? --DamianJohn 20:49, 28 January 2012 (EST)

Third World is not an insult. Rob Smith 16:19, 29 January 2012 (EST)
Yes it is. Don't get cute Rob. Can't you go about editing an encyclopaedia without hurling insults at everyone? Or is that beyond your capabilities? --DamianJohn 18:12, 29 January 2012 (EST)
If the term "Third World" is a pejorative, blame the United Nations, not me. Rob Smith 19:21, 29 January 2012 (EST)
No. I blame you Rob, because the word no longer has the meaning it used to have. Also, you could not say with a straight face that you were using the word in the anachronistic sense. In any case, even under the older sense of the word, New Zealand was a first world country. Every post you make you look more and more foolish. --DamianJohn 19:33, 29 January 2012 (EST)
New Zealand is a Superpower? don't think so; New Zealand's not even a member of NATO or the European Union. New Zealand may be among the developed nations, which could earn it Second World status, dependent upon the level of its foreign debt and trade surplus/ deficit. But even if it has a fairly decent living standard by world standards, adjustment must be made for its military and defense contributions to maintaining a stable international trading system. And if it spends .01% as Japan does of it's national income on defense, leaving American taxpayers to pick up the slack (and thus, suffer a lower standard of living) no way does New Zealand under any circumstances equal First World superpower status of the US. Rob Smith 19:56, 29 January 2012 (EST)
I know of no person, except you, who claims that first world means superpower. Even your cite doesn't argue for this. In fact your cite explicitly calls NZ a first world country. Now if you want to make up a definition for a term, at least have the decency to let everyone know that. I don't know if you are just trolling, or you seriously believe what you are saying, either way, I suggest you go have a long hard look at yourself in the mirror. I'm done with you. --DamianJohn 20:15, 29 January 2012 (EST)
Congratulations, welcome to the First World. You'll see, it's no big deal. Rob Smith 20:32, 29 January 2012 (EST)

I hear your country got the beginnings of a health-care system, I see America is rapidly approaching first-world status :), glad you could join us. Cmurphynz 05:37, 20 October 2012 (EDT)

Expansion of the universe

Yes, Rob, if you look at a star today, and then 500 years from now, you will notice a difference in distance of 500*rate of yearly expansion. RachelW 20:59, 30 January 2012 (EST)

The rate of expansion is about 73 km/s/Mpc. What that means is that for every megaparsec you are in distance from a point, you will be moving 73 km/s away from that point due to the expansion of the universe. So, 1 megaparsec away means you are moving 73 km/s, 2 megaparsecs away and its 146 km/s, and so on. For your reference, a megaparsec is about 3,261,636 light years, or 20 billion billion miles. This is why we don't really notice the expansion of the universe without high powered telescopes. Its a very small rate of expansion relative to the sizes involved. Hope this helps. RachelW 21:21, 30 January 2012 (EST)

It does. So the gravitationally bound objects likewise are moving with the expansion at the same rate? Is matter in the universe likewise expanding? Not to sound absurd, but am I actually becoming more obese as the universe expands? Rob Smith 22:01, 30 January 2012 (EST)

It is not the matter itself, expanding, but the space between it. Think about a lump of bread dough with raisins in it, as it rises in the oven. The raisins don't expand themselves, but if you stand on a raisin and look at the other raisins, you'll see them moving away from you, and the farther away they are, the faster they move.

The thing is, any two objects close enough to be bound gravitationally are not likely to be far enough away for the expansion to matter at all. Although, actually, since the rate of expansion is increasing, some scientists believe that in many many many billions of years in the future, the expansion may rip apart every atom in the universe. It's called the "Big Rip" theory, and yes, it is a little kooky. RachelW 22:13, 30 January 2012 (EST)

Oh, and as to the question of scale: You basically have to look at objects in other galaxies for the expansion to become noticeable. I won't see any expansion looking at stars in the Milky Way galaxy, but I will if I look at a star in a galaxy much farther away. And actually, the galaxy closest to us, Andromeda, is being drawn into our galaxy by gravity and so is not rushing away from us like most other galaxies are. RachelW 22:19, 30 January 2012 (EST)

Thank you. So I got it wrong, the theory states expansion is accelerating, not decreasing. Question: Will an observable object 13 billion lights year away be 13 + y billion lights years away in y billion years? Rob Smith 23:16, 30 January 2012 (EST)
Well, as we said before, for every 3.2 billion light years away you are, the speed increases by 73 km/s, or 45 miles per second. So, for an object 13 billion light years away, it will be traveling at about 180 miles per second relative to the earth, or 5.7 billion miles per year. So, in say, 1 billion years, that object will have traveled approximately 5.7 billion billion miles, or 970,000 light years, a change in distance of much less than one percent. RachelW 23:34, 30 January 2012 (EST)
Not quite. There's a bit of a compound interest effect involved. Every second another 73.8km gets added to the distance, and that's expanding as well. Over a few billion years that can add some real distance. --GeorgeLi 00:27, 31 January 2012 (EST)
The distance equation wouldn't be exactly linear, of course, but the change in distance really is so small that you can treat the speed as constant and it makes a very good approximation. RachelW 10:23, 31 January 2012 (EST)

Good work on Paul

I am very much liking what you are saying about St Paul. Very well put. Paul saw the light and stopped being a rule-obsessed Pharisee, yet people today try to turn him back into one. We shouldn't let them!--CPalmer 09:58, 23 February 2012 (EST)

That's right; User:Conservative is preaching a Gospel which basically says, "Ye must be circumcised and not be obese." Rob Smith 14:24, 23 February 2012 (EST)

You are unblocked

RobSmith, you are unblocked.

How about creating this project which could be featured on the main page: Conservapedia:Encyclopedia on Communism.

If you wanted and if this helps, this could serve as a template with any modifications you think are necessary: Conservapedia:Encyclopedia of Conservatism. Conservative 06:34, 25 May 2015 (EDT)

Welcome back!

So you were editing as "OscarO" nearly the whole time that you were blocked (all but 5 months)? Impressive. And it says something about the admins' ability to accurately identify sock accounts.

Anyway, you created an enormous amount of Venona material over at Ameriwiki. (Remember that?) There were approximately 3.847 gajillion articles, which I combined into one huge one because I was tired of seeing one of them come up every time I hit "random page". I assume you still have that material. If you don't have it, and you want it, I may be able to scrounge it up from when I exported the whole database before the site died. SamHB 22:03, 28 May 2015 (EDT)

yah yah, I was worried about that and would appreciate it. What happened to wikinet anyway?It died without fanfare and I lost tons of original creations. Rob Smith 00:01, 29 May 2015 (EDT)
I lost a lot too. When I saw that it was going away (long story) I exported the whole database; it's in an xml file, as I recall. I'm not familiar with xml extraction, but it was the best I could do. It's on one of my disks, I believe. I'll see what I can do, but it may take a while. SamHB 00:43, 29 May 2015 (EDT)
How many decent size articles are going to be recovered and put on CP? 05:25, 29 May 2015 (EDT)
I was simply offering this as a personal favor to Rob. I would do the same for SharonW or AlanE. Rob can put his material up if he chooses. If you are wondering whether I'm planning to bring over any of my own material, or anyone else's, the answer is no. It's a very long story, and I won't bore you with it, but essentially none of what I wrote for AW would be suitable for here, for various reasons—it's basically a difference of "vision". Also, what I wrote about science for AW used lots of pictures and diagrams, and I don't have upload rights. There have been a couple of very tiny exceptions, like what I wrote recently about Joseph Warren. I did that from memory. It's very interesting that he was the guy who "pushed the button" and made the decision to start the American Revolution, and I wanted that in the CP article. In any case, there was nothing about atheism and sailboats.  :-) SamHB 22:34, 29 May 2015 (EDT)
Yah virtually all of it is redundant. They're my original versions from WP, CP, and elsewhere. Rob Smith 00:02, 30 May 2015 (EDT)
Are you saying you don't need me to recover your AW material? I'll do it if you need me to, but it's something of a pain. So if you've saved it, or contributed it elsewhere, please use that. SamHB 00:12, 30 May 2015 (EDT)

Welcome back! --Joaquín Martínez 19:03, 31 May 2015 (EDT)

I sent you an email

RobSmith,

I just sent you an email. Conservative 16:20, 10 June 2015 (EDT)

Had no idea this account was unblocked. Thanks. Have U seen my Global jihad essay? It's #16 on Google out of 2.4 million. Or my DAESH entry (well, not all mine) it has been in the top 6 of Google for one solid year now. Rob Smith (talk) 17:15, 23 March 2016 (EDT)
Glad you are getting some readers for your global jihad work. You put a lot of work into it. Same with the DAESH article.
As far as the title of the article "Essay: Global jihad", my guess is that people prefer articles and not essays. You would probably get more clicks if you didn't have the prefix "Essay".
My guess is that your article was too right wing for the website your wrote it for so you had to use the prefix essay.
I could be wrong though. I have had some popular web pages with the prefix essay that rank well for relevant terms at a search engine beginning with a G. :)
Anyways, take a look at my note below and I wish you all the best. Conservative (talk) 17:43, 24 April 2016 (EDT)

Conservapedia's web traffic is up

Conservapedia is one of the top 100,000 websites in the world as far as web traffic according to the web traffic tracking company Alexa,[1]

Thank you for all your contributions.

Conservapedia continues to receive millions of page views per month.Conservative (talk) 17:59, 19 April 2016 (EDT)

re: recent note to me

RobSmith,

You wrote: "Accept my terms for returning...". I already recommended to the owner of CP that you be made a Sysop again. I set up the ball in front of net, now it's your job to spoke it over the net.

There is really nothing for me to accept. Only the owner of CP can reinstate your Sysop rights. Get in contact with the owner of CP and hammer something out.

I also suggest contacting Karajou. You want him to be for it and not against it.

I wish you the best in getting back your Sysop rights. Conservative (talk) 17:11, 24 April 2016 (EDT)

If you hit a wall when asking for your Sysop rights back, I suggest building up some goodwill with some new content at CP and then asking again. If necessary (and I don't think it would be necessary), keep repeating this cycle until your are a Sysop.
I really think it would be easy for your to get your Sysop rights again. You just need to put a little effort into it. Andy liked your content so I am confident things would work out. Conservative (talk) 17:28, 24 April 2016 (EDT)

Kept your content from being deleted.

There was an attempt to delete your Essay: New Ordeal content. I could see that you put a lot of work into it so I merely moved it so it would not be deleted.

I like the term "New Ordeal". It is clever. Conservative (talk) 23:26, 28 April 2016 (EDT)

Put this on Andy's talk page - work something out with Andy - RobS: Another reason why he should be an editor and subsequently be an admin. Something should be worked out

This was originally put on Talk:High_morale_of_Christendom, so as to get Cons's attention, and then moved here. SamHB (talk) 18:45, 1 May 2016 (EDT)
But it might interest you [that's Cons] to know that, back at Ameriwiki (you remember Ameriwiki? No? It's just as well) Rob wrote a gigantic number of articles about Communism in the 30's and 40's, and senator McCarthy, and FDR, and Venona, etc. etc. A biographical page for every person involved in that subject, and Rob is a walking encyclopedia of that. I believe there were hundreds of such pages. They swamped the "random page" thing. That is, when you clicked on "random page", you had a high probability of getting one. It made Ameriwiki look like an encyclopedia of Communism during the FDR administration, while I was trying to make it look like an encyclopedia of Americana and American history. (And mathematics too, of course.) Rob had put an enormous amount of effort into writing those articles, and I put an equally enormous amount of effort into combining them into sections of one huge page. Or several huge pages. Whatever. Rob and I communicated during this, and he appreciated the work I was doing. I assume he has saved all that stuff somewhere.
SamHB (talk) 00:26, 29 April 2016 (EDT)

If RobS has backups of his Ameriwiki articles, see if he wants to put them onto Conservapedia.

I may have a backup; I made an export of the whole web site, as a gigantic xml file, before Ameriwiki disappeared. I may have it on some disk somewhere. But I hope RobS has better things to do in 2016 than put that material up. SamHB (talk) 18:45, 1 May 2016 (EDT)

The middle/centrists appear to be dropping out of America politics somewhat and the far right/alt right and socialist wings appear to be growing. I am guessing there is some topical overlap between socialists and communists as there are anti-socialist communists, anti-communist socialists, etc. etc. etc.

In addition, communism articles and atheism articles at the same wiki is a great match. A good portion of people interested in atheism articles would also be interested in communism articles. The two areas are related as atheism was a central tenet of communism.

I do regret pushing for RobS to lose his admin status. Maybe he will decide to purse being an admin again. I know Andy liked his article contributions. Conservative (talk) 00:53, 29 April 2016 (EDT)

Winograd Commission (Democratic Party)

re: Winograd Commission (Democratic Party)

I made the change you requested. Sorry about my first attempt of "Winograd Commission (Wisconsin)". I did a favor for a friend last night and was up a bit late. I was a little groggy. Your suggestion made a lot more sense. Conservative (talk) 12:48, 15 May 2016 (EDT)

re: Hillary Clinton article

Given present demands on my time, I shouldn't have waded into the Hillary Clinton article and done it in a matter that minimized discussion.

If you want to revert the article to your last version, please do so.

Lastly, I don't see myself getting involved in any of the political oriented articles at Conservapedia in 2016 given my present priorities. Conservative (talk) 12:31, 21 May 2016 (EDT)

re: Hillary article

RobS, you can revert the Hillary Rodham Clinton article and then fill it in if you decide to be an active editor. I clearly said that.

Don't put back in the editorial warning in italics and the beginning of the article. See my talk page comments on this matter. Conservative (talk) 15:56, 22 May 2016 (EDT)

re: Hillary Clinton article - do whatever you want with the article

Do whatever you want with the Hillary Clinton article. I am not going to interfere again with any of your political content.

I will let the other admins/editors who are into politics more work with you on the political articles since they are more interested in politics than I am.

I am going to take a long break from the news and attend to other matters so I won't be doing any wiki content or oversight as far as political topics. Conservative (talk) 22:54, 22 May 2016 (EDT)

re: Detente

I am glad we are now in a period of detente.

Down the pike when I have more time at my disposal and should you remain an active editor, I will once again recommend you get your admin status back.

I have already changed Karajou's opinion so now he is in favor of it. And you are also closer down the field in terms of getting Andy to agree. Andy is a conservative lawyer and they tend to be a cautious lot, but I believe that if you are persistent that this will ultimately win the day. Conservative (talk) 17:03, 23 May 2016 (EDT)

re: You are farther down the proverbial football field and...

A standard football field (note the hash marks running horizontally down the field).

How you you like to make a play that would get you at the proverbial 99 yard line? Within inches of the full admin endzone.

RobSmith,

I heard you are going to get picture upload rights as early as today. I asked for this to happen.

Question: How do you feel about get your Admin rights back, but agreeing to not edit the main page? That would put you on the proverbial 99 yard line. Within inches of crossing over the full Admin yard line and scoring a touchdown. I think if you were to agree to this, it could speed up the process of getting your full Admin rights back. Before you answer, consider this proverb "Inch by inch it's a inch. Mile by mile it's a trial".

It's time to make that play that gets you to the 99 yard line. Do it for the Gipper.

And remember, the prospect of eating a huge salami sausage at one sitting is a startling suggestion to most people. So let's not startle the conservative and cautious lawyer who owns this website. But who can resist salami slices? I think it's time for you to be one salami slice away from being a full Admin. Agreed? Conservative (talk) 17:56, 24 May 2016 (EDT)

(User rights log); 22:29 . . Aschlafly (Talk | contribs | block) changed group membership for User:RobSmith from Block, SkipCaptcha, edit, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO and nsTeam2_talkRW to Block, SkipCaptcha, edit, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW and Upload ‎(account promoted)
10 yards further down the field! It's time to make the play that gets you to the 99 yard line. Agreed? Conservative (talk) 18:33, 24 May 2016 (EDT)
Sounds like a winner. If I find any good news items or headlines (and I have some good sources), I'll put on mainpage talk.
FYI, I'm sitting right outside (about 150 ft) from a big Trump rally & counterprotest as we speak; two days ago Bernie Sanders was at this same location. The counterprotest is about half the size of the Sanders rally, and the Trump rally is about 3 times the size the Sanders rally was. Also, Bill Clinton is in across town right now, fighting a rear-guard action trying to hold on to what the Hillary people got; Trump's getting top billing in all local media, and Bill is pretty much ignored. RobS aka Nobs01Enter if you Dare! 90/10 Awaits: Beware! 19:47, 24 May 2016 (EDT)
Trump crowd is increasing, and he's not due to speak for another hour & 10 mins. Trump crowd is approaching the same size Obama drew in 2008, and is made up of people of all ages, races and sexes. Anti-Trump crowd is basically the same rioters we've had here during police shooting protests & Occupy Wall Street. It should be noted, I live in the most Hispanic state in the Union where Hispanics outnumber whites, natives etc. RobS aka Nobs01Enter if you Dare! 90/10 Awaits: Beware! 19:52, 24 May 2016 (EDT)

I will try to move this forward. I do have one request though.

Someone whined about your promotion and mentioned a previous block you received from Karajou. I looked through the blog log and a lot of people blocked you in the past. Let's turn the page as far as you locking horns with people when you can avoid doing so.

I might be able to get this done today as far as this proposal. I will be busy this week, but don't see a delay as a no. Conservative (talk) 20:35, 24 May 2016 (EDT)

Please check your email. Conservative (talk) 20:47, 24 May 2016 (EDT)
Page move would be handy; for example [Hillary Clinton Exploratory Campaign Committee]] should be moved to [Hillary Clinton 2008 Exploratory Committee]. RobS aka Nobs01Enter if you Dare! 90/10 Awaits: Beware! 01:00, 25 May 2016 (EDT)
Update: Trump rally erupts in violence. [2] RobS aka Nobs01Enter if you Dare! 90/10 Awaits: Beware! 01:04, 25 May 2016 (EDT)
Please check your email. Conservative (talk) 22:55, 25 May 2016 (EDT)

Something about a conflict with GerryV

I came across this: [3] in Recent Changes. I know nothing of what the issue is about. But I wonder if you could contact this person and straighten it out. SamHB (talk) 01:26, 27 May 2016 (EDT)

I just made a pledge to avoid conflict, so sorry pal. You're (and the user account you advocating for) are on your own. RobS#NeverHillary 11:25, 27 May 2016 (EDT)

Picture change Hillary Clinton article

I changed the picture for the main Hillary Clinton article. I didn't want you to lose fence sitters because they clicked off a page with an ugly picture or quickly surmised by the previous ugly picture that the article was not going to be fair-minded.

Just laying out the facts should dissuade reasonable people to not to vote for her. Conservative (talk) 15:18, 28 May 2016 (EDT)

I thought it was a pretty good likeness. RobS#NeverHillary 16:30, 28 May 2016 (EDT)

Hillary and the Children's Defense Fund

If you haven't done so already, I think you should do some material on Hillary Clinton and the Children's Defense Fund. Here is some potential material: https://www.google.com/search?q=hillary+clinton+children%27s+defense+fund&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8

I think that is one of her talking points to bolster her image. Conservative (talk) 12:40, 30 May 2016 (EDT)

Incinerating 17 children at Waco covered that; I had planned to put refutations of the CDF of her garbage talking points on the subpage while expanding her abuse of women & child directly in the bio. RobS#NeverHillary 12:49, 30 May 2016 (EDT)
This issue is somewhat related to the Clinton Foundation claiming their donations go to fight hunger, poverty, and AIDS. So the question is, who dominates? do we allow the Clinton's to set the agenda and dictate what goes into her bio by having to refute her fraudulent window dressing and talking points, or does the article go straight forward to facts. RobS#NeverHillary 12:52, 30 May 2016 (EDT)

Resource for free web pics/graphics and put a suggestion on Andy's talk page about you being given additional editor privileges

Resource for free web pics: Free web pics and graphics.

I just put a comment on Andy talk page about you gaining more editor privileges. Conservative (talk) 17:51, 3 June 2016 (EDT)

re: Page move and page lock

I just sent Andy a request via email to give you page move and page lock rights.

I don't enough about the Wikimedia software to know if that requires you to be an Admin. Conservative (talk) 21:45, 3 June 2016 (EDT)

When are we gonna see any progress on this? RobS#NeverHillary 16:04, 15 June 2016 (EDT)

re: getting you admin privileges

Getting you admin privileges is taking longer than I expected.

I hope you loading pictures which are not in according with either being public domain or uploadable as per the license terms of the picture is not slowing things down. You need to stop doing this if you want to expedite getting yourself Admin privileges. I think you are making my tasks harder due to this matter. There are so many pictures that you could upload that you are free to upload and I think you are possibly hampering your ability to be an Admin. See: Public Domain pictures and pictures with generous copyright provisions and free clip art

I think I may not be able to work on the matter of helping you be an admin for several months. Maybe not until 2017. But I do intend to get back to this matter (if you stop uploading pictures not in accordance with Conservapedia's uploading policy. See: Copyright), but hopefully my assistance will not be needed as you will already be an Admin. Conservative (talk) 12:26, 4 June 2016 (EDT)

No problem. Are you saying I should check those sites you provided and replace what is there already, then ask for deletion, etc.? RobS#NeverHillary 12:38, 4 June 2016 (EDT)
I am about to attend to another matter. To expedite things due to my deadlines, I will delete the pictures that you don't have the rights to have uploaded. You can take care of any leftover cleanup. Conservative (talk) 12:46, 4 June 2016 (EDT)
I fixed thuings. Please don't upload pictures unless they are public domain or you can meet the criteria for uploading as per their license rights such as Creative Commons non-Commercial/attribution photos. There are a ton of pictures available and here are some of them: Public Domain pictures and pictures with generous copyright provisions and free clip art Conservative (talk) 13:21, 4 June 2016 (EDT)

A suggestion to getting you to be Admin sooner

I think if you work with the users in the conversation here http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:Aschlafly#Copyright and Andy to have a better picture upload process, you would be a problem solver.

I think being a problem solver might help you be an admin faster. Conservative (talk) 13:30, 4 June 2016 (EDT)

re: User:JayHarper

re: User:JayHarper

He was a parodist. I deleted a few of his articles. If you have time, please go through some of his past edits. Conservative (talk) 20:12, 9 June 2016 (EDT)

I tried to fix a few but all I get is [Internal Server Error]. RobS#NeverHillary 22:12, 9 June 2016 (EDT)

Please read the email I sent you....

Please read the email I just sent you. It has to do with your efforts to be a Sysop again. Conservative (talk) 14:57, 18 June 2016 (EDT)

"Move" privileges added to account

I added "move" privileges to your account. Congratulations!--Andy Schlafly (talk) 23:32, 19 June 2016 (EDT)

Added "protect" privileges also.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 23:40, 19 June 2016 (EDT)

Please check your email

I sent you an email. Please let me know if you got it. Conservative (talk) 21:12, 17 July 2016 (EDT)

Two matters

RobS,

Two things:

1. Please check your email.

2. Please create these articles:

I think this election is going to be close. I know some people are predicting a landslide for Trump and it may happen, but I still think it is going to be close.

Thanks for all your efforts on creating Hillary Clinton content. I think millennials are going to be a factor in this election. So keep the Hillary content coming! Conservative (talk) 02:57, 17 September 2016 (EDT)

Hillary Clinton - suggested articles

RobS,

You might want to create these articles since there is a lot of public interest in these topics:

Conservative (talk) 17:41, 5 November 2016 (EDT)

I mentioned you on main page right for your work on the Hillary Clinton related articles

I mentioned you on main page right for your work on the Hillary Clinton related articles.

I wrote: "Kudos to User: RobSmith for all Conservapedia Hillary Clinton article content he created before the 2016 U.S. presidential election. User: RobSmith created multiple articles related to Hillary Clinton." Conservative (talk) 18:20, 9 November 2016 (EST)

Thank you. After 20 years, we've finally developed the historical narratives about both Clintons that will stand forevet. No one can or will dismiss it as partisan or fringe conspiracy theories.RobS#NeverHillary 09:39, 11 November 2016 (EST)