Talk:Dave Ross

Birthdate

I deleted the birthdate a while back because Ross said on his show that it was incorrect, but it has since been restored. Since I'm the person who put it there in the first place, I'm going to delete it again until a better source than me can be found. Richard K. Carson (talk) 02:56, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

I finally looked for and found Ross's birthday (see this) and added it to the article. -- Ssilvers (talk) 05:33, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Recent edits

On 7 February, on a discussion of Newt Gingrich's staff maliciously editing Wikipedia articles, Dave Ross and Luke Burbank wondered on-air how easy it was to edit Wikipedia articles. Luke bet Dave that Dave Ross's own article would be edited by someone within the next few minutes due to the mention on the show. Thus the large number of non-constructive edits on the page. This mention is at the end of the 10:00am - 11:00am podcast on the linked page, and the reaction is on the next hour's podcast. -- Arthur Allen 04:36, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Ah! That clears it up. Thank you, Arthur - I just listened to the broadcast that you linked to. Interestingly, upon being told that COI editing was prohibited on Wikipedia (an overstatement on Luke's part), Dave understood and strongly defended the COI policy. But Dave underestimated the number of jokers who might edit Wikipedia. -- Ssilvers (talk) 05:22, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Dave Ross. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100916210304/http://bonneville.com/pdf/bonnevilles_best_2008/Ross.pdf to http://www.bonneville.com/pdf/bonnevilles_best_2008/Ross.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081011010538/http://www.seattleweekly.com/arts/0629/pirates.php to http://seattleweekly.com/arts/0629/pirates.php
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120202233848/http://mynorthwest.com/daveross/ross30.php to http://mynorthwest.com/daveross/ross30.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:26, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Tense

I have tried to add to the webpage to make the beginning read in a more active present tense manner, like I've seen with all the other living people on this site. "Has been" is a passive present tense and "is" is an active present tense. I was told that I was wrong in changing it and to post here. What should I do? ValentinesDay88 (talk) 05:10, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for coming here, rather than continuing to revert to your preferred choice. I see you are a relatively new editor, so please take the time to read a very important guideline: WP:BRD, which outlines what you should do when one of your edits is reverted. You should not try to just put it back in, but to use the article's talk page to discuss the change with other interested editors. While the discussion continues, the article's WP:STATUS QUO remains in place. I am sure that the editor with whom you have been having the back-and-forth will comment here shortly to discuss the matter. - SchroCat (talk) 06:52, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Valentine'sDay, you ended the sentence with: "and has been since 1987", so you are leaving in the same "has been" that you are complaining about and making the sentence more awkward, not less. If you can come up with a more elegant proposal for expressing the facts (please propose it HERE, not in the article itself), I'm all ears. Also, please explain why you think "occasionally" is better than "sometimes" in this case. See WP:BROKE. -- Ssilvers (talk) 07:06, 12 July 2019 (UTC)