Talk:Rogelio Roxas

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Rogelio Roxas article.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

	This article is within the scope of Tambayan Philippines, the WikiProject and notice board for topics related to the Philippines. To participate, visit the Tambayan for more information.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

	It is requested that a photograph or photographs be included in this article to improve its quality.
	The Free Image Search Tool (FIST) may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Contents 1 Unencyclopedic 2 RFC: Is article encyclopedic and sources used 3 The Golden Budha Corporation 4 The Baguio City Court proceeding regarding the buddha

[edit] Unencyclopedic

Article is based on Roxas v. Marcos appeal transcripts. Actual information about Roxas is omitted from the article. Born in (year?), born in what city, how long in service and what did they do while in the service? Other pertinent information has been left out as well. Jim (talk) 13:57, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Not left out, just unavailable online. Would you like to help improve the article? Your assistance is highly appreciated. I'll allow the tag to stay for three days. If no one objects after that time period, I'm removing the tag. -- • Kurt Guirnela • ‡ ^Talk 05:05, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

This non-verifiable article is in direct violation of Wikipedia policies. Please refer to WP:NOT and WP:OR. Jim (talk) 11:25, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

NOTE: This editor requests an RFC tag be placed before Admin actions, or the creator of this article removes Unencyclopedic tag. Jim (talk) 11:32, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

There is no problem with this article except a stronger source should be used in place of Timelines if possible. This is not a delete candidate, and the unencyclopedic tag is misapplied in this case. Professor marginalia (talk) 15:34, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Article creator is removing unencyclopedic tag. -- • Kurt Guirnela • ‡ ^Talk 02:55, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Goodness, that was a quick three days! Jim (talk) 03:54, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

You seem to have a vested interest in these articles. I noticed all your contributions center on the following. Please read WP:COI. -- • Kurt Guirnela • ‡ ^Talk 08:41, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Your point is moot. You have a stake in some of those same articles, as well. If you could produce a WP reference as to NOT editing in like subjects or genres, that would be dandy. You might want to review WP:HAR. This article still breaches the WP:OR and WP:NOT policies. Jim (talk) 11:40, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Oh well. To each his own. If you truly believe the article to be unencyclopedic, nominate it to WP:AfD. However, it is better to light just one little candle, than to complain of the darkness. -- • Kurt Guirnela • ‡ ^Talk 03:54, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] RFC: Is article encyclopedic and sources used

Jim (talk) 11:26, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

To anyone concerned: JimBobUSA is disrespectful of other editors and WP policy, as shown by his conduct at Talk:Yamashita's gold. It appears that he may have some kind of agenda in relation to these issues. I suggest that we ignore this AfD nomination and retain the article Grant | Talk 06:16, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Grant, this section is for discussing this article. If you are so inclined to whine and complain because I did some editing on your article, that you did not agree with, I suggest you create another section and title it appropriately. I also suggest you view WP:HAR and pay special attention to the definition of Wikistalking. Jim (talk) 11:48, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

After reviewing the article and its sources I ran across a few problems:

• None of the text sourced to the Timeline Phillipines is actually supported by that source.
• None of the sources mention Roxas's imprisonment
• The last source, the Honolulu Star Bulletin, is actually from the Editorials section; not generally considered reliable.

At the least, this article needs considerably better sourcing, since most of the information if only found in the court documents, which are a primary source. Since there is only this single claim to notability which currently doesn't seem to have been widely publicized, this probably doesn't meet the notability guidelines. An AfD might be the best way to go. Shell ^babelfish 03:57, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Golden Budha Corporation

The Golden Budha Corporation (albeit spelling) is the correct spelling of the corporation started by Roger Roxas, and is legally binding. The Golden Buddha is not the registered name of the corporation. The correct corporation name, including spelling should be used Jim 04:23, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

State of Georgia, 2007 Corporation Annual Registration filing for the Golden Budha Corporation can be found here: Golden Budha Corporation Jim 13:27, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Baguio City Court proceeding regarding the buddha

In regards to Jose Roxas. There are several paragraphs related to this incident in the Roxas v. Marcos appeal. See section 1 (background) number 7. You may wish to use this, as it is a more reliable source. [1] Jim 03:12, 3 December 2007 (UTC)