User talk:Sceptre/Archive 36

Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.
— Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights

edit

Some handy links

I'm still around, pottering away, editing where I need to.

The current local time is: 04:41, 21 December 2024 (GMT)

Only 51821 articles (0.748%) are featured or good. Make a difference: improve an article!

edit

Sceptre's talk page: Archive 36

edit

67.71.142.187

Hi there. You indef blocked this IP two years ago. It's currently in the pool of dynamic IPs assigned to a large number of customers (/14) so it has no effect on the original target but it just hit me, and must have hit others in the meantime. Already posted an unblock request to my talk page, but I've evaded the block now so just letting you know. <eleland/talkedits> 19:03, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

...and it's already unblocked ([1]) Happy New Year :-) <eleland/talkedits> 19:05, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year!

Dear friend, I hope you had a wonderful New Year's Eve, and that 2008 is your best year yet! ~ Riana ⁂ 04:24, 2 January 2008 (UTC) [reply]

Haven't come here in a while, I see it's all maroon :o ~ Riana ⁂ 04:24, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Voyageofthedamned.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Voyageofthedamned.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Fasach Nua (talk) 15:38, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Jericho 1x01 "Pilot".jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Jericho 1x01 "Pilot".jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 18:28, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On choosing tone. . .

This wasn't particularly helpful. Let's try to be the good guys here. Namescases either needs to figure out that he's wrong or he'll be blocked, so the thing to do is genuinely to try to help him figure it out. Chick Bowen 00:52, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not disagreeing with you. I'm just talking about the best way to proceed with a difficult user. Chick Bowen 00:59, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Of course I know why, nor do I blame you. Merely making a friendly suggestion about rhetoric. Chick Bowen 01:04, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A cup of tea, perhaps?

Calm down a bit, eh? I realize that it must suck being the target of countless lowlifes, but honestly, acting out this way just gives them more fodder... anyway, sorry, that was just my advice. Cheers, Master of Puppets ^{Call me MoP!} 01:29, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And this is just silly. My advice is to not sink to their level. Master of Puppets ^{Call me MoP!} 01:34, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Troll

Just thought I'd let you know I blocked him indef. jj137 ^♠ 02:06, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Who were the other two? jj137 ^♠ 02:24, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Story of Old Michael

Hi Will, Happy New Year. Apologies for the delay, I am planning to get back to "Supper's Ready" after the upcoming weekend. BTW, can you let me know what you used to draw the M62 map, as I need similar for an article I've been working on? Thanks. --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 01:53, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers! That was quick for someone claiming to be offline. I'll give Inkscape a go. --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 01:56, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Partners in crime

Thanks for closing. However, I was kinda trying to prevent the article form being reverted, which is almost bound to happen sometime in the future. Oh, and Happy Newyear! — Edokter • Talk • 15:39, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry. You were right.

My complaint a while back and my characterization of you as a "disgruntled ex-admin who rejects consensus" was false. I admit I had misconceptions about Wikipedia policy and I've come to respect your "Wikithoritarian" philosophy.

With that said, yes, you're apparently right about the mobs of trolls, including ones engaged in trivial disputes over minor ethnic issues. See the arbitration case I just issued: Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#Anti-Dominicanism. While UnclePaco is a blatantly obvious troll, the ironic thing is that, looking over his contributions, at one point, he got into a dispute with User:BigGabriel555 who is apparently a Dominican himself, and has been POV-pushing Dominican nationalism. So, what you have on the article on Dominican Republic is trolls reverting edits by trolls! You have anti-Dominican racists pushing POV and Dominican nationalists pushing POV. I assume articles on Eastern Europe have the same problem? Your insight would be welcome. Zenwhat (talk) 19:38, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Simply out of curiousity...

Is not the deletion discussion supposed to continue for a five day minimum?

I ask simply because I noticed that the Tales of MU page was deleted by you less than half that time after the article was created, and was wondering what the reason for this was. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.230.72.86 (talk) 00:15, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. The arguments in favor were poor, but some of us (who contribute to AfD a lot) would have made better ones and improved the article. I'm not finding a lot of solid secondary sources, but there are 10,000 ghits. Enough to at least keep this open in the hopes that something can be found. Hobit (talk) 14:46, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also, [2] would indicate a massive number of unique viewers. Hobit (talk) 14:49, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just thought I'd point out that Hobit has responded on their own talk page. 72.230.72.86 (talk) 21:07, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, should have gone here.

Yeah, I understood the trainwreck note. But it certainly doesn't hit A7. It must be clear that it isn't notable and no reasonable person would disagree. That certainly isn't the case here. The arguments made were poor, but this does appear to be the first of its kind (professional writer writing an on-line serial) as far as I know, not to mention the large number of ghits indicate that the subject may be notable, even if the article as written was not. Thus, it really should make it through a full AfD. I'd appreciate it you'd relist it and we can start again. Hobit (talk) 20:01, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Invitation

Hello there

I see you are interested in the Life On Mars Television Series, as I am.

At the moment I have A Life On Mars Wikiproject currently up for approval by the Wikiproject Approval Council. As you are interested in Life On Mars I was wondering if you would be interested in adding your name and joining. If you are interested you can find it on Wikipedia: WikiProject Council/Proposals its right at the very bottom you cant miss it as its titled ‘Wikipedia: Wikiproject Life on Mars (Television Series)’. And after your name is added to Wikiproject propsals please add it to the main page Wikipedia:Wikiproject Life On Mars

If you are interested by all means feel free to join

Regards

Police,Mad,Jack, 19:36, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Elonka 3

Thank you for your support in my RfA. It was definitely a dramatic debate, that landed on WP:100! I paid close attention to everything that was said, and, where possible, I will try to incorporate the (constructive) criticism towards being a better administrator. I'm taking things slowly for now, partially because of the holiday season and all the off-wiki distractions. :) I'm also working my way through the Wikipedia:New admin school and double-checking the relevant policies, and will gradually phase into the use of the new tools. My main goals are to help out with various backlogs, but I also fully intend to keep on writing articles, as there are several more that I definitely want to get to WP:FA status! Thanks again, and have a great new year, --El on ka 07:16, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note

I am drafting an FAQ here and would appreciate any input or constructive edits you could give on/to it. -Jéské ^{(Blah v^_^v)} 07:58, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RfD nomination of "Elliptical clause"

I have nominated "Elliptical clause" (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) for discussion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. Floaterfluss ^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:35, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:2007Macra.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:2007Macra.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 19:40, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Family of Blood (gaseous).jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Family of Blood (gaseous).jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 21:13, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Family of Blood (human).jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Family of Blood (human).jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 21:13, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Family Guy Star Wars vs Doctor Who Vortex

The picture comparison you uploaded compares the Dr. Who theme to the millenium falcon entering the vortex... I think the comparison was meant for the Star Wars vortex as it appears once spaceships are already in it, such as in this picture.--Dr who1975 (talk) 23:28, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Arnold Murray

Please explain why you deleted the entire article and proposed it for deletion? --Dan Leveille^TALK 02:54, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There was no need to delete the entire article. You could have proposed it for deletion as the entire article, and it could be cleaned up, content could be selectively removed or revised, rather than removing the bulk of the article. --Dan Leveille^TALK 03:01, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If articles are unsourced on WP, we don't just delete them, we find sources for it, and then we remove information, that clearly doesn't need to be there. --Dan Leveille^TALK 03:05, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RFC discussion of User:Fasach Nua

A request for comments has been filed concerning the conduct of Fasach Nua (talk · contribs). You are invited to comment on the discussion at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Fasach Nua. -- — Edokter • Talk • 15:32, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User contrib

Is there a reason you changed the tool that this userbox uses? I, personally like the one that has been there all along, so I restored that one. I didn't see any discussion about changing it, so if I missed it let me know. - Rjd0060 (talk) 18:09, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK. I prefer the wannabe because it lists the most edited pages. Feel free to change it back though, since you've got a reason to do it. - Rjd0060 (talk) 18:16, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:Beepdeeppeep2

~~Has not been warned throughly and will probably fail AIV. Just letting you know. Compwhiz II^(Talk)_(Contribs) 22:01, 12 January 2008 (UTC)~~ [reply]

I was wrong :( Compwhiz II^(Talk)_(Contribs) 22:02, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

On 13 January, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Appreciation Index, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Royalbroil 14:09, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for passing that along; I didn't even realise it had been nominated by anyone else until I saw your message. Liquidfinale ^{(Ţ) (Ç) (Ŵ)} 18:26, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

LOL

Now that was funny. Minor humor barnstar. I (talk) 23:28, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pixelface

I opposed purely in the sake of appearing fair. This *is* getting ridiculous though. BLACKKITE 00:02, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

weird

What is wrong with this guy? Do people not have better things to do? --Cheeser1 (talk) 00:03, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop

Please stop archiving the ANI thread that was opened against me. If the discussion needs to be moved to Talk:List of Scrubs episodes, that's fine with me. But you don't get to decide when the discussion is over. --Pixelface (talk) 00:31, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My Own Worst Enemy

How exactly is that notable? While reviews do help assert notability, two on their own doesn't really provide much context. If it were to get non-trivial production notes or some reception comparable to My Musical, it would easily change my mind. I started a discussion on the episode list talk page, so you can just reply there. TTN (talk) 19:54, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

While they are not bad sources, two reviews really isn't significant. That is pretty much possible for any episode of any slightly popular series. It's more about having a unique article that shows a standpoint that would be impossible to convey in the episode list. You could just as easily link to IGN's and Television Without Pity's Scrubs sections from the list. TTN (talk) 20:05, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs: Michael Shapiro (actor); Uploading and downloading; Firearms (computer game); Jess Cliffe; Icewind Dale; Ian Briggs; Turtle Rock Studios; Philip Martin (screenwriter); Bruno Langley; GoldSrc; Winston Groom; Night; Team Fortress 2; Cool (aesthetic); Ian Stuart Black; Halo 3; Matthew Graham; List of fictional universes; Half-life of knowledge

Cleanup: Summerland (TV series); Bill Baxley; Furby
Merge: Seven Hour War; Effective half-life; Biological half-life
Add Sources: Portuguese Wikipedia; Urecco; A1 (band)
Wikify: Theonomy; Black Hebrew Israelites; Steve Howe (baseball player)
Expand: Eugene R. Black; Silent protagonist; Giant Sequoia National Monument

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- ForteTuba (talk) 22:02, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]