User talk:Tghe-retford/Archive 4

Discussion Archives

This is Archive 4: December 2006 - April 2007

This is an archive of inactive discussions. Please do not edit it. If you wish to revitalize an old topic, bring it up on the active talk page.

Archive 3

Archive 5

Archived discussion

Semi-protection

Your user page is now semi-protected; sorry that I didn't get it quite right the first time around. | Mr. Darcy talk 16:30, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot. Appreciate it. --tgheretford (talk) 16:31, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stupid (TV channel)

Hi tghe-retford!

There is definately no channel named Stupid, and it was User:GMTV made both (fake) articles for Stupid and The Hit Channel, however it was rumoured on the Digital Spy forums that the person behind User:GMTV is a sockpuppet of "something2001", but it is such a long time ago I can't remember! The article The Hit Channel was speedied, however nobody picked up on "Stupid". Infact, I don't even think HIT even got round to launching their channel overseas. Marbles333 21:35, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AFD

Hi. Thanks for letting me know. I have just voted against deletion, my reasons are on the discussion page. Wikiwoohoo 17:42, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re:AfD Nomination: ITV Idents and Presentation

Hi Gareth, thank you for informing me on your decision to nominate ITV Idents and Presentation for deletion, I can understand why you have done this, but strongly disagree with the concept of the article being deleted, for reasons I have stated on the discussion page. Aidan, Aidsoo 21:03, 18 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]

WP:NOT

Hi, I'm not really sure what you mean by that. What in my nomination did you think would be a good idea to add? Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 23:33, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I getcha. Assuming this MfD passes, I'll do that. Thanks. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 23:45, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup following AFD

Hi. Just to let you know that as promised, I will begin my work on the articles named in the AFD nomination for ITV Idents and Presentation tomorrow. I added the main balloon image back into the BBC One Balloon idents article today and have added a full fair use rationale for it. Bear with me! :) Wikiwoohoo 23:18, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Would you mind taking a look at BBC television idents following the work of myself and others recently? It isn't finished by a long way but it is looking a lot better. I'd say the BBC One section is complete though. Wikiwoohoo 20:53, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, it looks a lot better, the key is to write the articles in prose and only use fair use images if prose cannot bring a point across to the reader, which you have done. The only improvement needed now would be reliable sources for the articles, maybe something from Red Bee Media or Lambie-Nairn? As for your work, check your user talk page... --tgheretford (talk) 21:22, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the barnstar, it isn't just me editing the articles though! There is still much more to be done and I haven't begun work on the ITV idents page though I believe other editors have tackled that. Wikiwoohoo 19:17, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've had a go at BBC 'Rhythm & Movement' idents now and decided which images to keep and which to tag for deletion. The next step will be adding a good deal more text to accompany each ident image. What do you think? Wikiwoohoo 19:13, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It looks better, thanks. The only thing that page needs is sources for some of the text. If I am not busy, I will try and add them. --tgheretford (talk) 19:22, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

BBC television idents

Hello; bit of a project update for you. I have removed the under construction and afd-cleanup tags from the article now as I believe it is complete. I've added an 'oldafd' tag to the talk page to signify that it was nominated for deletion. Where I can, I'll add references like you have with BBC 'Rhythm & Movement' idents and I was thinking of putting the article up for peer review later. What do you think? Wikiwoohoo 22:13, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The key was to keep the fair use images (as per WP:FAIR) down to a minimum, to what was needed within the article. I think you have managed to achieve that. Thanks. --tgheretford (talk) 22:40, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ITV Idents and Presentation → ITV television presentation

Hi. Just to let you know that I have now completed my cleanup of the ITV Idents and Presentation article. I decided it should have a better name and have now renamed it as ITV television presentation. I have also marked all superfluous images as orphaned fair use though there are parts of the article which could do with other images. Hope you like how it is now. My next step will be working on BBC One 'Circle' idents, another article I renamed. So far I have tagged the images all in the .PNG format for deletion and will upload others in the .jpg format. Wikiwoohoo 22:26, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Good work so far. --tgheretford (talk) 22:35, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A question of portal

Hello, I have been putting a lot of work into Portal:BBC since discovering it. I was wondering if you knew how to change the colourscheme of the boxes since grey is frankly dull, I was thinking of maybe black with white text. Since it was you and User:Unisouth who set up the portal in the first place, I thought you might know. Wikiwoohoo 19:05, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unisouth did all the coding for that page, but you can change the colour of the boxes by editing the Portal:BBC/box-header and changing the relevant field to either the name of the colour (ie. Black) or the six figure HTML colour hexadecimal number the colour you want is. Hope this helps. --tgheretford (talk) 19:25, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And yes, I agree, grey is dull! --tgheretford (talk) 19:27, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help. What do you think of it now? Wikiwoohoo 19:29, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A lot better, though anything beats grey! --tgheretford (talk) 19:32, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A bolt out of the blue

Hello. You might be a bit shocked by this but I would like to ask if you would like to be nominated by myself to become an administrator. I believe you would make a great admin and where I've seen you around becoming active in policy and so on, I would like to put your name forward for adminship. What do you think? Wikiwoohoo 22:02, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. And thanks for the kind words and for nominating me in advance. --tgheretford (talk) 22:36, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Glad to hear it. Just before I actually do nominate you, I'd recommend you have a look at Wikipedia:Guide to requests for adminship to see if you really are ready at this time, as well as Wikipedia:Administrators' reading list and Wikipedia:Administrators' how-to guide to make sure you know what you would need to to become an administrator. Let me know to confirm what you'd like to do. Wikiwoohoo 14:59, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the links. I am aware and know most of what is said from those links, but I will have read through all the documents. I'll give you a defintive response once I have decided after reading everything. --tgheretford (talk) 15:38, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The following text was pasted from User talk:Wikiwoohoo:

Decision

I've made a decision about the request for adminship, and I have decided for the moment not to go ahead for nomination. My primary reason being (thinking it through for the last week) is that I should take time to focus on my cognitive behavioral therapy for my social anxiety, which needs to be the main priority at the moment (alongside thinking positively in social situations). I think it would not hurt as well for me to read through the Wikipedia policies and guidelines in my own time.

Treatment for that should be complete in a few months, and then if you wish, you can ask me if I wish to be nominated for a request for adminship.

Again, thank you for the kind words and the request for the nomination. Take care.

Gareth --tgheretford (talk) 18:57, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not a problem, I fully respect your decision. Best of luck with your therapy, you will make a great admin. Just say the word when you're ready and I'll nominate you! Wikiwoohoo 16:05, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nottinghamshire articles

Hi tghe-retford, you've made some excellent contributions so far on Wikipedia.... would you like to help me expand some Nottinghamshire-related articles??

I've just started editing them, the Perlethorpe article is my first one, and I'm doing other Nottinghamshire villages too...

Any help is appreciated.... --SunStar Net^talk 18:07, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

BBC one old logos

I have asked the originating user to add some text to BBC One logos. I moved them from the BBC One page as they seemed pointless. Also, I think the images have all been taken from other sites. ••Briantist•• talk 17:59, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The logos are covered textually in the BBC television idents anyway, so the BBC One logos article and the logos originally on the BBC One article are redundant. If any of the logos should go anywhere, it should be the BBC television ident article, as long as it stays within the WP:FAIR policy. --tgheretford (talk) 18:15, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed ••Briantist•• talk 18:20, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

BBC Two Idents

Hi. I started the article BBC Two 1991-2001 idents, and am planning to start up pages featuring the BBC Two Yellow Idents and Window Idents respectively.

After some thought and consideration I can see why a cleanup is required for the fair use images, on one hand but I fear the article would sound rather vague if all were described without being illustrated, but on another I think that other resources put in external links might suffice. Since my aim is to keep the page as clear and concise as possible, I wish to keep the images, but it depends on how others feel really. Cheers for your feedback. Psychic Potato 15:37, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Smooth jazz userbox

Just to let you know, I have created a userbox for smooth jazz. I recently noticed that you had your own, however, apparently, you are the only one using it. You may continue to use your own version, however, my version is posted on the list of music userboxes. My version is located at Template:User Smooth Jazz. Thanks. Andros 1337 17:29, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Replaced. I shall speedy my userbox under CSD U1. Thanks for the heads-up. --tgheretford (talk) 17:33, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Centralized video game navbox discussion

You previously expressed a strongly-stated opinion about a video game navbox or all video game navboxes in general, or perhaps I clicked on your talk page by mistake. Whichever it is, you are invited to offer your opinion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games#Navboxes III: Son of Navboxes. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 07:21, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

2007 British television phone-in scandal

A tag has been placed on 2007 British television phone-in scandal, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you plan to expand the article, you can request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material. To do this, affix the template {{hangon}} to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dreamweaverjack (talk • contribs) 00:14, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder if this make the whole Quiz channel article un-notable then? Let me look into it... --tgheretford (talk) 07:39, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's fine and passes WP:N, but needs sources and expansion - goody good good... --tgheretford (talk) 07:40, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ITV Play

Pasted from User talk:81.158.134.115 by 81.158.134.115: --tgheretford (talk) 13:54, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I removed some opinion you added from the article. The talk page should be where any proposals or disagreements with other editors should be discussed. Thanks. --tgheretford (talk) 13:15, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

that's what I'd hoped someone knowing how to would do, so put those comments, the other guy changing it totally & removing all the spiky stuff was wrong. you got it right :o) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.158.134.115 (talk) 13:38, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Editor review

I reviewed you. YechielMan 02:51, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jazz portals

Hi Tghe-retford, just want to compliment on your userpage and especially on your 'Smooth jazz portal' I just discovered as a sub-page. If there are more jazz portals hidden behind your (or someone else's) userpage let me know ok? We also made a jazz portal at the dutch Wikipedia. It's located here. Why don't you start an official jazz / smooth-jazz portal here? Or at least I couldn't find one yet when making the interwiki's. Only the French and German Wikipedia's have one. Jazzy greetings, Freestyle(NL) 09:27, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have done the jazz portal, may leave the smooth jazz one for now, at least until I come off my Wikibreak. --tgheretford (talk) 15:03, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, great work! Thanks for that. Enjoy your wikibreak for now... Freestyle(NL) 20:57, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

4 Digital Group

Dear Sir or Madam;

I have noticed that you take an interest in UK Broadcasting subjects.

As such, I wondered if I could consult your opinion on a WP:RM I am proposing here as the discussion is somewhat lacking in contributors.

Many thanks,

-- Fursday 19:48, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]