User talk:Sceptre/Archive 46

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: 18:25, 9 November 2024 (GMT)

Only 51640 articles (0.748%) are featured or good. Make a difference: improve an article!

edit

Sceptre's talk page: Archive 46

edit

Back to the Future timeline

Hi, the deletion review closed with "Non delete closure endorsed. The discussion below doesn't show a clear consensus for or against the merge, but that can be hashed out editorially" which I would think means that a merger should be discussed before doing so. That's why I removed the redirect. Thoughts? Hobit (talk) 01:06, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

- Sorry, I don't understand your response. Could you explain what the closer meant by "The discussion below doesn't show a clear consensus for or against the merge, but that can be hashed out editorially". My reading is that the merger discussion should occur editorially, not that the merger was endorsed. Could you explain how you are reading it? Thanks, Hobit (talk) 01:22, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think I understand what you are saying, but one of us is mis-reading the closer's comments. I'll ask for clarification. Thanks! Hobit (talk) 01:27, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, sorry to butt in, but I can't find a deletion review, or any indication that there was one. (Had I known, I would have contributed.) Can you just point me to it so I can read it? Thanks! --Karen | Talk | contribs 03:59, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, that was fast! But it's not there, unless somehow it';s hidden from me. Listed are: Yo, Retarded Animal Babies, Institute of Design IIT, Steve_Pavlina, and List of fonts by Ray Larabie. No Back to the Future timeline. It didn't turn up on previous or next day, either. Am I going mad? --Karen | Talk | contribs 04:08, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah! There it is! Thank you very much!--Karen | Talk | contribs 04:10, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. My intention in closing the DRV was to channel further discussion on to talk pages rather than deletion related fora since actual deletion was no longer on the table. Given the state of the discussion I would say that the merge should be considered an editorial decision on the part of the closer rather than an official decision. Still it has substantial support and probably shouldn't be reverted absent further discussion. Eluchil404 (talk) 00:53, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Marc Chase

Hello! Just FYI, I've been working with the author to fix the article. S/he is brand new to WP, so go easy on him/her! Cheers!--Sallicio ^{$\color {Red}\oplus$} 04:16, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image deletion

Just curious at the several screen cap images that are being deleted per your request? Is there a reason to G7 them? Thanks! -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 05:38, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sigh. The articles are worse off for the lack. IMO, anyway =D -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 18:04, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Daleks in Manhattan.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Daleks in Manhattan.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) 12:18, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

On 28 March, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article The Unicorn and the Wasp, 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.

--Wizardman 13:07, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Images, damnit!

Hiya; just to let you know, take a peep at my new thread at WT:WHO... —TreasuryTag—t—c 13:36, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi; thanks for your support! I was just wondering... should I respond to the others' statements (Majorly's in particular...) or leave it as it stands for the Arbs? —TreasuryTag—t—c 16:25, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Cabals MFD

Thanks, I should have merged them myself, it's much appreciated George The Dragon (talk) 23:00, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gooddays

I've archived the AN thread for trolling. I just wish I could do something more about it, but people hate me for not being cheery enough... create another thread about him if he continues. Sceptre ^(talk) 20:48, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I understand :-). However, in this situation, you had to make a decision either to stand on the red side or the green side, and personally I think you picked the right side. Thanks for the help. ShoesssS ^Talk 23:25, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

alas, he continued, & has now been reblocked, 24 hours. Sceptre, could you either start a subsection or a new section or whatever and link so as not to highlight the trolling--I'm not quite sure how to set it up and I rely on your greater experience. DGG (talk) 23:48, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW, I've noticed him too (see his talk page, and his message to me, which made me laugh out loud). Everything, absolutely everything his is tagging, is related to Slovenia. It's some kind of nationalist pissing contest, but I can't figure out what the heck he thinks he's accomplishing with the mass tagging. Antandrus (talk) 00:22, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RE:User:Proxy User

The user in question has 364 edits and has been editing since November 9. Blocking the user for a user name policy, imo, would not serve to help the 'pedia. If someone feels that the user name should be changed, then I think going and asking the user would be better than blocking him/her. I hope this explains my opinion. Cheers. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) 03:50, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Name change for Screw/Bolt article to Screw

I'm not sure why you did this. I was the one that changed the title to Screw/Bolt because the article is about screws and bolts and not the other uses of the term screw. It might have started as a general article about all the various meanings of screw but it is not that now. There are several other articles that deal with the term screw in a more general sense. Your comment made it seem like you preferred Screw/bolt because of capitalization. Is that correct? Perhaps you would have preferred Screws and Bolts as the title to the article?

Davefoc (talk) 07:41, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the WikiProject Doctor Who Assessment Committee

Sceptre...Thank you for agreeing to be part of the Assessment Committee of WikiProject Doctor Who. Please stop by the talk page to discuss how the articles will be assessed. To denote your participation in this committee on the main project page, you can use the following image next to your user name. Image:Gnome-searchtool blue.svg

Thank you for taking the time to assess these articles. - LA @ 22:56, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again...There is a discussion on the importance of Doctor Who articles on the Doctor Who Assessment talk page. Please stop by and comment as this may have an impact on articles you have already assessed. - LA @ 21:05, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rambutan

Hi, do you think I could ask what this was about? —TreasuryTag—t—c 15:15, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I see... I thought it was probably that, except the email said "Porcupine" and your post said "Rambutan" :-) —TreasuryTag—t—c 16:48, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Macedonia Naming Dispute

Hello, I just received your note about reverting the edits I made to this page. In fact I did use the edit summary box, and would like to ask that you undo your revision as I do feel it was constructive from a critical and scholarly point of view. The content goes DIRECTLY to territorial integrity, and furthermore it was an official and public statement by a government official relating a critical an crucial aspect of the history of the region, providing the essence for understanding the depth of the difficulty, and which is historically verifyable and correct. Thanks for the input, but I kindly ask you revert your edit to the addition I made. Please respond. Regards, 207.112.23.122 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 00:21, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

re: switchfoot revert

Hi, I am new here and don't know if I am even talking to you correctly, so forgive me if I am wrong.

I believe my switchfoot page edit was constructive. I filled in the edit summary to try to explain that. I own and run the website www.Learning2Breathe.com, which is where the lyrics and song-stories are linked up to (on the main Switchfoot page, and other related pages). I would simply like others to know that there is more to my website than just the lyrics. I thought my edit was a solution. Please let me know if I am violating some rule with this. --Concretegirl2 (talk) 04:15, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

thank you

Thank you for the information, I wasn't aware of that. However, I did not choose to put my lyrics and song-stories on the page in the first place. I am happy to be of help, just thought I would direct others to the rest of my site in the process.

On a similar note, I was wondering why there are NO fansites in the External Links. Is it possible to add a sub-category in the External Links for fansites? I know of a couple that update regularly and are nice quality. --Concretegirl2 (talk) 04:20, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand why you instant on characterizing the CBC protests as "minimal" when more than 10000 people have signed an online protest. There is a live protest happening in Vancouver. If you insist on "minimal", provide your source. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.157.184.185 (talk) 05:21, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

?

Not meaning to sound nosy or anything, but I take it that this is an April Fools joke? FusionMix 22:19, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think so, I think he's trying to suggest that Aprils fools day pranks have finally gotten to him and made his work on wikipedia unbearable. He's been off-line all day, which is a rarity. No doubt he'll be back in a week though, he'll miss the place too much Devilmaycare (talk) 22:31, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah. I don't particularly blame him, the main page was an atrocity. FusionMix 11:13, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Figured it was a joke, just wanted to make sure. You might have just coined a new word there, never heard of 'Masterrolling' before. Hope you feel better. FusionMix 12:59, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RE:AFD

Semi-serious? Delete rickroll? I'll have no part in that. :P Also, I could've sworn The Game was passed through AFD as a delete consensus... humph. Oh, and instead of having the image I made you be tiny, how about I make it into a banner? The disadvantage is it wouldn't necessarily always be the width of the page (as different viewers have different resolutions), but you could probably center it or something... Anyway, I could just crop out a wider, shorter piece. Cheers, Master of Puppets _{Call me MoP! :)} 02:33, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was also wondering the same thing. Was this AfD supposed to be serious? If so, I'll move it back to its proper location. --Ixfd64 (talk) 06:27, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I reopened it and commented, as you intended for it to be serious (though I think it should be speedy kept :P). Oh, and I'll work on your image soon. Cheers, Master of Puppets _{Call me MoP! :)} 06:57, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As for the image; if you want to remove the ones that are there now, I'll upload a new version. I don't want to upload now, since I don't want to hunt through your userspace, and if I didn't remove them the large width would blow up the page. Master of Puppets _{Call me MoP! :)} 07:07, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done.

If you want me to make any adjustments I've stored all the files, so feel free to suggest away. Cheers, Master of Puppets _{Call me MoP! :)} 09:51, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mate, I just rickrolled your AfD. :D dihydrogen monoxide (H₂O) 11:54, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rickroll

There is a reason for nominating articles for deletion. When you nominated the article for deletion, you did not point out any reason. Articles have a reason to be deleted. If you have reason for the nomination, explain it. Mythdon (talk) 10:03, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cabals

There is a new discussion regarding the cabals which were brought up at MfD last week. I've started an informal consensus survey which I hope will help us come to a conclusion on whether the cabals should remain deleted. You can express your opinion at this page (link). Thank you. - Diligent Terrier (and friends) 12:49, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Awarding Barnstar

		The Barnstar of Good Humor
		Aprils fools day was a blast. Loads of users lightened up to have good old fashion fun. I want to thank you for taking part in editing this page in particular and even though I may not know you, embrace the same talk pages, or even edit with you in the near future, I'd like to award you this Barnstar for making Wikipedia a fun environment in which to contribute. Until next year. :) SynergeticMaggot (talk) 13:14, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sakotis!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Here's a Sakotis for you! This cake promotes WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving this cake to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Make your own message to spread WikiLove to others! Happy editing! Fernando Buceta (talk) 10:50, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		Thanks so much for helping me out with my template. You saved the day. нмŵוτн τ 19:06, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Alternative music Newsletters

The Alternative music WikiProject Newsletter
Issue 12 - March 2008

"Expressions of irony through clothing are very important.'"- Carlos Dengler
Project news

"Just Like Heaven" (song), Flea (musician), Bernard Fanning, Odyssey Number Five, In Rainbows and Silverchair reached featured article status in the past month! Additionally "This Charming Man", a former Featured Article, has been re-promoted to FA status. Well done to WesleyDodds, NSR77, Grim-Gym, the various WikiProject Powderfinger editors, Atlantik, Ceoil and Dihydrogen Monoxide.
The discography of Silverchair reached featured list status during the past month. Well done to Dihydrogen Monoxide.
Surfer Rosa was featured on the Main Page on March 21.
We collaborated on In Rainbows, Vitalogy, The White Stripes, Blur (band) and Accelerate (R.E.M. album) during the past month.
During the month of March, Nine Inch Nails live performances, Oasis (band), Boredoms, Hoodoo Gurus, and Vitalogy were promoted to good article status.
This month's "Recommended Alternative Album" is Editors - An End Has a Start (2007).

New members

NewMarqueeDayMoonRising, Thundermaster, and SuperNeek joined the alternative music fold during March.

Editors

User:WesleyDodds

If you missed last the previous newsletter, you can find it at Wikipedia:WikiProject Alternative music/Newsletter/February 2008.
You are receiving this newsletter because you have signed up for WikiProject Alternative music. If you wish to stop receiving this newsletter, or would like to receive it in a different form, add your name to the appropriate section here. This newsletter was delivered by the automated Giggabot (talk) 09:51, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Forest of the Dead/River's Run

See [1] - not vandalism by WierdEars at all, though he did add the title badly! Stephenb (Talk) 18:15, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Doctor Who newsletter, March 2008

The Space-Time Telegraph

The WikiProject Doctor Who newsletter

Issue 1

March 2008

Project News: We have five new participants: Sm9800, Seanor3, T saston, Type 40, Jammy0002.; One editor has left the project: StuartDD.; The Doctor Who portal has expanded to increase the number of selected stories to 33.

Articles of note

New featured articles

None

New featured article candidates

Voyage of the Damned (Doctor Who) (FAC)

New good articles

Delisted articles: None

Proposals: A proposal for changing the layout of the episode pages is under way here.; A discussion about the formatting of the cast lists in episode pages is under way here.; A discussion to move United Nations Intelligence Taskforce to UNIT is under way here.
News: The Torchwood project has become a task-force under the project's scope.; The Torchwood series 2 finale airs on 4th April, and the 4th series of Doctor Who will start to air on 5th April.

For the Doctor Who project, Sceptre ^(talk) 19:18, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You have received this letter because you are on the newsletter recipients list. To opt-out, please remove your name.

Sceptre, thanks for doing this. I haven't been very active in the project lately, and it's great to have this to keep up-to-date with developments. (I assume you're the one behind this, since you signed the newsletter delivery?) Anyway, it's a great idea. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 19:20, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

small note on newsletter

thanks very much for sending me the Dr. Who newsletter. i really appreciate it. however, one small note; my user name happens to be Sm8900, not SM9800. Just wanted to mention that. it's not really a big deal though. thanks very much for all your work and efforts. thanks. see you. --Steve, Sm8900 (talk) 22:27, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Doctor Who (series 4) redirected by User:Tim!

Tim! has redirected the article to the List of Doctor Who serials, calling it "redundant". Just thought I'd mention it. — Edokter • Talk • 10:17, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

thanks, get well soon

Hi Will, thanks for the welcome back. I hear that you're under the weather. I hope you feel better soon. --Kyoko 16:27, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Same from my end: hope you're feeling better soon, Sceptre. Anthøny 16:33, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's good to hear. I'm doing fine, thank you. --Kyoko 16:48, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Doctor Who (series 4)

Well done. A much improved summary of tonight's episode. --Brian R Hunter (talk) 23:03, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Classic! Well done! —TreasuryTag—t—c 11:11, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Star_Wars#GA_review

Talk:Star_Wars#GA_review all done Gary King (talk) 04:16, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dumb question

Whats "NTWW nom" mean? Google says "NOT THE WEST WING". Is it my nom of him, or some nom of his on an article? MBisanz ^talk 06:23, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And it would mean Not the Wikipedia Weekly... MBisanz ^talk 17:28, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Davros not humanoid?

Your change to remove speculation over the 1/2 dalek on the Series Four page was correct. The justification should have been POV speculation. Davros clearly fits the description. He was of course a Kaled that evolved into The Emperor. This supposed fact of his return should not appear in wikipedia until a reliable source can be quoted. --Brian R Hunter (talk) 18:41, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes indeed. In Remembrance of the Daleks he is not humanoid. But the unnamed episode is rumoured to include a return to Skaro, so Davros is likely to be in his earlier incarnation. This looks to be another superb series, I'm happy to wait and see but others will always want to speculate. Keep up the good work. --Brian R Hunter (talk) 18:51, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah I see what you mean. But the speculation was to what had been seen the shadows. The villain had the bottom half of a Dalek, while its top half looked like it could be human [2]. This is exactly what Davros looked like albeit quite horribly scarred and crippled . The Doctor of course does not refer to any Daleks as part-human as this would assign emotional characteristics they do not have. --Brian R Hunter (talk) 19:06, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why, it's Hitler himself!

— $PЯINGεrαgђ 03:54 8 April, 2008 (UTC)

I…um…learned from Elara. ;) It's interesting, because sometimes (as you've noticed) I use slightly looser language on the net than I would in real life, but in real life I only swear when, well for example if somebody was threatening my daughter or sister or mother or pretty much anyone in my family, I would likely lose it and indulge my taste for the verbal colour palette. Apart from that, any young kids could listen to what I say during the course of my day. — $PЯINGεrαgђ 18:29 8 April, 2008 (UTC) P.S. I liked your reference to Mengele, very appropriate. ;) I only said Hitler because the vandal put his name up there. :P

Imperial triple crown jewels

Thank you for contributions to the project, Great work, especially on List of Doctor Who serials - quite comprehensive and well-sourced at that. May you wear the crowns well. Cirt (talk) 11:40, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I hope you feel better. Cirt (talk) 11:42, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Use of rollback

Please remember that rollback should only be used to revert obvious vandalism. Using it to revert edits that are the subject of a content dispute, like this revert, isn't appropriate. Thanks! Stifle (talk) 11:53, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Doctor Who/Davros

Have you ever being involved in Doctor Who episodes? The only way to get the point across is to R(B)I anyone who puts in these inane rumours, as it gets beyond a joke. Hell, I've violated 3RR many times on List of Doctor Who serials (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) just to keep it at featured list quality (I don't know how the hell I hoodwinked everyone into getting it promoted). Sceptre ^(talk) 11:55, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've seen it come up increasingly on WP:RFPP lately. I've protected Doctor Who (series 4) until after Saturday's episode, which should hopefully help. But you don't get a free pass over 3RR because they're featured, good, or because he's the Doctor, or because he's a Time Lord, or because he's from the planet Gallifrey in the constellation of Kasterborous, or because he's 903 years old, or etc. Just like every other currently-running series, people are going to try and put in the most current information. Stifle (talk) 12:01, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is a shame it had to be protected as it still needs some copy-edit work. It can be hard constantly educating editors that speculation and POV does not belong in wikipedia. Sceptre, do not be discouraged, you do a lot of very useful work. The only advice I can offer is to engage those misinformed editors on the articles talk page, you will be backed in your efforts to keep the quality high. We need to distinguish the real vandals from those who just get it wrong. Keep taking those deep breaths and allow others to help you. --Brian R Hunter (talk) 12:17, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FreeContentMeta and derivatives

Best take this up with you instead of the mostly unwatched Template talk:FreeContentMeta - there's really no reason for the boxes to be that shade of green. It's immediately eye-grabbing against the faint blues, greys, and whites of normal backgrounds. I know the need to disambiguate sister projects and free wikis, but this is the wrong way to do it: we should be advertising our wikis first. I've edited the DW wikia box as a bold test to make it look different but not too different: see Template:TardisIndexFile. Thanks, Sceptre ^(talk) 18:36, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't particularly care what color is used, provided that it stands out from the shade of grey used for the sister project templates. Your new attempt is a step in the right direction (compared to your previous attempt), but I still don't think that the distinction is obvious enough unless the two boxes are viewed side-by-side.

Incidentally, while I appreciate the desire to promote free-content wikis in general, I'm not entirely sold on the idea of allowing these boxes to exist for non-sister projects (and I definitely agree that the Wikimedia sites should come first). Alternatives have been proposed. —David Levy 18:57, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

NFCC 8 revisited

You were involved in this discussion, so I thought you might be interested in Wikipedia talk:Non-free content#Criterion 8 objection. howcheng {chat} 21:07, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: FAC records

Again, we'll have to get in touch with Guinness, but kudos to you! —97198 talk 06:28, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Explanation

Nishidani has a history of disrupting conversation with 19,000 char off topic comments that usually use anti-Zionist sources and anti-Israel soapbox to boot (sometimes accompanied by bigoted comments also). Since he is not a party to discussions and his commentary was completely off topic, I believe it would be best to remove this offtopic commentary. To clarify, non relevant information is a common disruption. Regardless, I consider you to have final descision on this subject, now that I've clarified it.
With respect, Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 12:26, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

MfD Close

Good substantive close but bad technical ;-). You need to add {{subst:mfd bottom}} to the bottom of the discussion page, the purple background now goes all the way to the bottom of the MfD page! Also, you really should put "(non-admin closing)" right before your signature. Also, don't forget to remove the MfD tag and place an old mfd tag on the talk page. I'll give you a few minutes to fix them and if I don't see anything I'll take care of it. Cheers.--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 14:05, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't realize that you'd been an admin before, so that this was more likely a goof than lack of knowledge of the process. Sorry. I fixed the mfd bottom and removed the mfd tag from the nominated page. Obviously since this is a redirect we can't put mfd old on it very well, so that point is moot. You still should add (non-admin close) though. Cheers.--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 14:19, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]