User talk:Sceptre/Archive 6

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: 03:27, 10 November 2024 (GMT)

Only 51638 articles (0.747%) are featured or good. Make a difference: improve an article!

edit

Sceptre's talk page: Archive 6

edit

Milestones

I took a cue from you and added a Milestones section to my userpage. But in the case of editing articles that have been recently deleted, wouldn't that make edits harder to track? I can't track anything after 1 for that reason..unless you have any suggestions? Thanks in advance - File:Ottawa flag.png nath a nrdotcom ^{(Talk • Contribs)} 20:24, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just put it on 1000 contribs/page (you'll have to manually change the url argument value from 20/500 to 1000), and put every 1000th article there Sceptr e ^(Talk) 21:26, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, is that how it's done. Thanks for telling me. - File:Ottawa flag.png

nath a nrdotcom ^{(Talk • Contribs)} 21:48, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

JavaScript comments

Hey... just a random comment. I stumbled across your userpage — nice design — particularly liked hiding the userboxes. Anyhow, I noticed the link to your MySpace profile and your comment there "MySpace filters out the hash sign. In Javascript, it's used as a COMMENT, not as some mad hax symbol (don't believe me? Check this)". Just felt compelled to drop you note and say that I'm sure the hash sign cannot be used as a comment in JavaScript... many programming languages (such as Perl) yes, as your link to Wikipedia shows... but not JS. JS comments are // or /* */ à la Java. Not sure quite why MySpace feels the need to remove # however, as I'm not sure it could be used for much malicious intent... _└^UkPaolo/_talk^┐ 15:30, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

doesn't do that much JS* Sceptr e ^(Talk) 21:34, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My RFA

Thanks for participating in my RfA. It passed with a final tally of 98/13/10, just two short of making WP:100. If you need my help with anything, don't hesitate to ask.

Naconkantari e|t||c|m 23:17, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Deathrocker starting again

Seeing as yew helped out with the problem between us last time, i thought id come to yew to sort the user out this time.

Recently the user added an infobox to the article for the band Moi dix mois, [1].

I corrected some gramma and restored the genres to what they previously where, before Deathrocker changed them [2].

Deathrocker reverted this, marking the revert as minor [3].

After reverting their edit [4], i posted to Deathrocker on their talk page, making a polite request concering the article, aksing them not to start a revert war and to post to my talk page if they have a problem with my edits [5].

Deathrocker deleted this [6], and then went on to revert me, inciting a revert war and making personal attacks using the edit summary [7].

I reverted this, noting that i had asked him not to revert war, and noted id be informaing an admin [8].

He reverted me again, making yet more personal attacks in the edit summary [9].

I reverted this again with some neutral wording [10], which then a user seemingly in the intrest of ending the edit war changed it [11].

Deathrocker however immediatly went on to revert back to his copy, violating 3RR [12].

At this point, i reverted his version again, leaving the note that the neutral attempt was good, but wasnt in Wikipedia prose [13].

Deathrocker then went on to attack me on the Moi Dis Mois talk page calling me an idiot, [14], to which i responded [15], which he then went on to revert the Moi Dix Mois article calling me a troll 'unwilling to partake in discussion on the talk page' [16].

He has also attempted to edit what i have written to you, changing what i have written to insult me [17], which i reverted, noting the vandalism [18].

This is the situation as i wrote this, i will add more as this continues. I beg for assistance in this matter. Ley Shade 16:44, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Myself and an other user who is editing the article; flowers, have agreed on a neutral version of the article. Leyasu continues to go against that concencus without any explination POV pushing a version to include a musical genre which she is a fan of (as she does in every other article on Wikipedia).

She has also tried to bullshit you here, I said she was 'unwilling to partake in discussion on the talk page' BEFORE she even attempted to discuss any points (at this point she was just vandalising the page, as myself and flowers were discussing the issue in depth, trying to come to a neutral concencus; which we did. Before Leyasu returned once again to vandalise the article, with her POV pushing.

Also claiming I was "attacking" her in the edit summarys, more rubbish as usual. - Deathrocker 18:00, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ON top of everything here, Deathrocker just made more personal attacks, and claimed im bullshitting even though i provided diffs and they, havent. They have also continued the revert war, even though Flowers has left the situation and Deathrocker is claiming to 'revert back to Flowers', yet is reverting back to their version. Irony, no? Ley Shade 18:06, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sentox Nerve Gas

Hey man, this is user:Waldo J. Cartridge, but you can call me Woody. I'm just getting back to you on that Sentox nerve gas page I started. I was a little annoyed when you deleted it, but I completely see your reasoning. Truth is, I only had about ten minutes online and I quickly wrote that one sentence up. I was planning on finishing it later.

-Woody

okay, okay, but if I put it back on with more info I don't want it to be deleted again.

Deathrocker commiting serial offences within 12 hours of being unblocked

I logged all of Deathrock's offences on a page from my user page, so only myself and Admins can edit it. The link is here, [19]. I urge yew to look into this matter immediatly. Ley Shade 21:45, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm stealing your talk page

In other words, congratulations. --Cyde Weys 23:23, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Aah, it's not stealing if you have the owners consent Sceptr e ^(Talk) 23:24, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Blast you got me there. Anyway, I ended up making some significant modifications but the end product doesn't quite look as good. You're welcome to see what I've done with it and maybe make some modifications :-P Cyde Weys 23:43, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I, too, have stolen your talk page code and modified it for my own purposes. :) --F a ng Aili 20:00, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Deathrocker/Parole/Bragging

If yew check this evidence page i made, he actually goes on to brag about having protection due to being pally with an admin, policys not applying to him, and the fact he can get me 'banned for violating parole'.

Ive blatantly violated it, and ive been counting, im over 40 reverts today, he is over 100!!!!.

Hes taking advantage no end, and just made a comment on the Gothic Metal talk page, that you dont exist!!! Ley Shade 23:26, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stressfulness

Sorry to hear that you are stressed out! I hope all your stress blows away soon (just like the image says... :) -- Nataly a 20:58, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

File:Esperanza.Fhloston.jpg

Esperanza hopes that your stress will blow away soon.

Thanks

Thanks for the Barnstar, dude!Finite 01:38, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:Rschen7754's 3RR block

May I ask why you blocked him/her? Were there any other reason than reverting User:SPUI's allegedly "joke" edits? (Please see WP:ANI for more details on this.) If there are not, I don't think he/she should be blocked. --Nlu (talk) 02:33, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The edits in question are reverting SPUI's request for proof of flat-out vandalism on his RfC. Those edits he made weren't vandalism, just in bad faith (The page was WP:CASH, and with Goal 1 being ??? and 2 (SPUI's) being Profit!, it's a bad joke, and a reference to the South Park episode Gnomes). There's a fine line, but I'm going to incline with SPUI that it wasn't clear vandalism Sceptr e ^(Talk) 11:09, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if it's not clear vandalism, I think the most can be said about it is that it's not clearly non-vandalism either. In which case, I don't think a block is justified. --Nlu (talk) 16:33, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure 3RR limits breaking of it to clear vandalism Sceptr e ^(Talk) 17:52, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:Locke Cole

Please reverse this deletion. Locke_Cole is a party to an Arbitration request, and there are edits in the page history that may be necessary. You may either blank it or redirect it to his talk page (even protect it, if necessary) after restoring. Thanks. -- Netoholic @ 20:50, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Deathrocker Open Sockpuppet Use

Deathrocker openly just used a sock puppet to make a supposed 'comment' on the ANI page. Not so much a comment though, as he goes on about how a lying idiot, you kiss my ass, i kiss your ass, and me and you should be banned for a month as well.

Just thought you might want to go add your two cence to the issue, or log it for Arb Com purposes.

Oh and to do with the Arb Case, remember to include Diffs for all your comments and statements. Ley Shade 21:43, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nice try Leyasu, I said if I am to be banned for a month, so should you (not Sceptre) as you were the other party involved in the war (official wikipedia policy states in revert wars both parties should be treated with the same punnishment), and I never said Sceptre has "kissed your ass"... I have said the other way round though.

I have not called Sceptre a "lying idiot" either... all I have to say on the matter is in my reply, whch was requested of me on the Aribtration page. - Deathrocker 11:10, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Attemp By Deathrocke To Have Us Banned Via Arbcom

In response to yew opening the Arbcom case, Deathrocker provided this, a clone of my evidence page in which he makes personal attack after personal attack about me and yew. He infers several times thoughout we are in a sexual relathionship as well, and threatens me with real life violance, albight at the end stating 'you make me concerned for my personal safety'.

Im not going to be bullied or intimidated, or hounded by this user, but is there anyway of blocking this user and his sockpuppets from having any access to my user page and talk page? Ley Shade 08:39, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My reply to this utter slew of slanderous lies by Leyasu can be read here: [20], you will notice, how I never said "you (Sceptre)" should be banned as also stated in the message above.

Aswel as NEVER suggesting the two of you are having any form of "sexual relationship", (ridiculous) Leyasu is just trying to suck up for the Arbitration case. Read the link I provided.

And also it states that I am concerned for my personal safety after Leyasu has stalked my every movement and logged it down in the shrine, it worries me, how is that me threatening him/her with violence? It isn't. Just more Leyies. See you in Arbitration. - Deathrocker 11:19, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Halifax, West Yorkshire GA nom

Howdy Sceptre, I just removed Halifax from the GA noms. I put my reasoning on the talk page. Don't take this personall--I know we're supposed to review from the top down, but I happened to click on Halifax. I'd appreciate your input (especially if you're a Star Trek fan) on Data (Star Trek), which I just nominated. Cheers. --F a ng Aili 19:07, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

tintin

thanks for thinking of me on that one, but I'm afraid I don't use userboxes. anyways, keep up the good work.--Alhutch 20:29, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A belated thanks from me too. Tintin (talk) 15:10, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

FYI

I am not involved in the current Arbcase involving User:Leyasu, but was involved in the preceding. First, let me start by saying that he ignored your warning on 03/20 [21] to not edit any more metal-related pages [22]; he has been continuously trying to start problems with me and other users since.

If he hasn't been blocked yet, please look into this: He has been reverting out a lot of my edits, erroneously calling them "vandalism" [23] (he has been warned countless times that abuse of this word on Wikipedia is a *PERSONAL ATTACK*) and placing his own POV in articles that has not been backed up by any sources. Post the ArbCom ruling he was imposed with a 1-revert-per-page-per-day rule, which he broke today.[24] [25] Today, he also called another user's good faith edit "made up garbage". [26] Definitely a personal attack. If you want any more examples or need some extra explanation, let me know. There's plenty. Thank you. --Danteferno 22:35, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Danteferno was violating WP:CITE which User Nargos apologised for on the Nu Metal talk page. Danteferno specifally gloated on the fact he had waited too revert mty revert. Danteferno was also warned by WesleyDodds about removing the cited information to which Danteferno simply ignored the warning. This was basically a case of cut and dry by Danteferno, and malicious baiting and Wikilawyering. Danteferno is also under suscpicion for being one and the same as Deathrocker, as a pattern has emerged of when one is blocked, the other appears, editing the same articles, and referring to things that have been done to the other which havent involed that one at all.

I will also note that the only time ive violated the Arbcom ruling has been Reverting Dante once after he violated a warning by WesleyDodds and Admin User:Spearhead, and violated WP:CITE, on the Nu metal article, gloating about how he had waited until id used my revert on the Nu Metal article, so he could get around me reverting him. So i reverted, what was also noted by WesleyDodds and Admin Spearhead as vandalism, only ro prove a point.

The incident on Black Metal, also wasnt a good faith edit, as the same user who had created the supposed subgenre, openly admitted to coining the term in violation of WP:NOT. The user was also found responsible to be recreating articles that had been deleted by AFD, and i have been again working with Admin Spearhead to keep an eye on these things, per his request for help on my talk page. Ley Shade 01:41, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

changes to Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace

You subst'ed {{unblock}} in Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace with the reason that "stop it showing at WP:RFU". While I agree that it should not show up on WP:RFU there is also a good reason to not subst it. If the template changes we would want to show the current template, not an old one. That would require it to be not subst'ed. I do not know how to solve this problem, but I would lean towards leaving it how it was. please respond on my talk page, or Wikipedia_talk:Template_messages/User_talk_namespace. Jon513 17:24, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg

Hi. I notice that you have blocked Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg, who may have violated the 3RR, but you have not blocked Lokiloki. Moshe_Constantine_Hassan_Al-Silverburg was given a 3RR warning at 13:16, 25 March 2006 (UTC), after which no further reverts were made, but he was blocked for 24 hours at 20:53, 25 March 2006 (UTC). Lokiloki was given a 3RR warning at 13:37, 23 March for making five reverts, acknowledged the warning, and continued to revert four more times. He has not been blocked. See Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/3RR#User:Humus_sapiens for details. —Viriditas | Talk 22:05, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sceptre, would you mind reconsidering Moshe's block? I can't see that there was a 3RR violation; rather, there were two edits, which both involved deletion, but that in and of itself doesn't make them reverts; and then two reverts of substantial edits made by an anon IP. See the discussion at WP:AN/3RR#User:Moshe_Constantine_Hassan_Al-Silverburg. Cheers, SlimVirgin ^(talk) 22:14, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't see the history. Oops :S Sceptr e ^(Talk) 13:47, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So your saying you wouldn't have blocked me if you saw the actual edits?- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 01:27, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Sceptre, this just has come to my attention. I find it very disturbing because this is not the first time you've abused your admin powers. Is it too much to ask for you to doublecheck before you do this?? ←Humus sapiens ^ну? 02:50, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks.

Thank you for dealing with this user, it's much appreciated.

However, User:70.53.109.79 appears to be the same user, as per this edit and should probably be blocked as well. — nath a nrdotcom ^{(T • C • W)} 23:03, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Esperanza Newsletter, Issue #1

Reach out
Reach out is a program aimed at allowing users to bring issues that they have had in Wikipedia to a listening, sympathetic and caring audience: "No one can know how we feel if we do not say. We cannot expect to get understanding if we do not ask for it. No one will dispute that sometimes life's issues are too much for one person. It is fair to say that sometimes Wikipedia's problems fall under the same heading. This is a place where you can bring the bruises that can sometimes be got on this project for attention."
Stress Alerts
The Stress alerts program aims at identifying users who are stressed, alerting the community of thier stress and works in tandem with the Stressbusters at trying to identify causes of stress and eliminating them.
Note from the editor
Welcome to this new format of the Esperanza Newsletter, which came about during the last Advisory Council meeting - we hope you like it! The major changes are that each month, right after the Council meeting, this will be sent out and will include two featured programs and a sum up of the meeting. Also, it will be signed by all of the Advisory Council members, not just Celestianpower. Have an Esperanzial end of March, everyone!

The last AC meeting (full log)
Future meetings are to be held monthly, not fortnightly as before. Bans and Access level changes (apart from autovoice) in the IRC channel are to be reported at the new log. In the IRC channel, there is going to be only one bot at a time. The charter requires members to have 150 edits and 2 weeks editing. Why this is the case will be clarified. A new Code of Conduct will be drafted by JoanneB and proposed to the Esperanza community. The NPA reform idea is to be dropped officially. Charter ammendments are to be discussed in future, not voted on. The Advisory Council is not going to be proposed to be expanded by the Advisory Council themselves, if others want to propose it, they will listen.
Signed...
Celestianpower, JoanneB, Titoxd, KnowledgeOfSelf and FireFox 17:47, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox shopping center

Hi User:Sceptre. Thanks a lot for your contribution. I saw your notice "Closed!" in the edit summary line and wonder what will now happen regarding your proposal. Will it change something or not? CeeGee 18:39, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I closed one of my inactive cases, not that case Sceptr e ^(Talk) 19:20, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again. Do we have any progress in this case? CeeGee 19:31, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure, I've been busy doing my discussion forum software over the past few days, so I haven't checked in Sceptr e ^(Talk) 19:34, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WP:PAIN

Hello. I have posted a comment on the Admin's notice board regarding WP:PAIN Backlogs which may be of interest to you, as you have been dealing with that page recently. Regards, MartinRe 22:37, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You are my friend

Hi. Yes, while what that userbox says is true, i was actually about to start removing some extra userboxes from my page in the next few weeks. I also plan to redesign my userpage. Thankyou for the userbox all the same, --Ali K 23:03, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Archive #5

Is it on purpose empty? Or just something else. feydey 02:36, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know what happened o_O Sceptr e ^(Talk) 09:03, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Response

Hey Sceptre. It's nice I'm getting popularity, but unfortunantly not enough for adminship :-( Oh well, maybe I'll retry ~~one day~~ no.. ~~soon~~ maybe.. ~~a few months from now~~ still not right.. ~~the year 2007~~, err... let's just say the future. Moe ε 00:21, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, request for Admin|PLEASE HELP!

I'd like to report User:Hatchet. He has been vandalizing many articles for months now. You can see (here) the list of his disruptions. Most of problems were on Cradle of Filth page. He has been changing the genre category entry which is already under heavy dispute. Changes are against WP:NOT, WP:NPOV, and WP:POINT. I have properly warned him but he did it again. If you could take some measures concerning this because I added him to WP:ANI but they didn't replyed. Many fellow editors would be grateful and it would make their work easier. Thank you! (talk) Death2 11:06, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RFC on Deathrocker

I regret to advise you that this RFC page has been deleted as it was not certified by two or more users within 48 hours of its creation. Stifle 11:08, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Category:User:Sceptre's friends

I (and a couple of other admins) think it would be a good idea to delete Category:User:Sceptre's friends, since it's not an appropriate of a category. That's ok? If you don't agree I guess we will go to MfD.--Commander Keane 08:52, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Meh, ok Sceptr e ^(Talk) 11:00, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

YO

I notice you have MySpace, and MSN, so I figured I might as well send you a freind request and added you to my MSN. Plus, I like your user page, and I don't see many admins my age very often. ---WGee 00:50, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's a good idea, I should as well (but I'll ask first). —

nath a(?)nrdotcom ^{(T • C • W)} 09:50, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Deathrockers Old Tricks

To let you know, Deathrocker just blanked his talk page again to start his Unblock campaign [27]. I dont know who unprotected his page but the ban doesnt seem to have gotten the point across to him, at all. Ley Shade 21:39, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My RfA

Hi Sceptre. Just a quick note to thank you for your support in my RfA, which recently passed 62/13/6. I will do my very best live up to this new responsibility and to serve the community, but please let me know if I make any mistakes or if you have any feedback at all on my actions. Finally, if there is anything that I can assist you with - please don't hesitate to ask. Cheers TigerShark 03:53, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

?!?!?!

"You, apparently, are a homophobe Sceptre (Talk) 13:53, 5 April 2006 (UTC)"

And the meaning of perpetuating this moron's vandalism on my page is? Xtra 14:06, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was directing you to his personal attacks on you. I'm sorry if you took this the wrong way. Sceptr e ^(Talk) 14:08, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You could have worded it better than "apparently you are a homophobe", because this is all I have been gettig from this nutter and his friends all day. The root of this problem, I believe, and with only circumstantioal evidence, is user:PSYCH. See the history of my talk page. Xtra 14:11, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This goes back a long time and a similar thing happened around the time I took out an arbitration against PSYCH about a year ago. He just has a problem with me and posts on other sites telling people to vandalise my page etc. (or is doing it himself). Xtra 14:15, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How about re s-protecting my page, till this wave passes. Xtra 14:19, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gee, your user page has been vandalised only 14 times less than mine. Xtra 14:23, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

Hi - Please be careful when reverting to a last version by another anon IP. They often do two in a row from different IPs, knowing admins commonly do this. Thanks. [28] --Stbalbach 16:17, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Whupps

I blocked User talk:216.48.128.13 about eighteen seconds after you did, but for a longer time period. Please adjust if you feel a shorter block is appropriate. --CBDunkerson 12:03, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]