User talk:StrangeloveFan101/Archive 3

Thank you for the coffee

Good to have you with us again. Happy editing! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:50, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, and you're welcome! StrangeloveFan101 (talk) 17:52, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Content

Hi, Im just asking if it will be ok to keep the content It looks constructive and notable on Max Caulfield, I mean the user who originally made it isn't active anymore. 194.193.223.146 (talk) 00:49, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not too sure why you're asking me @194.193.223.146:. I would recommend asking the folks at the Teahouse perhaps. Good luck!StrangeloveFan101 (talk) 01:34, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(watching:) The content is in the history, you can just copy from there and create something if you think it's woth the effort. It would need good sources to survive, the present ones look horrible to me, bare urls, wrong formatting, and I can't judge reliability - not my field. I know of a character article up for deletion. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:17, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your thread has been archived

Hi StrangeloveFan101! You created a thread called Question about the posters of certain Star Trek films at Wikipedia:Teahouse, but it has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please create a new thread.

Archival by Lowercase sigmabot III, notification delivery by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} (ban this bot) or {{nobots}} (ban all bots) on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:06, 3 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Easter or whatever you celebrate

or: the resurrection of loving-kindness --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:12, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, @Gerda Arendt:. Happy Easter to you too! StrangeloveFan101 (talk) 18:14, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Today, Le Concert Spirituel. Nice to see your GA work! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:45, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

... even if failed for the moment. When I can't get a composer's article where I want it, I write about his composition, today see Credo, or this is the day from Psalm 118. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:29, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, @Gerda Arendt: StrangeloveFan101 (talk) 11:36, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'll go for GA for Inge Borkh, dyk? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:38, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Gerda Arendt: I think you can do it! StrangeloveFan101 (talk) 11:39, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I hope so. The last one failed, though. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:45, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of The Tree of Life (film)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article The Tree of Life (film) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Rusted AutoParts -- Rusted AutoParts (talk) 18:40, 20 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Dr. Strangelove

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Dr. Strangelove you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Chiswick Chap -- Chiswick Chap (talk) 11:00, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, a human here. It's a great article, but there is a little work to be done to complete its progress to GA status. I'd be glad if you could let me know (here, or better on the GA1 page) when you plan to do this. All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:21, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Dr. Strangelove

The article Dr. Strangelove you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Dr. Strangelove for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Chiswick Chap -- Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:01, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of The Tree of Life (film)

The article The Tree of Life (film) you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:The Tree of Life (film) for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Rusted AutoParts -- Rusted AutoParts (talk) 14:01, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

May

Thank you for article improvements in May! - DYK my list of people for whose life I'm thankful enough to improve their articles? - I have a FAC open, one of Monteverdi's exceptional works, in memory of Brian who passed me his collected sources. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:51, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, @Gerda Arendt:! Vespro della Beata Vergine is impressively written. Good job to you and the others who contributed there! StrangeloveFan101 (talk) 21:01, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

today a composer pictured who wrote a triple concerto for violin, harp and double bass, in honour of the composer who died and my brother who plays double bass. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:58, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"What is thy bidding my master" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect What is thy bidding my master. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 June 24#What is thy bidding my master until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. OcelotCreeper (talk) 16:24, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:TocaBocaLogo.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:TocaBocaLogo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 19:01, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:58, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Unban request (moved from JzG's talk page)

I've taken the liberty of copying the discussion from there to here, since Guy is currently inactive. --Floquenbeam (talk) 20:07, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Over a year back, I put myself into some trouble, and one of the things it resulted in was being banned from talking about infoboxes. For the sake of being in 100% good standing with Wikipedia and Wikimedia, may I be unbanned from talking about/mentioning infoboxes? I will follow the guidelines laid out by WP:CIVILITY, I will not start fights in discussions related to IBs (or any other for that matter), heed to ArbCom sanctions, and not mention the editors I have been told not to interact with.

Even though it was a while ago now, I am sorry for what I did. I will not let it happen again.

Thank you for your time. StrangeloveFan101 (talk) 15:39, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Guy is inactive on this project at the moment, and wont be able to unblock you. But, I think you were unblocked some time ago. Read your own Talk page Archive that you linked to above again. The last section of that page, and the fact that you could post here supports this! -Roxy the grumpy dog. wooF 17:01, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

He's unblocked, yes, but still indefinitely topic banned from discussing infoboxes. That's what he wants Guy to lift. As Guy is inactive I'll ping User:Floquenbeam who was also involved in the unblock request and see if he has any thoughts. Personally StrangeloveFan I don't think it's a good sign that you just went back to Talk:Stanley Kubrick and started talking about the lead photo, which seems to be gaming the ban to me.-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 17:24, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at your link, that's a lot of respected editors involved. I think I'll just slink away, and hope nobody notices. -Roxy the grumpy dog. wooF 17:35, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Pawnkingthree, I didn't really stop to think about how me opening a discussion in the lede of image of Kubrick and then coming here to ask about getting unbanned from IB discussions might look fishy. I'm sorry I came off that way, and I understand how it looks devious. That was and is not my intention. I'd like to be in good standing with Wikipedia, and I know people (or even you) may not support my support for IBs, but I would like to be able to simply say "Support" when the time comes (I should've put that in my first message here. Sorry about that.). If I do so, I will not put myself into any arguments or any one's discussions regarding IBs within the talk page for that matter. Like I said, I know I'm on thin ice when it comes to this kind of topic, and I know there's nothing I can do to change what I did. I'm just asking for a second chance. Again, I'm sorry for what I did last year. StrangeloveFan101 (talk) 18:47, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I believe I'm the one who proposed those unblock conditions. In Guy's absence, I'll look later today at StrangeloveFan101's recent contribs and see if I'm comfortable removing the first condition. If so, I'll do it myself. If not, StrangeloveFan101 can still request an unban at AN. --Floquenbeam (talk) 19:20, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Any further comments/actions I make about this will be at User talk:StrangeloveFan101. I suggest people move this discussion to there. --Floquenbeam (talk) 20:05, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(end of material copied from Guy's talk page)

OK, I've reviewed SLF's edits since the unblock with conditions, and have the following comments:

They do not seem to have gotten into trouble in any other subject.
They have not interacted with the people they aren't supposed to interact with.
They have not been discussiing whether an article should have an infobox or not.
They have been making edits/having discussions about lede images, many of which are inside infoboxes. A case could be made this is a violation of the "no infobox discussions" condition. However, I'm not inclined to do that here, because it is clear they are discussing ONLY the image, not the infobox. It would have been better to seek clarification, though.
I note that in the current discussion at Talk:Stanley Kubrick, they are not personalizing the dispute or derailing the conversation.

So, unless someone comes up with a good reason not to, I'm probably going to remove the topic ban from SLF's unblock conditions tomorrow. If I do so, it will be made clear that a resumption of that behavior is going to result in a swift re-ban. No series if escalating warnings first.

Anyone watching want to agree/disagree before I do this? I am relatively confident that if Guy were around he wouldn't object to me doing this unilaterally, instead of going to AN. --Floquenbeam (talk) 20:24, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Go for it. It's been a year and no red flags that I can see - although they returned to the Kubrick talk page they haven't been disruptive. No need to go to AN on this, I feel. Pawnkingthree (talk) 21:55, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

OK, since no one has opposed, and the topic ban can be fairly easily reinstated, I'm rescinding the first unblock condition. You can now participate in infobox discussions. Just to be clear, because of the previous problems in this area, you won't have the same cushion others might have. A quick re-imposition of the topic ban, or a block, will follow any rudeness, attempts to dominate the discussion, or otherwise disrupt it. No escalating series of warnings. So bend over backwards to participate in an un-criticizable way. As an aside, I don't know why anyone would want to participate in an infobox discussion...

The other two conditions are still active.

I cannot find these unblock conditions logged anywhere besides the history of your talk page, but if they're also listed somewhere else, I'll modify it if you point that out to me. --Floquenbeam (talk) 13:19, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Floquenbeam. I appreciate it. StrangeloveFan101 (talk) 13:22, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. --Floquenbeam (talk) 13:26, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Cr1TiKaL

Hello StrangeloveFan101 , i noticed that you added an infobox image for Videogamedunkey using his logo under fair use and i was wondering if you could do the same for Cr1TiKaL using his logo: https://static.wikia.nocookie.net/youtube/images/3/3b/BigMoistCr1TiKaLLogo.png/revision/latest?cb=20210131063054. I tried to do it myself but the upload process was a bit too complex for me as a newbie and i was wondering if you could do it instead. Thank you in advance if you decide to do it. Yousuckcharlie (talk) 11:05, 5 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]