Jump to content

User talk:TreasuryTag/Archives/2011/Jun

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Re:Judoon

It just didn't seem notable to me. They're mentioned in the synopsis as it is, and as opposed to the recurring characters that are mentioned in continuity (which, I feel, may be better left out of the plot synopsis) they are only linked to preious Judoon appearances by the species, not the plot or the specific Judoon seen. I won't contest a reversion though. U-Mos (talk) 18:15, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Miliband

Hi, it seems ok now, I hope you agree, thank you for presenting the citations that asserted the notability of the addition. Regards. Off2riorob (talk) 20:20, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Good work, both of you. --Dweller (talk) 20:29, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
Thanks to both :) ╟─TreasuryTag►sundries─╢ 20:58, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 6 June 2011

Would you believe

in my day to day life, I use the word "moron" freely and meant with out (much) malice? It's a bad habit picked up from a lecturer. I'll cool it on here.~ZytheTalk to me! 23:54, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I think that would be best! ╟─TreasuryTag►hemicycle─╢ 07:18, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Alternate account

Please verify that user:Treasurytag is an alternate account of yours and not an impersonation. Thanks - My76Strat talk 14:46, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Nope, it is indeed an impersonation account I'm afraid: second this week. ╟─TreasuryTag►Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster─╢ 14:47, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

People should note that I have just created TreasuryTagg (talk · contribs) with a scrambled password, since that seems to be one likely future guise my 'new friend' may attempt. ╟─TreasuryTag►Regent─╢ 14:53, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

The Cheshire Unicorn

Please read WP:BITE. Andy Dingley (talk) 16:15, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Please read WP:SPAM, WP:NPOV, WP:COPYVIO and WP:CSD. ╟─TreasuryTag►Regional Counting Officer─╢ 16:48, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marriage Guidance Counsellor

This post to WP:VPP is considered canvassing, specifically it is a form of campaigning. It does not matter that you did not include a link to the AfD itself, this still falls afoul of Wikipedia:Canvassing#Inappropriate notification which specifically includes: "Soliciting support other than by posting direct messages, such as using a custom signature with a message promoting a specific position on any issue being discussed." Your technique isn't novel or a new idea. Please don't do this again. --Tothwolf (talk) 22:23, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Your comment seems like a rather desperate violation of WP:AGF... Could you suggest a better method of seeking advice to deal with the ongoing disruption at that AfD? I would note that I didn't link to it (yes, it could easily be found in my contributions, but that's kind of unavoidable) and worded my message completely neutrally: if you disagree, perhaps you could suggest alternative phrasing.
Reading WP:CANVASS#Campaigning, I see that campaigning is "an attempt to sway the person reading the message, conveyed through the use of tone, wording, or intent." None of those seems to apply here; in fact, your whole comment above is outrageous and I would ask you to justify it further or apologise. ╟─TreasuryTag►First Secretary of State─╢ 22:26, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

File:Pontificality of prelates.jpg

Great picture. Could you add a source as to where you found it? Also, it should be moved to Commons. Cheers, postdlf (talk) 16:59, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Added details as requested. I'm afraid I'm not terribly skilled at all this interwiki moving business, but do feel free yourself! ╟─TreasuryTag►prorogation─╢ 17:05, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
I normally just tag them with Template:Movetocommons, so that way a bot or someone batch processing can take care of it with greater ease. Otherwise, I have to save a local copy to my hard drive, upload it to Commons, copy and paste the text from the WP page, and then delete the original... I'm only a volunteer, after all. postdlf (talk) 17:20, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Editor review

Good to see you went and did the WP:Editor review, but you could also use {{Editor review}} template or the {{Editor review sticker}} to advertise the fact. The ER page is a bit low traffic, and that would help ensure you actually get some feedback. Rd232 talk 20:44, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

 Done ╟─TreasuryTag►international waters─╢ 20:47, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 13 June 2011


CSD notification

The page William paul shao looks like it may be a valid CSD, but I prefer not to delete a page unless the creator has been notified. I understand that sometimes automated tools fail to do the notification for some reason. Not sure if that was the case, but could you make the notification?SPhilbrickT 16:03, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Given that the creator has commented on the article talkpage, I suspect that they're aware already! Best, ╟─TreasuryTag►person of reasonable firmness─╢ 16:04, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
Heh, I almost sent you a message regarding another page, then I said that doesn't sound like TT, and I saw the editor had been removing notices. So this time I double checked to make sure the editor hadn't removed the notice from their talk page and failed to check the article talk page. Mea culpa.--SPhilbrickT 16:11, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
No problem. I'm normally content to blame automated tools anyway, but in this case... ;) ╟─TreasuryTag►pikuach nefesh─╢ 16:12, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Which AFD?

Which one is the one that is alluded to from VP? All the other posters seemed to know it.TCO (talk) 22:26, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

What? ╟─TreasuryTag►quaestor─╢ 22:30, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
Oh—for Marriage Guidance Counsellor. ╟─TreasuryTag►Woolsack─╢ 22:30, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Dolma and User:BobbleheadWater - Twinkle error?

Hi - you reverted this edit [1] as vandalism when it clearly isn't - the editor has all of four edits and it looks like he was making a good faith attempt to draw attention to the fact the statement in question might not be true - a more experienced editor would probably have marked it "citation needed". You then issued an "only warning" for vandalism. Did you misclick something while using Twinkle? Exxolon (talk) 15:49, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 June 2011

WP:CIVIL

Please try to be more civil in discussions. "He must either be incompetent or intentionally disruptive" are not the only options when people disagree with you. Insinuating that I can't read is also ridiculous and uncivil. — BQZip01 — talk 18:44, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

At no time did I insinuate that you could not read. Please get your facts right. ╟─TreasuryTag►without portfolio─╢ 18:45, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

FYI

Just an FYI, I've no desire to revert your edit, but group photos of leaders at summits are called "family photos". It may sound twee, but I'm afraid that's how they're referred to. You can see its official use here, here and here.- J.Logan`t: 19:01, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

MarsMediaGroup

Hi, I was considering deleting this article but noticed that the page creator had not been notified of the speedy. Was this a TW error? Fæ (talk) 08:08, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

The creator has commented on the article talkpage, contesting deletion, so I would imagine that they are aware of the speedy tag! Best, ╟─TreasuryTag►pikuach nefesh─╢ 08:56, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Sorry

I feel I owe you an apology. You were right, she is unfriendly and unthankful. --87.79.226.158 (talk) 09:19, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cuban Hebrew Congregation

I know--but you know what I was saying. You and Sarek practically cohabitate at ANI (sorry, couldn't resist), and it's perfectly within reason to assume that Sarek followed the link to the AfD you placed there, as I did. You two have enough marital difficulties already (sorry, couldn't resist, again) and little barbs don't help. As for the AfD, thanks for doing that legwork. There's probably a real interesting article in those references you dug up. Drmies (talk) 19:59, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Open letter to all watchers, regarding TT's editor review

Hello You'll probably have noticed that TT has opened an editor review (link is at the top of this page). You may well be wishing to contribute, but, like User:Exxolon, be unsure how to phrase things without causing disruption. TT seems to genuinely want to reduce the heat around his editing. Further, he has pledged not to edit the ER page again, so there'll only be heat if you apply it yourself.

Simple (wise) advice from User:SarekOfVulcan:

  • "Keep it neutral and short, that's what I tried to do."

Simple advice from me:

  • Focus on tangible and "doable" things TT can do to address the problems other users find with his edits
  • Avoid generalities, personal attacks and lengthy diatribes
  • Take a big, fat dose of AGF before you save your changes and check that what you've written is really constructive

If anyone finds that useful or helpful, I'm delighted. If it ultimately works and thereby helps improve Wikipedia, that's best of all. --Dweller (talk) 10:20, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks Dweller, entirely agreed. I'd just like to expand and confirm one point: I will not edit the editor-review page again. There will be no badgering, no responses, no "actually that's not true," nothing. But that places a responsibility on those commenting to not abuse that freedom to leave needlessly nasty comments immune from reply. But basically what Dweller said :) ╟─TreasuryTag►Acting Returning Officer─╢ 11:01, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
  • TT, I truly hope you did not take my comments as mean, or vindictive, or nasty in any way. They honestly were not meant that way. I was only trying to point out some things that appeared to unnerve some of the other editors. I do understand if you consider me one of the "usual suspects", and if you feel insulted in any way, then I'll gladly steer clear of your talk page, and try to avoid any direct contact in the future. I'll also say that from my point of view, you've been avoiding many of the drama areas recently. I commend you for that. Cheers and best. — Ched :  ?  19:17, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
    Erm... no, I didn't have any problem with your – very fair – comments. (In fact, I don't think I've even had anything to do with the ER since you posted them?) Whatever made you think that? ╟─TreasuryTag►quaestor─╢ 19:19, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
    Well, I noticed a couple comments that I thought were a bit rough on there. I know it's easy to feel down and frustrated when folks start picking you apart and finding fault. To be honest TT? There have been quite a few times I've had a very good chuckle at some of your replies; You do have a tremendously sharp wit that I enjoy at times. But I can't admit that on WP. I just don't enjoy telling someone they should do this .. or should not do that - I'm not good at it, and I have enough of my own faults. I think you're a good person, and a huge asset to the project, and I didn't want you to feel frustrated or down because of anything I might have said. — Ched :  ?  19:29, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
    There are indeed some comments on the ER and beyond which seem less than constructive; I predicted this, which is one of the main reasons that I vowed not to actively engage with it at all while ongoing! However, there are also comments which I by no means include in the previous sentence, and yours was definitely one of them. Best, ╟─TreasuryTag►inspectorate─╢ 19:32, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
  • Comment to prevent premature archiving. ╟─TreasuryTag►Odelsting─╢ 13:14, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:TreasuryTag/Archives/2011/Jun&oldid=1146027273"