User talk:Sceptre/Archive 58

DYK for I Dreamed a Dream

 * You didn't just nominate it, you also contributed to the article in its infancy (not to mention that it was your idea to put it up for DYK to begin with). Thanks Sceptre! Zephyrnthesky (talk) 22:31, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Bot request for Category:Terrorists subcat emptying
Hi, I noticed that you posted a bot request at WP:BOTREQ for a bot to clear all of the subcategories of Category:Terrorists, which has been deleted. I'd be happy to complete this&mdash; it's really simple&mdash; but I checked the subcats involved and they appear to be empty. Please read what I wrote on that request. Regards, The Earwig  (Talk &#124; Contributions) 03:15, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

congrats
congrats for winning the uphill battle in CAT:TERRORIST. I gave you a snowball's chance in hell, but apparently, hell froze over. I suppose we will be entitled to a second serving at DRV, but still, it is a very good first step. Thanks for your unflinching stance and stamina on this one. Jasy jatere (talk) 07:06, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Let me know if it shows up at WP:DRV. I think your stance was wrongheaded and the damage to our indexing of terrorist related information will not recover, but the debate was appropriately closed, and I'll be willing to say so. Ray  Talk 00:34, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

MP's expenses row
Hi Sceptre, I removed your comment just for now because all I/we am/are currently looking for it suggestions. We will get into the voting later - hope you dont mind. regards--Vintagekits (talk) 13:28, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

whaaa...?
What on earth has been going on on my page? I haven't even been DOING anything lately....why am I the target all of a sudden? Gee, really makes me want to dive back into the wikiworld. :P K. Lásztocska talk 17:15, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Goodness, I think I see what you mean. Great welcome back, Wiki.... K. Lásztocska talk 23:07, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject User Rehab
Would you be interested in joining this project? We need more editors who share a burden for rescuing promising editors who have gotten into serious trouble because of behavioral issues. IF (a fundamental condition!) they are interested in reforming and adapting to our standards of conduct, and are also willing to abide by our policies and guidelines, rather than constantly subverting them, we can offer to help them return to Wikipedia as constructive editors. Right now many if not most users who have been banned are still active here, but they are here as socks or anonymous IPs who may or may not be constructive. We should offer them a proper way to return. If you think this is a good idea, please join us. -- Brangifer (talk) 04:21, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject User Rehab
Feel free to put this anywhere on your user page. To edit this box for improvement click here

I Seek To Help &amp; Repair! (talk) 07:56, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

WikiCup Newsletter XVI
Delivered for the WikiCup by  ROBOTIC GARDEN  at 09:16, 18 May 2009 (UTC). To report errors see the talk page.

Pfeh - teach me for giving the benefit of a doubt at WP:WikiProject User Rehab. Undoubted troll sock whatever of someone. I sent it to AIV, but if you get there first, enjoy. - 2/0 (cont.) 23:15, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Thirteen (House)
Yes. It's a serious proposal. Stop reverting my proposal to merge this with House (TV Series). This amounts to vandalism on your part.George Pelltier (talk) 17:43, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
 * You're not assuming good faith. This is extremely disruptive to the Wikipedia project. Follow the rules and assume good faith on changes like merges. I'm not exactly sure why you think that a merge proposal is "not serious". Even if you had proof this seems extremely ridiculous on your part.George Pelltier (talk) 17:56, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
 * AGF is not a suicide pact. Sceptre (talk) 18:20, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Pokemon!!!
I should've known better than to Pokemon Wikiproject? ;> – xeno  talk  18:47, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Argh. WP:BEAR. That's not the first time I've gotten shortcuts mixed up. I've gotten the Doctor Who WikiProject, Dead Wikipedians, and Dead Link Patrol mixed up before. Sceptre (talk) 18:57, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
 * That bear page could use some expanding... I want to put something in there about a fish... – xeno  talk  19:01, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

May 2009
Disruptive warning template removed C.U.T.K.D   T  12:30, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
 * CUTKD; don't be silly. You nominated that page for deletion after deliberately ruining it, please be sensible about this. ╟─TreasuryTag►hemicycle─╢ 12:32, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
 * CUTKD - Stop being so pathetic and just get on with some decent editing rather than being deliberately disruptive! Jenuk1985  |  Talk  12:38, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Calling someone "pathetic" is a personal attack btw, consider yourself lucky you are not getting a warning for that. Yes I edited the WP:BEAR article before establishing the mfd. All I did was to add further explanation of what the essay means, as was consensus according to the talk page: none of it was solely my own opinion. That being the way it was, and regardless of my addition, I still feel it is a candidate for deletion. Scepte, I have reverted the warning you left on my talk page, (as permitted by WP:TALK) as it is downright insulting. The fact that you have speedied the mfd is also grossly inappropriate, as not only are you not an administrator, but you are clearly personally involved in this case. Back off! As such I will be reverting your closure of the mfd, and reporting your behaviour to WP:ANI. I'll notify you below when I'm done. C.U.T.K.D   T  16:40, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Boring. ╟─TreasuryTag►hemicycle─╢ 16:46, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Ok, if you find it boring you no longer have to involved, I've taken it to ANI, so the administrators can deal with it. If they come to the same conclusion as you then fair enough. C.U.T.K.D   T  17:03, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Thirteen (House)
Hey, you and User:George Pelltier seem to be in a content dispute over the moveproposal tag on Thirteen (House) While I do not think the proposal is a good idea myself, could you please leave the tag up until the discussion on the talk page is closed? Oldlaptop321 (talk) 15:02, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
 * No, because it's not a serious proposal. Hell, it should be closed now per SNOW. Sceptre (talk) 15:14, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

ANI
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. C.U.T.K.D  T  17:02, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Heads-up
I'm not sure what to make of it, but you are mentioned at Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2009_May_21. Regards,  Skomorokh   21:09, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

WikiCup Newsletter XVII
Delivered for the WikiCup by  The  Helpful  Bot  at 20:07, 23 May 2009 (UTC). To report errors leave at message here.

Requests for arbitration/Fringe science amended
The following motion was carried 9 to 0 (with 2 recusals and 1 abstention) further to this request to amend the Fringe science arbitration case:


 * 1) Kaldari, Sceptre, and Durova are granted permission to act as proxies for ScienceApologist by making edits to the optics article, its talk page, and any process pages directly related to the optics featured article drive.

The remedy has been entered onto the arbitration case page, at #Further motion following Request for Amendment (May 2009).

For the Arbitration Committee, AGK 14:18, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

WikiCup newsletter XVII.V
This is just a quick reminder that the round ends this Friday, May 29, 2009. I wanted to let you guys know the current standings. If you are very close, but not close enough, work as hard as possible these next two days. Pool leaders are listed as usual, and under the 10 wildcards, are competitors that are still fighting for a spot. Also, if you currently have any un-reviewed GAN's up and you'd like them to be reviewed and counted for this round, you must place them on the appropriate thread of the WikiCup talk page.


 * Pool A
 * 1) 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁷󠁬󠁳󠁿 Shoemaker's Holiday (647)


 * Pool B
 * 1) 🇨🇴 ThinkBlue (247)


 * Pool C
 * 1) 🇸🇪 Theleftorium (455)


 * Pool D
 * 1) 🇩🇰 Candlewicke (539)


 * Pool E
 * 1) 🇲🇽 Durova (479)


 * Pool F
 * 1) 🇨🇭 Sasata (961)


 * Current Wildcards
 * 1) 🇺🇸 Useight (393)
 * 2) 🇮🇸 Scorpion0422 (372)
 * 3) 🇹🇭 Rlevse (329)
 * 4) 🇯🇵 Wrestlinglover (307)
 * 5) 🇰🇭 Paxse (285)
 * 6) Ottava Rima (248)
 * 7) Flag of Albany, New York.svg Mitchazenia (226)
 * 8) 🇮🇪 Juliancolton (181)
 * 9) the_ed17 (179)
 * 10) 🇮🇲 J Milburn (168)
 * 11)  Bedford (156)
 * 12)  Gary King (147)
 * 13)  97198 (142)
 * 14) 🇱🇺 Ceranthor (111)
 * 15) 🇮🇳 Tinucherian (106)
 * 16) 🇻🇺 Matthewedwards (98)

GARDEN, iMatthew :  Chat  , and  The  Helpful  One   The  Helpful  Bot  00:53, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Torchwood Institute GAR
I have nominated Torchwood Institute for a community review of its GA status, which can be found here. Since you are a main contributor of the article (determined based on this tool), I figured you would be interested in weighing in on the discussion. Please comment there for ways of improving the article and helping it to maintain its GA status. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 03:41, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

James Hunter Blair
Regarding this revert: just because it was described as being violation of a ArbCom sanction (technically, it wasn't), doesn't mean it should be reverted on sight. Do you have any evidence suggesting this gentleman had this title you reverted to? Because the three obits I found do not mention it. . Rockpock e  t  07:41, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Then move it back. The only reason I reverted it was because it was done by a user banned from moving such pages. Sceptre (talk) 13:39, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

WikiCup Newsletter XVIII
Delivered for the WikiCup by The  Helpful  Bot  at 14:42, 31 May 2009 (UTC). To report errors leave at message here.

Fantasy Black Channel Review
Hi there, I was wondering if you have had the chance to review the FAC article as per your comment on the talk page. Don't mean to rush you or anything but it's been filibustering for a while now with few editorial reviews and I would like to see a conclusion or some more editing advice. Thanks. Rafablu88 (talk) 18:36, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I'll get too it sooner rather than later. Although I am understandably busy over the next few weeks, I'll try and fit it in. Sceptre (talk) 22:21, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
 * That's great, thanks. Rafablu88 (talk) 08:34, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Karen Gillan AfD
Hi. I see that you speedily kept Karen Gillan on the grounds of WP:SNOW using a non-admin closure. I am uncertain whether this was an appropriate application of non-admin closure. WP:NAC explicitly says that WP:SNOW should not be used for non-admin closures, and generally favours leaving discussions open for at least 5 days, whereas you closed this AfD down in a mere 23 minutes. I think you were probably right in that this article was never going to get deleted, but I thought it might be useful to discuss the approach taken in this case. Bondegezou (talk) 10:38, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

IPBE Removed
Hello Sceptre, just so you know, I've removed your IP Block Exemption as it appears that the block that was originally affecting you when I placed it has expired. If you are having any further difficulty editing, please let us know. Thanks! Hers fold  (t/a/c) 16:24, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm on study leave from school, and that's a school IP, so... yeah. Sceptre (talk) 16:31, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Mediation at WP:FICT
I'm suggesting we ask for mediation to help build teh guidance at Notability (fiction). What I propose is that a mediator be the only person to edit the project page itself and be the one to guide discussion and discern consensus. I've proposed it at Wikipedia_talk:Notability_(fiction). As a past participant in the lengthy debates, I'd appreciate your input and hopefully your agreement. Hiding T 10:11, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

GA Reviews for Matt Smith (actor) and Planet of the Dead
Just wanted to let you know I've begun GA reviews on both Matt Smith (actor) and Planet of the Dead. Cheers! Vicenarian (T · C) 20:27, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
 * As a follow-up, I'm afraid I had to fail Planet of the Dead, as there appear to be some legitimate edit conflicts still ongoing. Renominate after consensus has been reached. Thanks! Vicenarian  (T · C) 11:50, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I've passed Matt Smith with flying colors, and am going to take my second look at Planet of the Dead. Cheers, Vicenarian  (T · C) 22:12, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Alternative Music Newsletter for May 2009
SoxBot (talk) 10:54, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Re: Jacob
It's possible, which is why I chose not to warn the user or anything of the like. Andrea ( talk ) 21:57, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Re: Peacock Terms
You're going to have to explain how those aren't peacock terms before just removing them and claiming they aren't. They clearly are. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Avoid_peacock_terms —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rustydangerfield (talk • contribs) 20:50, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

WikiCup Newsletter XIX and XX
Delivered by The  Helpful  Bot  at 22:02, 13 June 2009 (UTC) for the WikiCup. To report errors, please leave a message on the talk page.

Centralized discussion about Macedonia
I have noticed you have previously shown interest in the naming of the Macedonia-related articles. I want to inform you about the opening of Centralized_discussion/Macedonia discussion. I'd like to ask you if you will be interested to add your proposals found in Talk:Macedonia in the discussion pages or contribute in other ways with your input there? Thank you. Shadow mor ph ^"^ 17:24, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Fantasy Black Channel FAC
Hi, sorry to bother you but the FAC people are being really anal and want supporting users to additionally state whether they believe the sources to be reliable because Ealdgyth left them to the editors' discretion (no idea why especially as I fulfilled his criteria). Could you pop back and add your thoughts about them to your support? Thanks. Rafablu88 (talk) 15:08, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

RfD nomination of Chuck Norris Messiah Juice
I have nominated for discussion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. gordonrox24 (talk) 19:33, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

AN/I thread about copyright
Hi, I just made then reverted the following comment at AN/I. I'm posting it here because this is mostly a suggestion for you...


 * (unindent) It appears pretty clear at this point that no administrative action will be taken on the underlying incident. I will not comment on the merits of the original complaint. A suggestion for the future to Sceptre or anyone else... the command that we remove copyright violations without delay, and the 3RR exception, really apply only to clear / blatant / significant / undisputed (take your pick) cases of copyright violations. If it's not an obvious case, and there's good faith disagreement, best not to get into an edit war even if you think you're right. If you are right, surely someone else will take note, or else you can report it to the copyright notice board, the article talk page, or some other place. So, maybe wrap it up and be a little less trigger-happy on the undo button? HTH, Wikidemon (talk) 23:15, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 09:23, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

RE : Requests for arbitration/Obama articles
This arbitration case has been closed and the final decision is available at the link above.


 * ,, , and  are admonished for their edit-warring. Furthermore, they shall be subject to an editing restriction for one year. They are limited to one revert per page per week (except for undisputable vandalism and BLP violations), and are required to discuss any content reversions on the page's talk page.
 * In addition, and  are topic-banned from Obama-related articles for six months, including talk pages.
 * and are not to interact with each other, including replying or reverting of each other’s actions.  and  are not to interact with each other, including replying or reverting of each other’s actions.

Non-compliance to the above are grounds for blocking for the duration specified in the enforcement ruling.


 * is admonished for his part in the edit warring.
 * and are reminded to be civil when dealing with hot-button and controversial situations.
 * is reminded to be more civil when dealing with users and to not use talk pages as a forum.

The probation on articles relating to Barack Obama will be reviewed by a group of involved and non-involved editors and administrators to see how effective it has been. The process will last two weeks. After the two weeks elapse, the working group will provide their findings to us and the community, and will outline how the article probation will run in the future.

- For the Arbitration Committee, Mailer Diablo 15:38, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

WikiCup Newsletter XXI
Delivered by The  Helpful  Bot  at 22:34, 22 June 2009 (UTC) for the WikiCup. To report errors, please leave a message on the talk page.

Merge proposal
Talk:List_of_Wii_games. Please partake in the merge proposal. Thegreyanomaly (talk) 01:23, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia_talk:Centralized_discussion/Macedonia
We're holding a preferential vote to decide what proposals should go forward to the community and narrow down the vast selection that we currently have. Since you've commented at the above discussion, I thought you would appreciate the opportunity to participate Fritzpoll (talk) 08:27, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Macedonia article naming
Since you have in the past taken part in related discussions, this comes as a notification that the Centralized discussion page set up to decide on a comprehensive naming convention about Macedonia-related naming practices is now inviting comments on a number of competing proposals from the community. Please register your opinions on the RfC subpages 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5.

Shadow mor ph ^"^ 21:11, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Precedence
I don't consider precedence an argument on WP. To what extend does WP consider precedence an argument? Thanks. -Pecoc (talk) 17:57, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Precedence? You mean precedent, right? It is actually a persuasive argument; guidelines are built on precedent and/or previous practice. Sceptre (talk) 17:59, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Correct. Well if it is not a policy or guideline, I see arguments to precedent as weak. -Pecoc (talk) 18:24, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

WikiCup Newsletter XXII
Delivered for the WikiCup by  ROBOTIC GARDEN  at 21:55, 28 June 2009 (UTC). To report errors see the talk page.

WikiProject Alternative Music Newsletter for June 2009
SoxBot (talk) 22:48, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

WikiCup Newsletter XXIII
Delivered by – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 16:47, 5 July 2009 (UTC).

GA reassessment of Flying the Flag (for You)
I have conducted a GA reassessment of this article and have found a few minor referencing concerns which may be viewed at Talk:Flying the Flag (for You)/GA1. Thanks. Jezhotwells (talk) 23:03, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the notification, but I had already noticed it on my watchlist. If I don't do anything towards it in a few days, poke me; I'm pre-occupied with writing a brand new article at the moment, so I may forget this one. Sceptre (talk) 01:37, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks
I see you didn't have an easy life on WP either during the time I was gone. No, I don't think that was the problem, since there are dozens of editors at least as "invested in [their] political views" still pretty active in EE topics (and probably in other topics). The problem was my big mouth and the fact I called a spade a spade a bit to often for WP admin's taste. I also hoped WP had changed, but in the short time since I've been back I've already seen gross assumptions of bad faith, tendentious commentaries about fellow editors and even editors opposing a suggestion just because it came from me. WP is still too myspace-like, were sentiments between editors are more important that the content itself (I a short incursion in a topic that isn't part of my main editing interests I've seen otherwise correct editors supporting articles that go against all the "what Wikipedia is not" for reasons that had little to do with the actual content), so that even the most neutral editors have to chose a "side" to continue their productive editing. I think we'll just have to wait until en.WP becomes mainstream in EE.Anonimu (talk) 11:57, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Silent Alarm FAC
Hey there. If you have the time, could you have a look at my new FAC Silent Alarm like you did for Fantasy Black Channel and if possible give a verdict? It's been there for a while now and we're trying to get a consensus or obtain further advice. Thanks. Rafablu88 20:36, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Re: Skins
Cool, thanks for that. And we may or may not end up with things like "X (Skins series 3 episode)" after series 4. I'll try and dig up some references for Cassie and get back to you later! :) — 97198 (talk) 04:18, 15 July 2009 (UTC)