This user has autopatrolled rights on the English Wikipedia.
This user has extended confirmed rights on the English Wikipedia.
This user has page mover rights on the English Wikipedia.
This user has pending changes reviewer rights on the English Wikipedia.
This user has rollback rights on the English Wikipedia.
This user has template editor rights on the English Wikipedia.

User talk:Sceptre/Archive 40

From WikiProjectMed
Jump to navigation Jump to search

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: 08:05, 28 April 2024 (BST)

Only 50361 articles (0.739%) are featured or good. Make a difference: improve an article!

from Erath from FireFox from Cool Cat from Dr. B from Holocron from Brandmeister, originally rotating from Phaedriel from Sergeant Snopake from Ding Xiang from Chili14 from Sergeant Snopake from Springeragh from Springeragh from Chili14 from Springeragh from Springeragh from Springeragh from Springeragh, originally rotating from Springeragh from Springeragh from Springeragh from Riana on behalf of User:E@L on behalf of E@L from Glygly from Felixboy from Springeragh from Darksun, originally rotating from Springeragh from Sharkface217 from Acalamari, originally rotating from I (minor barnstar) from Porcupine from RFerreira from GundamsRus from Orderinchaos from Josiah Rowe from thedemonhog from KillerChihuahua from Bearian from So Why from thedemonhog from Jenuk1985 from Chillum from TheMightyQuill from Ruby2010 from Cirt from Kudpung


edit 
Sceptre's talk page: Archive 40


Jack Chick

I'm not sure if you're planning on making more cuts, but I'm working on the sourcing as we speak. Would you mind not cutting anything unsourced out for a little while? It'll probably only take me an hour or so. Natalie (talk) 18:02, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I know, but some were sourcing issues, and I have actually found sources for those claims. Natalie (talk) 18:11, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Template:User fr-s

A tag has been placed on Template:User fr-s requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{transclusionless}}</noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 21:05, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for Deletion

You do not have that much stuff written on this page, so I apologize if I am not suppose to post here. I am considering editing the Oxford Round Table entry, but do not if it is worth it if it will be deleted. When will it be nominated for deletion again? PigeonPiece (talk) 23:11, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ben Linus

Heya! did you tag this article with the Template:Underconstruction because of my edits or are you going to work on it now?--Yamanbaiia(free hugs!) 18:58, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, i have some useful links over at my sandbox. I was sort of getting really into this article so if you want help with anything just give me a call, i have some experience with fictional character's articles.--Yamanbaiia(free hugs!) 19:07, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm gonna keep on editing the article, i don't agree with your version (like separating by seasons, see GA Boone Carlyle and FA Nikki and Paulo). If afterwards your version looks better then so be it. Cheers.--Yamanbaiia(free hugs!) 20:27, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. I am just starting with the article, cleaning up first (so as to have a wider perspective of everything) and making things tighter afterwards.--Yamanbaiia(free hugs!) 20:48, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FC Sion

I think you should've checked the history before adding that speedy tag. Philip Trueman (talk) 19:45, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Sceptre 3

Hello Sceptre, would you like me to delete Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Sceptre 3 for you? You declined this nomination, and keeping this page around looks like this RfA was unsuccessful when in reality it never even happened. Acalamari 20:19, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted. :) Acalamari 20:32, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted warnings

Not sure why you deleted a bunch of warnings here, so I replaced them. Jeepday (talk) 14:47, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

February 2008

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Amy Winehouse, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Esprit15d • talk • contribs 13:57, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Amy Winehouse

Hi. You just used your rollback tool to revert an edit on Amy Winehouse by User:Esprit15d. As I am absolutely sure you know, this is not on. Please don't do that again. Sam Korn (smoddy) 14:03, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It takes you about two extra seconds to use an edit summary. You even have the useful "undo" tool. There is absolutely no reason to engage in such callous incivility. Sam Korn (smoddy) 14:09, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You are quite capable of being polite. Sam Korn (smoddy) 14:14, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Winehouse

First, I would like to apologize for issuing a vadalism warning to such an experienced wikipedian. That said, I think its not out of line to clarify that I honestly didn't check your history, but simply thought your edit one of several that happens weekly if not daily to this vandal target, particularly such a mass deletion that has an edit summary of "don't." I have been a very active editor on this article for some time now, and have likewise fought the tabloid, BLP wars. While I still disagree with you deletion, I will join the conversation on the talk page.--Esprit15d • talk • contribs 14:19, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

UAA report

What's with this? Rudget. 17:25, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You probably expected that question. :) Even still, what's the problem? Rudget. 17:30, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

mccain controversy

i'd recommend 'tagging' your initial comment with Delete, as that appears to be the format this process uses. Anastrophe (talk) 19:51, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I approve of this Monty Python reference

I'd be happy to help, since having separate articles for these characters is pretty much disastrous (while I'll admit that I'm not a major player of the games, I'd hazard to say only Gordon can merit a separate article.) Since there are less characters to worry about, I'd say structuring the article like Characters of Halo, with the more prominent characters, regardless of the game they appeared in, appearing farther up the list. Solves the issues for cross-game characters. David Fuchs (talk) 20:20, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pretty much. I can help you with content and organization, but since I'm not a HL player I can't be as capable of doing sourcing. David Fuchs (talk) 20:37, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Amy Winehouse

As an editor involved in the recent content issue regarding this article, please see the talk page for discussion of the article and the events of the past 24 hours. Wildhartlivie (talk) 22:42, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination - U.S. Journalism scandals??

Hi...why not improve the article rather than nominate it for deletion? There is a lot of good (and some questionable) content at the article, and a talk page entry there (I made) to start a discussion. Can we talk about it there before attempting to delete it? WNDL42 (talk) 22:49, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Admin Coaching Re-confirmation

Hello, previously you expressed interest in participating in the Wikipedia:Admin coaching project. We are currently conducting a reconfirmation drive to give coaches the opportunity to update their information and capacity to participate in the project. Please visit Wikipedia:Admin coaching/Status to update your status and move your entry to the Active list. Also, please remember to update your capacity (5th table variable) in the form of a fraction (eg. 2/3 means you are currently coaching 2 students, and could accept 1 more student). Thank you. MBisanz talk 09:31, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is not helpful

[1]. Don't do that again. Lawrence § t/e 00:10, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Problems?

Will, I agree with you maybe 99% of the time but this episode was troubling. Are you under some pressure that could be affecting your judgment? Raymond Arritt (talk) 03:45, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Sceptre. You have new messages at Thedemonhog's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Image:Itchy.jpg

Thank you. Arch O. La Grigory Deepdelver 16:10, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Blanking, deletion, merging, redirects, moving and others

"You're one of the only 'pedians I know who actually knows what deleting is in Wikipedia terms" (what you said to Lara). Would you mind discussing what I said at the DRV? I said: "Redirecting without merging, and then claiming that it wasn't deleted? That is blanking of discussion, pure and simple, and the technical difference between that and deletion is purely semantic. People signed comments they put on that page. They don't expect it to be only accessible in the page history."

  • Blanking - this is simply editing a page and removing the content and saving as a blank page, or blanking parts of the page (generally reserved for cases where no editing of the content takes place - either replacing or adding stuff - new editors often call this 'deletion')
  • Blanking with a notice (this is blanking the page and replacing with a notice - sometimes combined with protection)
  • Redirect - this is blanking a page and replacing with #REDIRECT (history is still available and content can be unblanked if the redirect is not protected), the difference is that people following a link get taken to the redirect destination, and don't always know enough to get back to the page with the history.
  • Moving - this moves an entire page and its edit history to a new title, leaving a redirect behind. This is the way pages are renamed on Wikipedia. If the redirect is deleted, it can be difficult to track down the full movements of the page, especially after several moves. Sometimes the redirect is turned into a disambiguation page. Pages can be move-protected.
  • Merge - this can be done to pages as a whole or sections of a page or the text on a page (raises GFDL concerns, which are usually met by naming the merge destination and source page in the edit summaries either end). The text in question is cut from the source page and pasted into the destination page. S-merges involve shortening the text before merging. A full cut 'n paste merge need to leave a redirect behind that contains the edit history and thus needs to be preserved (sometimes the redirect is turned into something else). Cut n pasting merging is a common method of archiving talk pages, and sometimes referred to as 'archiving' or 'moving' content.
  • History-merging - in rare cases, if the edit histories don't overlap, or to repair cut 'n paste moves, history merging may need to be performed. Done by admins and can be complicated.
  • Deletion (the ordinary and boring deletion button - only admins can see the page and its history)
  • Salting (protecting a deleted page to prevent recreation - often combined with a notice, but now more commonly achieved by cascading protection of redlinks on a list)
  • Revision deletion (can be done by admins to delete revision of a page with less sensitive information than that dealt with by oversighters, or, more commonly, to carry out various forms of history merges and whatnot - admins can see the deleted revisions in the page logs)
  • Oversight (need special permissions in the software, can sometimes be detected by page versions not matching up, but generally is effective at hiding sensitive information)
  • Developer root access - the ultimate in deletion (wiping the servers - might still be copies on the mirrors or database dumps if the deletion is known about)

Did I miss anything? Do I get an award? :-) Carcharoth (talk) 16:31, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What the heck?

This seems to me like a pretty out-of-line edit. I know you are a former admin, but consider this a warning about being this impolite to other users. I don't think this is typical of your behavior, so I'm not blocking you over this, but it is no way to address another contributor. - Jmabel | Talk 21:47, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please advise

Hello, Sceptre! I believe it was inappropriate to fail to notify me of Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2008 February 20#Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts .28closed.29, since I closed it. As such, I was not given an opportunity to comment and the DRV is now closed. Why did you not alert me for discussion? Was it merely forgetfulnesses? I am disappointed in this oversight. Please respond here. Regards. --12 Noon 2¢ 01:08, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your response seems hollow, insincere and non-sequitur; you were able to go to DRV while you were in school, so how does that prohibit you from notifying me? Please realize that your actions appear deceptive and disrespectful to me, and I must insist going forward that you follow accepted and recommended procedure to notify an editor when disputing their actions. As this DRV has progressed beyond remedy, it is highly irritating. But life goes on. Regards. --12 Noon 2¢ 17:42, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No worries, I'm over it. --12 Noon 2¢ 17:53, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

just great!

Why? David D. (Talk) 06:26, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There's no need for civility for civility's sake. One look at the report screams "troll". Will (talk) 09:09, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
There is a need for civility if you just create more drama. And now I see you are continuing to fan the flames. One does not have to do what you are currently doing to be effective. You'll learn one day. David D. (Talk) 16:41, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with David. Even when addressing someone you believe to be a troll, "Shut the hell up" is inappropriate. It lowers the level of discourse, rather than raising it. We all make mistakes sometimes, and we all sometimes say things we regret, but keeping cool under pressure is important. At this point I consider this incident to be closed, but please note that further comments like that may lead to a block.
It would be big of you to apologize to Boodles for your particular choice of words.
Regards, Nandesuka (talk) 20:12, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I also agree with David, and would add that your suggestion that Boodles is a troll for helping contain an editor making antisemitic posts is unhelpful. I hope you will reconsider your actions in future. IronDuke 23:43, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings

Hey you got it (squids of the southern ocean) while i was trying to put comment on the talk - hope you agree with the sentiment - please feel free to modify any of my talk page items - cheers SatuSuro 04:32, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Careful

On Keanu Reeves, you restored vandalism with this edit, and warned the IP who was trying to remove it. It's all corrected now, and I know it was just an honest mistake. I just thought you'd want to know. Take care. --Bongwarrior (talk) 08:44, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

February 2008

Hi, the recent edit you made to Jesus (disambiguation) has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thanks. Will (talk) 22:48, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

How so?--Carlaude (talk) 22:51, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re The seven trumpets blowing sweet rock and roll

Hi Will, no, I don't sadly, but I'm planning to go to the library tomorrow & will put it on my list- should be a useful source. Will let you know if I find it. Cheers. --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 23:03, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

USS Cole

Go to http://www.foxnews.com USS Cole has been deployed to Lebanon. Im just trying to make Wikipedia a more reliable source. Gordon24fan 23:18, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Go to the official USS Cole website and it says that too. Don't say that ain't reliable. Mark Foley is a duface.(Gordon24fan (talk) 23:21, 28 February 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Maddox

You just gave User:Servant Saber a warning about vandalism. I thin you are mistaken. I would ask that you strike out your warning. The edit you cited as vandalism was not vandalism at all, but only him talking to me on the talk page, thanking me for fixing the page. Blizzard Beast $ODIN$ 23:23, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why can't a location be further specified?

why is it improper to give a rough direction as to where something is located? 74.225.169.82 (talk) 23:32, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://mdwiki.org/wiki/User_talk:Sceptre/Archive_40"