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
I was strongly considering blocking you for disruption (but I'd prefer it doesn't come to that.) It's been going on for days, at least. Will you stop, or will someone need to stop you? Friday (talk) 16:58, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
Hey, thanks for your responsiveness about the "Stolen Earth" images. Now, let me genuinely try to be constructive for once, in return: how about that other old idea of yours about having an image from that climax scene of the doctor dying? It would be a bit similar to the "Last of the Time Lords" one we fought over so hard, but unlike in that case, here you'd actually have the "critical analysis" in place, because the scene is covered substantially, and not just in the sense of a renarration of the plot. How about one of those with Rose holding the dying Doctor in her arms, like here, caption along the lines of: "The climactic final scene, described as a "bitter moment of high emotion", as the Doctor is seemingly dying in Rose's arms. (bah, a bit long, but you get my drift.) (Trouble is, if you want it in the infobox, you'll probably want a longish caption to make the analytic significance transparent. In my opinion at least, it really helps if the caption refers explicitly to the analytic aspect, rather than just to the plot.) Fut.Perf. ☼ 17:00, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
Actually I had best intentions when putting that up, and was meaning it to be pointy. I apologise that it came across that way. However, when one person disputes a page, the tag should be applicable to one person. I don't see a reason to have the full tag on the page because it's not disputed, so I replaced it with one for an individual user. No other meaning was intended or implied, and I was reverted for being pointy (which I wasn't being), so I consider this matter concluded. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 20:49, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
Well, maybe not on the double, but Jimbo and I would be pretty tickled if you could work some magic for him. :D — $PЯINGεrαgђ 03:31 8 August, 2008 (UTC)
I'd like to invite you to join the newly-formed Rock music WikiProject. There's alot of Rock-related articles on Wikipedia that could use a little attention, and I hope this project can help organize an effort to improve them. So please, take a look and if you like what you see, help us get this project off the ground and a few Rock music pages into the front ranks of Wikipedia articles. Thanks! -- Be Black Hole Sun ( talk) 09:04, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
The WikiProject Eurovision Newsletter | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Delivered by Grk1011 ( talk) 16:03, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
I've reverted this redirect as it was stupid thing to do, and whatever happens on other articles is no precedent for this sort of thing. Thanks. -- Rodhull andemu 22:21, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
I have directly contacted members in the discussion about DYK directly on their talk page so that we can all come to an understanding. Many of the DYK people feel sensitive over abrupt changes to DYK because of recent history. I hope you can understand and respect that. There are strong feelings on both sides, and the action has been done. Ryan offered to allow another admin willing to change it to do so. However, its no longer on the main page, so I hope we can all move on without too much ill will and a mutual understanding of everyone's feelings and worries. How does that sound? :) Ottava Rima ( talk) 01:32, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
Well, that was pretty dumb of you. "Criticism of" articles are not always POV forks... especially in the case of large computing articles, as Windows Vista certainly is, it's a simple WP:SUMMARY-style expansion. This is amply explained in the very guideline you attempted to hold up as a reason for its deletion. In the future, when considering whether to put up an article for deletion, do some research as to why the article was created in the first place. Also, reviewing a prior AfD to see what people thought of it then is useful research, too -- not a single person voted to delete the article then. Your future commitment to not wasting other editors' time will be appreciated.... thanks. Warren -talk- 08:00, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
The Yummy TARDIS cake Doctor Who Barnstar | ||
For outstanding contributions to WP:DOCTORWHO articles, I award you this cake. Enjoy, Cirt ( talk) 00:06, 11 August 2008 (UTC) |
Please do not erase 2/3 of an article ( Megan's Law) without consensus and discussion. I will continue to revert such edits and may report them to the administration as vandalism if you insist on wholesale deletion rather than helping to make the content fit the policies you cite. Deleting the content makes it unavailable to be repaired or re-worded to fit the policies. Feel free to rewrite or modify the text to fit policies, but simple removal of it all is not a solution to the problem. Daivox ( talk) 14:33, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
I undid this edit because it broke the references. -- Elliskev 18:20, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
...want to read through your comment again. I had a hearty laugh. :P Asenine, 07:53, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
As this is the IP anon's 7th or 8th ANI complaint, targeting me and me alone. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 03:28, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
Looking through the edit history for this article, I notice you have removed large chunks of this article without explanation either in the edit summaries or on the talk page. The sections removed cited numerous reliable sources and were written in the style of sections apparent on many Doctor Who articles. Please could you explain why you think these cuts are necessary, especially as I think they should be restored? Wolf of Fenric ( talk) 16:58, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
Why did you revert my edit to the talk page of this article? The information that I removed is inappropriate for inclusion on a talk page, including file-sharing links (Wikipedia is not a file-sharing service), irrelevant discussion about editors' feelings on whether or not tracks should be / should have been on the album, and other discussions best-suited for a fan site (Wikipedia is not a fan site). -- Winger84 ( talk) 19:48, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
I've offered my opinions, and yiou dismiss them. When I offer some changes, you revert them. I am not sure why you sought my opinion if you are not willing to compromise. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 16:14, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
Will, thank you for your contribution to the discussion at my recent RfA. I liked your question, even it was confusing at first. :) If ever you have any concerns about my actions, adminly or otherwise, don't hesitate to let me know. Best wishes, Paul Erik (talk) (contribs) 21:01, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
The WikiProject Doctor Who Award | ||
For the great work you did that helped promote The Stolen Earth to FA status, you deserve this Barnstar! So Why 23:26, 16 August 2008 (UTC) |
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Q T C 18:57, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
Hi again. By way of illustration of why it's a bad idea to de-list GAs when there's little work to be done on them to maintain their status, Max Mosley is still not back at GA. Not because anyone doesn't think it's of high enough quality. The very small amount of work required to maintain GA status was done a month ago. However a combination of the GAR process, which seems now to be very confusing, the lengthy GA nom list for sports articles, and an argument that blew up out of nowhere (see talk:Max Mosley) means it's still at B-class.
A vast amount of energy has been expended over the last month by myself, Geometry Guy, Giggy, D.M.N, Resolute and Narson, in return for really quite small changes to the article. Because we all agree that it is of GA quality, with the minor changes, which I would have made if you had simply raised the issue at the article talk page or directly with me in the first place. Please, when you are considering de-listing articles in future, have this question in mind: "what is the most efficient way of mainting the quality of this article?" Cheers. 4u1e ( talk) 07:28, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
There is a disagreement over the inclusion of Image:AntiSmokingNaziGermany.jpg in the article in Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Anti-tobacco movement in Nazi Germany. For this reason a consensus is necessary and discussion is going on in Talk:Anti-tobacco_movement_in_Nazi_Germany#Consensus_for_Image:AntiSmokingNaziGermany.jpg. Notifying you because you are involved in it. Otolemur crassicaudatus ( talk) 14:36, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
Can you please discuss your concerns on the template talk page Template_talk:DoctorWhoEpisodeHead rather than just removing work you believe is a CV? -- Deadly∀ssassin 23:36, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
Here (and also, if possible, here?) Justmeherenow ( ) 05:13, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
Can you please delete my account and all my files please
Thank you
Freakishmedia ( talk) 22:41, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
That was unexpected but appreciated - and thanks for the page move as well. I don't remember, but you may have been one of the admins to whom I talked to about these lists previously, and who helped me with restoring edit histories and such. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Advanced Dungeons & Dragons 2nd edition monsters may not be heading for a snowball close though, but we'll see where it goes. BOZ ( talk) 14:30, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
I am disappointed, Sceptre, that you decided to ignore my messages. Anyhow I have reopened this AfD debate and I would ask that you be more careful about applying speedy keep in future, as this one certainly did not meet the guidelines. Best wishes, MSGJ ( talk) 03:14, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
Done per a note on my talkpage confirming the off-wiki discussion with MBisanz. Rollback is no big deal, and after a week and a bit, and an acknowledgement of a genuine misunderstanding, I'm willing to return the tool, with the proviso that any admin may remove it without consulting me. Fritzpoll ( talk) 22:13, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
As someone who thought this article should be recreated, closing it early seems like a really bad idea given the massive history and strong emotions concerning this issue. Better to let it go for the full time and then be closed by an admin. JoshuaZ ( talk) 23:51, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
Hi Will. I reverted the scaled-down Time Crash image, as it degraded the image in the infobox. I tend to use 512 as the default format which should meet NFC without problems. Each image I upload has the best attainable quality by using custom gamma- and sharpening levels during scaling. Simply scaling it down again caused the image to blur even more, and this particular frame was already suffering from considerable motion-blur that was very hard to supress. Hope you don't mind. — Edokter • Talk • 21:43, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
Could you please comment on this? Thankyou. Srnec ( talk) 16:45, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
Would you like to at least look like you want to work it out on the talk page or shall we go back to dueling fixes? At least until J smacks up side the head?
- J Greb ( talk) 01:04, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
Hope you're feeling better. I removed a speedy tag from Shmuel Herzfeld. The article definitely contains some notability claims. You could try AfD? Anyway, thanks for tagging. -- Dweller ( talk) 16:09, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
I was working on the page and had just saved it so as not to lose all the research I was putting in; you nominated it for speedy deletion and I put a "hold on" marker on it. I had just pasted my rationale into the talk page when it indicated that it had been deleted already. This happened over the span of 3 minutes.
If you want to delete a page for lack of notability, and you want people to explain why it is notable, you need to give them a chance to do so. Otherwise, it's like that Mitch Hedberg joke -- "you know what I like? Mashed Potatoes!" . . . Dude, you gotta give me time to guess.
I'm going to recreate the page and hope that you give me 4 1/2 minutes this time because, I assure you, my contributions to Wikipedia so far have been nothing but constructive, positive, and worthy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JJEagleHawk ( talk • contribs) 17:43, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
Hello, Sceptre. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. -- MBisanz talk 12:39, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
Having been the one to return rollback a few days ago, I have now removed the tool on the grounds that there are various examples listed by editors indicating that the basic tenant of WP:ROLLBACK, to revert only blatant vandalism has not been followed. Just as it is no big deal to have rollback, so it is no big deal to remove it. Since I am presently not very active on-wiki, any administrator may, of course, override this with good cause, so should you wish, please appeal to another administrator or at WP:PERM Fritzpoll ( talk) 14:03, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
Unfortunately I am blocking you for the disruptive edits by this user, based on evidence from Checkuser. I find it highly unlikely that any of the usual possibilities might apply. To do so, you would have had to had a visitor or family member who, on multiple occasions far after midnight in your location, used a computer at your home that you were actively using (in some cases 2-6 minutes both sides), to post anti-Giano and anti-Kmweber disruptive vandalism on the wiki as an IP, following which your IP resumed editing as a logged in account.
As you are well aware, I and others are trying hard to get the message across to Giano, a respected editor, that if he doesn't act up with others, he won't have undue attention taking him away from things he enjoys. Your harassment, especially petty juvenile harassment/vandalism/disruption, is exactly what is not needed, and in posting those posts, you have made all our activites here more difficult without any positive benefit whatsoever, and wilfully stressed and harassed another editor. This was completely inappropriate, harmful, and antagonizing.
If you will affirm to the community that you will do nothing disruptive, and especially nothing related to Giano or Kmweber, then I leave it to the community to decide when, whether and on what terms you should be unblocked.
As an aside, I also noticed some rudimentary experimentation with IP cloaking when I was looking at this case. You edited from *.adsl-dyn.* and from *.no-dns.* in June and July. This suggests a possible view towards deliberate concealment of activities. Briefly: if you were thinking of it, just don't.
FT2 ( Talk | email) 15:20, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
Sceptre ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
It's boggling that, when evidence was sent to the arbitration committee about a month ago showing Kmweber wilfully harassing several prominent editors, it was ignored. While I do admit to the Kmweber vandalism (78... is my static IP) it is in no way harassment. It's just frustration over how much Kmweber is allowed to get away with. The Giano vandalism was for the same reason. I request the arbitration committee investigate the harassment claims and sanction him if necessary, regardless of whether their authority is seen as legitimate by him.
Incidentally, FT2 has a history of sanctioning users without offering to ask them for their defence; cf Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Orangemarlin. This block should not have happened without first contacting me, if only as a common courtesy to an editor who has shown dedication to the project and was just annoyed.
By the way, I've not used proxies or IP cloaking. Any checkuser on my account should resolve to BT (my school's ISP), Orange/PlanetOnline (my old ISP), or BeUnlimited/O2. I was in Belgium in late July-that explains the belgacom IP, and I assume that the keme.net IP was the internet cafe that I sometimes use. I have never even heard of Frostie Jack before today; that's just an unfortunate coincidence that he vandalised in Giano's userspace. Please overturn this block. Sceptre ( talk) 15:48, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Per the below comments - appeal should go through the arbitration committee directly, I assume via their mailing list arbcom-llists.wikimedia.org. — Rjd0060 ( talk) 16:02, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{ unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
To anyone who's watching the page: I regret vandalising Kurt's user page. I was annoyed, and it wasn't the best thing to do. But I won't apologise specifically because I'm being requested to - any apology now would make it seem hollow and forced. If you want an apology, please don't ask for one. Sceptre ( talk) 16:22, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
To save splitting of discussion, I suggest taking the relevant points to the WP:ANI thread, and then coming back here once a consensus has been reached. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ( talk) 17:04, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
I think we've gone far enough with this, it sounds like Sceptre is coming around...I still think the behavior was wildly out of bounds and he seems to get that. FT2 wasn't acting alone, and with that in mind I think they should put their heads together and shorten the block (or reduce it to time served). But I think the unblock should only come from them, and if they have other reasons why the block should remain for now they should indicate that. But none of this reduces how completely inappropriate the edits were.
RxS (
talk) 17:30, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
(edit conflict x3) Good grief, Sceptre, this is not a happy situation to find you in. You do realize that whether or not it was sustained harassment or not, it was petty, abusive, and juvenile vandalism with intent to insult via personal attacks and smears, right? So why on earth do you think that's somehow not worthy of a very long block? As Arcayne has said above, if you're so irritated you "need to blow off steam" you go for a walk or something, you do not log out, vandalize in a thoroughly childish and nasty way, and then log back in with your innocence intact. I cannot believe you're even suggesting that, yet that's how "it was a mistake" reads. "Mistake" means "oops". Your edits were deliberate, and deliberately concealed. KillerChihuahua ?!? 17:32, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
Mentorship has been mooted around a bit at AN/I and I think it would be a good idea if I'm being honest. It would be a good opportunity for you to have someone to turn to if you get overly stressed upset about things and they could lead you in the right path. Are there any people you'd like as a mentor? Ryan PostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or let's have banter 17:33, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
I'd be up and willing to "help" Will (mentorship is overly draconian). I don't want him to turn into a "bad egg", which I know he won't. But it's best for the community as a whole to give guidance in times of trouble. We've all been there, we can empathise. Scarian Call me Pat! 18:31, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
I must vehemently protest any movement towards an unblocking of Sceptre. Two or three years ago, he was found guilty of sexually harassing underage female admins and creating attack accounts in droves; he was nearly defrocked for this - and would have been if not for the intervention of Jimbo. (Perhaps the reason that this is being overlooked is that Sceptre's harassment predates most active admins' tenure as an editor.) If he's refused to modify his behavior after so much time, we must conclude that this is an untreatable behavior problem and show Sceptre the door. east718 // talk // email // 18:57, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
Oh, unblock him. FGS he's only 17 - probably learnt a valuable lesson for life - he's had the scare, been shown he's not as clever as he thinks he is - didn't we all at that age? I say this with one proviso - he prove confidentialy to a designated and trusted Admin that he is only 17 - not a 48 year old wierdo - etc. Giano ( talk) 20:52, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
Just stumbled across all this and thought I'd throw in my two cents. I've watched your featured topic aspirations with great interest, and am sure you'll achieve that goal. Don't let editors who can be greatly annoying get to you, as they're frankly not worth the effort. LuciferMorgan ( talk) 18:21, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
Although the vandalism and the insults are very childish as you're well aware, I fully acknowledge and accept your point that it was never your intention to harass anyone, and that labeling those edits 'harassment' is far-fetched, to say the least. To put it more frankly: Imho, you're the one being harassed by The Real Drama-MongersTM for not accepting the "community's" decision, where "community" really means those self-appointed free speech advocates who don't know to value open discussion and who have managed to filibuster every suggested remedy regarding Kurt into oblivion. You have my deepest sympathies, and the block against you was certainly excessive, and applied in the wrong manner like you correctly assessed in the unblock request. user: Everyme 19:11, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
Just a reminder: "The purpose of blocking is prevention, not punishment." I do hope this punitive block is lifted soon as it's obvious you're going to cease any undesirable behaviour. Matthew ( talk) 21:39, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
I would certainly consider unblocking you, but no doubt it would get added to the list of abusive things I have done list. Majorly talk 22:32, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
To put in my own two cents (US$0.02, in the increasingly worthless US dollar), I think what Sceptre did was silly and immature, and I'm hardly a friend or ally of him in general (I've had my strong disagreements with him in the past), but in my opinion the indef block of him was grossly excessive and should be shortened. Many editors and admins have gotten away with various and sundry acts of incivility and vandalism -- an admin once even vandalized my user page, and retained his adminship and clean block record. The word "harassment" has been stretched to the breaking point from people claiming it as a means of getting the upper hand. *Dan T.* ( talk) 22:55, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
I still don't like edits being said as vandalism when it is clearly a constructive edit. I know Sceptre has some people that he doesn't like but to "blank them completely" in my opinion is unnecessary. The post in question didn't seem inflammatory, no personal attacks were noted, so it should never be labelled as vandalism. I don't like the feeling of Sceptre in the future marking edits as vandalism when they clearly are not. D.M.N. ( talk) 10:58, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
Hey, if you want to vent or talk, I have Windows Live, just email me your email address or post it here :) Grk1011/Stephen ( talk) 22:14, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
...you can contact me over IRC. If you'd prefer antother method of communication, I'll see what I can do. Hang in there, and remember I'm here if you want to talk. Although I think you acted badly, I too am guilty of it, so I know what its like. Best wishes, Qst ( talk) 11:51, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
The AN thread is really painting me out to be this guy when I'm really not. Yes, I was stupid two years ago in harassing an admin. I actually did learn from that and have been apologising profusely to everyone who mentions it ever since. Any notion that my vandalising of Kurt's userpage is "harassment" is woefully incorrect. Real harassment is much much worse and much more persistent than my simple name calling; if sporiadic name-calling in itself constituted harassment, half of the world's population would have criminal records before their sixteenth birthday. Additionally, I have only wilfully abused rollback once. The other two times were accidental misuse of the tools because I thought in good faith that the edits should be rolled back; labelling it as abuse of the tools implies that I used the tools in bad faith. But of course, good faith doesn't exist on Wikipedia any more... neither do standards either. Until those two return, I have no incentive to edit. Sorry. Sceptre ( talk) 18:58, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
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
I was strongly considering blocking you for disruption (but I'd prefer it doesn't come to that.) It's been going on for days, at least. Will you stop, or will someone need to stop you? Friday (talk) 16:58, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
Hey, thanks for your responsiveness about the "Stolen Earth" images. Now, let me genuinely try to be constructive for once, in return: how about that other old idea of yours about having an image from that climax scene of the doctor dying? It would be a bit similar to the "Last of the Time Lords" one we fought over so hard, but unlike in that case, here you'd actually have the "critical analysis" in place, because the scene is covered substantially, and not just in the sense of a renarration of the plot. How about one of those with Rose holding the dying Doctor in her arms, like here, caption along the lines of: "The climactic final scene, described as a "bitter moment of high emotion", as the Doctor is seemingly dying in Rose's arms. (bah, a bit long, but you get my drift.) (Trouble is, if you want it in the infobox, you'll probably want a longish caption to make the analytic significance transparent. In my opinion at least, it really helps if the caption refers explicitly to the analytic aspect, rather than just to the plot.) Fut.Perf. ☼ 17:00, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
Actually I had best intentions when putting that up, and was meaning it to be pointy. I apologise that it came across that way. However, when one person disputes a page, the tag should be applicable to one person. I don't see a reason to have the full tag on the page because it's not disputed, so I replaced it with one for an individual user. No other meaning was intended or implied, and I was reverted for being pointy (which I wasn't being), so I consider this matter concluded. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 20:49, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
Well, maybe not on the double, but Jimbo and I would be pretty tickled if you could work some magic for him. :D — $PЯINGεrαgђ 03:31 8 August, 2008 (UTC)
I'd like to invite you to join the newly-formed Rock music WikiProject. There's alot of Rock-related articles on Wikipedia that could use a little attention, and I hope this project can help organize an effort to improve them. So please, take a look and if you like what you see, help us get this project off the ground and a few Rock music pages into the front ranks of Wikipedia articles. Thanks! -- Be Black Hole Sun ( talk) 09:04, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
The WikiProject Eurovision Newsletter | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Delivered by Grk1011 ( talk) 16:03, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
I've reverted this redirect as it was stupid thing to do, and whatever happens on other articles is no precedent for this sort of thing. Thanks. -- Rodhull andemu 22:21, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
I have directly contacted members in the discussion about DYK directly on their talk page so that we can all come to an understanding. Many of the DYK people feel sensitive over abrupt changes to DYK because of recent history. I hope you can understand and respect that. There are strong feelings on both sides, and the action has been done. Ryan offered to allow another admin willing to change it to do so. However, its no longer on the main page, so I hope we can all move on without too much ill will and a mutual understanding of everyone's feelings and worries. How does that sound? :) Ottava Rima ( talk) 01:32, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
Well, that was pretty dumb of you. "Criticism of" articles are not always POV forks... especially in the case of large computing articles, as Windows Vista certainly is, it's a simple WP:SUMMARY-style expansion. This is amply explained in the very guideline you attempted to hold up as a reason for its deletion. In the future, when considering whether to put up an article for deletion, do some research as to why the article was created in the first place. Also, reviewing a prior AfD to see what people thought of it then is useful research, too -- not a single person voted to delete the article then. Your future commitment to not wasting other editors' time will be appreciated.... thanks. Warren -talk- 08:00, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
The Yummy TARDIS cake Doctor Who Barnstar | ||
For outstanding contributions to WP:DOCTORWHO articles, I award you this cake. Enjoy, Cirt ( talk) 00:06, 11 August 2008 (UTC) |
Please do not erase 2/3 of an article ( Megan's Law) without consensus and discussion. I will continue to revert such edits and may report them to the administration as vandalism if you insist on wholesale deletion rather than helping to make the content fit the policies you cite. Deleting the content makes it unavailable to be repaired or re-worded to fit the policies. Feel free to rewrite or modify the text to fit policies, but simple removal of it all is not a solution to the problem. Daivox ( talk) 14:33, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
I undid this edit because it broke the references. -- Elliskev 18:20, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
...want to read through your comment again. I had a hearty laugh. :P Asenine, 07:53, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
As this is the IP anon's 7th or 8th ANI complaint, targeting me and me alone. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 03:28, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
Looking through the edit history for this article, I notice you have removed large chunks of this article without explanation either in the edit summaries or on the talk page. The sections removed cited numerous reliable sources and were written in the style of sections apparent on many Doctor Who articles. Please could you explain why you think these cuts are necessary, especially as I think they should be restored? Wolf of Fenric ( talk) 16:58, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
Why did you revert my edit to the talk page of this article? The information that I removed is inappropriate for inclusion on a talk page, including file-sharing links (Wikipedia is not a file-sharing service), irrelevant discussion about editors' feelings on whether or not tracks should be / should have been on the album, and other discussions best-suited for a fan site (Wikipedia is not a fan site). -- Winger84 ( talk) 19:48, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
I've offered my opinions, and yiou dismiss them. When I offer some changes, you revert them. I am not sure why you sought my opinion if you are not willing to compromise. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 16:14, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
Will, thank you for your contribution to the discussion at my recent RfA. I liked your question, even it was confusing at first. :) If ever you have any concerns about my actions, adminly or otherwise, don't hesitate to let me know. Best wishes, Paul Erik (talk) (contribs) 21:01, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
The WikiProject Doctor Who Award | ||
For the great work you did that helped promote The Stolen Earth to FA status, you deserve this Barnstar! So Why 23:26, 16 August 2008 (UTC) |
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Q T C 18:57, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
Hi again. By way of illustration of why it's a bad idea to de-list GAs when there's little work to be done on them to maintain their status, Max Mosley is still not back at GA. Not because anyone doesn't think it's of high enough quality. The very small amount of work required to maintain GA status was done a month ago. However a combination of the GAR process, which seems now to be very confusing, the lengthy GA nom list for sports articles, and an argument that blew up out of nowhere (see talk:Max Mosley) means it's still at B-class.
A vast amount of energy has been expended over the last month by myself, Geometry Guy, Giggy, D.M.N, Resolute and Narson, in return for really quite small changes to the article. Because we all agree that it is of GA quality, with the minor changes, which I would have made if you had simply raised the issue at the article talk page or directly with me in the first place. Please, when you are considering de-listing articles in future, have this question in mind: "what is the most efficient way of mainting the quality of this article?" Cheers. 4u1e ( talk) 07:28, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
There is a disagreement over the inclusion of Image:AntiSmokingNaziGermany.jpg in the article in Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Anti-tobacco movement in Nazi Germany. For this reason a consensus is necessary and discussion is going on in Talk:Anti-tobacco_movement_in_Nazi_Germany#Consensus_for_Image:AntiSmokingNaziGermany.jpg. Notifying you because you are involved in it. Otolemur crassicaudatus ( talk) 14:36, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
Can you please discuss your concerns on the template talk page Template_talk:DoctorWhoEpisodeHead rather than just removing work you believe is a CV? -- Deadly∀ssassin 23:36, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
Here (and also, if possible, here?) Justmeherenow ( ) 05:13, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
Can you please delete my account and all my files please
Thank you
Freakishmedia ( talk) 22:41, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
That was unexpected but appreciated - and thanks for the page move as well. I don't remember, but you may have been one of the admins to whom I talked to about these lists previously, and who helped me with restoring edit histories and such. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Advanced Dungeons & Dragons 2nd edition monsters may not be heading for a snowball close though, but we'll see where it goes. BOZ ( talk) 14:30, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
I am disappointed, Sceptre, that you decided to ignore my messages. Anyhow I have reopened this AfD debate and I would ask that you be more careful about applying speedy keep in future, as this one certainly did not meet the guidelines. Best wishes, MSGJ ( talk) 03:14, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
Done per a note on my talkpage confirming the off-wiki discussion with MBisanz. Rollback is no big deal, and after a week and a bit, and an acknowledgement of a genuine misunderstanding, I'm willing to return the tool, with the proviso that any admin may remove it without consulting me. Fritzpoll ( talk) 22:13, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
As someone who thought this article should be recreated, closing it early seems like a really bad idea given the massive history and strong emotions concerning this issue. Better to let it go for the full time and then be closed by an admin. JoshuaZ ( talk) 23:51, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
Hi Will. I reverted the scaled-down Time Crash image, as it degraded the image in the infobox. I tend to use 512 as the default format which should meet NFC without problems. Each image I upload has the best attainable quality by using custom gamma- and sharpening levels during scaling. Simply scaling it down again caused the image to blur even more, and this particular frame was already suffering from considerable motion-blur that was very hard to supress. Hope you don't mind. — Edokter • Talk • 21:43, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
Could you please comment on this? Thankyou. Srnec ( talk) 16:45, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
Would you like to at least look like you want to work it out on the talk page or shall we go back to dueling fixes? At least until J smacks up side the head?
- J Greb ( talk) 01:04, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
Hope you're feeling better. I removed a speedy tag from Shmuel Herzfeld. The article definitely contains some notability claims. You could try AfD? Anyway, thanks for tagging. -- Dweller ( talk) 16:09, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
I was working on the page and had just saved it so as not to lose all the research I was putting in; you nominated it for speedy deletion and I put a "hold on" marker on it. I had just pasted my rationale into the talk page when it indicated that it had been deleted already. This happened over the span of 3 minutes.
If you want to delete a page for lack of notability, and you want people to explain why it is notable, you need to give them a chance to do so. Otherwise, it's like that Mitch Hedberg joke -- "you know what I like? Mashed Potatoes!" . . . Dude, you gotta give me time to guess.
I'm going to recreate the page and hope that you give me 4 1/2 minutes this time because, I assure you, my contributions to Wikipedia so far have been nothing but constructive, positive, and worthy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JJEagleHawk ( talk • contribs) 17:43, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
Hello, Sceptre. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. -- MBisanz talk 12:39, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
Having been the one to return rollback a few days ago, I have now removed the tool on the grounds that there are various examples listed by editors indicating that the basic tenant of WP:ROLLBACK, to revert only blatant vandalism has not been followed. Just as it is no big deal to have rollback, so it is no big deal to remove it. Since I am presently not very active on-wiki, any administrator may, of course, override this with good cause, so should you wish, please appeal to another administrator or at WP:PERM Fritzpoll ( talk) 14:03, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
Unfortunately I am blocking you for the disruptive edits by this user, based on evidence from Checkuser. I find it highly unlikely that any of the usual possibilities might apply. To do so, you would have had to had a visitor or family member who, on multiple occasions far after midnight in your location, used a computer at your home that you were actively using (in some cases 2-6 minutes both sides), to post anti-Giano and anti-Kmweber disruptive vandalism on the wiki as an IP, following which your IP resumed editing as a logged in account.
As you are well aware, I and others are trying hard to get the message across to Giano, a respected editor, that if he doesn't act up with others, he won't have undue attention taking him away from things he enjoys. Your harassment, especially petty juvenile harassment/vandalism/disruption, is exactly what is not needed, and in posting those posts, you have made all our activites here more difficult without any positive benefit whatsoever, and wilfully stressed and harassed another editor. This was completely inappropriate, harmful, and antagonizing.
If you will affirm to the community that you will do nothing disruptive, and especially nothing related to Giano or Kmweber, then I leave it to the community to decide when, whether and on what terms you should be unblocked.
As an aside, I also noticed some rudimentary experimentation with IP cloaking when I was looking at this case. You edited from *.adsl-dyn.* and from *.no-dns.* in June and July. This suggests a possible view towards deliberate concealment of activities. Briefly: if you were thinking of it, just don't.
FT2 ( Talk | email) 15:20, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
Sceptre ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
It's boggling that, when evidence was sent to the arbitration committee about a month ago showing Kmweber wilfully harassing several prominent editors, it was ignored. While I do admit to the Kmweber vandalism (78... is my static IP) it is in no way harassment. It's just frustration over how much Kmweber is allowed to get away with. The Giano vandalism was for the same reason. I request the arbitration committee investigate the harassment claims and sanction him if necessary, regardless of whether their authority is seen as legitimate by him.
Incidentally, FT2 has a history of sanctioning users without offering to ask them for their defence; cf Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Orangemarlin. This block should not have happened without first contacting me, if only as a common courtesy to an editor who has shown dedication to the project and was just annoyed.
By the way, I've not used proxies or IP cloaking. Any checkuser on my account should resolve to BT (my school's ISP), Orange/PlanetOnline (my old ISP), or BeUnlimited/O2. I was in Belgium in late July-that explains the belgacom IP, and I assume that the keme.net IP was the internet cafe that I sometimes use. I have never even heard of Frostie Jack before today; that's just an unfortunate coincidence that he vandalised in Giano's userspace. Please overturn this block. Sceptre ( talk) 15:48, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Per the below comments - appeal should go through the arbitration committee directly, I assume via their mailing list arbcom-llists.wikimedia.org. — Rjd0060 ( talk) 16:02, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{ unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
To anyone who's watching the page: I regret vandalising Kurt's user page. I was annoyed, and it wasn't the best thing to do. But I won't apologise specifically because I'm being requested to - any apology now would make it seem hollow and forced. If you want an apology, please don't ask for one. Sceptre ( talk) 16:22, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
To save splitting of discussion, I suggest taking the relevant points to the WP:ANI thread, and then coming back here once a consensus has been reached. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ( talk) 17:04, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
I think we've gone far enough with this, it sounds like Sceptre is coming around...I still think the behavior was wildly out of bounds and he seems to get that. FT2 wasn't acting alone, and with that in mind I think they should put their heads together and shorten the block (or reduce it to time served). But I think the unblock should only come from them, and if they have other reasons why the block should remain for now they should indicate that. But none of this reduces how completely inappropriate the edits were.
RxS (
talk) 17:30, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
(edit conflict x3) Good grief, Sceptre, this is not a happy situation to find you in. You do realize that whether or not it was sustained harassment or not, it was petty, abusive, and juvenile vandalism with intent to insult via personal attacks and smears, right? So why on earth do you think that's somehow not worthy of a very long block? As Arcayne has said above, if you're so irritated you "need to blow off steam" you go for a walk or something, you do not log out, vandalize in a thoroughly childish and nasty way, and then log back in with your innocence intact. I cannot believe you're even suggesting that, yet that's how "it was a mistake" reads. "Mistake" means "oops". Your edits were deliberate, and deliberately concealed. KillerChihuahua ?!? 17:32, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
Mentorship has been mooted around a bit at AN/I and I think it would be a good idea if I'm being honest. It would be a good opportunity for you to have someone to turn to if you get overly stressed upset about things and they could lead you in the right path. Are there any people you'd like as a mentor? Ryan PostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or let's have banter 17:33, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
I'd be up and willing to "help" Will (mentorship is overly draconian). I don't want him to turn into a "bad egg", which I know he won't. But it's best for the community as a whole to give guidance in times of trouble. We've all been there, we can empathise. Scarian Call me Pat! 18:31, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
I must vehemently protest any movement towards an unblocking of Sceptre. Two or three years ago, he was found guilty of sexually harassing underage female admins and creating attack accounts in droves; he was nearly defrocked for this - and would have been if not for the intervention of Jimbo. (Perhaps the reason that this is being overlooked is that Sceptre's harassment predates most active admins' tenure as an editor.) If he's refused to modify his behavior after so much time, we must conclude that this is an untreatable behavior problem and show Sceptre the door. east718 // talk // email // 18:57, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
Oh, unblock him. FGS he's only 17 - probably learnt a valuable lesson for life - he's had the scare, been shown he's not as clever as he thinks he is - didn't we all at that age? I say this with one proviso - he prove confidentialy to a designated and trusted Admin that he is only 17 - not a 48 year old wierdo - etc. Giano ( talk) 20:52, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
Just stumbled across all this and thought I'd throw in my two cents. I've watched your featured topic aspirations with great interest, and am sure you'll achieve that goal. Don't let editors who can be greatly annoying get to you, as they're frankly not worth the effort. LuciferMorgan ( talk) 18:21, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
Although the vandalism and the insults are very childish as you're well aware, I fully acknowledge and accept your point that it was never your intention to harass anyone, and that labeling those edits 'harassment' is far-fetched, to say the least. To put it more frankly: Imho, you're the one being harassed by The Real Drama-MongersTM for not accepting the "community's" decision, where "community" really means those self-appointed free speech advocates who don't know to value open discussion and who have managed to filibuster every suggested remedy regarding Kurt into oblivion. You have my deepest sympathies, and the block against you was certainly excessive, and applied in the wrong manner like you correctly assessed in the unblock request. user: Everyme 19:11, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
Just a reminder: "The purpose of blocking is prevention, not punishment." I do hope this punitive block is lifted soon as it's obvious you're going to cease any undesirable behaviour. Matthew ( talk) 21:39, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
I would certainly consider unblocking you, but no doubt it would get added to the list of abusive things I have done list. Majorly talk 22:32, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
To put in my own two cents (US$0.02, in the increasingly worthless US dollar), I think what Sceptre did was silly and immature, and I'm hardly a friend or ally of him in general (I've had my strong disagreements with him in the past), but in my opinion the indef block of him was grossly excessive and should be shortened. Many editors and admins have gotten away with various and sundry acts of incivility and vandalism -- an admin once even vandalized my user page, and retained his adminship and clean block record. The word "harassment" has been stretched to the breaking point from people claiming it as a means of getting the upper hand. *Dan T.* ( talk) 22:55, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
I still don't like edits being said as vandalism when it is clearly a constructive edit. I know Sceptre has some people that he doesn't like but to "blank them completely" in my opinion is unnecessary. The post in question didn't seem inflammatory, no personal attacks were noted, so it should never be labelled as vandalism. I don't like the feeling of Sceptre in the future marking edits as vandalism when they clearly are not. D.M.N. ( talk) 10:58, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
Hey, if you want to vent or talk, I have Windows Live, just email me your email address or post it here :) Grk1011/Stephen ( talk) 22:14, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
...you can contact me over IRC. If you'd prefer antother method of communication, I'll see what I can do. Hang in there, and remember I'm here if you want to talk. Although I think you acted badly, I too am guilty of it, so I know what its like. Best wishes, Qst ( talk) 11:51, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
The AN thread is really painting me out to be this guy when I'm really not. Yes, I was stupid two years ago in harassing an admin. I actually did learn from that and have been apologising profusely to everyone who mentions it ever since. Any notion that my vandalising of Kurt's userpage is "harassment" is woefully incorrect. Real harassment is much much worse and much more persistent than my simple name calling; if sporiadic name-calling in itself constituted harassment, half of the world's population would have criminal records before their sixteenth birthday. Additionally, I have only wilfully abused rollback once. The other two times were accidental misuse of the tools because I thought in good faith that the edits should be rolled back; labelling it as abuse of the tools implies that I used the tools in bad faith. But of course, good faith doesn't exist on Wikipedia any more... neither do standards either. Until those two return, I have no incentive to edit. Sorry. Sceptre ( talk) 18:58, 29 August 2008 (UTC)