Jump to content

User talk:Sceptre/Archive 55

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

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: 00:35, 30 November 2024 (GMT)

Only 51724 articles (0.748%) 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 55

Welcome back

Welcome back. I'm sorry I couldn't handle your unblock myself, Sceptre—I've been bogged under of late. I assure you it was not a deliberate snubbing. Best of luck with your second chance. AGK 18:26, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I'd like to say, for anyone reading, that I apologise for any grief caused (with maybe a couple of exceptions) again, thank you for trusting me enough to unblock me. I hope that I can regain the trust of those I've lost it from. Thank you. Sceptre (talk) 18:34, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
So just what reason did you give for requesting unblock two times since you were blocked other than that you just didn't feel like waiting it out? I'd love to hear it because it sounds to me like you seem to have the idea that you're special since you don't have any problem calling for other users to be blocked yet aren't even willing to take one yourself.--ParisianBlade (talk) 20:09, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I would suggest not responding to that, Sceptre. Just return to your editing as you've wanted to do. - auburnpilot talk 20:14, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It's okay AuburnPilot. I'm okay with answering this. ParisianBlade: you want the reason why I requested the unblock? So I could help out maintaining today's featured article (which I haven't been able to do because I've had to defend myself). To be honest, I have learnt a lot during my block. Mostly that it's not the end of the world if I get unblocked or someone makes an edit you don't like. Seriously. Wikipedia is dangerous for your health; it saps your energy and your will. After the annoyance over my block passed, I actually felt a lot relieved; better than I have been feeling for the past two or so years. For your sakes: take a break from editing for a few days.
Another thing is that several Wikipedia policies have become lame ducks because of how haphazardly they're applied. Civility and harassment are the main two. Anyone who has listened to me on IRC will know that I am very disdainful of the harassment policy because it makes no distinction between editing the same article as someone, and what several Wikipedians (who I shan't name out or respect) have had to endure in real-life, and that a small instance of on-wiki childish behaviour (I'm loathe to call what I did harassment, because it doesn't fit the criminal definition [which the Wikipedia definition should be much nearer to] and that, as Morven said, harassment has a more frequent and ongoing pattern than what I did) is much more deplorable than a concerted and continuous off-wiki campaign to annoy and upset various respected admins. Which, of course, is dead wrong. And of course, I only have to say one five-letter Italian name to make my point about civility. Interestingly enough, recently I've come to the opinion that if Giano is left to his own devices and allowed to write articles in peace, it'd be a lot better for everyone. Giano won't be as sullen and snippy, and we won't have kneejerk RfArs for every block that happens.
As AuburnPilot has just said on AN, there's a difference between understanding something was wrong and apologising for it. Yes, I acted like a giant dick. And I would apologise to Giano for attacking him, if I was given the chance (I just hope he takes the advice people have given him). But I won't apologise for what I said about Kurt. While the comments in August were offensive hyperbole and I know it was wrong (if only that it meant that I didn't have the moral high ground anymore), I will not apologise to him. My anger at Kurt was really born out of frustration at him harassing (without airquotes) me and several admins I hold in high regard, and that people didn't do anything about it. I opposed his unblock (privately) because I didn't think that he would change if he was put on parole. And I'm right. I won't apologise to Kurt until he apologises, contritely, to the people he's hurt. I've done so in the past.
In any case: what does a two-week-early unblock do to hurt you? If you're seriously upset about it, you need to get your priorities straight. I can't dress that language up for you either; sometimes, brutal honestly is the only way to make a point. It's an empirical fact that (according to the philosopher Jagger) You Can't Always Get What You Want. What does my unblock do to help the encyclopedia? Well, I could write an article and get it passed through FAC in three weeks, if I'm lucky. Featured articles are good, right? I've learned that the hard way because my frustration over Kurt got me blocked. Anyway, that's enough of standing on my soapbox. I'll leave you with one of my longstanding principles: don't be a dick to me, and I won't be a dick to you. I think that's fair enough. Sceptre (talk) 20:46, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Try and enjoy editing again... welcome back. Ian¹³/t 16:50, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed

Welcome back, my friend.    SIS  23:20, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Requests for help

Splice request

{{adminhelp}}

I'd like some help in merging my talk page history (I'm a bit fernickerty [is that a word?] about it). Can an administrator please:

  • Delete my talk page
  • Restore everything prior to 29 August
  • Move that to User talk:Sceptre/Archive53
  • Restore Archive53
  • Edit Archive53 so the four other "threads" are appended to the end of "One last thing" (the untitled thread being "sockpuppetry block", for instance)
  • Full protect Archive53
  • Restore between 29 August and 22 November
  • Move all to User talk:Sceptre/dev/null, or the like (it's all trolling [either by me or trolls unnamed] and bot deletion notices)
  • Delete User talk:Sceptre/dev/null
  • Restore my userpage and talk page with the full protection.

Thank you. Sceptre (talk) 18:34, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Do you not mean for semi-protection of your user and talk pages? Welcome back, –thedemonhog talk • edits 18:58, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
 Doing... AGK 19:09, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. And to thedemonhog: semi-protection for the talk page, full protection for my user page. Sceptre (talk) 19:10, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, all done.
I've also killed some of the more recent, flagrantly inappropriate troll edits to your userpage.
If there's anything else, just say. AGK 19:24, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
My userpage should be full-protected, per the long-standing trolling problem. Sceptre (talk) 19:27, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A quick note, you should remove the rollback and account creator logos/boxes from this page and your userpage, since both are incorrect--Jac16888 (talk) 19:32, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I should, yes. Sceptre (talk) 19:42, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have fully-protected your userpage.
If you wish, I will evaluate your progress in a month or two and hence consider granting you the rollback userright.
Oh, and was "pernickety" what you were looking for? AGK 20:15, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes it was. Sceptre (talk) 20:17, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I was not trying to be pernickety, nor was i trying to make any kind of point, i simply thought it would be best to mention it to you now, rather than you forget and someone else hold it against you later on--Jac16888 (talk) 21:16, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sceptre was referring to himself up above.--Tznkai (talk) 21:35, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
oops, sorry--Jac16888 (talk) 23:02, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hypothetical about my (temporary) limits

{{adminhelp}} I've just thought of this hypothetical: when I talked to tznkai, I only outright said FAC, but I implied the rest of the FA/GA area (FTC, FLC, FSC, FPC, FPoC, GAC, GTC, GAR, FAR, and TFA/R) too; some time earlier (back in early October) when talking to tznkai I said "TFA/R" as well (as I was going to be part of the DWME TFA/R had I been unblocked early). Would it be okay for me to edit those areas? Sceptre (talk) 00:05, 25 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I cannot envisage anyone sanctioning you for working in all areas of FA/GAs, and thereby actually improving content, so yes, as far as I am concerned it's OK. --Stephen 02:03, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed - these are not the drama-producing areas that people were most concerned about. Fritzpoll (talk) 10:03, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Contacting FT2

{{helpme}} Hey. Can someone direct to FT2 that I wish to speak to him on IRC tonight about something (around 7pm UTC)? I'm in no hurry, but I'd rather speak to him sooner or later (it's partially an arbcom matter which I've spoken to him about not so long back). Sceptre (talk) 10:16, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I can't promise to be round at any specific time, but I'll try. I can imagine what it's in regards to. If you need help from any arbitrator, you can email others too, if you like. FT2 (Talk | email) 10:27, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Sceptre (talk) 12:52, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Trial of a Time Lord

Welcome back! I was sad to hear of your ban, and was following your case with interest - but all that is over now. I'm just dropping a note here because I've put The Trial of a Time Lord up for GA Review, having noticed its A-class during a quality sweep. The nice Article History template on the talk page showed me that you have taken an active role in promoting this article to FA-class, and I felt you might like you to know that the article is being reviewed. I put it up for review because it was the only A-class Doctor Who article not to be a GA, and the new, more stringent A-class criteria require it to be assessed by at least 2 people, and a GA would help to assure of its quality. Hopefully, this GA can aid in the FA campaign. Happy Doctor Who 45th Anniversary! Thanks - weebiloobil (talk) 20:33, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll need to get the DVD boxset before I clean it up and boot it onto G/FAC. Happy anniversary to you too. Sceptre (talk) 20:38, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ooh, I never knew that - thanks! ╟─TreasuryTag►contribs─╢ 08:09, 25 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. I would like to help you improve the prose for the article but I will need your help as I have not seen this series. Get back to me on my talk page so we can work together. Glubbdrubb (talk) 20:39, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Holy crap, thank you!

Do you know how much suspense you caused the community? Too many admins (and former admins) are leaving, and we don't exactly wanna' lose you ;) —Ceran [speak] 23:14, 25 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome back, my friend

We missed you. :) —  $PЯINGεrαgђ  01:30 26 November, 2008 (UTC)

Good to see you are back :) seicer | talk | contribs 18:26, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah. I might take myself away from Wikipedia for a few days as a pressure valve release... thing. I'm already feeling a bit queasy. Sceptre (talk) 18:28, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
How did you get that really nice template above the talk page edit box? seicer | talk | contribs 20:52, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Special:Mytalk/Editnotice will be transcluded to the edit screen of your talk page. I nicked the idea from AGK. Sceptre (talk) 20:54, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cite serial/The Stolen Earth

Welcome back! I've been away for a while, so I've no idea what all the drama was about... Anyway, thanks for changing "Cite serial" to use a dash instead of a hyphen - the began and end fields were looking off to me, but I couldn't put my finger on what was wrong. Also, I noticed you're changing the dates in the citations in "The Stolen Earth" to d-m-y format; just a head's up that you don't have to do that manually, that's the default for the template (lucky for us). No harm in doing it if you want to, of course, I only bring it up because I know there are still requests for comment going on about this date autoformatting/linking thing, so it may end up changing again in some way. (Although I hope not, I like the new format.) --Brian Olsen (talk) 17:29, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Heh. I'm changing them all to DMY when I can because I'm pernickety about this sort of stuff (see above!). The reason I changed it was WP:MOSDASH; ndashes are recommended for ranges (such as 8 April to 15 May, or 36 to 58) It's a bit annoying that cite episode hasn't changed along with it, though... Sceptre (talk) 17:33, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

John Barrowman‎

Hi, welcome back. I don't understand your edit summaries here, and I doubt the editor adding that information will either. Rather than edit-war, would it not be a good idea to put a comment on the talk page instead? Thanks. --Rodhullandemu 21:12, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Which I've just seen you've done. Cheers. --Rodhullandemu 21:14, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The edit summaries are from: [1]. Sceptre (talk) 21:18, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Probably worth a refresher course here, then. --Rodhullandemu 21:22, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Canvassed opposition on Jayvdb's ArbCom candidacy

Thanks for highlighting this issue. I've looked into it further and I think there's clear evidence that a number of editors have been canvassed off-wiki - see WP:AN#Possible ethnic block voting in ArbCom elections?. -- ChrisO (talk) 00:37, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Turn Left (Doctor Who).jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Turn Left (Doctor Who).jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:18, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AN

Hey, someone's talking about you on AN. Gwen Gale (talk) 12:23, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

You've been blocked until the 9th of decemeber. You have been unable or unwilling to keep to the promises you made when you secured the unblock. If you feel this is out of line you may appeal the block or respond here directly to me. Protonk (talk) 22:14, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ugh. I see you've had the wool pulled over your eyes as well. Besides, I never promised anything to do with civility. I promised to keep within mainspace, with a few exceptions. And really, ParisianBlade brought it on herself, given that I warned her that I wouldn't be civil if she kept trolling me. Sceptre (talk) 22:17, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Rather than wikilawyering about just what you promised, you might be best off trying not to antagonize people in general, whether or not you can come up with a justification for everything you do. (This is something I don't always live up to fully myself, but I've managed to the extent that I still have a clean block record.) *Dan T.* (talk) 22:21, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Of course, I have justifications for accusing DWTD and PB of wikistalking: because they were. Both editors seem to be solely editing concerning me these days. Besides, I refuse to assume good faith to people who call me a "terrorist sympathiser" or accuse me of signing them up for spam, then get their boyfriends to harass me via email. Sorry. Sceptre (talk) 22:29, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Sceptre (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Just to get people's attentions: if you're going to apply a block, do it properly, and definitely don't hardblock an established user for incivility. Protonk, you've managed to block half of Be Unlimited.

Decline reason:

Ah, it's sorted out. Thanks. I still think this block is foolish (I mean, do civility blocks ever work?), but I'm not going to contest it. I'm sick of Wikipedia at the moment. — Sceptre (talk) 22:41, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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.

In case anyone cares, I'd like to say that to the extent that this block concerns Sceptre's editing out certain uses of the word "terrorist" on the OBL bio, I would not support it (though I'm sure it was done in good faith). I know nothing of the issues regarding other users, so have no opinion as to whether the block is justified on that level; it may well be. But on the "terrorist" issue, though IMO Sceptre is maddeningly wrong here, it is 1) a content dispute and 2) he's not the only one who thinks what he thinks. IronDuke 00:19, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dude?

I haven't watched the last few days' events with regard to you, but this is not good. Whatever's going wrong, this isn't the way to solve it. DurovaCharge! 23:21, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Portal and Half-Life

Thanks for the tip. I think the sections are sufficient but I will have another look at them later. I don't have any of the games on me at the moment, but you might get have better luck asking User:S@bre as he was the one that wrote most of the Development section for Half-Life 2: Lost Coast. Gary King (talk) 04:17, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome back!

Jack Merridew has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend, Go on smile! Cheers, and Happy editing!=) Cheers, Jack Merridew 05:49, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.


M62 motorway FAR

Dear Sceptre

I have read the FAR you have stated on the M62 motorway article. You stated you nominated it because "it was promoted around a year ago, and standards can change in that long a period. I'm hopig to gain opinions on how to update it to today's standard." I think it is excellent that you want to ensure the article meets today's FA standards. However, in consideration of that reason, I believe the best place you should have brought the article to in order to gain tips on how to improve it was WP:Peer review. FARs are intended for the articles for which specific FA criteria concerns are raised. I hope you can see where I am coming from, and I suggest you withdraw your nomination so that it can get a more appropriate Peer review. On another note, I do believe the article meets today's FA standards, though I would welcome info on the article about future plans regarding the motorway. Thanks for reading. Terrakyte (talk) 16:23, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfC news

Dear AfC participant,

  1. Msgj and Tnxman307 are organising the AfC challenge! It's a little competition to help improve some of the articles created through AfC and we are hoping that everyone will get involved. For level 1, you just need to bring a stub up to Start-class. Level 2 is improving a Start-class article to C-class. And so on. To get involved or for more information please see the competition page.
  2. Those of you who haven't reviewed an article recently might not have noticed the new process that was implemented this year. Reviewing articles is now more enjoyable than ever :) You might like to give it a try. All articles waiting for review are in Category:Pending Afc requests. (Please read the updated instructions.)
  3. Please consider adding {{AFC status}} to your userpage to keep track of the number of articles waiting for review. At the time of writing we are officially backlogged, so help is needed!
  4. There is currently a proposal to bring the Images for upload process under the umbrella of WikiProject Articles for creation. The rationale is that both processes are designed to allow unregistered users to take part more fully in Wikipedia, and partipants in each process can probably help each other.

If you no longer wish to receive messages from WikiProject Articles for creation, please remove your name from this list. Thank you.

Kmweber ban proposal

Per your comment in your oppose vote, see here. Daniel Case (talk) 00:55, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

About time. Sceptre (talk) 01:18, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've got an open mind. Can you show me a content edit of Kurt's which wasn't good. Mccready (talk) 01:28, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It's not so much his content edits aren't good, it's that there are so few content edits to even judge him on. Sceptre (talk) 01:32, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gloating is not becoming of you, it would be nice if you remove it and move on. Also, 03:17? You really need to get to bed earlier :) the wub "?!" 12:24, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. the wub "?!" 19:21, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You musta seen this coming...

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Wikipedia:Village pump/ACFeedback. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedy-deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. . Toodles!Jayron32.talk.contribs 21:40, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't try to force an AFD closed like that, especially after it's only been running for such a little while. In that way lies the path to maximal drama. --Cyde Weys 22:28, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The David Gerard AFD? Meh, I guess I'm the lesser of the two evils in this case. But some dolt will invariably come up and call me a troll and pin the blame on me... Sceptre (talk) 22:31, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

NFCC

Yeah. I hated to do it (more people need to hear Jeff Buckley), but we can't IAR on it. Sceptre (talk) 22:34, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Arbcom motion

Welcome back :) - Just to be helpful, I believe I'm correct to say that Arbcom votes are decided by a simple majority of those active Arbs who do not abstain, except for the vote on closing a case (which does indeed require 4 net votes). Cheers --RexxS (talk) 01:54, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring

This is not a template, but it *is* a warning. Stop edit-warring on User:Bedford's user page, or risk getting blocked. He is using the phrase as a metaphor, as you well know. And your edit summary was inappropriate. You wouldn't like it if someone referred to your desysop in an edit summary; keep that in mind. Horologium (talk) 02:03, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Fucked as a baby in a pedophile convention" is also a metaphor. Doesn't stop it from being offensive and inappropriate. Sceptre (talk) 02:04, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It's also not equivalent to what he said. Further, this was discussed on AN/I, and there was no clear consensus for removal. You and he have clashed before; this can be viewed as axe-grinding and pointy on your part. Horologium (talk) 02:10, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You are at 3RR. You will be blocked again if you don't stop. This is a bright line; you could be blocked now for edit-warring. Horologium (talk) 02:11, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe it is axe-grinding, but I take offense to being called a rapist. You would too. And as it's a grievous personal attack on another user, 3RR doesn't apply as personal attacks are inherently BLP violations. Sceptre (talk) 02:14, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
He didn't call you a rapist. Drop it, now. Horologium (talk) 02:15, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It isn't a metaphor. It's a straight accusation, and therefore, he's calling me a rapist as I was heavily involved in the pre-desysopping discussion. Sceptre (talk) 02:19, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Admin help/userspace reorganisation

{{adminhelp}}

  1. Can an admin please delete these scripts? (As they're scripts, they cannot be put into C:CSD):
    By the way, when I need some help with deleting some .css transclusions, I'll re-insert the template. Sorry for being a nuisance. Sceptre (talk) 12:23, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
     Done - if you need this kind of help, feel free just to drop by my talkpage. Fritzpoll (talk) 12:43, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  2. And again, for these pages:
    Thanks, Sceptre (talk) 17:14, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Hut 8.5 17:49, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. Sceptre (talk) 17:52, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Close AFD Deleted

As per your request, I deleted your Close Afd pages. Let me know if I did that correctly. Thanks. Hiberniantears (talk) 15:28, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Sceptre (talk) 15:29, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hallelujah (Leonard Cohen song)

Please give a proper reason for seeking to delete any reference to the Alexandra Burke version X Factor in the article. Saying "fuck off" is not acceptable. I suspect WP:IDONTLIKEIT, which as you know is also unacceptable. Ghmyrtle (talk) 09:41, 23 December 2008 (UTC) PS - sorry I misread your edit earlier, but the same principle of WP:AGF still applies :) Ghmyrtle (talk) 09:51, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Controversy" is a word to avoid because of it effectively meaning "waah I don't like the article subject". This is no exception. Reverting the page backwards to when we had stuff about the grassroots campaign where it should be. Sceptre (talk) 10:13, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
OK, but that doesn't explain your other edits or your aggressive and insulting edit summaries. The photo is irrelevant - it is not a record cover, and it adds no value whatsoever to the article. As you've correctly taken out some of the worst prose, the article does not resemble a fansite, so I've reverted that as well. Ghmyrtle (talk) 13:11, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Seeing as album covers are discouraged for song articles, that parameter shouldn't even exist... Sceptre (talk) 15:18, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas

Wishing you the very best for the season. Guettarda (talk) 00:47, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Sceptre! I just wanted to wish you and your family a merry Christmas! May this Christmas be full of great cheer and holiday spirit. Again, merry Christmas! Ashbey 00:58, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you don't celebrate Christmas, then happy holidays!
Real-World Perspective Barnstar
I was trying to find a barnstar that you do not already have and I think that this might be the only one! It is for the outstanding achievement in article editing and featured content writing that is the masterpiece of The Stolen Earth. Of course, it was too long for me to read, but quantity equals quality, right? –thedemonhog talk • edits 09:42, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. And to think, I'm not finished writing it yet... I used to think that I wouldn't be able to hit 60kb; to hit 80kb would be daunting... Sceptre (talk) 12:29, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

DID we talk about that?

Hey K. I remember about twelve months ago, I talked to you about "Hallelujah", but other than that, my memory's a bit fuzzy (I know something about the lyric being scrawled on a wall). If you're not that busy, do you want to help out with writing the article? Sceptre (talk) 13:38, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Goodness, my memory has blanked. I've been, as you may have noticed, almost totally inactive here for months due to (a) school and (b) laziness. I just watched the entire fourth series of Doctor Who in the past three days though.....*contented sigh* K. Lásztocskatalk 02:29, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ages ago. My memory is weird like that; can't remember what I had for lunch yesterday, but I can remember minutae of conversation from ages ago. I probably guessed that studying was the reason you've been inactive (as I said, "if you're not too busy"); I really should be revising myself. But that would ruin Christmas. It's a shame David's leaving; I really liked him. Oh, and have you seen the FA I made of the first part of the series finale? I haven't even finished it yet: I've got a book coming on Monday (would've got it Christmas Eve had Amazon not screwed around with my card); and I've got to get my hands on the DVD commentaries without spending £60. Ah well; I'll be on the couch watching the new episode in fifteen hours and writing the article in sixteen ;). Merry Christmas. Sceptre (talk) 02:42, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Careful there, remember I'm a whole series behind you....NO SPOILERS!!! But yes, David Tennant is amazing. And hot. And....I'm gonna go back to my scholarly work now. K. Lásztocskatalk 02:51, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
We're literally three minutes in front of you (i.e., we've already had the cold open as a charity thing). Have fun :) Sceptre (talk) 02:56, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oh yes, and I doubt you're following football this year, but we're top of the Premier League (at Christmas!) :). Sceptre (talk) 02:57, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Eh, as much as I've been able to.....didn't see a match in ages but my dad did keep me updated on the standings. :D K. Lásztocskatalk 03:42, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hallelujah

Here's some source material to start with: [2], [3], [4]. Be sure to access them soon, as you can only view them for free for a short time. WesleyDodds (talk) 04:46, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Sceptre (talk) 11:38, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Fringe science

An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Fringe science/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Fringe science/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Gazimoff 00:57, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Userpage

Hello, will you consider perm semi, as opposed to full prot of your userpage? It is the wiki way. Best, NonvocalScream (talk) 05:59, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tried it. It failed. Shit happens. No thanks. Have a nice day :) Sceptre (talk) 06:00, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm confused

Are you a rapist, or an idiot? an idiot who rapes? Someone who rapes idiots? At any rate, this piece of excrement appreciates your helpful informative post. Thanks much and carry on! KillerChihuahua?!? 22:20, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just a rapist. Die4Dixie would be the "idiot" in this case :) Sceptre (talk) 22:21, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oh thanks, that clears it all... no, that isn't right. Meh. This is an odd place at times. KillerChihuahua?!? 22:23, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

I'm really impressed with what you've done with that article, and suggest that you take it to FAC soon. I think it's GA passable now, but before you take it to FAC, you should check out the Doctor Who production material available: Doctor Who Confidential at Christmas, The Next Doctor Podcast, and Doctor Who Magazine 403 (and most-likely, 404) will all have quite a bit of information about him. Sceptre (talk) 22:59, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comments. I listened to the podcast hoping to gleam something from it but there wasn't much said about his casting or anything like that. The current issue of Doctor Who Magazine didn't go into too much detail either but perhaps the next issue (which has a full set report of the Christmas special) will now that the veil of secrecy has been lifted. I'm hesitant to take the article to FAC before his film comes out; the current section about his directing work is a bit light and I'd rather not go through all the FAC fuss only to end up dramatically changing the article in six months' time.Bradley0110 (talk) 23:41, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism articles

Give it up. I whole-heartedly agree with your cause and support it 100%, but with the current trend of "zomg keep it has sources" votes at AFD, you can't do shit all. You're just going to get more stressed out if you try and push; believe me, it happened with me. Sorry. Sceptre (talk) 04:22, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not responding to anything else on that AfD, and thankfully there are others who see the problems that come with it. All it means is that one has to evolve with the time and break new ground here on WP; perhaps I can work on creating in the future, Praise of Vladimir Putin as an aside to the Criticism of Vladimir Putin article. Of course, you'll likely see many of the same people Keeping, rushing to Delete that one. It wouldn't be WP:POINTish in the slightest at all, it's a valid topic I know, someone who has 85% approval ratings is surely going to have a lot of praise thrown at him in media, books, scholar journals, etc. What has gotten up my goat somewhat is at the bottom here; in that there has been a complete breakdown of WP:AGF because of this nomination; I've left messages for all 3 there, as you'll see. Also, you have mail..... Cheers, --Russavia Dialogue 04:31, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
There's a good point about approval ratings: even Bush, who is languishing in the high-30s, deserves three-eighths of positivity in an article :) Sceptre (talk) 04:34, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Twat

"Twat" is actually quite an inappropriate thing to be calling your coeditors. Sexually demeaning terms aren't tolerated in working environments, and they shouldn't be here, either. I've blocked you for 72 hours. - Nunh-huh 07:06, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You have been temporarily blocked from editing in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. Nunh-huh 07:06, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Sceptre (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I really don't see what the big difference is. "Twat", as it's used in the UK, is a mild swear word at best. Besides, it's 7am, I've been up all night. I'm just being a bit silly. Don't assume malice when stupidity will suffice. Sceptre (talk) 07:16, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Seeing as you are treating this as a joke, it is evident you don't get why you're blocked. Maybe the break will help you understand that societal differences and time of edits aren't excuses to insulting fellow contributors wantonly. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 07:38, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Note to reviewing administrator: please review the thread at Wikipedia:AN/I#Sceptre.C2.A0.28talk.C2.A0.C2.B7_contribs.29 and differences therein before coming to your decision. - Nunh-huh 07:24, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Twat is a vulgar, demeaning, sexist term for the external female genitalia. It's use can only serve to relegate women to the role of "Other" and perpetuate a misogynistic patriarchal hierarchy that aims to limit women to the role of sexual object and further dehumanize them. Do not be confused.Die4Dixie (talk) 07:26, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Societal differences. If a primetime television show in the UK said "spaz", there'd be thousands of complaints. It got used in Heroes and got no complaints. Sceptre (talk) 07:30, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ridiculous. Reinstate immediately.Manhattan Samurai (talk) 07:42, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
As an American living in Britain, I've run into this sort of problem before. The bottom line though is once you know that the word you are using is offensive you need to stop using it and apologise. Sceptre, societal differences is a reason to make a mistake, but now you need to acknowledge that it was a mistake, apologise, and not use it again, ok? dougweller (talk) 11:36, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
[Ignoring my retirement to make this comment.]
This block was warranted. Sceptre, you're back on to the slippery slope that led to your ban. You're also actively being a source of disruption through your comments, and were blocked as a result. I'm not buying the "It's an okay thing to say in the U.K." argument—I'm Scottish; I know it is: but we are an international project, and your conduct ought to reflect that. There are no two ways around this.
If Wikipedia's getting too much for you, take a WikiBreak. Make sure you're not spending too much time on here; there's loads more to do besides the Internet and besides Wikipedia. Please—before you get too much for Wikipedia...
Regards, AGK 14:42, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

{{helpme}} Can someone post this on AN?: Regarding OrangeMarlin, that was hardly an insult. In that context, I was using it analogous to the word "dick". You don't need to get into hidden long-past grudges; sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. I left OM alone after he agreed to the parole, and only brought the matter up on ANI precisely because it's the behaviour he exhibited pre-parole that he admitted wasn't the best of attitudes. Maybe "twat" wasn't the best of words, but I'm using it in the context of "bleedin' idiot" instead of "fucking asshole". So as it stands, a 72 hour block for one non-insult and one relatively tame insult where I've arguably been provoked, even given past history, and with no-one just to point it out and say "dude, what the hell?", is way way overexcessive. As I wasn't planning on doing any major editing tonight—a book I've ordered hasn't come yet (why should it? It's Christmas)—I'll be fine with a 24-hour, or even a 31-hour block. But really... 72 hours is reaching into the bounds of punishment rather than prevention. Sceptre (talk) 15:33, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The whole thing seems like yet another silly drama that this site is infested with. On the one hand, Sceptre has a tendency to act like a... (better not fill in any body parts here, lest I get blocked for incivility too!)... lots of people wish he'd grow up a little. On the other hand, throwing a big fit because somebody used a bad word is silly, too. Thicken your skin, everybody. *Dan T.* (talk) 23:52, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I suppose it all boils down to what we want WP to be: A pristine "academic" and "collegial" undertaking? A hwut? Ain't no such thing. A place where we try to make the best of the sack of ((baaad word)) that we and our forebears and offspring lived through and will inherit? Hmmm (scratches beard, might do...). Or a free for all? Not good probably. Sigh. •Jim62sch•dissera! 05:01, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Will. I missed most of what went on here. May I offer a bit of advice? Use other words. Sure, I understand that intensifiers vary around the world — 'twat' is one that sets some people off. Use of such words backfires on you, so just dig deeper into your vocabulary; English is quite a rich language and I'm sure you can find ways to express yourself that convey your meaning without bringing the wrath of the self-righteous down on you.

You know some of my history here; look at any of my posts for the last four years and you'll be hard pressed to find any usages of hot-button words. Yet I've managed to express myself. I have been called uncivil a number of times, but no one's ever come up with reasoning beyond that they don't like my opinions. Opinions alone are worthless if the reasoning behind them has no substance (and everyone has opinions;). So, focus on the reasoning and don't shoot yourself in the butt.

Cheers, Jack Merridew 05:07, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The path you are taking

Sceptre, the path you have carved out for yourself will not do you any good. As a young Briton, you have much potential. Don't waste it on those who you dislike. Step above the system. Torment begets torment, strife begets strife. It has to stop somewhere, so why not with you? I am proposing that you stay away from Bedford and Die4Dixie and work towards becoming a trusted member of this community. Right now you are harming your cause more than you are helping it. Geoff Plourde (talk) 09:16, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year!

Dear Sceptre,

Wishing you a happy new year, and very best wishes for 2009. Whether we were friends or not in the past year, I hope 2009 will be better for us both.

Kind regards,

Majorly talk 21:05, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism???

I've been here at WP for more than 4 years and don't remember ever vandalizing anything, why do you think I'd start now? Rogerd revetred my edit without any explanation, that's more of a vandalism. I added the category because I arrived there from the Thomas Ferebee article which is already included there. The only options were either to add the category to Tibbets' article or to remove it from Ferebee's as well; it was based on common sense to choose the former option after reading the article. – Alensha talk 18:20, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's a wartime action for which the legality or lack thereof is debatable. Given that Tibbets and Ferebee probably have descendants, it's best to err on the side of caution and not characterise them of murdering, especially seeing as they were following orders. Harry Truman doesn't have the category on it either. Sceptre (talk) 18:26, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just checked it, Hitler isn't categorized there either, it surprised me even more... But I still think Wikipedia looks like a hypocrite when killers who killed 10 people are called mass murderers, and those who killed millions aren't called that. :( Can we at least include Tibbets in the "People associated with the Hiroshima bombings" category? Ferebee is there. – Alensha talk 18:34, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that category is okay for inclusion, I think. The point I'm trying to make is, that Hiroshima and Nagasaki are legal until proven otherwise. Seeing as people like Peter Sutcliffe were convicted of murder, it's fair to call him a murderer. But in the case of Ferebee and Tibbets, it's a grey area. Sceptre (talk) 18:38, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It is not a gray area. Tibbets and Ferebee where following lawful orders and have not been found by any legitimate authority, not even the Japanese, to be guilty of a war crime. To call them mass murderers is just pushing a POV, and Alensha knows it. --rogerd (talk) 18:54, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, the Japanese did find the bombing illegal... whether that counts internationally, I don't know, don't care, and don't want to get into. Sceptre (talk) 18:59, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You know, Roger, I still believe that someone who murders lots of innocent people is a mass murderer, whether you call it a POV or not. There is no gray area here, it's not like accidentally hitting someone by car. If not even Hitler is in the category then it's okay that this guy isn't there, though I still find it sad. But I don't buy that killing people is only a crime if international law says so. (Sceptre, sorry for hijacking your talk page to answer Roger, I just had to add this. I'm finished with it.) – Alensha talk 20:51, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As you entered the WikiCup late

File:Happiness in Slavery video.jpg

Can you please clarify why you believe that "NFCC#8, IIRC, is/was specifically excepted from being a speedy deletion rationale"? I'd be very grateful if you would copy your reply to my talk as I rely on the yellow new messages box to see that I have a message. Stifle (talk) 22:56, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The reason is that a criteria for speedy deletion needs to be objective, unquestionable, frequent, and non-redundant. Anything about the NFCC is the latter three. But for NFCC#8... millions of IFDs have proven that NFCC#8 is very subjective. To your credit, you did use {{Di-disputed fair use rationale}}; I think it was your edit summary that tipped me off (as it says "This image is up for deletion per WP:CSD.") Sceptre (talk) 23:30, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That's the Twinkle edit summary. The consensus at WT:CSD is that a disputed non-free rationale should be tagged as disputed for seven days and if nobody objects, it can be deleted thereafter. Stifle (talk) 11:41, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stereotypes of Jews (2nd nomination)

Would you mind revisiting this AfD, given the current state of the article and the sources provided for expansion on the talk page? Thanks. seresin ( ¡? )  01:40, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Sceptre. At my suggestion the 2nd nomination was reopened and the votes from the 3rd nomination were merged in. This has resulted in an expanded version of the 2nd nom in which your delete vote appears twice. You could revisit the AfD and tidy this up. Thanks! EdJohnston (talk) 16:39, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Doing so. Sceptre (talk) 16:40, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Sceptre/Archive_55&oldid=1163261645"