User talk:TreasuryTag/Archives/2008/Mar
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
AIV
Thanks for seeking to prevent vandalism! However, I advise you: please don't list a vandal on WP:AIV simply for vandalism after a block. The IP must have received a final warning recently, except in an extreme case, which most of the vandals you've listed in the last few minutes haven't. I'm not going to block any IP or registered user that hasn't received a recent final warning, unless it's an extreme case, and I doubt that much of any other admins will either. Nyttend (talk) 15:20, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
- OK. TWinkle has an option that said precisely what came out (!) so I assumed that that was fine. Porcupine (prickle me! · contribs · status) 15:26, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
Now you seem to be reporting IPs with no warnings at all. Even one with exactly one edit ever. Please read the instructions at WP:AIV. Thank you. —Wknight94 (talk) 17:35, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
- Oh, those are for removing speedy delete notices four months ago. I feel a little better (since you can't see deleted contributions), but you should still take a look at the IP's contributions to determine if a block is warranted. Edits and warnings from four months ago have no bearing on blockability now. —Wknight94 (talk) 17:41, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Archiving seems to be broken; hopefully this'll fix it! —TreasuryTag talkcontribs 08:02, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
The drums, the drums, the neverending drumbeat.
Failed the Utopia GA as it's nowhere near what the other GAs in the project are like - use the Doomsday article (as it's FA) as a template. Shannon Sullivan has accounts of all of the series 3 episodes, so that might be helpful. Thanks! Will (talk) 19:01, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
- Fair enough.--Porcupine (prickle me! · contribs · status) 21:38, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Archiving seems to be broken; hopefully this'll fix it! —TreasuryTag talkcontribs 08:02, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for February 18th and 25th, 2008.
 |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 8 | 18 February 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 9 | 25 February 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:06, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
- Archiving seems to be broken; hopefully this'll fix it! —TreasuryTag talkcontribs 08:02, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
Re: Buddy Farts?
No problem. I wish I was an admin, but I still have a ways to go. Two One Six Five Five τ ʃ 00:30, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
- Archiving seems to be broken; hopefully this'll fix it! —TreasuryTag talkcontribs 08:03, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi - mentoring ending...
Yeah, been planning something since this morning, but RL is interfering. I'll try to do it asap. --Dweller (talk) 13:23, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
- Archiving seems to be broken; hopefully this'll fix it! —TreasuryTag talkcontribs 08:03, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
I have filed a notice about you at WP:AN. Good luck. --Dweller (talk) 14:44, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
- Nice one, mate. Tonywalton Talk 20:47, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
Archiving seems to be broken; hopefully this'll fix it! —TreasuryTag talkcontribs 08:03, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
I've approved you. Good luck! ScarianCall me Pat 16:39, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
- Cheers!-- TreasuryTagtalkcontribs 16:55, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
Archiving seems to be broken; hopefully this'll fix it! —TreasuryTag talkcontribs 08:03, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi, TreasuryTag. Your recent disambig + clean-up using AWB of Maclay School didn't work out well, since the images were left to show at full size. I'll put it back. You may want to check and see what went wrong. Tim Ross (talk) 18:15, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
- Will do - thanks for letting me know! TreasuryTagtalkcontribs 18:28, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
Archiving seems to be broken; hopefully this'll fix it! —TreasuryTag talkcontribs 08:03, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
AfD of The Romance of Helen Trent
I suggest tht you take a look at the article for deletion soon. I have added multiple third party sources. Undeath (talk) 17:01, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
- What AfD? I've no idea what you're talking about!! —TreasuryTag talkcontribs 17:55, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for March 3rd, 2008.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 10 | 3 March 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:19, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
Welcome to VandalProof!
Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, TreasuryTag! You have now been added to the list of authorized users, so if you haven't already, simply download and install VandalProof from our main page.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or any other moderator, or you can post a message on the discussion page.
Finally, I'd like to appologise for any delay, and wish you luck with VandalProof! Ale_Jrbtalk 19:27, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
- Oh, how lovely, thanks! —TreasuryTag talk contribs 19:34, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
- Hi. Unfortunately, your access to VandalProof access has been revoked due to a number of blocks for edit warring, which were concealed by your username change. For security reasons, and to prevent abuse, we do not allow users with this type of block to use VandalProof. I apologise for any misunderstanding and inconvenience. Ale_Jrbtalk 20:44, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
Re: Blocking of user
No problem. Rudget (?) 12:29, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
Please also note the following: [1]. Camaron | Chris (talk) 12:44, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
Your signature
Please could you consider shrinking your signature? At the moment it is huge, taking four lines on an edit window and disrupting the editing of places were it appears. In this edit your signature alone takes up more than three quarters of the total edit you made. Thanks in advance! ➨ REDVEЯS dreamt about you last night 13:02, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
- I'll look into reducing it later this afternoon. —TreasuryTag talk contribs 13:12, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
- Sorry about this, but now you're transcluding User:TreasuryTag/Sig2 on each page you sign. This puts strain on the servers as it needs to be fetched again every time the page is refreshed, any change you make will force updating of every page you've signed, and it's a vandalism magnet - one change and your signature on every page could be made to read "FUCK YOU!!" or the like. Please consider changing to a code signature. Thank. ➨ REDVEЯS dreamt about you last night 09:39, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
I've whittled it down so that the transclusion is at bare minimum; I'm just about to fix it so that vandalism won't show up... —[[User:TreasuryTag|User:TreasuryTag/Sig2]]—[[User talk:TreasuryTag|User:TreasuryTag/Sig2]]—[[Special:Contributions/TreasuryTag|User:TreasuryTag/Sig2]] 09:52, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
- You can get around the transclusion problem by using subst:, which causes pages to only fetch your signature once, when the signature is first posted. Equazcion •✗/C • 10:09, 9 Mar 2008 (UTC)
- Indeed, but then we get back to the length issue :-) —TreasuryTag—t—c 10:10, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
- This is just after a little fiddling, cut down quite a bit I think:
- Indeed, but then we get back to the length issue :-) —TreasuryTag—t—c 10:10, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
<small style="white-space:nowrap;size:95%;color:#2F74FF"><small style="background:#FFFFFF;border:#EB8500 1px solid;padding:0px 3px 1px 4px">'''TreasuryTag'''</small>—<small style="background:#DBDBDB;border:#EB8500 1px solid;padding:0px 3px 1px 4px">'''t'''</small>—<small style="background:#DBDBDB;border:#EB8500 1px solid;padding:0px 3px 1px 4px">'''c'''</small></small>
- Produces: TreasuryTag—t—c
Yeah, that's pretty good, thanks :-) After a little fiddling of my own, I managed to get it down to... —TreasuryTag—t | c 10:16, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
FYI - what is vandalism?
The IP edit at Talk:Secret Weapon (album) wasn't vandalism... the comment was part of a discussion, and was related to the IP's previous legitimate edits. Please use caution when assessing edits. --Ckatzchatspy 11:08, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
- Oh, I see - sorry, I just assumed that ignoring {{uw-tilde}} was bad-faith!! —TreasuryTag—t—c 11:09, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I believe that you have reverted a couple of my edits to discussions and also left some warnings in my talk. Please can you have a closer look at things before doing this, I was editing my old discussion posts (in fact one of them to say that I could not remove one of my posts (because you had reverted it)). Thanks Jackocleebrown (talk) 11:12, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
- Ah, that's 'cos you deleted the village-pump discussion for seemingly no reason, and I assumed that your other edits to suicide-related pages were also iffy. Pardon me. —TreasuryTag—t—c 11:14, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
- No problem, I will leave the Village pump section now anyhow. I was removing it because we have reached concensus on talk:suicide and it is no longer helpful to have the two discussions going on in parallel. I'll put a note to that effect on the page. Jackocleebrown (talk) 11:17, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
- I've been watching your reverts and the complaints posted here, Treasury, and I request that you please try to be a little more careful when reverting. I'm assuming you're using Huggle for these, and it can be tempting to work quickly through many edits when using that program, but please consider carefully whether each edits actually constitutes vandalism. Talk page edits in particular should be handled with extra care. Equazcion •✗/C • 11:18, 9 Mar 2008 (UTC)
- No problem, I will leave the Village pump section now anyhow. I was removing it because we have reached concensus on talk:suicide and it is no longer helpful to have the two discussions going on in parallel. I'll put a note to that effect on the page. Jackocleebrown (talk) 11:17, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
- I agree. Please make use of the talk page; it does appear that you are editing simply to favour the status quo sometimes and with no consultation. dfutter (talk) 11:19, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
- While I apologise for my seeming carelessness, I would ask that you give me credit that I wasn't trying to disrupt discussions and maintain the cabal-approved version of the page. —TreasuryTag—t—c 11:23, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
- I agree. Please make use of the talk page; it does appear that you are editing simply to favour the status quo sometimes and with no consultation. dfutter (talk) 11:19, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
- Further to this, I've reverted your messages on Jackocleebrown's page; pardon the comment there ("no vandalism, just legitimate edits to user's own posts."), but it has to be clear to future readers that the editor didn't do anything wrong. Please ask if you have any questions about this. --Ckatzchatspy 11:21, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
In addition be careful when adding speedy tags. Two article that you just tagged Miracles of Life and Newport Free Grammar School should not have been tagged. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 16:38, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
- Actually, I feel that they should, since they fail to assert their notability. I'll nominate them for deletion shortly, I think. —TreasuryTag—t—c 16:40, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
- I'm fine with you nominating them for deletion. But I do feel that the speedy tags were OTT. We are here to write an encylopedia. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 16:47, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
- Indeed we are - I just feel that they don't meet the relevant notability guidelines, and I assumed that the {{db-a7}} tag was for tagging articles subject to the A7 criterion. The requirement is that they assert their notability and they transparently don't. —TreasuryTag—t—c 16:49, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
- Speedy tags are for articles that can and should be quickly deleted without debate. The bit about "asserting" notability in the guildline is to catch people writing about random junk and allows admins to simply delete it without having to go through a debate. Does an autobiography article about a person who merits a wikipedia article assert notability by merely being written by that person? I'm not sure but not willing to speedy it. It needs debating. Likewise a school. Concensus is that schools are considered notable, especially such an old one. When the arilce isn't new then speedying it is silly. These things need discussing. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 16:58, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
- Actually, I'd have said that an autobiography article about a person who merits a Wikipedia article would merely duplicate the contents of that article, both being biographical!! Anyway, I'm still at a loss to see where the argument is. They both fail to meet the relevant guidelines and don't even attempt to. —TreasuryTag—t—c 17:00, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
- Speedy tags are for articles that can and should be quickly deleted without debate. The bit about "asserting" notability in the guildline is to catch people writing about random junk and allows admins to simply delete it without having to go through a debate. Does an autobiography article about a person who merits a wikipedia article assert notability by merely being written by that person? I'm not sure but not willing to speedy it. It needs debating. Likewise a school. Concensus is that schools are considered notable, especially such an old one. When the arilce isn't new then speedying it is silly. These things need discussing. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 16:58, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
- Indeed we are - I just feel that they don't meet the relevant notability guidelines, and I assumed that the {{db-a7}} tag was for tagging articles subject to the A7 criterion. The requirement is that they assert their notability and they transparently don't. —TreasuryTag—t—c 16:49, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
- I'm fine with you nominating them for deletion. But I do feel that the speedy tags were OTT. We are here to write an encylopedia. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 16:47, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Your sig
Doesn't work... WEBURIEDOURSECRETSINTHEGARDEN tell me a joke... 20:43, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
- I'm in Firefox; hold on, I'll try it in IE. —TreasuryTag—t—c 21:09, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Works now. Thanks for pointing it out!! —TreasuryTag—t—c 21:11, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
- I'm using firefox and the contributions tag works but the user and talk tags don't :-( Theresa Knott | The otter sank 21:21, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
- Actually, thinking about it that's probably because you commented on this page. Ypu might also want to wikilink your name to your userpage though. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 21:25, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
- Good thought :-) —TreasuryTag—t—c 21:31, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Astrid Peth's AfD is being discussed at WT:AFD
Hello Treasury Tag. Another editor has noted the way Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Astrid Peth was closed and is afraid it was not the right procedure. Though the close appears unorthodox, your nomination was also a bit puzzling, since what you wanted to achieve could be handled by an ordinary merge, which does not need admin help. You are welcome to add your own opinion to the thread at WT:AFD. EdJohnston (talk) 18:48, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
- OK, I'll have a peep there. Thanks for letting me know. —TreasuryTag—t—c 19:44, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for March 13th and 17th, 2008.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 11 | 13 March 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 12 | 17 March 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 23:34, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
3RR warning me
Come on, you know no-one would block me for reverting on current eventing Doctor Who pages. Besides, we're on the same side, right? Will (talk) 17:07, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
- I've extended the expiry time on List of Doctor Who serials to an undefined length. Hope this helps. Rudget. 17:19, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
Planet of the Ood
Fair enough, To be honest we have about as much information on the third as the first two, it would be number four i'd resist to start, but if this is the way you want it to be I'm not going to stop you, may I suggest we revert this closer to the date to prevent my time from being wasted,
Much thanks, --Wiggs (talk) 22:32, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
- The redirect has been reverted. Frankly, TT, why did you do it? I could see maybe suggesting "don't do it" before the article was created - but after? Yes. it is a stub, but it has references, even information on the DVD, and the episode airs in a few weeks. --Ckatzchatspy 08:26, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
- I understand you don't quite want the artical yet, this is fair enough, but I did spend rather a lot of time creating the artical last night only to have all traces of it unfindable this morning, can I note for the future its good pratice to keep these articals in a sandbox until a time when the exact same artical is excepted, I understand this certantly wasn't done on purpose but it would have been nice to be able to have reverted it back at a later date rather then having to completely recreate the artical.--Wiggs (talk) 11:33, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
My mistake, I was redircted to the list of series page then went to the artical (at the top) from there and then to the hitory section, I must have been on the previously created page, (when the Ood episode was annonced someone created an artical under the wrong name "Planet of the Ood (doctor who)"). Thanks, I do know how wikipedia works, its just I confused the previous artical with the current one both of which redirect to the list of serials page.--Wiggs (talk) 11:47, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
How's this future episode article look like?
The Unicorn and the Wasp (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I know we don't have articles for 4.4 through to 4.6, but I couldn't help it :) Sceptre (talk) 16:34, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
Image caption
Actually, it can be seen if you hover over the image :) Sceptre (talk) 19:47, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
- Yeah, so I noticed - sorry for doubting you :-D —TreasuryTag—t—c 19:50, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
Template
Quick placeholder - give me a sec. to write a note re: the speedy and the template please. --Ckatzchatspy 20:59, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
- I'm waiting... —TreasuryTag—t—c 21:00, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
- Please don't take it personally if there is an opposing view... I can't speak to the other stuff that seems to have occurred today, but with regards to the template I think that some of your ideas can definitely improve the existing "future" template. (As for the speedy, a) don't feel you have to nuke it yet if you don't want to, and b) I reverted it only because I noticed that it was also making the Pompeii article pop up in the "speedy" list.
I think there is a way to format it to avoid that happening; if you still wish to speedy, I can help figure out what to do.I see you've found the formatting.) --Ckatzchatspy 21:10, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
- Please don't take it personally if there is an opposing view... I can't speak to the other stuff that seems to have occurred today, but with regards to the template I think that some of your ideas can definitely improve the existing "future" template. (As for the speedy, a) don't feel you have to nuke it yet if you don't want to, and b) I reverted it only because I noticed that it was also making the Pompeii article pop up in the "speedy" list.
Cheer up...
Don't let other get to you. Cussing won't help. Have a cup of tea, and remember we're doing this for fun. — Edokter • Talk • 21:35, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi
Hi. Don't begin to understand the issues that everyone's got hot under the collar about, but do understand very well that people get hot under the collar on Wikipedia. Generally, (not saying that's the case here) it's over something amazingly banal, that if you tried to explain to your friends would leave them bemused, if not amused.
A Wikibreak's a fine idea. I'd be somewhat saddened if you didn't return, but that's your decision. Hope to see you back refreshed when you're ready. --Dweller (talk) 21:45, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
Inappropriate use of the rollback button
Hi. In regards to this edit on Partners in Crime (Doctor Who), please remember that the rollback button should only be used to revert simple and indisputable vandalism, not as a convenience in edit wars. Inappropriate use of the button may result in that privilege being removed by an administrator. Thank you. --B (talk) 22:31, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
- Sorry, when I left this message, I was going through the AN3 report and didn't know that it had already been removed. If, after a reasonable period of time (like a month), you would like to have rollback restored, come to me and provided that there is no recent edit warring in your history, I will restore it. --B (talk) 22:49, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
- They removed mine aswell!--Lerdthenerd (talk) 14:43, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for March 24th, 2008.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 13 | 24 March 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:59, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
hi treasure
Just read your post on WP:ANI. Please don't despair, we're not all !%*!s honest, -well not all the time.:) special, random, Merkinsmum 22:08, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
- Please don't leave over this. It's a minor silly dispute. Water under the bridge. Enigma message 05:22, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
backlink removal
I was testing the full twinkle tool out :) Sceptre (talk) 16:07, 30 March 2008 (UTC)