User talk:Trebor

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Will be around very inconsistently for a bit; real-life problems. Trebor 15:57, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Archives:1, 2

If you leave a message here, I will probably respond here. If I've left a message at your talk page, you can respond there or here.

I am an administrator (blocks, protects, deletions), so ask me if you need assistance requiring the extra tools. I am open to recall; if five editors in good standing (which I will judge liberally) request it, I will stand for reconfirmation.

Add a new comment

Contents

[edit] Re: Transclusion of signature

So I can't usee the \{{User:Averross/signature}}? I'm not objecting or bitching or making excuses or anything, but I just see it all the time. Is there substitution method? I do like my siggy. Also, I'm not sure what your second comment meant. --Averross 18:10, 22 February 2007 (UTC) :( -Okay, I figured out how to properly get the signature using preferences, now all I can't figure out is your second comment. --Averross (u♠t♠c) 18:19, 22 February 2007 (UTC) -Okay, I see now. Thanks a lot. --Averross (u♠t♠c) 13:08, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ernest Emerson

Ernest Emerson Featured Article Review: It's been a week, I believe I addressed most if not all of your concerns. Let me know what else I need to do.

Thanks again for taking the time to review. Mike Searson 19:39, 22 February 2007 (UTC)


I think I've addressed everything you requested, can you have another look if you get a minute? Thanks. --Mike Searson 14:05, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your support! --Mike Searson 16:41, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] William Sledd

OK, it is time We Tubers had our own wiki. I am starting a wiki just on YouTube guys with more than 100 subscribers. I need ten good sysops. I've seen your contributions and that you realise there is a problem here on WP with too many mems being added in. We need to broaden the idea of wikis. I would like to invite you to participate. Please let me know by emailing me. frummer 08:48, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/SkyTrain (Vancouver)

I believe your objections have been fixed. Can you take another look at it? Thanks. — Selmo (talk) 21:50, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

It's been a week and a bit since my recent request for adminship passed, and since I haven't managed to delete the Main Page - yet - I figure it's safe to send these out. Thanks a lot for participating in my RfA; I hope to do a good job. If you see me doing something wrong, need help, or just want to have a chat, please don't hesitate to drop by :) – riana_dzasta 13:00, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Good luck with your ongoing RfA! – riana_dzasta 13:00, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Congratulations!

Congratulations!
It is my great pleasure to inform you that your Request for Adminship has
closed successfully and you are now an administrator!

Useful Links:
• Administrators' reading list • Administrators' how-to guide •
• Administrator's Noticeboard • Administrator's Noticeboard for Incidents • Administrator's Noticeboard for 3RR •
Your admin logs:
• blocks • deletions • moves • protects • uploads •

If you have questions, feel free to leave a talk page message for me or any other admin. Again, congratulations! Essjay (Talk) 01:08, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes indeed, congratulations to you and all your puppet friends . Regards, Newyorkbrad 01:12, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Heh, that was an interesting RfA for a while :) Congratulations, and all the best. – riana_dzasta 07:53, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re:Vandalism

Awww...noobie admin!

Hehe, if no vandalism has occurred within 24 hours of being issued a final warning (t3 or t4), then I won't block. If the person has been blocked very recently, you can go directly to a t4 warning. If they vandalize, then you can block. For now, I won't unblock since I think the IP is not being shared, and should still remember being warned just two days prior for vandalism. Btw, congrats! Nishkid64 15:31, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Restaurants in the City of Thuringowa - the result was delete

just like to say thanks for doing what you did now you should go and look at the other 200+ pages that are the same as what mine was, i stated this page so i could link to it from the main page but i guess i was the unlucky one that got picked out this time Thuringowacityrep 23:56, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Deletion of User:Potus7

I've undeleted User:Potus7, as the page was made with the permission of the user. "Page created by another user" isn't a CSD, and neither is "possibly attack page." Next time, if you aren't sure as to a user page's purpose, please ask its creator or the user it's associated with instead of deleting it. JDoorjam JDiscourse 22:53, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Films February Newsletter

The February 2007 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. Cbrown1023 talk 23:57, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XII - February 2007

The February 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

Delivered by grafikbot 17:03, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Input is appreciated

Dear editor, per your suggestion in the closing statement of this recent AfD, I would appreciate your input here: Talk:List of films that most frequently use the word "fuck"#Arbitrary cut-off discussion. Best regards, --Cpt. Morgan (Reinoutr) 09:22, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Jackie Barnes

You deleted his page but he has done extensive touring worldwide and recorded on over 15 albums? You said you deleted it because of a google search? Jackie has his own official website www.jackie-barnes.com and is mentioned on www.jimmybarnes.com and www.jimmybarnesonline.com if you do a google australia search you will find a lot more results under his name due to the release of his song "Same woman" on the Double Happiness record. Will you reconsider re loading his page? it has been there for quite a while now until you deleted it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Thongchai4286 (talk • contribs) 18:25, 2 March 2007 (UTC).

I will talk to the person who runs his website. He is still dealing with google in terms of getting the page searchable. I think it is to a degree for the moment. so far the forums seem to be coming up.

There are some factors that show he is eligable to have his page re loaded. He sung a duet on the Double Happiness album by Jimmy Barnes. That album debuted at number 1 on the Australian charts. The song from the album "same woman" has been on rotation in radio in australia as well as in many cd stores around Australia. He has toured internationally as a drummer with Jimmy Barnes. The band has toured UK, Europe, Asia, Australia and New Zealand. these have been reported in newspapers etc. He is currently recording the new Jimmy Barnes album, and has done some writing for the new Living Loud album with Steve Morse and Bob Daisley. His website shows the 20 albums he has appeared on as a soloist and drummer. In the children's group The Tin Lids, they were nominated for the ARIA award for Best Children's album, I believe it was 1992 or 93. There are plenty of recordings on his site available to listen to and youtube videos.

Surely there's enough there to merit his page being re loaded? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 192.136.22.4 (talk) 19:57, 2 March 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Imeem

Hi. I'm just checking whether you've requested oversight for the personal info you deleted from this page? If not, I'm happy to do it, but thought I'd better check first. Many thanks. Trebor 21:06, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

I guess that may have beem more appropriate. No, i did not. I have not done much with oversight. I just know how to do admin revision deletion. Was that an innapropriate course of action? -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 21:07, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] thanks

Thanks for that —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Thongchai4286 (talk • contribs) 22:53, 2 March 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Thank you

Thanks for semi-protecting The Wedge (Australian TV show) your support has been huge and appreciated. Shaggy9872004 10:14, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hey

Good work at RFPP today :) I kept trying to get in there before you, but finally gave up. I think I managed to protect one, and got so excited that I forgot to tick it off on the page :) – riana_dzasta 12:40, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks!

[edit] Levitron edits

There was actually three IPs in usage. You may want to block 202.83.43.249 (talk • contribs • WHOIS • RDNS • RBLs • block user • block log) as well. (→Netscott) 16:24, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the assistance. I would have sought blocking save for the fact that there were three IPs in usage. I'll follow your advice and head on over to WP:AIV if another IP pops up again. Cheers. (→Netscott) 17:18, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Unproctection

Thanks, how long to you think it will take it's only a simple warning I want to give RuleBrittania 18:51, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes I don't know the guy but he wasn't following AGF on what I saw, Please don't be patronising, I know I haven't been here long and am not part of the hierarchy but I'm sure I should have the same credit as others.. --RuleBrittania 19:47, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] JW's talk page

Only wanted to let you know that an anon forgot to sign this edit and you may have mistaken it as part of something I posted in reply. Gwen Gale 23:01, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] edits to Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows

Hello ! I see you have added a proposed text in the "Deathly Hallows" article [1], however this proposal was still being debated and was thus uncomplete.

It seems you have been misled by the words of User:Sandpiper, who has manipulated my previous sentences in order to make me say something that does not correspond to my actual opinion and which does not reflect any of the concerns I had raised.

I had expressed doubts at the beginning, but he didn't listen and directly proposed his text for integration. I then objected, and pointed out that it was still uncomplete and still needed to be worked on before being acceptable for the article. However, Sandpiper then started to argue that I "had not the right to express my opinion" after having already said something a week before. More over, he kept ignoring every concerns I had raised in my original statements, and he just wouldn't allow me to have an opinion now.

That he has spoken in my place, and that he has manipulated my words in order to make me sound like I agreed with him, while it was not the case, and that a proposed text was integrated in the article without consensus (while there was a debate going on), is just unfair. It's not normal that a contributor, who is not me, could talk in my place and pick up only the words he likes among my messages, and leave the rest aside, thus depriving me of my right to object. Folken de Fanel 00:34, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Here we go, for the record I am copying here the entire exchange from FdF where he commented on this version for the 'hallows' section before I waited, then posted it for inclusion:
Well, sounds good. I guess this issue didn't deserve so much time and energy wasted, after all...Just a little comprehensive effort from Sandpiper, and almost a week of fighting is over. Congrats'.
Just a little thing, your proposition is exhaustive as to relics hallows, it would also be interesting to cover some shrine hallows (anyone has an idea ? Stonehenge, maybe ?) Folken de Fanel 22:19, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
I put this together, but as I pointed out above, I am certainly not an expert on the subject of hallows in legend. My paragraph about legends with hallows may be acceptable, but is it correct? It seemed to me that Lulurascal contributed considerably to this section, and we havn't heard her opinion yet. There is also the issue that we do not address the meaning of 'deathly', which I have seen people confusing with 'deadly'. Sandpiper 07:46, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
Anyway, as far as speculations and "hallows in HP" are concerned, i have nothing against this version. This a preliminary version of course and others can share their knowledge of literary hallows, but it seems appropriate for a de-blocking of the article...Folken de Fanel 15:51, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

(Sandpiper 09:55, 6 March 2007 (UTC))

This wasn't my fight. The edit war was with two other editors. While I agree with them more than Folken,I'm not convinved that debating with someone who can't make up his mind is likely to produce a solution. Sandpiper 18:36, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Habbo Hotel

Thanks so much for the sprotect on the Habbo Hotel page. It was really needed, the level of vandalism was rising each day. Thanks again, --Spebi[talk] 07:58, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] RfA thanks

Hi, Trebor. Just getting through the thank you list for support at my RfA. Your support was very much appreciated. Look forward to working with you around Wikipedia! By the way, how's it coming along for you being fairly newly mopped also? Bubba hotep 09:11, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ben Scowen

Hi, Trebor. We're having problems with recreation of the article Ben Scowen and I wondered if you could protect it. Thank you! BlackBear 22:57, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] User:Worthadonkey

He's up to his old tricks again; recreated that Christina McHale article, etc. I suspect you shouldn't have unblocked him. --Orange Mike 15:22, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Apprentice UK

Image:Fired!.png Hello, Trebor and thank you for your contributions on articles related to The Apprentice UK. I'd like to invite you to become a part of WikiProject The Apprentice UK, a WikiProject aiming to improve coverage of The Apprentice UK and related articles on Wikipedia.

If you would like to help out and participate, please come over and visit us here for more information. Thanks! Dalejenkins 22:48, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sorry

Yep, that's cool, even if we disagree on the technical violation I was wrong to do it. Pls see the note I left you under your notice. Gwen Gale 20:11, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Meanwhile...

I think cooler heads are holding sway over at Essjay controversy. Could you unprotect it? Gwen Gale 21:27, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, even if I now think I asked too soon :/ Gwen Gale 22:11, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Actually in all of this I really only see one problem editor. I've counted something like five reverts by User:QuackGuru in the last 24 hours. I realize that blocking is not punative but I am inclined to file a 3RR report against him. If he were prevented from editing I believe that things would quite down and the article wouldn't need protecting. (→Netscott) 22:47, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Here are the reverts:

They're not all reverts of the same content save a few of them but WP:3RR says for all reverts. (→Netscott) 22:52, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Disruption, edit warring, careless reverts disguised as edits, misleading edit summaries, refusal to discuss after being asked to by the protecting admin... not to mention a borderline disruptive username and deprecated signature format. Gwen Gale 22:54, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
From my understanding, User:C.m.jones was also very involved with edit warring over the images (about which there is larger disagreement, even if not everyone is reverting). I think leaving it protected for a while would be best, while you attempt to hammer out things on the talk page. I will warn User talk:QuackGuru that further reverts without discussion (after protection is lifted) will result in a block (blocking him now would prevent communication over the issues, so I think it would be a mistake). Trebor 22:59, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
True, and User:HighInBC but I see three reverts each for both of them. Also User:C.m.jones was an editor at the center of the last article protection. (→Netscott) 23:03, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
Keeping to three reverts avoids violating the letter of WP:3RR, but it is supposed to be an electric fence not an entitlement. I don't think the edit warring can be wholly pinned on any one editor, so keeping it fully protected until things cool down and people start discussing makes sense to me. Trebor 23:07, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
True, true. Still I see a large difference between 5 reverts and 3..... you might like to join the last discussion thread on Talk:Essjay controversy. (→Netscott) 23:09, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
Truth be told, everyone was discussing things rather calmly until QuackGuru went on his revert mission back to a much earlier article state. Everything about this user is either borderline or flauntingly outside WP policy. Thanks for following things either way though :) Gwen Gale 23:12, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
While I did revert 3 times, it was to reflect the consensus on the talk page, I stopped there. HighInBC(Need help? Ask me) 23:38, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, noted :) Trebor 23:39, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Comment blanking?

This is a worry. Gwen Gale 17:12, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

I think the software is glitching, as everyone seems to be doing it. See if it sorts itself out. Trebor 17:19, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Pretty sure it is, the same thing happened to me twice. HighInBC(Need help? Ask me) 17:25, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Revert warring

This is raw revert warring IMHO. Argh. Gwen Gale 17:44, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, probably not a good idea and I'm now involved. But the tagging is against consensus and, at times, downright silly (like the expert tag). Trebor 17:49, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Large pathetic galaxy

Sure! The reason I closed this as no consensus was that there were solid arguments to delete, good ones to merge and redirect, to just redirect, and to move to another title. "No consensus" doesn't necessarily mean anyone necessarily argued to keep, it simply means the participants in the discussion didn't come to a clear consensus on what should be done. Of course, merging/redirecting, moving, or just redirecting are editorial decisions and need no AFD, so if you want to keep discussing it on the article's talk until a conclusion's reached, please do! (The other thing I do advise people to remember is that AFD is a discussion, not a vote, so "I think it should be deleted but I'd be alright with redirection" is a perfectly acceptable position, and can help to prevent no-consensus trainwrecks.) Seraphimblade Talk to me 19:35, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] List of films that most frequently use the word "fuck"

This page needs protection, or something. Every day someone comes along and want to change the numbers. It's a really hard kind of vandalism to spot. I'm telling you because you commented on its talk page. - Peregrine Fisher 09:51, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Please see my comment on Talk:List of films that most frequently use the word "fuck" before protecting the page. --Cpt. Morgan (Reinoutr) 11:10, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Natural History of South Asia mailing list

This article is up for deletion can you kindly share your opinion on it [2] .

Thanks Atulsnischal 12:11, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hello!

Congrats on becoming an admin! Oh, and you know how you said it would be interesting to see how an FAC on a minor television character would turn out? Well, now you can. :-) Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 04:50, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] FYI

Your old user name is a double redirect. Cheers! - Anas talk? 15:38, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, it's now fixed. Trebor 16:03, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AfD

Hi Trebor, this is a message I'm posting to everyone who participated in this AfD. I have nominated the same article for deletion again here – you might be interested. Regards, KissL 09:04, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] March WP:FILMS Newsletter

The March 2007 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This is an automated notice by Cbrown1023 talk 00:58, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XIII - March 2007

The March 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 20:22, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Peer review/Shahbag

I have just put the article to peer review. Would you care to take a look? Aditya Kabir 20:13, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../t/r/e/User_talk%7ETrebor_79d5.html"