User talk:Treelo

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


User talk
 If I left you a message: please answer on your talk page, I am watching it

If you leave me a message: I will answer on my talk page, so please add it to your watchlist

Please click here to leave me a new message.
NOTE FOR THOSE ANY BIT INTERESTED: The archiving method has changed, instead of the 60 day old cutoff point previously used along with the near-quarterly archive separation there will now be a 20 day cutoff with monthly separation instead.
Archive
Archives (Index)
2006-April 2007
May 2007-September 2007
October 2007-December 2007
January-April 2008
May 2008
About archives • Edit this box

Contents

[edit] Happy Holidays

 This section may contain information of unclear or questionable importance or relevance to the article's subject matter even after a explaination.
Please help improve this article by clarifying further. Treating it like a Magic Eye picture may help with the confusion involved.
The Roman aquadux in china.
The Roman aquadux in china.

O...K, context anyone? Please? Context. How about you Budda24, context? --treelo talk 11:20, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

The picture is about two roman soldiers that are gay, They had a secret love affair in the army. During the wars of the late 16th century they fell passionately in love, and guarded each other backs, however this didn't last for long when they were both struck by double blow cannons in the fields of Norway. The statute is a symbol for their heroic behavior, and known throughout the bulkins as well as parts of Asia. "I hope this explains why I put the picture there". thanks Buddha24 (talk) 13:47, 9 May 2008 (UTC)


Ok, since I have treelo's talk on my watchlist, I have to pipe in here with a wha...? Being this is a very famous statue, apparently currently at the Louvre [1], and the fr.wikipedia has quite a different story [2], translated here on en.wiki [3] Yngvarr (c) 14:00, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
Interesting but still, holiday? I'm enjoying this little slice of kooky though and it may earn you a barnstar (Budda24, not you Yng. You have enough) as we do need people like you around, helps lighten the mood. treelo talk 14:46, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
He also apparently thinks Kobe Bryant was charged with murder. ;) Reminds me a little of this user. Enigma message 05:45, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
Oh yeah? Well, I do like a little vandal hunting, keep me informed if you find anything. treelo talk 16:06, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] My Gym Partner's a Monkey

Just FYI, I saw this [4], but it's not salted. It's created at List of Minor characters in My Gym PArtner's a Monkey, so I submitted to to CSD under G4, re-creation of previously deleted material. The only AFD I could find was at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of minor characters in My Gym Partner's A Monkley, but that's a little on the oldish side, I could have thought there was more... Yngvarr (c) 23:40, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Getcha, missed the second capital A in Partner hence why I reckoned on it being the salted article and it was redlinked at the time I undid the edit. That AfD is interesting, never figured animated shows were held in such contempt by other editors unless they were pre-50's. --treelo talk 23:57, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
Yea, the redlink was added at 18:50 by Special:Contributions/66.11.249.213. Then they registered as User:ChillingPenguin at 18:52, and created the target at 19:19. Time is all EDT.
I don't know why, but something about this has piqued my curiousity... It's probably nothing. Yngvarr (c) 00:32, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
It's something as it's a returner, remember back to June last year where the list kept having vandalism ([5] [6])from a bunch of anons? Well, they've returned and seem to be doing the exact same crap as before, be on the lookout. Having a little looking about from the anon's WHOIS report it seems they both use the same ISP and that they most likely have an account this time around due to the semi-prot on the char list. treelo talk 00:56, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] To Make Your Day Better

Gregory E. Miller (talk) 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. Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Thought you could use it. :) Gregory E. Miller (talk) 13:41, 12 May 2008 (UTC))

[edit] Wikipedia:Editor review/Treelo

I reviewed you. Sorry for the delay. Shalom (Hello • Peace) 04:30, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Slow down

You are editing so fast you are reverting edits that aren't vandalism.--I LIVE IN A HAT (talk) 10:59, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Yup, sorry, saw "lulz" and clicked. You get blind sometimes. treelo talk 11:02, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Changes to Alice Cooper article

Hi Treelo,

I spent a lot of time and thought on making some changes to the Alice Cooper article this morning. I am convinced that these changes represent a major improvement to the article. I note, however, that you have reversed them, and I was wondering what your justification for this was. I'm quite happy to discuss any points you might have in detail.

Best Wishes Jprw (talk) 11:47, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Consider it a bad click, I didn't warn you did I? If so you can remove it or leave it and I'll do it for you treelo talk 11:52, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Victor I. Petrik

Hi. I can't find any sign that this creator requested deletion of this page, as you tagged it here. He did remove his misplaced hangon content from the article, but placed a more expansive rationale on the talk page. Looking through his contribution history, I don't see anything else that I might interpret as a deletion request. I'm removing the tag for now on the presumption that its placement was an accident. If I'm missing an author request, please feel free to let me know. Thanks. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 13:16, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] G7 tags

Per the mention above and again on The joy formidable. Can't find anything verifying this. Are you perhaps using a tool for this that is malfunctioning? Are we in someway missing the requests? Perhaps they were done by email or something? Jasynnash2 (talk) 13:29, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Since you've been editing and haven't responded, I presume that this tag was placed in error. I've declined it accordingly. Please let me know if you'd like to discuss either of these tags further. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 13:52, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] huggle and warnings

Hi. You have a box saying that you might accidentally delete good faith contributions and warn users for them, because you're using huggle. This is not acceptable. You must take responsibility for your edits. This means that you should apologise when you make mistakes (so well done there) but you should try to avoid amking those mistakes first. Dan Beale-Cocks 14:51, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Of the edits I make, I make a substantial amount more beneficial edits than I do faulty ones and usually revert and apologise for those which are wrong and I can route back. I am not shirking responsibility and trying to avoid them but I am human and you guys (mainly admins for whatever reason) must allow for the occasional edit error especially when there's a lot going on. I'm warning people as to why some things happen as a courtesy to people like yourself who might and have been concerned when some edits fall through the cracks and those who might fall foul, not to shift responsibility to the tool though admittedly you can as it isn't perfect anymore than I am. treelo talk 15:01, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] usernames for admin attention

why did you report user "workinginpartnershipsprogram"? Please can you tell me which SPECIFIC part of policy they're violating? Did you notice that several editors were already talking to this editor? Did you consider asking this editor to change their name before you reported them? Dan Beale-Cocks 14:53, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Are you not reading the username? It's clear they've got something to do with an organisation and that's against policy (not going to cite it, you can find it on your own). Yeah, the user was responsive to others and it's questionable that there was a COI issue involving them but really, the name wasn't right and I'm sure they knew it anyway. A warning as to their name being wrong would have been good but another admin didn't have an issue blocking them on that basis and I'd rather if admins were more unilateral in what goes on. treelo talk 15:06, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
Your inability to answer the question about policy has been noted. I am reading the username. WiPP is NOT an organisation - it's a UK Government policy. It doesn't have members, you can't join, it doesn't have an office, there isn't a newsletter. the name wasn't right and I'm sure they knew it anyway Please ASSUME GOOD FAITH. This was a new editor making good faith contributions to the encyclopedia. You say that the user was responsive to others - this just makes your actions worse. I ask again, in bold this time: Why didn't you ask the user to change their name? Please, read the freaking huge red box at UAA before you report people there again. Dan Beale-Cocks 15:48, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
So I made an error, problems can be fixed and the user in question is still editing so please can you cut the bureaucratic nonsense and drop it next time I make a report at UAA you dislike? You're not even an admin, what do you care? treelo talk 16:07, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
Treelo, sorry it is not good enough to say "problems can be fixed" when it is solely the fact that you are editing so fast that causes the problems to occur in the first place. I'm not quite sure why you are editing so fast - chasing after a particular edit count perhaps - but as anyone can see by simply reviewing this page your hasty actions are continuing to cause other editors inconvenience. Specifically in the case of new editors (particularly registered ones), this is exactly the kind of thing that can cause people to leave the wikipedia community - and every time a genuine editor does leave we are all worse off. So may I offer some friendly advice, in the best spirit of Wikipedia....please slow down and consider your actions before you take them. ColourSarge (talk) 17:11, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
The issues of Huggle misfires and bad UAA reports are separate. The former is is an issue that exists but you or anyone else cannot tell me that it's never happened to anyone else ever, it's just not that likely. The latter occurred because I didn't follow the rules and not something I did whilst in the midst of revert-drunk nuttiness, I'm not even concerned about it because someone else agreed with my sentiment also. Doesn't exactly make it any more right but it wasn't an issue until Dan made it one.
This is the very first time I've ever reported a username and look, it turns out I didn't "play the game" right. It's things like that which make editors like me who have sent several reports to AIV and reverted plenty of vandalism give up the vandal reverting game, always somehow getting it wrong even when trying to do the right thing. Heck, I even reigned in what I pay real attention to, only hitting that which is blatant such as pageblanks and I pay due consideration to all my reverts but if you or anyone else want to tell me to give in the vandalism reverting game and get back to doing whatever it is I did before I used Huggle because a handful of problems popped up then I will, just give me the word. treelo talk 18:00, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
Treelo, I apologise my lack of civility. Please, let me try again. Some usernames - "FUCK JESUS" - "BEN IS GAY" - "ARSE BUM FUCK FLAPS" are so bad that they need to go to UAA and be blocked immediately. Others need to be blocked at some point, but trying to talk to the editor is good; it shows you communicate and it lets them know the project isnt run by bots. There's RFCN to dscuss problem usernames. Again: I'm sorry for my aggressive, impolite posts. Dan Beale-Cocks 23:18, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
Hmm, alright, apology accepted then. I know now I did wrong by not communicating with the person and trying to get them to change it themselves by making sure they knew what was wrong and how to change it so might just not notify UAA as the bot does a decent job of it. I've been under not exactly lots of wikistress but enough to put me off talking to anyone as nobody has a good word to say to me it seems so I might have given you a bit too curt of a reply also. Apologies from me I guess because I just cannot be sorry enough when it comes to the wider Wiki editing world. Might be a bit self-pitying but at this point in time I doubt I care all that much. treelo talk 00:26, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Refresh my memory

Remind me who Colective is/was? I don't think it was KL lover. Yngvarr (c) 18:01, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Good ol' Greg Jungwirth, better known as Rhode Island Hero, Claymort and Crips r us amongst others. Much worse than Komodo lover and twice as loopy, I know that him and Gregory E. Miller are the same person, the evidence is there. If you want, I can give you fairly detailed reasoning for my suspicions as I'm prepping a sockpuppetry case and possible RFCU also. treelo talk 18:14, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
Ah yes, those names are old friends, now I remember. I'll just look at your SSP when you're done with that. Funny how these things go in cycles, it seems. See, one of the things that sorta caught my eye was [7]. GEM had posted to your page, so I checked him out, and he seemed innocent enough (you can see my posting on GEM's talk), but when I saw Colective post this particular diff, I began to wonder how on earth Colective targetted GEM. GEM didn't really have many contribs, and didn't stumble into what seemed to be Colective's usual domain. And it can't really be an association thing, because there are messages between us (you and I) on both our talk pages, and he's never really bothered me personally. Yngvarr (c) 19:06, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
See you're coming to the same conclusions as I have, I'm ignoring GEM's little wikilove message as it means I'm onto him and he's trying to soften me up. If I remove it, I'll end up with a pageblank so it stays for now. I figured User:The Legend of G to be innocent too until he went apeshit one time, can't be too careful it seems. It's not association until such time you get involved and take action against him, just how I got caught in this crap. Before this, it was merely a concern for Elaich but then GJ strayed into my territory so you know what happened next... treelo talk 19:14, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
Right, thanks for your other sockpuppetry case you added, that was pretty quick though. I'm nearly ready to submit what evidence I have but if you feel like getting a little more dirt on him then go ahead and see what you can get, I'll be submitting around 10PM UTC today so get it added before that. treelo talk 16:05, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
No, I think that's it for now, as far as my poor old memory can recall. I can always add stuff when you submit it. Yngvarr (c) 17:53, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
Alright then, you'll know where to find it. treelo talk 18:28, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] From me... to me

The Nothin' Barnstar
For the countless undos done against the edit testers for seemingly minor reasons and continually shooting yourself and several others in the feet along with other limbs and body parts using the veritable scattergun we call Huggle I give to you the Nothin' barnstar for a job not really being done. treelo talk 20:01, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] May, 2008

Who got all huffy? It just didn't make sense to me why you did that. But it wasn't like i was downing you because at least you reverted it. And i'll have to go back and check, but i'm not sure you're allowed to edit another user's talk page. Thanks, Terminator14 (talk) 20:18, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

You came to me ten days after a minor incident to give me a hard time for doing something that didn't even affect you for a minute, that's a touch huffy to me. It's an article talkpage on which I reverted you on, not a user talkpage and generally editing other user's talkpages is bad form unless reverting vandalism or adding something. Be cool, learn how to be more civil when it comes to issues with other editors and just keep editing. treelo talk 21:02, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
I didn't discover it until ten days later. And i wasn't giving you a hard time, i was just questioning why you did it. And did you not edit my talk page to take away the message you sent me? Maybe that's why i didn't address this until ten days later. And please don't advise me on how to be more civil, there's really no need in that since i haven't disrespected you. Terminator14 (talk) 21:15, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
Maybe I'm missing something but I really cannot see your issue. Telling me that "Obviously you were in the wrong for trying to reverting my question about Mr. T. Maybe you are the one who needs to experiment with the sandbox" was no question but an outright statement against my abilities which is incivil. Don't make an issue where none exists, especially when your problems comes down to reverts and warnings which were undone changing absolutely nothing. treelo talk 21:43, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
Gonna step in here. If Treelo reverted a self-posted message placed on your talk page, wouldn't you think that perhaps the original message was a mistake? Look at the timestamps: a message was posted at 7:08 (local time) and reverted at 7:08 (local time). And the revert of the Mr. T talk page was also reverted back. A self-revert of a revert at those close time periods usually indicates the original revert was considered in error. Yngvarr (c) 21:32, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
Point made there, Terminator14, don't drag this on. treelo talk 21:46, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
Whatever, i won't drag this out simply because it's kind of boring, and i'm not getting much entertainment from you. You're the one who advised me to use the sandbox, so in turn i advised you. But oh well, i suggest next time you want to revert something just think it through. And once again, i wasn't meaning any disrespect, maybe Europeans just phrase things different that Americans, hard to tell. Terminator14 (talk) 22:33, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Particleman24

Once again created a page for Ed, Edd n Eddy season 6, and moved the 2 disputed episodes there. I reverted and redirected, but he isn't going to let this alone. Fact is, though he doesn't really have any proof that they are season 6, we don't really have any that they aren't. This is touchy, which is why I have been handling it with kid gloves. I wish we had some way of finding out one way or the other. Suggestions are welcome, and I am going to email Animation By Mistake, and see if I can get an answer. -- Elaich talk 02:38, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm going to request for full protection until the issue is sorted, don't need it to go down as another pointless revert war. treelo talk 09:16, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
Please note my message left under yours on his talk page. We've been holding his hand long enough: from now on, issue the vandalism warnings, and if he persists, he will be banned. I don't see any good faith: just a dogged determination to have his way no matter what. Agreed? -- Elaich talk 13:21, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
Sure but I'm already at that point anyway, the warning shot I issued today was just notifying him of what's going to happen so it's not some sneak attack when warnings do occur. Just don't be slapping any 4im level warnings his way, procedure might as well be taken. treelo talk 13:29, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Trolling

Ah, recent activity has pushed me to the point where I just can't resist trolling your talkpage.

100px

Yngvarr (c) 20:11, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Harumph, one more outburst like that and it's your butt at AIV! treelo talk 20:38, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] GJ

See the RFCU. You were right. I was always suspicious of him too. That's why I didn't go out of my way to help him. I've made sure all are blocked and tagged. — Rlevse • Talk • 21:30, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Yup, been watching this since earlier today. Figured I was right, far too many coincidences for it not to be, be sure to check and close up shop on the SSP case as it's pretty much finished now. Also, keep an eye on those blocked users talkpages, GJ doesn't seem done and is keeping up the nice front he had going with GEM which is strange as for an apparently innocent user he seems to be a bit too calm about it. Not saying he should be a raving idiot but he wouldn't be taking it on the nose and leaving gracefully as if of his own will if he was innocent as he says. treelo talk 21:37, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Faulty G7 requests for articles

The G7 tag for Victor I. Petrik was placed by Huggle in what I figure was supposed to be a simple revert due to the removal of the hangon tag so two for two there. Next up, The joy formidable. This was an issue to me and still is as it's just a bunch of links and again was a result of the tool.

I'm saying it's the tool because I'm not that unaware or working too fast to notice when someone didn't blank the article as a request for deletion but marks it as such anyway. Feh, I'm sticking to more manual means of CSD in the future. treelo talk 14:03, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

If you try to revert the creator of a page, Huggle asks you if you want to tag it for speedy deletion instead. I'm assuming you answered "Yes" when you intended to answer "No"; I'm not sure that's a problem with Huggle. If you weren't asked first, that is a problem and I'd like to know about it. Thanks -- Gurchzilla (talk) 19:12, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
I wasn't asked about it that time from recollection, just slapped a CSD tag on and off it went. It was slightly strange to me as I haven't been able to recreate it since but know for certain no dialog asked me if I wanted to tag for speedy deletion, can't say much more than that. treelo talk 21:49, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
OK, thanks -- Gurchzilla (talk) 22:13, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Goodbye!

Wow, this place has gotten so bad that I'm leaving for a long time. Goodbye! --Particleman24 (talk) 23:18, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Aw no, why? What did we do? I mean obviously it's better to leave by your own pace than get thrown out on your ass and all but really, what tipped the scale? We're not bad people! Hm, a real shame being "chased out" as it were for not noticing the inherent greatness of YouTube Poop which, when you bother to watch the visual-visual version of "Will It Blend?", you really get an idea of just why it's called poop as it is truly the product of a kid with shit for brains. treelo talk 00:18, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] About your RfA

Hi there Treelo, I went ahead and closed your RfA per WP:SNOW do to the fact that at this time it was clear that the community did not see it fit to place you in a administrative role. I recommend you do some of the fallowing things to improve your chances next time around:

Let me know you have any questions, or can be of any further help. Cheers, Tiptoety talk 16:00, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

I hope your recent unsuccessful RFA doesnt let you down... Keep up the good work in Wikipedia. .Your overusage of automated tools and lack of other experience were the few reasons of not making it. Please also understand that Adminship is no big deal. Follow the suggestions by Tiptoety.Take a break and do come back after sufficient experience. Best Wishes

Tinucherian 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. Cheers, and happy editing! -- TinuCherian (Wanna Talk?) - 16:14, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.


[edit] The Wolf Hunter

I don't see how any one has a right to delete some ones work from here. Wikipedia is a Encyclopedia for people to gain knowledge about things in life, pop culture and things from around the world. The Wolf Hunter film it's self is a film that has lots of fans and supporters as does the character. I think just because its not as well known as Freddy or Jason does not mean it should not be on here. I have already seen that some one else has edited the article as well. I think that if this does go off its a shame and what kind of Encyclopedia for the people rob people from learning about films and characters from a independent film.

--bloodline video 06:43, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

That might be but notability means a lot for just what goes in which yours just isn't/wasn't. It's not an issue of server space or one of dismissing independent film but one of it simply not being that well enough outside of that circle to be of actual benefit to readers. I'm sorry that your article might be deleted but don't misconstrue what Wikipedia is and what it does when it comes to what content is within it. treelo talk 10:11, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] I would appreciate some feedback ...

on the genetic code talk page before the figure being discussed is inserted. Doug youvan (talk) 02:44, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the invite but I know squat about the subject at hand, probably just did a fly-by revert of some vandalism hence why I'm one of the last 10 editors. Hope your issue gets resolved though. treelo talk 10:33, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Talk:YouTube Poop

Speedied and salted. :) Thanks, PeterSymonds (talk) 22:43, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

No prob. treelo talk 22:44, 3 June 2008 (UTC)