User talk:Trampikey/Archive 10

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Trampikey. 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.

Archive 5

←

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

Reverts

Trampikey, it is considered quite uncivil to revert another editor's good faith changes without discussion. The caption that I've added to the EE infobox is optional, and should not affect any articles unless someone wants to add a caption. Why are you so against it? --Elonka 22:34, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

I don't think it's needed, it was added without discussion, and what other image is going to be in the infobox than one of the character? It's just common sense that the image is of the article subject, and a caption is not needed. -Trampikey^(talk)(contribs) 22:36, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

See Martin Fowler (EastEnders). When I first looked at the article, it wasn't clear to me which actor was in the image. I also think that the Years line in the infobox is confusing, because it makes it look like that one actor has played the role consistently. I don't want to get into a revert war with you... Let's go ahead and move this discussion to the WikiProject and get some other editors' input. --Elonka 22:45, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Actually I was going to add the caption the other day but forgot about it. The reason I was going to do this is mainly because of Billy Jackson - the image not being of the actor who last portrayed the character. This needs to be discussed at the project page. — AnemoneProjectors (zomg!) 22:49, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

I've replied on the project page but I'm going to bed now, absolutely nackered - but please actually take my views into account before just going ahead and doing things. -Trampikey^(talk)(contribs) 22:53, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for June 18th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 25	18 June 2007	About the Signpost

From the editor
Wikipedia critic's article merged	Board election series: Election information
Admin account apparently compromised, blocked	Controversial RfA withdrawn, bureaucrats fail to clarify consensus
WikiWorld comic: "They Might Be Giants"	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

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 09:25, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

The EastEnders dogs

Is there some reason why articles about dog characters should not be in the subcategory for characters? Instead of just reverting for no stated reason, try explaining yourself. Otto4711 14:43, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Maybe you'd like to discuss this on the relevant talk page(s), as I am not the only editor who has reverted your changes. -Trampikey^(talk)(contribs) 15:08, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Actually, you are the only one who has removed these three articles from the category. Otto4711 15:28, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

So is your linking CIVIL at me supposed to be a response to the question? Otto4711 16:07, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

As I have already stated, I am not prepared to discuss this on my talk page, and have commented on the relevant talk page, where you rightly raised the issue. I still find your general tone quite confrontive, rude, threatening and generally uncivil. Perhaps you should also read m:Wikistress and consider a Wikibreak until you have calmed down considerably, as well as reading WP:CIVIL. -Trampikey^(talk)(contribs) 16:11, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, I have no need of your diagnosis of my mood or stress level. Nor am I responsible for how you're choosing to misinterpret my statements. The notion of feeling threatened by a question on a talk page is bizarre. Otto4711 16:18, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

The fact is that I feel threatened and upset by your actions, as I find your general tone very rude and dismissive. The fact that someone can get away with being such a rude individual to many other editors (not just myself) is beyond me. I still seriously suggest that you read m:Wikistress, WP:BREAK and WP:CIVIL, especially the latter, and assess your own behaviour if you don't "need" anyone else to do it for you, as your general uncivility will only cause you problems in the long run - maybe reading those three pages will give you something to think about and you might see fit to correct your behaviour. -Trampikey^(talk)(contribs) 16:24, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

The fact is that I'm not responsible for whatever it is that is leading someone who lives in England to feel "threatened" by someone who lives on the other side of the Atlantic Ocean. If you really feel "threatened" then you probably ought to take a break yourself because that's not a rational response. Otto4711 16:27, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

I didn't specify that I felt physically threatened, but your irrational and extremely rude behaviour is intimidating. 16:29, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

I'd also thank you not to bring my personal life into this. -Trampikey^(talk)(contribs) 16:33, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

East Enders Pets

Thanks for that. I needed a laugh. Eusebeus 22:50, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

• Indeed, well put. Anyway, gotta go my celebrity dog needs a walk ;) Eusebeus 22:55, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Please keep your mitts off my talk page

The conversation is over and I've read your coments. I will consider any further restoration of your comments to my talk page to be disruption and harassment and will take the appropriate steps to report it. Stop. Otto4711 03:48, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Trampi, it's okay, let him have his talkpage. He's actually allowed to do pretty much anything he wants to it, including deleting warnings. See Wikipedia:User page#Removal of warnings. But don't worry, everything is still in the history. You've made your point, and he's definitely read your message. If there are further problems, simply post again, with an edit summary of "Civility", and include a diff to any problem. That's usually the most effective way of dealing with these kinds of things. --Elonka 03:58, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Mark 91.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Mark 91.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images 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 any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 07:22, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Tom watt lofty.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Tom watt lofty.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images 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 any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 07:25, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Joe 96.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Joe 96.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images 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 any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 08:16, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Nick den 88.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Nick den 88.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images 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 any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 08:25, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Shilpa Shetty - Notable roles

Hi. You reverted my removal of the notable roles in the Shilpa Shetty page. As accepted by Bollywood related editors, notable roles are not permitted for our actors. It's a personal opinion. You can say she was notable. I can say she wasn't. Who does decide what her notable roles are? Baazigar for example was a film of 35 minutes. She was the supporting actress. Dhadkan was a really good performance by her, but it never won her awards or whatever appreciation, so who declared that she was notable there? In general, notable roles are not suitable so please do not add them back. Best regards, --Shshshsh 13:17, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your message - however I feel that if the field in an infobox can be filled, it should. -Trampikey^(talk)(contribs) 13:21, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for June 25th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 26	25 June 2007	About the Signpost

Board election series: An interview with the candidates	RfA receives attention, open proxies policy reviewed
WikiWorld comic: "Thagomizer"	News and notes: Logo error, Norwegian chapter, milestones
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

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 08:12, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Puss ee.JPG)

Thanks for uploading Image:Puss ee.JPG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images 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 any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 09:05, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:Mary harkinson.jpg

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Mary harkinson.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 05:15, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for July 2nd, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 27	2 July 2007	About the Signpost

IP unwittingly predicts murder of wrestler: "Awful coincidence"	Board election series: Elections open
German chapter relaunches website, arranges government support	WikiWorld comic: "Cashew"
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

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 08:21, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Li Chong

I was just wondering why you reverted the edit about Li.There was no source attributed to it and I heard it was mentioned in the same article in Inside Soap as the new characters of Rainie and Craig, which you reverted as there was no attributed source. I have not read anywhere else that Li was leaving and even if it is true why isn't a source mentioned just like Bert and Stella? ( You only reverted the Li part.)

Not upset just confused. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.90.207.39 (talk • contribs)

If it's just something you've heard, it can't be counted as accurate, unless you can cite a source for it. -Trampikey^(talk)(contribs) 21:11, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

I know that, but, there is still no source or footnote mentioning that Li is leaving, (like the ones for Bert and Stella). I reverted the edit and put her back in with the contract characters but you reverted it, without putting a source,but you didn't put back the characters of Rainie and Craig, (before some were found.) I was simply wondering why you reverted the Li edit. Is there a linkable source? Sorry for the confusion.

:)

Hey, welcome back. Gungadin 21:34, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. It was weird, I couldn't view websites at all, and now I can. Bloody computers. -Trampikey^(talk)(contribs) 21:39, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

That happened to me once. It was something to do with a registry error. You can get that from spyware and also when you uninstall programs - files get left behind and it slows your pc and fuxs it up. My boyfriend downlaoded this for me [1] it's free and fixes all registry problems. It also cleans temp memory from your pc, which takes up huge amount of space. If you use the registry cleaner, make sure you save a back up of your current registry settings when prmopted, just in case. you also might wanna try this [2]-Free spyware thing that's really good (If you dont have it already).Gungadin 21:55, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Whatever's happened, my whole iTunes library has been wiped. Depressing! -Trampikey^(talk)(contribs) 22:40, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

That's very strange. I suggest trying "system restore", which is under 'system tools' in Widows accessories menu. You will probably have numerous store points from before the crash, sometimes they go back every day for years, and your music files may come back when you revert. Otherwise, there is a way to copy all your music off of your ipod back onto you pc. Apple tries to stop people doing this for copyright reasons, but all you need to do is expose the hidden music files on the ipod. But when you initially plug in you ipod to ur PC make sure that you stop itunes from updating/syncing it. If you dont it will wipe your ipod too. Here's a guide [3]. Gungadin 23:02, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the info, but my iPod was stolen about 6 months ago! I only use iTunes when I'm at hthe computer! -Trampikey^(talk)(contribs) 09:44, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Adoptive Families In Soaps

I've noticed that you've excluded a lot of family members in the Four main UK soaps(EE, CS, ED, HO). I understand Grandparents, Uncles, Aunts and Cousins aren't includied in this spectrum but surely siblings do as they're the biological children of the adoptive parents in questions? I'm just asking. COnquistador2k6 15:23 8 July 2007 (UTC)

The siblings didn't legally adopt them, the parents did, so legally, only the parents are related to them. -Trampikey^(talk)(contribs) 15:09, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Ok, Fair rationale. But what if more than one child is adopted? Anyhow, I got a wee bit of cleanup to tend to. COnquistador2k6 20:41, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Note to self

[4] - Peter Beale's first actor here. -Trampikey^(talk)(contribs) 08:27, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

[5] good who shot phil stuff here. -Trampikey^(talk)(contribs) 00:51, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Alistairmcgownasdot.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Alistairmcgownasdot.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. MER-C 12:58, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for July 9th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 28	9 July 2007	About the Signpost

Seven administrators request promotion to bureaucrat status	Board election series: Elections closed, results pending
Wikimedia Foundation hires consultant, general counsel	Newspaper obituary plagiarizes Japanese Wikipedia
WikiWorld comic: "Ann Coulter"	News and notes: FA stats, top information site, milestones
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

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 08:21, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

BB8 UK Table

Note 3 already says the exact same thing, and has a ref. Darrenhusted 00:57, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Who's who EE.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Who's who EE.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 04:59, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Jonathan Durden

Jonathan Durden, an article you created, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that Jonathan Durden satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jonathan Durden and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Jonathan Durden during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. -- Jreferee ^(Talk) 03:17, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

"Discuss" on the talk pages

You are the only person paying attention to the articles, so that won't really get us anywhere. Why should they stay? How can they possibly ever meet the standards set by WP:WAF and WP:FICT?

As a side thing, please do not revert with the statement "discuss" if you are the only one actually having anything to do with it. "I think it is notable" is a perfectly valid reason, but forcing a pretend discussion just irks me. TTN 22:46, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Excuse me, but I don't think that just because you think something should be redirected that it should automatically be done. Changes like that need to be discussed. I have tons of information that could pad those articles out with out of universe information - but that's why they're stubs, because they haven't been added to yet. -Trampikey^(talk)(contribs) 22:49, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

It's part of WP:BRD. Forcing discussions for the sake of forcing discussions doesn't help; it only helps when someone has a valid reason. Now that you have given a valid reason of them being notable (i.e. don't use something with a generic message like that next time), we can discuss it.

OK now, what is this information? Is it actual real world information or just plot summaries and character development in a real world light? If it is the latter, the articles still need to be redirected, no matter how much you can add. TTN 22:57, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

It's a book written about the series by the editor with out of universe information about casting, the actors' portrayals of the characters, etc. -Trampikey^(talk)(contribs) 23:01, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Can you just add a few examples to the articles to assure me that this really is important information? The last five times I have run into claims of information from guides, it's been very, very far from article building information or it is never actually used. TTN 23:07, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

External links

Hi Trampikey.Thanks for your message. Please explain to me why a link to What's on TV, which has many profiles of soap characters and is a brilliant resource for anyone interested in the major UK soaps and other popular programmes, is considered spam, but a links to itv.com and tv.com is not. Both are commercial sites, so that cannot be the conflict. Our profiles are written by professional writers who have been in the business a long time. Like ITV we are a household name. The rules state that the link should "contain further research that is accurate and on-topic", which my link certainly was. Take a look at the Wiki entry for Edna Birch (Emmerdale) and at itv.com. The whole of the first page - bar a few tweaks - is the same (Wiki text is lifted from ITV). Now look at the What's on TV site (http://www.whatsontv.co.uk/soaps/emmerdale/whos_who/edna_birch) - totally different content. Please help me out here because I am genuinely perplexed and cannot understand why my link is not considered to enrich the Wiki experience but itv.com and tv.com (a pretty poor offering, where the last Emmerdale episode is for 23 June) does.