User talk:Ned Scott/Archive 17

Archives • ℹ
1. 02/06 - 05/06 2. 06/06 3. 07/06 - 08/06 4. 08/06 - 09/06 5. 10/06 - 11/06 6. 11/06 - 01/07 7. 02/07 - 03/07 8. 04/07 - 05/07	9. 05/07 - early 08/07 10. 08/07 - 10/07 11. 11/07 - mid 02/08 12. mid 02/08 - mid 05/08 13. mid 05/08 - mid 07/08 14. mid 07/08 - 11/08 15. 12/08 - 05/09 16. 06/09 - 04/11 17. 05/11 - 06/18

Phoenix Wiknic

Phoenix Wiknic is ready to go (pending a few minor tweaks) --Jax 0677 (talk) 23:40, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Undeletion request notification

Hi, you participated in a deletion request at commons:Commons:Deletion requests/Wikipe-tan lolicon (2007-01-04). The same files are now being considered for undeletion at commons:Commons:Undeletion_requests/Current_requests#File:LoliWikipetan.jpg. If you're still around we'd appreciate your opinion and feedback. Thanks! Dcoetzee 23:22, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. While I disagree that the image should be undeleted, I can't fault you for bringing this up for discussion. I'm a little surprised no one else had done so in the last four years. -- Ned Scott 12:59, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

User talk:Tom Morris/Why Women Don't Edit Wikipedia

This is nither funny nor helpful. I would recomend removing it.©Geni 23:49, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

I think it's fucking hilarious, but then again I have questionable taste in humor. -- Ned Scott 23:55, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Digimon Adventure

I removed fan sites according to the guidelines written on Wikipedia:External_links#What_to_link. Some of the fan sites linked there are not written in a neutral point of view nor are they written by anyone of higher authority. The Digimon Encyclopedia may have some leeway, but Digimon Uncensored probably not. lullabying (talk) 07:06, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Fair enough. I concede to your assessment. -- Ned Scott 10:54, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

FGwiki

I responded on my talk page. Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 00:52, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Leave the tantrum

Editor has been reported and will likely be blocked before long. Let's leave the tantrum and clean it up then.This is just a waste of time right now.  :) Cheers Wikipelli ^Talk 03:10, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

He's blocked. That was fun. Calabe1992 (talk) 03:13, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

@Ned Scott, an anon IP had an absolute tantrum on your talk page; see the edit history; looks like a lot has since been removed. Calabe1992 (talk) 03:21, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Thank you to all involved for cleaning it up for me. I don't know who it is, but it's probably the same anon who comes by every so often. I meant to leave his original message on my talk page but removed it by accident when I was cleaning up other sections (damn iPhone), since he gets tired quickly and leaves. It doesn't really bother me much, but it's kind of funny that this guy cares enough about 3-4 year old drama to keep bringing it up. I guess that means I made a lasting impression on someone? :D -- Ned Scott 07:14, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

You know, I think this one deserves a spot on WP:LAME. Wikipelli, anyone else have thoughts? Calabe1992 (talk) 00:43, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

This link documents it entirely: http://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ned_Scott&offset=20110915030950&limit=56&action=history Calabe1992 (talk) 00:59, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Re: TheMovieDB.org

Hello, Ned Scott. You have new messages at Erik's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Erik (talk | contribs) 13:39, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

WikiProject United States Newsletter

I just wanted to let you know I added you to the opt out list so you won't get it anymore. Cheers. --Kumioko (talk) 04:44, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Brilliant Idea Barnstar
	This is damn dedication. Like others, I came through Reddit. Saibh (talk) 03:12, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

I didn't write it, I just saved it from deletion by giving it a home. It really is something, isn't it? -- Ned Scott 03:15, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Futurama broadcast order

This debate is re-emerging at Talk:Futurama (season 6). Just thought I should warn you Thegreyanomaly (talk) 08:18, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Invitation to event: bot, template, and Gadget makers wanted

I thought you might want to know about some upcoming MediaWiki & Wikimedia developers' events (such as the hackathon preceding Wikimania), where you can learn more about MediaWiki customization and development, extending functionality with JavaScript, the future of mw:ResourceLoader and Gadgets, the new Lua templating system, how to best use the web API for bots, and various upcoming features and changes. We'd love to have power users, bot maintainers and writers, and template makers at these events so we can all learn from each other and chat about what needs doing. Best wishes! - Sumana Harihareswara, Wikimedia Foundation's Volunteer Development Coordinator

Sumanah (talk) 14:07, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Television episode and season articles badly needed

Because of the high number of edits that you have made at Wikipedia talk:Television episodes, I would like to call your attention to a list of the most critically acclaimed episodes and season articles that need to be created: Wikipedia:TV-EPISODE#Important_articles_to_be_created.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 14:15, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm not sure what leads you to believe this Mr. Spock dude has any input on this information. 88.12.58.209 (talk) 16:41, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Block history

Su historial de bloque es grande. ¿Cuál es su comentario? Por favor, Spock referencia en su respuesta. 88.12.58.209 (talk) 16:46, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Regarding 88.12.58.209

Hello.

I saw the user posting in Spanish on your talk page. I have tried to take care of the issue by leaving notes here. I am not sure if (s)he was intending bad faith edits. I referred him or her to the Spanish Wikipedia if (s)he is unable to speak in English or cannot do so very well. Thanks. 75.53.218.81 (talk) 16:59, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Bueno, para llamar a los que ponen un dedo para abajo sin leer siquiera la respuesta, y creo que lo mismo de Ned Scott! 88.12.58.209 (talk) 18:08, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

UPDATE: I have also put some of his entries into Google Translate. It appears that there may be misunderstandings here. I have tried to refer the user to the Spanish Wikipedia. Thanks. 75.53.218.81 (talk) 17:10, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

UPDATE: Hello. I'm unable to remove his or her repeated addition of the comments to your talk page due to the edit filter. If warranted, a block should be issued and the user be informed to stop making Spanish entries to English Wikipedia. 75.53.218.81 (talk) 17:27, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Por lo tanto frustrantes, aunque la mona se vista de seda mona se queda. Lo que filtra las ediciones?

88.12.58.209 (talk) 17:31, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Mi única opción es editar WIKIPEDIA, porque usuario del ES WIKINEWS no está disponible!!!! 88.12.58.209 (talk) 17:40, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Mira con atención esta página: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Unified_login#Someone_is_using_my_name_on_another_wiki.2C_how_can_I_get_that_account.3F

88.12.58.209 (talk) 17:46, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

"Nos" tiene muchas cuadras de aquí y de ES WIKINEWS, por lo tanto, rechazar la solicitud de los administradores de la cuenta. Yo soy Ned Scott. 88.12.58.209 (talk) 17:52, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Sí, usted es Ned Scott. Aspiro a ser Ned Scott en ES WIKINEWS solamente. Pero usted tiene demasiados bloques que dicen. Es una locura. ¿Verdad? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.12.58.209 (talk) 18:00, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Yo de entrada de Google Translate antes de hablar. Es mucho más claro? 88.12.58.209 (talk) 18:03, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

File:Katefromlost.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Katefromlost.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 02:18, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

show hack template colbert

Can you please explain what the need for this template is and why the standard episodelist isnt used?? just it doesnt seem to be needed and if there no real reason for it it should be covnerted to epsiodelist and this show hack deleted--Andrewcrawford (talk - contrib) 17:07, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Citation needed

Hi Ned. Statements like "the aim of MOS:BOLD is to avoid bold abuse in typical articles. " and "It's talking about unnecessary over-use of emphases in traditional pose/article-style, which is very hard to apply to a list. " really need evidence. As far as I can tell, that's simply your (and other folk's) convenient interpretation of MOS. I don't see any explicit guidance in MOS that backs up your stance. "The aim of..." & "It's talking about..." is all very well but it's not laid out quite as objectively factually as you seem to claim. Would you be able to back up your claims with evidence or are they just that, claims? (By the way, what's a "typical article" or a "traditional prose/article-style" page?) The Rambling Man (talk) 19:15, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Most of this is common sense, man. Guidelines, like the MOS, are typically not explicit, because then they would be Policy. That's a fundamental of Wikipedia, and I'm sure there's a page that explains the different between guidelines and policies. You've been around long enough to know this, and to know what I'm saying. Being overly bureaucratic in a discussion like this (where people simply do just explain things how they see them and attempt to honestly re-account what was going on when these pages were made) strikes me as you trying to find a way to discount anything I say because I can't cite god having decreed everything I have said.

Are you seriously asking me to cite talk page discussion? I've been through at least two ArbCom cases, coming out on top on both, so it's certainly something I can do, but I'm taken back that you think that I would lie about these things, or that I even have anything to gain from this. If anything, it's little disputes like this that cause me to avoid Wikipedia. What have I done to you to earn such distrust from you? I am not here for a dispute, I am here for productive, happy work that makes Wikipedia a better place to edit and read.

It's bold titles in episode lists. In the big picture I don't really give a fuck if they're bold or not. However, I enjoy trying to help, trying to make this great tool that is {{episode list}} better, and to try to defuse the unnecessarily heated debate (and pile-up on one editor). It also helps distract me from the fact that I'm 29 years old, and right now am getting chemo-theory treatments for cancer. Otherwise I wouldn't have the free time to comment on this stuff, which is why I haven't been as active as I once was. (And no, that's not for pity. While this is has been a major event in my life, I got lucky and the doctor expects me to be 100% cancer free at the end of treatment).

I wanted to make my viewpoint on the bold titles clear, but at the same time I am trying to present something else that keeps getting ignored: I don't want to push for or fight for bold titles. I only want the {{episode list}} template to be the best template it can be. I would rather explore ideas not even considered than repeat everything that has already been said about bold titles. Bold titles was one method tried, and the only method so far. I have no attachment to that method.

So calm down man. This isn't a dispute. We are supposed to work together, and to respect each other. It's one thing to ask if I can clarify myself, or even point to a previous discussion about something I brought up. It's another to start treating it like an ArbCom case. -- Ned Scott 19:56, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

I'm perfectly calm, thanks for your concern. I am tired of reading "MOS is only for prose", that's simply untrue. I also can't deal with walls of rebuke. I didn't ask for this, I just said, let's try, as a project (i.e. Wikipedia) to comply with a common set of style guidelines. And I strongly advocated it for FLC, particularly for inclusivity, per WP:ACCESS. I have little interest in anything else here, just for brilliant lists that everyone can enjoy.

As for your treatment, of course, I wish you the best. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:03, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Then allow me to apologies for coming off that way. The MOS isn't just only for prose. I say prose for a lack of a better word to come to my mind. I do think that the main context of the MOS is for normal paragraphed pages, rather than lists, or mathematical examples, or other "not quite article" pages or sections. Most, if not all, of the MOS can still be applied to such pages/sections, but should be treated in context to the situation. I come to these conclusions based on the discussions that often lead to MOS and guideline pages. If we go back and look at "what the problem was" and "what the guideline is trying to do/fix", we often see that we are trying to apply these guidelines to situations that might not have been considered before, so we do have to rely on interpretation and good judgement. That's why I don't have an explicit passage to cite to anyone.

When I bring up my take on these things, I'm sorry if I'm coming off as "a matter of fact", rather than "this is just what I think based on my experiences here at Wikipedia". I don't expect anyone to take it as fact, but just as a point in a discussion. I can see how I could have come off as "matter of fact", and probably should have ran through my postings before posting them, so that my intent was clearer.

I also did not mean to have my statements be "walls of rebuke". I only wanted to clarify my viewpoints. For one reason, I wanted to make it clear I wasn't trying to be confrontational. At least that's how it worked out in my mind as I was writing up replies. That's why my first posting about wanting bold titles was followed by a "on second thought" reply, because it really isn't that specific "bold" issue that I even care about. I guess it's easy for me to get caught up in expressing myself, and maybe when I go on too long about it, it comes off as "walls of rebuke".

Also, I think it is very awesome that {{episode list}} is coming into compliance with WP:ACCESS. That's one of the best additions to the template in years and really ups the functionality. Thank you for pushing that. I wasn't even aware about the way screen readers work and all that, and found it very cool that things would work better with them. -- Ned Scott 20:35, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Ned, no problems. Fighting for proper accessibility is a challenge that the more technical featured list candidates have to deal with daily. Reading prose is usually a cinch for most of us and for screen readers, but reading tables isn't so straight-forward for everyone. I was certainly one of the cynics when access-savvy folks complained about our tables but now I realise it's more important than I thought. For slight aesthetic changes, we gain huge rewards for the "disabled" community. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:44, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Episode list/Colbert

Template:Episode list/Colbert has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Andrewcrawford (talk - contrib) 16:09, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

File:Katefromlost.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Katefromlost.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:56, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

RFC/User

Because you are an editor who has participated in previous discussions on the same topic (or a closely related one), I call your attention to discussion at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Rhode Island Red.2. Sincerely, GeorgeLouis (talk) 16:49, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

I probably won't be of much help, given that my comments on the previous RfC had more to do with concerns with some of the people who filed the RfC, and the application of SPA/sock tags, rather than commenting on Rhode Island Red's specific behavior. Though I guess it might be a nice arbitrary reason to poke my head back in Wikipedia and provide some "semi-outsider" input on a situation. -- Ned Scott 16:59, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Digimon Wiki

Template:Digimon Wiki has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 05:48, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

References in Template:Episode list ShortSummary row

Hey, Ned. Thought I should check in with you about my question again at Template talk:Episode list#Question about references in ShortSummary row. Any way code can be tampered to fix the issue? Thanks. -- Wikipedical (talk) 04:46, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Upper Peninsula War

Hi Ned,

Dcoetzee and I have been restoring and preserving hoaxes at Wikipedia:List of hoaxes on Wikipedia. I see you had Upper Peninsula War userfied; would you be okay with my moving it to be with the others? — Hex (❝?!❞) 23:47, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

I don't mind at all. It was only placed there to save it from deletion. I'm sure it will be happy to be with its own kind :) -- Ned Scott 23:50, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

:) Done! — Hex (❝?!❞) 16:33, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Wikipedia:Don't assume

Wikipedia:Don't assume, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Don't assume and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Wikipedia:Don't assume during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Codename Lisa (talk) 01:06, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Hotties are always notable listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Wikipedia:Hotties are always notable. Since you had some involvement with the Wikipedia:Hotties are always notable redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Nathan ^T 01:09, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

• hawt! -- Ned Scott 02:43, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

An RfC that you may be interested in...

As one of the previous contributors to {{Infobox film}} or as one of the commenters on it's talk page, I would like to inform you that there has been a RfC started on the talk page as to implementation of previously deprecated parameters. Your comments and thoughts on the matter would be welcomed. Happy editing!

This message was sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(t • e • c)} 18:26, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

XBMC

Kodi Media Center should be rename back to Kodi Entertainment Center as Blog post. Though 'Entertainment Center' hasn't been announced as part of the new official name yet, but 'Media Center', which was part of the name XBMC, has been dropped. Read the full blog post carefully. Hei Liebrecht 11:58, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I am actually a member of Team XBMC/Kodi. Right now neither "sub-title" is official, since we haven't made any formal announcements that could then be used as a source by wikipedia, and my own knowledge isn't considered a verifiable source. It will most likely be "media center" per our internal discussions. For now I shall call it "Kodi (software)". -- Ned Scott 00:28, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Request for Comment

Based on your comments here: https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Avoiding_harm, I am interested in having your feedback/criticism dialogue here: https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)#Guideline_for_crime_victims_of_world_wide_significanceMeropeRiddle (talk) 11:01, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WANNABEKATE listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Wikipedia:WANNABEKATE. Since you had some involvement with the Wikipedia:WANNABEKATE redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. JohnBlackburne^words_deeds 23:03, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:BentonCompPAGE listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Wikipedia:BentonCompPAGE. Since you had some involvement with the Wikipedia:BentonCompPAGE redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Steel1943 (talk) 22:53, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Digimon Adventure group shot.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Digimon Adventure group shot.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:33, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

Nomination for merging of Template:CatScan

Template:CatScan has been nominated for merging with Template:PetScan. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Evad37 [talk] 08:07, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

Asian 10,000 Challenge invite

Hi. The Wikipedia:WikiProject Asia/The 10,000 Challenge has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge and Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The 10,000 Challenge. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like South East Asia, Japan/China or India etc, much like Wikipedia:The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. At some stage we hope to run some contests to benefit Asian content, a destubathon perhaps, aimed at reducing the stub count would be a good place to start, based on the current Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon which has produced near 200 articles in just three days. If you would like to see this happening for Asia, and see potential in this attracting more interest and editors for the country/countries you work on please sign up and being contributing to the challenge! This is a way we can target every country of Asia, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant! Thank you. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 11:22, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

Meh, I'm not that active these days. -- Ned Scott 20:54, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Ned Scott. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Digimon Wiki

Template:Digimon Wiki has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 01:27, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Ned Scott. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Digimon Adventure group shot.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Digimon Adventure group shot.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:28, 8 June 2018 (UTC)