This is UDScott's talk page, where you can send messages and comments to UDScott.



Help me [1] Gremista.32 msg 18:21, 9 January 2023 (UTC) Gremista.32 msg 18:21, 9 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(Talk page temp watcher): I noticed Gremista.32's help request above and assessed that they had Completed stage I of WQ:Votes for deletion#Requesting deletions by adding a {{Vd-new}} tag [[:Special:Diff/3229490] a couple of days ago but had not not managed to complete stages II and III and were asking for help with that. Looking at Nigel Schroeter I believe it is reasonable that process enters a deletion process. After looking at the article which began "I am" I determined Speedy deletion request could be reasonable and have raised the same. Gremista.32, at this stage of your experience please under no circumstnances raise a speedie deletion. If you attempt to raise a WQ:PROD or WQ:VFD please immediate ask at the village pump if anything goes wrong or if you have not been able to contact the article creator. Thankyou. -- User:Djm-leighpark(a)talk 20:22, 9 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Hey UDScott what's up? 15:15, 13 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks & My badEdit

That would be "Thanks" for the quick fix (on "Film director") and "My bad" for having made that extra work for you in the first place. A bit too much multi-tasking on my part, I'm afraid. With both the then-current version and that 6/21/21 prank edit open on separate screens (plus 2 Wikipedia edits elsewhere), I must've inadvertently edited the latter, thus unwittingly restoring that unnoticed bit of John Carpenter mischief even as I (thought I) was repairing the rest. Anyway, red face notwithstanding, the key thing is that when the dust cleared, the article—for what appears to be the first time in its eight-year-plus existence—has a normal-looking and perfectly functional TOC. Well done, as usual. Otherwise (esp. as I don't believe we've corresponded since well before the pandemic), I hope you've been doing well, on and off the wikis.

Thanks again. DavidESpeed (talk) 20:36, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Do you take requests? 2600:387:C:7131:0:0:0:6 15:32, 6 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Can you edit Spider-Man as the main protagonist of the Marvel Universe on English Wikipedia? 2600:387:C:7131:0:0:0:6 15:41, 6 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Nope. I suggest you place such a request on that site, not here. ~ UDScott (talk) 15:45, 6 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@UDScott, this IP is an LTA. Simply as w:Wikipedia:Long-term_abuse/Bucharest_Wild_Kratts_and_horror_film_vandal. Please take a look of global contribution. Lemonaka (talk) 15:50, 6 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Could you please block this sock-puppet?Edit

This sock-puppet (Special:Contributions/2600:387:15:630:0:0:0:6) has just uploaded a copyrighted image of Bela Lugosi as Count Dracula. File:Bela Lugosi as Count Dracula 1931.jpg Could you please not only block him, but also delete the copyrighted image? AdamDeanHall (talk) 04:15, 9 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(talk page watcher): This file in question is a file from commons and needs to be dealt with there per commons:File:Bela Lugosi as Count Dracula 1931.jpg and commons:Commons:Deletion requests/File:Bela Lugosi as Count Dracula 1931.jpg. I believe there's sufficient of a concern to make these edits Special:Diff/3247553 and Special:Diff/3247549. -- Djm-leighpark(a)talk 06:59, 9 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Could you please block this user?Edit

This user, Special:Contributions/Engiolpodua, is bugging me and has been leaving me messages on my talk box. Could you please block him right now? AdamDeanHall (talk) 14:49, 9 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Y Done ~ UDScott (talk) 14:54, 9 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Could you please get rid of this user?Edit

This user is bugging me about a glitch in the Horror film page on Wikipedia. This is the user I'm talking about: Special:Contributions/2600:387:15:634:0:0:0:1 Could you please get rid of him for me? AdamDeanHall (talk) 16:31, 9 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Looks like this one was already taken care of. ~ UDScott (talk) 17:33, 9 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


please take a look at that. i added big chunk of a quote. i dont know if this suits english wikiquote polices. is it? thank you. Modern primat (talk) 17:51, 9 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I would agree that it is a bit long as a single quote - I've split it up into several pieces (and trimmed part of it as well). ~ UDScott (talk) 18:48, 9 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
my main question was about copyright. not actually how long it is. for me, every sentence of that quote is valueable. but i have concerns about copyright and you didnt answered that. Modern primat (talk) 20:27, 9 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The length of the quote is actually about copyright - see Wikiquote:Limits on quotations for some guidance. In its original form, I believe what you had posted was a copyright issue. In this now trimmed and split out portion, I believe it is acceptable. ~ UDScott (talk) 20:40, 9 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Susan WojcickiEdit

Hi, please review your good faith deletion of Susan Wojcicki as I do not believe the criteria for speedy deletion was met. I had converted the page to a valid article and would have simply expected revision deletion of the attack page and protect it from vandalism. If you prefer you might consider emailing me the content you deleted although its past my bedtime but I am currently sleep disrupted. Thankyou. -- DeirgeDel tac 00:09, 3 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I was planning a DRV on this speedy deletion as you had not responded (and I fully accept everyone has RL). However events on the latest incarnation has resulting in me choosing to raise Wikiquote:Votes for deletion/Susan Wojcicki and I judge it would be overkill to run a DRV disucssion in parallel with that. Obviously you may care to contribute at the VfD. Thankyou. -- DeirgeDel tac 00:26, 6 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Sorry, I have been away for a few days and entirely missed this. It appears as this original issue is now overcome by events and I will comment in the VfD discussion as needed. ~ UDScott (talk) 15:35, 6 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


You obviously don't know what's going on the English Wikipedia website don't you? 17:56, 6 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If we split the 2010s-present content on the history section of the horror film article we can add a history for the 2020s content about what horror films came out recently like Scream, Nope, The Black Phone, The Menu, Last Night in Soho, and M3GAN. 18:05, 6 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ohh and X and Pearl. 18:07, 6 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Last warning: why you continue to chastise people to make changes on an external site is beyond me. Please refrain form bothering folks here and take it up there if you wish. If you continue, you will be blocked yet again. ~ UDScott (talk) 18:09, 6 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks, etc.Edit

UDScott, I've tried to send you messages & have been blocked in the past. Trying again now. For years, it has seemed to me like we have had an unspoken understanding here -in hundreds if not thousands of instances we have had harmonious collaboration without the need for a bunch of chatter. We both know corruption & ignorance are huge problems in our world.
It does seem to me that admin (was it green means go?) did not follow the rules when he first blocked me 'forever' back in the days of om777om; and the other police like admins since then have also used silly reasons to prevent me from working, a way to push their povs. So, have I ever done any vandalism or anything malicious here? Ever?!! IMO, a youngster's 'reality' that is based on corruption or lies or simply ignorance, is not reality and is often best ignored, especially if they have power they can abuse at will without being scrutinized for it.
It will be very interesting to see what the Steward has to say. Hope he/she has time to dig & reflect. It might take some time. I'm taking nothing for granted here, but hope to continue. As always constructive criticism is welcome.
So sorry for the 'trouble' surrounding my presence & all that. WTH?
Thank you for putting up with me thus far. Que Sera, Sera! :-D - All the best Okthen-trytryagain (talk) 04:21, 8 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

PS. The toxic fears expressed (spread) by that one that's called for the removal of APL page are unbelievably ridiculous. Also, btw I know I don't own anything here. Nobody here owes me anything. It's good to see the garden grow, but those weeds are something else! Okthen-trytryagain (talk) 06:07, 8 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Gary LinekerEdit

I am contesting your good faith PROD of Gary Lineker for the purpose of having that article undeleted and upgrading it to a properly sourced article. From an American Citizen viewpoint w:en:Gary Lineker may seem unnotably but from a English Soccer viewpoint is is perhaps in some ways an equivalent of say w:en:Troy Aikman in the American NFL. The deletion rationale was unsourced and while that may be true it may well contain a significant quote that I wish to try to source. I would expect this to be restored within 48 hours after which I will take it to WP:DRV. That is not to say that we do not have RL. things. It is almost always my practice to build from a previous incarnation rather than to w:en:P:TNT and start a new incarnation. I have abolutely no issue if you immediately convert that restored contested PROD to a VFD with immediate effect. Thnakyou. -- DeirgeDel tac 12:36, 17 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

While I am here I also wish to express my disappointment at the failure to restore WQ:DRV:The Biggest Little Railway in the World. The requests reflects the fact you initially seem to have PROD'd the article with no notification to the creator (under by now abandoned account Djm-leighpark) and failed to answer their queries about that undiscussed PROD; which was effectively an unanswered contestation. My understanding is any reasonable request to dePROD should be honoured in a reasonable timescale but immediately converted to a VFD on restore if necessary. This is a case where admins should be facilitating editors to make good faith content contributions rather than making them feel frustrated and begging and being made to beg and wait which is simply frustrating for everyone. I cannot remember the exact content of that article now but your actions at the time certainly created on me a very poor impression on Wikiquote. And I certainly wish to review that especially in the light of unsourced dialogues that are created unchallenged here some of whom simply seem to glorify death and profanities and allow the creator to make their own grisly interpretations of death. Thankyou. -- DeirgeDel tac 12:36, 17 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I have no issue restoring the Gary Lineker page if you are prepared to correct the issue that got it deleted on the first place. Note that I was not the person that tagged it for deletion, but was simply closing out PROD nominees that had exhausted their review time period. Also, note that this deletion had nothing to do with notability. As for the other page, yes I probably failed to notice this request, but even in looking at it again, I fail to see a rationale for restoring it, as the problem identified in the PROD nomination was not even addressed. And again, I was not the person who nominated it for deletion, but rather just the one who happened to be cleaning out the backlog of PROD that day. To be honest, until you started bring these up, we have never really seen anyone requesting the restoration of PROD'd pages - if there was a need, the pages have simply been recreated. I get what you are saying that you prefer to resurrect rather than start from scratch, but be aware that it has rarely if ever happened in the past. I will restore both pages, but please take action on both to rectify the issues with them. Thanks. ~ UDScott (talk) 13:41, 17 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]