User talk:UDScott

From Wikiquote
Jump to: navigation, search

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


Category:Suspected criminals[edit]

A page that you have been involved in editing, Category:Suspected criminals, has been listed for deletion. All contributions are appreciated, but it may not satisfy Wikiquote's criteria for inclusion, for the reasons given in the nomination for deletion (see also what Wikiquote is and is not). If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikiquote:Votes for deletion/Category:Suspected criminals. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Thank you. Superchilum (talk) 08:58, 20 July 2016 (UTC)


Hi. Have a look at the range-blocks that I just added, and feel free to change them as you like. It seems to be a vandal that has targeted certain pages for some time now. Would you consider semi-protecting the pages, or is range-block the way to go in this case? -- Tegel (talk) 00:35, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Assuming this might be the same person or group as the already blocked range, I am afraid that (1) he will be back again using more ranges, but (2) the attack is broader than the handful of pages targeted in the last couple days. It is probably a good idea to semi-protect selected biographies of political persons for the duration of the current campaign silly-season, as there are many people who might like to deface them; but it will only mitigate, not eliminate, the impact of determined broad-spectrum vandals. ~ Ningauble (talk) 13:12, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Urgent message[edit]

Numerous IP addresses continuously make unnecessary edits (and vandalism edits to boot) on the following pages:

Toy Story
Toy Story 2
Toy Story 3
Monsters, Inc.
Monsters University
The Incredibles name but a few, and they refuse to cease and desist, nor even explain their edits. I request that all those IP addresses be blocked for the maximum time allowed, and that all pages on which they have edited be protected for at least six months. WikiLubber (talk) 17:50, 26 September 2016 (UTC)


This user is probably the most unpleasant one I have ever seen on Wikipedia or Wikiquote. I've read over dozens of his edit notes and remarks on his own page, and I've seen a disturbing degree of hostility, aggressiveness towards other users. I could cite example after example from pages he patrols as if they are his own personal territory and no one else's. Maybe he serves a purpose for Wikiquote by ruthlessly chopping down one Wikiquote page after another and forcing it to strict adherence to the LOQ regulations. But the harsh, automatically near-hostile speech he uses, over and over, is NOT needed nor should it be acceptable. I quote the user on Wikipedia who declined to unblock him this year, after he finally got himself banned on Wikipedia:

Wikipedia is not your personal property where others should avoid you if they don't want to be insulted (and yes, you have engaged in all kinds of personal attacks, ranging from unfounded accusations of bad faith to outright insults, over the past few weeks). Since you cannot even see why your behaviour is unacceptable, much less credibly claim to change it, I cannot unblock you. Huon (talk) 15:05, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

None of this is any accusation against UDScott, not in any way. Nor is it suggesting that no action has ever been taken against Eaglestorm at times where it's been necessary. But if this user is banned on Wikipedia for the very reasons I mention, why is he allowed to roam free on Wikiquote- where he continues to use the same hostile language and treats pages as if they belong to him personally, once he claims them on his growing list of LOQ-regulated pages as part of the larger project by Wikipedia? Wikipedia and Wikiquote are not supposed to be run by assholes, which Eaglestorm, in my opinion, indisputably is. Again, there is no accusation or criticism of you, UDScott, in any of this. I'm just trying to express some serious concerns about a user who, it looks to me, has not learned any lessons from getting kicked off Wikipedia earlier this year for his hostility. I just wanted to bring this to your attention. -- 16:31, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

Splitting series page into seasons[edit]

Hi, I was wondering what is the norms of splitting TV series' pages into separate season pages. How many seasons would warranty a split-up? --SuperJew (talk) 07:46, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

There really isn't any hard and fast rule on this - in general, I would only consider it if the page became so large as to be unwieldy (much as we do for author's pages that become too large and we split out individual works onto their own pages). This usually only occurs if there is an inordinate amount of seasons (think 8+). I'm actually a bit disturbed that so many TV shows are having their seasons split into individual pages (unnecessarily so, in my opinion). To me, that just encourages adding too many quotes (limits apply to the entire TV show, not just season pages separately). ~ UDScott (talk) 11:17, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
Thanks, that sounds a reasonable way. I'm asking since an IP recently split Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D., and it's only in it's 4th season. What would you suggest to do with it? Revert the split on the mainpage and nominate the season pages for deletion? --SuperJew (talk) 11:53, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
Yes, that sounds reasonable - except that rather than delete them, I might just make them redirects to the main page. ~ UDScott (talk) 12:33, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
Okay I did that. Thank you --SuperJew (talk) 13:35, 28 October 2016 (UTC)