• This user believes in keeping talk page conversations in one place.
  If you leave a comment here, expect a reply on this page.

---

Please click here to start a new discussion

---

• Archive: 2009 • 2010 • 2011

Contents 1 Template:Featured, new parameter 2 Image discussion 3 Private contact options 4 148.63.229.146 5 Page deletions 6 Corresponding templates 7 Broken Link? 8 Categories on title templates 9 Grammar 10 edit 11 Block 12 bytheby 13 Image templates 14 Thanks for the help 15 TNG Interactive Technical Manual? 16 Renaming images 17 Section transclusions 18 Other non-canon edits? 19 Spambots 20 Prop photos 21 Kelly Connell change 22 POV 23 ShipClass and Class 24 Removal of "nitpick"

Template:Featured, new parameter Edit

I guess you have a better overview about which FAs have been "reconfirmed" so far, so I'm putting this here. Perhaps you can add the new parameter where appropriate, or at least let me know which articles need it:

I updated Template:Featured with a new parameter "reconf", to be used in cases where the FA status of an article has been reconfirmed. I think it is good to know when reading the FA note that an article has "survived" such nomination more than once already. -- Cid Highwind 13:12, January 5, 2012 (UTC)

See here for what I was writing while you were writing this. :) - Archduk3 13:17, January 5, 2012 (UTC)

Image discussion Edit

I'm not sure what I did to earn a dose of unnecessary vulgar language from you, as your points could have been made quite successfully without it. It's not what I've come to expect from you and in a lot of ways seems out of character. I don't really seek a response from you but I wanted to express that.--31dot 02:27, January 12, 2012 (UTC)

None of what I've said ain this "discussion" is directed at anybody personally other than Cid, who I think frames discussions, and then participates in then in a way that stifles open debate unfairly. I think he abuses the system, and I think he's been doing it for years and only gets away with it because of his position. If swearing, name calling, appealing to, or presenting as the only options, the most extreme examples, belittling others, dismissing valid suggestions out of hand, refusing to get the point, and fervently supporting unwritten policies right up to the point they might apply to him is how he wants to do things around here, I'm going to be giving him nothing but the same from now on. I've gone out of my way to keep thing professional, if not friendly, between us, and he's done jack shit in return, so I don't own him any courtesies or favors, and I'll be giving him none. I appreciate your concern, and I'm sorry if I've offended you, but I honestly believe that Cid, and other like him (including myself), need to be checked quickly when these kind of self-serving underhanded "tricks" are attempted. - Archduk3 13:49, January 13, 2012 (UTC)

And I'm not sure what's to gain from being insulting and suchnot. Especially since you well know the MA rules on that kind of thing, so I don't feel that I need to reiterate them or point you in the right direction.

I'd appreciate it if you'd do a couple of things now:

a) stop acting like that

b) consider stepping back from interacting with Cid until you no longer feel the need to act like that again.

Thanks. -- sulfur 14:49, January 13, 2012 (UTC)

I intend to limit my interactions with Cid, but I don't intend to let him reverse years of policy decisions, most of which he was here for and I wasn't, without complaint. What he is trying to do here is wrong, and needs to be opposed. - Archduk3 15:01, January 13, 2012 (UTC)

There are ways to do that without being insulting. Try to use those methods instead. -- sulfur 15:03, January 13, 2012 (UTC)

I agree, tell Cid that as well, since these are all things he does to no end it seems. - Archduk3 15:06, January 13, 2012 (UTC)

If you want, I can provide links and detailed reasons for every single one of my statements, cause I can tell Cid exactly where he stands in this shit, and that is covered in it. - Archduk3 15:50, January 13, 2012 (UTC)

Private contact options Edit

Archduk3, is there a way to contact admins outside of a public forum? Sometimes I have things I want to take "offline" with the admins and sometimes I have things to ask which are so stupid and trivial that they really don't deserve to waste public attention :-) I've looked around for this, but haven't found it... so I figured I'd just ask. Thanks!! IGaveUpCrackForThis 05:55, January 15, 2012 (UTC)

Sorry to chime in, but there should be an "email this user" link in the toolbox on the left of the screen when you are on their usertalk page or user page(when you are using the Monobook skin, if you are using the other skin I'm not sure where it is)--31dot 11:55, January 15, 2012 (UTC)

I don't know where that link is either in the default skin, but you could also use the IRC chat room. Not everyone in there is going to be an admin, and it is public, but at least someone who can help you should be lucking around. - Archduk3 13:59, January 15, 2012 (UTC)

148.63.229.146 Edit

I was just wondering why you posted a canon warning on 148.63.229.146's page today, as that IP hasn't edited since the 15th.--31dot 12:03, January 24, 2012 (UTC)

That user created a page that AD3 deleted. -- sulfur 12:12, January 24, 2012 (UTC)

Ah- that would do it. :) Didn't check that far. --31dot 12:25, January 24, 2012 (UTC)

Page deletionsEdit

Please don't forget to put reasons for page deletions in when you're deleting something. It just saves the rest of us time when we see it. Thanks. -- sulfur 20:05, January 25, 2012 (UTC)

Corresponding templatesEdit

I recall what we were originally going to do. Set it so that they defaulted to TOS so that we wouldn't have to change hundreds of images by hand or by bot. -- sulfur 20:29, January 26, 2012 (UTC)

That would have worked for {{Corresponding original}} and {{Remastered image}}, but not for {{Corresponding remastered}}, since it supports more than 1 image per template. Having the fourth call switch to TNG when the second and third aren't used isn't the best solution, so that one was the one I though needed the first call be the series switch. I was going to do them tomorrow, to cut down on the number of these edits in the recent changes per day. I was also going to ask bp if he could use the DYKbot to locate the images using the Remastered image template that already doesn't have a call for TOS, since I seem to remember you pushing that pretty early on. - Archduk3 21:41, January 26, 2012 (UTC)

The best solution would have been to simply name the series parameter. That way, all the existing ones could have been kept as-is. -- Cid Highwind 22:10, January 26, 2012 (UTC)

I disagree, that's the lazy solution, not the best. Since you're here Cid, are you just going to let those FA nominations fail, or can you maybe be bothered to contribute to something in a capacity other than complaining about it. - Archduk3 22:28, January 26, 2012 (UTC)

For the other templates... perhaps let me run the bot on them instead of you filling up the RC too...? -- sulfur 02:39, January 27, 2012 (UTC)

I don't feel any pressing need to do the work myself, so I'm fine with the bot doing them, I just happen to have the time to do them today. Also, on a complete aside, can you actually get to Memory Alpha:Bots, cause that has been timing out for me for the last couple of weeks. - Archduk3 19:06, January 27, 2012 (UTC)

The DPL there can't cope for some reason. If you hit it as an anon, it seems to work though. Weird. I'll go through and bot the changes for the other templates this evening (read: when I'm home from work). -- sulfur 19:22, January 27, 2012 (UTC)

Broken Link? Edit

It doesn't exist at all on Startrek.com... However, I'd link to http://web.archive.org/web/20040430154258/http://www.startrek.com/startrek/view/news/article/5355.html instead... :-S Ariyen 20:27, February 9, 2012 (UTC)

Use the {{brokenlink}} template then. -- sulfur 20:55, February 9, 2012 (UTC)

That doesn't make sense... if it doesn't exist anymore on the actual site. it's not a broken link. It's a former link that's found in the archive machine... 72.148.31.114 22:53, February 9, 2012 (UTC)

"Broken link" - Archduk3 04:52, February 10, 2012 (UTC)

Categories on title templatesEdit

There was a reason that we didn't put categories on these -- the template parsing blew the limits on some of the pages with lots of templates when categories were on some of these due to the size of stuff. Just FYI. -- sulfur 12:55, February 14, 2012 (UTC)

Is there an example of this? It seems weird that adding a category which shouldn't be included would do that. - Archduk3 13:02, February 14, 2012 (UTC)

When a template is transcluded, the entire template is put into the page in the first run-through. The second run-through removes the "noinclude" segments. It was happening on the Kirk and Worf pages that I recall. -- sulfur 13:14, February 14, 2012 (UTC)

I haven't had my coffee yet, so is the problem just too many expensive parser function calls or something more catastrophic, as in the pages no longer render correctly after the second run? If I remember correctly, at a certain point parser functions are suppose to stop working, but I haven't seen that happen to my knowledge. I suppose leaving the templates on the uncategorized templates list is fine in the second case, but it seems silly to do so if the problem is only that pages already over the limit are just over the limit. - Archduk3 13:37, February 14, 2012 (UTC)

Grammar Edit

It was meant only as a facetious comment and I apologise if any offence was caused to you or anyone else. It was certainly wasn't my intention.

Incidentally, not being an American myself, I would hardly assume that all users on the site were.

--GusF 18:36, February 14, 2012 (UTC)

edit Edit

http://en.memory-alpha.org/index.php?title=FGC_47_lifeform&action=historysubmit&diff=1368516&oldid=1368514

So I guess you changed it because I added a redundant category?--Marhawkman 23:37, February 14, 2012 (UTC)

In short, yes. - Archduk3 23:48, February 14, 2012 (UTC)

Ok then. For some reason I wasn't thinking od "species" as "sentient species". heh. :p--Marhawkman 05:09, February 15, 2012 (UTC)

Block Edit

I have reluctantly decided to institute a block on you specifically for your "he's a giant dick" comment on this edit. I am not making any judgements about your claims and I welcome you to make them in such a way as to lose the name calling. --31dot 21:04, February 15, 2012 (UTC)

If I went to two admins to complain about you deleting pages you yourself brought up for deletion after a month (because no one else had got to it), is not the first and correct interpretation that I was being a "giant dick" for doing so? Is all but saying something different from flat out saying it? I'm not asking you to read the meaning in my words by using other ones. I'm fine with sitting out a day, as I've said I would be be, and agree with the block, but I suggest you pay even more attention to Cid from now on, as you can insult users without flat out using word's like "dick", and he does it all the time. - Archduk3 21:13, February 15, 2012 (UTC)

To be honest, I wasn't sure any agreement had been formally reached on that issue. Even if it had, given the controversy it generated it might have been better to post a notice that you were going to delete it beforehand.

I would rather not get into a discussion analyzing who did what and which comment meant what and what have you. It all boils down to the fact that I feel the comment you made crossed the line of a personal attack. I'm not going to watch any user (you or Cid- what follows this applies to both of you) any more closely than I was before- personal attacks will not be tolerated against anyone, and if this wiki keeps being disrupted by your exchanges with Cid I will deal with both of you accordingly. I truly do not wish to take these actions but I am tired of the way you both interact with each other and it will come to an end. I hope it comes to an end due to both your own actions, but it will end somehow.--31dot 21:28, February 15, 2012 (UTC)

There's nothing "formal" or "unformal" about closing a open discussion that hasn't been commented on for a month, but the controversy was going to happen anyway, no matter what was done. It's better to just get it over with instead of waiting another month for the same problem. Cid stated here that he was fine with the images being deleted so long as the rational wasn't because they were fan made. In the IfD discussion I mentioned that even if they we weren't deleting them because they were fan made, they were going to remain unused and should be deleted for that reason. A month passed, and so I cleaned up the page to use it for other images, something no one else was willing to do, and deleted the images for the reason given. No one had addressed the unused reasoning, and waiting for a discussion to end, that hasn't been touched in a month either, is not a valid reason to wait any further, because a stalled discussion after that amount of time has ended. Cid has proven himself a liar by objecting to these deletions that he said he agreed with by trying to say that stalled discussion is now a policy, which it isn't, and that we should be working off of it. I work within the current policies and guidelines when deleting and restoring things, and I don't restore anything that was just deleted to make a point, especially not a point that doesn't require the image anyways. If playing one incomplete draft policy off another is OK, I guess trying to undo the canon policy with one poor wording choice in another must be nothing then. Cid has disrupted MA to prove a point; it's not the first time, and since it's not stopped or address usually, it won't be the last either.

As I said before, I've made efforts to work with Cid, he's done nothing in return. I won't be making any more of an effort than he is, come what may. - Archduk3 22:05, February 15, 2012 (UTC)

bytheby Edit

My very last remark made , that was not you, I gather you got that--Sennim 23:49, February 24, 2012 (UTC)

Even as disingenuous as I think some of the things done around here are, and I'm not excluding myself in that, the only way to make things better is to continue to contribute, either in spite of or defiance of of it. I would urge you to not avoid discussions because of who is in them, but instead participate to make sure their behavior doesn't happen again. - Archduk3 00:05, February 25, 2012 (UTC)

I hear what you're saying, but I find it quite cumbersome to participate, due to the language bombardment of a certain party, which I more and more am becoming convinced of being intended to overwhelm...For some time I've become feeling increasingly guilty of you having to bear the torch alone as I feel on the main as you do...Sennim 00:16, February 25, 2012 (UTC)

Image templatesEdit

Hi. You asked me to "seriously, learn how to use the templates". Please teach me. Where on Special:Upload can I insert the appropriate template? Thanks very much for your help. —Scott (message me) 23:52, March 5, 2012 (UTC)

On the first upload of an image, text inserted into the summary box will be placed on the image description page. If the text at Template:Imagelicensing and Help:Image description page is unclear about what you should do, you can, and have, ask an administrator or check the formatting on an image that is similar to the one you are uploading, in this case File:Alan Bernard and Patrick Stewart.jpg will be used as the example. The text on that page is:

[[Alan Bernard]] and [[Patrick Stewart]] on the set of the ''[[Star Trek: The Next Generation]]'' episode "All Good Things...". (Picture from the [[TNG Season 7 DVD]] special feature "Starfleet Moments and Memories")
{{image paramount}}
[[Category:Memory Alpha images (production staff)]]
[[Category:Memory Alpha images (performers)]]

...which breaks down to:

DESCRIPTION. (CITATION)
COPYRIGHT TEMPLATE (Paramount version)
IMAGE CATEGORIES (as many as needed)

...and then duplicate that for your image upload making any changes as necessary. This text can also be added after the image upload, so you can use the auto-suggestion feature if you're not sure about what image categories there are or what links to use.

The reason for these is that by using the preformatted copyright templates, that are listed at Template:Imagelicensing/shortcuts, you should be able to license any image without having to use the full imagelicensing template (which can be a pin if you're unsure how to use it), and that we are sure all of our images have a copyright and comply with US laws. The licensing templates also automatically add the image to the appropriate copyright category, making it easier to find them. The only other information you might need for everyday use is that the episode template will also automatically add a category, so if the image is from "All Good Things...", you would add:

({{TNG|All Good Things...}})

...for the citation, and the image will automatically be added to Category:Memory Alpha images by episode (TNG: All Good Things...). Administrators will always be happy to help you with this if you ask, though if you are having a hard time remembering anything here, you can always create a "cheat sheet" for next time on a subpage, such as my formatting one. - Archduk3 00:23, March 6, 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, that's all very informative. But I don't see any of it on Special:Upload. —Scott (message me) 07:24, March 6, 2012 (UTC)

Both point 1 and 4 directly address image licensing, as in you must comply with the policy and that images must have a licensing template to do so. If you have any suggestions on how the text should be changed, feel free to say so, but people already don't read that (TLDR), so that's a problem. The rather poor system wikia used for selecting image licensing actually creates more problems than it solves right now, so using that don't help either. - Archduk3 07:43, March 6, 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the helpEdit

Thanks for the tips for links! NokiaTouchscreen 00:58, March 11, 2012 (UTC)

TNG Interactive Technical Manual? Edit

What is your opinion on sourcing images (of consoles, etc.) from the Star Trek: The Next Generation Interactive Technical Manual? I have the old CD which I should be able to extract close-up images of the various TNG set pieces... if they are good enough quality, would those be a good source for images? What sort of credit should I tag them with? Aatrek 02:51, March 13, 2012 (UTC)

Those images can definitely be used in the background sections of articles, like File:Enterprise-D bridge, 2371.jpg is, but can't be used in canon sections if there is something that breaks the POV. File:Galaxyclass sickbay.jpg is from the the same source, so just copy that. It should be noted that images from the show are prefered if available. - Archduk3 09:12, March 13, 2012 (UTC)

Renaming imagesEdit

You mention that anyone can move pages, but there is no "Move" option on the edit drop-down for images. Not for me, anyhow. - Aatrek 02:58, March 17, 2012 (UTC)

Images can only be renamed by admins. -- sulfur 03:14, March 17, 2012 (UTC)

That's news to me, since apparently I didn't read the last sentence in the introduction to Help:Rename a page. ;p - Archduk3 03:27, March 17, 2012 (UTC)

Section transclusionsEdit

Try it now. See here. -- sulfur 19:15, March 22, 2012 (UTC)

Sweet. That was fast, thanks. :) - Archduk3 19:37, March 22, 2012 (UTC)

Other non-canon edits? Edit

Could you look at Kaferian apple? I'm not sure if the links that user added are canon or not.--31dot 14:17, March 24, 2012 (UTC)

SpambotsEdit

When you get delete and block stuff from spambots, can you delete their talk pages too? Thanks. -- sulfur 02:03, April 4, 2012 (UTC)

Do you still have access to the preference to see bot edits by default in the recent changes? - Archduk3 02:06, April 4, 2012 (UTC)

Not under my prefs. Just the selection on the RC. I'm more referring to deletions like the one you did recently on the "WordPress-SEO" page. -- sulfur 02:13, April 4, 2012 (UTC)

If I miss the talk page, it's because I don't see it, and therefor didn't think about it. I used to have bots defaulted on, but turned if off during one of the last few bots runs and apparently never turned it back on for some reason. I'll make an effort to remember it next time, but deleting spam isn't something I put much though into while doing it. - Archduk3 02:21, April 4, 2012 (UTC)

Prop photos Edit

Hi, me again! I have a large collection of catalog photos from the Christie's auction in 2007, which have nice, clean images of a whole bunch of Trek props - like this one and this one and this one. If sourced correctly, could they be used on the objects' pages? Aatrek 18:35, April 4, 2012 (UTC)

As far as I know, if the correct copyright and source is given they can be used in the background sections with accompanying text. I would suggest cropping out as much of the white padding as possible though, and exercising some common sense about the need for for these. For example, a better bg image of this uniform would be a big help, while we already have clear images of the skants. - Archduk3 18:49, April 4, 2012 (UTC)

Sure, if there's a clear on-screen image already being used, there's no need for duplication. Thanks. Aatrek 18:56, April 4, 2012 (UTC)

Kelly Connell change Edit

Hi Archduk. We received an e-mail via Special:Contact yesterday from Kelly Connell about part of the article about him (I'm sending this to you since you recently reverted a change related to the e-mail there). Mr. Connell's concern is that the general statement "was unable to fulfill this part" is overly vague and does not fully reflect the circumstances surrounding the Star Trek: Enterprise role, and therefore sheds a negative light on him. I have offered to talk to you about a different wording to the sentence, which would be:

Connell was also cast to portray the Vulcan Kov in the Star Trek: Enterprise episode "Fusion" but was unable to portray the role due to illness. The role was recast with actor John Harrington Bland.

That wording would therefore reflect the fact that he was unable to fulfill the role due to circumstances outside of his control, thereby not shedding any negative light on him as an actor.

If you can change the article to reflect that, that would be much appreciated. Please let me know. Thanks! - Brandon Rhea^(talk) 16:34, April 6, 2012 (UTC)

ThomasHL tends to be the guy to contact with these, as he has the ability to verify people and was the one to add the info from the call sheet. That said, I can make the change to the article now and forward it on, but we like to have these things confirmed. - Archduk3 21:59, April 6, 2012 (UTC)

I've added the information about Mr. Connell and his "Fusion" connection. If Mr. Connell provides the cicumstances (illness) for this part being recast I don't think we need a further citation for this information and can add it and reword the sentence to remove the negative light which is completely unintentional. Tom 22:16, April 6, 2012 (UTC)

POV Edit

You say I need the POV of someone looking back at the past. I changed it from present to past tense...--{{subst:User:VideoGamePower/sig}} 16:25, April 9, 2012 (UTC)

This is why it's best to keep conversations in one place, as I've already commented on this here. - Archduk3 16:38, April 9, 2012 (UTC)

ShipClass and ClassEdit

Since you've decided to arbitrarily rename this template, please don't spend a week changing each reference to them. I'll run my bot on them later. -- sulfur 17:32, April 15, 2012 (UTC)

I didn't really see a pressing need to change the links, and after moving the type template I was going to address the wider issue with these, since being bold tends to be the only way to get anything that might require some work done around here. - Archduk3 17:36, April 15, 2012 (UTC)

Renaming templates used all over the wiki is not being bold. Next time, please at least make the suggestion. I don't mind the change myself, but suggest. -- sulfur 17:40, April 15, 2012 (UTC)

I agree. Please remember it's a community, as well as your admirable boldness, Archduk. --Defiant 18:44, April 15, 2012 (UTC)

See Forum:Template naming policy. - Archduk3 18:52, April 15, 2012 (UTC)

Removal of "nitpick"Edit

You removed my addition of a production gaffe to the background info for "Angel One", with the note "rm nitpick". Since I have seen numerous episodes with "nitpicks" listed in the background info, I'm curious as to why this specific one is a problem. Piso Mojado 19:15, April 30, 2012 (UTC)

Please see MA:NIT. We just haven't managed to exterminate all of them yet. Having said that, production errors/issues mentioned by production staff in a citeable place? Those can be used and kept. -- sulfur 19:22, April 30, 2012 (UTC)

Sorry I wasn't able to follow up on this sooner, but pretty much what sulfur already said. - Archduk3 04:57, May 1, 2012 (UTC)