Memory Alpha

Cid Highwind/Talkpage/Archive2005

< User:Cid Highwind | Redirected from User talk:Cid Highwind/Archive2005

41,750pages on
this wiki
Add New Page
Add New Page Discuss0

This is an archive of discussions/messages/notes which formerly appeared on my talk page. Please visit that page to start a new discussion - do not modify this page!

Sorry about that mess... Edit

Sorry about the mess. You would probably find all the good stuff at this page (a list of all pages with "list of" in the title) as a starting point for category contents.

When does the "Hand-held weapons category" talk stop, and creation begins? Edit


I've been talking to you about a "hand-held weapons" category, and I think we've come to some agreement about what it should contain. When does it become accepted, and who should do it? zsingaya 20:20, 17 Jan 2005 (CET)

I'm not sure if I'm up to the task... I'm quite new to all this... It seems like you're the right man for the job! So, is there going to be one category for hand-held weapons, and one for other weapons? zsingaya 20:32, 17 Jan 2005 (CET)

Weapons category talk - redux! Edit

Hi again... I've been in hospital for a few days, so I've lost track of stuff. I like whats been done with the weapons category, it seems to be growing well. I was looking at the category of biogenic weapons, for example, that includes Harvester technology, and was pleased to see it linked to my Harvester page! Many thanks. zsingaya 16:50, 25 Jan 2005 (CET)

Founders of the Federation Edit

Are you sure there are only 4?

It might be best to ask this question on Talk:United Federation of Planets instead, but... There are only four species we definitely know are founding members. Humans, Vulcans, Andorians and Tellarites; if I remember correctly, these four were mentioned in "Zero Hour". There may be more than those four, but at the moment this would only be speculation (and recent ENT episodes suggest that it stays that way). -- Cid Highwind 19:36, 2005 Jan 31 (CET)

Categorization Edit

Regarding in-universe and out-universe, I looked at it the other way. The only things that really exist are the movies, tv shows and other accepted sources, while articles on a specific person or planet are derived and cumulated from the content material. Just a different way of looking at things. I prefer a much more intuitive and Wiki style of categorization. Categories will often reveal themselves once you start grouping things together and nodes will form that you never would have imagined if you tried to do it in a hard linear fashion. Remember: Lists != Categories. Drhaggis 08:13, 1 Feb 2005 (CET)

Bot in Memory Alpha Edit

Hello, in Memory Alpha/de we discussed the possibilities about using a bot in Memory Alpha. I'd like to know your opinion on using a bot aswell. Please check out the discussion in Ten Forward. Thank you. -- Kobi - (Talk) 13:46, 9 Mar 2005 (GMT)

Protecting MediaWiki namespace Edit

Hi Cid, perhaps you can help me out. The language MediaWiki-pages in de:MA are not protected by default. That means, a common MediaWiki:Tagline is protected, but all language-versions (e.g. MediaWiki:Tagline/en) are not. This is a flaw which can be used by any kind of disquieters to alter international texts. I can protects all those pages by hand, which would make about 900 messages × 60 languages. Is there any convinient way to have the whole MediaWiki namespace protected with sysop grants? I don't dare to bug Angela and Jason again for such "simple" matters. -- Florian - Talk 02:46, 23 Mar 2005 (EST)

Licensing GDFL -> CCL Edit

This topic needs admins and is very time-consuming. Perhaps you will want to split it up with other en-admins. It's about the license-texts for multi-language support. By deafult all wikicities come with GDFL-license. We agreed to have a Creative Commons License, which is not combinable with GDFL. Although, if you change your interface-language (to nl, es, whatever) you can see GDFL-notices all around. I did a documentation on this problem and how to solve it: de:Benutzer:Florian K/Licensing CCL GDFL.

Besides this, there a a few multilanguage MediaWiki-texts, which need a fix: MediaWiki talk:Monobook.css/de, MediaWiki talk:Showhideminor/de, MediaWiki talk:Showhideminor. -- Florian - Talk 06:42, 2 Apr 2005 (EST)

Spelling errors Edit

Hi Cid,

I did actually search for "gene rodenberry" on the search page myself and corrected all the errors before making the redirect page. It's just because I, actually (!) thought that it was spelt like that and then spent a while trying to find the real page. Creating the redirect page simply means that if anyone types "gene rodenberry" (note misspelling) into the search box, they are redirected to the right page.

Adam Kidburla 12:20, 8 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Hi again,
Thanks for your message. I have created a new section on the redirects page and explained basic policy on this idea.
Cheers again, and I'm not offended, I'm relatively new here.
Adam Kidburla 13:51, 8 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Offensive "Nigger" pageEdit

Right, I'll try here (blush, sorry!) I think a few people will find this page offensive, so its been merged with Slang, but someone's re-started the page and reverted the edit so its exactly how it was. Can you make it a redirect to Slang#Insults please? Thanks. zsingaya 21:55, 4 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Deleted according to immediate deletion guidelines. -- Cid Highwind 22:03, 4 Sep 2005 (UTC)
Might be worthwhile searching for it again in a few days time, the person will probably be back and try it again. You know what, after a time on here, you begin to anticipate what the vandals will do! Maybe I spend too long on here... zsingaya 22:05, 4 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Thank you Edit

Before I head off for class, I just wanted to tell you how much I appreciate your clearing up the whole user name/custom signature issue. :-) --Truly, From Andoria with Love 20:12, 14 Sep 2005 (UTC)

  • And I would like to correct User:Shran's belief that you cleared anything up; all you did was instigate problems by forcing an innocent user to violate policy and circumvent a ban. I was going to leave a message to Shran apologizing only to find that I couldn't do so because I was blocked. Please remove this inappropraite ban immediately. Angry Andorian 21:34, 14 Sep 2005 (UTC)
    • If this user is banned, should they not be able to be logging onto the website under another username? --Alan del Beccio 21:43, 14 Sep 2005 (UTC)
      • They should, but it automatically blocked me because I "share an IP with" (A.K.A. used to use) the username. And as for the name, it wasn't copied from somewhere; that was the point of using it. It was a play on words from the James Bond film "From Russia with Love." I assume Shran got his inspiration there; I know I did. Angry Andorian 21:46, 14 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Request to unban User:From Andoria with LoveEdit

(copied from above) Please remove this inappropraite ban immediately. Angry Andorian 21:34, 14 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Your original username, whether coincidentally or deliberately similar to an existing username, was inappropriate. You already moved or copied the content of your old user pages to the new ones and left a comment regarding the name change. Also, as I already said on your talk page, I don't really believe in "coincidence" here, and combined with the fact that the few contributions you made with that other account were similar to those of recent vandals, I don't see a good reason to lift that ban.
If you feel that you are treated unfairly, feel free to bring that up for discussion. We haven't had a need for arbitration in the past, so just start a new topic on Memory Alpha:Ten Forward or continue the discussion here. Thanks, Cid Highwind 21:52, 14 Sep 2005 (UTC)


No, the words "within ten days" imply that the nomination can be removed and archived any time after a consensus has been reached during those ten days. If an article is clearly rejected after five days (for example), it may be removed and nominated as consensus has been reached within ten days. I believe you might think it means, "should only be removed after ten days", but it neither states nor means that (as it currently written). I hope I've clarified my point. --Defiant | Talk 11:51, 23 Sep 2005 (UTC)

I don't really mind where the TATV nomination ends up (nomination page/archive). Mostly, I was trying to show the error in the nomination policy that could be abused, and I hope I've demonstrated that (I think I have!) I actually believed that the nomination policy indicated that nominations should wait 'til ten days, and haven't read the Talk page you gave me as I already believe the policy means wait until then, but isn't correctly written! --Defiant | Talk 19:09, 23 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Any chance you could help with peerreview again? Any assistance would be much appreciated. Also, I didn't quite understand your last post there. Were you suggesting two accounts of the episode, a concise summary and a longer retelling? I thought users (including you) would prefer a small summary, alone?

I also think that some users are being ridiculous when it comes to FAs. I actually laughed when I readLogan5's comment that the summary for "Yesterday's Enterprise" is too long! Shouldn't articles be judged on their quality and not quantity? I thought that was the idea behind FAs...? --Defiant | Talk 23:22, 23 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Your just as bad, nominating articles and removing nominations "to make a point" and twisting my words to make them look like a personal attack. Grow up. Ben Sisqo 23:31, 23 Sep 2005 (UTC)
No personal attacks on MA - and EVEN LESS ON MY TALK PAGE! Stop that, now. -- Cid Highwind 23:35, 23 Sep 2005 (UTC)
I was making the point that it wasn't a personal attack. :oP But sorry for putting it here. Ben Sisqo 23:38, 23 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Reply Edit

No problem, just trying to help. :) However, I thought Admins could just change policy without discussing it first...? Am I right/wrong? --Defiant | Talk 23:06, 23 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Okay... so, for example, if I found something as trivial as the wording of "within ten days" again, I'd just change that without consulting the policy's Talk page? --Defiant | Talk 23:13, 23 Sep 2005 (UTC)

POV inputEdit

(I'm sending the same text to all the admins that are currently active, so I apologize for cut and paste):

I've been having a conversation with a new user on (my talk page regarding how to write an article on M/A in the proper point of view, that is from within the Trek universe (in the case of objects, people, places, ships, etc) rather than from the outside looking in.

My understanding of this website, from day one, has been that it is the internet version of the Star Trek Encyclopedia, and have never had any difficulty understanding it any other way. This user thinks otherwise. I'm to the point in the conversation, and I'm surprised no other admins have thrown their hats into the ring yet, that I would like to ask for a little assistance, as I believe we shouldn't have to have any "policy" (per se) on such a straight forward and frankly "common sense" issue, either by starting a separate talk page or to Ten Forward. Whichever the case, and no matter how many articles we have written in the point of view which I am defending (that being roughly 10000) this user does not seem to understand, and we do not seem to have any page (aside from a subpage Cid had in his archive that I found) that I could use as an example (btw, the user in question more or less snubbed off Cids page anyway). So please, anyone else willing to assist would be much appreciated. I can't seem to better defend a point, a method and a style that is so "ingrained" into my brain/our brains as "normal" any other way than I have, as being right, without getting out a big stick -- and thus far this user has been an exception, as I have had experiences with countless other newbies and they seems to catch on to our style, well except one other, rather quickly.

Anyway, I should also note, that I am aware of this users attitude and previous conflicts with adminstrators from other message boards (from my old Starship Modding days) and am somewhat in a position of a conflict of interest -- because frankly I believe this individual would rather go out in a blaze of glory than work our well established conformity.

If you need an example of the work in question, just compare the perspectives of the original contributions of the user to the draft rewrites I made in the respective histories. Thanks so much! --Alan del Beccio 18:50, 27 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Template reference Edit

Cid, I was looking for a good reference on these template things you are talking about like the {{welcome}} and so forth. Perhaps a list of "established" ones? and how to create the markup in the articles that mark the text as exportable.

Could you point me in the right direction? (Relatively new to Wikis, and I love the concept)--Funkdubious 18:17, 5 Nov 2005 (UTC)

Hey Cid, you around?--Funkdubious 19:12, 8 Nov 2005 (UTC)

Old user page Edit

Hello again. I was just wondering, would it be okay to delete User:From Andoria with Love and its talk page? The user was blocked for using my signature as her user name, and has since made a new account (Angry Andorian). However, she has not been on since the incident a few months ago, and the "From Andoria with Love" name simply redirects others to the newer page and to my user page. So would it be okay to get rid of it? --From Andoria with Love 17:20, 7 Nov 2005 (UTC)

Interesting info tidbit from wiki dev Edit

I saw your response in TenForwad regarding templates, and FYI: One of the wiki devs told me you can actually include a page in another page: {{:Demon}}

He also asserted that you could wrap the entire rest of the page with <noinclude></noinclude> tags everywhere except for the description (kinda like using a sledge hammer for a picture nail)

Just though you'd be interested to know. --Funkdubious 18:40, 10 Nov 2005 (UTC)

BTW: the link [[1]]--Funkdubious 18:41, 10 Nov 2005 (UTC)

you just don't like Stargate. -The Wraith 19:17, 14 Nov 2005 (UTC)

Administrator Edit

How does a person apply, or suggest someone, for an Administrator nomination? After a few rounds with Shran, it's apparent I'm more familiar with M/A guidelines than he is, awards notwithstanding.--Mike Nobody 03:17, 4 Dec 2005 (UTC)

No offence, boyo (to Mike), but as often as you violate copyright and the try to defend it, I wouldn't be talking about being more familiar with M/A guidelines. Also, if you mean that part about M/A covering everything Star Trek, keep in mind that doesn't necessarily mean production info, just the Star Trek universe in general. And if you are referring to my calling what you did a night or two ago vandalism, to me, deleting information from several pages which others might find useful and then not giving a reasonable reason why you deleted it in the talk page (except for "Irrelevant" <unsigned>), this does indeed constitute vandalism. Violating copyrights, removing information without explanation, not signing your comments, and possibly mis-interpreting guidelines -- yup, sounds to me like you're much more familiar with our guidelines than I am. :-P --From Andoria with Love 12:02, 4 Dec 2005 (UTC)

The deletions were to make a point (which you missed completely, I see). Throwing an angry little fit won't justify your position any more than vandalizing the work of other contributors. And yeah, research is WORK. As for copyright issues, if you want to beat on that dead horse again, bring it on. It was my understanding that the founders of M/A were trying to establish the most complete guide to Star Trek, as I've endeavored to make it as much as I can. Personal attacks against other contributors are against the rules of "the game" (using your term). Grow up little boy.--Mike Nobody 12:13, 4 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Could you please not discuss this on my talk page? There's a better place for this, for example Mike's nomination, should he decide to do so. Thanks :) -- Cid Highwind 12:18, 4 Dec 2005 (UTC)
Sorry about that, Cid, but I'm just tyring to get him to understand how M/A works. Anyways, when you get the time, could you read over the argument at Talk:John Ford and give your opinion. Thanks a bunch! :) --From Andoria with Love 12:22, 4 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Episode solution Edit

I've been pushing this thing even though it was the Vedek's idea, partly because I think it's a more viable and realistic concept than the Refit of the Week and partly because I find it surprisingly useful when I can't decide which episode to watch (then I do the summary along with it, making some use out of my hour). Anyway, seven people have voiced support for it, including myself, and Sloan sounded positive although he didn't officially support it. I think Rcog's idea of incoporating the Duty Roster into the Pages Needing Attention and touting that on the main page, welcome message, etc. was the icing on the cake; between this addition and the changes on Main Page/temp (now obsolete), MA is moving in the right direction IMHO, averting the stagnation some people feared. :-) Weyoun 04:22, 5 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Triacus Edit

sorry about Triacus, Cid, judging by Alan and your comments on talk:Triacus, i really dropped the ball on that one, because i was in a hurry -- and didn't know my TOS Season 3 well enough. -- Captain Mike K. Barteltalk 18:15, 6 Dec 2005 (UTC)

I'm sorry my attempt at involving other archivists didn't sit well with you. -- Captain Mike K. Barteltalk

Do I sense sarcasm here? -- Cid Highwind 18:23, 6 Dec 2005 (UTC)
Actually, nothing of the sort -- i was confused with how the two of you quickly chimed in that i was incorrect in tagging an article for attention that i didn't have time to give it. just wanted to make sure we're on the same page (no pun) on how these things get handled. -- Captain Mike K. Barteltalk

Template stub articles on the recent changes pageEdit

Hi there Cid, thats a great idea of yours, having it on the recent changes page. It should also make an almost instant impact on the number of stubs on MA. Zsingaya Talk 10:40, 9 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, Zsingaya. I hope it does... :) -- Cid Highwind 11:04, 9 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Shran's got a short memory. Edit

Shran and I went through a lot of this last week. I'm tired of debating with him. But, I refreshed his memory concerning deletions and M/A policies. M/A editing policy;

Always try to preserve information.
Don't just make arbitrary deletions to an article — instead, preserve the text on the talk page or on a new archive page for future reference. Alternatives include rephrasing the content, moving text to a different article, or adding more of what you think is important.'
Reference deleted content on the talk page.
If you find false information in an article, mention it on the talk page and describe the corrections — because if one person believed it was true, chances are someone else believed it was true, too. Preserving comments helps inform later contributors.

Am I wrong on this? I thought this had been settled into a compromise?--Mike Nobody =/\= 23:40, 15 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Oberth class size issuesEdit

If you get a moment, could you bop in on Talk:Oberth class and give your two cents (or local currency of choice) on the matter so that we can resolve this and get the page unlocked? --Alan del Beccio 22:28, 27 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Removing old comments Edit

Just remember, archive don't delete. :P --Vedek Dukat Talk | Duty Roster 12:22, 28 Dec 2005 (UTC)

If you'd read the introductory passage of this page - I'm removing old and now irrelevant discussion bits that have either been answered/moved elsewhere or have no long-term value at all. Even then, these sections can still be found in the page history, because I'm removing them one section at a time, each time noting in the edit summary that this section was now "removed". That this is something completely different from, for example, bunch-deleting several recent requests to not vandalize pages (without any comment in the summary) should be obvious. I think we also discussed this procedure somewhere... -- Cid Highwind 12:37, 28 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Re:Page move revert Edit

Ah, I see. Sorry about that. I have noticed the concerns raised on reversions, and I will try to limit them. In this case, I was assuming that this particular page move was against policy directed at Memory Alpha:Naming conventions. I also could have sworn that this page move (that same exact page) had been discussed before. Anyways, I'm easy so I'll go with whatever you think is best. :) --From Andoria with Love 11:21, 30 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Well, I personally feel that "Klingon chancellor" and "Andorian chancellor" are good enough, but I do see the point you and Sci are making. If Klingon chancellor isn't the official title, then the page should be changed to reflect what the official title is. For the record, though, I'm not entirely sure the Andorian chancellor's official title was given as "Chancellor of the Andorian Empre". ;) --From Andoria with Love 11:37, 30 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Also on Fandom

Random Wiki