Leave a new message!I will reply and drop a note on your talk page unless I know you'll check back here. Please be sure to sign your posts with ~~~~ so I know who you are!
Hee hee, that's a cute version of it, made it masculine, I like it! And of course I don't mind, everything is, in part, inspired by others, so steal away! Hee hee. Ariel♥Gold16:58, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, thought I should check with you first :P I don't know if I want it yet, but how would I go about making it take up the entire width of the page? (For any sized screen). Thanks again, Tiddly-Tom17:01, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You can just add a width to the style of the table, if you want it to be almost full, you could just add width:90% to the style line at the top of the table. I actually like it a little more compact, personally, maybe it is because I'm on a widescreen, high res monitor, lol. Ariel♥Gold17:17, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have just implemented the new look talk page, and there are a few things that I don't like the look of. Can I reduce the gap between the 'To view this page in non pretty colors, please click here' and the 'Welcome to my talk page' box, and can I make the contents box the grey color and the archive box the same? Does anything else stand out that I should change as this is an attempt to make it look prettyfull! Feel free to make any changes... Thanks, Tiddly-Tom19:34, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ack! The layout is scrolling horizontally quite severely, and I'm on a high res widescreen monitor, lol. Let me finish up what I'm doing and take a look at the code. Ariel♥Gold21:14, 29 September 2007 (UTC)X[reply]
Wow! Thanks for spending so long over it. I didn't realize that you would have to scroll to see it :S it is fine on my 1280 X 800 laptop screen. I really don't know weather I need the 'click here to see this page in non colourfullness' message? I was trying to do it for if anyone was color blind and found it hard to read the text... Maybe I should just have a white background with a boarder, like you do :P You make a good point about the TOC, and I think I should probably have it in a simalar location to yours, but with a grey boarder :P What are your views? Thanks for you help with the Malcolm Pointon subpage, although I had actually gone ahead and already made the Malcolm Pointon article, but because I thought your changes were so great, I merged them with all the changes that other users had done :) Tiddly-Tom09:32, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, How the donkeys do you do over 6k edits a month! I have just done 1000 this month and think it is quite a bit :P You do like 150 edits a day! No wonder you have to archive your talk page every 36 hours! Tiddly-Tom11:03, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
lol, well I'm retired, so I don't have many other things to take up my time, and I enjoy a really wide variety of areas on Wikipedia, there's always stuff to do! Hee hee. So, just tell me what you'd like, if you'd like me to put changed into your talk page, or if you'd like to see them first, I'm more than willing to help, I think it would look a lot better with a modified design, and you could even have a really light grey background if you want to. Just let me know and I will leap into action! Ariel♥Gold19:40, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Wow :) I think it is important that everyone can read my talk page, so if you dont mind, could you sort the width, lighten the color, move the TOC out of header... Anything else you see appropriate would be appreached, and I'll look through all the changes and if I am not impressed by some thing I'll have a go at changing it, but I don't like it how it messes up for other people (I looked using Vandle Proof) and it looked weird, so go ahead and make any changes you like :) Thanks again! Tiddly-Tom20:01, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, you kind of have to consider all types of ways it will be seen, Firefox, Opera, Mac, IE6 and 7, and then the various programs like VP and AWB, so sometimes, the simpler the better, especially for talk pages. You can get a bit more fancy with userpages, because if they don't display right, it isn't a huge deal, but I like to keep talk pages clear, concise, and organized. Let me work on it, and I'll holler when I've put the changes into effect. Just a warning, it may look quite a bit different than it does now, but the color scheme will not change, and the content will not change. Just the way things display for variable widths will change. (~*Ariel rubs her hands together... mwuwhahahaha I love doing this stuff! *~) Ariel♥Gold21:09, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I like it! Thanks! I have just added a boarder around the Archive box so we are now on V1.1. :) I think I might like the text in the 'Welcome to My talk page' box to be a little larger, and would it work if it was center aligned? Thanks again!! Tiddly-Tom06:04, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
How hard would it be to make the archive box the width of the old 'Welcome' box, going across the top (with rounded corners). With 'Archives' on the top line, then 'This page is archived by..' and then 'Archive 1' on the next, with the ability to expand the number of Archives. Then below it I can have the rules centered? How does that sound? Thanks again, Tiddly-Tom06:26, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That would actually be easier than the way it is now! lol. I'm not a fan of columns, except in certain situations. Let me go to work on that. And thank you for the barnstar! Ariel♥Gold06:29, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, thanks for all your work. I have changed it slightly (size of welcome, and mered two of the boxes) and think it is brilliant now, just as long as it does not mess up on different browsers :P I think I might do some vandle fighting and then face the daunting task of a User pageshudders. Thanks again, Tiddly-Tom16:56, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Shouldn't look any different in different browsers, other than their size, you know, like how AWB or VP may display in a smaller window. The two boxes combined looks good, very nice! Ariel♥Gold20:46, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I just meant finding the typo and then showing it to you to giggle over. Something I'd expect more from the male, junior high demographic. :P GlassCobra19:43, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
tiddly? You do realize that AnonDiss is reading this discussion... G rated please, or you could head over to Jmlk17's talk page... *runs* --DarkFallstalk05:17, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Funny story really :P I thought it meant small when GMail suggested it for a name... a few years later to realize that it ment 'Drunk' :S :P Tiddly-Tom18:24, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
So, based on this guy's contributions, I'm having a really hard time seeing how he's not been blocked yet. I know that you in particular champion the cause of "four strikes before you're out" and all that, but this guy's been breaking the rules since day one; he hasn't made a single good-faith edit. But just because he only vandalizes once or twice before leaving for a bit means that he gets to escape the boot? GlassCobra09:46, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, you're right that the account appears to not be used in any constructive manner, Cobra. However, 9 edits in 6 months, even if they are all unconstructive, I'm not sure if that they would warrant an LTA report. Admittedly, the editor is not contributing positively, but you know, it isn't that disruptive, a couple edits here and there that are quickly reverted, and I'd still like to think that just maybe, over time, someone like this will end up finding that Wikipedia is a wonderful project, and decide to help, instead of harm. All that being said, if you want to ask an administrator what they think, that might be a good idea. Ariel♥Gold18:44, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I understand that, and yes it can be hard when all you do is deal with editors who seem to have no respect for the project. But, this is just one of the things that I think is so awesome about Wikipedia, that when you get tired of that, there are just so many other things you could go do, that are fun, that show you there are people who do care, and that help you see the big picture. In cases like the above, I really think it would be more helpful to continue to encourage the person, as they aren't someone I'd really label a long-term malicious offender, and maybe it is naive, but I'd like to believe there is good in everyone, and maybe some day, they'll turn around. Ariel♥Gold21:15, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Argh, I know, but vandalism is always going to be our biggest problem. People who are bored and figure "Oh, I'll go claim that I invented Facebook" (actually happened today). I just feel like the second I turn my back, these sneaky buggers slip by and edit something that won't be seen by anyone for months. Just very frustrating sometimes. GlassCobra (Review) 06:31, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
:)
Cheers, Lights (♣ • ♦) has wished you well! Joy promotes WikiLove and hopefully this little bit has helped make your day better. Spread the WikiJoy by sharing the joy someone else, Try to brighten the day of as many people as you can! Keep up the great editing! Smile at others by adding {{subst:Joy message}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
I know what you're thinking, not another article with WP:BLP issues. But no, in this case it would be hard, now, as he died 10 days ago. Anyway, I want your opinion. I'm fleshing out the games listed in the Works section. Should I make each game title a level 3 heading? And if so, should I put the publication year in the paragraph about the game? — TimotabTimothy (not Tim dagnabbit!)02:30, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
(Actually, recently deceased people still fall under WP:BLP issues, so all the same policies apply for now.) I'm sitting here staring at that article, and trying to figure out why it looks so ... not pretty, lol. I think that putting each game in a subheader would clutter up the page with the [edit] boxes, so I would not do that. I think that what I'd do, is put the ones that have their own pages into a list as "most notable" and then put the others, non-bold, but italicized, into a prose list, like after the paragraph about Big City, add:
Along with Big City, two other games are well known, TransAmerica, and TransEuropa. Other titles include Hellas (2002), Zahltag (2002), GoldBräu (2004), Dos Rios: Valley of Two Rivers (2004), Nah Dran! (2004), Fjords (2005), Manila (2005), Kunstmarkt (2006), Zanzibar (2007), and Container (2007).
Ahhhh, well you didn't say they were all going to be their own paragraph, :p hee hee. In that case, yeah I'd make them level 3 headers, probably. Ariel♥Gold02:59, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
And just seeing you pop in to say hello brightened my night! Are you psychic? I actually was just going to bug you but you hadn't edited in 8 minutes (gasp) so I didn't know if you were around, lol. Lucky for me, I found someone who was, and didn't mind my stupid question, lol! Ariel♥Gold04:04, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I actually saw you were on from the pages I stalk watch, such as Dark Falls' page. I've been busy in real life and I haven't been on as much in the past week. I know, crazy! -- Flyguy649talkcontribs04:08, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've noticed! Ariel not like it when Flyguy isn't there to bug! ~*pout*~. I hereby decree you shall be "Unbusy" from now on! There, how's that? Ariel♥Gold04:13, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Awww, well, yes, that probably should come first... harumph! lol. Take a day off this week and come hang around the 'Pedia with us! Ariel♥Gold04:18, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
New Yorker Cartoons in general versus the "On the Internet..." cartoon
As the article you cite even mentions (much as I despise unreferenced weasel words) this is the "most reprinted" of all The New Yorker cartoons, which should strongly suggest an AFC go ahead. And besides, the phrase has a currency which had taken on a life of its own, which even the minimum sourcing I've put in the article so far should suggest. 183 G-books hits (not to be confused with its 48,900 G-hits) for a 14 year old cartoon is nothing to sniff at. And the real besides, shouldn't the article about the most famous cartoon about anonymity on the internet be created via WP:AFC? Geez, that's not irony, that's poetry! -- 146.115.58.15207:46, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I am in no way questioning the notability of the cartoon at all. I'm sorry if it seemed as if that were the case. Since I'm one who tries to use caution, I just put the "maybe" template up for other editors to know it had been reviewed, and wasn't rejected, so they'll take a good look at it. (I've never heard of the phrase, nor of the cartoon, and I've had a computer since 1986, and been online since the very early 90s, so it may be an East Coast thing, I don't know, lol.) I'll just let another editor more familiar with the subject handle it. Ariel♥Gold07:56, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hmmm I have to wonder per "early 90s" exactly which side of Eternal September you were logged on at. But, as a computer science major in the early nineties this concept came up a lot. Er, that or I've had a lot more cyber sex than you? That's actually a significant undercurrent, which I expect to find in the sources. You meet a "girl" online, etc., but maybe she's a 40 year old man, etc. Anyway, it is/was a real meme even beyond the standard comp. sci. textbook use about internet privacy, though I can understand if you missed it. -- 146.115.58.15208:18, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
lol yes Timothy dear. And probably I led a sheltered life, I'm sure most people have had more 'cyber sex' than I have, (that would be none, for me, lol) And I really don't doubt the notability or the popularity, I just haven't heard of it, lol. I did edit my "Maybe" to reflect that it is just my ignorance that led me to neither accept nor decline it, hee hee. And, um, I've never heard of Eternal September either, lol. But I've been online since the early days, (1988-1989-ish) when the internet was just PINE and usenet groups from universities mostly, lmao. My first computer was a $4,000 dollar, top-of-the line screaming fast 10mhz processing machine! I was the envy of everyone else who had a computer (all two of them!) Ariel♥Gold08:34, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hrmm, I think there's an insult in there regarding my age, but I may just be getting too senile to grasp your young whippersnapper comments... Ariel♥Gold08:40, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Random edit break
Yow, cyber sex? This is even worse than the pubic comment, haha! Ariel, your talk page can certainly get racy. I know Wikipedia isn't censored, but think of the children! :P GlassCobra (Review) 15:57, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, it's cyber-bestiality. Ew! Gee, now I am kinda sorry for bringing it up. Just FYI, I've expanded the article proposal quite a bit using google book refs, which may make your tag look silly. If you do get a chance to reconsider, please do; some people aren't going to read past the tag. -- 146.115.58.15206:15, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, that is a whole lot better, much more content and context. I'll go create it, and post here when it is created, sound like a deal? Ariel♥Gold06:17, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Much obliged. I myself was trying to use the phrase is conjunction with Wikipedia myself here. One of the joys of Wikipedia Talk pages is that you can link out to some meta-concept and have a better chance people will be able to understand what you are getting at, versus some message board, and I was surprised there wasn't an article. Good work. -- 146.115.58.15217:35, 2 October 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.98.206.2 (talk) [reply]
Me again...shortcutting...
I think the articles Lantana and Lantana camara should be merged, since both seem to overlap. HOW do I make the request? What text do I add to the pages in question and where do I report it, or is there an automatic protocol that pops-up? Please leave it for me to do... I need the practice! Hope you're going strong!!! Shir-El too15:49, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
~*Butts in*~ Two ways to do it, depending on how WP:BOLD you are feeling, or how controversial you think the merge would be. One way, is to pick the article that you think has the more appropriate title, merge the information from the other into it, then make that latter title a redirect. All the information is revertable, and if someone does, you should then discuss, per WP:BRD.
The other way, once you've selected which article you plan to merge to, is to use {{mergeto}} and {{mergefrom}} templates at the top of the appropriate articles and then discuss it (noting to direct people to the same talk page, per the documentation on those templates). No need to report it anywhere; editors interested in the article will see the request, editors interested in merges will see it in the categories. Lastly, I've wikilinked the articles in your comment, to make it easier for people to go there - hope you don't mind. — TimotabTimothy (not Tim dagnabbit!)16:10, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Timothy, and hi Shir-El! I hope your holidays were wonderful! Timothy has explained it quite well I see, but if you have any other questions, feel free to ask me! (And no worries, I won't do it for you! Hee hee) Now, if you decide to go ahead and just do the merge, the way to make a redirect would be to remove all the text on the page, and replace it with this:
#REDIRECT [[Lantana]]
(This is assuming you'll be merging the subtype into Lantana.) That will make it so anyone visiting the Lantana camara page will be "auto forwarded" into the Lantana article. Holler if you need any help, dear! Ariel♥Gold20:54, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
1) Sorry: don't see it, Timothy. I'm not that proficient yet.
Anything you don't understand, feel free to ask, and it is just fine, everyone realizes that the various guidelines and things are a bit overwhelming, and sometimes we may use terms you're not familiar with, so just ask for clarification and we are more than happy to do that for you! And Wikipedia's sandbox auto-resets, so no worries there. I've left a note on your talk page explaining how to make your own personal sandbox to experiment in if you'd like to. Ariel♥Gold03:19, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I did notice that earlier, and considered replying on your talk page, but I saw you'd already left a note about COI, and figured you'd be able to explain everything (as you have) quite fully when you saw the message. I think you did a marvelous job, nothing more you could add (I fixed some typos, but that's all I had to add), and if the person cannot understand, point them to WP:BLOG and perhaps suggest a MySpace page instead. While I understand the daughter's frustration, at the same time, as you've said, policy and guidelines must be upheld. I think you've handled it fine! Ariel♥Gold00:21, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
LOL I just ran across it doing "Random page patrol", and decided to clean it up. Did you tag any other articles that you're concerned about? If so, no real need to worry, the "cleaning team" will get to them, lol. I'll take a look at some of his other submissions though, and see if there's anything I can do. Ariel♥Gold00:33, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi
Sorry it took me so long to respond. Thank you very much for your feed back, I'll take it into account next time I make contributions to the STS-120 page. Since I'm new, I'd apperciate any help that you can give me, and I will also take a look at the differnent wikipedia "new user" manuals when I get a chance. I should let you know that I'm only 15 and in high school, however, I'm very bright for my age. Next year I will be attending the Illinois Math and Science Academy (IMSA) [5]. Also my dad is an aerospace engineer and works for the aerospace divsion of Boeing under the United Space Alliance, so he an expert on the shuttle and we both keep close eyes on missons as well. Dispite speaking 4 different languages: Spanish, English, Russian, and French (I've also started studying Japanese), along with excelling in Mathmatics and Science, my speling and grammar isn't the best. So, please feel free to correct my mistakes and let me know what not to do in the future. I hope that we can work together now and in the future, with our knowledge and your experience in using wikipedia I beileve we can become "colleagues" to create and contribute (to) pages for future space missions/expeditions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 3 of 5 Tertiary Adjunt of Unimatrix 01 (talk • contribs) 00:55, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, you are so lucky to have access to such great information from your dad, what a wonderful experience that is! Also, I'd just like to thank you for coming and explaining things to me, it really helps! And I'm more than willing to help you along the way, Wikipedia is quite daunting in its scope at first, and I really understand that and I'm impressed with your knowledge you've gained already! I'd love to work with you and with the upcoming mission, it will be an excellent opportunity for you to see how the space mission articles develop during the course of a mission, we can have a lot of fun! That is so cool that you speak Russian, you can understand the ISS folks when they're doing their planning conferences, lol. I'll drop a note on your talk page as well so you know I've replied here, but you can keep an eye on your "Watched list" if you want to add articles or talk pages for editors, and you'll know when they have activity there. Just click the "watch" tab at the top, and then at the top right, there's the "my watchlist" link to see recent changes. Also feel free to ask me anything you want, and if I can't answer, someone will be along shortly who can, or who will point you in the right direction! (And I still just really love the name!) Ariel♥Gold01:06, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You are so quick... thanks for removing that comment. If you look at the IP's talk page, they're saying the page belongs to them and not to edit it. Is it too mean to leave a message on the page explaining to them how user talk pages work? :P ~Eliz81(C)02:06, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, I was the one who was reverting the edits on Tim Sylvia's page. I didn't stop to realize that putting his website's autograph info on the page may be seen as advertisement so thanks for pointing that out, I suppose that is a good reason to keep it out. As for the rest of the edit though, that seems to be general consensus among people and anything else seems to be POV. My temporary IP was blocked already by some other mod for the same edit you messaged me about, keeping the fight info out seems like fanboyism to me so I don't know what that mod was thinking... Cyrus77704:04, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Cyrus! I'll admit I didn't really notice who originally placed the promotional info on the page, but just removed it. If it was placed by someone else, my sincere apologies. However, when I look at what you were reverting, [6] I can't find what you felt you were removing as "POV fanboy" edits. It appears to me, that you actually added significant amounts of information, including that promotional "mail 20 bucks to this guy" line. Here is one example of something that is not written neutrally: "in what is considered one of the single most lackluster fights in UFC history". That's stating your opinion, or the opinion of others. Now, while that opinion may indeed, by true, unless you cite that with a reliable, third-party source and specify that "this source thinks it was a lackluster fight", those kinds of edits are going to be considered POV. I can understand your reasons, but I think you perhaps just went about it in the wrong way. Sorry for any confusion, Ariel♥Gold04:26, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I actually didn't add any information, any info written was by other people and not myself, I just reverted some edits. I reverted the one which removed his webpage because I felt it was important enough information to mention but as I already said I didn't stop to realize it may be seen as advertisement and therefore should not be there. And the other one I reverted was because in all seriousness it seemed to describe what had happened extremely accurately and not just based on the point of view of one or two people. I'm sure I've seen 3rd party sites which say the same things which were written there... though even if I use those as sources someone is bound to dispute it because it makes Tim Sylvia look bad. Also, sorry for originally writing this at the top of your page, I don't usually write a lot of things so I didn't realize it should go at the bottom of your talk page. Cyrus77704:43, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oh no worries about placement, not a problem! And I think if the sources are highly respected, and if the wording is done correctly, it won't be removed, as the opinions would be valid and attributed to the news organization that published it. However, since I simply ran across this article on Recent Changes patrol, and have no clue who the person is, I really wouldn't be the best person to do that, lol. Anyway, no harm, no foul, no worries! Cheers, Ariel♥Gold04:47, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Question
Hey—how did you make this edit summary? You didn't do undo, and you didn't use any of the twinkle buttons, as best I can tell. So unless you manually typed in "Reverted 1 edit by ..." I wonder what you did? Thanks! — isaid04:30, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That was Twinkle, it was just me being verbose in the edit summary and using up all (and then some) the characters available, lol. No room for "TW" lol. Ariel♥Gold04:32, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Really?! That makes sense. I didn't know there was a limit. I assumed there was, but have never been so verbose as to reach it. Although I'm not suprised you have — isaid04:43, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
LOL Should I be insulted?! Hee hee. Actually the limit is really easy to hit if you're removing copyvios and pasting in the URL where it was taken from, lol. But yep, I use the edit summary to its very fullest extent quite often, (Even when I'm not reverting!) lmao. Ariel♥Gold04:49, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hee hee, yeah I know you weren't insulting me, I was just kidding. P.S. You're right about that fair use image, and it does need to be removed. Ariel♥Gold05:11, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
←EVula seems to have taken care of it. And I asked first. But it has crossed my mind a bit, but I'm awfully low on mainspace edits. And I'd like to change my username. I know you like it so much, but it's awfully hard to refer to me in coversation. — isaid05:16, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I do like your username, but for the very reason that it is fun to be able to use it in conversations, lol. Yeah, it is confusing though. And, it is pretty hard to tell when you're being referred to lol. What would you choose instead? I haven't come up with a nickname for you so I'm fresh out of ideas, lol. Ariel♥Gold05:18, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've been toying with Tau. But you still haven't answered my question. As a side, more WP related note, have you ever read the MfDs for RFCN? isaid05:27, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah actually I have. I honestly don't understand how people think RFCN is not helpful. WP:UAA is not the place to discuss borderline issues, and the talk page would get absolutely clogged if they were all done there, so I think RFCN absolutely performs a vital function. But, that's just my own silly little opinion, lol. And I'm amazed that name isn't already taken lol. You should grab it while you can, lol. Ariel♥Gold05:30, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I kind of wonder the point of most of the username policy anyway. But as long as it exists in the form it does, then I agree RFCN is a useful tool, if done properly. I don't really understand some of the opposition in the MfDs. And it has been registered, but it is usurpable.isaid05:34, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Odd, I checked the name, and there was no creation log for it. Of course, I've noticed a bug with this. For example, I have no creation log. lol. (Omigosh, does this mean I don't exist!?) Ariel♥Gold05:39, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
There are no creation log for users created before a certain date (I don't know specifically). I imagine ~2005 was before that, the reason you'll find a lot of old hat users don't have creation logs. isaid05:45, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
(ec x 2)They (RFCN MfDs) were I think a bit heavy-handed attempts at instituting change. There were some problems with the process, but I thought some people took it way too far. I dislike how an MfD was used instead of discussion. </stalk> You probably saw the same thing this past week (only it was a threat of an MfD). And , I, User:Tau has no blocks or deleted edits. I thought about changing to User:Pi once. -- Flyguy649talkcontribs05:40, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, I ususally read XfDs for pages I watch. But I reread them after a suggestion of another at WT:U, and was wondering what another user thought of them. isaid05:45, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
LOL Oh boy, imagine the fun you could have with a sig if your username was Pi! LOL. What was the issue last week, Flyguy? I must have missed it lol. Ariel♥Gold05:42, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hee hee, cute sig. And hrmm, nope I didn't see that issue. It seems to me though, that username issue is inherently going to have problems, regardless of policy or re-structuring, simply because there is no possible way to imagine every way someone could abuse the system. The policy is open for interpretation, and certainly it shouldn't be abused, but at the same time, some names should not be allowed simply because they aren't specifically cited in policy as being against the rules. The issue is certainly not an easy one, by any means. But I think that the current method is working well, although I realize not everyone seems to think so, and valid points are certainly raised. But the underlying problem is the WP:U not being able to cover every eventuality. I've yet to see any large "forum" such as this, that doesn't have those same issues, when I was an administrator for Microsoft Gaming Zone, we had all the same conversations about controversial or inflammatory names. Ariel♥Gold05:58, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. English Wikipedia is huge. We need "rules", likeWP:U, to make things run smoothly. Unfortunately, people wikilawyer, which leads to an increase in the complexity of the rules -- more clauses, examples, etc. Then this leads to an increase in people trying to interpret and wikilawyer, so more clauses are added. It's a vicious circle. It would be nice if WP:U was simply, "Choose a unique alphanumeric username that will permit harmonious editing. Confusing usernames and those that will prevent harmonious editing will be blocked". The problem is that simple seems too confusing -- people want to wiggle through the loopholes. -- Flyguy649talkcontribs06:11, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
LOL Um, you're going to have to explain that one to me, granted, I tutored math, but most of it has seeped out of my brain from lack of use, lol. Ariel♥Gold07:03, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi ArielGold, this is to let you know that I've just left a message here about an accident that just happened over at meta. I accidentally damaged one of your pages, then undid it staright away. Sorry about that, I was probably dozing off as it's 5.30am here (England) and I need to go to bed. Thanks, umdrums (talk) 04:33, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Heheheh Thanks for letting me know, and it is no problem whatsoever! There are enough eyes over there that they'd catch it, or I would. I wouldn't think it was malicious, and you reverted, so no harm done! Sleep well! Ariel♥Gold04:38, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It is most certainly creative, lol, but it is also much longer than is allowed, and as you can see, your sig takes up nearly an entire line, lol. Ultimately it is not my decision, but I think you should prepare yourself for needing to find a shorter, more appropriate name, you can review the username policy for guidance, if you wish. Cheers, Ariel♥Gold09:56, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hee hee. Well, 20k is a pretty big milestone, and while I don't have editcountitis, I still think that's a pretty cool thing! Congrats m'dear. Ariel♥Gold21:09, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Time delay? LOL I just checked, nothing. How do you time delay one, and why? hee hee. (I got your earlier email, is that what you mean?) Ariel♥Gold22:15, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I knew exactly what to do and what will it produce and I am satisfied with the results. Seriously, it just was a "funny" page making some offensive comments to certain segments of , uh, people, so I decided to "contribute". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.153.93.219 (talk) 01:19, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
