User talk:Human/Archive17

This is an archive page, last updated 7 May 2023. Please do not make edits to this page.

Archives for this talk page:

<0>, <1>, <2>, <3>, <4>, <5>, <6>, <7>, <8>, <9>, <10>, <11>, <12>, <13>, <14>, <15>, <16>, <18>, <19>, <20>, <21>, <22>, <23>, <24>, <25>, <26>, <27>, <28>, <29>, <30>, <31>, <32>, <33>

, (new)(back)

HELP

I missed what changes you made on Genesis, and I was editing at the same time. I'm not sure how i should best handle this, as I'm new at editing. I just cut and pasted my changes into a Word doc. Can you let me know what you changed, so i don't destroy your edits?--WaitingforGodot 16:23, 7 July 2008 (EDT)

I think all I did was fix two typos - mesopotamic was wrong and another word later in the sentence? Also, if you click on the "fossil record" tab, you should see all edits listed, they can be compared by choosing the little check off circles. Thanks for asking... ħuman 16:34, 7 July 2008 (EDT)

I also decapped the headers where appropriate. I think everything I did is still there... ħuman 16:36, 7 July 2008 (EDT)

Thank you for the refinement!

I noticed the help you added in to the article on "The Origin of Life". I guess I was getting a bit long-winded, but your... well, not exactly additions... no, subtractions sounds negative... Beh... helpful reductions made for a much better article. Again, thank you! Javascap 21:33, 7 July 2008 (EDT)

You're welcome - I gave up on the universe forming part because it was too much to fix. But I liked some of the funny of how cells formed, so I didn't muck with that much. By the way, UV is only a problem for life that evolved after the ozone layer started blocking it... Hell, oxygen used to be a toxic poison to life! But we evolved to cope with it... ħuman 21:35, 7 July 2008 (EDT)

Yeah... oxygen does have that small kink of being highly reactive. Even to this day, there are some organisms that can't tolerate oxygen, and live in enviroments similar to that of a primordial world. To the best of my knowledge, the Ozone only formed after plant life came around under the Ocean, so UV's killed all terrestial life... dammit, where did I put my AP Bio book?! brb Javascap 21:38, 7 July 2008 (EDT) HERE IT IS!

Step One, the earth and its atmosphere formed

Step Two, the primordial seas formed

Step Three, complex molecules were synthesized

Step Four, polymers and self replicating molecules were synthesised

Step Five, Organic molecules were concentrated and isolated into protobionts (precursours of cells)

Step Six, primitive heterotrophic prokaryotes formed

Step Seven, Primitive autotrophic prokaryotes formed (cells that make their own food)

Step Eight, Oxygen and the ozone layer form (Mass extinction due to reactivity of Oxygen)

Step Nine, Eukaryotes form

Source: Cliffs AP Biology, 2nd Edition. Javascap 22:07, 7 July 2008 (EDT)

Nice work... now, can you figure out a way to make that all sound funny and add it to the article? Hehe... ħuman 22:09, 7 July 2008 (EDT)

Hmm... thats the part that may take me some time. I am currently finishing with the formatting for the Native American myth, and the Norse Myth is currently in bullet format. I guess I will finish that scientific one... when the other two are finished. As for making it funny... well, you may have noticed where my talk page links to... Javascap 22:15, 7 July 2008 (EDT)

Try to leave some facts in there ;) ħuman 22:25, 7 July 2008 (EDT)

Well, one of the basic codes of Uncyclopedia (HTBFANJS) actually points out that the fact is funnier than a completly made up lie. Saying that George Bush is a "Gay lesbian who makes ROLSOX with his mum lollol" is stupid, not funny. Saying, however, that George Bush is "A strange man with an odd Onion aroma around him, who enjoys playing with his Georgie Bush"... come on, that elicted a chuckle ;-) Javascap 22:28, 7 July 2008 (EDT)

Sockpuppets

Correct me if I am wrong, but at one point sockpuppet accounts were encouraged, right? Seeing as Ratwiki has changed and developed in the past year or so, I think we should ban the use of socks, or at least socks that the owner does not come clean and claim. It is getting far to confusing with all these users running socks of themselves. I have a number of socks myself, but I make sure that the puppeteer (me) is known. Please consider this Hugh, for the good of the mob, and the good of the wiki. That is all. Bohdan2 01:42, 8 July 2008 (EDT)

Bohdan... think about this for a second.

You're asking him to ban something that we have no possible way of detecting. _{<blink>↳</blink> ↑ ⇨ ↕ ▽ ←} 01:45, 8 July 2008 (EDT)

I was hoping that the puppeteers would have the decency to stop or come clean if this policy is enacted. Bohdan2 01:46, 8 July 2008 (EDT)

I think they probably wouldn't want to. Is it really a problem? _{<blink>↳</blink> ↑ ⇨ ↕ ▽ ←} 01:51, 8 July 2008 (EDT)

No, socks aren't a problem here. Here's my impression of Bohdan: <whine>It's haaaaaaaaaaaarrrd!</whine> Suck it up Bohdan. You are the only one here who has complained about it. Therefore, this entire change of policy hinges upon you and your needs, not the needs of everyone else. Furthermore, if anyone were to ever deny ownership of a suspected sockpuppet, we would have no way of verifying it (checkuser having been removed). If we ban the account as a sock anyways, we run the risk of irreparably alienating a legitimate account—and voila!, we are now Conservapedia! Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 05:39, 8 July 2008 (EDT)

Invitation

CONGRATULATIONS Human, you have been invited to attend the First Annual RationalWiki Olympics! Just follow THIS LINK to sign up for an event of your choosing!

Javascap 06:45, 8 July 2008 (EDT)

Wikipedia rejects

Do we have anywhere that documents prominent Conservapedians that have been throughly pwned and finally kicked out of Wikipedia, I can think of several off the top of my head... if we have an article about it, I'd be happy to expand it, if not, I just have to start one. SirChuckB^{I brake for Schukky} 07:33, 8 July 2008 (EDT)

I don't think so. The topic may be mentioned briefly in some of our "cp:sysop" type articles, but as far as I know there is no overview. Sounds like a decent topic though. Starts with Aschlafly, of course ;) It looks like you've even got a good title already, Conservapedia:Wikipedia rejects"... ħuman 16:11, 8 July 2008 (EDT)

here NightFlare^{Still doesn't have a (nonstub) RWW article.} 16:27, 8 July 2008 (EDT)

Ah, doh, thanks! ħuman 16:32, 8 July 2008 (EDT)

A private question I want to ask

A couple o' days ago, I was Sysoped for reasons I still do not understand. While I was Wandelising Charles Darwin, I recieved a 150 day block, was made into a Sysop, and allowed to unblock myself. While I am not complaining, I was wondering if it would be... okay... for me to excercise Sysop powers (so long as I do not abuse them). What is your input on this? (Please, do not de-Sysop untill this little discussion is finished...) Javascap 21:15, 8 July 2008 (EDT)

Well, first, a wiki talk page isn't exactly private... but anyway. I don't know anything about the events you are describing (except the "work" at C.D., which as far as I could tell was all in good fun, that I did see). Who blocked you? Who sysopped you? To your last question, I guess if you have the buttons, you are expected to use them - but only when necessary, right? You can move vandals to the vandal user group, or block for short periods if necessary, delete bad leftovers after pagemoves, and aggrandize your user page with the sysop pledge template. Other than that, sysops are just the same as regular editors - their opinion or arguments are worth no more or less, and they exercise no power over the normal editing process or editors on a day-to-day basis. This is a bit different than many wikis, where sysops are a class of editors who usually do have more power, more pull, and "authority". We are anti-authoritarian, so part of the experiment of this wiki is that sysops are just what we call "janitors" - since they're extra buttons just make cleanup work a bit easier. You might also want to read this: RationalWiki:Sysop_guide. ħuman 21:42, 8 July 2008 (EDT)

Janitors who happen to enjoy crucial user privileges. _{<blink>↳</blink> ↑ ⇨ ↕ ▽ ←} 21:48, 8 July 2008 (EDT)

Twas TMT who sysopped Java.   ^Contribs_Talk 21:56, 8 July 2008 (EDT)

Thanks, yeah, I looked it up, and it all made sense. Scap added some funny to the CD article; TMT blocked him for 150 days in honor of the 150 anniv. of the book (?), but also sysopped him with the comment "unblock yourself". JS, sometimes the way we "do things" around here (anarchy, basically) is a little hard to explain to people from other wikis ;) Speaking of which, we could use a couple more bureaucrats... ħuman 21:59, 8 July 2008 (EDT)

Yeah, I found it probabally around the same time you did 00:25, 8 July 2008 Tmtoulouse (Talk | contribs | block) changed group membership for User:Javascap from (none) to sysop ‎ (Feel free to unblock yourself....) after the 150 day block. I did read the Sysop Guide, and I accept the conditions in it, so I would be willing to remain a Sysop. Javascap 22:02, 8 July 2008 (EDT)

I just took a look at the recent changes, and found I do not understand a small, albeit important detail... how do I unblock an unknown IP adress that the User was blocked from? Javascap 22:09, 8 July 2008 (EDT)

I think you have to find the block number, it will be listed somewhere in "current blocks". This issue is why we discourage blocking the IP as well as the user name. You can practice on yourself if you want ;). Or Trent, since he doesn't seem to be around right now (travelling?), and, of course, deserves it. ħuman 22:13, 8 July 2008 (EDT)

I am one heck of a fresh mustard jar... where do I find the block number? I remember seeing block numbers on Uncyclopedia... the question is how do I find them here? Javascap 22:17, 8 July 2008 (EDT)

Let's play... first, block me and my IP. Check the log, and note the block # of the IP block. Unblock my user name only, then see where you find the IP block number. The block log itself may have all you need, though - the IP block, with its number, will be right after the username block, and say "recently used by XXX". Who was the user who's IP you are trying to unblock? ħuman 22:20, 8 July 2008 (EDT)

Oh, I love games! As to your question, I was watching the recent changes, and Jellyfish got a block, asked to get unblocked, which Radioactive Aforkman (Spelling WAY off) obliged. Anyway, I am off to practice ban... be right back... Javascap 22:22, 8 July 2008 (EDT)

(deindent) How did I do? Javascap 22:28, 8 July 2008 (EDT)

Well, I seem to be able to edit, so you couldn't have screwed up much! Were you able to track down the IP block from the block log? ħuman 22:46, 8 July 2008 (EDT)

Invitation²

NEVER MIND... already invited you up higher. Dang... -_- Javascap 07:28, 9 July 2008 (EDT)

quote

Sure thing Huw, keep the quote. The only person who heard this fabulous quote was activist Robert Sherman (who also referred to African-American Democrat Illinois Representative Monique Davis as a "negro" (what a guy!). No Hew, using a quote that is sourced to a single activist is so not Conservapedia-like, is it? [1], [2]. Bohdan2 23:49, 9 July 2008 (EDT)

Just out of curiosity, has GHWB ever denied it? Not that that is proof, but that quote is all over the place, you'd think if it wasn't true he'd issue a denial somehow? ħuman 00:04, 10 July 2008 (EDT)

Whatever, hate me because of my Danish ethnicity. I expected as much. Bohdan2 00:06, 10 July 2008 (EDT)

I can set my anti-Dernisch bigotry aside long enough to discuss this, don't you think? Hey, why don't you go do something funny over at CP so we can wigotalk about it? I don't mean leave, just do it in another window or sumthin. I'm looking forward to being able to edit there myself in a couple months or so... ħuman 00:10, 10 July 2008 (EDT)

What is there to discuss? You even misspelled "Danish" as a Danish profanity (Dernisch). When does your CP block expire? Have you tried to be unblocked? Bohdan2 00:13, 10 July 2008 (EDT)

Hello, I just wanted to point out the "just like Conservapedia" argument would be more persuasive if you weren't one of the hypocritical tyrants that run it. NightFlare^{Still doesn't have a (nonstub) RWW article.} 00:16, 10 July 2008 (EDT)

Sure. Bohdan2 00:25, 10 July 2008 (EDT)

"01:54, 5 September 2008" Have I tried? I asked a few sysops after the blunt knife banning, I believe it was you who kindly replied asking if I had ever heard of RationalWiki (the reason for my block). That was five years, but samwell or mexmax unblocked me and it got redone for only a year. Hey, you could unblock me, so I could diligently improve the various articles on the Daengriesh peoples and their popular "culture"! ħuman 00:19, 10 July 2008 (EDT)

If I unblock you will you promise to only edit articles on The Danes? Bohdan2 00:25, 10 July 2008 (EDT)

Can 10% of my edits be on talk pages? Oh, also, if you unblock me, you might want to unprotect my user & talk page too... All I know about Danlande is Thoren Kierkegaaard, Tommy Seebach, and Hamlet. I'll have to learn in order to write. ħuman 00:37, 10 July 2008 (EDT)

I don't know about 10, how does 8% sound? Your list of Danish interests includes one... that just doesn't fit. (S.K. that is). Bohdan2 00:45, 10 July 2008 (EDT)

8% seems fair, as long as I don't have to ever discuss anything with Rashfly? Can you wave a magic wand around Dunemarch to keep him away? Like I said, I'll have to learn a lot of things I didn't already know about Denzelande before I can write much. ħuman 02:32, 10 July 2008 (EDT)

Are you in charge here?

I am not a vandal but I keep running into this message when trying to edit:

<You are seeing this message because you are a newly registered user and attempted to make two quick edits in a row. In order to make vandalism less fun newly registered users can only make one edit every 15 seconds. This limitation will automatically be taken away from your account very soon.>

How long is "very soon"? What can I do to avoid this? Thanks. Credulous 02:17, 10 July 2008 (EDT)

I think it lasts a day or two. Just try to space your edits out a bit? ħuman 02:23, 10 July 2008 (EDT)

It was introduced in the last week or so to slow down new account vandals, it means that newly-registered users can't go on a dudden deleting and page moving spree. I think it lasts about three days. If you have some feedback on it you might put it User talk:Tmtoulouse's page. He created and installed it. He also is the closest thing to a project "owner". --Bob^{bing up} 05:33, 10 July 2008 (EDT)

Last I checked, he isn't just the "closest thing", he is the project owner. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 03:39, 10 July 2008 (EDT)

Well, Trent is certainly "Mr. Responsible" if the law come knocking. Genghis^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 04:21, 10 July 2008 (EDT)

Don't forget that he also pays our server costs. And has root access. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 05:42, 10 July 2008 (EDT)

I'd say founder rather than owner, I think he might agree. And as founder, it's been he who makes up the difference between our donations and ad revenue and the monthly bill. But to get back to the question raised in the header, no, I'm not, and neither is anyone else, really. ħuman 13:14, 10 July 2008 (EDT)

You're right, Human. As Wikia-esque as it may be (Wikia sites are "owned by the community" and have no true leader), we don't have a formal leadership. Interestingly, unlike many Wikia sites, we also have no system set up to handle... anything, really. All hail the mobocracy! Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 13:44, 10 July 2008 (EDT)

Could you have a look at something

I did that page move we spoke about but, frankly, I seem to have messed it up. The project page RationalWiki:Newcomers is where it should be but I made a slip-up with the first move and I seem to have lost the talk. Do you think you Could you have a look at it for me?--Bob^{bing up} 15:56, 10 July 2008 (EDT)

It seems to have gotten lost! Nice little wheel war you had with yourself there... ħuman 16:06, 10 July 2008 (EDT)

I must try to remember what I did in case I ever want to vandalise a wiki.--Bob^{bing up} 16:11, 10 July 2008 (EDT)

Check your contribs? When you move a page, its history gets moved. If you then move something else over where you moved it, it can get permanently lost. I'll look and see how you might have screwed up ;) ħuman 16:13, 10 July 2008 (EDT)

Thanks.--Bob^{bing up} 16:18, 10 July 2008 (EDT)

Here's what you did:

1. 15:47, 10 July 2008 (hist) (diff) m User talk:Bob M/FAQ‎ (RationalWiki talk:Newcomers moved to User talk:Bob M/FAQ over redirect: revert) (top) [rollback]
2. 15:47, 10 July 2008 (hist) (diff) RationalWiki talk:Newcomers‎ (RationalWiki talk:Newcomers moved to User talk:Bob M/FAQ over redirect: revert)
3. 15:41, 10 July 2008 (hist) (diff) m RationalWiki:Newcomers‎ (User:Bob M/FAQ moved to RationalWiki:Newcomers: Open for editing.)
4. 15:41, 10 July 2008 (hist) (diff) User:Bob M/FAQ‎ (User:Bob M/FAQ moved to RationalWiki:Newcomers: Open for editing.) (top) [rollback]
5. 15:41, 10 July 2008 (hist) (diff) m User talk:Bob M/FAQ‎ (User talk:Bob M/FAQ moved to RationalWiki talk:Newcomers: Open for editing.)
6. 15:38, 10 July 2008 (hist) (diff) User talk:Bob M/FAQ‎ (User talk:Bob M/FAQ moved to RationalWiki:Newcomers: Open up for editing.)

Reading upwards, first you did it right - article to article, talk to talk. Which can be done in one step if you click the "move the associated talk page" box. Then, for some reason, you then moved the "now a redirect" FAQ again... twice? Then you moved the RW talk page back to the FAQ.... who knows which step made the mess, but it should have just been a one-step process (rename & move talk page checked off). Or you could have just "copied and pasted" for safety, although that loses the history. ħuman 16:18, 10 July 2008 (EDT)

Yeah? I thought I did it right first time as well, but when I looked at it it seemed that only the talk page had moved, and that it had moved in place of the article page. I suppose I misunderstood. Then I tried the fix what I thought was a problem. And then I decided that whatever I did made it worse. So I stopped. Is it fixable, or do we just lose the talk?--Bob^{bing up} 16:24, 10 July 2008 (EDT)

I think we lost the talk completely. If you look at its logs (check history, then click logs) at the talk:FAQ page, you'll see diff links - they aren't available any more. Perhaps drop Trent a note to ask if he can find them somehow? ħuman 16:29, 10 July 2008 (EDT)

OK. Thanks for looking at it.--Bob^{bing up} 16:31, 10 July 2008 (EDT)

Awesome

Rescued from the sandbox ;) ħuman 17:16, 10 July 2008 (EDT)

And it's a lovely variation of the original (mine!), too : ) Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 17:28, 10 July 2008 (EDT)

Unblock

Here is what we know:

1. You are blocked at CP
2. You have expressed strong dislike for CP
3. You have expressed a desire to be unblocked
4. I can unblock you

If I unblock you for a while, say - an hour, will you make some Danish related edits? I can only leave you unblocked when I am logged on, for reasons I think you will understand. Bohdan2 23:11, 10 July 2008 (EDT)

I'll try to... what is the time window? IE, I'll need enough time to find a Denlish article (or one to create?) and good info for it, before you have to shut me back down. ħuman 23:19, 10 July 2008 (EDT)

Why dont you write about the cp:Copenhagen Stock Exchange? If you say yes, I will unblock you know to write about it. Bohdan2 23:24, 10 July 2008 (EDT)

Sure, that sounds interesting. Danish popular culture would have been more fun, I but I'll take a crack at the CSE if you prefer. Just to be clear, I get one hour to work? So I don't get caught trying to save it after being reblocked? (Actually, I'll probably save it a few times as I work) ħuman 23:28, 10 July 2008 (EDT)

Tell me a figure from d-pop that you would like to write about, and I'll tell you if its notable enough. Bohdan2 23:35, 10 July 2008 (EDT)

On second thought, lets stick with CSE if that's okay. Bohdan2 23:41, 10 July 2008 (EDT)

CSE is fine, I got it started at least. I would actually prefer to get back to work on the building trades things I was working on (since I know something about them already!). perhaps "building trades in Denmark"? Hehe. ħuman 23:54, 10 July 2008 (EDT)

I didn't unblock you. It looks like you were already fully unblocked. You can apparently edit whatever you want. But I will advise you to be careful and think twice about what you post. My last request is that you write (or expand if it already exists) an article on windmills. Bohdan2 00:00, 11 July 2008 (EDT)

And if I ever see you use the phrase "welcome wagon" again, I will ban you so fast... Bohdan2 00:01, 11 July 2008 (EDT)

That's odd, because I have been seeing "you are blocked" whenever I look at the source of a page there. Oh well, who knows, maybe it was during the nighttime shutdown? makes no sense... Windmills? As in, tilting at? ħuman 00:04, 11 July 2008 (EDT)

How are you editing if you are blocked? Bohdan2 00:06, 11 July 2008 (EDT)

Hahahaha I bet I know what happened. My IP was blocked ages ago, and it never really changes. Last night my innertubes broke, and I had to reboot a few things (modem, router, main box) and I bet it reset my IP! Hi-fucking-larious timing, eh? ħuman 00:12, 11 July 2008 (EDT)

Can you unlock my user page so I can dered the link, or at least add "Yeah, it's him" to it? ħuman 00:16, 11 July 2008 (EDT)

Oh well, "editing" got turned off. Sure is a confusing wiki to work on! Can you go edit "stock exchange" to make the links to stocks, and bonds, singular? ħuman 00:18, 11 July 2008 (EDT)

UNBLOCK ME TOOOOOOOOOOOOO-caius (heckuva job!) 00:19, 11 July 2008 (EDT)

Hahahaha... Ames, apparently "user:human" wasn't blocked anymore, just the IP I've had for the last couple years. I'll log out somewhere to see if it looks like it changed... ħuman 00:23, 11 July 2008 (EDT)

Yup, I gotz me a shiny shiny new IP address! ħuman 00:24, 11 July 2008 (EDT)

You should make articles about Finland, and you know the reason already! --Jellyfish 01:10, 11 July 2008 (EDT)

Now, make 10000 more QUALITY EDITS, and....they'll probably reblock you anyway, since you're a Known Liberal. --Gulik 01:44, 11 July 2008 (EDT)

Writing plan for Human

While you're around, could you fix cp:Chess tactics? I once mentioned it on RW a long time ago and mailed two CP sysops, but nothing ever happened. It's about the "Fork" section, especially the sentence "Knights are especially adept at forking because their method of movement allows them to attack any other kind of piece without being under attack from that piece." This is obviously wrong because if a Knight is one of the targets, it can simply attack the forking Knight. So it should say something like "any other kind of piece (except another Knight) without". --Sid 13:49, 11 July 2008 (EDT)

Thy will be done ;) ħuman 13:55, 11 July 2008 (EDT)

Awesome, thanks! :) *feels like he has his own personal editing slave now* *tries hard not to cackle* *fails* --Sid 14:03, 11 July 2008 (EDT)

Speaking of writing plans, do you want to start cp:Conservapedia:Conservapedia project Denmark with me? Bohdan2 20:16, 11 July 2008 (EDT)

That might be fun... can we wait until CP is loading properly again, at least, though? You know that to write CSE I had to quadruple my knowledge of Densklunde, right? ħuman 20:25, 11 July 2008 (EDT)

We could write about Danish imperialism. Bohdan2 20:30, 11 July 2008 (EDT)

That might be interesting. And the benefit to all the world had they been colonized by Dezanes instead of those smelly French, boring Brits, and greasy Spaniards. Or not? ħuman 01:46, 12 July 2008 (EDT)

CP seems to be "functioning" again, after a long weekend of crappy loading. I will immerse myself in studies of how the Dainz conquered parts of the world and imposed their will upon them, in the next few days. Please feel free to leave red links on my CP talk page for me to follow... ħuman 22:58, 12 July 2008 (EDT)

At cp:homeschooling Andy mispelled "theoroy" with his Schrodinger addition. I'd fix it, but I can't... Please to do so. ħuman 01:19, 14 July 2008 (EDT)

Debate

regarding this edit: Huh? SirChuckB^{I brake for Schukky} 02:47, 11 July 2008 (EDT)

"Did PZ Myers cross the line by insulting the Catholic rite of communion?" is not what we were discussing, really. The original header was "PZ and his crackers". The line I quoted implies that PZ insulted the rite as a given, and asks "did he cross the line". I don't think, for my part, that he insulted the rite - although, of course, that could be debated. Putting it at the top makes it seem as if it is not debatable. That's why I added what I did. If I could have thought of a snazzier, more neutral header I would have changed it. ħuman 03:05, 11 July 2008 (EDT)

Well, my reasonsing was that by insulting the practice (ie, it's a frackin cracker) that is kind of insulting the rite, but I see your point and if you'd like to change or remove it, I won't complain.... I was just looking for a space filler. SirChuckB^{I brake for Schukky} 03:28, 11 July 2008 (EDT)

Probably something like "Discussion of PZ Myers reaction to (whatshisnames) reaction to (whatsisnames) stunt", with the 3 or 4 links that form the basis for the story is more like what I would have liked, I guess. No big harm, but the header isn't what I was chiming in on when I commented, is all. If it had been I would have been discussing whether or not he insulted it and if that matters... ħuman 12:41, 11 July 2008 (EDT)

HEY!

When exactly did this happen? --*Gen. S.T. Shrink* ^{Get to the bunker} 02:48, 12 July 2008 (EDT)

A few minutes ago? Enjoy your mop and brushes... I'll leave you link on you talk page to some helpful stuff, I guess. ħuman 02:50, 12 July 2008 (EDT)

Tyop

Thanks! --λινυσ^(☮) 22:54, 12 July 2008 (EDT)

No prob, it's my job ;) ħuman 22:55, 12 July 2008 (EDT)

Thank You for the "Decent" changes

Seriously though, thank you before that became really embarrassing. Believe it or not, I do run a spellcheck and I catch mistakes before they I hit the submit button. I just don't catch everything. Rylon 04:24, 14 July 2008 (EDT)

Aminal sex

I liked the edit. Does it really need to leave? --Gen. S.T. Shrink ^{Get to the bunker} 02:14, 15 July 2008 (EDT)

Not sure it had to go, I was actually thinking about it afterwards. Partly, it was one of our IP overlords, and partly, maybe I thought the wording wasn't great. What I'd prefer to see is an article on aminal rights... but I see our IP has joined and re-edited. The point may be moot? ħuman 02:28, 15 July 2008 (EDT)

I'll reword if it pleases his majesty. --Gen. S.T. Shrink

^{Get to the bunker} 02:29, 15 July 2008 (EDT)

I still think it might be better worded as a link to veggieism, veganism, etc., rather than a statement that saying "sex with animals is wrong" is invalid if you eat them. Also, the editor rather assumes that we eat animals but argue against having sex with them. How do they know we aren't veggieheads? Also, I find the username "zoophile" to be perverted... hehe... ħuman 02:34, 15 July 2008 (EDT)

Oh yes, ye Cabbage Wedge Gank who is obsessed with Helena Bonham Carter (or was it Pal who tried that meme?) -- Gen. S.T. Shrink ^{Get to the bunker} 02:36, 15 July 2008 (EDT)

HBC was mine, goat was Doc's. ħuman 02:40, 15 July 2008 (EDT)

zoo in latin means animals (excluding humans) phile is someone who loves something

--Zoophile 02:37, 15 July 2008 (EDT)

Confirming my assertion of perversion. I like animals. I like plants. I also like a varied diet, and I am willing to kill whatever it is I need to make such a diet. However, I won't fuck plants, animals, or minors. ħuman 02:40, 15 July 2008 (EDT)

That argument is valid if you had to kill a 90 year old or a baby, you'd kill the older one, I simply pick the lesser of two evils --Zoophile 02:57, 15 July 2008 (EDT)

That's your descison. Mine is to eat steak. And suppose you had two children. Would you kill the older one if you had to choose? -- Gen. S.T. Shrink ^{Get to the bunker} 03:00, 15 July 2008 (EDT)

!emocleW

_{<blink>↳</blink> ↑ ⇨ ↕ ▽ ←} !EERF s'tI ?margorp "eibweN a tpodA" ruo nioj ot ekil uoy dluoW !namwuH ,ikiWhsidaR ot emocleW

conservapedia

Hugh, I want you to start making some contributions. NOW! Bohdan2 22:10, 15 July 2008 (EDT)

Hi Bohdan, long time, no torment. Have you tried our new vandal group yet? Pinto's5150 ^Talk 01:43, 16 July 2008 (EDT)

What, when where, why, how? I noticed the CP article on teh Dennisherz was very good... and copied from a US govt source? ħuman 02:06, 16 July 2008 (EDT)

Fight me!

Marginally Less Chaos!^Audacity! 20:58, 16 July 2008 (EDT)

Essay

Yeah, he just created it again when no one was watching. I would have deleted it, but I seem to have lost my trebuchet. Best wishes, Marginally Less Chaos!^Audacity! 21:07, 16 July 2008 (EDT)

I have poisoned your shoes

Marginally Less Chaos!^Audacity! 22:43, 16 July 2008 (EDT)

But I don't wear shoes... ħuman 23:02, 16 July 2008 (EDT)

Hippy. Marginally Less Chaos!^Audacity! 23:04, 16 July 2008 (EDT)

What are you doing?

Why, cp editor, are you waisting time at this wiki? Go write content at conservapedia! Carpe diem! --Bohdan2 22:59, 16 July 2008 (EDT)

CP is too broken to work on right now. When pages don't load over 50% of the time it's very frustrating to work on a wiki, since almost every edit creates a problem over whether it went through or not. Under such circumstances I simply wait until the tech admins tune-up the site's performance again. But thanks for caring. ħuman 23:02, 16 July 2008 (EDT)

Quit complaining. Yes, you are impatient. Yes, you are easily angered. But didn't you see I wrote "carpe diem"? Bohdan2 23:05, 16 July 2008 (EDT)

CP is working fine for me. If only I weren't blocked there. Oh, tarnation... tsk tsk tsk... Marginally Less Chaos!^Audacity! 23:04, 16 July 2008 (EDT)

WP links

Human, is there any way that I can convince you to stop this purging of WP links from our articles. These are concepts that we're realistically not going to explain, and we probably couldn't do it better than WP does anyway. I really don't understand the rationale behind actually making it more difficult for our users to get the necessary context for these things. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 06:55, 17 July 2008 (EDT)

Methinks that we've not had a good inconclusive community standards debate for a while. --Bob^{bing up} 07:11, 17 July 2008 (EDT)

This particular debate has occurred on a few talk pages several times over, I am not particularly a fan of WP links in the articles themselves, they are better placed as external link options. Links in the article text itself should be reserved for RW links. tmtoulouse ^beset 09:25, 17 July 2008 (EDT)

I just don't understand what the reason for this is. Let's take this edit, for example. Obviously, I put that link to WP's article on the Risorgimento in for a reason - the historical background is essential to understanding why the Inquisition lost its powers in Italy. Now, since we're not going to write an article on the Risorgimento ourselves (it's not on mission, and WP's article would explain things much better anyway), why not make it easy and convenient for people to actually find this information by putting the link right where they need it? --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 04:00, 18 July 2008 (EDT)

Just for my own personal knowledge..... Are we discouraged from links to Wikipedia and if so, do you want others to join you in your quest to destroy them :) SirChuckB^{I brake for Schukky} 02:49, 19 July 2008 (EDT)

Here's my perspective: I don't like them "in line", like this, because they make it look like we don't need an article. However, I agree with Andreas the Dane that sometimes Wp links are valuable. So I created template:wpa - use it like this: {{wpa|brilliance}} to produce:" See the Wikipedia article on brilliance. "- best used in EL sections. You are welcome to form your own opinion about them, of course. This is not a war (See the Wikipedia article on war.), it's only a crusade (See the Wikipedia article on crusade.). ħuman 03:09, 19 July 2008 (EDT)

Bible Guides

Thanks for the advice and I'll take any other stuff you think needs done. This is our single slowest two months of the year, and we quite literally sit around either reading Case Law, or playing on the internet. I'd rather be here doing tedious things like "redline edits", and interesting Religious edits, than reading Daily Kos and getting angry at everything political. :-) I'll make sure I make the changes to 1) the Bible guide template, and 2) the list of books on "Guide_to_the_bible". anywhere else I need to watch? --WaitingforGodot 09:38, 17 July 2008 (EDT)

Well, first, I appreciate all the work you are doing here! Second, and you're probably already doing this, as you follow the biblical links around, I guess you'd be in a great position to make sure all appropriate articles are in the bible category. You might even want to write a "portal"-type intro thing for the bible category? ħuman 19:52, 17 July 2008 (EDT)

Vote here!

Here we have an opportunity to bugger up Trent's new programming by selecting the All-Time Best Old Fart Rock Band Ever!

2

Beatles

2

Rolling Stones

-1

Some band no one (besides you and your super-hip friends) has ever heard of

2

Frank Zappa/Mothers of Invention

Thank you for playing. ħuman 20:04, 17 July 2008 (EDT)

Does the last one look different (Above/below v side by side) to everyone else?   ^Contribs_Talk 20:43, 18 July 2008 (EDT)

Not to me, but that bug has been seen before, at WIGOCP. I thought Trent fixed it... ħuman 20:55, 18 July 2008 (EDT)

And it dumps me at the top of the page after I've voted.   ^Contribs_Talk 21:04, 18 July 2008 (EDT)

They're randomly Up/Down Side/Side on WIGO too. (Firefox 3 before you ask)   ^Contribs_Talk 21:07, 18 July 2008 (EDT)

Have you brought it up on Trent's talk page? He's the only one who can fix it... As far as the "return to top", I personally prefer it at WIGOCP to being jumped down to wherever I was. I agree, on this page, with the poll down very low, it's a bit weird. ħuman 21:16, 18 July 2008 (EDT)

What's your window width? On my full screen, I get no trouble at WIGO, making it narrower starts f'ing up the arrows. Trent said before that it was a table issue, so that makes sense. Let's go read him the riot act ;) ħuman 21:25, 18 July 2008 (EDT)

Yup! that's it - if I go full screen they side/side - solved well done H. Night night y'all   ^Contribs_Talk 21:28, 18 July 2008 (EDT)

New user

I welcomed a new user. He made good faith edits which may need review. Some stuff may be better lower down the articles. Proxima Centauri 07:32, 18 July 2008 (EDT)

Thanks for the tip, PC! ħuman 15:51, 18 July 2008 (EDT)

Huw..WHUH

Well, not quite. I just was wondering what this was about. You know as well as anyone does the only reason Karajou signed up was to advocate Ed. -- Gen. S.T. Shrink ^{That's what she said.} 20:13, 18 July 2008 (EDT)

And, ironically, I'm actually Scarian. Thanks Human. (I'll check back here later to see if you need proof too.) :-) 81.105.28.52 20:23, 18 July 2008 (EDT)

Here. Just thought I'd make it clear. And I think the block will stay. :-) It's funny how we kinda bumped into eachother like this after first meeting over the acid thing! 81.105.28.52 20:27, 18 July 2008 (EDT)

I just didn't see it as being an insta-bannable offence - but then, I'm not intimately familiar with WP policy, either. Also, of course, the account could be an imposter. What acid thing? ħuman 20:29, 18 July 2008 (EDT)

Yeah, I think I noted it as being a possible imposter. But some of his talk page messages were venomous, indicating otherwise. Basically, it's just common sense on Wikipedia. The guy turns up canvassed, makes an account just to vote and hasn't made any other contributions since. I guess we just have different methods. 81.105.28.52 20:37, 18 July 2008 (EDT)

Hi again Human

[3] - I can add it back in when it fails though, right? Take care! 81.105.28.52 20:21, 18 July 2008 (EDT)

Yes, sure. I went to check the edit because of the mild anti-canvassing thing we are trying to do, and then undid it because it referred to something that hasn't happened yet. It might be better off at the Ed Poor article though, eh? It's not really a "nickname". ħuman 20:30, 18 July 2008 (EDT)

And freakin' log in, already! Hehe... ħuman 20:31, 18 July 2008 (EDT)

Bah! I'll stay as the only constructive IP contributor here. Um... if you look on the IP's talk page you'll see you "telling me off" for adding in references to LSD on a lot of conservative articles :-D I need to sleep, 1:38 am here. Night! 81.105.28.52 20:39, 18 July 2008 (EDT)

Heh, I remember that. Oh, and thanks for the shoutout at WP. Night night! ħuman 20:58, 18 July 2008 (EDT)

gnihtolc dnah-dnoces ruoy dessertsid evah I

_{<blink>↳</blink> ↑ ⇨ ↕ ▽ ←}

Um, well, good for you... thanks... ħuman 02:29, 19 July 2008 (EDT)

_{<blink>↳</blink> ↑ ⇨ ↕ ▽ ←} .namwuH ,emahs roF .CR ni nur tcefrep ym tliops uoY

Surely you mean for "shame", not for that existentialist Western movie? ħuman 02:35, 19 July 2008 (EDT)

Marginally Less Chaos!^Audacity! P: sopyt ruoy nmad dna uoy nmaD

I see you had one of your suckpoppets whitewash your cluelessness... and hey, didn't block you for an hour? What's up with that? ħuman 03:30, 19 July 2008 (EDT)

I Have Sent You a Very Important Message.

I have sent you a very important message.--Bob^{bing up} 03:45, 19 July 2008 (EDT)

And I Replied Very Importantly to Your Message

And I Replied Very Importantly to Your Message. (brilliang, by the way.) ħuman 03:54, 19 July 2008 (EDT)

OK, I've created it - but I don't know how to set the voting up. Could you do that?--Bob^{bing up} 04:07, 19 July 2008 (EDT)

I think I've worked it out actually.--Bob^{bing up} 04:26, 19 July 2008 (EDT)

Vandal Group

I tried to move User:ReligionSucks out of the vandal goup and accidentally moved him into the vandal group. I can't now correct this. Further the user has disabled hands and may need a special keyboard. This aparent vandalism may be a computer malfunction. I dfon't know how these keyboards play up. Proxima Centauri 04:02, 19 July 2008 (EDT)

He has, in fact, already apologised for that and should have been removed from the vandal group yesterday. See my talk page and User talk:Tmtoulouse.--Bob^{bing up} 04:15, 19 July 2008 (EDT)

Um, that "apparent vandalism" is because his/her keyboard doesn't work right? I'm skeptical. However, I will make sure the user is not in the vandal group for now. I hope I don't regret it... ħuman 04:25, 19 July 2008 (EDT)

Slate cleaned. Future hopeful? ħuman 04:26, 19 July 2008 (EDT)

He said it was deliberate and he apologised for it.--Bob^{bing up} 04:27, 19 July 2008 (EDT)

Ah, ok. As I said, future hopeful. Hey Bob, please to not utterly break the new voting code by ignoring the format... k? ħuman 04:29, 19 July 2008 (EDT)

I have to confess that I don't fully understand it. Could you check the implementation on RationalWiki:Proposed award? (And where is your vote?):-)--Bob^{bing up} 04:31, 19 July 2008 (EDT)

Yes... don't use "wigo" - use a new phrase, then increasing numbers (see my dumb poll above for example) ħuman 04:42, 19 July 2008 (EDT)

Ok, sorry anyway, I socked the number back to 2.--Bob^{bing up} 04:45, 19 July 2008 (EDT)

S'ok, it's gonna be a learning curve, now that the instructions are on Talk WIGOCP archive #53 ;) You have to use a new IP to change the vote, btw... ħuman 04:51, 19 July 2008 (EDT)

But since I changed the "filename", you should just vote as yourself again. ħuman 04:52, 19 July 2008 (EDT)

According To

I think a judge blocking the attempted re-endangering of a species is pretty important (while not technically within the letter of the mission) anyway, I think it's a lot more interesting than the four or five Anti-Mccain things that have been poping up SirChuckB^{I brake for Schukky} 04:38, 19 July 2008 (EDT)

I think the anti-McCain things sucked ass too. The wolf thing? On mission? Really? Mainpage? Please, let us discuss at talk:according to? I really think according to should move "slowly" - only when really good things turn up. It sure as hell shouldn't be the DailyKoz ticker... ħuman 04:42, 19 July 2008 (EDT)

In which Human blatantly brown-noses Joaquin...

Nice Job! I Love You!!!1!!1!!

What can I say, I liked the painting. ħuman 22:51, 19 July 2008 (EDT)

Wasn't gonna say anything but "what PF said".   ^Contribs_Talk 23:01, 19 July 2008 (EDT)

Actually, if I had intended to stick my proboscis up his sphincter, I would have written more... as it is, I'm trying to avoid talk pages, but that painting gave me flashbacks. ħuman 23:04, 19 July 2008 (EDT)

Schlafly Scrutiny

Thanks. Sorry about the typo. I got the term from the saved CP talk pages, and figured it should have an article.^{— Unsigned, by: Mustex / talk / contribs}

No big deal... thanks for writing it. ħuman 23:39, 19 July 2008 (EDT)

BTW, can you help me out on something? I signed up on the message board, but I think I accidently deleted the activation e-mail, so I can't get into the account, and it won't let me start a new one on the same e-mail address. I kind of wanted to discuss the possibility of shutting up creationists by gathering a bunch of money and offering to pay for any experiment they propose that could falsify their hypothesis (once it became evident they couldn't think of one, they'd be quiet for a while). ^{— Unsigned, by: Mustex / talk / contribs}

You might try asking Linus... are there no buttons that look inviting to fix the problem? (I can't get at the root stuff to fix it). Do you have access to another email addy, even a temporary disposable one? ħuman 22:46, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

vandal

That 'Zodiac' wandal was all over Wp recently.   ^Contribs_Talk 03:02, 21 July 2008 (EDT)

Article of the weak

Help me get it out of the cellar. Please? tmtoulouse ^beset 21:38, 23 July 2008 (EDT)

Fix that tyop in the VOTE code first ;) (see your talk page) ħuman 21:42, 23 July 2008 (EDT)

Done. tmtoulouse ^beset 21:43, 23 July 2008 (EDT)

OK. Now what do you want me to do, Tease Me Toulouse? ħuman 21:51, 23 July 2008 (EDT)

Let us get this Article of the weak thing going, we need our "first" one, which should be set up at whatever it's permanent home will be, then we should convert the "proposed article of the weak" to where we submit proposed articles. Then we need to promote it. Is there anything that needs to happen to the software before we "go live"? tmtoulouse ^beset 21:54, 23 July 2008 (EDT)

I added a "total votes" thing under consensus as I am sure people will find that interesting and I added the ability to "unspam" comments that have been marked spam. That saves the need to ask me to manually do it. We have to be almost done right? tmtoulouse ^beset 14:04, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

I saw the "total votes" thing, that's a good one. Is the review button what lets us "unspam" comments? Yes. I see you added a "return" link there, good. How about only one "Review" button? Since they all go to the same place... perhaps just a text link "review comments marked as spam" in the little note to sysops? And, yes, we are close. I still want to re-review the ideas others had at the talk page (that's where a lot of what I asked you to do last night came from). And we should do one last brainstorm of what people tend to expect from a Web 2.0 page like this (like the total ratings # you added - PS, change it to "X ratings so far"? For consistency?). ħuman 14:19, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

I'd also like to see some more input on the "descriptions" - so far, I'm the only person who worked on them, and I'm sure they would be better if a few more people chimed in. ħuman 14:22, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

Wow button button

I didn't know we were allowed to delete comments we find unamusing. That's certainly food for thought...
You wait here while I make coffee. _{<blink>↳</blink> ↑ ⇨ ↕ ▽ ←} 04:21, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

Completely empty comments? That add nothing and lead to nothing? It was nothing but spam, in the final analysis. Gibberish. Not a "comment" but an accidental leaning on the keyboard. ħuman 04:25, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

Can I apply this rule? There are lots of comments that will need to go, then. We're gonna be busy. _{<blink>↳</blink> ↑ ⇨ ↕ ▽ ←} 04:32, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

No, noone can ;) I already had one of those "I am (random verbing) your (random noun)" things, in swardkcab text, yet, I saw no need for another... by the way, how come you don't use "I have passed your clock" to help you generate them? ħuman 13:27, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

They are individually tailored, akshully. They wouldn't be funny if I just got a template to make them, now would they? How can you not find "I have poisoned your socks" hilarious? "I have converted your best friend to hexadecimal"?? These are solid gold, Schuman! _{<blink>↳</blink> ↑ ⇨ ↕ ▽ ←} 14:24, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

Yes, some were funny... a couple of weeks ago. I just don't think the meme has legs. Now, if you were to leave an actual message here, serious or not, and use one of those lines as the subject, the amusement level would probably be far higher. IMHO. ħuman 14:28, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

It's not a meme, just something I find funny. In future I shall remember that you don't care for it. _{<blink>↳</blink> ↑ ⇨ ↕ ▽ ←} 14:33, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

It is perhaps getting a bit too predictable? Too... unchaotic? --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 16:53, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

Award

Hey, thanks! I'll keep it for sure. Didn't even see it at first. Funny how you don't get a little orange box when someone edits your user page. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 07:49, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

Hehe, glad you like it. It was Bob M's idea, after we discussed it a bit we put it up for a vote/discussion, and the returns we unanimous. I thought of also leaving you a note on your talk page, or just leaving it there, but I was worn out from all the copying and pasting. Congratulations! ħuman 13:25, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

RationalWiki:Interactive articles

I added the votes to the other whats going on pages and cleaned them up a bit. Here is the list. tmtoulouse ^beset 16:42, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

Thanks, I started fleshing it out a bit. I hope people start adding to the blog/clog/4r articles! ħuman 17:15, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

Before we get too involved with the new front page, is there anything else that needs doing on the article of the weak? tmtoulouse ^beset 19:54, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

1) We need to go over the intro sections at the other 4 WIGOs so they make sense. They don't all have to be copies of each other. 2) We should have a little linkbox between them. I also need to go look at the old AotW talk page (where is it again?) to see if I missed any good suggestions. ħuman 19:59, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

Yes interlinking was something I was thinking about as well as the entries, it gets repetitive to read the same thing. The old talk page was at the proposed article of the weak, but my review didn't show anything new in it. tmtoulouse ^beset 20:00, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

Link to the old one? ħuman 20:05, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

RationalWiki talk:Proposed Article of the weak. tmtoulouse ^beset 20:07, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

Got it, thanks - yeah, nothing mentioned there that we didn't do. So on to 1 & 2 above, I guess. Any little linkbox we make is gonna have to play well with the CP template at WIGO CP of course. We could just do it manually, of course, in a double small font. ħuman 20:13, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

OH!!! 3 We need to copy the contents of "according to" over to the news of the world WIGO to preserve continuity! ħuman 20:22, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

I copied the stuff currently up there, but none of the archived stuff. tmtoulouse ^beset 20:24, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

We should just "move" the archives, and link them from the WIGO page. Did you get the stuff "below the line"? ħuman 20:31, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

Thoughts on my sandbox version main page? I think we are about to accidentally "go live", so can you zero out the "evolution" <article> numbers for a fresh start? ħuman 20:34, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

Too many places, from now on shall we do this over at RationalWiki talk:Interactive articles? I reset the database. tmtoulouse ^beset 20:52, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

Yes, I was thinking that, too. See you there. ħuman 20:54, 24 July 2008 (EDT)

RSS feeds! That's what we need! tmtoulouse ^beset 14:21, 25 July 2008 (EDT)

Yes! That'll get 'em addicted!

Also, we should have a system whereby each editor has a "score" on the wiki, and they lose 5 points for every hour they don't edit. _{<blink>↳</blink> ↑ ⇨ ↕ ▽ ←} 14:34, 25 July 2008 (EDT)

No, just no. Pinto's5150 ^Talk 14:40, 25 July 2008 (EDT)

Ten points for sysops. _{<blink>↳</blink> ↑ ⇨ ↕ ▽ ←} 14:45, 25 July 2008 (EDT)

What about crats? Pinto's5150 ^Talk 14:46, 25 July 2008 (EDT)

Twenty. There's also a penalty for signing a name that isn't your real username. Not that you'd be interested in that. _{<blink>↳</blink> ↑ ⇨ ↕ ▽ ←} 14:47, 25 July 2008 (EDT)

Hey, my username is in my sig..... Pinto's5150 ^Talk 14:50, 25 July 2008 (EDT)

D'you know, I've almost stopped looking @ Chaos's edits 'cause they're 99.999% "HUMOUR" [sic]   ^Contribs_Talk 14:44, 25 July 2008 (EDT)

Oi! Remind me to host all my discussions on your talk page in future. _{<blink>↳</blink> ↑ ⇨ ↕ ▽ ←} 14:45, 25 July 2008 (EDT)

Yes, please do, then I can ignore them all in one place. Pinto's5150 ^Talk 14:46, 25 July 2008 (EDT)

What he said.   ^Contribs_Talk 14:49, 25 July 2008 (EDT)

You're both being very mean. Which is presumably your childish way of showing affection.

Hugs! _{<blink>↳</blink> ↑ ⇨ ↕ ▽ ←} 14:53, 25 July 2008 (EDT)

Let's do it

I say bring over the new main page and tweak from there, I think the feedback so far has been helpful and once the change is made hopefully more will come. And people can start getting used to no more accodring too. tmtoulouse ^beset 19:44, 25 July 2008 (EDT)

OK. In about 20 minutes, gotta eat. I'll move the transcluded thing to a template and change the main page to be like the sandbox.

Next: Make it so we can transclude a WIGO from each to the mainpage... either the most recent, or the highest scoring? I figure they are already in unique tags, so it ought to be easy for you ;) ħuman 21:05, 25 July 2008 (EDT)

Done. I also mucked up a few things to support the transition. One more thing to do and that's write "insutructions" for working it somewhere.

I copied the main page transcluded thing to User:Human/sandbox5 for us/you to work on "quoting" bits from the WIGOs. Cheers! ħuman 21:29, 25 July 2008 (EDT)

Re: Help

H, I'm gonna work on redesigning the help pages as they're not very good/intuitive for novice users (or experienced ones either). I'll start on my other wiki tomorrow. This time I'll use the Help namespace - I've gotta keep busy or I'll be thumping someone.   ^Contribs_Talk 21:34, 25 July 2008 (EDT)

Cool - keep in mind that the earlier ones that you wrote & I edited are actually very good for noobs - since we wrote them when we still remembered being such. Some of the later ones, as you know, were "kinda" copied over from that unhelpful hellhole wikipedia. I'd recommend finding those and rewriting them completely! I think the "images" one, for example, is ridiculous.

You know what else people have trouble with? Finding things to link to, and templates and categories. Not sure where that sort of thing would go, though...

YES YES UES exactly!! First thing I wanted here (unrealistically of course) was a list of all teh pages, so i knew if i typed something like "a pink elephant is a mammal" if "pink" and "mammal" existed to link to. Aslo the "catigory" struture. Do we have a head page there that says "the 5 (10)(20) head cats are, then thier sub cats are... then the sub subs are...? or do we just wing it?etc. these are questions inquiring but intelligent (and drunk) noobs want to know!!!!!(pardon the spelling, but i don't fell like fixing red wiggly lines at the moment! --WaitingforGodot 22:52, 25 July 2008 (EDT)

Have a look through the special pages (bottom of the toolbox - much will be revealed.   ^Contribs_Talk 23:07, 25 July 2008 (EDT)

I wanted to arrange a nice category tree but got mobvoted down - now we've got a mess mesh of categories.   ^Contribs_Talk 23:09, 25 July 2008 (EDT)

Let me know if you want anything proofread at any point. ħuman 21:38, 25 July 2008 (EDT)

Agreed.   ^Contribs_Talk 21:43, 25 July 2008 (EDT)

And one day the main help page could use some careful rearranging. I can't find things I know are there half the time! ħuman 21:46, 25 July 2008 (EDT)

Eggsactly.   ^Contribs_Talk 21:50, 25 July 2008 (EDT)

congratulations

You are now a member of the DWG! Commence contributing, or else your membership will be revoked. And I know how much this status means to you. Bohdan2 21:35, 25 July 2008 (EDT)

Where do we meet? We need to draw up some guidelines, and elect a president, treasurer, and secretary. A good conflict resolution process would be good to have in place, too. ħuman 21:43, 25 July 2008 (EDT)

There is a redlink in the box, but seeing as we are all having problems loading cp, can we meet in your userspace here? Bohdan2 21:45, 25 July 2008 (EDT)

Sure, let's use user:Human/Danish Writing Group. I'll put a link on my user page so we can always find it. ħuman 21:51, 25 July 2008 (EDT)

Can I join? :) ~ Gloom_{(is never asleep)} 21:49, 25 July 2008 (EDT)

Busy body, semi drunk blond women want to know why you are glorifying the Danes? What did they ever do to you? Now, Flemish I could see. --WaitingforGodot 22:55, 25 July 2008 (EDT)

Question

Is there any way to fix the problem with Special:Userlogin&type=signup wherein it appears as a wanted page? Pinto's5150 ^Talk 23:09, 25 July 2008 (EDT)

probably my fault, I stick it on some user page or other a while ago - I'll humt it down.   ^Contribs_Talk 23:13, 25 July 2008 (EDT)

I've killed the one that I was responsible for.   ^Contribs_Talk 23:23, 25 July 2008 (EDT)

I think the deal is, "special pages" don't work as simple wiki links, you have to do the whole http etc thing. That's what I think, anyway. Try it. ħuman 04:54, 26 July 2008 (EDT)

Teaser quote

Okay may BAC might be at the right level to work on this. All you want is to be able to show the the latest entry for each wigo page right? tmtoulouse ^beset 23:34, 25 July 2008 (EDT)

Basically, yes. And perhaps even limit the amount of text to "X" characters. Use my sandbox to play. And congrats on the BAC, I'm still playing catchup... ħuman 23:36, 25 July 2008 (EDT)

EvoWiki

EvoWiki is down. Who needs to know? Proxima Centauri 05:37, 26 July 2008 (EDT)

It does that a lot, a lot. It can be down for a few hours to a few months. tmtoulouse ^beset 14:15, 26 July 2008 (EDT)

Wigoquote

First round is a go, implemented at User:Human/sandbox5. It takes the top 5 rated items and randomly displays them for each page. tmtoulouse ^beset 14:15, 26 July 2008 (EDT)

Wow, that looks great... ask the mob first, or just implement? (Considering they already asked for it...) ħuman 15:45, 26 July 2008 (EDT)

Well, there are some issues to work out, such as how many should we randomize between, is there a cut off in the number of votes it has to have? What to do if there isn't one available? Let us say that we just archived and there are 3 up and none have been voted on, do we have a default text instead? Right now things get included with only 1 or 2 votes because that is all the voting there is...once these issues are worked out we can implement...but I don't think it is ready yet. tmtoulouse ^beset 15:48, 26 July 2008 (EDT)

OK, good point. I think we should have a 5 vote or so cutoff. Can you take the "descriptive" text we used to have and randomly include that, too? That way if there are no items over 5 it just does the "description"? Perhaps the descriptions could be commented out as "#0" at the bottom of each WIGO (and forced to >5 votes manually)? Will your function still find them if they are commented out? ħuman 16:00, 26 July 2008 (EDT)

Yea, it will still find them commented out. I will stick a 5 vote cut off, should I only use the default when there are no options and if there are >5 just use how many there are up to 5? Or always have the default rotating in? tmtoulouse ^beset 16:03, 26 July 2008 (EDT)

I think the default should always rotate in, that way people will gradually see the descriptions of what these things "are". But either way is fine with me. ħuman 16:13, 26 July 2008 (EDT)

Okay there is now a 5 vote minimum to be included, it takes however many >5 vote entries there are up to 5 and adds the "default message. Then gives equal probability to however many we have. So if we have all 5 and the default each has a 1/6 probability of appearing. If we only have 1 and the default it is 1/2. If we have none then the default is the only thing that shows. tmtoulouse ^beset 18:42, 26 July 2008 (EDT)

Sweet! I think you nailed it. We'll see how it plays out over time, of course. ħuman 02:24, 27 July 2008 (EDT)

Chaos

H, put something on Chaos' page - I had a bit of a spat with him today & he's done a SusanG (gone off in a sulk). He altered Main page & I told him to put it back & then he argued incessamtly that we should protect scientology (that BoN bot vandal came along) until I told him to sod off & bother someone else. Links? User talk:SusanG, User talk:Chris Fanshaw (he's another story!) User talk:Chaos! and various other places. He axed to be de-sysopped after blocking himself for 5 days (I unblocked him & refused to desysop him). Anyhow, he's sulking in a corner somewhere.   ^Contribs_Talk 15:48, 27 July 2008 (EDT)

He'll be back. I don't think he could stay away for long, anyway. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 15:58, 27 July 2008 (EDT)

I know but I feel as if I've smacked a Kitteh!   ^Contribs_Talk 16:01, 27 July 2008 (EDT)

I take it there is really nothing I need to do here but go about my normal wikibusiness? ħuman 16:08, 27 July 2008 (EDT)

Don't suppose there is.   ^Contribs_Talk 16:14, 27 July 2008 (EDT)

Now what

Did I call these people something wrong too? Chris Fanshaw 16:22, 27 July 2008 (EDT)

No, it just wasn't a very good edit - there are far better examples of endless talk at WP. ħuman 16:40, 27 July 2008 (EDT)

Noob question

How did you do that weird thing where the stuff moves over the page? -- Gen. S.T. Shrink ^{That's what she said.} 19:08, 27 July 2008 (EDT)

You mean the wandalism I copied from CP to my user page? (click "edit" to see...)

<div style="position:fixed; width=20000; height=2000; right:10%; top:20%; overflow:visible;"> {| align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="5" padding="10px" style="margin:25px; text-align:center; font-size:375%;" |Like ''this''! '''[[user:human|<font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"><big>ħ</big>uman</font>]]'''{{User:Human/sigtalk}} |} {| align="center" | {{wingnut}} |} </div>

19:50, 27 July 2008 (EDT)

New Schlafly template/article

Per Talk:Andrew_Schlafly#Educator.2C_and_our_potential I have thrown together User:Tmtoulouse/Andy warning. Any thoughts about either the talk page points or the potential template? tmtoulouse ^beset 20:26, 27 July 2008 (EDT)

Done, done, and done... ħuman 20:47, 27 July 2008 (EDT)

Thanks. tmtoulouse ^beset 20:52, 27 July 2008 (EDT)

Advice on avoiding war

So, I may about enter my first edit war, on the "War on Terrorism" piece. any suggestions how one can handle stuff like this when you really disagree with an editor? Other than just saying "f-you" and reverting something. ;-) --Waiting for Godot 14:56, 29 July 2008 (EDT)

Making clear arguments on the talk page? There, others will see them, and the mob will end up having its way. One way to achieve some peace is to have several sections presenting differing POVs, too. ħuman 15:05, 29 July 2008 (EDT)

Yes, you should address thing's on the talk page. As for having separate sections for each viewpoint, that is far too Wikipedia-esque for comfort. Aren't we just supposed to do the "rational point of view" and leave it at that? Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 13:18, 30 July 2008 (EDT)

Well, one thing that can occur here is we get some stuff written in a very humorous way, and other stuff written seriously. To co-exist, they often will need to be carefully demarcated. Also, if you look at the Shakespeare authorship thing, we are sort of on both sides (mostly since we don't care one way or another). The "separate sections" was meant more for two rational POVs with different angles. Sometimes we end up with two articles... ħuman 16:26, 30 July 2008 (EDT)

Blink

The little shit miss used my blink tag :(. tmtoulouse ^beset 19:24, 29 July 2008 (EDT)

It also used that awful javascript paste-in that makes you click "ok" 150 times before you can roll it back... ħuman 19:27, 29 July 2008 (EDT)

Yea that normally would be "ignored" by the media wiki software but I just dump the output from the "blink" tag without parsing it. I cut corners on my coding and someone figure it out. I will have to go back and change that for all my tags now. tmtoulouse ^beset 19:29, 29 July 2008 (EDT)

Ah, I see. ħuman 19:30, 29 July 2008 (EDT)

Bah. That's old stuff, the execution was unmaginative, and didn't even have anything interesting to say. Fail troll is fail. 2/10. --AKjeldsen^{Cum dissensie} 19:35, 29 July 2008 (EDT)

Why TK though? That is weird, other than I notice this particular vandal seems to date pretty far back. tmtoulouse ^beset 19:36, 29 July 2008 (EDT)

It is TK? </unfounded paranoia>. Oh, and AKj, 2? Isn't that a bit generous? Pinto's5150 ^Talk 19:37, 29 July 2008 (EDT)

OHHHsss, Ahhhhssss... it's a sticky!!!! Gots to get me one of those!--Waiting for Godot 19:43, 29 July 2008 (EDT)

K

Here ya go. -- Gen. S.T. Shrink ^{That's what she said.} 22:52, 29 July 2008 (EDT)

Here ya go. AGAIN. Gen. S.T. Shrink ^{That's what she said.} 23:04, 29 July 2008 (EDT)

Third. -- Gen. S.T. Shrink ^{That's what she said.} 01:13, 30 July 2008 (EDT)

I await

I await your commentary on a recent essay of mine. Hans Johnson as in "keep ya hans off my" ^{(cover your eyes!)} 12:59, 30 July 2008 (EDT)

Are you back yet or not goddamit? -- Gen. S.T. Shrink ^{That's what she said.} 13:03, 30 July 2008 (EDT)

Not. Hans Johnson as in "keep ya hans off my" ^{(cover your eyes!)} 13:14, 30 July 2008 (EDT)

I see you finally got the site moved. We need to update RW:RWW to reflect that... ħuman 16:35, 30 July 2008 (EDT)