User talk:Micky12/archive1

From RationalWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
New logo large.png Welcome to RationalWiki, Micky12!

Check out our guide for newcomers and our community standards!

Tell us how you found RationalWiki here!

If you are interested in contributing:

PowderSmokeAndLeather: Say something once, why say it again?.Moderator 02:58, 8 January 2014 (UTC)


Hello, in your articles, I personally think that you should divide the non-scientific info from the scientific info. This would make it easier for people to find out what is real or fake. Thanks. Micky12 (talk) 05:24, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Words have meanings.[edit]

"Corporate punishment" is not a thing that exists. You mean "corporal punishment." PowderSmokeAndLeather (talk) 04:46, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

"Minor edit"[edit]

It seems that you are marking most of your changes as "minor edits". It should be noted that it is supposed to be reserved for really minor edits, such as fixing typos and formatting, and generally in one's own previous edit.--ZooGuard (talk) 19:33, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Again, please stop marking every edit as a minor - most of your edits are not. It's possible that you have set your preferences to do this ("Preferences"->"Editing"->"Mark all edits minor by default"). If so, please turn it off.--ZooGuard (talk) 09:01, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
Again, a reminder: adding or removing an article to a category is not a "minor" change.--ZooGuard (talk) 21:45, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
Again, a reminder - this was not a minor edit. If you have enabled the "Mark all edits minor by default" setting in your preferences, I suggest disabling it.--ZooGuard (talk) 20:39, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

A problem you've created.[edit]

As of now, no articles link to religious pluralism. when you create an article, please try to find a way to lin k into it, as well as from it. Thanks. PowderSmokeAndLeather (talk) 23:21, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

A bunch of those stupid "bingo" pages.[edit]

I just moved a bunch of those pages to fix faulty titling/capitalization. PowderSmokeAndLeather (talk) 00:20, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

What about all the redlinks? WëäŝëïöïďWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 00:31, 5 February 2014 (UTC)


You've made some edits that I'm not really crazy about -- the whole "Bingo" series is a mess, as far as I'm concerned -- but you're also doing a bunch of wiki-gnoming that's probably useful in the long run, so, be a sysop. PowderSmokeAndLeather (talk) 04:16, 9 February 2014 (UTC)


While your intentions are to be lauded, I am afraid you have misunderstood our category system. We always use only the lowest, most specific categories, and not the larger overarching categories. So you added Category:Icons to all those files in vain, since they were already in Category:Portal icons. ZooGuard is reverting your changes. Please, in the future, before making such big changes, start a discussion about it first. That way you can get some affirmation on what you plan to do, and all that work won't be for nothing! I hope you aren't too discouraged. You're a fairly new user, after all. You're bound to make some mistakes.--"Shut up, Brx." 22:16, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

"Oak Island..."[edit]

When you write a new article, please make links to it on other pages. Thanks. PowderSmokeAndLeather (talk) 16:11, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Category sorting keys[edit]

Another technical note: occasionally, you'll see category strings that look like this: [[Category:Some category| ]]. These are deliberate - they cause the article to be listed at the very front on the category page, and this syntax is used for articles that are considered "main" for the given categories. It's a special case of the more general [[Category:Some category|KEYWORD]] syntax, which causes the article to be sorted according to KEYWORD (instead of the article title) in the article list on the category page.--ZooGuard (talk) 21:53, 18 February 2014 (UTC)


Because of edits like this: The convention here is that the article section with links pointing outside of RW is called, unsurprisingly, "External links", just like in Wikipedia.

And please acknowledge messages on your user talk page by replying to them. You haven't replied to any of the users that have left posts on this page since the very beginning, and it appears that you don't read them.--ZooGuard (talk) 11:34, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Sorry for not responding to the earlier messages posted here. I read all of the posts and will work to make RationalWiki better.

Micky12 (talk) 23:34, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Franklin Graham also made comments on the "gay agenda"[edit]

1: a single sentence is not a section; 2: A sentence that says someone "made comments" but doesn't say a word about what those comments were is worse than having no sentence at all. How about this: Could you possibly consider writing 1 decent sub for, say, every 4 subs that you put up that are basically a title and a single piece of data? That would be awesome. TeenageWasteland (talk) 18:58, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

Seriously. Re: Douglas Batchelor, or whatever his name was.[edit]

Creating two virtually information-free stubs in a row is just creating work for the rest of the community. Pick a topic, write up something substantial in your user space, and put it in main space when it is more than a title and a fact. Thanks.


Stop writing one-sentence sections. They look horrible. And please have the manners to acknowledge the messages on your talk page. TeenageWasteland (talk) 22:15, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

Ok. Micky12 (talk) 22:15, 26 April 2014 (UTC)