RationalWiki's 2019 Fundraiser

There is no RationalWiki without you. We are a small non-profit with no staff – we are hundreds of volunteers who document pseudoscience and crankery around the world every day. We will never allow ads because we must remain independent. We cannot rely on big donors with corresponding big agendas. We are not the largest website around, but we believe we play an important role in defending truth and objectivity.

If everyone who saw this today donated $5, we would meet our goal for 2020.

Fighting pseudoscience isn't free.
We are 100% user-supported! Help and donate $5, $20 or whatever you can today with PayPal Logo.png!

Donations so far: $2200Goal: $3000

Difference between revisions of "User talk:Human"

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(gnihtolc dnah-dnoces ruoy dessertsid evah I)
(gnihtolc dnah-dnoces ruoy dessertsid evah I: ...eniws ,em kcolb t'nod dnA)
Line 302: Line 302:
:Um, well, good for you... thanks... '''[[user:human|<font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"><big>ħ</big>uman</font>]]'''{{User:Human/sigtalk}} 02:29, 19 July 2008 (EDT)
:Um, well, good for you... thanks... '''[[user:human|<font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"><big>ħ</big>uman</font>]]'''{{User:Human/sigtalk}} 02:29, 19 July 2008 (EDT)
::{{User:Chaos!/sig12}} .namwuH ,enahs roF .CR ni nur tcefrep ym tliops uoY
::{{User:Chaos!/sig12}} .namwuH ,emahs roF .CR ni nur tcefrep ym tliops uoY
:::Surely you mean for "shame", not for that existentialist Western movie? '''[[user:human|<font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"><big>ħ</big>uman</font>]]'''{{User:Human/sigtalk}} 02:35, 19 July 2008 (EDT)
:::Surely you mean for "shame", not for that existentialist Western movie? '''[[user:human|<font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"><big>ħ</big>uman</font>]]'''{{User:Human/sigtalk}} 02:35, 19 July 2008 (EDT)
::::[[User:Chaos!|Marginally Less Chaos!]]<sup>[[user:Barack Obama|Audacity!]]</sup> P: sopyt ruoy nmad dna uoy nmaD

Revision as of 06:43, 19 July 2008

This user may experience moments of lucidity,
but don't count on it.

Hey goobers, it's my talk page!

Just so's you all know, I have a distinct preference for continuing conversations on the talk page they start on. Otherwise my aging brain hurts! (ie, no table tennis conversations, please)
Anyone is welcome to nominate editors for demotion to sysop, and discuss the nominations here.
Sysops can summarize the nominations here

Archives for this talk page: Archive list (new)
See the history of vandalism to this article


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... ħumanUser talk:Human 16:34, 7 July 2008 (EDT)
I also decapped the headers where appropriate. I think everything I did is still there... ħumanUser talk:Human 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... ħumanUser talk:Human 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... ħumanUser talk:Human 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 ;) ħumanUser talk:Human 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)


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. 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? 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! Star of David.png Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 05:39, 8 July 2008 (EDT)


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. SirChuckBBATHE THE WHALES!!!! 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"... ħumanUser talk:Human 16:11, 8 July 2008 (EDT)
here NightFlareStill doesn't have a (nonstub) RWW article. 16:27, 8 July 2008 (EDT)
Ah, doh, thanks! ħumanUser talk:Human 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. ħumanUser talk:Human 21:42, 8 July 2008 (EDT)
Janitors who happen to enjoy crucial user privileges. 21:48, 8 July 2008 (EDT)
Twas TMT who sysopped Java. SusanG  ContribsTalk 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... ħumanUser talk:Human 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. ħumanUser talk:Human 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? ħumanUser talk:Human 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? ħumanUser talk:Human 22:46, 8 July 2008 (EDT)


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


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? ħumanUser talk:Human 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... ħumanUser talk:Human 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. NightFlareStill 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"! ħumanUser talk:Human 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. ħumanUser talk:Human 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. ħumanUser talk:Human 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? ħumanUser talk:Human 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". --Bobbing up 05:33, 10 July 2008 (EDT)
Last I checked, he isn't just the "closest thing", he is the project owner. Star of David.png 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. Jollyfish.gifGenghismutating 04:21, 10 July 2008 (EDT)
Don't forget that he also pays our server costs. And has root access. Star of David.png 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. ħumanUser talk:Human 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! Star of David.png 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?--Bobbing up 15:56, 10 July 2008 (EDT)

It seems to have gotten lost! Nice little wheel war you had with yourself there... ħumanUser talk:Human 16:06, 10 July 2008 (EDT)
I must try to remember what I did in case I ever want to vandalise a wiki.--Bobbing 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 ;) ħumanUser talk:Human 16:13, 10 July 2008 (EDT)
Thanks.--Bobbing 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. ħumanUser talk:Human 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?--Bobbing 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? ħumanUser talk:Human 16:29, 10 July 2008 (EDT)
OK. Thanks for looking at it.--Bobbing up 16:31, 10 July 2008 (EDT)


Rescued from the sandbox ;) ħumanUser talk:Human 17:16, 10 July 2008 (EDT)

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


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. ħumanUser talk:Human 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) ħumanUser talk:Human 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. ħumanUser talk:Human 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? ħumanUser talk:Human 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? ħumanUser talk:Human 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? ħumanUser talk:Human 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? ħumanUser talk:Human 00:18, 11 July 2008 (EDT)

UNBLOCK ME TOOOOOOOOOOOOO-caius (tinker) 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... ħumanUser talk:Human 00:23, 11 July 2008 (EDT)
Yup, I gotz me a shiny shiny new IP address! ħumanUser talk:Human 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 ;) ħumanUser talk:Human 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? ħumanUser talk:Human 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? ħumanUser talk:Human 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... ħumanUser talk:Human 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. ħumanUser talk:Human 01:19, 14 July 2008 (EDT)


regarding this edit: Huh? SirChuckBBATHE THE WHALES!!!! 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. ħumanUser talk:Human 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. SirChuckBBATHE THE WHALES!!!! 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... ħumanUser talk:Human 12:41, 11 July 2008 (EDT)


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. ħumanUser talk:Human 02:50, 12 July 2008 (EDT)


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

No prob, it's my job ;) ħumanUser talk:Human 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? --US-O11 insignia svg.pngGen. S.T. Shrink Get to the bunkerUS-O11 insignia svg.png 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? ħumanUser talk:Human 02:28, 15 July 2008 (EDT)
I'll reword if it pleases his majesty. --US-O11 insignia svg.pngGen. S.T. ShrinkUS-O11 insignia svg.png

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... ħumanUser talk:Human 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?) --US-O11 insignia svg.png Gen. S.T. Shrink Get to the bunker 02:36, 15 July 2008 (EDT)
HBC was mine, goat was Doc's. ħumanUser talk:Human 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. ħumanUser talk:Human 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? --US-O11 insignia svg.png Gen. S.T. Shrink Get to the bunker 03:00, 15 July 2008 (EDT)


!EERF s'tI ?margorp "eibweN a tpodA" ruo nioj ot ekil uoy dluoW !namwuH ,ikiWhsidaR ot emocleW


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? ħumanUser talk:Human 02:06, 16 July 2008 (EDT)

Fight me!

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


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... ħumanUser talk:Human 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. ħumanUser talk:Human 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. --AKjeldsenCum dissensie 06:55, 17 July 2008 (EDT)

Methinks that we've not had a good inconclusive community standards debate for a while. --Bobbing 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 beleaguer 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? --AKjeldsenCum dissensie 04:00, 18 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? ħumanUser talk:Human 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!

2Rolling Stones
-1Some band no one (besides you and your super-hip friends) has ever heard of
2Frank Zappa/Mothers of Invention

Thank you for playing. ħumanUser talk:Human 20:04, 17 July 2008 (EDT)

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

Not to me, but that bug has been seen before, at WIGOCP. I thought Trent fixed it... ħumanUser talk:Human 20:55, 18 July 2008 (EDT)
And it dumps me at the top of the page after I've voted. SusanG  ContribsTalk 21:04, 18 July 2008 (EDT)
They're randomly Up/Down Side/Side on WIGO too. (Firefox 3 before you ask) SusanG  ContribsTalk 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. ħumanUser talk:Human 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 ;) ħumanUser talk:Human 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 SusanG  ContribsTalk 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! ħumanUser talk:Human 15:51, 18 July 2008 (EDT)


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. --US-O11 insignia.svg Gen. S.T. Shrink Mr. President...I lost the WMD's 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.) :-) 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! 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? ħumanUser talk:Human 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. 20:37, 18 July 2008 (EDT)

Hi again Human

[3] - I can add it back in when it fails though, right? Take care! 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". ħumanUser talk:Human 20:30, 18 July 2008 (EDT)
And freakin' log in, already! Hehe... ħumanUser talk:Human 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! 20:39, 18 July 2008 (EDT)
Heh, I remember that. Oh, and thanks for the shoutout at WP. Night night! ħumanUser talk:Human 20:58, 18 July 2008 (EDT)

gnihtolc dnah-dnoces ruoy dessertsid evah I

Um, well, good for you... thanks... ħumanUser talk:Human 02:29, 19 July 2008 (EDT)
.namwuH ,emahs roF .CR ni nur tcefrep ym tliops uoY
Surely you mean for "shame", not for that existentialist Western movie? ħumanUser talk:Human 02:35, 19 July 2008 (EDT)
Marginally Less Chaos!Audacity! P: sopyt ruoy nmad dna uoy nmaD