Archives: | |
Thanks for the comment. Have you visited The Museums?? E Eng 15:45, 16 October 2016 (UTC)
...the article should mention the issue of [something substantive with long-term consequences which came up during the campaign cycle but which was later deleted from the article covering the events] other than from a sensationalist angle… Good luck with that :) — JFG, 23:24, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
That is pretty classic. I'll frame that quote on my wall or something. :-) 47.222.203.135 ( talk) 21:28, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
Iryna Harpy (
talk) is wishing you
Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's
Solstice or
Christmas,
Diwali,
Hogmanay,
Hanukkah,
Lenaia,
Festivus or even the
Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!
Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{ subst: User:WereSpielChequers/Dec16a}} to your friends' talk pages.
That was the best subtle burn of them all. Thanks so much for being willing to help do the report.-- Milowent • has spoken 16:00, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
...had the best edit summary. Really great edit summary. Everybody says so. Edit summary so good it'll blow your mind, believe me folks. MWGA. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 20:22, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
I just love seeing playful edit summaries on my watchlist. Especially on political articles.
You've escaped justice for now, but you can't escape it forever.
Just when you think it's safe to remove the truth from an article based on your churlish WP:BLPREMOVE claims, one of your betters will make a 10,000-word post arguing (successfully) that maybe there were no BLP implications after all, thus you've violated 1RR on an article subject to discretionary sanctions—whose purpose is to ensure that the truth is not improperly removed from WP articles—and all of a sudden, BLAM, you'll be indeffed without discussion. Book it. Your days are numbered, troll.
lololololololol Factchecker_atyourservice 19:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
(in reference to a "cut-the-crap" edit)
The definition for "child" in Webster includes: an immature or irresponsible person
Atsme
📞
📧 16:44, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
I'm being completely earnest here; those pages need more comments like the one I responded to. [1] [2] Too many people get too caught up in it (and I'm not just referring to the political right; the lefty editors and even apolitical editors do this, too) and get waaaaay too upset. It would, IMHO be a damned good thing if a few threads were to degenerate into back-and-forth comedic quips from time to time, rather than petering off when the most vocal editors lose the page in their watchlist, or exploding into shit-stirring AE fodder. Those (too few) of us willing to crack wise on those threads really should band together and Make Talkspace Great Again. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 22:03, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
References
Thanks to all well wishers! ♥
| |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Happy Halloween![]() ![]() Happy
Halloween!
Hello JFG: SMILE!! 16 DECEMBER 2017![]() Smile at others by adding {{ subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Happy Holidays
HH
Happy holidaysI'm having a merry Christmas and I hope you have a good day today and a happy new year. Thanks for working with me over the past year on the Top 25 Report. Keep up the good work. SchreiberBike | ⌨ 23:03, 25 December 2017 (UTC)
|
Last night I dreamed that you advised me in article talk that the Chrome browser doesn't immediately show my edits to existing comments, something to do with how it handles its browser cache for improved performance. I should therefore avoid modifying existing comments. I responded that that makes the Chrome browser largely incompatible with Wikipedia talk spaces. I hereby ban you from my Wikipedia dreams. ― Mandruss ☎ 06:43, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
Hilarious - not. CNBC = not sure what to do with this info. The term was removed here but Google had already picked it up. Atsme 📞 📧 13:57, 1 June 2018 (UTC)
Thanks. -- mfb ( talk) 22:29, 2 June 2018 (UTC)
I was surprised to see
this, the title of which reminded me of the movie
Free Willy. I was even more surprised to see the outcome, and lack of participation. Why was it not listed in any of the WikiProjects? There is now a proposal to merge it into the main article. I kinda sensed our pedia was in trouble when I saw what was happening with the jacket caper but I didn't realize to what lengths we were letting tabloid journalism rule over the pedia...
Atsme
📞
📧 21:31, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
![]() |
The Barnstar of Good Humor |
For your auditory contribution to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Free Melania (2nd nomination). Thank-you. Ifnord ( talk) 00:51, 27 June 2018 (UTC) |
Where should we have the won deposited for keeping dear leader's pictures looking good? PackMecEng ( talk) 13:45, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
Funny - I had been planning to move this article today to remove the year, and when I went to remove it I discovered it's already gone - you beat me to it! Have you been reading my mind, or is it just a case of GMTA (great minds think alike)? -- MelanieN ( talk) 18:10, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
Re this, "apparently resolved" is not "closed", which is what #13 says. I've treated "answered" edit requests as "closed" but otherwise applied a bright line that has worked just fine up to now. It wouldn't have hurt anything to keep that around for another 5 days—even if there were four times as many threads in the TOC—and I can safely predict that a blurred line will create problems with premature archival. ― Mandruss ☎ 09:40, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
You evidently like to slow down the Wikimedia servers, wasting computing cycles and as much electrical energy as possible by employing horrifically inefficient code. — Quicksilver (Hydrargyrum) T @ 06:43, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
Aaagh! I just blocked your account by mistake, when I intended to block another editor. I've unblocked you a few seconds after realising my mistake. Many apologies, The Anome ( talk) 11:48, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
Is this move vandalism? PackMecEng ( talk) 02:54, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
Archives: | |
Thanks for the comment. Have you visited The Museums?? E Eng 15:45, 16 October 2016 (UTC)
...the article should mention the issue of [something substantive with long-term consequences which came up during the campaign cycle but which was later deleted from the article covering the events] other than from a sensationalist angle… Good luck with that :) — JFG, 23:24, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
That is pretty classic. I'll frame that quote on my wall or something. :-) 47.222.203.135 ( talk) 21:28, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
Iryna Harpy (
talk) is wishing you
Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's
Solstice or
Christmas,
Diwali,
Hogmanay,
Hanukkah,
Lenaia,
Festivus or even the
Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!
Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{ subst: User:WereSpielChequers/Dec16a}} to your friends' talk pages.
That was the best subtle burn of them all. Thanks so much for being willing to help do the report.-- Milowent • has spoken 16:00, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
...had the best edit summary. Really great edit summary. Everybody says so. Edit summary so good it'll blow your mind, believe me folks. MWGA. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 20:22, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
I just love seeing playful edit summaries on my watchlist. Especially on political articles.
You've escaped justice for now, but you can't escape it forever.
Just when you think it's safe to remove the truth from an article based on your churlish WP:BLPREMOVE claims, one of your betters will make a 10,000-word post arguing (successfully) that maybe there were no BLP implications after all, thus you've violated 1RR on an article subject to discretionary sanctions—whose purpose is to ensure that the truth is not improperly removed from WP articles—and all of a sudden, BLAM, you'll be indeffed without discussion. Book it. Your days are numbered, troll.
lololololololol Factchecker_atyourservice 19:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
(in reference to a "cut-the-crap" edit)
The definition for "child" in Webster includes: an immature or irresponsible person
Atsme
📞
📧 16:44, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
I'm being completely earnest here; those pages need more comments like the one I responded to. [1] [2] Too many people get too caught up in it (and I'm not just referring to the political right; the lefty editors and even apolitical editors do this, too) and get waaaaay too upset. It would, IMHO be a damned good thing if a few threads were to degenerate into back-and-forth comedic quips from time to time, rather than petering off when the most vocal editors lose the page in their watchlist, or exploding into shit-stirring AE fodder. Those (too few) of us willing to crack wise on those threads really should band together and Make Talkspace Great Again. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 22:03, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
References
Thanks to all well wishers! ♥
| |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Happy Halloween![]() ![]() Happy
Halloween!
Hello JFG: SMILE!! 16 DECEMBER 2017![]() Smile at others by adding {{ subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Happy Holidays
HH
Happy holidaysI'm having a merry Christmas and I hope you have a good day today and a happy new year. Thanks for working with me over the past year on the Top 25 Report. Keep up the good work. SchreiberBike | ⌨ 23:03, 25 December 2017 (UTC)
|
Last night I dreamed that you advised me in article talk that the Chrome browser doesn't immediately show my edits to existing comments, something to do with how it handles its browser cache for improved performance. I should therefore avoid modifying existing comments. I responded that that makes the Chrome browser largely incompatible with Wikipedia talk spaces. I hereby ban you from my Wikipedia dreams. ― Mandruss ☎ 06:43, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
Hilarious - not. CNBC = not sure what to do with this info. The term was removed here but Google had already picked it up. Atsme 📞 📧 13:57, 1 June 2018 (UTC)
Thanks. -- mfb ( talk) 22:29, 2 June 2018 (UTC)
I was surprised to see
this, the title of which reminded me of the movie
Free Willy. I was even more surprised to see the outcome, and lack of participation. Why was it not listed in any of the WikiProjects? There is now a proposal to merge it into the main article. I kinda sensed our pedia was in trouble when I saw what was happening with the jacket caper but I didn't realize to what lengths we were letting tabloid journalism rule over the pedia...
Atsme
📞
📧 21:31, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
![]() |
The Barnstar of Good Humor |
For your auditory contribution to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Free Melania (2nd nomination). Thank-you. Ifnord ( talk) 00:51, 27 June 2018 (UTC) |
Where should we have the won deposited for keeping dear leader's pictures looking good? PackMecEng ( talk) 13:45, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
Funny - I had been planning to move this article today to remove the year, and when I went to remove it I discovered it's already gone - you beat me to it! Have you been reading my mind, or is it just a case of GMTA (great minds think alike)? -- MelanieN ( talk) 18:10, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
Re this, "apparently resolved" is not "closed", which is what #13 says. I've treated "answered" edit requests as "closed" but otherwise applied a bright line that has worked just fine up to now. It wouldn't have hurt anything to keep that around for another 5 days—even if there were four times as many threads in the TOC—and I can safely predict that a blurred line will create problems with premature archival. ― Mandruss ☎ 09:40, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
You evidently like to slow down the Wikimedia servers, wasting computing cycles and as much electrical energy as possible by employing horrifically inefficient code. — Quicksilver (Hydrargyrum) T @ 06:43, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
Aaagh! I just blocked your account by mistake, when I intended to block another editor. I've unblocked you a few seconds after realising my mistake. Many apologies, The Anome ( talk) 11:48, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
Is this move vandalism? PackMecEng ( talk) 02:54, 30 April 2019 (UTC)