Kevyn -
I noticed that you have reviewed both the Bubonic Plague and the Black Death articles. Would you look over the work I've been doing on the Bubonic Plague page -- and the argument I'm having with myself on the very quiet discussion page. I'm still an anonymous - and learning the ropes. Most of the changes I have in mind for this and other topics should be done by someone who knows the system and links. I'll learn in time -- and will undoubtedly sign in, so I can shuffle pages and download images. Comments and criticism welcome. -W. 2-16-05
Its all good. i just didn't understand. Vaoverland 06:09, Mar 19, 2005 (UTC)
His opposing votes seem very questionable and outrageous. Do you think we should remove them? He is posting stuff like, "GOD I hate star trek..." -- AllyUnion (talk) 23:40, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Nah, I'd let them stay. No need to have anyone accuse us of being undemocratic or stifling opposition. Are his reasons vapid? Sure. But it's just one negative vote on a couple of sections, and they'll be cancelled out as more people vote in favour of them. I wouldn't let him worry you. Kevyn 00:57, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I added two new sections... and a few more titles. -- AllyUnion (talk) 00:16, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- I see. OK, well, we'll let them stand or fall on their own merit. But if you ask me, some of those titles are just... bad. ;-) Kevyn 05:10, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Thank you. I wasn't positive I could vote, so I hedged on the negative. I will fix, and vote some more! Disclosure: I am genetically predisposed to bad puns. -- Mothperson 14:29, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I just sent this to -- AllyUnion. and then noticed he is off, moving. Perhaps you could help with this question. Someone who shall remain nameless wants to add some titles that fall under "television" but are references to a single show, maybe some quotes, too. Probably a small bunch of references. Or maybe a slightly bigger bunch. The person thinks the show might deserve its own category, but can't figure out how to add it without a) completely messing up the numbering system; b) linking it inappropriately to an existing number; c) putting it down at the very bottom under the page numbers, which seems odd. What do you think would be the most sensible way to handle this? I will convey your directions to the person. Thanks. -- Mothperson 16:51, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Adding a section is very easy. You don't need to worry about the numbering system: It's completely automatic. Just edit the page, and at the point you want to insert the new category, just type it like this:
- == Category title here ==
- If it's a subcategory, do this:
- === Sub-Category title here ===
Looks like Wikipedia:Valley of the Bad Jokes and Other Deleted Nonsense is full... I think it's time to start a new BJAODN page... -- AllyUnion (talk) 08:00, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Mothperson tends to vote Oppose alot. Does he just have a passion for disagreeing with us? -- Riffsyphon1024 18:02, May 3, 2005 (UTC)
- Nah, Mothperson is just playing politics. It's discovered that it can affect the outcome of votes by using Oppose votes to weigh down titles it doesn't prefer over titles it does. This makes its favoured titles rise up in the rankings. This is a perfectly valid tactic in the democratic process, but it will lose its effectiveness as time goes on, because others will cancel out Mothperson's votes. I wouldn't let it "bug" ya ;-) -- Kevyn (talk) 17:09, 4 May 2005 (UTC)
But now, I am laughing somewhat hysterically because I came here due to paranoia, and found the above, which transforms it to veranoia. No, actually I came to make sure you knew I was just joking about the moon-landing thing. But this is interesting - the idea that "oppose" is viewed as an irritating "tactic". I honestly didn't think opposing suggestions was such a terrible thing, given that I am extremely enthusiastic about others. Why do we have to love everything? I kind of don't like having my opinion viewed as a tactic, but it doesn't really matter. You liked BJAODN on Blueberry Island, so you get a free pass to "insult" me whenever you want. You're okay, in my books. (of course, my approval of you has probably just lowered your general Wiki standing but I didn't mean for that to happen!!!) Cripes. Can't do anything right, it would seem. Ç'est la vie. -- Mothperson 14:49, 20 May 2005 (UTC)
Hi - I made a list of users who've been around long enough to have made lots of edits but aren't admins. If you're at all interested in becoming an admin, can you please add an '*' immediately before your name in this list? I've suggested folks nominating someone might want to puruse this list, although there is certainly no guarantee anyone will ever look at it. Thanks. -- Rick Block ( talk) 17:11, Jun 18, 2005 (UTC)
Hello,
Since you contributed in the past to the publications’ lists, I thought that you might be interested in this new project. I’ll be glad if you will continue contributing. Thanks, APH 11:12, 11 September 2005 (UTC)
Kevyn -
I noticed that you have reviewed both the Bubonic Plague and the Black Death articles. Would you look over the work I've been doing on the Bubonic Plague page -- and the argument I'm having with myself on the very quiet discussion page. I'm still an anonymous - and learning the ropes. Most of the changes I have in mind for this and other topics should be done by someone who knows the system and links. I'll learn in time -- and will undoubtedly sign in, so I can shuffle pages and download images. Comments and criticism welcome. -W. 2-16-05
Its all good. i just didn't understand. Vaoverland 06:09, Mar 19, 2005 (UTC)
His opposing votes seem very questionable and outrageous. Do you think we should remove them? He is posting stuff like, "GOD I hate star trek..." -- AllyUnion (talk) 23:40, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Nah, I'd let them stay. No need to have anyone accuse us of being undemocratic or stifling opposition. Are his reasons vapid? Sure. But it's just one negative vote on a couple of sections, and they'll be cancelled out as more people vote in favour of them. I wouldn't let him worry you. Kevyn 00:57, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I added two new sections... and a few more titles. -- AllyUnion (talk) 00:16, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- I see. OK, well, we'll let them stand or fall on their own merit. But if you ask me, some of those titles are just... bad. ;-) Kevyn 05:10, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Thank you. I wasn't positive I could vote, so I hedged on the negative. I will fix, and vote some more! Disclosure: I am genetically predisposed to bad puns. -- Mothperson 14:29, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I just sent this to -- AllyUnion. and then noticed he is off, moving. Perhaps you could help with this question. Someone who shall remain nameless wants to add some titles that fall under "television" but are references to a single show, maybe some quotes, too. Probably a small bunch of references. Or maybe a slightly bigger bunch. The person thinks the show might deserve its own category, but can't figure out how to add it without a) completely messing up the numbering system; b) linking it inappropriately to an existing number; c) putting it down at the very bottom under the page numbers, which seems odd. What do you think would be the most sensible way to handle this? I will convey your directions to the person. Thanks. -- Mothperson 16:51, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Adding a section is very easy. You don't need to worry about the numbering system: It's completely automatic. Just edit the page, and at the point you want to insert the new category, just type it like this:
- == Category title here ==
- If it's a subcategory, do this:
- === Sub-Category title here ===
Looks like Wikipedia:Valley of the Bad Jokes and Other Deleted Nonsense is full... I think it's time to start a new BJAODN page... -- AllyUnion (talk) 08:00, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Mothperson tends to vote Oppose alot. Does he just have a passion for disagreeing with us? -- Riffsyphon1024 18:02, May 3, 2005 (UTC)
- Nah, Mothperson is just playing politics. It's discovered that it can affect the outcome of votes by using Oppose votes to weigh down titles it doesn't prefer over titles it does. This makes its favoured titles rise up in the rankings. This is a perfectly valid tactic in the democratic process, but it will lose its effectiveness as time goes on, because others will cancel out Mothperson's votes. I wouldn't let it "bug" ya ;-) -- Kevyn (talk) 17:09, 4 May 2005 (UTC)
But now, I am laughing somewhat hysterically because I came here due to paranoia, and found the above, which transforms it to veranoia. No, actually I came to make sure you knew I was just joking about the moon-landing thing. But this is interesting - the idea that "oppose" is viewed as an irritating "tactic". I honestly didn't think opposing suggestions was such a terrible thing, given that I am extremely enthusiastic about others. Why do we have to love everything? I kind of don't like having my opinion viewed as a tactic, but it doesn't really matter. You liked BJAODN on Blueberry Island, so you get a free pass to "insult" me whenever you want. You're okay, in my books. (of course, my approval of you has probably just lowered your general Wiki standing but I didn't mean for that to happen!!!) Cripes. Can't do anything right, it would seem. Ç'est la vie. -- Mothperson 14:49, 20 May 2005 (UTC)
Hi - I made a list of users who've been around long enough to have made lots of edits but aren't admins. If you're at all interested in becoming an admin, can you please add an '*' immediately before your name in this list? I've suggested folks nominating someone might want to puruse this list, although there is certainly no guarantee anyone will ever look at it. Thanks. -- Rick Block ( talk) 17:11, Jun 18, 2005 (UTC)
Hello,
Since you contributed in the past to the publications’ lists, I thought that you might be interested in this new project. I’ll be glad if you will continue contributing. Thanks, APH 11:12, 11 September 2005 (UTC)