This user may have left Wikipedia. Mod mmg has not edited Wikipedia since November of 2013. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else.
I will generally reply to posts here on this page unless you request otherwise!
My reconstruction of my talk page is almost complete, all that remains is to find out how to get a link with alternate text for display to link to the page which creates a new section in a talk page (i.e. does the same thing as clicking the "new section" button on the top of the talk page). The link must be able to work from multiple subdirectories and still lead back to creating a new section on the main talk page. If you can help please leave a comment/message.
These are my responses to your comments on this page (I will most often respond on this talk page rather than leave a reply on yours). They will begin with @namehere where namehere is the name of the person I am responding to. They are in order from newest to oldest so new ones will be added at the beginning.
Your unexplained shutdown of DASHBot at User:DASHBot/image has been reverted. Please stop shutting the bot down without explaining yourself. The bot appears to be functioning correctly. Thank you, --Hammersoft (talk) 13:39, 22 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You're trying to use the picture on a talk page: this is strictly unallowable per WP:NFCC#9. On the main article for the game it's fine, but not on talk pages. you can link to the picture on a talk page via the preceeding colon if you need to discuss it there, though. --MASEM (t) 21:54, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Concur with Masem. See my response to you on my talk page. --Hammersoft (talk) 21:56, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You are receiving this message because you indicated support for this project or commented on its proposal.
If you are interested in being part of the Talk Page Cleanup Crew, then go stick your name on the list! Any help, thought, comment, advice, or suggestion you can give is welcome.
Note: Some things are still under construction. -Garrett W. {☎✍} 03:38, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. You have a new message at Garrettw87's talk page. Hello. You have a new message at Garrettw87's talk page. (Feel free to remove these templates after you've seen them.)
Upon more research, you're probably talking about this, which is Phantomsteve's personalized message. I strongly suggest that you not change it without his permission. PrincessofLlyrroyal court 22:09, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry. I really can't think of any other templates. Can you show me an example of where you've seen this notice? PrincessofLlyrroyal court 17:14, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This editnotice seems to be locked as there is no link to it: I suspect that only admins can change it. Therefore, you will have to ask an admin to change the link you mentioned on Wikipedia talk:Editor review. Hope that helps --Jubilee♫clipman 22:01, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've just seen the above! What change do you think is needed to be made to the edit notice? As Jubileeclipman says, only admins can change that editnotice - contact me if you want me to change it! -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 14:20, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your help! Now while your reading this can I ask you quickly three very unimportant questions? How you did you get that "status: online" thing on the top of your talk page, did you use {{REVISIONUSER}} for your editnotice to diplay the name of the viewer and how does that work, and last (and most pathetic) question: are there really people watching your talkpage? I've seen that on a few people's talkpages and always wondered... Mod MMG (User Page) Reply on my talkpage. Do NOT click this link 07:05, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Glad to be of service.
I use QUI. {{Statustop}} tells you my "Qui status"
Welcome to my talkpage {{REVISIONUSER}} does the trick
Yes: people watch my pages! You will see lots of (talk page stalker) links all over my talkpages, for example, indicating that one of then has answered a question while I have been unavailable. Dang useful people...
Hi. I noticed your signature and was thinking that it is kind of confusing/distracting. I don't know if other people thinks this, it's just my opinion. Happy editing! Homework2TalkWhat I do! 00:31, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, I love my signature actually! The black really catches the eye in a debate involving many people, which is the whole idea as people then read my comments. Mod MMG (User Page) Reply on my talkpage. Do NOT click this link 06:42, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Eyecatchingness is the same reason I made mine bold and included a <br /> to put it on its own line – but only to make it more obvious (to me or anyone else) which comments were mine. A black background looks more obtrusive and out-of-place. Also, it does not make me read your comments; it only tells me "Mod MMG wuz here".
My recommendation would be for you to go the route of xeno and use bold, black text with no special background. Lastly, there's no need for two links to your talk page; one would suffice.
The user I linked to in the body of my comment. ( ^ Look straight up from here)
Did you even read what I said? -Garrett W. {☎✍} 07:27, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Whoops! sorry. Also, I read your comments out of order as I had like 10 wikipedia tabs open at once and I was reloading my talkpage while clicking the "new messages" link and it was acting wierd. Mod MMG (User Page) Reply on my talkpage. Do NOT click this link 07:30, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. Also, please don't ever copy the whole thread to my talk page just for me to see your response. That's not how I run my talk page, and I'd imagine lots of other users would feel the same. If you must leave something on my talk page, make it a simple {{Whisperback}} (or {{wb}}), as is mentioned in the banner plastered across the top of my talk page (and my editnotice too – which are both there for a reason). -Garrett W. {☎✍} 07:38, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No, but seriously, I was just making sure you all noticed it, sorry if it bothered you. Mod MMG (User Page) Reply on my talkpage. Do NOT click this link 07:46, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well I had watchlisted your page, as I had stated twice on my talkpage. Anyway, Garrettw87's form of your signature is probably what you should go with. It looks much better. As for eyecatchingness, you could just add color. You don't have to make your signature, ah, annoying, to have people read what you say. Cheers! Homework2TalkWhat I do! 16:48, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I actually like the white on black. I would recommend simply ditching the sentences after the user page and usertalk page links; these are are not only redundundant but also confusing, IMO:
<br />[[User_talk:Mod_mmg|<span style="background: black; color: gainsboro;">Mod MMG</span>]] ([[User:Mod mmg|User Page]])
That is actually more noticable, I would say, since there is less clutter! BTW, I also have watchlisted your page (and am therefore Talk Page Stalking you at the moment!) but you can also place {{tb|Mod mmg}} on my talkpage (rather than the entire thread!) if you feel I need prompting (and if you wish me to reply here rather than there, which further makes the link in your present sig redundant). I hope you don't feel we are ganging up on you, BTW! We are simply trying to help you as best we can though perhaps being a little clumsy about it --Jubilee♫clipman 19:44, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the advice, I'll review the Wikipedia policy on signatures over the weekend then decide on a new signature. I still rather like the idea of linking that WP:BEANS sub-page, but I don't know... I'll decide over the weekend. Mod MMG (User Page) Reply on my talkpage. Do NOT click this link 22:01, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No problem! It took me a while to find a half decent sig and I still fiddle around with it on occasion! --Jubilee♫clipman 22:10, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I was asked for my opinion, so here goes...I personally couldn't care less about signatures, as you may have noticed by my very plain one, but I don't think there's anything particularly objectionable about your current one, although I would say the link to the WP:BEANS subpage and the second talk page link are both a bit extraneous. Agree with Jubileeclipman, cutting those out wouldn't hurt anything, and might be less confusing. But it doesn't matter, really; I really don't care what your signature is in the least, to be honest; seems sort of like a waste of time to be discussing something as minor as that. Cheers, C628 (talk) 22:22, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I agree: it is hardly a blockable signature (no links to spam sites nor any personal attacks etc) but one new editor (Hereforhomework2) found it confusing and distracting. Other newbies might feel the same. We oldies see all sorts of weird sigs! --Jubilee♫clipman 22:30, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I'd like to invite you to participate in the Guild of Copy Editors July 2010 Backlog Elimination Drive. In May, about 30 editors helped remove the {{copyedit}} tag from 1175 articles. The backlog is still over 7500 articles, and extends back to the beginning of 2008! We really need your help to reduce it. Copyediting just a couple articles can qualify you for a barnstar. Serious copyeditors can win prestigious and exclusive rewards. See the event page for more information. And thanks for your consideration. Homework2TalkWhat I do! 03:18, 12 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I will be moving this back to Duranta erecta, where it belongs and where it was originally created. Seven of the eight references refer to it as D. erecta, and two of them note that D. repens is no longer used. (The Missouri Botanical Garden link is more explicit; the Culbert article is a bit more circumspect about it, and the USFS simply calls D. repens as a synonym). However, the preponderance of sources use D. erecta as the primary name, which is where it belongs, with a note about the alternate D. repens, which is in both the taxonomy sections and in the infobox. Please do not move it again. Horologium(talk) 13:44, 3 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I removed the speedy deletion tag from this page. Although you meant to tag it db-a7, it wasn't categorized; what you need to do is simply copy {{db-a7}}, which in this case would have been {{db-corp}} (if you didn't know that already). However, there was notability asserted; a Disney radio station does assert enough notability to get past A7. Don't worry about it; I made this mistake a few months ago with an old Disney cartoon, it's easy to do. You can still take it to AfD, because I'm not sure if this is notable enough to be here, but being an affiliate of Disney is enough to keep it past A7. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 06:43, 26 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I haven't myself; if you want to, go ahead. That sort of thing is not my area (my username and signature should be a pretty good indication of what my areas are), so I wanted to leave that up to someone more familiar with it. If you mark it for deletion, I'll probably participate in the discussion; I personally don't think it's terribly notable, but I'll have to brush up on the guidelines for radio stations. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 22:59, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, you can PROD it; if it gets contested, take it to AfD. My interests are in very arcane topics (the writing is Japanese, it's a polite way of saying "please speak"); I'm interested in Asian history and polar (McMurdo Station and Svalbard) topics. Right now, I'm working on the Zoya Phan article (if you want to, by all means help out...), and I've done some work fixing transliterations of Japanese terms. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 23:08, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks a lot for replying to my Question in the 'Age of Empires I' Talk Page.
What are the graphics issues that I need to worry about if I try to play this on Windows 7?
--Arima (talk) 03:47, 29 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
In order to better control the quality of new pages, keep out the spam, and welcome the genuine newbies, the current system we introduced in 2011 is being updated and improved. The documentation and tutorials have also been revised and given a facelift. Most importantly a new user group New Page Reviewer has been created.
Under the new rule, you may find that you are temporarily unable to mark new pages as reviewed. However, this is nothing to worry about - most current experienced patrollers are being accorded the the new right without the need to apply, and if you have significant previous experience of patrolling new pages, we strongly encourage you to apply for the new right as soon as possible - we need all the help we can get, and we are now providing a dynamic, supportive environment for your work.
