User talk:Wtshymanski

This page has been blanked. --Wtshymanski (talk) 19:29, 10 February 2012 (UTC) ..again.

Not even remotely fair.

Your listing of a simple typo that was quickly corrected as if it was a major error
(See https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User%3AWtshymanski%2FGriping&diff=490185155&oldid=489153153)
is unfair and offensive. Have you never hit the 9 key when you meant to hit the 0 key? I am asking you nicely to please remove the entry. --Guy Macon (talk) 21:37, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Why? It's on the record and it's amusing. It also serves as a reminded that we look foolish in arguments. Hardly offensive if it's true. --Wtshymanski (talk) 21:42, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

I don't mind looking foolish when I have actually been foolish. This was just a slip of the finger. It is not true that a simple typo belongs on your list of boneheaded statements. It should be reserved for people who actually believe the misconceptions you imply that they believe. --Guy Macon (talk) 21:55, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

It's been a while and I haven't looked back into this particular teapot, but I think the reason it made the list was the *insistence* that a chip had 49 pins instead of 40. It was more than a one-shot typo. Plus when you're being swarmed in the schoolyard sometimes pointing out a bully's untied shoelace is all you've got. --Wtshymanski (talk) 13:19, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Evidence, please.

Typo made here:

[ http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Single-board_microcontroller&diff=458094248&oldid=458075828 ].

Typo corrected here:

[ http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3ASingle-board_microcontroller&diff=458170305&oldid=458163206 ].

So where is the diff showing where I allegedly "insisted" that a 8748 microcontroller has 49 pins instead of 40? (sound of crickets...)

BTW, it is hardly "bullying" to respond to your lack of knowledge concerning Harvard architecture, Von Neumann architecture, and the number of address bus pins needed for each, and it is hardly "being swarmed" when multiple engineers and computer scientists attempt to correct your ignorance before you harm the article further. --Guy Macon (talk) 18:05, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

yes, Guy. --Wtshymanski (talk) 18:20, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

So, are you retracting your false "the reason it made the list was the *insistence* that a chip had 49 pins instead of 40. It was more than a one-shot typo." claim? If so, this would be a good time to offer up a sincere (as in "not sarcastic or backhanded") apology. If not, please provide evidence that your claim is true. --Guy Macon (talk) 18:30, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

OK Guy... What happened, did you and Andy decide to switch roles thsi week? He's been positively cuddly compared to his usual behaviour, where as I'm beginning to sense a certain strain in our previously cordial relations. Last month it was the other way around. What fun. --Wtshymanski (talk) 18:33, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

MfD nomination of User:Wtshymanski/Griping

User:Wtshymanski/Griping, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Wtshymanski/Griping and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Wtshymanski/Griping during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Elen of the Roads (talk) 11:09, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

NACA reports

Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2012_May_2#Category:National_Advisory_Committee_for_Aeronautics

This should be discussed centrally, once and for all. Andy Dingley (talk) 15:37, 2 May 2012 (UTC)