Jump to content

User talk:Arms & Hearts/Archive 1: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
→‎Timeline: new section
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:

== douche bag ==
you are a douchebag liberal queerface asshole. you tagged my page and i hate you forever. asswipe.
==Door Wide Open==
==Door Wide Open==



Revision as of 19:49, 9 April 2009

douche bag

you are a douchebag liberal queerface asshole. you tagged my page and i hate you forever. asswipe.

Door Wide Open

Just a note to say thanks for your help. It looks a lot better now. I realized my error in naming the book after I created the entry.Kerojack, Argenta (talk) 16:15, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

2012 Page

Why did you remove my image? I updated the Numbers along with the current predictions, and used the map to show that the democrats would lose six votes from 2008's election, if the results were to go the same way, backing up a claim on the page.

Making predictions for an election over a year before there are even going to be any candidates is clearly a massive violation of WP:Crystal. The map as it was before (and is now) is better quality, and doesn't make any uninformed predictions based on the completely unprecedented idea of the results of one election being exactly the same as those of the election which preceded it. — Hysteria18TalkContributions 12:54, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The map as it stands now does not match the information on the page.
I didn't realise that was the case. I'm personally uncertain as to what source we're using for these sections, but of course consistency between the map and the figures given in the article is a necessity. Feel free to edit the numbers on the map; my only problem is with the colouring of the states, which I've explained above. — Hysteria18TalkContributions 18:45, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

2012 Page

I like your idea. Thanks. And, as a lesser note, how do you get those template thingies on your user page? Like the one that says "this user is a libertarian socialist." FallenMorgan (talk) 19:10, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. The boxes on my page are known as Userboxes and you can find them at the subpages listed here. From those pages, you just need to find the boxes you want, then copy and paste the code to your userpage. Hysteria18 (talk) 19:30, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
How do I organize them into a table sort of thing, now? And also, thank you for treating the third parties as real parties. Most would outright delete the section for a third party, rather than edit grammar and things like that.  :) FallenMorgan (talk) 16:49, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If I were you, I'd just copy the code straight from my page, if you want it to look roughly like mine, then change the boxes to the ones you want, and change the colours and other parameters as you want. Alternatively, you could use the Userboxtop and Userboxbottom templates as outlined on the Userboxtop page to put them in a sort of vertical table, or the gallery template to have them more as a break from the rest of the text, rather than alongside it. — Hysteria18TalkContributions 17:27, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

2012 Third Party

If you read the talk page of the 2012 Presidential election, you'll see that it was agreed upon to have them together in one section. Rockyobody (talk) 22:48, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe then we should have all the candidates together in one section. FallenMorgan (talk) 00:35, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm afraid to say I still have no idea what you're talking about. I've read the talk page the whole way through twice now, and I'm still unable to find the consensus that you refer to here and in one of your edit summaries. Do you think you could provide a link? Thanks. — Hysteria18TalkContributions 16:17, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We Did It, Kid

Judging by what Rockyobody said in his tiny edit summary, it looks like we won the edit war! FallenMorgan (talk) 08:49, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, Arms & Hearts! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! Flewis(talk) 01:38, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Getting started
Getting help
Policies and guidelines

The community

Writing articles
Miscellaneous


S

The rule is that if the name of someone, a state, or whatever ends with an S, you don't add an apostrophe S at the end. So for example, let's say there was a guy named Carlos and a guy named Arnold who both lost their hats; if you were to ask where their hats were, you'd say/type "Where did Arnold's hat go?" That one is with an apostrophe S at the end, but if you were to ask where the hat that belongs to Carlos went, you'd say/type "Where did Carlos' hat go?", NOT Where did Carlos's hat go? - Eugene Krabs (talk) 22:23, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You've caught me right as I'm going to bed, unfortunately, but I'll just say that if you're adamant that this should be the case, you've got a lot more moving to do. — Hysteria18 (TalkContributions) 22:27, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Do you literally want me to move them, or are you saying that so I won't? XD - Eugene Krabs (talk) 22:34, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Mainly the latter. — Hysteria18 (TalkContributions) 15:30, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dates

Hey Hysteria18, I appreciate all the good cleanup work you've done on Timeline of the Presidency of Barack Obama, which will certainly need it if it's going to cover several years, but is there any reason why you changed the ref dates to the UK system? This is clearly an American related article, and the dates within the timeline itself are done in that fashion. Thanks - Joshdboz (talk) 15:17, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

To be honest, I wasn't really thinking in terms of the national connotations of the date formats, and don't really know that much about them; my only concerns are consistency and the use of a full date (i.e. 27 January 2009 or January 27, 2009) over a shortened one (i.e. 27/01/09, 01/27/09). So feel free to change them back to the U.S. format, if you haven't already. — Hysteria18 (TalkContributions)
Thanks for searching out a better more reliable source for Feb6...at first glance I thought it was CNN. New glasses on order.--Buster7 (talk) 14:06, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Continued great edits at Timeline. Clean and precise. Kudos...--Buster7 (talk) 21:54, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Re;13390, agreed as to minor status.--Buster7 (talk) 23:01, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

List of internet Phomamana in the UK

i thought it would be good to have this page, and you could also make one for every country.

Remember you can't spell aircraft without RAF (talk) 12:41, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've thrawled through the article histories and found that the main article wasn't actually the first to write that information. I suspect the material was merged without proper attribution or redirecting. Please read my comment on the AFD and consider changing your comment. - Mgm|(talk) 10:34, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion at 2012 presidential election article

I invite you to participate in the discussion about the "front runner" section here. Timmeh! 01:13, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Timeline

Hey, I just wanted to thank you for the image/videos on Timeline of the Presidency of Barack Obama - it's actually evolving into one of the more attractive timelines on en.wiki, which is tough for any list. Nice work! Joshdboz (talk) 18:24, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]