User talk:hydnjo

Because of their length, the previous discussions on this page have been archived.

(See Wikipedia:How to archive a talk page)

Previous discussions:

This is the place to talk, explain, complain, or flame.

Welcome!

Hi Hydnjo! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! --Flockmeal 21:41, Nov 27, 2004 (UTC)

A barnstar for your voice - the encouraging and supportive one that resulted in the grand Reference Desk changes! --HappyCamper

I have been meaning to give you a barnstar for a while - the recent changes to the reference desk have made it even more fitting to do so. Here is one for your supportive and encouraging voice - on the reference desk, and on Wikipedia as a whole. We're so lucky to have an editor like you around here! I hope you'll treasure it - may it always remind you of the positive impact your contributions have had on Wikipedia. Cheers! --HappyCamper 02:51, 27 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Blimey! You might well have more time than me, but you've almost certainly got more tenacity too. I was working on doing a month per day if I'm lucky with time, but thanks for chugging along much quicker. Let's keep this up and hope that it'll soon become standard practice. Have a Working Man's barnstar in recognition! --HighHopes ^{(T)⋅(+)⋅(C)⋅(E)} 08:30, 24 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

File:Snowflake5.JPG

A snowflake of appreciation for you Hydnjo, from Wonderfool

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Wonderfool 2 is a page that you may be interested in. I'm after the 5 extra sysop buttons on here. At least, i think they're 5

Templates and the Reference Desk

Oh, check out the edits I made to Template:RD header. I'm thinking of shrinking the size of the question mark by changing the number 48 to a smaller number. --HappyCamper 03:33, 1 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Racoons and Adminship

Those racoons seemed to have disappeared now...not sure what the mothballs did, but they're still on the ground! I think removing the food really helped though. Finally some peace and quiet at night!!

Ah yes, my adminship. Thanks for the congrats! That was quite recent actually. I think I come across differently on that RfA than in my normal activities on Wikipedia. Have you read the thread about the Mysterious Wikipedian on my talk page? Wikipedia is so interesting at times...

Just wondering, what makes editing on Wikipedia enjoyable for you? --HappyCamper 23:48, 3 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ah yes - it's quite interesting to reflect how modern society has evolved in the Western world. It seems as if we have progressed from an agricultural, to an industrial, to a service oriented, to an information based society, in this order. What would be interesting to observe is the next generation - the ones that grew up with the internet, took it for granted, and know all the nooks and crannies of the technology.

I had no idea my user account was listed on the Signpost - heh, sometimes I think there's too much information to keep track of on Wikipedia! Usually I just focus on what's important at the moment and trust that the Wiki will help solve everything else! :D --HappyCamper 01:12, 4 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Would you like to become a "sir" someday too? :-) Let me know when you feel ready; I'd be honoured to nominate you when the time comes. Or, alternatively, I just might surprise you one day! It's well worth the consideration. I know you've been here for a while, and those extra buttons might complement your work here. Let me know what you think! --HappyCamper 02:13, 4 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Not draconian, but figuratively poetic :-) --HappyCamper 02:16, 4 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Gone without a trace

Well, we'll see how things unfold. I think it's too much of a neologism :-) --HappyCamper 03:01, 4 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

After further reflection and under more sober circumstances I have tagged this article for speedy deletion as I believe it meets the criterion of General article 7 (1.2.7) at WP:CSD. hydnjo talk 19:01, 4 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wondering if you would like the article to be enshrined in BJAODN heaven? WP:-)? --HappyCamper 23:35, 4 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

As its author I take no position as to memorializing my rant. I feel awkward that it has taken the notice that it has taken already. Scrap it if you want, I can always recreate it later if it seems relevant. Thanks for asking, hydnjo talk 23:41, 4 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted as requested, no archival. Had anyone else edited it, it would have had to stay on for the entire week. --HappyCamper 23:53, 4 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I have no clue as to why some Admin was insisting on WP:AfD instead of speedy. Anyway, thanks for your mercy. Some things that seem perfectly rational late at night make my face turn red the next morning and I can't imagine that an admin was saying No to my speedy request. I'm in your debt. I read the article to Heidi this morning and although she saw some merit and some insights she agreed that it wasn't suitable for an encyclopedia article. "Geesh, is that all you do all night?" or something. ;-) hydnjo talk 00:22, 5 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

And, if someone else had edited it I would have gladly given up ownership. That's the part I didn't understand. Perhaps the Admin thought that the article had some merit! Oh well, hydnjo talk 00:29, 5 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Fool family

There is a new progeniture who popped up on Wiktionary. His ancestory is unbeknownst to him currently, AFAIK. Family tree to be updated! --Wonderfool t (c) 11:04, 7 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Space opera in Scientology doctrine

It was my mistake, I think my browser wasn't refreshing properly, I have since changed the image, and reverted it back to your version. Autopilots 03:08, September 10, 2005 (UTC)

Excellent work on FA date template

I really like the FA date template you made. In fact, I liked it so much I made a clone of it for articles which are scheduled to soon appear on the front page (Of course, people will have to update the template once this date is passed). I also promoted the templates on Wikipedia talk:Tomorrow's featured article and Wikipedia:Template messages/Talk namespace. --Alabamaboy 19:08, 10 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Note: As much as I would love full credit, Template:Mainpage date is actually the result of a collaboration between Rick Block and myself. hydnjo talk 00:12, 11 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

TfD

Thanks for the congratulations — I was amazed at how much support it received. Re the TfD: I think that, seeing as there is still dissent from another admin on whether this is a speedy, I won't speedy it myself; I don't want to run into trouble on my second day! If you like, you can tag it again yourself although don't remove the TfD notice of course. You can always just check the "What links here" for the template once a day or something over the next week and replace any usages with the new one you have/will made/make. -Splash 20:11, 10 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

List of electrical engineers

Hi. would you take a look at the most recent addition of Kyle McGhee on this list and let me know what you think. It looks like BS to me but I wanted to get another opinion before rv. Thanks, hydnjo 00:37, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

I agree with you; that entry looks like nonsense and it should be deleted. Engineer Bob 04:56, 12 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. It appears he was a gold digger and I can find no evidence of him being an electrical engineer. Spliced 08:05, 12 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again. You deleted Rowan Atkinson from the subject list today, and while I personally don't have strong feelings one way or the other, I wondered what your reasoning is. Although Atkinson (aka "Mr. Bean") is best known as a comedian, he is "trained as an electrical engineer" per the list's introductory description. If we're proposing a more restrictive criteria for inclusion, there are a few others (Chinese politicians, for example) that should be deleted as well.

On a related note, about two weeks ago I proposed a couple other deletions from that list -- I'd appreciate your thoughts on the Talk:List of electrical engineers page. Engineer Bob 06:55, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Date format

Hey, thanks, that worked. I don't know what happened, I just logged on and all the dates were coming out this way! I don't remember changing it. Thanks again, for your help. PRueda29 09:43, 14 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

rfa

File:Snowflake5.JPG

A snowflake of appreciation for you Hydnjo

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Wonderfool 2 is a page that you may be interested in. I'm after the 5 extra sysop buttons on here. At least, i think they're 5

James I of England + Mainpage Date template

No problems - glad to be of service. --High^(Hopes) 23:22, 20 September 2005 (UTC) [reply]

First, thanks for your second message of thanks - and in light of going back through all the old ones, I certainly don't expect this everytime! I wasn't expecting any help with this, but the idea of working from both ends is a good one and is much appreciated. I'll keep a record of where I'm up to on my Pending Tasks box at the top of my userpage.

As I said in my message on the template talk page, I was surprised that a MP appearance by an article wasn't logged on the article's talk page - and it wasn't so long ago (I'm still fairly new) that I thought that a featured article was an article profiled on the MP. It is nice to know that this exercise is being considered worthwhile - to be honest, I've never known quite how I can add effectively to WP, so it's good to have something I can contribute. Thanks for your help! --High^(Hopes)(+) 20:36, 21 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Back again! Purely by chance, I stumbled across your earlier correspondence with Rick Block regarding this matter. I started adding the template for reasons I stated earlier, so we've obviously arrived at the same point independently - fools seldom differ and all that! I noted your comments about the milestones an article reaches that you thought worth recording. The ones I personally regard are important are the Main Page date and Featured Article date, though I would say that more important than the date at which either event/status occurred/was achieved is the simple acknowledgement of this. The Featured template does a good job and has become institutionalised, though I remain surprised that more isn't made within an article's space if it makes it all the way to the front page - I regard MP articles as being 'first among equals' and deserve recognition for this. Now that some of us have begun to ensure that such articles are noted on their talk pages, adding the date has come naturally.

As for recording the date FA status was achieved, the template could be amended, but a big backlog would have to be cleared to ensure the red links don't lurk for too long. And it might be hard to get this institutionalised (which is surprising, given how steeped in red tape WP is!). I'm going to drop a note to Rick Block and alert him to this thread. For now though, I maintain that acknowledging MP or FA status is more important than the detail, and I'm glad we've got going on that. --High^(Hopes)(+) 23:49, 21 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Good point - while I had appreciated your interest in the evolution of an article after being given such status, being there on the MP does tend to give rise to a flurry of editing activity. --High^(Hopes)(+) 00:03, 22 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Just seen that you left a message with Rick Block around the same time - fools still seldom differ! Just out of interest, who was giving you all the trouble over this matter?--High^(Hopes)(+) 16:57, 22 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your message, though when I started using MPD I did notice the error straight away - it didn't result in a link to the Today's Featured Article/(date). I was going to notify you but saw the discussion on your page and so carried on with the old one. I just find it easier to type the command ( Template:Mainpage date.... etc ) and copy it, and then just paste it for each talk page, updating the day of the month each time. Works alright for me! Did April 04 today - will have May done by end of tomorrow. --High^(Hopes)(+) 17:53, 22 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, you get used to the blue after a while...

Sorry for butting in on the template: I must admit to not looking at the history before I edited it. My main concern was to ensure that the date was properly wikified, so the user preferences would format it appropriately. The version that was there when I first edited it had the date inside the link to the WP:TFA subpage where the article has its main page write-up, which meant that the user preferences didn't reformat it.

As far as I can see, the only difference between my version and yours is that yours links to WP:TFA and not the subpage. I thought it made sense to link to the subpage, but, so long as the date works, I'm not all that concerned about that. -- ALoan (Talk) 00:11, 22 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

mainpage date template

Hi - Going through the recent versions of the template:

Brian0918 changed it so instead of just having a date, it linked to the featured article summary article as of the date the article was on the main page
ALoan changed it to keep the link to the article's summary article but also display the date according to user prefs (wikified date)
Brian0918 basically reverted ALoan's change
You changed it so the link goes to today's featured article summary (not the summary article for the date the article was on the main page), but with a wikified date
ALoan reverted to his version

The red vs. blue FA date link is an issue with the format of the link to the summary article. The summary article is at a subpage of Wikipedia:Today's featured article that has the date in the name. Hey Jude, for example, is at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/July 24, 2005 with the date as part of the page name in "Month day, year" format. The template on the talk page for Hey Jude puts the date in "day Month, year" format, so when the link to "Today's featured article" is generated the link goes to Wikipedia:Today's featured article/24 July, 2005 (which doesn't exist). The fix is to change the reference on Hey Jude's talk to {{Mainpage date|July 24|2005}}. Why the link changes from blue to red is because the template expansion changed. It used to use the date only to display the date (wikified, so that user prefs for date format display will take effect). With Brain0918's (or ALoan's) version the date arg is also used as part of the link to the summary article. When it's only used as a date, it doesn't matter whether it's "Month day" or "day Month" (and either displays the same way assuming you've picked a date format in your user prefs). When it's used in the link to the FA summary article it HAS to be "Month day".

BTW - the way you're using it causes it to be NOT "compiled" into the page, so when the template changes if you redisplay a page using it the page should show the change. There are some weird cases where this doesn't happen (like if the template adds the page including it to a category and you either delete this from the template or change the category), but this shouldn't be one of them. You can reference a template in a manner that causes the template to be expanded ("compiled") into the page when you save it (and further changes to the template don't affect that page). How you'd do this is by entering (for example) {{subst:Mainpage date|July 24|2005}}. It will look the same when you preview, but after saving it if you edit the article again you'll see the expanded code (not the template reference). At some point, somebody may suggest you do it this way. The tradeoff is future changes to the template don't affect articles already using it (and you can't find references via "what links here") but it's less work for the software to regenerate the page (it doesn't have to look up the definition of the template). Changing a template used on thousands of pages is also an issue - it causes the software to do a bunch of database work to indicate that the pages using it need to be regenerated the next time they're viewed.

Probably more than you wanted to know :)

-- Rick Block (talk) 00:16, 22 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Did I miss something? What's the problem? To fix the articles where the link is red, the first argument needs to be changed to "Month day" format (rather than "day Month" format). Or do you object to linking to the day-specific summary article rather than WP:TFA? I'm confused. Would it help if I explained this issue on the template talk page? I suspect ALoan and/or Brian0918 simply don't realize the change has broken some (I don't know how many) references. Please don't give up on this. Other people editing what you start is the wiki-way. With templates, sometimes folks come along and make changes that require updating some (sometimes all) references to the template (and they should generally realize this and make the necessary updates themselves). This is just like somebody coming after you and editing an article, although with slightly (sometimes dramatically) more impact. The real beauty of the wiki is that rather than any individuals owning certain pieces everyone owns everything. Is this helpful? -- Rick Block (talk) 03:01, 22 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wow. I'm honored. Thank you. BTW - would you like me to explain the issue at the template talk page? Your last note there sounds a little angry (alright, it sounds a lot angry). Please let me know. -- Rick Block (talk) 03:51, 22 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You're invoking the template wrong. You need to supply a date and year to get it to work right, just as it says on the template talk page. — BRIAN0918 • 2005-09-22 04:01

I've always invoked it as follows:{{Mainpage date|DAY MONTH|YEAR}}. But now it seems that that is not correct. So, I'm at a loss. Thanks to all who have tried to help me here. --hydnjo talk 04:30, 22 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I assume you've seen the template talk. The newly required syntax is {{Mainpage date|MONTH DAY|YEAR}}. I left a suggestion that the folks that broke it should fix it :) (although, sigh, we all own it so we should all fix it). -- Rick Block (talk) 04:36, 22 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the further message, and sorry for any confusion. I think Rick has identified the problem: the template will need to be invoked as {{mainpage date|Month day|Year}} for the version that links to the subpage to work (if that is the one that we stick with). But as I say above , I am rather less concerned about whether the link is to WP:TFA or the relevant subpage of WP:TFA and more so that the date should be wikified so it displays according to user preferences.

Please don't give up - the template is serving a useful function. We just need to hit upon a consensus version that works for everyone. -- ALoan (Talk) 09:13, 22 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

date order insensitive version of mainpage date template

Hi - Can we make a version that isn't sensitive to the date ordering? Well, yes, but my guess is you might not like it very much. One way would be to use three named arguments rather than two positional arguments. Ignoring what the template code would look like, the reference on the talk page might be:

and any order would do. The arg names could be more concise, for example m=, d=, and y=. Using named arguments you can put the arguments in any order, but you have to remember what the names are. Using positional arguments you have to put them in the right order, but you don't have to remember any names. The wikipedia "template language" is pretty primitive - something as simple sounding as recognizing a date is in "day Month" form and transforming it to "Month day" form is actually quite difficult. What it's really set up for is creating a shorthand notation for a chunk of text, with arguments simply substituted in (like a form letter). Doing any computation or making the output vary based on parameters is extremely difficult. I can't think of any way (well, no reasonable way) to accept either "Month day" or "day Month" as a positional argument and preserve the link to the specific WP:TFA summary article. An unreasonable way is to have two sets of 366 templates, one for each day in either form, and use these templates inside the main template to expand the argument to what's needed for the link to the TFA summary for the given date.

Would you be interested in a version with named arguments? -- Rick Block (talk) 18:50, 22 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

No, I think that may make the situation worse. Heck after HighHopes and I are done it's only going to be used once a day anyway. I'm sure we all can keep track and catch any trip-ups (mainly from EU I would guess). Thank you for taking a look. :-) --hydnjo talk 19:30, 22 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, we're done. ;-) --hydnjo talk 19:02, 24 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Pufferfish

Hi, and thanks for adding the MainpageDate template to featured articles. You also added the "featured" tag to Pufferfish, but unfortunately I had to remove this again. Pufferfish was a featured article, but is no longer featured, since most of the information was moved to Fugu. Anyway, thanks for updating many featured article talk pages. Happy editing -- Chris 73 Talk 08:12, 24 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, just for clarification: I removed the "Featured" tag, but kept the "Mainpage" tag, since I think it is a great idea! Keep up the good work! -- Chris 73 Talk 08:59, 24 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Progress Report

Blimey! You might well have more time than me, but you've almost certainly got more tenacity too. I was working on doing a month per day if I'm lucky with time, but thanks for chugging along much quicker. Let's keep this up and hope that it'll soon become standard practice. Have a Working Man's barnstar in recognition! --HighHopes ^{(T)⋅(+)⋅(C)⋅(E)} 08:30, 24 September 2005 (UTC) [reply]

Wikipedia Widow

Take a look here: Wikipedia:Improve this article about Wikipedia. Hmm...didn't that term first enter Wikipedia a while back ago? :-) And congrats on the new barnstar! --HappyCamper 13:07, 24 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

PRueda29

hmm... dunno if i'm ready to be a sysop; I don't even know how to add that little arrow thing (that redirects) to the edit summary people add when editing pages. Of course, If I were nominated I'd accepted, but I doubt I'd get much support. Maybe i'm just being overly cynical. Thanks for your comments! PRueda29 15:19, 25 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ASK

It's not so much that they'll find it with the new name, but that experienced users will refer to the page by that title, and it will show up at the top of the page. I reverted some, but not all of Barrett's changes. Hopefully, he'll accept the compromise. Superm401 | Talk 18:55, 25 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Templates and ASK

I like the new WP:ASK. I think we can remove the red words though. I'd really love to protect that page once everything has settled down. I'm not too keen on putting moving the "Ask Wikipedia a Question" into a more prominent place quite yet, but I have proposed that the bottom links be placed in alphabetical order as a compromise. I think that link has caused the reference desk to swell to well over 700 questions at the moment! Putting it into an even more prominent place would make it even harder to maintain, although I'm not sure if shifting it over would really make much of a difference. I'm actually thinking of writing a bot to maintain the RD pages at the moment. --HappyCamper 20:37, 25 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I find the question mark distracting being on the right side. It sort of draws attention away from the text. --HappyCamper 03:26, 28 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

"Vandal Shield"

I appreciate your praise of the "vandal-blocker" I put in, but it's really a simple HTML comment. I tried to explain it in the talk page of WP:AQ, but in essence it's simple. Anything between  doesn't appear. Superm401 | Talk 01:26, 26 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You can get rid of the question mark. I really don't care. I didn't put it in. Superm401 | Talk 02:06, 26 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Arrows

This edit should not have an arrow because I clicked on the plus sign at the top of your user page. But, if you were to click the edit link to the right of this post and reply here, you should see a little arrow in your edit contributions.

And if it still doesn't work...then try the sandbox and experiment! :-) --HappyCamper 02:06, 26 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

OK, Lets see if an arrow appears now. --hydnjo talk 03:44, 26 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!

Obviously, first and foremost for the barnstar - not sure I've deserved it, but thanks all the same. It has pride of place on my userpage and I hope you don't mind me appending it with what it was for.

I've had some time off recently and thought I may as well get going with the Portal, so thank you for your encouraging remarks. It seemed like a gap worth filling (am surprised there wasn't a portal before), and hopefully I'll get time to keep it going. Most of the formatting is based on the Cricket portal - go and check it out, you lot should be playing it instead of baseball!

As for the user page - at the time I had nothing to say on my page, hence the links. I'm not usually a techy/Webby type, so I'm surprised that I've got into WP - suppose it's the encyclopedic bit that I like. That said, I shouldn't hold your breath waiting for me to turn up on nominations for adminship - I don't contribute anywhere near enough or often enough (like I said, this week off sick was an exception). And I'm really not sure about having contributions recognised - I think you need to mix with the 'elite' to get noticed! Not that I'm bothered by that sort of thing - it's not the reason I'm here.

The name - simply, after the last song recorded by the Floyd.

Anyway thanks once again, --HighHopes ^{(T)⋅(+)⋅(C)⋅(E)⋅(P)} 02:02, 29 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Template weirdnes

You wrote:

Hi again template genius. Template:Mainpage date was enhanced recently by HighHopes with the WP Mainpage logo (nice touch). The weird part is that when I call a talk page that calls that template there is a hang-time of (sometimes) several seconds between the template expansion without the logo until the logo shows up. Also, my browser (Safari) progress bar indicates incomplete until the logo is in place. The other templates on the same page (Featured, etc) appear all at once, logo and all. I'm concerned that the way the logo was added may be incorrect. Please take a look and let me know what you think so I can sleep soundly tonight. Thanks, --hydnjo talk 00:44, 3 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I forgot to mention that it seems to happen (I think) only with the first call after adding the template. --hydnjo talk 00:59, 3 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The logo that's included at this point is a .4M version of the image rescaled on the server (!) to a 42x42 version for inclusion with the template. The rescaling is done by an Apache server (not cached by the numerous squid cache servers) every time any user views a page including the template. Ummmm, this is dumb. It would be FAR more efficient for the smaller (42x42) version of the image to be stored on the server. Given that this is a copyrighted image of the Wikimedia Foundation, there might be some sensitivity to uploading a pre-condensed 42x42 version of the 600x600 original. I'm not sure if there's a way to force the rescaling to be done by the user's browser (rather than by the Apache server), but I'm trying to figure out a way to do this. Please stay tuned. -- Rick Block (talk) 04:37, 3 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

And I responded:

I can't believe that I asked a question requiring such a convoluted (to my mind) answer! Now I'm feeling bad that I put you through all of this for such a minor annoyance. Thanks of course Rick for looking into this, I was just wondering if adding the logo could have been done in a more efficient way. As always, your research has helped me understand the underlying mechanics and I thank you for that. --hydnjo talk 04:53, 3 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Heya

I really do think that Certificate should be split up... it's hard to wikilink directly to a computer security type certificate (that's the issue I had with MDAC) - Ta bu shi da yu 08:14, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You are far more experienced than I in these matters so go right ahead. Im sure you'll design a fine disambig page. My concern was about preserving the usage of the term within so many contexts. hydnjo talk 15:09, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, not necessarily :-) I think you make a good point. I'll think about it and see what I can work out... - Ta bu shi da yu 02:35, 6 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wow!

I've been so astonished and flattered by all the support for my RfA that my head is about to burst! (And when it does I'll be sure to write a Wikipedia article about it. :) Thank you for all your support and your encouragement in the past, and also for your note on my Talk page - without that I might never have noticed that I was nominated, since RN put the announcement on my User page, and I rarely go there to read about myself! ;)

As for Boothy443: what a ...(whatever)! I went looking and found lots more info about him (including Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Boothy443), after following that link you gave me. I personally think that a condition of his further participation in Wikipedia should be that he stops trying to prove his point, whatever it is, in the voting. He's creating WAY too much drama and pointless discussion. But that's just my two cents.

The whole RfA process is fascinating and mesmerizing. I may write about it after I'm done being put through the wringer. :)

Anything else you'd like me to photograph for you at WDW? - Brian Kendig 02:28, 7 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

OwenX's RfA

Thank you for your support on my RfA. Your trust in me is well appreciated. Owen× ☎ 22:29, 7 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Brian

Thanks for informing me. I had no idea that such a thing had happened. Regards, User:Nichalp/sg 17:52, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

Its there, but it strangely does not appear. If you use the sectional edit, you'll see the username. I have no clue why this is happening. User:Nichalp/sg 18:06, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

Mystery solved, my doing infact! User:Nichalp/sg 18:30, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

I don't think that's necessary. I believe he had added it before the {{user}} template came into use on that page, so it is currently redundant. User:Nichalp/sg 18:47, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

Tank truck

{{van-stub}} was the most specific stub I could find! Apologies to all the van and truck purists. Hopefully a van expert will be able to assist with this truck page anyway. Scottkeir 23:05, 8 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you both

for all your support and warm fuzzies. I really appreciate you, and I'm glad you're out there! :) - Brian Kendig 23:44, 8 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your support on my RfA!

Thanks for your support of my adminship!! I was surprised at the turnout and support I got! If you ever have any issues with any of my actions, please notify me on my talk page! Thanks again! Ryan Norton ^{T | @ | C} 04:16, 13 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I see you supported not one but TWICE - well thanks again!! Ryan Norton ^{T | @ | C} 04:22, 13 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the encouragement

It certainly brightened my evening. And encourages me to continue. Open2universe 13:07, 13 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wonderfool has moved

Good day, Hydnjo. Just to let you know that User:Wonderfool has moved. (S)he now resides at User:Newnoise. And shall pretty much behave in a similar manner to Wonderfool. Apart from the whole being a wikipest for 2 hours every 9 months. --Newnoise 16:52, 14 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Tank truck stub

Hello Hydnjo, glad to help with the stub. sorry it took so long but its a very busy wikiproject even with 100 of us working on it! It was the first stub template ive made so hopefully it works ok :) BL kiss the lizard 04:33, 15 October 2005 (UTC) [reply]

woot! my first barnstar! thank you! BL kiss the lizard 09:36, 15 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Very odd

I double checked my block log. Wonderfool will be back, 31 December 2005. I also told him that if at any time he wanted to be unbanned, I would gladly do it for him. I haven't received anything in my mailbox yet. I think I'm going to revert those pagelinkings. If that is really Wonderfool, he would have done this differently I think. --HappyCamper 21:30, 15 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

-You think I'd've done this differently?!? What are you, some kinda psychologist or mind reader? Remember I always had a penchant for sockpuppets. Remember User:Onefool? --Newnoise 09:19, 17 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Um...not really...it's just really confusing that's all. Anyway, if you need to perform some page merges and stuff, let me know. :-) --HappyCamper 15:23, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Can I get your vote?

I have been nominated for an adminship and I was wondering if I could get your vote. If you feel inclined, please go to Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Alabamaboy and cast your "yes" or "not in a million years." Many thanks.--Alabamaboy 02:33, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the vote. I was just trying to let people I'd interacted with over the months know about the vote. My bad. --Alabamaboy 12:36, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the notice. You know, I am surprised at people being so worked up about asking people to vote for an RfA. I had seen people do this a number of times (and I'm sure others do it behind the scenes with e-mail). However, if I had known there was such strong feelings about this I wouldn't have done it. Perhaps a notice in the About RfA section would be appropriate?--Alabamaboy 12:47, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Happy now

Maybe i dont like talking to lemmings, --Boothy443 | trácht ar 23:51, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

What? Ëvilphoenix ^Burn! 03:59, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Our thought exactly. Lemmings look like fat furry hamsters. They have strong legs and claws for digging. Thick fur helps to keep them warm. ;-) --hydnjo talk 23:53, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

cheers

Thank you both again for all your kindness and support! And please don't take down the big yellow banner from my talk page - I like it, I'm going to archive it with the rest of my stuff there! :) Actually I haven't had occasion to use any of the "superpowers" yet, aside from using the shortcut-revert once... but it does make me feel a little more affirmed. :) I'm helping in a situation right now in Kim Jong-il, and if things continue to go poorly and people violate 3RR again, I'm going to start imposing temporary bans and protecting the page... *cackles gleefully* ;) - Brian Kendig 02:55, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

formatting

Thanks for your comment on the formatting of my question, but I didn't understand what you said. I did a diff on the histories and saw no difference. I signed my name with the 4 tildes, so I don't know why you suggested that I didn't. I am not being defensive, I simply don't understand.--Ben Best 21:40, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Statistics for Hydnjo

As you requested, please find the statistics I generated for you here. Any comments you may have are appreciated. Have a great day! >: Roby Wayne ^{Talk • Hist • E@} 17:54, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Request - hope you won't find it offensive.

Hello, Hydnjo. I've just seen this. You may not have been aware of that user's background. He was a recovering methadone addict, had a rather stormy history on Wikipedia, is often suicidal, and has very recently started using methadone again. He's also mentally ill. He has just left Wikipedia. I don't want to play on your emotions or conscience by hinting that your comments led to his relapse or his departure. I am sure they did not. I think he went back on methadone before you made that comment, and there were many other Wikipedias who wrote things that upset him. As regards his departure, he has left before and come back.

Could I request that you send him a note on his talk page? I don't mean a grovelling apology, just a nice note to say that you didn't mean any offence and that you hope his problems sort themselves out.

And yes, I realize that I have absolutely no right to make such a request – but, well, I feel sorry for him. Check the recent history of his user page, if you're interested. Regards. Ann Heneghan ^(talk) 00:59, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Response to Ann: ==Regarding sensitivity==

No problem, I had no clue. Just thought he was being a "wise-guy," thrust and parry kind of fooling around. Also, I didn't notice any followup to my comment at Redwolf24 so I assumed all was cool with everyone. I will definitely comment on his talk page as best I can. Thanks for keeping me in the know in your usual kind and considerate way. Are you an Angel or something? --hydnjo talk 01:30, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I said hey you to get his attention, not to be disrespectful. Let me know if I can be helpful in any way. --hydnjo talk 02:19, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks. I appreciate that! I know his outbursts are startling, but I'm sure he's a decent person. Ann Heneghan ^(talk) 02:21, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

RD archival

I am archiving the RD pages less frequently partially because I have become increasingly busy with other activities on Wikipedia. I am so happy to see that the number of active questions has finally decreased below 100 per page! --HappyCamper 04:54, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for supporting my RfA

I know I've been slow in saying this, but thanks for supporting my request for adminship. It was an honor to be both nominated and approved as an admin. If there is ever any adminish (is that a word :-) things you need help with, please let me know. --Alabamaboy 16:15, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Re: WP:ASK

Thanks for the note on my talk page. However, what exactly does the 'a---' mean? :) --Kwekubo 20:25, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ah. You can see I'm not fluent in Geek Code - or in most other computing languages... --Kwekubo 21:57, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Oh, I did it up, but to demonstrate by example I've only just realised this minute that my code has had two syntax errors for the past several months... --Kwekubo

It's better not to sign the insertion of {{unsigned}} - at a glace I thought the template (on evolution was referring to you. Guettarda 15:45, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

WP:RD

Hey, I see you're doing great work on there. Just figured I'd drop a line to say thanks for the hard work :-) Ta bu shi da yu 06:52, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Minor barnstars...

They're barnstars for minor edits. I personally think they are more special than the bigger normal barnstar, because the smaller one isn't awarded so often. --HappyCamper 08:21, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Messed up pages

Hi, thanks for your support. Your talk page is messed up again. Would this eplain it, or is it an unrelated problem? Cheers! Ann Heneghan ^(talk) 23:57, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Stuff

Hi, thought I should quickly register myself to acknowledge the emails I received whilst I was away from WP - I have both studio versions of High Hopes, although I must say that the live version from P*U*L*S*E is the best. You'll note from my user page that I really can't be bothered with Wikipedia anymore - I had said before that I'm not a techy type and looking back I'm quite surprised I even got involved with this project in the first place. It's not good, hardworking editors like yourself that have pissed me off, it's the 'clan' that dominate this whole thing... it just all seems so pointless! WP is a great idea, but I don't think it works in practice. Keep it up - you do a good job round here. --HighHopes 19:55, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]