User talk:Delldot

Archives

1: 10/05–12/06 2: 12/06–01/07 3: 01/07–02/07 4: 02/07–03/07 5: 03/07–06/07 6: 06/07–09/07 7: 09/07–11/07 8: 11/07–11/07 9: 11/07–12/07 10: 12/07–01/08 11: 01/08–02/08 12: 02/08–03/08 13: 03/08–04/08 14: 04/08–05/08 15: 05/08–06/08 16: 06/08–07/08 17: 07/08–07/08 18: 07/08–08/08 19: 08/08–10/08 20: 10/08–04/09 21: 04/09–01/10 22: 01/10–11/12 23: 12/12–03/13 24: 05/13–12/15

Thanks for dropping me a note! Don't be shy about asking questions, I'm always glad to help. I will reply to messages here, so you may want to watchlist this page.

If you'd like to undo an action of mine and can't get a hold of me within a reasonable time, go ahead. If I disagree, we can discuss it when I'm back. This applies to admin actions too.

Well

How the heck are you? I miss the IRC banter. Hope to see you around my most worthy rival. ;) KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 01:55, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

KOS!!! So good to see you again, so psyched you're back. Sorry I didn't stop by to say hi earlier. I'll see you on IRC sometime soon. Peace, delldot talk 02:08, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Yes indeed! I'm kicking back a few cold ones and using hugglee. What an amazing tool, I was quite skeptical about using it at first, but wow it's amazing! KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 02:11, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

*huggles*

as you probably still can't last until Friday -- Gurch (talk) 09:41, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm a little hard up for the huggles, and I'm completely out of snuggles and cuddles (glomps too, but that's not as pressing of an issue). Anything you can do for me? *snuggles and all other types of affection* delldot talk 10:20, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Doesn't your boyfriend provide any of these things? :/ -- Gurch (talk) 11:00, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Yes, but I want Gurch huggles snuggles cuddles and glomps too! delldot talk 11:03, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Whatever happened to plain old hugs? *hugs delldot* -- Gurch (talk) 11:48, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Oh right, I need those too. *Hugs Gurch* delldot talk 11:51, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

*hugs Delldot tight* -- Gurch (talk) 18:42, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Thaaaaat's more like it. *hugs* delldot talk 19:16, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Halp me some moar!

Could you please use your administrative powers to redirect Sasha Toperich and Sasa Toperic to Saša Toperić? All three articles are about the same person but the variations in spelling caused some miscommunication and more than one article was created. Saša Toperić is the correct spelling (as indicated in Sasha Toperich and Sasa Toperic) so, unless I'm mistaken, that should be the main article rather than just serving as a redirect.

Thanks again!

Peace!

P.S. Apologies if I'm interrupting exchanges of Wiki-fection between yourself and Gurch :) SWik78 (talk • contribs) 17:57, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Looks like DJ Bungi moved Saša Toperić to Sasa Toperic in October. Are you sure it's the right name and that it would be an uncontroversial move? If not, it should be discussed first. But yeah, the material in the two articles should definitely be merged, I can do it if necessary.

P.S. No probs, we're pro's at wikifection and unaffected by interruptions. You're welcome to join in if you have the stomach for it! delldot talk 18:23, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Oh God! Or should I say Oh Ceiling Cat?

It shouldn't be a controversial move. Saša Toperić is the proper spelling in his native language whereas the other two are modified to allow the use of english alphabet. The other two articles even specify Saša Toperić as the correct name.

Saša is a pretty common name for ex-Yugo nationals, but it's often transliterated as Sasha for the english speaking world. As a point of interest, Saša is diminutive for Aleksandar or Alexander. Hence, I myself have 2 nicknames that I'm commonly referred to by my friends :)

SWik78 (talk • contribs) 18:36, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

K, I moved the long one to Saša Toperić. I'll let you deal with the merge from the stub. I don't want to do a histmerge with those because then you'd end up with a very confusing history; better to keep the histories separate with one in the redirect you'll create in the merge (like a merge from a regular article). Just refer to the article you're merging from in your edit summary and explain what you're doing (and you can link to the history on Talk:Saša Toperić). Hope I didn't bugger anything up, I've been editing wikipedia for like 19 hours straight now and I'm a wee bit disoriented :P Peace, delldot talk 20:02, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

All looks good, I can take it from here. But, seriously, step away from the keyboard dude/dudette. 19 hours? Now I can see your BF's point. SWik78 (talk • contribs) 20:50, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I think I've achieved a new unhealthiness record! Sweet! But I do have a real life excuse: I recently quit my night job and am having trouble getting back into day awakeness. So I'm trying to stay awake all day because the only way I'll be able to sleep at night is if I'm deliriously tired. So... no yeah, I need help. delldot is a dudette, but don't tell or they'll revoke her rainbow license on account of the boyfriend 22:39, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

:O TOO MUCH EDITING. See it is good for Wikipedia that you can't chat to me *huggles* -- Gurch (talk) 10:50, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

good article review for mirror neuron

Thanks for catching the image copyright problem: we need to know how the image in question got into the public domain. I have withdrawn the nomination and have posted a warning at the presumptive picture uploader's user talk page, as well as on the image page itself. Even if it's copyright it might be fair-use, but I am not a lawyer and am not qualified to make that determination.

I'll let editors more familiar with the subject matter address the other comments you left. Thank you for taking the time to review the nomination. 69.140.152.55 (talk) 02:46, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Hello, Delldot. You have new messages at 69.140.152.55's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

And as an aside, I might be victim of #59 on this list. Despite my literally thousands of edits (when you count the other IPs, as well as my brand-new username), I have produced only 3 "real" articles (about 6 or 7 if you count those stubs that are more than just "sub"- stubs), all during a short span of a few months. 69.140.152.55 (talk) 16:47, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Re: reversion

No problem. I must say, I really enjoyed the one thing you said, "It's like they think they're the only vandals in the world." I'll have to remember that... J.delanoy^gabs_adds 05:02, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

It's true, every vandal does! It's the only way they can possibly thing they're clever :P delldot talk 05:04, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

:O

*huggles* -- Huggle (talk) 14:09, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi!

There's no real reason for me to leave a message here, just realised I hadn't actually spoken to you in a while! Hope you're okay! Regards, CycloneNimrod ^talk?_contribs? 15:05, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Huntly Park

i can't quite decide what criterion for speedy deletion this comes under, but as the supreme court justice said 'i know it when i see it' your attention at your earliest convenience is requested.paix. Toyokuni3 (talk) 20:40, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Indeed, good catch. A slightly braver person would have speedied it as blatant advertising (for the advocacy group), but I felt safer prodding it. Unfortunately, this means it'll be around for a few more days, and if someone takes the prod tag down I'll have to take it to AFD (at which they'll probably be like "speedy it as blatant advertising!"). But yeah, thanks for catching that. delldot talk 01:46, 16 June 2008 (UTC)