User talk:Hydnjo/Archive13

DO NOT EDIT OR POST REPLIES TO THIS PAGE. THIS PAGE IS AN ARCHIVE.

This archive page covers approximately the dates between 30 September 2006 and 31 December 2006.

Post replies to the main talk page, copying the section you are replying to if necessary. (See Wikipedia:How to archive a talk page.)

Heidi & Joe

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

---

---

Welcome!

Hello, Hydnjo/Archive13, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  --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)

For tirelessly ensuring that Main Page articles are recorded and recognised, from HighHopes

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)

File:Snowflake5.JPG

A snowflake of appreciation for you Hydnjo, from Wonderfool

		The Working Man's Barnstar
		Scrumshus congradulates hydnjo for completing the challenge on his userpage. You were a working user, and you deserve it for doing so well!

Here's the barnstar for ya, Ṣ₡ЯՄՊՏɧѱᎦ ^☎/ _∑

		The Worker's Barnstar
		I always see you on my watchlist whenever you change the date on the reference desk. Thanks doing the job that could easily be given to a bot. bibliomaniac15 00:15, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

The good old RD...

...I don't know how to fix it. --HappyCamper 22:47, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

See this. That is all :-) --HappyCamper 04:29, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

The more I read, the more worried I get. I haven't been so worried about the RD since last year! --HappyCamper 16:49, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

But...as I said somewhere else in the digtal ether, everything will work out for the better. Three cheers for the Wiki!!! --HappyCamper 13:16, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Deep well drilling

Hi hydnjo, just an FYI that I moved and reformatted this article a bit as it had a Wikify tag on it (used to be called "Mathematics of deep well drilling") ... your work is still intact in a "Mathematics" section, though you might want to see the Talk:Deep well drilling talk page there to see what prompted me. Take care! JubalHarshaw 19:11, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

re: MH

Yeah. I'm actually a little amazed. BTW - you don't have Marilyn's book, do you? Maybe I'll have to just break down and buy a copy from Google. This is the song that never ends. It just goes on and on my friends. Some people started singing it, not knowing what it was, and they'll keep singing it forever just because this is the song that .... -- Rick Block (talk) 01:56, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

navigation bar template

Hi - Have you noticed template:Navigation bar I've been working on lately? Call me crazy (OK, I'll admit it), but I think this might be the best thing to show up since template:Category TOC. I've managed to make it work for pretty much all browsers, including the JAWS screen reader. To see it in action, see Bedford or Steve Lewis (athlete). As far as I can tell, nobody seems to be too interested. Am I missing something? I'd appreciate your comments about this . -- Rick Block (talk) 04:24, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Nice! A different and clever way to view a list. I think that it would be most useful (to me) was when I'd be looking for a known thingy but no clue as to its position within the list (alpha, chrono, number etc). If I had no precognition and the list were to be a random assortment (so to speak) then I wouldn't like it as I would want to be able to eyeball scan in a less structured way. All in all, it would seem to be useful tool but not for all "list" situations. So, if the list were meant to be scanned (read) in some order, then it's perfect.

I tried something below to see if I could nest a template (UBX) as an item but your nav template was uncomfortable with expanding that. I tried it to see if someone's userbox collection could be scrolled through instead splashed on their user page. See how it got dropped out from between items 20 and 21?

It seems to work fine with wikilinks as items, again between 20 and 21 so long as expansion isn't required:

Thanks for the opportunity to comment. I'm using Classic skin and Safari browser. --hydnjo talk 23:54, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

It is meant for lists with an obvious order (alphabetical or numerical), not randomly ordered lists. I hadn't thought about including userboxes in a list although this is an interesting idea. There might be a way to make it work for this although the CSS syntax is, let's say, challenging to make work across browsers. -- Rick Block (talk) 00:46, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

What's going wrong below with the first and last terms? I'm not trying to bust'em, just looking for bugs :-) --hydnjo talk 02:22, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Can't have embedded new lines in the list (should make this clear on the template page that describes how to use it). -- Rick Block (talk) 02:30, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

BTW - I generally use classic skin on a Safari (you seem to have excellent taste!), but have tried this with Opera (on a Mac), and IE, Mozilla, and Firefox (on a Windows Piece ofCrap), and have gotten feedback from a blind user who uses the JAWS (screen reader) screen reader. -- Rick Block (talk) 02:41, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Also note if you increase the font size (apple-+) it still works and if you shrink the font far enough the scrollbar goes away (if it's not needed anymore). Cool, huh? All of this relies on plain old CSS (well, alright, not that plain), but the basic functioning is implemented in the browser. -- Rick Block (talk) 02:48, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

I did indeed notice that the font size feature works perfectly (scroll bar exists only if needed and font size contributes to its need). As you probably know, font size is important in keeping Heidi involved so we're always screwing around with it. We truly appreciate your attention to that subtle but important detail.

You know (I hope) that the idiosyncrasies that I've noted are in the spirit of de-bugging and not for criticism. Also there is a bit of jealousy involved in that I can't imagine coding such a template myself so I'll just just help with the de-bugging part and if anyone can screw-up using a template well... never mind.  ;-) --hydnjo talk 03:27, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I thought you probably knew about changing the font size already and had a use for it. And I do appreciate the idiosyncrasy discovery (I've updated the usage information at template:Navigation bar). The main reason I asked for your thoughts about this is not for technical feedback (not that I don't think you're capable, but I do realize this is pretty far afield from your expertise), but for a sanity check on the utility of such a beast. The gargantuan navigation boxes that seem to be turning up at the bottom of every article, and not just one but several, seem to me to be getting truly out of hand. Most of them are alphabetical or chronological lists of something or other (like the previous version of the 4x400m Olympic champions, see for example this version, which used to be at the bottom of every single one of the athletes on one of these winning teams). There are hundreds (perhaps thousands) of templates like this that are (IMO) effectively nothing but visual clutter. Looking at Steve Lewis (athlete) now, there's a "clutterish" template for the 400m Olympic champions and the nice compact one for the relay teams. This seems like a very significant leap to me, but I don't get the impression that anyone else particularly thinks so (your comment about jealously is encouraging). I don't have any particular issue with insecurities about my technical abilitiies (how's that for immodest!), but general usability is a much more personal sort of thing. The question I'm really asking is, is this something that might make the 'pedia significantly more usable - in your opinion? user:Samuel Wantman and I collaboratively developed template:Category TOC, which went from no uses to 500 uses in, like, a day or two. It feels to me like this one should catch on just as fast. Will it? Should it? -- Rick Block (talk) 04:33, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

I agree with your thoughts and think that you could put this question to a very pragmatic test:

1. Choose several articles (with a list) where you think that the the navigation bar template would be particularly useful.
2. Edit the article to display the original list immediately followed by the navigation bar display.
3. Point out the edit duplication on the article's talk page and solicit comments.
4. See what happens. I expect that the article watchers will prefer the nav bar format.
5. Take it from there... (for outside opinions).
   

As far as my unbiased thoughts as to the utility of the template, well I'd sure want it to be available but I don't fully understand the conflict that you're feeling about its acceptance. Does it need some sort of approval (tacit or otherwise) to list it somewhere and I don't even know the "somewhere" where it would be listed. So, how does become known, VP/T or what?. Catch up with this tomorrow, bye for now --hydnjo talk 05:14, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

I listed it at VP/T already requesting technical feedback, but before it was finished (didn't work for all browsers yet and showed up on a printed copy of the page), and the reception was sort of lukewarm (including one "it's useful, but ugly" which I haven't managed to get a followup on). I've spent the past week or so tweaking it to make it work for all browsers. There hasn't been much interest in the template's talk page. I'll list it at VP/T again and maybe some other template-ish places (like Wikipedia talk:Templates for deletion). -- Rick Block (talk) 13:43, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

I think that some exposure at VT/T is fine but disagree with your idea about TFD/talk. The template is a good piece of work that will find utilization. I think that if you, we or any others that are aware of the template use it for it's intended purpose then it will weave itself into the WP culture. I see no reason whatsoever to do a TFD test at this time, it just hasn't been around long enough to explore and demonstrate its utility. Let's just see "what links here" shows some months from now. Perhaps a list of all prior MH arguments links or a list of RFAs links or whatever that you think that would be better presented with this template. Definitely don't scuttle it. We know that its your "baby" to do with what you will but our considered feeling is to keep. --hydnjo talk 22:37, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Not TFD, TFD talk (TFD being a place template-interested folks might watch). I have no intention of deleting it. -- Rick Block (talk) 00:35, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

I'm flipping through my consciousness and am unable to come up with a list that I'd want to be scrollable rather than blanket viewed. Sorry I couldn't be more helpful on this one.  :-( --hydnjo talk 01:30, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

I envision the main use will be to shrink some of the very large (20 lines or more) "footer" templates, like this version of the 4x400m Olympic champions (now replaced by this). It's not exactly operational yet, but I'm working on using it for a category TOC for a VERY large category (like category:living people) that will look something like the following. -- Rick Block (talk) 14:12, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Very nice indeed and thanks for the demo above and in actual use. Scrolling across sure beats loading page by page. --hydnjo talk 18:55, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

FYI - template:LargeCategoryTOC is operational, in use at category:Living people. There's a discussion at Template talk:Navigation bar#CEASE AND DESIST. about the advisability of using horizontally scrolling navigation bars (you might be able to guess from the section name what at least one editor thinks about it). -- Rick Block (talk) 21:35, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

RD tomfoolery

Hi - The volume of in-jokes and other crap that is effectively newbie biting has increased to the point that numerous people were complaining about it at Wikipedia talk:Reference desk. The "regulars" (Light Current, in particular) have been essentially unwilling to admit there's a problem, so I simply removed an off-topic, off-color remark he added leading to this discussion on his talk page (he added his comment back, I deleted it again and initially put template:seriously on his page). I also deleted this comment of StuRat's after he refused to (per this exchange on his talk page). I suspect this is what's heated up the conversation. -- Rick Block (talk) 14:57, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Hi back to you Rick - Firstly please allow me to express my admiration (no foolin') of your valor in stepping into what was surely to become a pissing contest (OK mister admin, WTF are you gonna do about it?). Damn, the skins around here are so thin as to easily see beneath. Secondly, the comments that I'm dropping in here and there are in support of your effort (with which I wholeheartedly agree) even if at times I'm seeming to be a counterpoint. I'm trying, in my own way, to assure that you're not alone in your effort to stabilize the "good ol' RD" (in HC's terminology). I think that Lc is beginning to see the light (no pun intended) and I see that others are coming to "chime in" in (Ooh, in" in) support of your effort to add some community cohesiveness as to what is or is not appropriate. You've certainly raised our collective awareness about an issue that was surely gone astray. Even those who openly disagree with you will think twice before jumping in with the first "funny" that comes to mind. Your nature is to deal with these rough WP edges in an authoritative but understanding and persistent manner and as such you gain the respect of those sometimes adversarial folks who (to save face) continue the argument. You clearly recognize when your point has been made and positions have been softened. Your ability to then show appreciation for everyone's patience makes it seem like a win-win for all. Good job. --hydnjo talk 03:16, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

The initial responses were so truculent it just seemed like somebody needed to do something to shake things up a bit. I'm not sure it's over yet (and I suspect I may have made myself a permanent spot on a couple of folks' shit-lists), however at least on the surface things seem better for now. I really appreciate your help. There are a number of other folks helping in response to requests I made at WP:ESP and WP:AN. It's been, let's say, interesting. -- Rick Block (talk) 04:23, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

I think that type of escalation is a very bad idea. While you seemed somewhat willing to listen to the comments of the regulars, I suspect that calling in more Admins may bring in an Admin who won't do that, but will start deleting things right and left and/or blocking users, resulting in many contributors abandoning the Ref Desk. The Ref Desk regulars are attempting to deal with this issue, and should be given the chance to do so. StuRat 15:00, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Sorry

Sorry for editing your comment out; it was an accident. Apparently you happened to edit just before I was reverting A.Z.'s changing a signature to their own name. I put it back in when you reverted it back again. What a mixup! bibliomaniac15 Review? 03:18, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Yea, I noticed your correction which was going on at about the same time my rv. Thanks for your considerate message. --hydnjo talk 03:24, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Image:Sambrown2003.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Sambrown2003.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --Chowbok ☠ 18:20, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

• Please see the next section for my response.

Image:Sambrown2003.jpg and Image:Barney Oliver.jpg

• Image:Sambrown2003.jpg has been nonimated for deletion by me at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion#November 15. I have no desire to defend this upload at this time as the credentials put forth when I uploaded were mistaken by me to be adequate. As that seems not to be the case, the image should be deleted so as to keep all images more in line with our copyright concerns. I have been unable within the timeframe allowed to either find a suitable replacement or to have the copyright holder respond. Thanks for bringing this to my attention as I would not want to put WP in jeopardy of any copyright violation. --hydnjo talk 00:52, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

addendum copied from previous post at WP:IFD: Uploaded without proper permissions. Please delete as soon as possible as I uploaded this image thinking that I had proper permission. As I don't want this upload to be a reflection of my character about these things please so delete immediately. I will look for a replacement but am unable to acomplish this within the timeframe allowed. I think that it is best for the project at this time to delete the image that I uploaded in good faith but apparently improperly. Thanks, --hydnjo talk 00:22, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

non-valid permission - Sorry, please delete this image. I have no clue whatsoever if this is or is not a "free" image. Sam's friend and webmeister said to please use this image from her gallery and to please relable the image to something less "sterile". I did so in good faith. It now seems that the "permission" is not valid and that this project would be better served without the image. --hydnjo talk 23:55, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

As previously stated, my premise for "fair use" seems to be somewhat dodgy or perhaps suspect. As that position is in no one's interest I ask that this image be deleted as soon as someone can get to my reasoning of this. If I am mistaken, please respond, again as soon as possible, on my talk page. I have no desire to promote this or any other image under less than impeccable credentials. --hydnjo talk 03:02, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Shamelessly ripped from this publicity opportunity --hydnjo talk 03:15, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

• Similarly, I've nominated Image:Barney Oliver.jpg for speedy deletion as I only have the webmasters permission to publish at WP. He was only reluctant to seek the copyright holder's (next of kin's) permission so as to preclude further anguish to the family. As he said that he was representing the family's best interest, I took him at his word. As this seems at this time to be an inadequate reason for publication of this image, I am requesting that it be deleted. --hydnjo talk 01:05, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Oh, Hi, and Thanks.

Thanks, it's nice to know that someone is watching.

Like my namesake, I am setting out on an adventure: I've no idea where it will end, but am just enjoying the journey through an unknown land :-). If I can kill a few trolls on the way, so much the better.

Thanks for the pointers, should prove usefulBilbo B 19:36, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Not feeding ref desk trolls?

Do you really think simply "not feeding the trolls" will help? My opinion is that the inappropriate behaviors on the ref desk have been ignored long enough, and that constructive criticism is not being listened to. I am done having long arguments, to be sure, but I believe I will start removing coments that clearly harm the reference desk. Can I ask if you think this is a good idea, and if not why not? Thanks. -- SCZenz 06:39, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

I should have made myself more clear under the "I don't like what you have written..." header. The suggestion about ignoring silliness was intended to apply at the RD/talk only, not at the RD itself, I'll do an addendum to clarify. I think that some users throws a lot of stuff at the RD/talk as bait for their agenda and you have had to spend a huge amout of time responding thus remaining silent at some point, and saying so, may leave them talking to themselves. I think that your stepping into this situation is admirable and I thank you for doing so. Regarding the RD itself, I believe that removing inappropriate comments is appropriate and I support you. I also believe that some users will respond by escalating their outrage on the talk page thus trying to tie us all up dealing with and explaining the removal. So again, after explaing your reason for removal, you need not allow yourself to be dragged into a long debate about it.

I added the next "I don't like..." header unwisely in that again I was referring to the RD/talk page and I'll try to clarify that as well. Thanks for bringing this to my attention, I should have been more expansive about my suggestion. --hydnjo talk 16:51, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

There is no reason to treat this situation with kid gloves. If they can't handle their precious seagull questions and insider jokes being deleted from the refrence desk, they might quit using it. JBKramer 17:21, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

I agree with you and have added context under the "I dont like what you have written, but I'm not going to delete it" header to clarify my meaning. I should have done that sooner, sorry. --hydnjo talk 19:40, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments. I took a long time trying to explain things precisely because I know that once we start removing comments, there will be an escalating shitstorm that may result in good users getting frustrated and leaving. I see nothing left I can do, however; at this point doing the right things is more important than avoiding stepping on toes. Can you take a look at User:SCZenz/Reference desk removals, which I intend to link as I start removing comments, and give me some feedback on the presentation or any points I missed? -- SCZenz 18:07, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

I didn't realize that you were "shooting" as a "sheriff" - good for you! My first read looks good. I'll read more carefully later - gotta go. Oh, you may want to run it by HC as well. --hydnjo talk 19:59, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Blockle

I didnt realise it was a sock. If so then of course I believe ANY contributions may be deleted unilaterally. So be my guest! 8-) --Light current 15:00, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Ref Desk qu

Hey sorry I didn't mean to get you all angry like that. Yeah I do have a different username, but I felt as feelings would be pretty strong on this subject I didn't want to have to have my name (which I use on places apart from on here) 'blacklisted' here or elsewhere. I am only trying to find out the answers to this question because I find it interesting. Also, if you would let me know what it was exactly you found offensive about the question (I tried to explain myself as fully as possible without going POV) that'd be helpful :) --Lightspeaker 00:48, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Your question encourages a debate rather than a factual answer. The reference desk was put in place to help folks (regulars or not) to find answers to which there is an expectation of a factual answer. Questions such as "is there a god" or other questions requiring opinion rather than fact have no place on the RD. I agree that the question that you posed would result in a rich dialogue, it would still to me seem a matter of opinion rather than fact. To treat such a question in a fleshed-out debate is of course possible but not within the confines of the RD. Thanks for coming here to express your opinion, I like that kind of openness. --hydnjo talk 01:04, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Ok thanks I put down what I hope was a more factual question before I read this reply but if that's no good then no worries, I will leave it. --Lightspeaker 01:11, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

You did indeed, thanks for that.  ;-) --hydnjo talk 01:14, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Smiley Award

Feel free to place this award on your user page, as a token of appreciation for your contributions. If you're willing to help spread the good cheer to others, please see the project page for the Random Smiley Award at: User:Pedia-I/SmileyAward

Thanks

For all your work keeping the RD neat, on-topic, respectful, accurate and helpful! Anchoress 03:46, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Re: Main page link proposal

To wrap up this issue, I've posted the following message to David Levy:

User talk:David Levy#Consensus on Main Page links

 The Transhumanist   03:49, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Science RD:Funny answers

Hi, I didn't really mean geesh - this place is really screwed up and I know just how to fix it but I chose to keep quite with an OK. Your OK back to you WC.  :-) cheers me back up -- WikiCheng | Talk 03:49, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Comments on RD talk page

Just wanted to say that your recent comments on the RD talk page about Light current's responses is beginning to look like harassment to me. If you disagree with his responses, wouldn't it be more appropriate to raise your concerns on his talk page ? What do you hope to achieve by berating him in public ? Gandalf61 09:56, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Reference desk strategy, help needed

As a user who has expressed interest in dealing with misuse of the reference desk, you may be interested in my comments at Wikipedia talk:Reference desk#Where we stand and my new strategy for dealing with the problem at User:SCZenz/Reference desk comments. It will take help from many people in order to make it clear which behaviors aren't appropriate. -- SCZenz 02:17, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Mainpage date on FAs

Hi, hydnjo. Someone else mentioned that you once (or still?) did the switching over of template on FA article talk pages once they reached the mainpage, but there may be a BOT doing that job now. Because the entire process of promoting/demoting FAs at FAC/FAR is somewhat labor intensive, we're trying to standardize a template to record all of the various pieces. Could you drop a note to Yomangani (talk · contribs) as to whether the change from "mainpage date to come" to "mainpage date" is done manually, or is handled by a bot? Thanks for any help, Sandy (Talk) 00:23, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

We've since figured out that SmthManly adds the "to come" date (manually), and the Schutz BOT updates it to appeared on by removing the "to come" portion - perhaps that's all we need to know for now? Thanks for the feedback on Yomangani's page. Sandy (Talk) 13:01, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the sig. Didn't mean for you to come back to it. I can just sign it now if you like. --Justanother 04:27, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Feel free to do whatever makes sense to you. I was just trying to avert any confusion as to who was saying what and to who(m)  ;-) --hydnjo talk 04:37, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Honors done

Thanks for doing that. I'm glad that you weren't bothered by my suggestion. :) -- SCZenz 02:22, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Happy Holidays!!

And a merry xmas to your family! - Abscissa 17:44, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

I'll tack on my greeting here too; Merry Christmas! --Lightspeaker 14:34, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

To all of the good folks on Wikipedia:

So this is Christmas, And what have you done, Another year over, A new one just begun. And so this is Christmas, I hope you have fun, The near and the dear ones, The old and the young.

A very merry Christmas, And a happy New Year, Let's hope it's a good one, Without any fear.

And so this is Christmas, For weak and for strong, For rich and the poor ones, The war is so long. And so happy Christmas, For black and for white, For yellow and red ones, Let's stop all the fight.

A very merry Christmas, And a happy New Year, Let's hope it's a good one, Without any fear.

And so this is Christmas, And what have we done, Another year over, A new one just begun. And so happy Christmas, We hope you have fun, The near and the dear ones, The old and the young.

A very merry Christmas, And a happy New Year, Let's hope it's a good one, Without any fear.

And so this is Christmas, And what have we done, Another year over, A new one just begun.

HAPPY CHRISTMAS TO ALL OF YOU! from hydnjo :)

Heidi & I thank you and wish you all well.  :-)

Sounds like Slade! Merry Xmas!! ?-|--Light current 01:16, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Intentional?

[1] mistake or something I don't see yet? Hipocrite - «Talk» 04:58, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, wondering what's up too. Was going to revert, but what's up? Most of those responses seem fine. --Wooty Woot? contribs 05:02, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Me three. Scratching ma head. Check other recent conts, block log? Anchoress 05:04, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

I guess I was not the only one puzzled by your removal of the sections. I reverted (before I saw this discussion), more than happy to discuss it, and am interested to hear the reason you removed those sections. --TeaDrinker 05:07, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Well one thing I noticed is that the reversion by Hydnjo removed edits by three different editors, which I didn't notice at first. I was scratching my head wondering how the editor with the long D name managed to make so many additions at once without edit conflicts, lol. But s/he didn't. Perhaps it was a malformed vandalism revert that had already been reverted, or was due to an old cache or something. Anchoress 05:16, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

• Sorry that I didn't see all of this sooner as I have no clue whatsoever so I'm scratching my head along with you folks. *thinking - thinking - thinking* Nope, still no clue! Seven comments by Dysmorodrepanis, one by WikiCheng and one by BenC7 and all under my sig!!!!! Not even a contiguous block of edits which could be seen as some slip of the finger. Thanks y'all for your collective concern and special thanks to TeaDrinker for rving 8 minutes later. --hydnjo talk 13:07, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Note to myself and others: From my edit history,

• 00:56, 28 December 2006 (hist) (diff) Wikipedia:Reference desk/Science

indicates an edit to no particular section on RD/S (whole page edit?). Hmmm, --hydnjo talk 14:15, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

I vote absent minded mistake (edited an old version, typed _, hit save), or always present database errors. Hipocrite - «Talk» 01:07, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Re: RefDeskBot

		The Minor Barnstar
		Thanks for adding the date headers on the Reference Desks - it was a real time saver (and stress buster) for me, when I was annoyed enough at the bot not working quickly enough! Thanks, and I want to let you know I appreciate it, with this barnstar Martinp23 01:26, 29 December 2006 (UTC)