User talk:The Mu - Revision history

Kermit1234: how'd you did that?

2007-12-05T02:58:26Z

how'd you did that?

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:58, 5 December 2007
Line 115:		Line 115:

	I'm moving The Funny Wiki back to the one you made. I need your help on an editing probablem, and my FireFTP Password. {{User:The thing/sig}} 21:26, 10 August 2007 (UTC)		I'm moving The Funny Wiki back to the one you made. I need your help on an editing probablem, and my FireFTP Password. {{User:The thing/sig}} 21:26, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
		+
		+	== How did you do that? ==
		+	i'm just wondering how you made your userboxes oval-y. you put userOVAL instead of userBOX, but how did you format the pictures in them?
		+	Thanks for answering. (in advance)
		+	{{User:Kermit1234/sig}} 02:58, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

The thing: /**/Funny Wiki

2007-08-10T21:26:00Z

: Funny Wiki

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:26, 10 August 2007
Line 111:		Line 111:
	:Interestingly enough, no. Although I am a fan of Earthbound, my username is not derived from that but rather of an alternate spelling of the word "moo." ¤ {{User:The Mu/sig}} 19:23, 28 May 2007 (UTC)		:Interestingly enough, no. Although I am a fan of Earthbound, my username is not derived from that but rather of an alternate spelling of the word "moo." ¤ {{User:The Mu/sig}} 19:23, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
	::Well, it still pretty cool. ^_^ [[User:Neox\|Neox]]		::Well, it still pretty cool. ^_^ [[User:Neox\|Neox]]
		+
		+	== Funny Wiki ==
		+
		+	I'm moving The Funny Wiki back to the one you made. I need your help on an editing probablem, and my FireFTP Password. {{User:The thing/sig}} 21:26, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Neox: /* Umma-umma-umm... */

2007-07-21T17:03:40Z

Umma-umma-umm...

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:03, 21 July 2007
Line 110:		Line 110:
	The Mu, besides being a Sonic fan (like me), did the inspiration for your username come from Earthbound? You know, Earthbound. Ness? The Mu as in Mu training? [[User:Neox\|Neox]]		The Mu, besides being a Sonic fan (like me), did the inspiration for your username come from Earthbound? You know, Earthbound. Ness? The Mu as in Mu training? [[User:Neox\|Neox]]
	:Interestingly enough, no. Although I am a fan of Earthbound, my username is not derived from that but rather of an alternate spelling of the word "moo." ¤ {{User:The Mu/sig}} 19:23, 28 May 2007 (UTC)		:Interestingly enough, no. Although I am a fan of Earthbound, my username is not derived from that but rather of an alternate spelling of the word "moo." ¤ {{User:The Mu/sig}} 19:23, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
		+	::Well, it still pretty cool. ^_^ [[User:Neox\|Neox]]

The Mu: /* Umma-umma-umm... */

2007-05-28T19:23:38Z

Umma-umma-umm...

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:23, 28 May 2007
Line 109:		Line 109:
	This might not be suitable for a discussion page, but...		This might not be suitable for a discussion page, but...
	The Mu, besides being a Sonic fan (like me), did the inspiration for your username come from Earthbound? You know, Earthbound. Ness? The Mu as in Mu training? [[User:Neox\|Neox]]		The Mu, besides being a Sonic fan (like me), did the inspiration for your username come from Earthbound? You know, Earthbound. Ness? The Mu as in Mu training? [[User:Neox\|Neox]]
		+	:Interestingly enough, no. Although I am a fan of Earthbound, my username is not derived from that but rather of an alternate spelling of the word "moo." ¤ {{User:The Mu/sig}} 19:23, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Neox: /**/Umma-umma-umm...

2007-05-28T15:18:27Z

: Umma-umma-umm...

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:18, 28 May 2007
Line 104:		Line 104:

	:Parsing the HTML code won't work here. My sig had gotten too complex for its own good. As such, I reverted it. ¤ {{User:The Mu/sig}} 21:33, 23 May 2007 (UTC)		:Parsing the HTML code won't work here. My sig had gotten too complex for its own good. As such, I reverted it. ¤ {{User:The Mu/sig}} 21:33, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
		+
		+	== Umma-umma-umm... ==
		+
		+	This might not be suitable for a discussion page, but...
		+	The Mu, besides being a Sonic fan (like me), did the inspiration for your username come from Earthbound? You know, Earthbound. Ness? The Mu as in Mu training? [[User:Neox\|Neox]]

Ten Ten: /* Signature Problem */

2007-05-23T21:34:07Z

Signature Problem

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:34, 23 May 2007
Line 101:		Line 101:
	== Signature Problem ==		== Signature Problem ==

-	I found out the problem with your new addition to your signature - somehow the code you had written was causing an empty ~~<li>~~</li> tag to be inserted into your signature. I'm afraid I don't know the cause of this, but you seem like a pretty smart person. I think you can fix it.{{User:Ten Ten/sig}} 21:32, 23 May 2007 (UTC)	+	I found out the problem with your new addition to your signature - somehow the code you had written was causing an empty </li> tag to be inserted into your signature. I'm afraid I don't know the cause of this, but you seem like a pretty smart person. I think you can fix it.{{User:Ten Ten/sig}} 21:32, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

	:Parsing the HTML code won't work here. My sig had gotten too complex for its own good. As such, I reverted it. ¤ {{User:The Mu/sig}} 21:33, 23 May 2007 (UTC)		:Parsing the HTML code won't work here. My sig had gotten too complex for its own good. As such, I reverted it. ¤ {{User:The Mu/sig}} 21:33, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

The Mu: /* Signature Problem */

2007-05-23T21:33:29Z

Signature Problem

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:33, 23 May 2007
Line 102:		Line 102:

	I found out the problem with your new addition to your signature - somehow the code you had written was causing an empty <li></li> tag to be inserted into your signature. I'm afraid I don't know the cause of this, but you seem like a pretty smart person. I think you can fix it.{{User:Ten Ten/sig}} 21:32, 23 May 2007 (UTC)		I found out the problem with your new addition to your signature - somehow the code you had written was causing an empty <li></li> tag to be inserted into your signature. I'm afraid I don't know the cause of this, but you seem like a pretty smart person. I think you can fix it.{{User:Ten Ten/sig}} 21:32, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
		+
		+	:Parsing the HTML code won't work here. My sig had gotten too complex for its own good. As such, I reverted it. ¤ {{User:The Mu/sig}} 21:33, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Ten Ten: Found the problem

2007-05-23T21:32:24Z

Found the problem

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:32, 23 May 2007
Line 98:		Line 98:

	Just wanted to thank you for having my back there. To paraphrase Bart Simpson: "Go, The Mu! Way to cite precedent!" --[[User:Jnelson09\|Jnelson09]] 03:32, 21 May 2007 (UTC)		Just wanted to thank you for having my back there. To paraphrase Bart Simpson: "Go, The Mu! Way to cite precedent!" --[[User:Jnelson09\|Jnelson09]] 03:32, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
		+
		+	== Signature Problem ==
		+
		+	I found out the problem with your new addition to your signature - somehow the code you had written was causing an empty <li></li> tag to be inserted into your signature. I'm afraid I don't know the cause of this, but you seem like a pretty smart person. I think you can fix it.{{User:Ten Ten/sig}} 21:32, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Jnelson09: /**/Fthoom-Bang

2007-05-21T03:32:23Z

: Fthoom-Bang

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:32, 21 May 2007
Line 94:		Line 94:
	:::::Well, this is a trivial thing to argue about, but... I like to be strict in following rules of grammar in an encyclopedic reference such as hrwiki.com. But language is a fluid thing and often usage diverges from "rules". IMHO, current common usage should prevail. (It eventually does, even if it takes dictionaries a decade to catch up). As for this specific case, I don't feel strongly either way, just some of the wordings felt a little awkward to me as I stated in the previous post.{{User:Bryanc/sig}} 20:37, 18 May 2007 (UTC)		:::::Well, this is a trivial thing to argue about, but... I like to be strict in following rules of grammar in an encyclopedic reference such as hrwiki.com. But language is a fluid thing and often usage diverges from "rules". IMHO, current common usage should prevail. (It eventually does, even if it takes dictionaries a decade to catch up). As for this specific case, I don't feel strongly either way, just some of the wordings felt a little awkward to me as I stated in the previous post.{{User:Bryanc/sig}} 20:37, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
	::::::This is why I began by saying I was not contesting his edits, just letting him know that unless the clarity of that specific example is improved, simply replacing a correctly-used word with another correctly-used word is hardly an effect use of his time and skills. {{User:Qermaq/sig}} 20:42, 18 May 2007 (UTC)		::::::This is why I began by saying I was not contesting his edits, just letting him know that unless the clarity of that specific example is improved, simply replacing a correctly-used word with another correctly-used word is hardly an effect use of his time and skills. {{User:Qermaq/sig}} 20:42, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
		+
		+	== [[Fthoom-Bang]] ==
		+
		+	Just wanted to thank you for having my back there. To paraphrase Bart Simpson: "Go, The Mu! Way to cite precedent!" --[[User:Jnelson09\|Jnelson09]] 03:32, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Qermaq: /* This page comprises this thread... */ yep

2007-05-18T20:42:03Z

This page comprises this thread...: yep

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:42, 18 May 2007
Line 93:		Line 93:
	::::Certainly yes. You are the critic they warned about. However, that note is also implicitly saying that such criticism is not entirely supported by the realities of modern usage. {{User:Qermaq/sig}} 20:31, 18 May 2007 (UTC)		::::Certainly yes. You are the critic they warned about. However, that note is also implicitly saying that such criticism is not entirely supported by the realities of modern usage. {{User:Qermaq/sig}} 20:31, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
	:::::Well, this is a trivial thing to argue about, but... I like to be strict in following rules of grammar in an encyclopedic reference such as hrwiki.com. But language is a fluid thing and often usage diverges from "rules". IMHO, current common usage should prevail. (It eventually does, even if it takes dictionaries a decade to catch up). As for this specific case, I don't feel strongly either way, just some of the wordings felt a little awkward to me as I stated in the previous post.{{User:Bryanc/sig}} 20:37, 18 May 2007 (UTC)		:::::Well, this is a trivial thing to argue about, but... I like to be strict in following rules of grammar in an encyclopedic reference such as hrwiki.com. But language is a fluid thing and often usage diverges from "rules". IMHO, current common usage should prevail. (It eventually does, even if it takes dictionaries a decade to catch up). As for this specific case, I don't feel strongly either way, just some of the wordings felt a little awkward to me as I stated in the previous post.{{User:Bryanc/sig}} 20:37, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
		+	::::::This is why I began by saying I was not contesting his edits, just letting him know that unless the clarity of that specific example is improved, simply replacing a correctly-used word with another correctly-used word is hardly an effect use of his time and skills. {{User:Qermaq/sig}} 20:42, 18 May 2007 (UTC)