|
|
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| - | == Some links to help get you started ==
| + | There's no archive here, matey. {{User:That'sBupkis/sig}} |
| - | '''Here are some resources to help familiarize yourself with the [[HRWiki:About|Homestar Runner Wiki]]:'''
| + | |
| - | *Before you do any significant editing, be sure to read our [[HRWiki:Standards|wiki standards]] and our other [[:Category:HRWiki Policy|policies]].
| + | |
| - | *If you need general information, editing tips, or answers to [[HRWiki:FAQ|frequently asked questions]], check out the various [[Help:Contents|help]] pages.
| + | |
| - | *To practice editing, head over to the [[HRWiki:Sandbox|sandbox]].
| + | |
| - | *If you have a question that isn't addressed on a help page, you can ask it on the [[HRWiki talk:FAQ|FAQ talk page]].
| + | |
| - | ----
| + | |
| - | '''To get plugged in to the community:'''
| + | |
| - | *Let us know a little bit about yourself on your [[User:Jc iindyysgvxc|user page]]. (Please see the rules and guidelines for your [[HRWiki:User space|user space]] first.)
| + | |
| - | *If you're not sure what you can do to help out, head over to [[HRWiki:The Stick|The Stick]].
| + | |
| - | *If you're looking for more community interaction, you can also register over at our <span class="plainlinks">[http://forum.hrwiki.org forum]</span>, or if you're feeling creative, you can register separately at the [[HRFWiki:|fanstuff wiki]].
| + | |
| - | *If you see an update on [[HR:|homestarrunner.com]] that isn't listed on the [[Main Page]], put it up [[H*R.com updates|here]].
| + | |
| - | *To sign and timestamp a post on a [[HRWiki:Talk page etiquette|talk page]], type four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>).
| + | |
| - | *Above all, be sure to '''[[HRWiki:Standards#Be bold, but know when not to be|be bold]]''' and have fun!
| + | |
| - | <div style="border-top:1px solid #aaa;background:#f4f4f4;border-bottom:1px solid #aaa;font-size:80%;line-height:110%;padding: 0.5em;margin-top:1.5em;margin-bottom:2em">The information above is provided as a service upon registration. Once you have checked out all the links, please feel free to delete it.</div>
| + | |
| - | | + | |
| - | == HW ==
| + | |
| - | | + | |
| - | Hello, I am DavidMichael. I will be messaging everyone with this message. Do not reply. Anyways, Happy Halloween! {{User:DavidMichael/sig}}
| + | |
| - | | + | |
| - | == Profanity? ==
| + | |
| - | | + | |
| - | Hi! Just saying, though not extremly vulgar in your case, please don't swear in subject bars. We all get that tense some times, but it really distracts us on the recent changes.. Keep up the good work anyway and happy Decemberween. --[[User:Jellote|Jellote wuz here]] 02:49, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
| + | |
| - | | + | |
| - | == Your recent message to anonymous user ==
| + | |
| - | | + | |
| - | I deleted a message you left for an anonymous user saying "How dare you!" I honestly have no idea what on earth you were talking about. I can find no evidence that the anon made any inappropriate contributions at all, and even if he/she did, that message is totally the wrong way to go about it. If an anon vandalises a page, please use {{tl|test}} to warn the user. Even then, make sure it's actually vandalism. Leaving and indignant and unclear message like yours won't do any good at all, so please don't do it again. Thanks. {{User:Heimstern Läufer/sig}} 08:42, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
| + | |
| - | | + | |
| - | :Well, the anonymous user edited a page that had not been edited for nine months. I can get quite annoyed when someone edits a long-untouched page for no particular reason. Now the anon's edits have caused a miniature edit war. Oh, and I believe the anon user should create an account. [[User:Jc iindyysgvxc|Jc iindyysgvxc]] 20:43, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
| + | |
| - | ::There's nothing wrong with editing a page that hasn't been edited in a while. And it's not "for no particular reason"; the reason is that the anon thought there was something that should be added. The fact that this happened to cause a slight editing dispute is no fault of the anon's. Furthermore, while we do like for people to get accounts, there's nothing at all wrong with editing anonymously. If you're going to take offence at anons who edit pages that haven't been edited in a while, perhaps you should simply refrain from talking to anons at all, because it's not OK to post indignant messages for people who haven't done anything wrong. {{User:Heimstern Läufer/sig}} 00:55, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
| + | |
| - | | + | |
| - | | + | |
| - | == May I ask... ==
| + | |
| - | Was there consensus on the [[Nicknames]] page to change every instance of self-nicknaming from the character's name to "himself"? You left no reason at all and the talk page says nothing, as well... --{{User:Homsar Jean/sig}} 23:13, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
| + | |
| - | | + | |
| - | == Real topic names ==
| + | |
| - | | + | |
| - | Hey there, RickTommy. I've noticed at least half a dozen times that you've just put "{{p|l=http://www.hrwiki.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Main_Page&diff=693800&oldid=693501 Question}}" in the subject/headline field when starting a new topic. This is less than ideal because it doesn't give someone reading the headline from recent changes or a watchlist some idea of what to expect (or perhaps ignore), it makes it difficult to search for specific topics, and it doesn't mesh well with the page history. Please use a {{p|l=http://www.hrwiki.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Main_Page&diff=693825&oldid=693817 real topic name}} in the subject/headline field when starting a new topic. It will make things much clearer and useful. Thanks one million! — [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 18:10, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
| + | |
| - | :Reviving this to point out that [http://hrwiki.org/w/index.php?title=HRWiki_talk%3AToon_loading_problems&diff=700156&oldid=700149 What...] is not really a good topic name, either. Please try to think of something that actually describes in some detail the subject you're discussing. Thanks. {{User:Heimstern Läufer/sig}} 08:41, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
| + | |
| - | | + | |
| - | == "Changey" sig ==
| + | |
| - | With the text fading from one color to another? {{User:That'sBupkis/sig}} 00:50, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
| + | |
| - | :Mmm...hmmm. [[User:RickTommy|RickTommy]] [[User talk:RickTommy|talk]] [[Image:slang.PNG|50px]] 00:51, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
| + | |
| - | ::Or did you want your sig to be the same color and font as Heimstern's? And if it's two fading colors you want, just tell which two colors and I'll get to work on it. {{User:That'sBupkis/sig}} 00:56, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
| + | |
| - | | + | |
| - | == Little questions ==
| + | |
| - | | + | |
| - | Hey RickTommy. When it comes to site maintenance, you don't need to ask questions about every little behind-the-scenes detail. The answer to such questions (as far as you're concerned) is typically "because we need to" and doesn't involve any decisions related to the content of the knowledge base. Cheers. — [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 03:37, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
| + | |
| - | | + | |
| - | == Userboxes ==
| + | |
| - | | + | |
| - | I noticed your userboxes are placed by themselves, it's the reason why they're messed up like that. Do you need help? {{User:ColdReactive/sig}} 12:29, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
| + | |
| - | | + | |
| - | :Yes. Oui. Ja. Hai. Si. {{User:RickTommy/sig}} 12:38, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
| + | |
| - | ::Notice the difference between your current code you use and the below code? If you do not, I can point it out to you. {{User:ColdReactive/sig}} 12:44, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
| + | |
| - | ::<blockquote><div class="usermessage" style="padding:0px;background:transparent;border:0px;border-bottom:3px solid #0000FF;margin-left:-13px;padding-left:12px">Code:</div><code><nowiki>{{userboxtop}}</nowiki><br /><br /><nowiki>
| + | |
| - | | + | |
| - | {{userbox|border=red|mainbkgd=yellow|codebkg=white|code=NOSTORE|msg=Unfortunately, I do not own anything from the store. And I don't think I'll be able to until I get my own [[credit card]] (which won't be for another year).}}</nowiki><br /><br /><nowiki>
| + | |
| - | | + | |
| - | {{userbox | border=black | mainbkgd=red | codebkgd=white | code=[[Image:Sbcg4ap105 235x225.png|45px]] | msg= This user got '''Maximum Awesomeness''' in [[8-Bit Is Enough]].}}</nowiki><br /><br /><nowiki>
| + | |
| - | | + | |
| - | {{userbox | border=#FC3 | mainbkgd=#FFF | codebkgd=#39F | codecolor=#F00 | code=2007 | msg=This user discovered the H*R site in '''2007'''.}}</nowiki><br /><br /><nowiki>
| + | |
| - | | + | |
| - | |}</nowiki></code></blockquote>
| + | |
| - | | + | |
| - | == 2 years ==
| + | |
| - | | + | |
| - | Please do not put random links in other peoples' talk posts. It's disruptive and not terribly funny - in addition, we have a rule not to edit other people's posts without a VERY good reason. --{{User:Jay/sig}} 10:51, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
| + | |
| - | :Going to revive this topic a bit. Along the same lines, linking within article text to the words "2 years" when the text has nothing to do with that email is illogical and misleading, and honestly, it's not even funny. Don't do it again, please. {{User:Heimstern Läufer/sig}} 00:16, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
| + | |
| - | | + | |
| - | == Subtitles ==
| + | |
| - | | + | |
| - | Hey RickTommy, you've been doing a lot of subtitles recently which is awesome. But I do wonder about the quality. For example, [http://www.hrwiki.org/w/index.php?title=Subtitles:sbemail136/fr&diff=693502&oldid=693495 this] is how a native speaker edited one of your French subtitles. I see that now you've also tried your hands at German and Turkish subtitles. Please have a read of the [[HRWiki:Subtitles#Translating_Subtitles|translation guidelines]]. Right in the first paragraph it says "We ask that only skilled users of a language (native speakers or advanced students with real-life experience using the language) create translations for the wiki." Do you fall into that category?{{User:Loafing/sig}} 06:58, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
| + | |
| - | :Hey, reviving this topic to remind you: you should use {{tl|fixtranslation}} on all your French subs so Meuhcoin or another native French speaker can check them. Thanks. {{User:Heimstern Läufer/sig}} 11:49, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
| + | |
| - | ::Bump. Please do this. Thank you. {{User:Heimstern Läufer/sig}} 10:41, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
| + | |
| - | | + | |
| - | == Feeding the trolls ==
| + | |
| - | | + | |
| - | Hey, RickTommy. When a troll comes along and starts vandalizing, it's best not to panic and {{p|l={{fullurl:User_talk:RickTommy|curid=50327&diff=699957&oldid=699772&rcid=660705}} report}} {{p|l={{fullurl:Talk:Main_Page&curid=710|diff=699956&oldid=699864&rcid=660704}} it}} everywhere. It's ''especially'' not good to provoke them. That is what's called [[Meta:What_is_a_troll%3F#Not_feeding_the_trolls|feeding the trolls]], and only eggs them on. What's best to do is just revert, revert, revert, and wait until either he he's done, or a sysop handles him. Just a little advice, {{User:StrongAwesome74/sig}} 03:29, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
| + | |
| - | :Warning another user about not feeding the trolls also fuels trolls. Use e-mail next time. {{User:ColdReactive/sig}} 03:36, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
| + | |
| - | ::I wouldn't say it was unresonable, and it's not like I informed '''during''' the attack. I waited until after. Besides, I don't believe RickTommy has an email address saved in his account, as I see no link to "email this user". {{User:StrongAwesome74/sig}} 03:46, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
| + | |
| - | :::You're correct; he has not entered an email address, so it would not have been possible to email him. As for vandalism, usually the best course of action is to report it in the [[HRW:IRC|chat channel]]. There's almost always a sysop around or someone who knows where to find one. — [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 03:51, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
| + | |
| - | | + | |
| - | == Constant questions ==
| + | |
| - | | + | |
| - | Okay, I'm not sure how to phrase this, so let's just go with the direct route: You've ''got'' to stop constantly asking irrelevant questions. Here is a handy guide to help you out:
| + | |
| - | ;Why hasn't article ______ been updated?:Because ''you'' haven't fixed it yet. It's a wiki. If an article needs to be updated, don't ask why it hasn't been updated, just update it. If you see a mistake that needs to be fixed, don't ask why it hasn't been fixed, just fix it.
| + | |
| - | ;Why did admin ______ do what he did?:Whatever it was, most likely it was or will be discussed with other admins. The action was either to keep the wiki tidy or to enforce one of our policies. You are not an admin, so unless it's something that ''directly'' affects you (which most things don't), you don't need to concern yourself with it.
| + | |
| - | ;Why hasn't admin ______ done ______ yet?:Because he hasn't gotten to it. Administration of the wikis and forum is not a paid job. We take care of things when we can. Things that are intricate or technical take longer.
| + | |
| - | ;Why did we have server maintenance?:Because it needed to be done. We try to let people know when there will be maintenance as a courtesy, but as long as server interruptions are infrequent and minor, it is not a topic for discussion.
| + | |
| - | ;Why ________________________________?:Sometimes there is no good answer. This is just a wiki about dumb animal characters and you probably shouldn't worry about it.
| + | |
| - | I hope that helps. If you have a question that begins with ''who, what, when,'' or ''where,'' and it refers to a ''toon,'' then feel free to ask on an appropriate talk page. Otherwise, please refer to the above. Cheers. — [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 00:20, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
| + | |
| - | :Hey, RickTommy. Look at {{p|l={{fullurl:User talk:ColdReactive|diff=700601&oldid=700379}} this post of yours}}. Notice the third sentence there? It's a ''why'' question, one you should not be asking. I realize you were trying to relate to him, but it is not your place to confront other users in this manner, and so it's best if you please leave these kinds of things to the admins. Thanks. — [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 22:37, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
| + | |
| - | ::{{p|l={{FULLURL:HRWiki:Subtitles/Data|diff=707348&oldid=672240}} Because ''you'' haven't fixed it yet.}} Sheesh, it's the first answer in the list here. — [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 04:01, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
| + | |
| - | | + | |
| - | == featured article ==
| + | |
| - | | + | |
| - | Hey there RickTommy.I have been noticing that you've been suggesting a lot of ideas for [[HRWiki:Featured Article Selection|the weeks featured article]] a lot.It's good that you're helping out,but could you tone it down a bit.You're clogging up the Recent Changes.Don't worry,I went on an editing spree once, but people just got mad at me, so I stopped, and I recommend you stop too
| + | |
| - | | + | |
| - | In conclusion, please disregard any and all negative comments or negative burning you may here or experience,<strike> on Decmeberween</strike> if you edit too much
| + | |
| - | | + | |
| - | Stealthily Yours, {{User:Wasd98/sig}} 14:27, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
| + | |
| - | :Hi, RickTommy. Every week almost as soon as the new FA comes up, you suggest a new one for the week 10 weeks away. Do you realize you're kind of hogging all the suggestions for yourself? You really should sometimes let someone else make the first suggestion. It doesn't have to be you every week. Please leave some chances for others. Thanks. {{User:Heimstern Läufer/sig}} 00:26, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
| + | |
| - | ::Hello again, RickTommy. Since you have failed to listen to what I've said, I am changing this from a suggestion to an order. Do not continue making the first suggestion each week as soon as it's ten weeks away. If you do, I will feel free to revert your edits. It's only fair for someone else to have the first turn sometimes. Thanks. {{User:Heimstern Läufer/sig}} 12:18, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
| + | |
| - | | + | |
| - | ==Account==
| + | |
| - | Don't want to, don't need to. --[[Special:Contributions/209.148.176.136|209.148.176.136]] 12:41, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
| + | |
| - | :I don't need an account. I can do everything I need to do without an account. Now stop pestering me. --[[Special:Contributions/209.148.176.136|209.148.176.136]] 01:58, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
| + | |
| - | ::I'm going to have to enforce this, RickTommy. Please don't repeatedly ask anons to get accounts. It's annoying. {{User:Heimstern Läufer/sig}} 04:59, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
| + | |
| - | I have an account now. Happy? --[[User:Kingdom Stars|Kingdom Stars]] 21:37, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
| + | |
| - | | + | |
| - | == Request for suppression ==
| + | |
| - | | + | |
| - | Please suppress the edit I made to Ar2nF's talk page. {{User:RickTommy/sig}} 12:23, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
| + | |
| - | :I'll do it this once, but I really don't want this to become a habit. Please think carefully about what edits you're going to make before you make them so that they won't have to be removed later. — [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 15:37, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
| + | |
| - | | + | |
| - | == Youtube Sub. ==
| + | |
| - | | + | |
| - | Thanks for the sub, I hope it's a subway melt-like sub. I love that thing. {{User:ColdReactive/sig}} 13:39, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
| + | |
| - | :No probalo! {{User:RickTommy/sig}} 02:24, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
| + | |
| - | | + | |
| - | == Featured article templates ==
| + | |
| - | | + | |
| - | There is no rule that says that the featured article template has to be created right before the feature goes live. If anything, creating it early is a good thing – it means there's time to write the summary and clean it up, 'cause we're not in a mad rush to get it done in time. So things like {{pl|l=http://www.hrwiki.org/w/index.php?title=HRWiki:Featured_article_for_2010,_week_27&diff=prev&oldid=705053 this}} and {{pl|l=http://www.hrwiki.org/w/index.php?title=HRWiki:Featured_article_for_2010,_week_28&diff=prev&oldid=705215 this}} and especially {{pl|l=http://www.hrwiki.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Gfdgsgxgzgdrc&diff=prev&oldid=705197 this}} are unhelpful and uncalled-for. You're not the wiki's police force, and you don't need to clamp down on people when you think they're breaking the rules. Even more so when those rules don't actually exist. {{User:Phlip/sig}} 11:34, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
| + | |
| - | | + | |
| - | == Do not police ==
| + | |
| - | | + | |
| - | Hello, RickTommy. Your recent note to 24.124.93.11 was inappropriate. There's absolutely nothing wrong with occasionally making an edit only to revert it. It happens. A person makes an edit and then realizes "Oops!" and undoes it. That's nothing to blink an eye at, let alone leave a negatively phrased message to a brand new IP editor over. What you did was rude and uncalled for. Furthermore, you have a habit of doing this kind of thing when trying to enforce policy, as several previous threads here illustrate (including the one right above this one). Since this clearly isn't working for you, please stop policing the wiki. This means don't try to make people follow the rules. If something needs doing, let a sysop know and we'll see what we can do. But you need to not be the one to enforce policy anymore. Thank you. {{User:Heimstern Läufer/sig}} 05:12, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
| + | |
| - | :Yes, sir. {{User:RickTommy/sig}}
| + | |
| - | | + | |
| - | == Sig too big ==
| + | |
| - | Hey RickyTommy, your sig is too big {{sigbox|User:RickTommy/sig}}. Please try to make it fix into the box. Thanks,{{User:Loafing/sig}} 06:03, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
| + | |
| - | | + | |
| - | == Thanks ==
| + | |
| - | | + | |
| - | Thanks for the stuff... on my page... on the wiki[[User:MiKEmalloy|MiKEmalloy, The Cool]]
| + | |
| - | | + | |
| - | == I've removed several things ==
| + | |
| - | | + | |
| - | Recently you have shown a particular interest in another user. The specificity and persistence of your questions have begun to cross a certain line. As such, I've deleted several things from your talk page, the user's talk page, and your signature. Please do not put them back. I would like to remind you that in general we are all uncomfortable with your [[#Constant questions|constant questions]], and this is a warning that your behavior is beginning to border on disruption. Please stick to editing the main namespaces. Thanks. — [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 20:18, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
| + | |
| - | [[File:Stop hand.png|left|50px]] I see now that you have continued pestering him on another site. This is your last warning. If you continue this inappropriate behavior you will be blocked from editing this wiki. — [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 23:43, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
| + | |
| - | {{clear}}
| + | |
| - | :Umm, he insulted me in his reply. I try to be nice, and this is what I get? An insult from the guy I'm trying to be nice to, and a block warning?! {{User:RickTommy/sig}} 00:05, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
| + | |
| - | ::Yup. For the record, he didn't insult you. It was harsh perhaps, but that's just an indication of how far you've crossed the line. Because of your reply above I think it's pretty clear that it's time to go ahead and serve you with a block for two weeks. — [[User:It's dot com|It's dot com]] 00:22, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
| + | |
| - | | + | |
| - | == FAS again ==
| + | |
| - | | + | |
| - | RickTommy, the main reason we switched to the new format you don't like so much is that in the old format, some people, yourself very much included, tended to try to dominate it instead of collaborating with others. And now you come along and at the last minute just change the queue to whatever you wanted? That's not cool, man. You've got to start listening to what '''others''' want on that page, not just what you want. I've undone your change to the queue. I or someone else should be working on the writeup for the SXSW article soon (I don't plan to delete your writeup, though, because we may be able to use the text later). {{User:Heimstern Läufer/sig}} 20:57, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
| + | |
| - | :RickyTommy, I have reverted your [http://www.hrwiki.org/w/index.php?title=HRWiki:Featured_Article_Selection&diff=prev&oldid=707234 changes to the queue]. You have been asked before not to simply change the queue, and you didn't even give any reason for it. I've also reverted your edit to MHarrington's comment. Do not edit someone else's comment.{{User:Loafing/sig}} 12:00, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
| + | |
| - | ::I actually ''did'' give a reason. I said that there didn't seem to be consensus. {{User:RickTommy/sig}} 12:17, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
| + | |
| - | :::No, you said "Also, the new format makes consensus harder" in your edit summary. That didn't seem to be related at all to your edit.{{User:Loafing/sig}} 21:06, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
| + | |
| - | ::::RickTommy, I'm going to be blunt here: cut it out. You're constantly warring with others to get whatever '''you''' proposed featured. That's just plain selfish and is inappropriate. Also, it's a form of policing, and you've been told not to do that. Enough is enough. Do it again and I will block you. {{User:Heimstern Läufer/sig}} 00:27, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
| + | |
| - | :::::But articles are being featured without consensus. {{User:RickTommy/sig}} 00:38, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
| + | |
| - | ::::::Your suggestion doesn't exactly have an overwhelming consensus, either. Either way, what we're trying to drill into your head is that '''you''' are not permitted to enforce policy '''regardless of what's happening'''. Don't do it again. {{User:Heimstern Läufer/sig}} 00:58, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
| + | |
| - | :::::::Try saying that in German. =P Anyway, before next week's featured article comes up, can we please have consensus? {{User:RickTommy/sig}} 10:47, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
| + | |
| - | ::::::::RickTommy, I don't get why you think it's harder to establish consensus. Frankly, I didn't think we had consensus for a featured article for Week 23 of this year. I just specifically remember that one b/c i was surprised to see a featured article being created on such little consensus (although i did have to look and see which week it was; i didn't remember that it was week 23...). anyway, point being maybe it's just hard in the first place no matter which method we use. And this is still in the experimental stages; maybe it will prove easier with time. {{User:The Knights Who Say Ni/sig}} 04:24, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
| + | |
| - | :::::::::See, this is why we should not use these things until they are finalised. I really like your point that it is in the experimental stages; it certainly is, given what has been featured this week: a newer short toon, just over [[2 years]] old, with its Wiki article on less than 40,000 page views. (Not to mention that it was most likely featured out of conflict of interest.) [[Where's The Cheat?]] (which has sadly not been featured yet), by comparison, is one of the older (not to mention more important) toons, over 8 years old, with a Wiki article on over 100,000 page views. (I'd also like to point out that earlier this year, we had 50 Strong Bad Emails' articles reach 100,000 page views; should we do something to mark the occasion, even if it is long-belated?) {{User:RickTommy/sig}} 06:42, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
| + | |
| - | ::::::::::I don't think most people think it's bad to feature new toons. I certainly don't. I think it's best for us to mix new and old. As for page views, I've noticed you often make points based on these. I really don't think very many people care much about these (I never even read them, myself). I really don't have any idea what you're getting at when you speak of "conflict of interest" at all, especially since the only person trying to put his or her own suggestions in the queue is you. At any rate, my point is that I don't really think your objections here are held by most other users (notice no one but you is complaining about the new format). {{User:Heimstern Läufer/sig}} 06:49, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
| + | |
| - | '''Edit conflict:''' Here's the thing, though: There's a big difference between a good article that our community is proud of (which are the articles we feature) and articles about important 'toons. When we feature an article, we're not featuring the 'toon the article is about, we're featuring the article. Also, certain articles might be popular, but page views and quality are not synonymous. --{{User:Super Martyo Brother/sig}} 06:51, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
| + | |
| - | | + | |
| - | == Editing someone else's comment ==
| + | |
| - | | + | |
| - | Hi RickyTommy. I noticed that you edited talk page posts by other users. For example [http://www.hrwiki.org/w/index.php?title=HRWiki:Featured_Article_Selection&diff=prev&oldid=707234 here] and [http://www.hrwiki.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Perducci&diff=prev&oldid=707236 here]. It's only OK to edit someone else's post if there is a very good reason. In these cases there was no good reason at all. And in both cases you changed the meaning. In one case you changed it significantly. Please don't do it again. Thanks,{{User:Loafing/sig}} 12:14, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
| + | |
| - | :The reason I edited the post in the first instance is because it didn't make sense the way it was originally written. He said "'''an''' article" instead of "'''the''' article"; this implied that he was referring to more than one article, when he clearly wasn't. {{User:RickTommy/sig}} 12:17, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
| + | |
| - | ::"an" can be used singularly too, it's not uncommon to do so. If I give you an article of clothing, it's still just one piece of clothing. {{User:ColdReactive/sig}} 15:47, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
| + | |
| - | :::Let's make this clear: pretty much the only time we ''ever'' edit others' comments is if they violate policy, such as if they have swears. Since you've been told not to enforce policy, you should not ever edit someone's comment. If it violates policy, someone else will handle it. {{User:Heimstern Läufer/sig}} 16:24, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
| + | |
| - | ::::Heimstern, I find it interesting that you're telling me not to edit others' comments, yet you have gone as far as to [http://www.hrwiki.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Reversinator&diff=694916&oldid=694915 do so yourself for being called a name that you don't like]. {{User:RickTommy/sig}} 00:38, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
| + | |
| - | :::::We've had a de facto exemption for fixing names. For example, DC's changed "It's Dot Com", I change "Heimy" etc. Fixing your own name would probably not be a problem for you, but pretty much anything else will definitely fall under policing. {{User:Heimstern Läufer/sig}} 00:52, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
| + | |
| - | | + | |
| - | == Block warning ==
| + | |
| - | | + | |
| - | [[File:Stop hand.png|left|50px]] RickTommy, you have been told repeatedly not to police the wiki and not to edit other users' comments. [http://www.hrwiki.org/w/index.php?title=HRWiki:Featured_Article_Selection&diff=707506&oldid=707471 This recent edit] is unacceptable in both regards. I am sorry, but you will be blocked from editing the wiki if you keep this up. Please take a step back, consider others, and contribute without alienating others. Thanks,{{User:Loafing/sig}} 06:06, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
| + | |
| - | :But as I said in the edit summary, that comment was uncalled-for. It also does not belong on that page. Also, I technically did not edit that comment. Oh, and there's something wrong. For some reason, I have recently been unable to edit FAS, but I can edit other articles just fine. What is going on? {{User:RickTommy/sig}} 06:09, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
| + | |
| - | ::You did edit that comment and not just a little bit. And while it does not belong on that page it was not insulting. There was no reason to edit it, especially after you've been asked not to do it.{{User:Loafing/sig}} 19:52, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
| + | |
