Talk:Main Page

From Homestar Runner Wiki

Main Page Talk
Archive
1 (1-20) 2 (21-40) 3 (41-60) 4 (61-80) 5 (81-100) 6 (101-120) 7 (121-140) 8 (141-160) 9 (161-180) 10 (181-200) 11 (201-220) 12 (221-240) 13 (241-260) 14 (261-280) 15 (281-300) 16 (301-320) 17 (321-340) 18 (341-360) 19 (361-380) 20 (381-400) 21 (401-420) 22 (421-440) 23 (441-460)	24 (461-480) 25 (481-500) 26 (501-520) 27 (521-540) 28 (541-560) 29 (561-580) 30 (581-600) 31 (601-620) 32 (621-640) 33 (641-660) 34 (661-680) 35 (681-700) 36 (701-720) 37 (721-740) 38 (741-760) 39 (761-780) 40 (781-800) 41 (801-820) 42 (821-840) 43 (841-860) 44 (861-880) 45 (881-900) 46 (901-920)

Contents 1 Anonymous editing 2 New-user creation 3 Videlectrix stubs 4 Slow=Update? 5 Error'd!

Anonymous editing

Hey, everyone. We're finally back with this edit by Tom. Also congratulations to 64.12.116.195 who made the first annonymous edit. — Lapper (talk) 05:03, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Wait, it's over? o_o I blinked and I missed it. --DorianGray

...is Totally awesome! Um one thing: the user login/account creation page only has the following fields available for new users: retype password and the image code. There is no field for putting in one's email addy, what happened to that? Also, the text below still mentions the email addy option (in case you were planning on eliminating that feature for future funny users. (I had to alliterate. I love lengthy alliteration. --Stux 06:33, 29 December 2005 (UTC)))

We still plan to reenable that. The code isn't ready for it yet, but it is ready for anonymous editing and new-user creation, so we went ahead and implemented what we have so far. — It's dot com 06:41, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Fanstuff's still locked up tight, though? --DorianGray

No, Fanstuff is back open. — It's dot com 06:45, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Then shouldn't you take down, or at least alter, the MediaWiki Site Notice at the top... You took it off here... --DorianGray

Do a hard refresh and see if that fixes it. — It's dot com 06:47, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

It still won't come off the main page, although it is off all the others. (However, it's not like I visit the Fanstuff frequently... Maybe once every 6 weeks, unless something major goes on. Don't even have an account.) --DorianGray

Makes sense... sweet! Good to have this running! Thanks! --Stux 06:43, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

SWEET LADY FREEDOM, LET'S MAKE OUT!!!! Well I'm glad the wiki's finally getting back to it's old self. Patrolling edits, battling trolls, greeting new users, I missed all of that... ⇔Thunderbird⇔ 06:54, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

I think the above user is the best ever. 142.179.33.98 06:55, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

There have been a few trolls... Check the history of my user page for one of 'em. --DorianGray

Well thanks annony, that means alot to me. ⇔Thunderbird⇔ 06:57, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

No problem. I also think Dot Com should get you a danish. 142.179.33.98 06:57, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

o_O ... By the way, TBird anonny, notice the capitalization of the short form of my name: it's Dot com 07:00, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Heh heh, my bad I mean... annony's bad. ;) ⇔Thunderbird⇔ 07:02, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Hey! Neat! (but still, this makes us more suseptible to troll attacks.)-- Benol, aka Coach B 12:38, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

I say: Bring it on! ):D — Elcool ^(talk)_(contribs) 13:27, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

THis is great. Anonnys can finally be back. To bad it will take a while to get the word out. And about the trolls, I don't mind. I am itching for a troll to fight! ! Rogue Leader / (my talk) 14:04, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Oh, and now wer have a super cool word-in-a-picture security device. That's just what we need. — Lapper (talk) 16:11, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Yay! We had our first troll (to my knowledge). http://www.hrwiki.org/index.php?title=Special:Recentchanges&limit=500&hideliu=1.

New-user creation

There's a glitch in the Captcha system that is not letting anonymous users create accounts. We are aware of the problem and are working to correct it. — It's dot com 19:59, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Update: I think I fixed it. — It's dot com 09:46, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Videlectrix stubs

As many know, most of the Videlectrix games are currently not available for play. However, we have articles on their respective subjects, only with the most minimal of information. Then each article has been tagged as a {{stub}}. After sitting in Category:Stubs for a considerable amount of time, it has become clear that there may never be any more information available on the subjects. Even if there will be, there isn't right now. I nominate that the stub tags from each of the articles be removed for the reason that they are complete at the moment. The following is a short conversation on the subject:

• <Lapper> BazookaJoe`, what do you think?
• <Lapper> We say the Videlectrix articles are uncompletable.
• <Lapper> There's no info left to add.
• <Lapper> But they stay in the stub category like they should be completed
• <Elcool> some stubs that should be destubbed:
• <Elcool> Cheat Commandos Playsets
• <BazookaJoe`> I think they became stub articles on the pretext that there might someday be more info on them
• <Elcool> Atari Strong Bad
• <BazookaJoe`> but, yeah. if there's nothing else to add, it shouldn't be a stub
• <Lapper> BazookaJoe`: Yet, there isn't right now, so why leave them as stubs?
• <BazookaJoe`> i don't see a reason

I've decided to be bold and remove the stub tags. If anyone objects, they should do so. — Lapper (talk) 19:19, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Additionally, there are quite a few other stubs that are technically complete, some of which have been de-tagged by E. L. Cool — Lapper (talk) 19:29, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

I agree, if there's no more information to put on the article then they don't need to be stubs. It's been discussed before, I just don't remember where (but it had to do with small articles too, and wikipedia not being paper). --Stux 15:15, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Slow=Update?

Is anybody else having H*R.com come up really slow? It's kinda on and off. Sometimes it's fine, and others it's not. Could this be 'cause of the long wanted update? Or is it just me? -AtionSong 22:11, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

It doesn't come up at all for me. It's definitely not just you. I think you're on to something, AtionSong. --DorianGray

It is all at normal speed for me. They might be updating, I hope they are updating, but don't get your hopes up. Rogue Leader / (my talk) 22:15, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

It was really slow before and their was no update. Maybe it's different now...or not.-- Bkmlb(talk to me·stuff I did) 23:09, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Boy. I wish I had job where I could skip out without telling anybody for a month.

Error'd!

Does anyone know why this has happened? Or if there is anyway to fix it? --ENUSY 14:51, 1 January 2006 (UTC)