This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Spangineer (talk | contribs) at 18:24, 16 August 2005 (→Rubik's Cube: clarify). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 18:24, 16 August 2005 by Spangineer (talk | contribs) (→Rubik's Cube: clarify)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)Archive: May 27 – July 24, 2005
Rv blanking on My Messenger
You've reverted blanking on the above article twice now... Notably, a vote of deletion has been placed on the article by its author and only editor who had blanked it. I am a relative newbie, so please explain if there is a reason that it should be unblanked, and not just speedy-deleted...? --jnothman 08:44, 1 August 2005 (UTC)
Thank you!
Thank you for your support on my RfA! When I submitted it, I was unsure of how I'd do, but the support was great. I promise that I won't do anything too stupid with the trust you've given me. humblefool® 19:44, 2 August 2005 (UTC)
- P.S. Stop by Misplaced Pages:Deletion reform!
vfd
You should have kept it in sandbox until the entry was ready. DyslexicEditor 22:10, 6 August 2005 (UTC)
Style Manual
The link in your comment to the Style Manual is a dead link (it's red). I tried to find something like that, but couldn't, so I just assumed the articles I was looking at were sloppy. However, I do think some of the changes I made were appropriate, like making separate sections for the card series vs. the movie, and deleting a dead external link. Jason Donaldson 19:30, 2005 August 9 (UTC)
Thanks for your support
Thank you for voting to support my RFA. I've been promoted, and I promise to wield the mop with good faith, patience, and fairness... except when I'm exterminating vandals with the M-16 recoilless nuclear Gatling mop. --malathion 07:49, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
Songs/Album colors
Thank you for pointing that out - both sides were incomplete, and gosh it was hard to kind the key. Noticed some inconsistencies so i went in to clean up - thanks for pointing out the extra table. though it doesnt seem to include a couple other single categories, like the lightblue for 12" MAXI singles. Barrettmagic 12:20 10 August 2005 (UTC)
- You responded saying there shouldnt be additional color codes for singles. Too late :) - they already have been.
- (see http://en.wikipedia.org/Like_a_Virgin_%28song%29) I didn't make the color code, but it made sense so I added it to the album table (see Madonna's MAXI Single list for example - (http://en.wikipedia.org/Like_a_Virgin_%28song%29) all in lightblue.
- so they all need to be adjusted to yellow, or this additional category which seems to be in place needs to be promoted. :) Barrettmagic 12:29 10 August 2005 (UTC)
Func's RfA :)
Flowerparty, I want to thank you for not being rude and supporting my adminship, thank you very much! :)
Please never hesitate to let me know if you have concerns with any administrative action I may make.
Func( t, c, e, ) 19:13, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
More Gopal Das!
Regarding the Rami Nuri and Gopal Das articles, which were the subject of that dramatic VfD; they now have a category, and that category has four articles in it. Looking through those four, however, they're rather stubby; I was thinking about merging them into a new article called ECK masters, and explaining what the hell an ECK Master is. Looking at the Eckankar website, there's more of these guys, and researching them and writing on them would be a learning experience for me, which is always welcome. It would also make them less vulnerable to VfDs; "ECK Master" gets a substantial number of Google hits, whereas "Rami Nuri" performs dismally. In fact, the second thing that pops up is that note you left on my talk page. What do you think? CanadianCaesar 19:57, 12 August 2005 (UTC)
- Yeah, that sounds like a sensible, nay excellent idea. Much more managable, anyway. I thought about tidying up the Eckankar page before but was kind of worried about showing my face 'round there, and never got much past the first paragraph; "brought forth"? "...for spiritual upliftment"?! But if you're feeling bold I'll have a look at it. I think it's got a long way to go before it follows Xenu, though! Flowerparty 22:59, 12 August 2005 (UTC)
- The Eckankar main article has problems. So do the subarticles, actually. But, I'm just writing to say that I took out a book in the university library and am going through the website, and the new article is going to be different and thoroughly referenced. It has the potential to be just as horrifying as Xenu. It's a work in progress, but none of it is yet saved in Misplaced Pages, just on my computer. CanadianCaesar 00:13, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
Rubik's Cube
Sorry about that; I'm not sure what happened (I was editing the external link section). I've switched back to mathematics, but I think it's better to not use the main article format. I've heard that using "main article: " is only used when that section is about twice the length of the lead of the article being linked to, and in any case, the section doesn't treat just the contents of that article. The article I split off is just about math, not about physics, so the main article link doesn't really belong there, in my opinion. --Spangineer (háblame) 18:23, August 16, 2005 (UTC)