User talk:Kylu/Archive 1

Archive 1

The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.

This is an archive of former discussions. Please do not edit it. If you wish to revitalize an old topic, bring it up on the active talk page.

Welcome! (We can't say that loudly enough!)

Here are a few links you might find helpful:

• Be Bold!
• Don't let grumpy users scare you off.
• Meet other new users
• Learn from others
• Play nicely with others
• Contribute, Contribute, Contribute!
• Tell us about you

You can sign your name on talk pages and votes by typing ~~~~; our software automatically converts it to your username and the date.

If you have any questions or problems, no matter what they are, leave me a message on my talk page. Or, please come to the Newcomers help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

We're so glad you're here! Admrb♉ltz (T | C) 00:49, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Bwahaha, I'm trying! There's that silly stub page that I'm absolutely furious nobody's tried to touch, and while they're not a favorite company of mine (a competitor of my work actually) I'm absolutely determined to be NPOV. I learned about ~~~~; fairly recently and have finally started using it to sign my comments (Bad Kylu! No cookie!) that have gone so long blank or with my IP addy only. Before I registered, I spent most of the time correcting minor spelling and grammatical errors . I guess someone has to do that, hey?

Anyway, I appreciate the welcome! Nicetameetcha! lilewyn 01:00, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Revol (Cell Phone Operator)

Looking good, though {{wireless-stub}} goes on between the American cell phone template and the article :). And when you are linking external sites, you only need one square bracket, not two [ not [[.

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs Midwest Wireless Integrated Digital Enhanced Network Dobson Cellular Northcoast PCS Volsunga saga Boost Mobile Edge Wireless Svirfneblin 7-Eleven Speak Out Wireless NetCom (Norway) Phone strap MegaFon Cricket Communications Qwest Wireless U.S. Cellular Mobile ESPN MetroPCS GrameenPhone Playboy Enterprises

Cleanup Purchasing power parity Fixed phone InterFaith Merge Co-production of society and technology Wap site Oceanic climate Add Sources Sprint Nextel Corporation Criticism of Family Guy Reporters Without Borders Wikify Navigation controls Port Moody, British Columbia Wireless energy transfer Expand Software cracking Verizon Wireless ChatterCube

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 02:30, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

...okay, I've GOT to ask... why in the world would it suggest I'd like to work on Playboy Enterprises ?? lilewyn 03:32, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

Angel Wikipedians

Actually, Template:user oops used to place the user in a nonexistent category called Wikipedians who try to do the right thing; if they make a mistake, please let them know! Angel Wikipedians is a much better category name, don't you think?--M Johnson (talk • contribs) 07:02, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

I really like it! :)

I'm considering proposing an "Angel Barnstar" possibly, maybe a little platinum-colored star with a halo and anime-wings, for wikipedians who go "above and beyond the call of duty" in being polite and helpful to other members of the community. I've noticed that on many talk pages, there are many who seem to remain civil during disagreements, a lot of people who for some reason tend to take every criticism personally, but a very rare few who not only will see personal attacks as simply mis-stated criticism, but respond positively to it and work things out with others. If we had an Angel Barnstar... uh, maybe they'd be more likely to be kind in dealings? That's my hope anyway.

Hmm... maybe we could make a "Wikipedia Archangel" group... I suppose it might sound a bit overly Christian, but I'd like to point out that I'm quite thoroughly pagan and still beleive in angels. c.c

**shrug** Any ideas?

Kylu t 17:02, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

There in lies a possible problem; We have to be as multicultural as possible. However, the group name I'd like is "Angelic Wikipedian Association."--M Johnson (talk • contribs) 23:45, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

The AWA? "I've gone AWA." "Go AWA." "I'm here, but I'm AWA."

*rofl* I'm having way too much fun with that... what'cha think, {{Category:Angelic Wikipedian Association}} ?

We'd need to come up with a description, motto, nifty stuff like that... you wanna author the page or should I?

Kylu t 00:37, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Oh, hey, btw, Wikipedia:Wikipedian#Wikipedian associations <- if you wanna, we could try to list AWA there. There's a "Wikipedia:Kindness Campaign" already, but our idea seems slightly different. I just can't quite put my finger on what it is yet. Kylu t 01:36, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Sad, I'm commenting on my own comments more than you get a chance to reply. Now let's see if I come up with an edit war against myself and lose!
Anyway, new image I whipped up, figured maybe you'd like it.

What'cha think?
Kylu t 03:50, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Kashimashi

Eh, in response to your message about Kashimashi...

Don't know if I'm doing this right or not, but thanks for the welcome. You can check animesuki.com or btjunkie.com to find the torrent for Kashimashi 12. - Juhachi

You're welcome for the welcome and thanks for the thanks! ... er, that makes sense, right?

Also, I found kashimashi 12 earlier. Shame I couldn't pick it up and had to download it instead, since I happen to like commercials sometimes (they're funny!) n.n <3

Kylu t 01:20, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the Thanks

Thanks for the thanks, but it's completely unnecessary, as you haven't tried my patience at all. And you haven't left the impression of denseness, either! I just sort of hate tags, which get put up, but rarely get taken down - but more of that at the page in question. Welcome to Wikipedia! - Outerlimits 03:17, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for thanking my thanks! :D

Kylu t 03:38, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

To do (4/19)

"http://www.phonescoop.com/news/item.php?n=1684 "Sprint's Family Locator Finds Kids, Sends Them Messages"" for article "Sprint Nextel Corporation"

"http://www.phonescoop.com/news/item.php?n=1677" "Jitterbug MVNO Targets Seniors" for article "Jitterbug Wireless"

RS IP: 207.145.133.34

User:Kylu/welcome

Just to let you know all you have to do to replicate this is paste {{ subst:welcome4|Kylu }} :) Admrb♉ltz (t • c • b • p • d • m) 20:50, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

How useful! Thanks! ~Kylu (u|t) 23:37, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

{{User:Aeon1006/Userboxes/User furry}}

Siberian Husky (pic); and you? ^.^ Admrb♉ltz (t • c • b • p • d • m) 05:12, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Catdragon here. (I'm the white one. Purple's Myre.) ^.^ ~Kylu (u|t) 17:37, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Cuteness ^_^ Admrb♉ltz (t • c • b • p • d • m) 01:47, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

subst vs {{tl}}

WP:SUBST is a guideline for substituting code for templates, such as the test series {{subst:test}}; to prevent accedental editing of the template, and to reduce server load calling the template 1000's of times. {{tl}} (template link) is used for user pages / meta pages to tell users to use a specific template and generates a copy-n-paste item from the main view, with out having to go into the source. As for {{qif}} not working while subst'ed, it is on the list of templates that do not work when subst'ed.

Uh, meow. I don't know what it is with templates... I've got articles down pat. Articles good. Got it.

I've got Categories, even if I don't always know how to refer to them. Categories good. Understood.

But... templates... some moments it seems I go "Oh, well, duh, of course that's how it works" and the next thing I know I'm looking at a {{tl}} and just blink. "What the heck is that?"

Y'know what? That's it. I'm chalking all this up to being blonde dangit.

>o.o< ~Kylu (u|t) 02:49, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

If you are just looking to call a template in an article just type in two curly brackets {{ then the template name with out Template: and then 2 close brackets }}. Admrb♉ltz (t • c • b • p • d • m) 04:22, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Yay fun! :D

Thanks, sir. ~Kylu (u|t) 04:32, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

No problem :) and see Template_talk:Tl for more tl style templates. Admrb♉ltz (t • c • b • p • d • m) 05:17, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Edit counter

In this specific case, since its passing a javascript param it is going to have to be a FQDN. If it wasnt for the dang ?username=Admrboltz you could just do User:Interiot/Tool2/code.js... Admrb♉ltz (t • c • b • p • d • m) 04:24, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

While it's not quite as nifty, check out the MathBot counter too. I'm not totally sure how it's quantifying the edits, but it's worth a mention. ~Kylu (u|t) 04:28, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

p.s. ... you think the new sig is too obnoxious?

I patrol WP:RfA, so I know about MathBot's edit summary useage tool, its a snifty thing that automagicly sees how often you use the edit summary box while editing real articles. And your sig is fine :). Admrb♉ltz (t • c • b • p • d • m) 04:46, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Ah, as far as I'm aware I use it multiple times per post. For the most part. On the rare occasion I don't preview my post, I invariably make some stupid mistake (usually punctuation or tense or caps) and have to re-edit the post three times before I smack my forehead and go, "Duh, preview." and make that final edit (with preview) which is just perfect.

As far as I can tell, it's not necessarily that the preview makes me do a good job as much as I do a bad job if I don't use it. I'm rather curious how MathBot can tell how many times I preview per post, though...where does it store that information?

~Kylu (u|t) 19:37, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

It doesn't check to see how often you use the Preview button, just how many times you fill in the edit summary when you hit submit. Admrb♉ltz (t • c • b • p • d • m) 19:44, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

A-ha. I was thinking that MathBot had some sneaky SDK backdoor into Wikipedia that I didn't know about....and if there's a sneaky SDK-like backdoor into Wikipedia, I wanna write some code for it also! (Please let it not involve http.get and related functions. *pray*) ~Kylu (u|t) 19:52, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

I am not a leet haxor for MetaWiki; though they are out there... :) Admrb♉ltz (t • c • b • p • d • m) 19:58, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Yah, I had a leet haxor edit Kylu/welcome earlier (no, not you) and did things with #ifdef that I have no clue what it means (actually, I think the ifdef was in your edit, actually) ... Y'know, I've written .h includes that made extensive use of #ifdef there, but the syntax here seems to be completely different. Either that or my wiki-blinders are on and I'm just not seeing the correlation. I asked the editor in question about the edits on his talk page and hopefully will get an answer that my little brain can understand. I looked at the template RfD and was a little on the unsure side about the whole thing... on one hand, I'm a bit hesitant myself about editing someone else's userpage or subpage, even though I know we're to Be Bold and all that, but it seems altogether different to not only edit someone else's user subpage to remove a template that you're actively pushing as unneeded... I think, personally, I'd at least have left a message on the page or its talk page and my signature explaining why. *shrug* We all have different styles. Personally, I don't quite understand why regular editors should have the ability to edit widely-used templates anyway.

I suppose, if I set the system up (which I didn't) or were in charge of the mess (which, thank goodness, I'm not) I'd probably require some sort of esoteric magical sysop-like powah (+can_edit_templates)to keep one minor change from ruining thousands of pages, albeit very temporarily, as the community would immediately rush to WP's defense and correct such changes. (I won't say vandalism. AGI you know.)

I need to remember to do more edits in 'cyclopedia namespace and stay the heck away from user/talk edits unless really needed. I already had one guy I stuck a `test` template on his talk remove the warning. I seem to recall someone else stepping in on the matter, but when you get to hardcore real-vandals (being banned once and coming back to repeat the same vandalism that got you banned is enough for me) I think I'd rather politely bow out of the situation. Guess that makes me a bit meek, huh. >^.^<

~Kylu (u|t) 20:15, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Yea, I saw Lock removing the ifdef, he did it on my page to. It had to do when i expanded a template by subst'ing it... its totaly redundant and didn't need to be there, and he has ifdef on WP:TfD.

Don't edit others userpages (except for talk), most people get very touchy when you do it...

Some templates are protected from editing by normal users that are used in large ammounts for just that reason.

If people are removing {{subst:test}} templates, add them back. If they continue to remove, report them on WP:AN/I. If after you have posted test - {{subst:test4}} and they continue, you should report it on WP:AIV which gets a quick responce (usualy). Admrb♉ltz (t • c • b • p • d • m) 20:55, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

I'll remember the reporting bit. I've seen it, of course, but ... eh, meekness, like I said.

I'm not so touchy about my userpage, provided it's a reasonable edit. If someone put "Kylu is a big fat jerkface doodyhead" on my userpage, I might be a slight bit miffed, but correcting a graphic link or something similar would be fine. More than once I've visited a userpage and noticed that the graphic they use in a self-created userbox was missing. So, instead of editing the page, I leave them a note, usually with a suggestion as for a replacement graphic.

~Kylu (u|t) 21:27, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

See some vandalism on my userpage... it was kind of fun... Admrb♉ltz (t • c • b • p • d • m) 21:33, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Ifdef / template conditionals

Heh, the code I removed would never have actually done anything; one of the Ifdef calls always equated to true, and the others always equated to false (so never displayed anything). I basically hardcoded (in HTML/Wikimarkup) what was always happening anyways. The reason I did so was because {{ifdef}} is currently on Templates for deletion (I nominated it as a fork of another template; {{qif}}) and seems to be heading towards deletion (you can see the deletion discussion here: Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2006 April 18#Template:Ifdef).

Anyways, you asked for an explanation of what it did do. Instead of using {{ifdef}} (which should be deleted soon), I'll use {{qif}} (which is nearly identical, it just uses named parameters ("foo=bar", etc)).

Qif (and Ifdef) take two parameters (and an optional third parameter). The first parameter is a blank/non-blank test (in Qif, this is the "test" parameter). The second parameter is the text to display if the first parameter isn't blank (in Qif, this is the "then" parameter). The optional third parameter is the text to display if the first parameter is blank (in Qif, this is the "else" parameter). Here's some very basic examples–

Code	Produces
{{qif|test=|then=foo|else=bar}}	{{qif}}
{{qif|test=baz|then=foo|else=bar}}	{{qif}}

In the first example, test is blank; so we see bar is displayed. In the second example, test is set to baz; so we see foo is displayed. Pretty straight forward I hope. =) These uses are kind of silly though because we've hardcoded the values. The Qif on the top will always evaluate to false (showing the "else" text), and the Qif on the bottom will always evaluate to true (showing the "then" text). This functionality becomes valuable when used within templates. Templates can use Qif to detect the presence or absence of parameters and dynamically change accordingly (causing table rows to display (or not be displayed), etc).

You might also want to check out these pages:

• m:Help:Template
• m:Help:Parameter default
• m:ParserFunctions

• Wikipedia:Qif conditionals (which was recently updated to use m:ParserFunctions so the name is kind of misleading)

Let me know if any of this makes sense; I've actually been wanting to try to explain conditionals to someone totally unfamiliar with templates or conditionals because it's been said that templates (and the conditionals now in use) are too complicated or hard to understand for regular editors. Though maybe this isn't a fair test since you mentioned programming experience. =) —Locke Cole • t • c 21:05, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

I suppose my stumbling block here is where, in a normal application, an editor might actually have some need of this. I'm going to make a wild guess here:

Let's say I make a ... {{technology}} infobox for cellular phone companies and it took two parameters, representing "Voice" and "Data"... I could make the infobox callable with this sort of syntax:

{{technology|Voice|Data}}

and would show a small infobox with icons and whatever based on the technology used.

for instance, on "Verizon Wireless" I could put {{Cingular|GSM/EDGE|GPRS/HSDPA}} and have it display both technology types.

...so, where's qif involved?

I'd use it in case the company... we'll call them PacketNet (pretend they're a data-only MVNO) uses Cingular's HSDPA technology for data only, so you'd want {{technology||HSDPA}} whereas the voice-only carrier Yakalot uses GSM/EDGE voice only, so {{technology|GSM/EDGE|}}...

...is that even close to correct?

~Kylu (u|t) 21:23, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

I have never used {{qif}} or other if-then statements in templates. if you were doing your data only then it would be {{technology||HSDPA}} or a voice only would be {{technology|GSM}}. Admrb♉ltz (t • c • b • p • d • m) 21:35, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

and cingular would be }{{technology|D-AMPS, GSM, W-CDMA|GPRS, EDGE, UMTS, HSDPA}} Admrb♉ltz (t • c • b • p • d • m) 21:38, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

I know, I know, I was just trying to make a simple construct that I can easily associate with. :) ~Kylu (u|t) 21:41, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

I think you've basically got it. =) Let's do a little test/example though. Take a look at User:Locke Cole/Basic Template. This is a basic template that takes two parameters: one required (foo), one optional (bar). It's written in straight HTML except for the call to {{qif}} and the parameter references. Here's some sample invocations:

Code	Produces
{{User:Locke Cole/Basic Template}}	User:Locke Cole/Basic Template
{{User:Locke Cole/Basic Template|Foo=stuff}}	User:Locke Cole/Basic Template
{{User:Locke Cole/Basic Template|Foo=stuff|Bar=other stuff}}	User:Locke Cole/Basic Template

First example has none of the parameters defined. In this case, the unspecified Foo parameter shows up as {{{Foo}}}. Second example defines Foo, and it gets filled in as expected. Third example defines the optional Bar parameter. This causes Qif to display the HTML (and the Bar value).

The one thing to keep in mind is that calls to Qif usually use the "parameter default" capability to make the value blank if unspecified. Normally you refer to a parameter like this: {{{Foo}}}. If the parameter is not provided, you get the ugly {{{Foo}}} shown above. If the parameter is provided but passed blank, you get a blank spot. And if an actual value is passed (stuff in our examples above) you get that. If you'd like to avoid displaying {{{Foo}}} if the value is not provided, you can provide a parameter default by placing a | (pipe) after the parameter name, with the default value after it. So if we changed the template in my userspace to use {{{Foo|}}} (note the pipe with nothing after it), this would cause the display above to no longer show {{{Foo}}} in the first example. If we changed it to {{{Foo|unknown}}} we'd get "unknown", and so on.

How does this relate to Qif? Most calls to Qif use {{{Foo|}}} (note the pipe again) to force the parameter to default to blank if left unspecified (thus allowing the Qif test to fail and not display anything related to that parameter).

For a practical example of this in use, see Template:Album infobox which uses straight HTML, but the newer #if from m:ParserFunctions. #if is almost identical to Qif, with a few minor differences:

1. #if uses a colon (:) between the first parameter and the #if (so {{#if:<test>| ...}}
2. #if doesn't use named parameters, but rather position depedent parameters: the first parameter is the test, the second parameter is the then, and the optional third parameter is the else. So a simple conversion from qif to #if:

Qif: {{qif|test=<test>|then=<then>|else=<else>}}

#if: {{#if:<test>|<then>|<else>}}

Anyways, I think you got it. =) —Locke Cole • t • c 22:03, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

If the Template RfD goes through, then will there be a bot put in place to go through the entire en: and change #if/ifdef's to {{qif}}'s, or are you going to do it all by hand like you have been? ~Kylu (u|t) 23:29, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Actually it's just {{ifdef}} that's up for deletion. =) #if is impossible to delete because it's built in to the software (it's not a template). Right now #if (part of m:ParserFunctions) is in a trial run to see if there's any major bugs or issues with it; if it works out as planned, it will replace {{qif}}.

If Ifdef were in wide use, yes, bots would likely be used to handle orphaning it off prior to deletion (at TFD all templates are orphaned before being deleted so as not to disrupt normal viewing; the method of orphaning varies, some templates are subst'd, some are replaced with other templates, or some other method is agreed upon). As Ifdef was only used in a few places, it was easy to orphan it (you can see that it's actually used in very few pages right now; see Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:Ifdef). —Locke Cole • t • c 23:58, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

I guess the big factor at whatlinkshere is that no actual articles seem to use it. So, assuming that Jimbo "threw the switch" and turned {{ifdef}} off right now, nothing critical would stop working. Got it. Sorry for all the questions! (See Admrboltz? You're not the only one I pester...) ~Kylu (u|t) 00:27, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

I'm not deletionist!

Spent the last few hours wading through new user "contributions" ... oh ... my ... god.

Upside: I got to welcome a bunch of new users, including one guy that's apparently running for office. I think I made a positive impact and brought a Notable Wikipedian into the fold.

Downside: Why is it that every John Jenkins has to write about how his girlfriend has big boobs and his enemy is gay? Really. It's like digital graffitti. (This being wikipedia, if I misspelled that, please feel free to correct it.) Why do people think it's funny to go into the article for "Foot" and erase the whole thing and replace it with "CACA" in 72pt font?

I think I'm starting to memorize speedy-deletion template names. o.o;
Ayep, time to write some new, nice, quality articles...

~Kylu (u|t) 07:02, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Welcome to the croud: heres a userbox. {{user delete}} and m:Association_of_Deletionist_Wikipedians. Admrb♉ltz (t • c • log) 16:15, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

You're just trying to make me cry, aren't you... :P

~Kylu (u|t) 17:17, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

No, I thought you could handle the truth, but I was wrong you cant handle the truth!. Admrb♉ltz (t • c • log) 18:09, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

I need to see that movie again sometime. Hm. ~Kylu (u|t) 18:13, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Notability

Hi Kylu! Notability is a horrible thing to judge. One million editors, one million definitions of what is notable.

The official notability guidelines are at Wikipedia:Notability, but the speedy delete criterion is tighter still: an article can only be speedy deleted if it makes no assertion of notability.

Now, obviously this is fluid itself and relies on judgement/guesswork as to what others will think! For instance, an article on Albert Einstein that failed to mention why he was notable (that type of thing does happen) wouldn't be CSD-A7. However, an article on my grandmother, the inventor of the flying car, would be CSD-A7 as the claim to notability is evidently false.

Different editors draw a line in different places. I happen to agree that the gentleman in question is non-notable, but I don't think that an AfD debate would agree with me unanimously, due to his holding patents if nothing else. Therefore I couldn't speedy delete the article.

That's not to say you were wrong in speedying it: you were perfectly right to do so in my opinion and a different admin may well have deleted him on sight.

As I say, it's a horrible thing to judge! ➨ ≡ЯΞDVΞRS≡ 18:33, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

I've read those guidelines and I still think they're overly vague (of course, all the guidelines seem to be that way to some extent, but I imagine this is by design) but I do feel that I tried to live up to the spirit of those guidelines.

In all honesty, it's not so much the notability that bothered me as the autobiographical nature of the article in question and the way that, in my opinion, it sounded a bit more like a CV/Resume than it does a biography. I had a similar conversation with the user Lee Nelson who is currently running for a Florida legislative seat. After my chat with Mr. Nelson, he agreed that I had some point in that there is inherent bias in writing your own biography in an enyclopedia format.

While he's not a perfect Wikipedian yet, I think I've turned him from being someone who thinks "Hey, I'm going to publicize myself on here" to someone who I really think is willing to contribute to both the encyclopedia and the community here. I'd absolutely love to see more people like this. Like I told him, I don't edit my article, because I know it'd only lead to problems. :)

Thank you for getting back to me, by the way! I know I'm a new editor and probably a bit of a squeaky wheel, so all I can do is beg patience from those who've been around longer. I've got a suspicion Locke Cole and Admrboltz cry when they see another question from me. *cackle* Take care, and thanks again for the input! ~Kylu (u|t) 02:08, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

I don't; thats why I use the welcome message that says talk to me if you want :p Admrb♉ltz (t • c • log) 02:36, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

I feel so much better now! :D I'm almost considering being part of that Welcoming Committee... I rather liked helping the politician the other day...er, yesterday. Kinda nice seeing someone take advice and learn from you... Thanks for being around for me to pester. ^.^ ~Kylu (u|t) 02:44, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

I only welcome people who make changes that show up on my watchlist and have a red link for a talk page :p Admrb♉ltz (t • c • log) 03:01, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Wikicookie

I know what you mean, this is about the 3rd time in 2 weeks that I had to deal with a situation similar to the one that just occurred. Hopefully this will help you regain some energy.--Joe Jklin 21:35, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

A wikicookie for your effort with new users and to give you some energy to keep up the good work.--Joe Jklin 21:35, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Yum! Thanks! Chocolate chip, my favorite. :D ~Kylu (u|t) 02:09, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:How to archive a talk page

May I suggest you skim over this page; as your talk page is allready over 32k! It might be time to archive. Admrb♉ltz (t • c • log) 03:04, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Beleive it or not, I was just noticing that it was a teensy bit large. I figured I'd do a "partial archive" ... I wanna keep my cookie handy. o.o; ~Kylu (u|t) 03:10, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Put the cookie on your main page. Admrb♉ltz (t • c • log) 03:15, 29 April 2006 (UTC)