Archives

| One — Two — Three — Four — Five |

NOTE

This is my Talk Page. I reserve the right to happily revert the edits of others [warnings from admins aside] on a whim.

Contents 1 me no like 2 Questions & Answers 3 Recent Changes: Loadsa edits, or not? 4 "negative score" 5 Why does it say Added by A F K When Needed on every image on your userpage 6 userpage: 7 bypassing wikia fail 8 "I still think I would not need the permission of 1+ admins to try something out" 8.1 Orphaned pages get deleted 9 Your userpage 10 Categorically Fucked 11 Re:User talk Madclaw 12 Permablocked 13 Personal congrats 14 Editor Review? 15 You've got your first editor review 16 No I bloody won't 17 Because those who insult others are the ones who deserve to be insulted. 18 Opposing the canadians 19 Oh really? 20 STOP THE MADNESS 21 UnAnswers/Uncyclopedia project meeting now open 22 Re:Hey 23 More activity then ever 24 Immigrants 25 Help with talkpage 26 Howdy 27 You have been invited 28 Sig pic 29 CONGRATULATIONS 30 What Happened? 31 I Hate Christmas 32 What does the scouter say about his edit count? 33 Administration AWOL

me no like Edit

You asked 50 questions two days ago, and over 30 today. They're boring to answer. I hated it over at WikiAnswers that they'd put questions on teh wiki from whatever sources that nobody cared about just so they'd have answers for google for them, while questions that people wanted to know went unanswered. The questions others ask get drowned in your sea. You never answer any questions, you don't know what it's like to answer these uninspired things of yours. I'm not going to. I'm taking a wiki break. --◄mendel► 21:06, October 18, 2010 (UTC)

What this wiki needs is more contributors. You may have missed the name, but it's "UnAnswers" not "UnQuestions", and so people are much more likely to get involved when they can answer and ask questions instead of every question being answered leading them to believe they should ask questions instead.

It's rather extraordinary that you choose to bemoan my contributing stlye in the context of me having contributed for two days fresh from being away for months with no mainspace editing. I don't think that fair; neither do I believe this is an issue you have purely with me - someone making good faith edits for two days simply can't drive a regular to take a wiki break. That, is frankly ridiculous.

And that said, to deal with the issue you have with whomever it may be (the community at large?) I have this to say. I've never read a rule, guideline or policy to say for X questions asked you must answer Y. If you're going to give people a talking to before blaming them for your absence, perhaps have the decency to inform others you've decided this behaviour is unreasonable? Reasoning would be nice. "I'm not going to." Nobody ever asked you to. Frankly my aim was to have questions with no answer for newcomers to find, something you limited the effect of greatly.

And then he shat a hedgehog into a bucket? is unimaginative. Really? I suppose this is, too?

Kindly let the past be the past and forget whatever grudge you have against me. I've done nothing wrong and I'm not here for some personal vandetta. All I want to do is contribute to the mainspace, I'd be much obliged if you'd leave me be. A F K When Needed 21:38, October 18, 2010 (UTC)

no afk, just no. This is not a grudge, at all. What mendel is getting at is that when you ask 50 how to put it... tedious, or maybe narrow minded? Questions, if someone has a really good one, it will get drowned out in the spam. Being bias to yourself will not help your case (it certainly hasn't helped mine in other places). mendel has no problem with the community, so idk why your even saying that. Hes not blaming anyone for an absence that never happened, hes saying hes leaving the wiki now because your spamming out the good questions. also to quote DE from gww: "the fact that your contributing in good faith will not save you from being permabanned forever," thought the quote does not fit perfectly, it does fit the situation in a lateral way. I encourage you to review the situation, and try to see the other side before you assume its due to a bias or make a ridiculous claim. — Scythe 0:20, 19 Oct 2010 (UTC)

First of all: No, in theory AFK did nothing wrong. Second: Mendel is right about drowning out other contributors in RC, but I find that he overreacted.

Personally, I think Mendel has a point about the huge RC spam, then again, I believe too few questions have been asked lately (I admit, I'm more of an answerer myself), and I've seen many questions afk previously "spammed" were put to great use. I can't immediately think of something concrete, but you get my point (I hope).

Mendel: You're overreacting, and not even trying to discuss. I'm not going to bring you two's history up, but I was hoping everybody could begin with a tabula rasa (clean slate).

AFK: I believe Mendel has a point however, and while I don't mind you asking questions at all, perhaps you're asking too many at a time. Perhaps try to spread them out a bit over a week, and ask a bit less, because while some are real beauties of questions, some are, as Mendel put it "uninspired".--El_Nazgir 14:52, October 19, 2010 (UTC)

@Scythe no scythe, just no. Look at how much of my response deals with the 'grudge' and think again. I didn't sit there and rage at him, I noticed how he immediately jumped on me when there has been several people - and likely will be again - who answer shit with "no" or answers which take a similar amount of time to be thought of which nobody (seemingly) has an issue with according to the talk pages of those users.

The whole "should we be elitest?" thing is something which needs to be discussed, but has never been talked about to a conclusion (that I know of). The reason I read his message and thought "grudge" was that he couldn't wait a day after my return before jumping on to my talk page and complain about how I'm driving him off the wiki - temporarily though it may be - when there are so many users being similarly 'uninspired' which he has no problem with. It seems to me rather targeted, which makes me think grudge. If you read my response to him and think I was emotional, I assure you that's not the case.

@El_Nazgir: Dude I've no problem with us being elitest, or not. But I'd ask that there be pages drawn up giving examples of things to do and things not to do and that it apply to both questions and answers. A F K When Needed 17:39, October 20, 2010 (UTC)

Questions & Answers Edit

Are they worth the same? Which is worth more? Is that by a considerable difference?

I want to know what people think. Considering a poll but... for now I won't (you can). I've always given a slightly bias to questions - which seemingly sticks me in the minority. As I touched on above, people (like me) ask questions and people (I'm looking at El_Nazgir) answer questions. I think both should be facilitated and encoruaged. (Agree / Disagree?)

If people want to ask questions, what can encourage that? Little except signs of a community (a full looking RC can help to portray this). If people want to answer questions, then surely the more questions to answer, the better? I think it's natural for new (answerer style) contributors to aim for questions currently without an answer, and so I attempt to keep as many of those around as possible (which inspired the above section which can be shortened to 'stop, or do it less often, kthx'.

Agree, disagree, bored with some time on your hands, let me hear ya! A F K When Needed 17:39, October 20, 2010 (UTC)

Recent Changes: Loadsa edits, or not? Edit

Moar feedback sectiunz.

Let's go along persuming that people are more likely to edit active wikis with a visible community -- which I believe to be true, and my experiences (misleading or otherwise) support. When making a deliberate effort to have as many edits in RC as possible (not something I do often) I do this with the idea that people will check RC, and if they see few edits they may be inclined to simply leave the wiki, or at least be less inclined to edit. So I spend time sticking in edits so that there'll be one more name appearing and more edits appearing, making the wiki look more active and thus looking more inviting.

Personally, if a wiki is dead or dying, I rarely invest the time to edit; when I do it's often specifically to offer some sort of assistance with that very thing (e.g. not mainspace editing).

Do you think the number of edits per day in RC has an effect on if people choose to edit or not? If so, how?

And also, as above if I'm interpreting correctly, do you agree that RC should optimally contain few edits so that the better ones are more easily noticed? (I don't, why deliberately look inactive..?) A F K When Needed 17:39, October 20, 2010 (UTC)

"negative score" Edit

That's not "negative". The mathematical negative is just there to show where that person lies on the ask/answer spectrum. Does it matter one is on that part of the scale and the other is on that part? no, because the comparison stays the same, even if you switch them. It's purely done mathematically to provide an easy way to compare...--El_Nazgir 12:28, October 21, 2010 (UTC)

Why does it say Added by A F K When Needed on every image on your userpage Edit

That's one of the new "features" of Oasis: Image attribution. On every page where an image is shown, it's also shown who uploaded the image. --El_Nazgir 21:19, November 15, 2010 (UTC)

userpage: Edit

1) can be applied to anyone: hence the neutral, I guess. --El_Nazgir 15:25, March 3, 2011 (UTC)

I presume you realize the main reason those two quotes are there. A F K When Needed 16:05, March 4, 2011 (UTC)

Not really. What, you're coming back or something? --El_Nazgir 18:18, March 4, 2011 (UTC)

Quote One: "Should AFK leave, there will be people to take over most of his duties."

Quote Two: "I was expected to hold this thing together and take over everything he did, which I can not, and tbh, will not do."

Onwards to your question... and indeed, state my position rather clearly;

I may be around on occasion, certainly.

My stance, however, on the actions of those who according to themselves will never put in the amount of effort I made, who put together likely had an edit count equal to or below mine, who arrived after so much of the hard work had already been done... my stance has not changed.

I reserve the right to edit on a whim. I have no interest in joining the current Admin Team.

So "coming back" as in being around, sure, maybe.

"Coming back" to levels of activity I once had... certainly not.

tl;dr: I might be around some of the time, but that is as far as it will go. A F K When Needed 19:52, March 4, 2011 (UTC)

bypassing wikia fail Edit

You were doing it, so I thought I ought to tag you with it. Apparently you didn't see the humor in that, so I'm sorry I did that. --◄mendel► 19:10, April 17, 2011 (UTC)

No apology necessary (appreciated as it is).

Just when you (seemed to me) to be doing away with my idea, by reverting ~everything, I didn't attach humor to that particular action. A F K When Needed 19:22, April 17, 2011 (UTC)

"I still think I would not need the permission of 1+ admins to try something out" Edit

I want to stress to you that you do not; nobody has criticised you for not seeking permission for an experiment.

I have counseled you to seek community input on the specific project you are undertaking, because doing so early will avoid disappointment and strife later; not because it is required, but because it is advantageous to do so. --◄mendel► 17:00, April 18, 2011 (UTC)

Thus far I've had one user (yourself) decide it shouldn't happen, and one person dissatisfied with your handling of the situation, besides my own dislike of said handling. A F K When Needed 18:03, April 18, 2011 (UTC)

I have decided nothing. Thank you for ignoring my point; you repeating your mistaken reading of me doesn't make it any more true. My handling of the situation is not under discussion; I have brought the above point to your attention because clearly you mistook what I meant to say. It seems my clarification did not help, as you still seem to suffer from the same misconception. If that's indeed the case, I'm sorry to have bothered you. --◄mendel► 21:42, April 18, 2011 (UTC)

If you have yet to decide it should not happen, please inform me. I wish to complain to El_Nazgir that my good-faith edits were reverted when nobody - not even he who carried out the reverts - thought it should not happen. That would be the single most malicious and absurd thing to do. As well as being bloody disruptive for no reason.

"My handling of the situation is not under discussion" - Factually incorrect. I am discussing it. A F K When Needed 22:15, April 18, 2011 (UTC)

"If you have yet to decide it" -- for the third time, I suggested you initiate community discussion before a "decision" may be reached (though you seem to have decided to have the category deleted, so that's probably moot). I admit that I personally do not understand why this category is useful, or why you must track this issue that is interesting to you via a category; you have not satisfied my question to this effect. However, my personal opinion is not a "decision" that is binding on the wiki (other than as part of community decision making, like every other editor's opinion), or on you. If you have gotten that impression, I apologize.

"I am discussing it." You are not discussing it, you have expressed your general dissatisfaction. There aren't even points here that you criticise, and again, even if they were, they would be offtopic here, and I remind you again that you should bring up issues like these on my talkpage, preferably stating what offends you as precisely as possible. --◄mendel► 22:39, April 18, 2011 (UTC)

1) I had taken your stance to be more similar to RT's that it is; e.g. it would have been useful / perhaps do this in the future. Apologies for the confusion; though it's awkward, and I'm similarly unhappy about having to get community consensus before I go work on something. That seems demeaning. Particularly with a history of looking for input on UnAnswers, and often getting no response at all.

2) I was discussing your actions in relation to a category, on the talk page of said category. When there was already a discussion happening there. Don't get me wrong; I certainly understand your view that such comments are also relevant on your talk page - I may even concede that they are marginally more relevant - but I don't agree there's completely and utterly out of place there. So I resent your stance of "this is ad hominem, not going to respond". Most of the resentment is due to your response. Your response which, to paraphrase, went something along the lines of "this is ad hominem, not going to respond". If you want to dismiss my argument, then there's a radical notion - why not dismiss my argument? I'm AGFing (no, I genuinely am) and going with the assumption that you were informing me this to be polite or something. But frankly, responses of "I'm not going to respond" always seem frustrating and annoying, when others are already aware you don't have to respond to them. And if you didn't respond at all, I wouldn't mind. Responding to say you won't respond, bugs me. This strikes me as my own fault, so I'm not holding it against you so much as saying "x annoyed me".

3) As for the label of ad hominem - again, I was discussing your actions toward the category, on the talk page of the category, because there was active debate there already. I still argue it was someway relevant, and just as your quickness to revert annoyed me, you've gotten to me even more since then. I didn't randomly PA you, and I didn't randomly start discussing it on the talk page of our spotlight image. There was reasoning for me to say it there; you are - for my personal tastes - far too quick to jump to the words "ad hominem". I was going to come on this morning and rant that you're doing it to dismiss what I've said, but that wouldn't be fair, so I won't and I do sincerely apologize for the bad faith (I have been AGFing on a number of points, not just that you informed me of the alleged ad hominem so that I could go to your talk page with something closer to what you find acceptable).

I'm trying. It's not always easy.

...if it ever is. A F K When Needed 07:04, April 19, 2011 (UTC)

Gotta clarify again. Re your point 1), please re-read my first two paragraphs in this section. Re: "this is ad hominem, not going to respond" - this is not my stance, and I didn't use "the label of ad hominem".

Please discuss my actions on my talkpage (or on yours, if you like, but could you make a separate section instead of re-purposing my topic?), it benefits all discussions on this wiki and helps to keep them civil, free of drama, and on topic. As a case in point, the idea of this section was to clear up your misunderstanding that I somehow required you to do something (e.g. getting comunity consensus before you do anything); this topic is still unresolved, and will remain so, as you continue to repeat your misunderstanding, ignore my posts about it, and plunge headfirst into a discussion of me with only general (instead of precise) indications of which of my statements you are having problems with. This approach essentially hoses all most of our chances to come to an understanding. --◄mendel► 08:12, April 19, 2011 (UTC)

I suffer no misunderstanding.

I didn't believe I needed to do that (we happen to be on a Wiki - people have the authority to edit); I rejected you seemingly implying that I did by reverting my attempts to use the category while suggesting I go the Community Portal Talk to go have a chinwag.

You've since (finally) explained your actions. Because you fall into a trap. You put yourself in everyone else's shoes to try to gain their perspective... but that's just it. We're not you. We act differently. It's been noted a whole bunch of times that you question other editors more than ~anyone the average user has ever met on a Wiki. Try to stop and think how the people in the community will view your actions - not how a collection of M.mendels would view your actions.

You've stated you don't see how you implemented sweeping changes. I struggle to comprehend this. I sought to include a category; you emptied it (minus a joke). That's as sweeping a change as possible (with the nature of categories in mind, I consider it equal to - not less significant than - going ahead and deleting the category. An empty category is nothing. A single joke entry, is also nothing). A F K When Needed 15:53, April 19, 2011 (UTC)

Ah, we're finally back on topic again. "I rejected you seemingly implying that I [needed to get consensus]" -- you thought I implied something and then rejected that? You still reject it, even though I explained several times I did not intend to imply it? What statement of mine are we talking about, exactly?

1. "Hmm, it would be an administrative category then; why don't you suggest this on the community portal? Especially since we disagree on the need to have one, it's mode, and its name."
2. "The general pre-existing consensus re: categories on this wiki is that they describe the content of the question (and sometimes the answer). If they're not doing that, they're what I call "administrative", because they're not about the content, but "meta"."

I thought you were referring to number 1, but now I'm not so sure if you don't mean 2, or something else entirely. Could you please help me and clarify? --◄mendel► 20:35, April 19, 2011 (UTC)

The Fog of War confusion is beginning to lift! (that was a joke; commenting on the confusion lifting reminded me of FoW from games; no hostility intended).

No, I did mean #1. Before your explanation on your talk page, I saw reverts and you saying why not discuss this first on the portal talk? As said before, you can be difficult to read. When one sees reverts "oh, maybe he's contributing to the goal of making this work" is the last of one's thoughts.

I would beg you to consider the reverts again. It wasn't that you reverted me a handful of times. As said before, it was that you left an empty category a category empty of the questions it was intended to hold, and then made an edit which seemed temporary in nature.

Would you consider us both being in the category a gesture of solidarity, a reminder of this incident, or something else - might I ask? A F K When Needed 21:52, April 19, 2011 (UTC)

I would consider it a sign that you had repurposed the category for teh funnay. :)

You're finally getting there: "need the permission of 1+ admins" ⇒ "having to get community consensus" ⇒ "why not discuss this first". ;) If you had read it like that from the start, I wouldn't have opened this section. (Here's a thought: which of these three interpretations fits best what I actually wrote?) --◄mendel► 07:12, April 20, 2011 (UTC)

Context, mon ami. A F K When Needed 14:13, April 20, 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned pages get deleted Edit

Category talk:Imma bypassin' Wikia fail

Cheatin' the system. They see me stylin', they hatin'. A F K When Needed 18:13, April 18, 2011 (UTC)

Have you seen Special:LonelyPages lately? --◄mendel► 22:42, April 18, 2011 (UTC)

We recently gained two Administrators. I figured there may be more Administratively errands being conducted than there were previously. A F K When Needed 07:04, April 19, 2011 (UTC)

Your userpage Edit

Your present userpage deals with me, hence I cannot refrain from a small comment. You write "I wouldn't mind if [..] he made clear what he was doing, and why", and "I came back to try. To learn. To improve." I believe that actually asking questions would have gotten you further in this. --◄mendel► 09:17, April 19, 2011 (UTC)

I believe dealing with anyone else would have been easier.

But there ya go. A F K When Needed 15:53, April 19, 2011 (UTC)

Categorically Fucked Edit

I fixed some pages in Category:Categorically Fucked. Of the pages that are left (and one I "fixed"), I don't see anything wrong with them. Why are they in that category? --◄mendel► 16:34, April 20, 2011 (UTC)

It appears they may not be the droids you're looking for :P

Without links to check the history - they may have been fixed but not removed from the category by human error - it's also possible the person who added them to the category (I'll assume it wasn't me as I know better) did not realize the meta (administrative?) category had a specific purpose.

Without specifics it's hard to be certain; I'll have more time later to look into the issue, just thought I'd respond while I had a few minutes to myself.

I presume Wikia aren't to be found in the history tab? If not I assume it's someone simply not understanding the purpose of the category. A F K When Needed 17:20, April 20, 2011 (UTC)

Well, in those cases you're the last person to edit, and you added the category, so I'll just assume Wikia ran a script on the server that didn't leave a history entry, now that I know that there wasn't another purpose to the category that I wasn't aware of. They're uncatted now, look in my contribs if you still want to check them out. --◄mendel► 22:04, April 20, 2011 (UTC)

Re:User talk MadclawEdit

\Tsunami Madclaw @ ^talk 07:21, April 21, 2011 (UTC)

Permablocked Edit

Hey my buddy "Brandon is the worst57ImBrandon" just got perma blocked and he doesn't understand why cuz he hasn't even made any edits yet, and it said it was b/c of vandalism and stuff and even when he tried to message an addmin it blocked him from posting can u help me out and see whats up?

Yo Da Best -Ian_Should_Get_A_Life_37-

Permablocked? Not on UnAnswers, so I bet it's global. I'm afraid you'll have to go ask the wikia staff about that. Best bet imo is to go to the community central and go to Sannse's talk page (tried making interwiki link go directly to it, but it didn't like that for some reason).--El_Nazgir 22:09, April 26, 2011 (UTC)

Cool thanks Ian waz hella pissed about it and stuff and i should mention that i am actually Brandon and he is actually Ian we just thought it would be funny to make fun of each other in our user names, which kinda leads me to another question if i wanted to change my user name could i? In a way everyone would still know its that guy and i keep my unedits and stuff? if not no biggy i'll live. I guess i could just think of it as a tatoo or something. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ian_Should_Get_A_Life_37 (talk • contribs)

No, it isn't possible to change account names without a serious reason as far as I know(iirc, only wikia staff can do it). What you can do is make a new account and redirecting your old userpage to your new, and the same for your talk page. AFK (whose talk page we have been slightly abusing so far :P) did that before. --El_Nazgir 10:42, April 27, 2011 (UTC)

Oh, I kinda forgot this before, but you can also contact wikia staff through the bottom of this page. --El_Nazgir 10:47, April 27, 2011 (UTC)

Annoyingly, this block has to stay. The purpose of the block is to stop attack usernames against the Wikia staff member Brandon Rhea - obviously, this isn't what's happening here, but there's really nothing I can do about it. For yourself, Wikia staff allows account renames (you're only allowed to do it once though, see Help:Rename_my_account) or, you can create a new account, and tell us that you're the same person if you don't want to get staff involved. I'm really sorry that the block hit your friend. He's welcome to ask for a rename by staff too, but it'd probably be quicker for him to create a new account. RandomTime 21:49, April 27, 2011 (UTC)

The last time a user came to me regarding an account name change, Wikia denied it.

The request was made to me due to the account making the person's real identity vulnerable; Wikia ignored this. It's possible they've since changed their stance on the matter but... forgive me, I consider RL concerns to be more important than keeping a username that is frankly far more ridiculous than even mine manages to be.

Please do sign your comments with ~~~~ A F K When Needed 10:27, April 28, 2011 (UTC)

Wikia didn't have a reaname process until recently - so it probably was techincally impossible, whilst now it's (fairly) easy for them to rename someone RandomTime 12:19, April 28, 2011 (UTC)

Technically impossible, or somewhat inconvenient? A F K When Needed 12:30, April 28, 2011 (UTC)

Honestly don't know, the script at the moment (as far as I can tell) blocks the old account, moves all contribs in the database, and then unlocks the account - I'd guess before the script all the database manipulation would've had to be done by hand, which is messy RandomTime 21:27, April 28, 2011 (UTC)

lol a simple yes or no would have been followed by an Change Your Username For Idiots link if yes Ian_Should_Get_A_Life 37 ©©©©© 04:24, April 29, 2011 (UTC)

What's wrong with "we don't know" followed by Help:Rename my account? --◄mendel► 10:01, April 29, 2011 (UTC)

Sigh.

We didn't know the answer, so we couldn't say yes or no. Randomtime helped you as much as one could expect to be helped. Really, it's a matter for Wikia Staff. Please take the discussion to Special:Contact if you wish further information [since we don't know it; so can't possibly help]. Thanks! A F K When Needed 10:14, April 29, 2011 (UTC)

Personal congrats Edit

My scouter tells me that your edit level is OVER 9000!!! congratulations.CANADA 19:40, April 30, 2011 (UTC)

Ah; I hadn't noticed that!

Thank you! A F K When Needed 22:29, April 30, 2011 (UTC)

Editor Review? Edit

From your userpage:

Considering requesting an equivalent of Wikipedia:Editor review.

After my RfA and the result of same (should I have used ER instead?) I'm... wary, to say the least. It's natural for people to find taking criticism difficult. I'm also unsure of how well I'd handle the process.

If you're on my userpage, you must be somewhat interested in me for whatever reason, so here's an insight into my mind.

Feel free to sound off opinions (on if I should do it; I have yet to do so, thus no review yet, please) on my talk page.

Here's something to ponder:

• I note that Wikipedia suggests you should have 300 edits; for you, those would encompass your period of activity back in October. What time periods would you want a review encompass? If you want the review to cover this year only, maybe you should accumulate more edits.

• The two questions that wikipedia reviewees are asked to answer are interesting (I've been looking through some of the answers there). To think about how to answer them would probably be a good idea for any editor, regardless of whether they intend to have a review or not.

• I could run a statistic on the types of edits our editors have been doing, like I've done before.

• If you are "wary" of how you'd react to this process yourself, you might ask one of the experienced editors you hope would review you to do so privately, beforehand (do give them the same statement and two answers to work with as you would for the formal review); that way, you have the option to not react at all, or do do it it differently, than you would if it were public. (If you do decide to go for the public review later, that private review could then be posted.)

I don't have an opinion on whether you should do it or not. --◄mendel► 11:03, May 2, 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the thoughts.

I was pondering this at 4:20, and indeed at different times during the night. I decided that, having recently gained a different perspective on a lot (things which happened over a year ago; and more recently), that reviews may just tell that which I have come to realize myself already.

I'm not entirely sure what I want. I've had many thoughts; each more proof of my sleep deprivation than the last. Most were a system to implement something which shouldn't be needed in the first place. One, if I remember correctly, involved a Sylvari.

I had one idea (check the CP talk in the next half hour) which I think I'll go with. It's not a direct remedy to anything I wish to correct, however it's a project I could hopefully work on with other active contributors. Which has the potential to help. Or it would, at least, be nice.

It's worth noting that the concept began as me going to bother RT on IRC. It changed to the 'everyone gets a say' format before he responded. I figured, not only could that be potentially more insightful than the musings of one contributor, but it could also show me I've more to work on than originally thought, depending on who conducts one.

Thanks again! A F K When Needed 12:29, May 2, 2011 (UTC)

Here's one more thought, may you make of it what you will: reviews may just tell that which I have come to realize myself already -- it might be more useful to you then to write that perspective down and ask for feedback on it (public or private); that way, you'd see it validated by others, and can attract comments that go beyond it. --◄mendel► 16:34, May 2, 2011 (UTC)

Good idea :) A F K When Needed 19:19, May 2, 2011 (UTC)

You've got your first editor review Edit

I don't think pokemon answers is that bad RandomTime 22:51, May 2, 2011 (UTC)

 :/ A F K When Needed 23:06, May 2, 2011 (UTC)

No I bloody won't Edit

Because embedding is disabled on it. --El_Nazgir 15:43, May 4, 2011 (UTC)

I noticed but didn't give a fuck, 'cause I'm lazy.

It still has some magic; click on the video a second time. Wait for the smoke to clear. A F K When Needed 00:49, May 5, 2011 (UTC)

Because those who insult others are the ones who deserve to be insulted. Edit

Telling Ian he has "an evident problem with will power" contravenes UnAnswers:No Personal Attacks.

Every other person can remember to either talk to others politely, or not at all. Why can't you? It strikes me as laziness; if you really can't bother remembering, please stop talking to people.

I mean, come on, how can you not remember when you've gotten in huge trouble over it before? I'm having a thought here; how about you don't ask or answer anything, until you have calmed down? Since you've an evident problem with will power, providing yourself such an incentive could be beneficial. Not a demand, just a suggestion.

Recognize anything? :) --◄mendel► 05:17, June 4, 2011 (UTC)

It's actually a belief demanded by AGF. Otherwise he's deliberately ignoring what is asked of him while making no effort to change consensus. In any event, I don't share your opinion of it being a personal attack; and I'm quite calm, tyvm. A F K When Needed 06:31, June 4, 2011 (UTC)

Opposing the canadians Edit

moved to UnAnswers talk:Requests for Adminship/CANADA#surplus of administrators, --◄mendel► 04:25, June 5, 2011 (UTC)

Oh really? Edit

Are you Tassadar? --El_Nazgir 13:37, June 7, 2011 (UTC)

http://wiki.reliccommunity.com/Dawn_of_War:_Quotes#Common_Quotes_2 A F K When Needed 14:00, June 7, 2011 (UTC)

Ironically, "your will" isn't in the subsection you linked to :P --El_Nazgir 16:27, June 7, 2011 (UTC)

I couldn't find it on any online collection of Chaos quotes.

However, I figured linking you to a list of Chaos quotes would successfully convey what the source of my inspiration was. Namely, it being a quote from Dawn of War. Of the Chaos variety. A F K When Needed 16:40, June 7, 2011 (UTC)

STOP THE MADNESS Edit

My head is going to explode!oh.no.it's.too.la-BOOM!!! CANADA 05:43, June 12, 2011 (UTC)

Who are you?

Who am I?

What are we doing here?

How can I get home?

Where is home?

WHERE ARE THE TOILETS?

HELP ME!! A F K When Needed 05:46, June 12, 2011 (UTC)

Wikia is going to have one hell of a hangover after tonight. CANADA 05:50, June 12, 2011 (UTC)

Hope they have protection a back-up. A F K When Needed 05:52, June 12, 2011 (UTC)

UnAnswers/Uncyclopedia project meeting now open Edit

Just so you know, I've discussed my ideas for developing unanswers in the Uncyclopedia village dump. If it is successful, we should expect to see discussion in the community portal from Uncyclopedia members. Could you by any chance post a notice on the front page so El Nazgir (and any other unanswers users who drop by) can join the discussion? thanks, and i'll see you in the discussion. CANADA 22:06, June 22, 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know!

To be honest, I reckon he'd notice your edit to the CP talk double-lively, as would most others who are actively interested in the wiki.

Depending on how shit goes, it may / may not be worth sticking on the CP itself ;) A F K When Needed 11:32, June 23, 2011 (UTC)

Re:Hey Edit

Guess who it is? --Veyneru 20:35, July 16, 2011 (UTC)

Yup, wanted a new username. Anyways, thanks for the rewelcome! --Veyneru 20:54, July 16, 2011 (UTC)

More activity then ever Edit

And El Nazgir just left. I think this might be telling me something, but I can't seem to put my finger on it... CANADA 02:26, July 18, 2011 (UTC)

It's pretty obvious.

People are (naturally) intimidated by his drug cartel. A F K When Needed 13:59, July 18, 2011 (UTC)

Immigrants Edit

Pleased to meet you. My name is AUSTRALIA, and i'm new here. --AUSTRALIA 17:30, July 22, 2011 (UTC)

Help with talkpage Edit

yo, remember when I was asking about creating a new archive and you explained about moving it to another page? Well, could you please explain the steps more in depth? I'm not a wiki expert and this is my first time moving a page, so it would really help to have a guide. Seriously, I should do this soon. If my archive gets any bigger, it will mutate into a giant monster and attack Tokyo. Thanks. CANADA 17:57, August 7, 2011 (UTC)

You move the talk page, and get rid of the redirect, where you now have a new talk page. Then put a link to the archive at the top of your new talk page. --El_Nazgir 19:13, August 7, 2011 (UTC)

10 easy steps.

1. Go to the top of your talk page.
2. See 'Create section'? Hit the arrow beside it.
3. Hit 'Move page'.
4. Leave the default text as-is.
5. Add something like /Archive_One at the end. Don't forget the slash at the start.
6. Go to your talk page. Click the link at the top back to your real talk page.
7. Blank the page (redirect = evil). Add a link to your archive.
8. Visit Tokyo. Realize it is better for us if it is destroyed.
9. Rejoice in the fact that you have an archive. You can now die happy.
10. Why are you still reading? Die. Happy. A F K When Needed 21:45, August 7, 2011 (UTC)

Step 8 is the most important one. --El_Nazgir 21:57, August 7, 2011 (UTC)

Accidently deleted talkpage instead of redirect. I'm an idiot. Aw well, at least i don't need those sections anymore.But i'll remember to do it right next time. Thanks anyway, Nazgir. CANADA 17:47, August 8, 2011 (UTC)

Would you mind restoring it, then moving it?

Technically you're not generally permitted to obstruct access to previous sections without a valid reason. A F K When Needed 18:11, August 8, 2011 (UTC)

Howdy Edit

Thought I'd just say... Interesting Site. 72.148.31.114 05:40, September 9, 2011 (UTC)

Cheers :)

Let me know if there's anything I can help you with ^ ^ A F K When Needed 18:32, September 9, 2011 (UTC)

Same on guildwiki. :-) (that is my ip, btw) Ariyen 19:08, September 9, 2011 (UTC)

Heh, thanks. Been there for just over four years so I've a reasonably good handle on most day-to-day things, but I'll remember the offer ^ ^ A F K When Needed 19:23, September 9, 2011 (UTC)

You have been invited Edit

Into the STFU program. Your creative genius and knowledge of coding will surely create great masterpieces of vandalism. --El_Nazgir 08:58, October 2, 2011 (UTC)

Guide me wisely. A F K When Needed 18:28, October 2, 2011 (UTC)

Sig pic Edit

I have a pic in my sig but each time I sig something I have to upload the pic for some reason. This don't make sense. Why can't the pic just be a part of my sig, like yours? Will exchange my rectum for answer. Rectal test user! 00:39, October 7, 2011 (UTC)

Hi. First things first.

Remove the external link from your signature. Those are not permitted. A F K When Needed 00:42, October 7, 2011 (UTC)

Once you've done that, I'll need you to be more specific regarding your problem. To my knowledge no image you have uploaded has been deleted, so any and all images you've uploaded are still there, in the same place.

Is this your only Wikia account? A F K When Needed 00:52, October 7, 2011 (UTC)

Are you aware that you will have to upload the image once per wiki? So, for example, if you upload the picture on wikianswers, we won't have it here on UnAnswers. A F K When Needed 00:55, October 7, 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. Rectal test user! 22:10, October 7, 2011 (UTC)

CONGRATULATIONSEdit

You are now Spock. The Enterprise, however, is MINE! --CANADA 16:51, October 9, 2011 (UTC)

I'm Captain *beat* Jean-Luc Picard of the USS *beat* enterprise. --El_Nazgir 20:16, October 9, 2011 (UTC)

Resistance, is futile. A F K When Needed 20:26, October 9, 2011 (UTC)

"TIME IS THE FIRE IN WHICH WE BURN"

--Malcolm McDowell

What Happened? Edit

Balgore, our newest member I believe, and my buddy, said that he unanswered 3 questions and that his edits were reverted (he didn't use that word). However, I'm unable to see any questions that he changed either on balgore or any annonymous IP user through recent changes. Reverted stuff doesn't get removed from RC, right? Do you know what questions he's talking about or what might've happened? I figure that he must've not published them or something. 24.246.45.26 03:03, October 30, 2011 (UTC)

LOL, of course when I write the above, I'm not logged in for some retarded reason. Khono 03:22, October 30, 2011 (UTC)

Strange. Reverted edits still show up on RC, only deleted pages don't, but the delete message still shows up. There haven't been any reverts or rollbacks for the last 6 days, so I haven't the slightest clue how it didn't show up. --El_Nazgir 09:33, October 30, 2011 (UTC)

El_Nazgir, have you tried viewing Balgore's deleted contributions? As a non-Admin, I can't. Wikia can destroy pages and remove them from RC entirely, but unless he was asking questions about them - and I'm talking about questions so obscene that we'd likely delete them ourselves anyway - I see no reason why they would choose to do so.

I've checked answers @ wikia, and he hadn't asked them there (while logged in, at least), so I'm not sure what happened. Perhaps he hit Preview and never saved them, as both of you have suggested. A F K When Needed 15:33, October 30, 2011 (UTC)

No deleted contributions but Khono's userpage. --El_Nazgir 16:28, October 30, 2011 (UTC)

Of course, if he could remember which questions he edited, that would (obviously) help lots. A F K When Needed 19:39, October 30, 2011 (UTC)

Should find out on Monday. He only goes to sites like these (or answers most emails) while at work. Khono 20:13, October 30, 2011 (UTC)

I Hate Christmas Edit

And xmas hates you! /give A_F_K_When_Needed 263 64 Khono 15:52, December 30, 2011 (UTC)

If I'm not mistaken he also hates minecraft :P --El_Nazgir 17:19, December 30, 2011 (UTC)

No one can hate MC! Khono 18:16, December 30, 2011 (UTC)

The Legoman is correct.

Thanks, though. A F K When Needed 21:26, December 30, 2011 (UTC)

What does the scouter say about his edit count?Edit

It's over 9,000!!!!!

I read it in your profile and got it immediately, that's my 15 y/o favorite phrase. :) --Liliana (my talk). 08:21, February 18, 2012 (UTC)

Heh :)

Speaking of getting things, I didn't get this for a second. You didn't use the new section function, and when I saw you edit the previous section on my talk page from RC, I wtf'd. :P

Obviously, once I saw the ToC I put it together. In my defense, I was hitting the vodka last night / this morning. A F K When Needed 12:48, February 18, 2012 (UTC)

Administration AWOL Edit

Some are available sometimes. Doesn't seem like we have much community left, though. Khono (talk) 12:37, January 1, 2013 (UTC)

Good to hear from you again, Khono! :)

Thanks for the response. A F K When Needed 21:31, January 2, 2013 (UTC)

I HAVE RETURNED! Now hand over all your twizzlers and kittens. I'm not interested in your money. CANADA 00:53, January 5, 2013 (UTC)

They must've changed the skin because NOW I CAN EDIT my wikis! (cue evil laughter) I guess this means I'm back and hopefully more mature than ever after my 2 year long sojourn at ff.net. It's great to see you all here. Yallow (talk) 14:36, March 31, 2013 (UTC)