User talk:Weyes

Template:Not here Don't go! Jayjg ^(talk) 3 July 2005 21:12 (UTC)

Gah! What just happned? El_C 3 July 2005 21:15 (UTC)

Don't you dare. I was just getting used to classic Weyes rvvs in my Watchlist! JFW | T@lk 3 July 2005 21:23 (UTC)

Whatever happened, I hope that you come back soon. Will => talk 3 July 2005 22:44 (UTC)

I very much understand your decision. I hope internal mechanisms of Wikipedia will improve and you'll find environment caring more to good editors than to vandals. Thanks for all work you did. Pavel Vozenilek 4 July 2005 03:24 (UTC)

What happened? Dan100 (Talk) July 4, 2005 10:54 (UTC)

Have a short break to recharge yourself, but please come back, Weyes. SlimVirgin ^(talk) July 4, 2005 21:47 (UTC)

Sorry to see you go. Too bad the vandals and trolls got to you. I hope that you come back soon and help us with more janitorial work and article creation instead of doing RC patrol. Take care. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 5 July 2005 08:02 (UTC)

I'd just like to say that I've seen some of your work, and it's certainly a shame that you're leaving. Had I seen more of your work, I probably would have voted to support your adminship. You (Talk) July 5, 2005 21:31 (UTC)

Sorry to see you go, we'll miss you. I was doing RC patrol after work on Monday and was surprised to see so much unpatrolled vandalism; I guess this would explain that. I hope that you eventually reconsider. JYolkowski // talk 7 July 2005 01:34 (UTC)

I've only seen your work as recently as the past few weeks, but I feel compelled to comment on your excellent work. Sorry you felt the urge to leave-- I completely understand. 172 7 July 2005 01:53 (UTC)

Please do come back after a break, it would be devastating you lose you :-(.

Hope you're back soon... Dan100 (Talk) 12:12, July 27, 2005 (UTC)

If I recall correctly, I was the one who left you your welcome message (though I went by "Ingoolemo" then). I just thought about you the other day, and wondered what happened. Sorry that you left. Karl Dickman ^talk 07:06, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Your Rfa

A few months on and I have come to the conclusion I was wrong to oppose your Rfa. Your absence is noticed. Shame, really. SqueakBox 18:04, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia_talk:Survey_guidelines#Fixing_giant_loopholes

The debate has restarted, your input would be much appreciated, as the discussed propoasal is the one incorporating your previous suggestions and comments. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 16:50, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

Come back Weyes

Please come back Brookie :) - a collector of little round things! ^(Talk!) 16:10, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Quantum sort joke

Hi! In condensing the joke, you have managed to surgically remove the essence of what the joke was about. It's a well known joke among computer scientists and physicists and the central point, punchline or whatever is that a) it's O(n) and b) that you've got to be able to destroy the universe. Never mind actual theories about real quantum sorts. The quantum sort joke is a joke after all. Bye, Shinobu 03:37, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Welcome back!

You are much welcomed back. Pavel Vozenilek 21:44, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, just killing some time... --W(t) 21:46, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Just FYI: almost nothing has changed here in the meantime, whatever one understands with it. Pavel Vozenilek 21:51, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Really? By the looks of it, wheel warring had become commonplace, no personal attacks had become a historical curiosity, and AIV response times had gone down the drain. But I'm glad to hear I'm mistaken :-P. --W(t) 21:54, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Look ar User:Rl: a good vandal fighter with around thousands of edits per month. I made the mistake to nominate him on RfA, he got besmirched and left. Really, everything as usual. Pavel Vozenilek 21:58, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Hey there!

We missed you. Nice to see you back :-) --HappyCamper 21:47, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Secovuoum?

The reason given on the {{prod}} tag ("Non-notable book promo") seems to have nothing at all to do with the article. Is this on the correct article? Tonywalton  | Talk 22:23, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Yup, have a look at the other articles by DwHunt, it's a set of articles about a nn fictional world. --W(t) 22:25, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Yeah - I was just looking at Special:Contributions/DwHunt and coming to the same conclusion. Good catch! Tonywalton  | Talk 22:29, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Welcome back

Good to see you on my watchlist again. JYolkowski // talk 23:12, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

understood

Understood about the AIV. Thanks.⇒ SWATJester ^Ready Aim _Fire! 00:50, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Please check your WP:NA entry

Greetings, editor! Your name appears on Wikipedia:List of non-admins with high edit counts. If you have not done so lately, please take a look at that page and check your listing to be sure that following the particulars are correct:

1. If you are an admin, please remove your name from the list.
2. If you are currently interested in being considered for adminship, please be sure your name is in bold; if you are opposed to being considered for adminship, please cross out your name (but do not delete it, as it will automatically be re-added in the next page update).
3. Please check to see if you are in the right category for classification by number of edits.

Thank you, and have a wiki wiki day! BD2412 T 02:10, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Why the hell did you do that?!?!?!

I updated the Dick Cheney page and you changed it back! What the hell is your problem?!

Thanks

Thanks for reverting vandalism on my user page. PJM 15:44, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

You're welcome (again.. the pretty green box on your user page was all the thanks I need). --W(t) 15:46, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Wikilawyering deletionist

Wikilawyering deletionists like you (diff) are what make Wikipedia a cheap HTML knock-off of the Britannica or Universalis, and that's the opinion I'm entitled to. -- 62.147.113.190 15:52, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Re:Category:Robert's Quartet

Hay. I put this to get it started. I just finished it. I don't need a "What a retard" letter writn to me every time I don't do something thay YOU think is right. — Hurricane Devon ( Talk ) 16:02, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Bruce Johnson

Greetings, Weyes!
You were kind enough to support the FAC candidacy of my article on Katie Holmes. I've put forward another nomination, Ohio's lieutenant goveror Bruce Johnson. I've would appreciate your comments at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Bruce Johnson. PedanticallySpeaking 21:30, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

GO AHEAD!

Go ahead and delete me, you'll just be doing me a favor!

Another RfA

That's very kind, I'm not really RC patrolling regularly though, just once in a while when the fancy takes me. I'm going to decline, but the offer is appreciated. --W(t) 14:40, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Redirects to user pages

Hi Weyes,

The reason I created such redirects is that I have a work in progress with several pages related one to another, and I don't want to put them in the main namespace until the work is done. But, if you are in trouble with the redirections, I can change my mind and put them right now in the main namespace. Croquant 15:20, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

You could also just leave a few redlinks, and possibly leave a note on the article's talk page that you're working on the redlinked pages. But if you feel the articles are sufficiently worked out to appear in the main namespace, that's probably easiest. --W(t) 15:23, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

prod

Ok, thanks. I had db'd pages like thatbefore only to have been told that I should have prodded them since they didnt meet CSD. Thanks. :) (Arundhati Bakshi (talk • contribs)) 16:41, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Ah yes, I see your problem. Though I doubt anyone would object to speedying an article containing ony a hostname, even if there wasn't a CSD for it. And if you want to check, there's always WP:CSD. --W(t) 16:45, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Subst

Just a little friendly reminder to please subst your warning templates. (Example: {{subst:test3}} rather than {{test3}}.) Thanks. :) Buchanan-Hermit™..CONTRIBS..SPEAK! 02:21, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

What exactly is gained by doing so? Lots of non-dynamic templates are still included, and the test templates aren't on high-traffic pages. I mean, I'm not going to object if anyone substs in my templates, but I don't think it does much for the readability of the page source, and I'd rather avoid the extra typing. Any enlightenment on the subject is welcome though. --W(t) 18:05, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

The purpose if it has to deal with easing the workload of the server and also due to the fact that if someone vandalizes or changes the warning template, it'd appear on ALL the talkpages that has the warning. Subst'ing would ease the server's workload and also prevent the possibility of "mass vandalism". Omitting the subst is usually for things that need/might need to be changed in the future, such as navigation boxes and such. Warnings don't need to be changed in the future -- they stay the same. It doesn't have much to do with the page's readability. Buchanan-Hermit™..CONTRIBS..SPEAK! 18:34, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

A vandalism to {{test}} might affect a lot of pages, but they're all low-traffic pages. The number of views are what matters for vandalism, not the number of distinct pages. The same pretty much goes for performance: If you want to reduce inclusion costs, you should be concentrating on templates like {{current}} which are used on high-traffic pages. --W(t) 18:38, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

However, {{current}} is not officially part of the article but rather a tag. Test templates are part of the talk page. (I'm not sure if you've already read this, but WP:SUBST explains all this in further detail. You should probably discuss this issue there too.) Buchanan-Hermit™..CONTRIBS..SPEAK! 18:41, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

{{Test}} is both part of the talk page text *and* a tag. But I think the issue has been discussed to death already, it's just that some people are more swayed by the arguments for and some by those against. --W(t) 18:45, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Copyvio notice

Thanks for seeing my message about the copyvio on Tena, Ecuador and fixing it up so quickly! Ben Cairns 10:57, 20 March 2006 (UTC).

Grant Barbour

Hi, I thought you would like to know that an anonymous contributor removed the speedy deletion tag that you placed on the above article. I've been watching this article; I prod'ed it a while ago and the prod tag was removed. I decided to let it be for a while because the subject is published and I wanted to see if the article was developed. However, since you nominated it for speedy and I still have reservations about his notability, I sent it to AfD so the larger community can review it. Regards, Accurizer 20:45, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

You're back

I knew you'd be back. Thank Heavens, I was truly thrilled to see that familiar name on my Watchlist. Please stay. If you think the trolls are getting to you, I will have some exercises that will help. Some involve Roman mythology or microprocessors. And there is always the judicious use of WP:ANI, the best invention since sliced bread. Cheers. JFW | T@lk 22:47, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, you're right, I can't resist procrastinating here, though I'm not back either. There's still far too much that needs to change here before I pack up my stuff and move back in, as it were, but I still enjoy a visit every now and then. Thanks for the welcome back. --W(t) 03:55, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Cinemann

Would you please explain proposed changes to The Cinemann on the talk page before making changes. Thank you. CherryPop 01:28, 3 April 2006 (UTC)CherryPop

The Game DRV part deus

Could you explicitly state if you want the article undeleted/restored/kept or deleted? Just "endorse closure" is ambigious, even if I think the rest of your comment shows which way you want. Kotepho 03:47, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I didn't realise at the time, sorry about that. Luckily it went the right way anyway, thanks for bringing it to my attention. --W(t) 11:26, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Verify your facts

I assure you, I have made no attempt at editing any pages on this wiki. Please verify your facts before making accusations and insulting people.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.203.103.121 (talk • contribs)

Weyes, I replied to this message on the talk page for 80.203.103.121. The current user of that IP address received warning messages that you placed one year ago and thought they were directed at him/her. Regards, Accurizer 16:42, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. --W(t) 11:27, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Subst

When using template tags on talk pages, don't forget to substitute with text by adding subst: to the template tag. For example, use {{subst:test}} instead of {{test}}. This reduces server load and prevents accidental blanking of the template. --Cyde Weys 01:35, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism

Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. KzKrann (talk) 06:13, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism

Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. KzKrann (talk) 06:14, 30 January 2014 (UTC)