User talk:Sixtyninefourtyninefourtyfoureleven

User talk:69.49.44.11

An anonymous user, by another name.

Hello, Sixtyninefourtyninefourtyfoureleven! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! QuackGuru (talk) 08:10, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply] Getting started A tutorial • Our five pillars • Getting mentored How to: edit a page • upload and use images Getting help Frequently asked questions • Tips Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention Policies and guidelines Neutral point of view • No original research Verifiability • Reliable sources • Citing sources What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability The community Build consensus • Resolve disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community Portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists Writing articles Be bold in editing • Develop an article The perfect article • Manual of style Stubs • Categories • Disambiguation Pages needing attention • Peer review Miscellaneous User name • User pages • Talk pages Clean up: General - Spam - Vandalism Join a WikiProject • Translation Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

I'd recommend laying off the refactoring of talk pages for now. It's usually not done except when pages are completely incomprehensible. I'm not sure it's a good idea in the middle of a fight, either -- better to let threads become so unreadable that they die on their own.--Father Goose (talk) 10:30, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds like good advice. I hadn't anticipated things would get this silly. 69.49.44.11 (talk) 15:48, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WT:IAR is home to much frustration, which flares up from time to time. This is the worst I've ever seen it, though. I'm glad I've had an outlet this time which kept me out of trouble.--Father Goose (talk) 03:27, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm the person who introduced the refactoring*. I also publicly concluded that it wasn't going to work out because it would probably end up in an edit war on the talk page. I feel a pang of guilt about mentioning the latter.

*for the sake of future readers, I should clarify that none of my refactoring involved the deletion of anyone's words, with the exception of a duplicate paragraph by User:Newbyguesses, and that after he left an explicit comment asking that no-one but myself[see below] refactor what he had written. I wouldn't have touched it, even so, if I had understood that the reason for the comment was that a talk-page editing conflict was already underway.

-- 69.49.44.11 (talk) 03:39, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't matter. Live and learn.--Father Goose (talk) 06:48, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Um, correction - my note did not say that "only" esteemed NU should refactor if necessary, only that I suggested NU69 would be the most suitable to do so. Thanks for catching my error, which you did; one of a number, lately, unusual for me, and a sign of too much pressure on myself. Hope you caught up on sleep missed, and also hope the "silliness" is over!

Now, at /Workshop, i would suggest that posts to the page not include SIGs (bit messy) but, I leave it entirely up to you and other editors. Thanks again Newbyguesses - Talk 01:11, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Whichever is preferable, I didn't want to start messing with your version, or imply that I was proposing that my version should be adopted. With regards to the note, my apologies for the error, clearly my memory of it was sloppy. I hadn't meant to be self-aggrandizing. 69.49.44.11 (talk) 01:21, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

		The Talkpage Barnstar
		I award this Barnstar to Sixtyninefourtyninefourtyfoureleven for his/her efforts in restructuring the Ignore All Rules talk page when the sections got lengthy, and adding section headers when appropriate. microchip08 (talk) 20:33, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations, I too appreciate your good work! Newbyguesses - Talk 01:15, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry if we got off on the wrong foot, sometimes it is hard for me to filter out the signal from the noise and make the wrong assumptions. Peace. _(1 == 2)^Until 18:45, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You are unreservedly forgiven for any offense caused or any words misspoken. There is peace between us. -- 69.49.44.11 (talk) 18:57, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please change it to remove the appearance of being an anonymous user. It is misleading and, if someone else uses that IP address, you would be impersonating them, which is against the rules. Thanks. ☯  Zenwhat (talk) 17:37, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I must admit, I was confused the first few times I clicked on your sig and reached this page. Perhaps you could change your sig to "The Editor Formerly Known as 69.49.44.11"?--Father Goose (talk)

☯  Zenwhat, my limited experience of your conduct towards others leaves me with less sympathy towards your wishes than I might otherwise have. The IP address in my signature is my own. It is as an anonymous user with this IP address that I became involved in the Wikipedia. I decided to become a registered user upon receiving an invitation from User:Awiseman, and I have found certain features available to registered users to be convenient, but I have no intention of retaining either my signature or this user name, should my IP address change. 69.49.44.11 (talk) 05:17, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Father Goose, as 'The Artist Formerly Known As Prince' is currently known as Prince; and as I am, as you will have read above, already 'The Editor Formerly Known As 69.49.44.11', I feel that I have been left with little option but to remain the editor currently known as 69.49.44.11 (talk). [05:17, 8 March 2008 (UTC)][reply]

I was pretty much joking anyway. Pledging to discontinue using the name/sig if your IP does change counters the reasonable fear that Zenwhat brought up; I can't see any problem with it beyond that. And changing your username remains an option in the future anyway.--Father Goose (talk) 06:58, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand. Who was joking, and what was the point. Oh dear. --Newbyguesses - Talk 12:33, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Father Goose was joking, and I was joking in my response to him. ☯  Zenwhat was writing seriously. I should emphasize that I believe that he did keep within the bounds of courtesy in his request, that he doubtlessly has good reasons to find IP addresses annoying - many people, for instance, have trouble distinguishing between a familiar one and a strange one - and that he did raise a legitimate concern about the stability of the claim to that IP identity. Unfortunately, because I have strong reasons for using the signature that I do, and because he had been rather tone deaf towards my attempt to focus attention on the argument, rather than the argumentativeness, of what he had written on the 'Ignore all rules' talk page, he got the reply from both barrels. -- 69.49.44.11 (talk) 15:49, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Have you seen this?sorry for any inconvenience--Newbyguesses - Talk 12:33, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, I hadn't! Thank you for pointing that out, I'd realized that it was a bit too broad in scope, after the fact. I've fixed it. 69.49.44.11 (talk) 15:59, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome, I am sure. And, thanks for the explanation above. Though often confused, Newbyguesses claims to guess right at better than a fifty-fifty ratio.--Newbyguesses - Talk 19:16, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How dare you mention anything related to Pokémon? I now hate you! To redeem yourself, you must find my four secret pages.... microchip08 (find my secret page!) 19:52, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

[[[joke]]]

Well, not at all, I don't hate you! If'n I did, I would suggest putting the contents of (a certain page in 'my' userspace) on your talking-page, but, I don't hate you, and I don't suggest that. It is a Humor template-thingy, and only for flippers to sport with, as I am, <One>, if you get my drift. Peace. --Newbyguesses - Talk 00:13, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm partial to Wigglytuff, myself.--Father Goose (talk) 04:55, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kim is starting the lectures on April 6th around 15:00 UTC (although that is apparently open to discussion). Just a reminder... Xavexgoem (talk) 14:16, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is 15:00 UTC, and I'd like to start talking on irc.freenode.net, #wikipedia-en-lectures.

--Kim Bruning (talk) 15:04, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

#wikipedia-en-lectures @ 15:00 today, yay. Xavexgoem (talk) 14:52, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Today (Apr 20th), around 15:00 UTC! Possibly on Skype, but certainly on IRC (#wikipedia-en-lectures on freenode)! I don't actually know about the Skype details... Message me on Skype (xavexgoem) about that, if you have it (no harm in getting it, either), and then maybe by that time I'll have a clue :-p Xavexgoem (talk) 14:28, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

They are today (27 April 2008) at 15:00 UTC. Here is the skype link & here's the IRC link. Xavexgoem (talk) 14:57, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I thought that the rearrangements you made to the CDS article didn't help. I undid them. Do you have a good reason for putting the contents page on the left of the intro when not only does it look poor but is inconsistent with other articles?
Zain Ebrahim (talk) 11:10, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I did. I thought it looked better and was more consistent*. Did you perhaps not read my comment?

"(Added TOCleft template, with explicatory notes for the regular editors. Hope this is welcome, revert freely.)"

Please assume good faith, ok?

* Although I'm not entirely sure why. I think my formatting was based on an old template.

— 69.49.44.11 (talk) 16:30, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, we're posting on time for once (40 minutes early). Todays lecture is by Vassyana (an expert mediator), who will be talking about how to deal with conflicts, whether you are a mediator or not. Hope to see you there! --Kim Bruning (talk) 14:15, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Todays lecture is starting! The topic is "How source experts judge source reliability" and the speaker is DGG. The meeting location for setup is #wikipedia-en-lectures on irc.freenode.net. The lecture will be given over skype. Contact Filll2 or kim_bruning to be invited to the lecture chat also.

--Kim Bruning (talk) 15:08, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You have a template loop on your page Template:MyTemplate. The reason is obvious: in it you call upon that very same page again, and that is a loop, and that is not allowed. I think you need some help here, because I even can't guess from the code what you were trying to do there. Something to do with finding out how long ago ... Perhaps I could help. Debresser (talk) 23:35, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Going by what I wrote in my edit summary (I don't really remember otherwise) the problem was that the pinyin line became so small(?) as to be illegible. There doesn't appear to be any problem following the latest change. W. P. Uzer (talk) 18:02, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Ignore all rules/TheShortVersion, 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 talk:Ignore all rules/TheShortVersion and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Wikipedia talk:Ignore all rules/TheShortVersion 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. Vanjagenije (talk) 22:08, 20 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. You're currently outputting a signature which reads "0x69494411 16:35, 20 June 2016 (UTC)" Per WP:SIGLINK, there has to be an actual link to your user page or user talk page in there somewhere, so that other editors can tell who you are without having to check the talk page's history. --McGeddon (talk) 17:52, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, modified to comply with current convention. 0x69494411 03:03, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If Airhead (subculture) is not actually a subculture, what would you say the proper word for it is?