User talk:Interestingstuffadder/Archive 1

ARCHIVE...DO NOT EDIT

Welcome!

Hello, Interestingstuffadder/Archive 1, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! NickelShoe 00:19, 19 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Redirects

You're partly right, in that it was your redirects that made me wonder whether the proposed deletion process could apply to redirects, but I don't think yours need to be deleted. They just reminded me of the numerous poop-related edits and redirects that kids add which are certainly deserving of being removed. I reverted a few of your edits because at first sight they are so similar to the childish vandalism that is prominent around here, but you say that there is some thought behind whatever you're trying to do, so have fun. Deli nk 17:55, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Flatulence

I apologize if it's unclear - I use that to denote the version to which I revert the page, not the vandal. I hadn't thought of that before. (ESkog)^(Talk) 03:12, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Business /= Defecation

Hi Interestingstuffadder. I could tell by your name that you were quite serious about what you added. Putting in an other uses section was a good idea. It should reduce any need for a disambiguation page. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 20:47, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Aaron Neville

We think alike :) look at our two edits. But I have reverted you because I said on the talk I wouldn't remove it until he responded. Once he does, though, feel free to remove it. Howabout1 20:44, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fuck Truck

I understand that you're acting in good faith; I just don't believe that the subject is notable. If the consensus is to keep the article, I'll be happy to work on it more. Catamorphism 05:03, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There'll be plenty of time to discuss where the page should be redirected once the deletion debate is over. Let's not be too hasty ;-) Catamorphism 04:37, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There are three more days left, and there's about a 50/50 split right now. It's impossible to say what the outcome will be. Catamorphism 04:42, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not an admin, so I don't know what the exact rules are for closing a debate. However, if 20 people voted "delete" in the next 3 days, and there were no more "keep" votes, that would be consensus to delete it, according to my understanding. I'm just saying, we can wait 3 more days to discuss details like this, given that if it's kept, it will probably be here for much longer! Catamorphism 04:55, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks; I'm planning to do some more research on this, using (gasp!) print sources, when I get a round tuit.. Catamorphism 23:47, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'll get right on the picture :) Isopropyl 02:37, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings. I noticed your opposition to the move on the talk page of Fuck Truck under the section "Move?". You probably want then to participate in the vote that is underway on the same page, only somewhat above your objection, under the section "Requested move". -- Mareklug ^talk 20:17, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikistalking

Can you please explain what I did that you think constitutes Wikistalking? In your answer, cite relevant passages from the article on that subject. Catamorphism 04:23, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As I responded on this user's talk page, I perhaps should have made my tongue in cheek tone more apparent. I have noticed a pattern of going through my recent contributions, but this doesnt yet literally amount to wikistalking. I have gone back and changed the title of my post to make its tone more explcit. I apologize for any confusion. Interestingstuffadder 05:29, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fire down below

On the Red hair article, you added "fire down below". I was not the person who originally removed this, but I do question what rationale you have for adding it. Are you sure this refers to red hair? I thought it only referred to people with red pubic hair, in which case it is not appropriate in the introduction to the article. Not because it refers to pubic hair, mind you, but because the article is not talking about pubic hair at that point. --Yamla 15:22, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

fire down below as common term for redhead

you have to be kidding. this is at best a bar room joke bordering on insult. it is not "common". maybe this belongs at the bottom under insults. what region do you claim this phrase is used commonly? where I'm from you would get punched for saying that. I've heard it, maybe, once. Not common. Respectively, --cda 17:14, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What happened?

I've been trolling around for fellow spanish wikipedians, by sheer chance I stumbled upon you, and I see that somehow you've copied, at the bottom of your page, the user boxes I've recently added to my page. In exactly the same order too. Even if some contradict what you say in previous boxes. I'm just curious, does that serve any purpose at all? Raystorm 22:12, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Interestingstuffadder, if you just want to make a collection of userboxes without the implication that the descriptions in them apply to you, you can make a subpage of your userpage that has those boxes (leaving the ones that do apply to you on your userpage). Otherwise, people might become confused by the fact that some of your userboxes contradict each other (like Raystorm just did). Catamorphism 08:13, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's just advice to keep from confusing people, like I said above. Please assume good faith. Catamorphism 20:25, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nah, no problem. I was just curious. I thought someone might have vandalised your page using mine, see what I mean? You wanna use them, go right ahead, they certainly don't bother me! :) Cheers! Raystorm 09:25, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism Ranger

I see that you like my Wikipedia Vandalism Ranger idea. This is both cool and neat. Maybe we should form a Wikipedia Vandalism Ranger Core and track down them varmets? lol. (Steve 21:36, 22 March 2006 (UTC))[reply]