User talk:Liquidhelium

Note: I dislike having a long talk page, since it increases the scrolling distance to get to my newest messages. Therefore, don't be surprised if conversations disappear into my black hole.

Anyone who uses British spelling or date format on my talk page can expect to be swiftly ignored.

Bob's asses
u broke it -- 22:49, September 4, 2010 (UTC)
 * What, you don't like my redesigned main page? -- 00:59, September 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * -- 11:04, September 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * It's only because of this move, and I'm done now. :D -- 21:52, September 5, 2010 (UTC)

Re: What?!?!?!?!
I hate your reasoning and I replaced it. Me sorry. I was looking at recent changes, went to diff and edited. I think when I clicked to edit you hadn't saved yet and I replaced it. Sorreh. 02:33, September 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * I think it was my fault, but whatever. Anyway, I liked Sentra's edit summary   02:35, September 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I've noticed that. Beginning to think the proposal was a bad idea.  I think I'll go nominate a couple images.   01:30, September 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * What shall I say? Yes?   01:57, September 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * Lrn2joke  01:58, September 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes suh. 02:01, September 6, 2010 (UTC)

#ifeq
Ifeq is hard stuff, it takes someone with an iq of at least 12 to learn it. Are you sure you are ready? 02:56, September 5, 2010 (UTC)

Rs:AR section
You don't think it should be left there for users to comment on if they are against it? - 13:04, September 5, 2010 (UTC)

Category Names
See User talk:Iiii I I I before you delete categories again. 16:00, September 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * The problem we were having was that users didn't know there was another category for users only. If we have the correct category suggested when they go to add the mainspace category, the problem would likely be avoided. 16:04, September 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * Some users (example) just add the category mark directly. I'm not totally happy with the name, but I don't see any other alternatives that would solve the problem. 16:07, September 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * It would require more code on userbox template, and some of the names would still have to follow my naming convention (for example, Bobian Users would not sound right). I can still do that, if you want. 16:10, September 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * The fact that both you and Iiii had issue with the format implies that many others will as well. Extra code will not be a problem. 16:14, September 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * I wish I knew. Anyway, I'm going to go with the extra code option. 16:19, September 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm about to go to church. I changed the names of the categories in the template, but it will take a while (no clue how long) for them to change on all the userpages. They will appear as redlinks, but they will be in the category none the less. Under the assumption that they will be fixed when I get back, I will delete the old categories (unless somebody else does it first). 16:42, September 5, 2010 (UTC)

RE: Question
... Another person asking that again? Seriously? >.> 19:28, September 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes. This has happened before >.> 19:30, September 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * Oops Misread that ^^" But Yes. We are different people 19:31, September 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * Its fine. You are just making sure. 19:33, September 5, 2010 (UTC)

RE: Excuse me, Mr. Chia
Yes (in recent times: 1 2 3). I don't vote in RfAs/RfBs if I feel as if I don't know the candidate, don't care, feel as if my vote won't contribute to the discussion or outcome, or have nothing to actually say. 20:35, September 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * 2007, I would assume. The process was a lot simpler [and less standardized] back then. 08:20, September 6, 2010 (UTC)

Imposter!
The bioshock disease is spreading. 00:02, September 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * The basis for my signature, and twigy's and someone elses I can't remember whose. Its a vidya game! 01:38, September 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * Do you mean mine, Psycho?  01:40, September 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * Yea you! Soon everyone shall be recruited into our ranks. Even liquidhelm! Mua ha ha ha ha ha! 01:41, September 6, 2010 (UTC)

Re:DAP
Simple, 1.Common practice at the time and 2. that wasn't put through consensus at the time (don't know if it's ever been) 4. There is no number 3.-- 02:09, September 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * Oops, I lied, there is a number 3, that thing was also written a mere 5 days before my RfA. Fin.-- 02:21, September 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * It was also three weeks long and the closest thing to wiki hell I can imagine. I was also a fairly divisive figure before in my earlier admin days.-- 02:30, September 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid you'll have to ask Psycho about that.-- 02:38, September 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * Looks good, though perhaps, one minor addition, you see I've been curious to anything that users would like to say in general. For instance a "general comments" page in which users can leave anything else they'd like to say that doesn't fit into the other categories, basically an 'other' page, as I seem to get the feeling some users (especially the newer ones) are unfortunately hesitant to talk to 'crats or give full opinions to the individuals themselves. Just a thought of course.-- 02:56, September 6, 2010 (UTC)

Re: Deleted contribs
Is that really high? I wouldn't think so... --Coolnesse 03:18, September 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * Now it makes me feel like I want deleted contribs with my others too... --Coolnesse 13:24, September 6, 2010 (UTC)

Re: DAP
It's fine with me. I'm a bit busy with classes, but I should be around. 03:58, September 6, 2010 (UTC)

RAGE
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU- -- 16:27, September 6, 2010 (UTC)
 * Why? -- 17:35, September 6, 2010 (UTC)

Re:RFD
Firstly do not call for deletion, but merging. Your arguments should be the same, but at the end you say Merge to Lucien instead of Delete. Also I would cite RuneScape:Requests for deletion/Dragon ore, since it was deleted under similar pretenses. 17:35, September 6, 2010 (UTC)