User talk:0 Degrees

For old discussions, go here.

Erm...

...to archive, you move the page to User talk:0 Degrees/Archive. Not by copy pasta.. Θρtιmαtum_Talk 22:24, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

But then the whole page will get archived. I archive sections when there's been no discussion in them for a week. 0° 22:25, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Ha ha pasta... the only way to do it is by archiving the whole page. (This is just a starter for a convorsation, you know)Pyles 00:13, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Archiving is a personal preference. Not everyone has to archive the same way and for the same reasons. 0° 00:14, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Talk page section headers is also personal preference, so stop harassing DCM about it. ^Maverick_Nate 02:45, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

But if you use level 1 headers, the below headers will become sub-headers when they're not supposed to be. 0° 02:46, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

So, it's a talk page. Those really only matter on encyclopedic pages. ^Maverick_Nate 02:48, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Level 1 headers are the same size as the page title up top, and that can't happen. You said that before. 0° 02:51, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

You know what else I said before? "Those really only matter on encyclopedic pages." I was talking about section one headers on mainspace pages. Do not take what I say out of context. The point was that you shouldn't yell at people for putting on something different, and you also shouldn't change them. They are part of other peoples' comments and no one is allowed to change other peoples' comments. ^Maverick_Nate 02:55, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

But if sections become sub-sections un-intentionally, it messes up the table of contents. 0° 02:55, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Well then, if it is your page, you can change them. But if it doesn't bother the other people when it is their user talk, then it doesn't matter. ^Maverick_Nate 02:58, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

But the fact is, the discussions that un-intentionally become sub-sections usually aren't related to each other. 0° 03:00, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Talk pages are unencyclopedic. Section headers do not matter on talk pages. If it is your page, you can change them. If it isn't, don't touch. ^Maverick_Nate 03:03, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Is there anything in the writing about that? 0° 03:04, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

what the hell is up with the center tag on this page?? -- MAGNEDETH 03:05, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

I got the idea from Cipher. 0° 03:05, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

its stupid. it completely ruins the layout of the page. -- MAGNEDETH 03:07, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

In your opinion, that is. I think it makes the page better. 0° 03:07, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Because he doesn't have to go around changing all the colons. Anyway, it is in writing. ^Maverick_Nate 03:12, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

That's not the reason. I just think it looks better. And I'm definitely starting a boycott against that rule. 0° 03:13, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

The rule that you aren't allowed to change other people's comments? I wouldn't do that if I were you... People would be able to change your comments all they like because you are trying to boycott that rule. ^Maverick_Nate 03:15, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

No, just the rule about the headers. 0° 17:25, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Some convorsation with O I guess... Pyles 17:31, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

How are you going to boycott it?--RexRacer -talk 17:39, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Forums. 0° 17:39, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

The Header rule is now part of the changing talk page comments rule. Breaking the header rule would result in breaking the rule where you can't change talk page comments. ^Maverick_Nate 20:02, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

I don't understand how headers are part of comments. 0° 20:12, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

There should be a law against the center tag being used on pages. It's goddamn killing the page. Oh, and Zero Degrees, tell Chocolatte that archiving is the same among any and all talk pages. In other words, no copy pasta~ Θρtιmαtum_Talk 09:12, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Archiving can be done either way. And the center tag wasn't my idea. 0° 21:10, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Hmmm... - Kogoro | Talk to me - 21:16, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

I'm trying to get that rule changed. 0° 21:18, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Have fun with that then. - Kogoro | Talk to me - 21:20, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Going to boycott it?--RexRacer -talk 21:23, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Yes. 0° 21:23, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

What are going to boycott? The header thing, the centering or what? --^Psychic_Rider^☮ 21:24, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

The header thing and the new archiving thing. 0° 21:25, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

OK then. Have fun with that. Where do you expect to find support? --^Psychic_Rider^☮ 21:27, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

So you're gonna like, post a forum topic? Create a poll? Complain to Archaic?--RexRacer -talk 21:29, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Nonviolent protests maybe...if you do that, I'll give you advice. I've taken part in two of them at my school. --^Psychic_Rider^☮ 21:30, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Sorry for any part I may have had in this. I hope we can be friends.--RexRacer -talk 22:30, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

It's okay. You have AIM, right? 0° 22:31, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

I have one, but I barely ever use it. I hope we can still be friends...--RexRacer -talk 01:06, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

AIM.

If you ever want to talk or chat, mine is PsychicRider, yes original isn't it? Feel free to add me. --^Psychic_Rider^☮ 21:23, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

I sent you a chat invitation just now on AIM. 0° 21:26, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Um, yeah. I've never used AIM before so I'm not sure what I'm doing yet, so if I don't respond right away, you'll know why. --^Psychic_Rider^☮ 21:28, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

All right. 0° 21:30, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Wait, I'm slow. Its PsychicRider362...sorry. I was working everything out and I noticed that. --^Psychic_Rider^☮ 21:32, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

BP Death

were not dead. in fact, over the past few months, page visits, and overall editing has increased quite a bit. i unfortunately do not have a numerical figure, but id take a wild guess at at least 20-30%. were far from dead. -- MAGNEDETH 22:29, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

That isn't what I meant by "dead". 0° 22:30, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

then you sir, are using the wrong terminology. dead means inactive, lifeless, not being used, etc. -- MAGNEDETH 22:32, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

<br clear="all" />

We need those. — THE TROM — 00:49, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

BR

THEY NEED TO BE THERE, DO NOT REMOVE THEM. -- MAGNEDETH 00:49, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

They put too much white space. 0° 00:49, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

no they dont. -- MAGNEDETH 00:51, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

From admin: "They keep those templates from f....ing up with alignments & s..t..." — THE TROM — 00:52, 11 February 2009 (UTC)