User talk:67.86.86.217

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Your edit to Mathematics

Your recent edit to Mathematics (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // AntiVandalBot 00:08, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Round borders on Jimbo's user page

This is the 2nd time you have changed Jimbo Wales' user page to remove the rounded borders on the boxes. Both times, you broke the CSS, making malformed tags. The first time, I undid what you did, assuming you had not intended it, however this time you mentioned it was intentional. What specifically did you mean about them being pixelated on some browsers? I am interested to know. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Kaldosh (talk • contribs) 10:36, 27 February 2007 (UTC).

Um...that was like over a month ago, if I remember correctly. You bring it up like it happened not five minutes in the past. If I "broke any tags" or what ever the hell you seem so concerned about, it certainly didn't seem to change the appearance of the page. At all. And nobody complained. In fact, it looks like people rather liked the straight corners because they've stayed since.
What I meant by the "pixelated" comment was that, yes, in some browsers (specifically IE and Firefox, less so in Opera) the rounded corners appear less like corners and more like little ugly steps. This of course, depends also on the user's screen resolution, and I know it doesn't happen on current Macs. However, since probably somewhere around 99% of the people who will ever visit this site are running IE on a low-end monitor, I think it would be more than prudent to avoid what in my opinion is hardly aesthetically appealing even when not broken up by a computer into little ugly bits. 67.86.86.217 20:28, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Not that you would care, but...

I just happened to be looking at this page and noticed that it appears differently depending on whether I'm redirected or not. Just thought I'd tell you in case you didn't already know. Pretty cool stuff by the way... 67.86.86.217 04:40, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Hmm, odd. Could well be a problem my end; it's quite a complex page, so I may have screwed something up somewhere. Alternatively, your browser may have cached an older version. Bypassing the cache (CTRL+F5 in most browsers) may fix it. Anyway, glad you like it – Qxz 04:42, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
Yep, that was it - now I only see the one "very important announcement" instead of three. 67.86.86.217 04:44, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, they were only tests; so I removed them. (Mind you, the remaining one is a test too. I'll remove it as soon as I have any real announcements to put there) – Qxz 04:46, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Please stop making changes to User:Ben's user page

Your edit summary stating that policy states that you must provide an explanation for a revert of non-vandalism is almost right. You are not entitled to make arbitrary changes to the user page of an editor in good standing, and uninvited changes to user pages are considered vandalism. Please refrain from making further changes to other editors' user pages without permission. Thanks, A Traintalk 23:55, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Trolling

Wow... you have exposed my big secret! I'm totally out of the closet, if you haven't noticed. Still, what's the point? -- Y not? 03:31, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Features and admins

Please do not continue to move Administrators and Bots to the bottom. The current setup is preferred because the amount of space required for featured pictures forces too much scrolling between featured content and admins/bots. The current layout also usually allows all of administrators and bots, and part of featured content to be visible without scrolling at all. Ral315 » 18:20, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

I do not see the sysop bit as a trophy. However, I believe that continuity is important unless there's a real reason to change. It's been this way for nearly 2.5 years, and as I've said above, I think there are reasons for keeping it this way. I'm welcome to a discussion on this; I presume you put the discussion on the talk page of a features and admins article, where it was probably not seen (and indeed, if you replied there, I also missed it); if you want to bring it up at Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Signpost, it'll get seen by a lot more people. Ral315 » 03:42, 2 July 2007 (UTC)