User talk:HexZyle

May i ask why you reverted me on the endermen article? many people (Excluding me) just cbf to look through the entire article for a trivia explaining why they're called endermen and not farlanders, as they might have thought.--Neil2250 21:25, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Um. I was thinking on whether to add "occasionally unofficially named Farlanders" or something like that but I was in a rush and went with the deletion option. Sorry. Just mention that their official name is the Endermen, and quite a few people don't want them called (or don't want to hear of them being called) Farlanders, although I'm not sure if opinion should be brought into a wiki. Just saying. 00:16, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Melon items.
Why did you suggest the moves for the Melon Slice page and the Melon Seeds page?

I was always under the assumption that the name outside of the parentheses was the title of the page, while the text in the parentheses was an extra definition added on only because something else had a similar name. For example: Verhalthur (talk)(contribs) 04:12, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah my bad. I said to Cool about how i didnt know much about the formats of wikis. Change it if you want. 06:13, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Done! I bet Ultradude25 is going to be confused about he many moves.  :D  Verhalthur (talk)(contribs) 13:11, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Um....don't want to be confusing but now that i think about it, having it as Melon (seed) is fine for now (Seeing as there is Iron (block), Iron (ingot) and Iron (ore) and also Restone (Torch), (Ore), (Dust), (Wire), and (Repeater)) 13:25, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh, right! This is that whole discussion on the Community Portal talk page.  I'll add a post to that with this information.  Verhalthur (talk)(contribs) 13:30, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Watchlist and signature
Only 145 pages? Bah, my watchlist has over 400 pages, and that's just on this wiki (on the Yu-Gi-Oh! Wikia, I have almost 8000 (yes, eight thousand) pages watchlisted). =D

As for your signature, it cannot simply be transcluded, since it otherwise will eventually become a widely-used template, with all the problems associated with that (whenever it's updated, the software must update every transclusion as well; a vandal can vandalize a large number of pages with a single edit (and if the page is protected to prevent this, it means you cannot edit it, but rather must get an administrator to make every change you want made)). A better method is to have it automatically substituted when you save a page: add the code  to the "New signature" inputbox in your preferences (replacing anything else that may be in the field already), and make sure the "Treat signature as wikitext" checkbox immediately under it is checked (this is the same setup I use for my sig). 「 ディノ 奴 千？！ 」? · ☎ Dinoguy1000 20:37, 10 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Understood. I'll have a look into this --HexZyle 22:49, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Re: Blaze Toms?
It's okay, I just hate vandalizing IP editors and I don't like when my summary can't be usual format undoing of it for an admin to see. Nothing against you. MegaScience 19:40, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Re: New, huh?
Well, I am/was a top editor at BioShock Wiki. I'm used to that. And I'm sorta good at learning. I think I can get along for the most part. Also, that page doesn't need a "Template:" in it since it's already in the User talk namespace. Template just keeps them in a certain section. MegaScience 14:58, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Re: You have been nominated...
Well I don't have to be. My main problem around here is redirects are promoted. The admins at BioShock Wiki, among their other instructions, specifically stated against them. Something about additional bandwidth or something in the technical sense, and promoting misspellings, off-casing, and generally incorrect interwiki linking in the cosmetic sense. I can't go over this whole site trying to correct it, especially when I could guess there's a very large amount of redirects... Just bothers me. Can't concentrate anymore, but you don't have to add me is my point. MegaScience 20:14, 2 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Redirects do absolutely nothing to bandwidth used; that's complete hogwash (they are almost identical to links to normal pages as far as MediaWiki is concerned; looking up a link to a redirect only requires one additional db access versus looking up a link to a regular article, whereas editing a page specifically to bypass a redirect causes something on the order of 100 additional db accesses). The other reasons given to generally avoid redirects, though, are significantly more valid. 「 ディノ 奴 千？！ 」? · ☎ Dinoguy1000 21:12, 2 October 2011 (UTC)