Talk:winter pool - Revision history

Happypasta: /* Running Time */

Happypasta — Mon, 03 Oct 2011 21:27:35 GMT

Running Time

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:27, 3 October 2011
Line 309:		Line 309:
	== Running Time ==		== Running Time ==

-	The Running time is listed as 4:00 official, 4:07 actual but I just check the new stuff menu and it has it listed as 4:06 not 4:00 so either the time was later fixed or it is just of by a second not 7 seconds. --[[User:Happypasta\|Happypasta]] 21:27, 3 October 2011 (UTC)	+	The Running time is listed as 4:00 official, 4:07 actual but I just check the new stuff menu and it has it listed as 4:06 not 4:00 so either the time was later fixed or it is just off by a second not 7 seconds. --[[User:Happypasta\|Happypasta]] 21:27, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
	----		----

Happypasta: /**/Running Time

Happypasta — Mon, 03 Oct 2011 21:27:05 GMT

: Running Time

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:27, 3 October 2011
Line 306:		Line 306:
	--[[User:Happypasta\|Happypasta]] 04:44, 9 January 2011 (UTC)		--[[User:Happypasta\|Happypasta]] 04:44, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
	:That or the chicken timer. One of the two. {{User:StrongAwesome74/sig}} 04:56, 9 January 2011 (UTC)		:That or the chicken timer. One of the two. {{User:StrongAwesome74/sig}} 04:56, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
		+
		+	== Running Time ==
		+
		+	The Running time is listed as 4:00 official, 4:07 actual but I just check the new stuff menu and it has it listed as 4:06 not 4:00 so either the time was later fixed or it is just of by a second not 7 seconds. --[[User:Happypasta\|Happypasta]] 21:27, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
		+	----

Strong Awesome: /* You Three */ I remember buyng a timer like that a long time ago. I was deeply saddened when I learned that it didn't make a rooster sound. Oh, and, reply.

Strong Awesome — Sun, 09 Jan 2011 04:56:20 GMT

You Three: I remember buyng a timer like that a long time ago. I was deeply saddened when I learned that it didn't make a rooster sound. Oh, and, reply.

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:56, 9 January 2011
Line 305:		Line 305:
	is he including [[Homestar Runner and Homestar Runner's Relationship\|himself]] or is he just being stupid?		is he including [[Homestar Runner and Homestar Runner's Relationship\|himself]] or is he just being stupid?
	--[[User:Happypasta\|Happypasta]] 04:44, 9 January 2011 (UTC)		--[[User:Happypasta\|Happypasta]] 04:44, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
-	~~----~~	+	:That or the chicken timer. One of the two. {{User:StrongAwesome74/sig}} 04:56, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Happypasta at 04:44, 9 January 2011

Happypasta — Sun, 09 Jan 2011 04:44:50 GMT

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:44, 9 January 2011
Line 303:		Line 303:

	I have always wondered why Homestar says to Strong Bad and Strong Sad "oh man you three",		I have always wondered why Homestar says to Strong Bad and Strong Sad "oh man you three",
-	is he including [[Homestar Runner and Homestar Runner's Relationship\|himself]] or is just being stupid?	+	is he including [[Homestar Runner and Homestar Runner's Relationship\|himself]] or is he just being stupid?
	--[[User:Happypasta\|Happypasta]] 04:44, 9 January 2011 (UTC)		--[[User:Happypasta\|Happypasta]] 04:44, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
	----		----

Happypasta: /**/You Three

Happypasta — Sun, 09 Jan 2011 04:44:16 GMT

: You Three

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:44, 9 January 2011
Line 299:		Line 299:
	:::::::::Should this talk page get a content warning, now? -[[Special:Contributions/132.183.138.157\|132.183.138.157]] 21:38, 17 June 2009 (UTC)		:::::::::Should this talk page get a content warning, now? -[[Special:Contributions/132.183.138.157\|132.183.138.157]] 21:38, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
	::::::::::No, the topic header is warning enough. The primary concern for the flashing-lights warnings is the articles, not the talk pages. — [[User:It's dot com\|It's dot com]] 23:00, 17 June 2009 (UTC)		::::::::::No, the topic header is warning enough. The primary concern for the flashing-lights warnings is the articles, not the talk pages. — [[User:It's dot com\|It's dot com]] 23:00, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
		+
		+	== You Three ==
		+
		+	I have always wondered why Homestar says to Strong Bad and Strong Sad "oh man you three",
		+	is he including [[Homestar Runner and Homestar Runner's Relationship\|himself]] or is just being stupid?
		+	--[[User:Happypasta\|Happypasta]] 04:44, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
		+	----

Coredumperror: /* Inappropriate? */

Coredumperror — Sat, 13 Feb 2010 10:40:49 GMT

Inappropriate?

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:40, 13 February 2010
Line 257:		Line 257:
	::::::::Actually after looking at the page I kind of disagree. The word in question is still fairly prominent within the "Media references/Music" section (whether or not that section survives is yet to be determined). While linking to 187 (number) is a little silly and unproductive, and while we generally can assume readers know Wikipedia is not censored, given our current practice, a content warning notice I think would be appropriate. ''But only for this page''. I see no slippery slope. The only criteria to add to this page is that the f- word appears several times ''on the page we are linking directly to'', but that I think is criteria enough. There's no need to scour the wiki for other such examples. --[[User:Stux\|Stux]] 17:25, 4 February 2008 (UTC)		::::::::Actually after looking at the page I kind of disagree. The word in question is still fairly prominent within the "Media references/Music" section (whether or not that section survives is yet to be determined). While linking to 187 (number) is a little silly and unproductive, and while we generally can assume readers know Wikipedia is not censored, given our current practice, a content warning notice I think would be appropriate. ''But only for this page''. I see no slippery slope. The only criteria to add to this page is that the f- word appears several times ''on the page we are linking directly to'', but that I think is criteria enough. There's no need to scour the wiki for other such examples. --[[User:Stux\|Stux]] 17:25, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
	:::::::::I'm actually going to agree with an inline content warning, as it links directly to 187 (murder). My comments on a "slippery slope" refer to an earlier version that linked to 187 (number), which most would have to agree would have been overkill. — [[User:Flashfight\|Flashfight]] 19:20, 4 February 2008 (UTC)		:::::::::I'm actually going to agree with an inline content warning, as it links directly to 187 (murder). My comments on a "slippery slope" refer to an earlier version that linked to 187 (number), which most would have to agree would have been overkill. — [[User:Flashfight\|Flashfight]] 19:20, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
		+	Seeing as how the 187 (murder) page has undergone significant edits since the above discussion took place, and all innapropriate language has been eliminated, I've removed the "mild language" warning from our link to the page. --[[User:Coredumperror\|Coredumperror]] 10:40, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

	==Wrong Perspective==		==Wrong Perspective==

It's dot com: /* Strong Bad Swearing */ reply

It's dot com — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 23:00:28 GMT

Strong Bad Swearing: reply

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:00, 17 June 2009
Line 297:		Line 297:
	::::::::Sure she did. Show me a birth certificate. We would of ''course'' not allow someone to go by the username "Shithead". The reasons should be obvious, but it's so beside the point that I'm not even going to elaborate further. OptimisticFool: We should consider tweaking the commentary, because it reads as though he says "Shithead". — [[User:It's dot com\|It's dot com]] 21:27, 17 June 2009 (UTC)		::::::::Sure she did. Show me a birth certificate. We would of ''course'' not allow someone to go by the username "Shithead". The reasons should be obvious, but it's so beside the point that I'm not even going to elaborate further. OptimisticFool: We should consider tweaking the commentary, because it reads as though he says "Shithead". — [[User:It's dot com\|It's dot com]] 21:27, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
	:::::::::Should this talk page get a content warning, now? -[[Special:Contributions/132.183.138.157\|132.183.138.157]] 21:38, 17 June 2009 (UTC)		:::::::::Should this talk page get a content warning, now? -[[Special:Contributions/132.183.138.157\|132.183.138.157]] 21:38, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
		+	::::::::::No, the topic header is warning enough. The primary concern for the flashing-lights warnings is the articles, not the talk pages. — [[User:It's dot com\|It's dot com]] 23:00, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

132.183.138.157: /* Strong Bad Swearing */ half joke, half serious question

132.183.138.157 — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 21:38:45 GMT

Strong Bad Swearing: half joke, half serious question

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:38, 17 June 2009
Line 296:		Line 296:
	:::::::But... my mom REALLY had a patient with that last name when she was a nurse... {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 21:24, 17 June 2009 (UTC)		:::::::But... my mom REALLY had a patient with that last name when she was a nurse... {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 21:24, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
	::::::::Sure she did. Show me a birth certificate. We would of ''course'' not allow someone to go by the username "Shithead". The reasons should be obvious, but it's so beside the point that I'm not even going to elaborate further. OptimisticFool: We should consider tweaking the commentary, because it reads as though he says "Shithead". — [[User:It's dot com\|It's dot com]] 21:27, 17 June 2009 (UTC)		::::::::Sure she did. Show me a birth certificate. We would of ''course'' not allow someone to go by the username "Shithead". The reasons should be obvious, but it's so beside the point that I'm not even going to elaborate further. OptimisticFool: We should consider tweaking the commentary, because it reads as though he says "Shithead". — [[User:It's dot com\|It's dot com]] 21:27, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
		+	:::::::::Should this talk page get a content warning, now? -[[Special:Contributions/132.183.138.157\|132.183.138.157]] 21:38, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

It's dot com: /* Strong Bad Swearing */ commentary should be tweaked and other type thoughts

It's dot com — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 21:27:40 GMT

Strong Bad Swearing: commentary should be tweaked and other type thoughts

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:27, 17 June 2009
Line 295:		Line 295:
	::::::But the thing is, it would never be his real name, because no one actually has that name. The it's an urban legend and a joke, just like the others in the snopes link. -[[Special:Contributions/132.183.138.157\|132.183.138.157]] 21:22, 17 June 2009 (UTC)		::::::But the thing is, it would never be his real name, because no one actually has that name. The it's an urban legend and a joke, just like the others in the snopes link. -[[Special:Contributions/132.183.138.157\|132.183.138.157]] 21:22, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
	:::::::But... my mom REALLY had a patient with that last name when she was a nurse... {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 21:24, 17 June 2009 (UTC)		:::::::But... my mom REALLY had a patient with that last name when she was a nurse... {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 21:24, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
		+	::::::::Sure she did. Show me a birth certificate. We would of ''course'' not allow someone to go by the username "Shithead". The reasons should be obvious, but it's so beside the point that I'm not even going to elaborate further. OptimisticFool: We should consider tweaking the commentary, because it reads as though he says "Shithead". — [[User:It's dot com\|It's dot com]] 21:27, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Defender1031: /* Strong Bad Swearing */ yes, i know how this sounds...

Defender1031 — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 21:24:17 GMT

Strong Bad Swearing: yes, i know how this sounds...

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:24, 17 June 2009
Line 294:		Line 294:
	:::::Firstly, I didn't say user name, i said real name. secondly, if that really was his name, you still think the ops would say so? I don't. {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 21:20, 17 June 2009 (UTC)		:::::Firstly, I didn't say user name, i said real name. secondly, if that really was his name, you still think the ops would say so? I don't. {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 21:20, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
	::::::But the thing is, it would never be his real name, because no one actually has that name. The it's an urban legend and a joke, just like the others in the snopes link. -[[Special:Contributions/132.183.138.157\|132.183.138.157]] 21:22, 17 June 2009 (UTC)		::::::But the thing is, it would never be his real name, because no one actually has that name. The it's an urban legend and a joke, just like the others in the snopes link. -[[Special:Contributions/132.183.138.157\|132.183.138.157]] 21:22, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
		+	:::::::But... my mom REALLY had a patient with that last name when she was a nurse... {{User:DeFender1031/sig}} 21:24, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:00, 17 June 2009
Line 297:		Line 297:
	::::::::Sure she did. Show me a birth certificate. We would of ''course'' not allow someone to go by the username "Shithead". The reasons should be obvious, but it's so beside the point that I'm not even going to elaborate further. OptimisticFool: We should consider tweaking the commentary, because it reads as though he says "Shithead". — [[User:It's dot com\|It's dot com]] 21:27, 17 June 2009 (UTC)		::::::::Sure she did. Show me a birth certificate. We would of ''course'' not allow someone to go by the username "Shithead". The reasons should be obvious, but it's so beside the point that I'm not even going to elaborate further. OptimisticFool: We should consider tweaking the commentary, because it reads as though he says "Shithead". — [[User:It's dot com\|It's dot com]] 21:27, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
	:::::::::Should this talk page get a content warning, now? -[[Special:Contributions/132.183.138.157\|132.183.138.157]] 21:38, 17 June 2009 (UTC)		:::::::::Should this talk page get a content warning, now? -[[Special:Contributions/132.183.138.157\|132.183.138.157]] 21:38, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
		+	::::::::::No, the topic header is warning enough. The primary concern for the flashing-lights warnings is the articles, not the talk pages. — [[User:It's dot com\|It's dot com]] 23:00, 17 June 2009 (UTC)