User talk:YAAM

Hello, please remain demure while you are here, we're a rather boring lot by Uncyclopedia's standards. Your userpage is unacceptable for Wiktionary at the moment, and I will delete it unless you clean it up. "say it, don't spray it" is an interesting expression, thank you for adding it. I attach the standard welcome template for experienced wikiers. Conrad.Irwin 14:04, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks, though I hate to see how you'll sign your name at me. Conrad.Irwin 14:26, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * If no one ticks me nor anyone else off whom I care about, then they'll not have to see my full name signed. If anyone wants to see how my full name is signed anyway, they'd better not tick me off on purpose -_- ; they can just visit my Uncyclopedian userpage instead. --YAAM 14:39, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Conrad.Irwin 14:04, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Antonyms
Greetings. The words friend: and motherfucker: are not actually antonyms (try swapping the two in "Yeah, that lazy motherfucker is my best friend" or in "Why the fuck did you do that to my friend, you dumb motherfucker"), so I rolled back your edits to those pages. Notice that one sense of the latter actually defines it to mean friend:. You may be interested in the Wikisaurus project. That's a great place for lists of friend/foe terms. :-) Rod (A. Smith) 14:43, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Scaramouche
This is actually a proper noun title of a novel (see Scaramouche). As the title of a novel, it is not dictionary material. --EncycloPetey 05:11, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

wonderful person isn't dictionary material --- WHAT???
What the living F^^^ do you MEAN it's not dictionary material?! Did you even BOTHER to VISIT the Google Books link??? There is a WHOPPING 442 hits on Google books. You read it right -- FOUR-HUNDRED FORTY-TWO HITS ON GOOGLE BOOKS! That ought to make it dictionary material, you think?! --YAAM 01:06, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

This is what we call a "sum of parts". That is, the meaning is simply the combination of the meranings of wonderful and person, just like "rainy Tuesday", "orange book", or "quick rabbit". We do not create entries for such combinations. --EncycloPetey 01:04, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I can cite it
See WT:ELE. It specifically says "If no quotation can be found, it is strongly encouraged to create an example sentence". "An" refers to one, not two. Teh Rote 12:34, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Well it's changed now. I can now put more than one on. --YAAM 16:05, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

WT:ELE
As stated on that page: Please do not modify that page without a WT:VOTE. The reason your wording may not be non-controversial is that it strongly implies more than one example sentence is good, I do not know whether all other editors agree with this. Conrad.Irwin 17:13, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Boldness.
Hi,

Boldness is good, but you might want to take it down a notch. When someone undoes something you've done, that likely means you shouldn't have done it, and therefore that you shouldn't turn around and immediately redo it. If you're unsure about something, ask.

—Ruakh TALK 01:07, 1 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Sorry that I reverted you without explanation. Usually people don't mess with other's talk pages here, especially for reasons of their own convenience. It is extra suspicious IMO when the messer has had some kind of confrontation with the messee. DCDuring TALK 02:01, 1 October 2008 (UTC)