Wikipedia talk:WikiSpeak/Decoding RfA

Re Support Reason No.8[edit]

"...alleged photograph..."? Can't the supporter tell if it was taken by a camera? WTF! LessHeard vanU (talk) 13:39, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This illustration illustrates a common phenomenon on WP. Unfortunately, the single best piece of commentary on this particular topic is on The Site That Must Not Be Named (and contains a personal attack on a fellow Wikipedian who's far more powerful than you or I) so I can't link to it, but Google has helpfully ranked it top if you search on "internet disease". – iride scent 15:18, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can you imagine what I might look like if the image on my talkpage is truly being rendered by the internet prism? LessHeard vanU (talk) 15:21, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Now now, you two. Fixed the grammatical gaffaw (you can't allegedly be a photograph, it is or it isn't a photograph), but you can allegedly be freekin hot as a person. Used Irid's link above to prove it. :-) Keeper | 76 | what's in a name? 15:23, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"...you can allegedly be freekin hot as a person"... Someone call? EyeSerene^talk 17:46, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dry[edit]

"

"Oppose, not enough mainspace edits"
means: "Oppose, you're 12"
"Oppose, too many userboxes"
means: "Oppose, you're 12"
"Oppose, I can't read your signature"
means: "Oppose, you're 12"
"Oppose, too high a ratio of user talk to mainspace edits"
means: "Oppose, you're 12"

"
What happened to the "truthiness" theme? The 12 thing seems like more of an inside-joke. Did the well go dry or what?--Koji †Dude ^(C) 21:15, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is only tangentially related, but somehow I suspect that oppose reason 6b is directed at yours truly. Anyways, I don't think it's really an inside joke - it's common knowledge that one's level of social networking clearly can be combined with whether an editor is a certain age in an infallible biconditional. Nousernamesleft (talk) 02:56, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This gets even better with time[edit]

I'm reading it again now, and it still merits a good laugh. Enigma^msg 15:34, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just came across this very very good. BigDunc 19:44, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]