User talk:Slartibartfast1992/Archives/2007/May

About Mindscript

Yeah, I can see you added citations missing templates to many articles... If you had the time to tag the Mindscript article, you probably also have the time to help get the citations for that article, since the citations needed bit was well known by people working on that article, which might be five at most. That article really needs some help... Slartibartfast1992 22:46, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm lazy. T-1 17:03, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

First of all, answer in my talk page or else I don't know whether you answered or not. I don't get the "You have a new message" if you just write it on your talk page. Seems like the first thing you did after getting a Wikipedia user was tagging all those articles, and it should be pretty embarassing to hear that after having a user for nearly a year. Second, and more importantly, just putting tags on pages and not actually helping to make the article better is not contributing. It's just being a (quoting my native language) reverendo pajero. Yes, that was the best way of expressing it. Now, as I was writing, you need to actually help get the citations or else you're just a tagging pest. If you're not gonna help, don't do the useless by tagging an article for something that's known. Mindscript doesn't have many sources since (guess what) it's a relatively new programming language which people haven't tried yet. The only people I know actually frequently use it are the Wikipedia user Coredev and I. No more mindscript users that actually know others exist. Hence, not many sources. So, are you going to help, or just uselessly tag articles? Slartibartfast1992 22:52, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

"Second, and more importantly, just putting tags on pages and not actually helping to make the article better is not contributing. It's just being a (quoting my native language) reverendo pajero. Yes, that was the best way of expressing it. Now, as I was writing, you need to actually help get the citations or else you're just a tagging pest. If you're not gonna help, don't do the useless by tagging an article for something that's known.". It's not useless, because otherwise the tags wouldn't exist. "Mindscript doesn't have many sources since (guess what) it's a relatively new programming language which people haven't tried yet. The only people I know actually frequently use it are the Wikipedia user Coredev and I. No more mindscript users that actually know others exist. Hence, not many sources." Then the mindscript article is violating Wikipedia's policy on notability and verifiability and should be deleted and probably will be. Again, I'm too lazy to do so. Goodbye. T-1 23:35, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

No, not goodbye. There are probably hundreds of thousands of Mindscript users worldwide, but as I stated earlier, not many know others exist, thus they do not communicate. Besides, don't come saying "Wikipedia rules" or "standards" when you didn't even know you had to leave messages in the other user's page until yesterday. Also, the only function of tags is informing other users, but here's what goes on in your mind: "why actually work on the article while I can just put tags so let everybody else know that they should work on the article". Work yourself. There are many people dedicated to the Mindscript article but here you come, the useless tagger, put a tag on the article about which content is already known throughout the users of the article before you put the freaking tag there. Help a bit. You definitely fit what you call yourself: lazy. FYI: that's what pajero means, except in a vulgar and degrading way that fits you exactly, for some quite obvious reason. Slartibartfast1992 23:23, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

you're wasting my time and yours, I already covered why. goodbye. T-1 02:29, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Anda a cagar, pedazo de mierda. Clearly with the humongously tiring edits that you perform, you don't have much time to waste. Tagging articles must really take up your time. Goodbye. Slartibartfast1992 14:23, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

I saw your post.

I saw your post on Gringo and I was thinking to add a section about How us Argentines dont really use the word Gringo we instead use Yankee and it only meaning to someone from the US. How does that sound?(XGustaX 16:17, 20 May 2007 (UTC))

Well, yeah I know what you meant. But I am saying that and Us Argentines really dont use the word Gringo that much, we use Yankee much more often. Which is the "traditional Argentine Spanish" way of Saying it. I was thinking of putting that in the Article.(XGustaX 22:30, 20 May 2007 (UTC))

Maybe because you go to school with a lot of Americans and they use to Mexicans saying that. But generally speaking Us Argentines use Yankee much much more then Gringo. To me that just sounds ""muy Mexicano"". (XGustaX 22:35, 20 May 2007 (UTC))

The fact of the matter is Gringo sounds just that "muy Mejicano", especially in Argentina. If you dont think so then you are mistaken since "mexicano" you are right is also. (XGustaX 22:43, 20 May 2007 (UTC))

Bueno. (XGustaX 23:29, 20 May 2007 (UTC))