Temporarily Insane

Welcome!

Hello, Temporarily Insane, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  Just H 01:01, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Magic: The Gathering sets

Hello! The only reason the individual set pages don't have expansion symbols at all three rarities is that it is a lot of work, because the original infobox templates didn't take into account multiple expansion symbols, so not only did the uncommon and rare symbols have to be uploaded, but also, the infobox template would have to be changed, and then every single individual set page would have to be edited to accomodate the new template, even the earlier sets which only had one expansion symbol.

I think that article X and Y's incompleteness should not be held against article Z. For example, consider list of sovereign states. Suppose hypothetically that on one of the states listed, that individual state's article did not include a flag image, even though the list article did. I don't think that individual state's article's lack of a flag image should be held against the list article list of sovereign states.

Also, you wrote "I would still be hesitant to support this, as the majority of the article reads like a list right now." I don't understand what you mean; could you clarify that for me? Since the vote is for Magic: The Gathering sets as a Featured List not a Featured Article, why would it be bad if the article read like a list?

Thanks for your time.

—Lowellian (reply) 18:41, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Seung-Hui Cho

Temporairly Insane, we are in the process of switching to Seung-Hui Cho. The media is now calling him by that order. WhisperToMe 17:15, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

MTG sets rationale

I'm sure you're aware that there is already a Template:MTG set symbol which I wrote which is currently being used on the MTG set symbol image pages. Anyway, my thoughts: I like how your version's #3-5 improve on my version's #2. You left off my #3, however, and you should include that. Also, your #2 doesn't mention retailers, as my #4 does, and it should mention retailers (because some portion of the profits from retailers eventually goes to WotC). Also, thanks for taking the time to help work on this. —Lowellian (reply) 21:02, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Bolding vs. Italics.

For future reference... according to MoS:T, Magic should in fact be italicized. Bolding should be used very sparsely; for article titles and definitions, generally (MOS:BOLD). Nothing too huge, but since you're a frequent contributor to MTG articles, figured it was worth a mention. SnowFire 01:07, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Ah, I confused mtg.com's standards with Wikipedia's. Thanks. --Temporarily Insane (talk) 20:46, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

List of Magic: The Gathering keywords

As a heavy editor of the above page, I was deeply disappointed to discover that it had been nominated for deletion and deleted without anyone notifying me. I'd been away from Wikipedia for a while due to other work, but I'd sign in occasionally to check my messages. At the very least I would have liked to voice my opinion. --Temporarily Insane (talk) 00:58, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

And it's been reviewed for deletion and overturned. Wow, I am behind on things. --Temporarily Insane (talk) 18:09, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:MTGkeywordsTOC

Template:MTGkeywordsTOC has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 15:21, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:31, 23 November 2015 (UTC)