User talk:Clyde Miller/Archive 1

Topics
 * First Months
 * Userpage
 * Work with Empires: Dawn of the Modern World

Plex soldier
I moved the article you created, and fixed spelling mistakes. Good luck!--ikiroid | (talk) 02:17, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Re: Username mixup
Don't worry, I'm fixing it.-- The  i  kiro  id  (talk) (Help Me Improve) 23:18, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Empires game
Hey I noticed you stuck a tag on this article. I created this article to shorten the content of Empires: Dawn of the Modern World and I am trying to get it up to good status (I'm kinda on my own). I'm not yet finished with either article, so I hope you don't mind if I remove the tag when I finish Empires: Dawn of the Modern World Classified Projects (I'll redo the intro). I've put many hours into the article (Empires: DotMW), and I plan on finishing what I started. --Clyde Miller 01:10, 3 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Ah, my bad, I should have realized the article wasn't finished. I initially put the tag on because there was nothing stating that the article was about a video game in the first line.  So, I tagged context because if you didn't know it was a game, you'd be lost.


 * Remove the tag at your discretion and good luck with the article!


 * --Mithunc 02:09, 3 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I got your response. You don't have to feel bad about putting the tag there. It's Ok and...acceptable? (I don't like that word. too formal) for you to do that. It's sorta your job. Anyway, my original unspoken fear was that you were going to put the article up for deletion. Until I looked at your edit count and time here, I thought you might be an administrator who was just going to put it up for deletion or knew some people high up to get it speedy deleted. Have fun partrolling. --Clyde Miller 15:19, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

RE: Asking permission
Hey I saw you added some cool stuff to the wikiproject: com and video games peer review for the game I nominated. I got many of your suggestions taken care of and I really appreciate your help. I thought it might be good to ask you before I do this however. Am I allowed to cross out the bullet points I've already taken care of? I don't want to offend you (bad), break any rules (bad), and it would help me know what I still have to do, as well as helping other people to know what to still look for in the article (improvement wise). Let me know if you care. Thanks --Clyde Miller 22:42, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

P.S. if you have any more ideas about the article I'd appreciate the help.


 * Well, I'd rather you let me cross off my own points, I'm sure you'll understand. Anyway, I'm happy to take another look at the article and clean up the prose, it needs a good copyedit. Not right now though, I'm too tired. Tomorrow sometime. -- Steel 22:48, 7 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Your idea makes sense, and is probably better. That way you can decide if your personal criteria was met, which is probably better then me deciding when a section is completed (since you are the one who gave the suggestions). --Clyde Miller 22:53, 7 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I know I said I'd have another look at the article yesterday and didn't. I'm not ignoring you, I'll get round to it sometime (hopefully today). -- Steel 11:33, 9 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Dude (no I'm not from the west coast. I just suck at wrtiting.<_<) you don't have to rush or anything. I'm not in any hurry. If you happen to get around to it, that would help me a lot. If you're too tired or whatever you said (I know what it's like. I didn't get much sleep) that's cool too. --Clyde Miller 15:00, 9 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Ok, good. -- Steel 15:01, 9 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Oh by the way, I put a little tidbit on the review page so people know I finished working on your suggestions (you don't have to respond to this. Based on the promptness of responding to me, I have great faith you willl read this). If you find them up to your standards or not, you may want to mention that on the review page, if you get the chance (I know pretty busy with Shadow of the Colossus).--Clyde Miller 15:12, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Ironically, I sent this to apologize for bothering you so much. I found a great article to use as an example format for critical reviews...yours. --Clyde Miller 15:24, 9 August 2006 (UTC)


 * lol. -- Steel 15:26, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

RE: Congrats
Hey I saw the article you were working recieved featured status. Congratulations!!--Clyde Miller 16:51, 10 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Heh, thanks! Now my focus is MGS3. Hopefully that'll be featured sometime as well. -- Steel 16:53, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Empires Gamplay
Hey, just a quick note to say that A Man In Black didn't delete the article. You can still access the older revisions in the page history. For the record, like A Man In Black I actually think the article is way too long and overdetailed (I actually proposed its deletion a while ago). -- Steel 21:28, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I recognize the fact that you and A Man In Black wanted the article deleted, but I don't think it was proper for him to redirect it. It was just in an AFD two weeks ago and was voted no consensus. If you want to put it in another AFD, that's fine, but redirecting without any consensus was a little rash. Plus Empires: Dawn of the Modern World may be failed because of the gameplay's deletion. What are your thoughts? --Clyde Miller 21:35, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


 * It may have been a bit rash considering the AfD but that's the way he operates. Oh, and nobody's going to fail your GA nomination because of this, don't worry. -- Steel 21:39, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


 * (by the way I know your my "enemy" in this since you want it bye-bye, but thanks for helping anyway) What should I do now? Is there some place I should go to have someone look at this and come up with a solution? (and I think that the gameplay section is rather pathetic without the main article about it. It may be failed because of that, but then again you have more experience so I'm really not sure). --Clyde Miller 21:51, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Check the first paragraph of the gameplay article and see if anything can be added to the gameplay section of the main article. The main article's section is fine in terms of length (SotC's isn't much longer). Everything other than that first paragraph in the gameplay article doesn't need mentioning under WP:NOT a game guide. -- Steel 21:57, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Bear in mind he'll respond on his talk page, not here. -- Steel 22:19, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Hello. I'm sorry that you feel Empires: Dawn of the Modern World Gameplay should be redirected, but it was just in an AFD and voted no consensus. I am in the process of cleaning it up, and you have no right to delete it. Also, much is being transferred to Strategy wiki, so I'm please asking you to bring the article back in it's entirety. It doesn't fit speedy deletion criteria, and I'd at least like to talk to you about it. --Clyde Miller 21:19, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I didn't delete it. I redirected it. What does an AFD have to do with anything that doesn't involve deletion? For that matter, how is a "no consensus" binding on any editorial decision?
 * That said, the "article" doesn't have a single external source, and seems to be rooted in nothing more than direct paraphrasing of the manual and direct observation of the game. Why is this lengthy, overdetailed, OR-ish description of the gameplay necessary, given the reasonable and brief gameplay description in Empires: Dawn of the Modern World? - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 23:38, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


 * My greatest worry is for Empires: Dawn of the Modern World itself, which is up for GA. I think it might be failed because of an insufficient gameplay section. I took out a lot out thinking someone could read up about it if they wanted to. I don't really know what to add back in. By the way, a redirect is pretty darn close to a delete. The article is gone and cannot be looked up by anyone who wants to read up about the subject (unless they are an expeirenced user). Plus, in the AFD, redirect was one of the suggestions, but was not the decision. I though that this meant that the a group consensus was that this article should be left as it was, since some people wanted it kept, deleted, redirected, or tanswikied. The other odd thing about a redirect is there is no equivalent to it for bringing an article back. I feel like you just skipped all policy and took deletion into your own hands in a quasi-vigilantyism (I'm pretty sure that isn't a word). Can you help me decrease the cruff? I am good at citing sources, and was improving it when it was redirected. I know you hate cruff, but can't this content be brought up to a good level. I mean the article on Gameplay of StarCraft only has four references. Is that enough? I'd really like some input and would like to find a way to bring this article back.--Clyde Miller 00:54, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
 * The AFD had no decision, really; it didn't have any result save that the consensus for permanent deletion wasn't there. Gameplay of StarCraft isn't a very good article, nor a very good example; why not take a look at some of the video game featured articles (Final Fantasy VII or Shadow of the Colossus, for a couple of examples) for some guideance on how detailed the gameplay section should be. Spinning off a massively overdetailed gameplay section that borders on original research is not the solution. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 02:16, 7 September 2006 (UTC)


 * My orginal point was that Starcraft was featured as well. That was the only RTS game ever to make featured or good article status, so they must have done something right. That's why I modeled Empires after it. Those other games are well written, but what I am worrying about is how to set up the gameplay section, not how to write it. I guess I am not very good at this, becuase reading about a different genre of games didn't seem too relevant to me. They're two different breeds of games, and I thought it would be a good idea for me to choose Starcraft. --Clyde Miller 20:40, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Starcraft is featured, its sub-articles are a trainwreck. My suggestion is to focus on the Empires article itself, then spin off articles if and only if there's sufficient referenced content to requires such a split. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 20:42, 7 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I thought I'd bring up something else. Steel showed me the history of the article and that it's still intact. That only happens on merges. So really you just did a lazy or harsh merge. Since I still have access to the history, I guess I'll work on it that way and hope that E:DotMW passes.--Clyde Miller 20:14, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Oh, I didn't realize you didn't know the history was still there. Yeah, when an article is redirected, the history doesn't go away; it's just another edit, one any user can make. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 20:16, 8 September 2006 (UTC)


 * The reason I didn't know the orginal history was there was because it was so hard to reach. The only reason I was able to reach it was through pop-ups, and that was kind of buried as it is. Is that the only way, or is there an easier one? Steel orginially dropped me a link to it, but I thought he was an administarator and was doing me a favor. --Clyde Miller 13:37, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

RE: Userpage
Hey I got a reccomendation that you are the best with userpages. After visiting yours, I think I found the right place. I copied some text from Leroyencyclopediabrown's page and I had some problems. He left, that's why I chose it (and I like it). I decided to take it a step further and add some different colored text (white) but it only worked on part of the userpage. I wanted to make the text (and maybe the titles) white, and I also had some problems changing the background color of the page. Can you help me make the text white and change the backgrond color? So few people know how to do this, and I could really use some help.--Clyde Miller 22:07, 9 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Sounds good, I'll work on the text. What background colour would you like? Master of Puppets The Walrus!  00:25, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Hmm, either they've changed code boundaries or I'm losing it, as every time any type of code at all got in the way of a color command, it stopped it. Even wikilinks acted like stoppers. Weird. Anyway, I used black as the background; I'll change it if you like. Cheers, Master of Puppets The Walrus!  00:50, 10 September 2006 (UTC)


 * It looks totally awesome (I hope that doesn't sound too cliche). If the links or text is stopping you you can delete all the text. I have the raw text saved on my computer so don't worry about messing with it. I'm not sure why the links are acting weird though.--Clyde Miller 01:01, 10 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Well, this is as far as I go; however, if you want me to set up a nice userbox tab for you like I have or such, feel free to ask. :) Cheers, Master of Puppets The Walrus!  01:02, 10 September 2006 (UTC)


 * You've done way more than I thought possible. I may add some more info or whatever, but everything else is great. If you are bored and it's not too much work, a hide/show thing with my userboxes would be cool. Could you help me with that? --Clyde Miller 01:08, 10 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Sure, I'll put them all in a little scroller so that people can scroll through them. Master of Puppets The Walrus!  01:09, 10 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Hey I was trying to add my current projects back in and I had some problems. What am I doing wrong? I think this is a good lesson becuase I am always adding or removing sections from my userpage and I need to figure out how to edit it (so I don't have to bother you). --Clyde Miller 01:59, 10 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Ok, put in the userbox; it works fine when you open it, but for some reason it's weird minimized, even though it shouldn't be doing that. Your userpage has some weird things about it. >_< I'll try to fix that. And I'll add in your current projects, too. Cheers, Master of Puppets The Walrus!  02:01, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

The userboxes look great. You have voiced continuing concern on the weirdness of my page, so I'm sorry if it's caused you a lot of trouble. You don't have to add anything else in if you don't want. Everything looks good, and I'll figure out how to put anything else in if I want to. I'll just have some fun getting aquantited with my cool and improved userpage. Thank you. --Clyde Miller 02:21, 10 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Oh, no, no! It's not your fault your page is like that. Maybe the software has been changed or such; it's just exhibiting some strange characteristics. But don't worry, you're not at fault. :) Anyway, I added black bars to the top of your user page and talk; I can make you a talk template if you'd like, too. Cheers, Master of Puppets The Walrus!  02:23, 10 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Thank you so much for adding the talk page and userboxes, and a talk page template would be neat. I don't want to push your courtesy too far, but it sounds cool to have. Your ideas have been really good so far, so do what you think is cool. --Clyde Miller 02:38, 10 September 2006 (UTC)


 * There we go, talk page template and a bit of colour added to your userpage. Hope you like it, and if you don't, feel free to tell me; I'll fix it right away.


 * Wow. It's done then. You have my deepest thanks. I guess there isn't really any way to ever repay you, but if you ever need a favor, let me know. --Clyde Miller 02:54, 10 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Edit added: Aww, shucks. You don't need to repay me, for what else is it but a favor for a friend? Also, I watchlisted the articles you have on your userpage so that I can guard against vandals there, too. Cheers and have fun Wiki-ing, Master of Puppets The Walrus!  02:53, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

link to 3D
Hello, when you want to link to the article about something 3D, please do not link to 3D, as that is a disambiguation page (which nothing should be linked to). Instead link to the one of the options found on that page such as 3D computer graphics by writing out 3D Regards, -- Jeff3000 22:02, 10 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Hey thanks for the link help, but unfortunatly I already knew that. I am just extremely lazy and never bothered to check that link. I'm not really sure what article you are talking about, but I'd guess it's one of the game engines. Thanks for the head's up, and I'll work on it for the future.--Clyde Miller 22:10, 10 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I completely understand that people forget, and it's a pretty easy thing to do. I'm just trying to raise awarness of disambiguation in general, since the number of dab links is not going down even with lots of people disambiguating links.  Anyways, the edit I was referring to was . Regards, -- Jeff3000 22:13, 10 September 2006 (UTC)


 * O yeah, that one. Good times. Yeah I pretty much suck with linking stuff. This one Bláthnaid guy fixed a few on my main project (Empires: Dawn of the Modern World). Feel free to bash me if I ever do it again. --Clyde Miller 22:21, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Boxes
Hey I was looking for some good userboxes and one of yours was german solutioned. You might want to look into that. I'd do it but I don't know how to edit your userpage. --Clyde Miller 22:28, 10 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks for pointing that out for me! didn't notice that it was german'd. The reason that you couldn't edit it is that each of the tabs on my page are links to seperate pages.  --PresN 23:43, 10 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Oh. Glad to help out. --Clyde Miller 23:47, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Userpage, talkpage, bears oh my!
Hey I love the userpage, but some links have changed to blue. Can you help me fix it? It might be good to explain how to fix it so I won't have to bother you if it happens again.--Clyde Miller 01:57, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Oh and is there a way to play around with what the talk page says other than what people are saying? Just wondering.--Clyde Miller 01:58, 22 September 2006 (UTC)


 * For the talk page, you can just go to User:Clyde Miller/Talktemp and edit any value you like. I edited it and put in guiding markers to help you tell which is which. Also, about the links being blue; I can't remember if I can change that; in the Special:Preferences page, every user sets what colour they want wikilinks to appear, so it'll look different for every person. I could be wrong, though, so I'll look around the format pages and see if I can fix that. Regards, Master of Puppets The Walrus!  02:13, 22 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks dude (I'm concluding from userboxes).--Clyde Miller 03:06, 22 September 2006 (UTC)


 * You conclude right. :D Cheers, have fun, and if you need any more help feel free to contact me! Master of Puppets The Walrus!  03:38, 22 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Oh, and I noted that your favorite colour is blue; if you like, I can add some blueish parts into your template schemes. It's no problem at all. Master of Puppets The Walrus!  03:54, 22 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Naw I'm good. Thanks though.--Clyde Miller 21:08, 22 September 2006 (UTC)


 * P.S. I just realized how dumb my question is. Links are always blue, I just forgot that if you click on it, it turns purple. God I'm stupid.

About your article
Well done! I think the whole Empire is going to be grateful for your loyal services. The Emperor will appoint you Sir Clyde Miller, lol... As I said before, nice work or should I say "buen trabajo chico"? Congrats, --Gustavo86 03:46, 8 October 2006 (UTC)


 * lol. Tengas una buen dia.--Clyde Miller 14:42, 8 October 2006 (UTC)


 * P.S. I'll send you an invitation to the knighting ceremony.

Re: Empires
Empires: Dawn of the Modern World is now in FAC. I finished a couple last minute corrections and it's on the list. here's a link to the FAC and here's a link to the Empires FAC. Thanks for all your help so far; without it, Empires would never have come as far as it did. I may add a final comment to the Peer Review to close it up, and just wait to see what people think on the FAC.--Clyde Miller 00:30, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Abraham Lure wanted me to add more about the gameplay section, so I did. If your bored, could take a look at it for grammer's and prose's sake? Thanks a million. I'm just worried that me adding more could jeapordize Empres' chances as an FA.--Clyde Miller 21:59, 9 October 2006 (UTC)


 * No problem. I'll get right on that. JimmyBlackwing 22:04, 9 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Oh thanks. No rush if you are busy right now.--Clyde Miller 22:07, 9 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Nah, it's fine. Just tell me if you need any more help, and I'll be happy to oblige. JimmyBlackwing 22:24, 9 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I know this may sound redundant and stupid, but thanks.--Clyde Miller 22:17, 9 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Is this slow down normal? or is it the article?--Clyde Miller 01:02, 18 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I've certainly never seen a slow down like this. Maybe you should try contacting Abraham Lure on his talk page to make sure his complaints have been taken care of. If they have, then one more support for you. If they haven't, then at least it will stop the slow down. JimmyBlackwing 16:48, 18 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Would it be appropiate for me to contact some of the other people that left comments but didn't make a vote (like Dev920, Jeltz, or kingboyk)? Or would that be in bad taste (like asking your friends to vote in an AFD)?--Clyde Miller 20:22, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Well Abe said he has no problems with the article, but he didn't support. Is that considered a support or should I ask him for it?--Clyde Miller 00:29, 19 October 2006 (UTC)


 * His comment will probably be taken as a support by the featured article director. It would likely be in bad taste to ask for further comment from the other reviewers, since they were simply discussing the placement of inline citations. If no more objections are made, it will be promoted to featured status. I suspect that a few more people will show up to comment on the article, and the featured article director is probably having similar thoughts, so the nomination could last for awhile yet. JimmyBlackwing 04:54, 19 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Empires failed. I suppose I'll wait for some copyeditors and then re-nominate it, or something.--Clyde Miller 21:58, 11 November 2006 (UTC)


 * No problem. It's getting to be a very solid candidate, so you should re-nominate once it's been thoroughly copyedited from top to bottom. There shouldn't be any problems after that. Good luck. JimmyBlackwing 22:08, 11 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Hey thanks for all your help, by the way. If it wasn't for you, I would have never made it as far as I did.--Clyde Miller 22:00, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

RE: FavoUr
Hey, sorry to bother you, but Empires is now in an FAC, and AnonEMouse wanted me to add the number of units sold. I looked through every featured article for where they found there unit numbers, and I still couldn't find empires on the website that had the information. Do you have any ideas? You've done two FAs, so I thought you might know some websites I haven't looked yet. Thanks. Any help would be appreciated.--Clyde Miller 03:17, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

I just realized that that might have come off like I want you to look up the stuff for me. There really isn't a way to say this without sounding awkward, but I just wanted to know if you could tell me about some websites the average video game editor wouldn't have known about. --Clyde Miller 03:47, 28 October 2006 (UTC)


 * The trouble with Empires is that it's not the world's most popular game, so it probably hasn't sold enough to get on vgcharts. You could check the various videogame website (GameSpot, GameSpy, IGN, Eurogamer, etc) and see if they've got anything on it, but I would be surprised if they have. Failing that, just tell the guy on the FAC that no verifiable information on the game's sales exists. Even if sales figures are super-important to an article (which they aren't, really), nobody can hold it against the article if there's simple no info on it. -- Steel 12:10, 28 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I looked around and, just as you and I both expected, there was nothing. Oh well, I'll tell mouse about it (it would really help if SSSI's website was still operating). On the same token, he thinks there is an article out there that compares AoE with Empires. I kinda laugh thinking about it. If this game sold so few units that it didn't even make the charts, who is going to do a comparison article on it?--Clyde Miller 13:45, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Hello
I've noticed the wonderful work you recently done with Empires: Dawn of the Modern World and thus wondered if you could help me out a bit. I've recently decided to try to expand the gem of a strategy game; The Settlers II. I just wrote how the gameplay works in the game in my sandbox but it sounds really cheesy to me. So if you dont mind I would like to ask you of what would you do different and if everything is understandble and should I add anything else? Thanks. - Tutmosis 21:29, 28 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Hey I heard you were working on Settlers II. I looked over the gameplay section, and it looks pretty good. I wouldn't call it cheesy; it's written from an out of world perspective, and I think it covers all aspects (probably the two biggest problems of gameplay sections). I've never played the game, but are their different sides you can be (I.E. axis and allies in WWII games)? That's really all I saw missing from the gameplay section (it's kinda hard to know what's missing if you haven't played the game, and it'd be pretty dumb for me to pull that "broad in coverage" junk.). Another thing that might be the reason that you called it cheesy was because most of the paragrapghs subjects were "the player." For example "During the beginning of the game, the main warehouse is the only building that has a radius granting the player territory. The player can expand his territory by building any of the three possible military complex's near the border of his current territory and sending atleast 1 soldier to operate the complex. A serf can become a soldier once a sword and a shield are constructed." could be "During the beginning of the game, only the main warhouse has the ability to grant territory for further growth. Territory can be expanded by creating one of three military complexs near territory borders. Each complex must have at least one soilder to continually operate the complex. Soilders can be created by constructing a sword and shield, and using them to upgrade a serf." I'm not great with prose or spelling, but the idea I was trying to convey was that the subject changes as the paragrapgh moves on. If you are talking about soilders and how cool they are and you want to move on to serfs, try to connect them. I know you've probably dealt with prose a thousand times, but I'm just trying to get across that prose is still there in RTS games. If you need more help with structuring video game sections, JimmyBlackwing helped me out a lot. You're doing a great job though. Keep up the good work. --Clyde Miller 22:29, 28 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your suggestions and nice comment. One last thing if you dont mind, what you think is best to cite in the gameplay section? - Tutmosis  22:33, 28 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Well look at the orginal research stuff if you haven't already (good stuff there), but usually people are more leanent with what needs to be citied regarding video games. It goes case by case usually, but stats and actual ideas are usually citied. I think I may have citied some uneeded things in Empires, but I think it is usually better to cite more than less. If you say that soilders fight, don't cite it, but if you say that soilders can kill serfs better than other serfs, you might want to cite that. I dunno, it's kinda hard to define.--Clyde Miller 22:44, 28 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Oh, okay thanks for the tip, I definetely understand what you saying. Anyway what you plan on working on once Empires passes fac? - Tutmosis  22:46, 28 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I am quite surprised you understood that. As for after the FAC, I haven't really thought about it. If you need some help with Settlers I could give help out. I'm stil a relative noob here (under 1000 edits) and Empires is my first project. I don't know what to do next.--Clyde Miller 22:56, 28 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Oh okay, well good luck if you decide to do anything else. As for Settlers, I'm not really running into any problems for now but if I need any help or suggestions I'll drop you a line. :) - Tutmosis  22:58, 28 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Cool. Uh...have fun.--Clyde Miller 04:41, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Re:Dude
Dude who did you anger? I have your page on my watchlist, and it been vandalized several times the past couple days. Wassup?--Clyde Miller 00:54, 10 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Agh just vandals, they don't like when I revert their vandalism. Thanks for noticing though. :) - Tutmosis  00:56, 10 November 2006 (UTC)