User talk:Horoball

Start a new discussion by creating a new section (use the + tab at the top).

o_0
Oh...you were kidding... My bad. Sarcasm (Sarcasm is really helpful) doesn't always get through on the internet ya know. Sorry bout all that, it's just is my knee-jerk response to that kind of thing. Cheers and happy editing—Cronholm144 02:51, 28 September 2007 (UTC)


 * It wasn't sarcasm though. At least, I see no elements of sarcasm.  I would categorize it as surreal humor.  --Horoball 06:52, 29 September 2007 (UTC)


 * You're right... perhaps another silly essay is in order.—Cronholm144 08:30, 29 September 2007 (UTC)


 * No need, I should just have whacked you with a trout. --Horoball 18:14, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Al Gore
Thanks for your help with the Al Gore page. -Classicfilms 12:53, 14 October 2007 (UTC)


 * You're welcome. After seeing how polite you and Hult041956 were, despite having your edits abruptly deleted without discussion, I thought you could use a hand.  --Horoball 01:06, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Missouri Collegiate Mathematics Competition
Hello – I see you relisted this article for more discussion on October 21, but the steps weren't completed. There's a little more to it than just placing the relist tag on the AFD page.

When you relist an AFD, the whole point is to give it more exposure to get more debate. To do that, you have to remove it (by commenting it out) from the log for that day, then you have to add it to the log for the current day.

With this particular AFD, it had to be removed from Articles for deletion/Log/2007 October 15 and added to Articles for deletion/Log/2007 October 21. If that's not clear, you can examine my contribution history – filter the results by just looking at my contributions in the Wikipedia namespace.

I've taken care of this discussion by moving this particular AFD to the log for October 22 – it should have gone on the October 21 log, but that would mean it wouldn't get a full five days of exposure. As I said, you can look at my contributions if my explanation was unclear. If you relist discussions in the future, be sure you do all the steps, and you can always ask me or another admin to look it over to see if it's done correctly. :-) Thanks for helping us out, 'cause we certainly need it! - Krakatoa  Katie  20:01, 22 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Oops! Thank you for your careful explanation.  I won't do it again.  Thanks!  --Horoball 20:37, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

October 2007
Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from. When removing text, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry, as the text has been restored from the page history. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Beloved Freak  20:13, 26 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Sorry. I didn't notice I had removed the infobox.  --Horoball 07:25, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

horocycle, sphere, ball, etc.
Hi User: Horoball. Quite a coincidence that we should meet at both the Horoball article and the Wolfram's 2-state 3-symbol Turing machine in the same week. :) By the way did you notice my remark that Lobachevsky had used "horicycle" and "horisphere" early on? --Vaughan Pratt 05:49, 1 November 2007 (UTC)


 * I just read your message on Talk: horoball. I will reply there.  --Horoball 08:12, 1 November 2007 (UTC)