Hello, you have come here looking for the meaning of the word
User talk:Eep. In DICTIOUS you will not only get to know all the dictionary meanings for the word
User talk:Eep, but we will also tell you about its etymology, its characteristics and you will know how to say
User talk:Eep in singular and plural. Everything you need to know about the word
User talk:Eep you have here. The definition of the word
User talk:Eep will help you to be more precise and correct when speaking or writing your texts. Knowing the definition of
User talk:Eep, as well as those of other words, enriches your vocabulary and provides you with more and better linguistic resources.
Because the wikipedia page was about a person named Astar. It had nothing whatsoever to do with the given definition. --EncycloPetey 05:44, 26 June 2007 (UTC)Reply
- Please read your sources. The citations you found for "mule" and a "star" are Old English transliterations of Persian words. They are not English. --EncycloPetey 06:29, 26 June 2007 (UTC)Reply
- Why are you replying here? Please reply where the discussion originated--on your talk page. -Eep² 06:43, 26 June 2007 (UTC)Reply
I'm not sure why you added a section header at jota with no content: . If you forgot to finish, please add what you wanted there, but otherwise, we don't need headers for languages which have no words that match the article title. Dmcdevit·t 01:11, 27 June 2007 (UTC)Reply
- I added it for the English Wikipedia link. ∞ΣɛÞ² (τ|c) 20:58, 27 June 2007 (UTC)Reply
- You don't need to do anything more than add the template. It creates a box that floats on the right side of the screen. Dmcdevit·t 21:20, 27 June 2007 (UTC)Reply
- I know but, obviously, it only applies to the English language, which was the point of creating the "English" section... ∞ΣɛÞ² (τ|c) 10:31, 28 June 2007 (UTC)Reply
- That's not obvious, since the English Wikipedia is written in the English language, it isn't about only English-language topics. In any case, I understand why you did it, and it's not a terrible mistake, but I am just telling you that it is unnecessary. It creates an empty section when all you need is the template. Please don't do it again. Dmcdevit·t 15:03, 29 June 2007 (UTC)Reply
Please take a look at the note I left over at Talk:eep. 76.9.73.248 14:03, 29 June 2007 (UTC)Reply
Please don't mangle templates; if you change one, you must change the related templates (rel-mid, rel-top3, rel-mid3, etc.) but even then, you should have some community consensus before doing so. Those colors are (and need to be) distinct from the translation sections and distinct form the normal background. --Connel MacKenzie 19:04, 7 August 2007 (UTC)Reply
- Mangle? Hardly. The background color doesn't need to be forced--and doesn't need to be distinct since the "show/hide" control distinguishes them enough. ∞ΣɛÞ² (τ|c) 19:04, 8 August 2007 (UTC)Reply
Why was I banned, just because I edited a high-use template without discussion? Sheesh...besides, my edit was reverted anyway and I didn't press the issue afterwards.
- What happened was that you edited a high-profile template, and were warned by an admin not to do that. Then you promptly did it again to another template, and that is why you were blocked. Doing it once without knowing is an honest mistake. Doing it again in full knowledge is blatant obstinance. --EncycloPetey 05:27, 14 August 2007 (UTC)Reply