User talk:Lemmiwinks2

		The Content Creativity Barnstar
		For your ongoing work on Timeline of the Bible. Falcon8765 (talk) 04:03, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply ]

I like what you've done with User:Lemmiwinks2/monobook.css, but is it possible to remove the large red bar at the top? --William S. Saturn (talk) 18:34, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Its a warning! Its supposed to be big and red. You can lose your account if you enter the wrong thing. Are you sure you want to change it. Anyway its just a message box of some kind. look at the source code for that box. then go to the section that colors the message boxes and look for that type of box. The message boxes were a real pain to get right. I eventually decided on 3 levels. simple infoboxes have black bachgrounds. more important message boxes have blue backgrounds. warnings have red backgrounds. You can always just go through the entire list of boxes and change everything thats red to blue or whatever you like. Lemmiwinks2 (talk) 19:15, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to change the black and green gadget, User:Prodego said he would change it to your code when you have perfected it. --William S. Saturn (talk) 22:16, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is a scene in Moneypit where Tom Hanks is told that the contractor said he would be back when Tom Hanks 'grows udders' and 'gets milked' and Tom Hanks replies 'thats a long time'. Its kinda the same thing here. I've perfected it as far as I'm capable of doing so. But even if it isnt perfected its still, if I do say so myself, an improvement. At the very least the parts involving background color of navigation popups should certainly be included in Blackskin. Lemmiwinks2 (talk) 00:32, 8 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Has your monobook.css fixed the problems with Blackskin where

1. colored signatures come up as black on black?
2. images come up as black on black?

this discussion led me here. (Is there a list of improvements?) --Elvey (talk) 21:22, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I havent noticed any signatures coming up black on black but that doesnt mean it doesnt happen. i dont pay much attention to signatures. there is no list of improvements but its considerable. or at least it was considerable when i wrote it. only a few small parts of a few pages still come up as white on some light background. these parts can always be read by simply selecting it. I gave up on trying to perfect all these minor things because its difficult when, like me, you dont know what you are doing and its a matter of diminishing returns. some parts cant even be fixed becase they dont even have an id or belong to any class. Lemmiwinks2 (talk) 22:05, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reply. here are some black-on-black sigs. Here are some black-on-black images. So with yours, much fewer things come up as white on light? I noticed that it was much bigger, and am hesitant to use something when I don't really have a good idea about what it does. All it does is try to make things display as light on dark instead of dark on light, like Blackskin, but better?--Elvey (talk) 18:59, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, yeah. it started off as blackskin. then i began adding things. eventually i copied over a large part of monobook.css and modified that too. have you looked at the code itself? i added a table of contents and even a section of 'notes' so others could figure it out.

Anyway, i got the signatures on that page to work but that doesnt mean that all signature will work.

i dont know enough about images to do much. As a temporary work around i just set background color for all images to blue so the most images should now work. But if an image uses blue then it will be blue on blue.

I've done pretty much all i can with it. someone who knows more about it than i do is going to have to finish it out. --Lemmiwinks2

Actually, I noticed the ToC after I left my previous comment. I looked through the code a bit more and I've adopted it. Thanks for answering my questions - and sharing. --Elvey (talk) 07:03, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

http://eternian.wordpress.com/2010/07/28/steady-state-theoryYahweh is Eternal (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 20:18, 28 July 2010 (UTC).[reply]

After even an ArbCom action against him for original research didn't stop him, he was finally banned indefinitely for original research. Now that wouldn't be so bad if it was good original research, but I've seen his work for at least 15 years, on Usenet before Wikipedia existed, and everyone I respect has always rejected his 'work' as fringe/just plain wrong.

Talk about the 'kiss of death'. Lemmiwinks2 (talk) 15:50, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

:) Thanks for the reversion, by the way. Some of us have worked hard cleaning up articles after him!

talk) 15:55, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply

]

Template:Main5 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Also the dependent {{Maincat2}}. -DePiep (talk) 04:12, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Adam-Jacob has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 08:22, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current

Template:Interlinear has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:48, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Lemmiwinks2:, your talk page text on "relativity"

γ = 1/√1-v/c
…
It is really convenient to use a spaceship with v=0.6c so that gamma is 1.25.

should read

γ = 1/√(1-v/c)
…
It is really convenient to use a spaceship with v=0.36c so that gamma is 1.25.

AFAICT. yoyo (talk) 05:25, 28 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Interlinear-nb has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:39, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Netbible-d has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 19:50, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]