MediaWiki talk:Sitenotice

The past tense notice deserves to be put in SiteNotice, because people seem to be disregarding it. - Daiku { Whine Here } { Look what I did! } {My Library} 00:40, 28 February 2007 (UTC)


 * I thought this wiki was written in the current time in Bionicle?LegoLover 00:54, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
 * No - to the best of my knowledge, we've been doing it as if the whole thing happened in the past. Easier to change when new info comes up. It's in the Manual of Style. - Daiku { Whine Here } { Look what I did! } {My Library} 01:12, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

No. It's all past tense, except for a few stubborn things that we probably won't change, like the "current status" or whatever. It's all in the context that The Bionicle was a story being told. \/  ladius  |\/|agnum  03:25, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

HELP!
When I clicked "dismiiss" the notice dissapeared! I can't get it back! I tried changing the notice,refreshing my page and even restarting my computer! Can somebod y tell me how to get it back?- LD760 { Talk 04:16, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Umm...you do know I removed that... -User:DaikuI'm not logged in!
 * Daiku,let me explain. You just erased the text. Before you erased it,I clicked dismiss. Now it's gone...- LD760 { Talk[[Image:Luigi.gif|24px]] 04:33, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

"Undismissing" the Sitenotice
To whoever's an admin here... if you change the Sitenotice, PLEASE add 1 to the number at MediaWiki:Sitenotice. To the first person who edits the Sitenotice, create MediaWikI:Sitenotice id with the number "0" as all its content; then, when someone adds to the number, it will "undismiss" the Sitenotice for every person who views this wiki; very useful when you change it, so people will actually notice changes. -- NOTASTAFF  GPT ( talk )( eating ) 22:44, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Hey, I didn't know that. I thought it did that automatically when the sitenotice got changed. Thanks. - Daiku { Whine Here } { Look what I did! } {My Library} 00:12, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

09 Spoilers
Actually, LEGO should allow 09 info, as long as the info wasn't leaked. And we're a wiki, we want as much info as we can get, don't we? And it doesn't say in the policy that 09 spoilers a banned. Remember when I said "no outright banning unless info is leaked"? I was talking about 09 too. So what say you, my Matoran and Toa brothers? Panaka lego  23:22, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

I guess I can back you up on this one but what about all those users with the "Lego is ruined forever thing"? Kazidii ----- I Am Ordering! 17 November 2008
 * Say what? - Daiku { Whine Here } { Look what I did! } 00:20, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't know what you mean Kazi, but why do we want to ban 09? LEGO would allow it, as long as it's not leaked. And we are a wiki, so why ban stuff we don't have to? Panaka  lego  03:59, 19 November 2008 (UTC)