User talk:Walkazo/Archive 9

Status: My computer died, and until it's repaired, I have to use my brother's computer to come online. As a result, I won't be as active an editor as I'd like, but I'll still be checking in all the time, so if you have any questions or concerns, feel free to drop me a line!

Important
Hey Walkazo, theres a problem with two images: File:Star bit shooter planet.jpg and File:Dual planets.jpg‎. The file history shows the wrong version and thats what shows up when the images are imbedded on a page. Could you help?
 * Can you be more specific about what's the "wrong" version? Do you want the versions uploaded today to be the ones that show up on the pages? Because when I checked them just now, the May 21 images are the ones that are embedded. You could be experiencing the problem discussed here (the Internet browser is remembering the old image, even though it's been replaced). Older versions always show up in the file histories: the top one is the current one, and as long as the image you want is the top one, everything's fine, even if the image itself looks wrong for you for a little while. - Walkazo 15:09, 21 May 2011 (EDT)
 * I just checked and they're working now, thanks for the explanation. Now I understand. 11:01, 27 May 2011 (EDT)

Grammar (Mario article)
I was not aware that that particular style was characteristic of British grammar. Thanks for the clarification.

Super Mario 3D
Can you look at the trailer for Super Mario 3D? In the beginning, Mario attacks Goombas, but they break apart and don't move. There are like cardboard. Should that be mentioned in the article? 13:56, 7 June 2011 (EDT)
 * The cutouts should be mentioned, but they're more like obstacles than actual enemies; maybe they could go in "Confirmed Features". - Walkazo 14:01, 7 June 2011 (EDT)
 * They actually remind me of Handfake, which is an enemy. 14:04, 7 June 2011 (EDT)
 * But the Handfakes actually attack Mario and Luigi and are present in battles; these things were just blocking Mario's path and got smashed like blocks. Unless more info is revealed to the contrary, I'd say they're Items for now. - Walkazo 14:07, 7 June 2011 (EDT)

Question
there was a proposal here [] that was mislabeled i think was mislabeled a NO Quorum and the proposer is currently banned my question is, if the proposal was mislabeled is it still valid
 * If a proposal is mistakenly labelled as "No quorum" or passes/fails when it really should be extended, the mistake should be undone. If the proposal needs to be reopened, so be it; if it passed/failed, any changes that requires should be made. In this case, the proposal did pass (the Clear Majority three-vote margin is only needed when there are 10+ votes, and "no quorum" needs less than 3 votes: this TPP had 4 votes (but you knew that already)). However, seeing as it's a year old, making a new header in the comments saying "well, it passed, we should do something about it, okay?" would be the more decent thing to do than simply enact it right off the bat, since peoples' opinions might've changed in the meantime. Plus, someone else will have to do it, since the proposer was banned (as you pointed out), so we can't just label it as passed and wander away to let it stagnate for another year. You can bring attention to the TPP by adding it to the list of TPPs on the Proposals page, with a "Passed (belatedly)" label. - Walkazo 18:45, 7 June 2011 (EDT)