User talk:Guy Macon

A Wikipedia Content Dispute.

Welcome to Guy Macon's Wikipedia talk page. Please Click here to start a new topic. Please post your new comments at the bottom of the comment you are replying to. Please sign and date your entry by inserting "~~~~" at the end. Please indent your posts with ":" if replying to an existing topic (or "::" if replying to a reply). I will generally respond here to comments that are posted here, so you may want to watch this page until you are responded to. I delete or collapse most messages after I have read them. The history tab will show you a complete list of all past comments. If you find this page on any site other than en.wikipedia.org you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated, and that I have no affiliation with or control of mirror websites. The original page is located at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Guy_Macon.

"Wikipedia's articles are no place for strong views. Or rather, we feel about strong views the way that a natural history museum feels about tigers. We admire them and want our visitors to see how fierce and clever they are, so we stuff them and mount them for close inspection. We put up all sorts of carefully worded signs to get people to appreciate them as much as we do. But however much we adore tigers, a live tiger loose in the museum is seen as an urgent problem." --WP:TIGER

Only 993,096,133 articles left until our billionth article!

We are only 993,096,133 articles away from our 1,000,000,000th article --Guy Macon

Depiction of Wikimedia Foundation destroying Wikipedia with Visual Editor, Flow, and Mobile App

Depiction of Wikimedia Foundation destroying Wikipedia with Visual Editor, Flow, and Mobile App.

--Guy Macon

Calvin discovers Wikipedia

• "A little rudeness and disrespect can elevate a meaningless interaction into a battle of wills and add drama to an otherwise dull day." -- Calvin, of Calvin and Hobbes. --Guy Macon

Another chart

Page views for this talk page over the last year
Detailed traffic statistics

--Guy Macon

Arguing with anonymous strangers on the Internet

"Arguing with anonymous strangers on the Internet is a sucker's game because they almost always turn out to be -- or to be indistinguishable from -- self-righteous sixteen-year-olds possessing infinite amounts of free time." --Neil Stephenson, Cryptonomicon
--Guy Macon

Just because you have some money, that doesn't mean that you have to spend it.

Updated essay: see new "2016-2017 update" information near the bottom.

User:Guy Macon/Just because you have some money, that doesn't mean that you have to spend it.

--Guy Macon

The most important^{[Citation Needed]} page on Wikipedia

User:Guy Macon/On the Diameter of the Sewer cover in front of Greg L’s house‎ --Guy Macon

"...It looks like Wikipedia is really pulling out all the stops in their latest appeal to their users..."

Donations Needed: Wikipedia Has Posted An Appeal Asking For One Night Of Physical Intimacy From Each User --Guy Macon

Wikipedia Celebrates 750 Years Of American Independence

"The Revolution's main adversaries were the patriots and the people from Braveheart," said speaker Tim Capodice, who has edited hundreds of Wikipedia entries on subjects as diverse as Euclidian geometry and Ratfucking. "The patriots, being a rag-tag group of misfits, almost lost on several occasions. But after a string of military antics and a convoluted scheme involving chicken feathers and an inflatable woman, the British were eventually defeated despite a last-minute surge, by a score of 89–87."[1]
--Guy Macon

Wikipedia: DNA edition

• Startup packs all 16GB of Wikipedia onto DNA strands to demonstrate new storage tech --Guy Macon (talk) 14:42, 6 July 2019 (UTC)

Reasoning

"Reasoning will never make a man correct an ill opinion, which by reasoning he never acquired: for, in the course of things, men always grow vicious, before they become unbelievers..." --Jonathan Swift ( 1721)[2][3]

In modern language that would be

"You cannot reason people out of something they were not reasoned into. They will viciously attack you instead of abandoning their beliefs".

--Guy Macon (talk) 12:59, 3 August 2019 (UTC)

OJ

I admired the effort you put into helping OJ and thought that there was a real chance they could be turned around. Even though OJ failed to live up to everyone's hopes, please don't let it sour you on looking for the best in others. Sometimes efforts can fail but it doesn't mean it was wrong to try. Schazjmd (talk) 00:59, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

I echo that. Well said, Schazjmd. El_C 09:23, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

I admire your efforts. -Roxy, the PROD. . wooF 12:37, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

By my estimation, roughly 25% of the people who I have recommended for an unblock have gone on to become productive editors, and the other 75% were quickly reblocked without actually doing all that much damage, so WP:ROPE really does seem to work. Of course recommending an unblock is a lot easier than it would be if I was the one making the unblock decision; I would have to see a real consensus for unblocking if it were my decision to make. --Guy Macon (talk) 18:42, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

RFA Recommendation

Guy, go for it. Seriously you would make for an excellent admin. RickinBaltimore (talk) 16:30, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

• +1 Puddleglum ^2.0 23:57, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

Wow. I am also getting emails with the same message.

I basically have two concerns, and both are based upon the fact that in a RfA you have to not defend your self.

First, My edit history has a lot of improving existing articles, but not a lot of creating new articles. This is sure to result in criticism and I would be really tempted to defend myself and say that Wikipedia needs both kinds of editors.

Second, there are quite a few people on Wikipedia who absolutely hate my essays at WP:YWAB, WP:1AM, or WP:CANCER. I expect some nasty attacks and I would be really tempted to defend those essays.

I guess what I am hoping for is someone to say "If I see a completely unfair or untrue attack, I will speak up, but if there is even a tiny bit of validity to it, that's for you to handle." --Guy Macon (talk) 00:20, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

+1 from me as well - I can't really speak for the essays, but as far as I'm concerned, article creation is not a prerequisite for a good admin, and Wikipedia absolutely does need both kinds of editors. I say that out of pure self-interest, of course. From what I've seen you have a level head on your shoulders and would make a solid admin. creffett (talk) 01:33, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Guy, I think plenty of people will speak up in defense of editors in a range of situations. I think the number 1 predictor of a successful RfA (1st attempt) is whether respected sysops are suggesting you run. There are only two cases in the past couple of years I can think of where many respected sysops suggested someone run for a first RfA and they did not pass. In both those situations I would suggest it was their actions/answers during the RfA when conerns were expressed that made the difference as much as the concerns themselves. 75% of people saying really great things and 25% saying criticism can be though because those 25% feel like a lot more than 25%. However that's still enough to pass. I hope you'll reconsider and run. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 03:33, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

• @Guy Macon:, so to comment on the three aspects you raise (which somewhat mix): concern about insufficient from-scratch articles, concern about controversial essays, and concern about how to handle criticism when you're restricted from self-defence. I'll endeavour to be pragmatic.

1. Essays - I've had a read through them all (2 i'd read before), and I don't think they've pick up significant amounts of opposes. If I saw people raising it, I'd probably ask a question about it, as most oppose causes are worth hearing the candidate's reasoning on.
2. Articles - in blunt terms, this will get a few opposes. You have plenty of content creation, but it will still get opposition. Of itself (or even with the essays), unlikely to be enough to defeat your well suited candidature. If you have time you could always create a couple of "C"s of course, but discounting that, I think addressing it head-on in either/both your nomination/required questions would be worthwhile.
3. Undefended criticism - so the above are right that it's in-RfA activity that has caused 2 major candidates problems in the last couple of years. However, I've not spotted criticism going without objections - usually opposes get a lot of discussion from those supporting. I think it's also just a case of using your questions well, and we know you can write well - it's getting "down in the weeds" that's problematic.

I think you can run and pass. I think you'd pass more comfortably with some more article creation, but I still think you'd pass without it. In either case, you'd make a good admin. Nosebagbear (talk) 09:54, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

+1 I've long thought you'd be a good fit for the role. Yes, you speak plainly, but your tireless work maintaining the quality of our content on some contentious areas is invaluable. I'm probably a bit wet behind the ears to offer myself as a nom, but you can expect a detailed support rationale. GirthSummit _(blether) 11:10, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

@RickinBaltimore, Puddleglum2.0, Creffett, Barkeep49, Nosebagbear, and Girth Summit:

OK, I have thought about it and have decided to run if somebody is willing to nominate me. If anyone decides to do so, please wait until after 6AM in Los Angeles (2PM UTC) so I can be fresh for answering the initial flurry of questions. If someone beats you, feel free to co-nominate. --Guy Macon (talk) 01:47, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

I've (AFAIK) always got on fine with you and this is intended as advice, not a slight, but before you send any RFA live, make sure you have a clear answer to just why you have more than 1400 edits to ANI and almost 1200 edits to Jimbotalk. For anyone skimming your history (and most participants at an RFA won't be very familar with you and will only judge you on what you say, your nominator says, and a brief skim of your edit history), that's one of the key markers of someone who's likely to have a battleground mentality and to be more interested in internal wiki-politics than improving and maintaining content, regardless of whether in your case it's actually true. (Just to put those stats in perspective, I've been an active admin for a decade and during that time have at times been an arbitrator, checkuser and oversighter and been directly involved with some of Wikipedia's more bitter controversies and with some of Wikipedia's most notorious problem editors, and I still have fewer edits to ANI than you; you even have fewer edits to ANI than Newyorkbrad, the closest thing we have to a machine politician.) It won't necessarily tank an RFA provided you have a legitimate explanation, but you need that explanation front-and-center before the opposes based on it start to pile up and generate momentum. Ritchie333 would be a good person to talk to, as he's done a lot of nominating and has seen for himself what generates opposition.

Obviously, as you already know you also want to address WP:CANCER before it goes live, so the issue is framed in your terms not the WMF's; I assume you're aware from Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Signpost/2017-02-27/Op-ed that you made a lot of the WMF payroll vote very unhappy there, and the WMF machine is slow to learn and slower to forget. ‑ Iridescent 19:39, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

Thanks! Pointing out possible problems is probably the best thing you could possibly do to help me.

I will, of course. have to re-address these if they come up during the RfA, but let me take a shot at addressing them here:

ANI:

Here are the last 5 times I went to ANI:

• Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive1029#Carnivore diet
• Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive1029#187Ernest
• Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive1029#Is this linkspamming?
• Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive1026#Joseph Rowe
• Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive1026#Joloimpat / 173.66.144.28

My posts at ANI are mostly in three areas.

First, there are times when I have completely screwed up and been taken to ANI over it. For a while there I drifted into being overly aggressive and even insulting. That was wrong. I took a long hard look at my own behavior and started disengaging more and confronting less. I expect to do some serious apologizing when people bring these sort of issues up.

Second, there are times I ended up at ANI because I edit a lot of pages where there are people who really want Wikipedia to say nice things about what they do for a living. Examples include acupuncturists, promoters of fad diets, and the makers of various electronic products. Sometimes I report them and sometimes they report me, but I have never ended up blocked over these sort of ANI reports.

Third, there are places where I simply add some information or ask a question about a technical issue without reporting someone or being reported. Here is one recent example:

• Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive1030#User:Psychologist Guy

I expressed no opinion on the user who had been reported, and instead simple documented some off-wiki canvassing by an already-blocked user that might explain why we were getting so many SPAs at that article.

Another recent example:

• Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive1025#A word of caution from a member of the engineering community

Again this was not about the editors or the dispute, but rather about how the admins should deal with this sort of issue. I am going to quote it here because I think it speaks to whether would I be a good admin:

"A word of caution from a member of the engineering community

"I am an embedded systems engineer. If you are making an electronic toy at a rate of 100,000 units per hour and want to reduce your costs by 0.01 cents per unit I am your man. Medicine, not so much. I don't edit medical articles for the same reason that Colin and Doc James don't edit our articles on Cockcroft–Walton generators, Hall effect sensors or Negative resistance. I am very much an outsider in this situation, but I do understand the human aspect of how subject-matter experts like Colin and Doc James end up interacting with ANI and Arbcom.

"In the above discussion, I am seeing a lot of discussion about user behavior, the usual "he creates content and has friends, so behavior that would get anyone else a 24-hour block gets a warning" bad attitude, and at least some examples of "Yeah, I know we aren't supposed to rule on content disputes, but dang it, this content dispute is just so darn interesting that I am going to forget the basic rules about ANI and content disputes just this once". I recognize the latter because I have seen it when engineers end up at ANI fighting over engineering content disputes.

"My caution is for each of you to watch yourself carefully and only to deal with user behavior, without any hint of ruling on article content.

"Nothing I wrote above should be construed as supporting either side on the content dispute or on the behavioral issues." --posted by Guy Macon at ANI, 15:13, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[4]

If someone wants to criticize me for posting to ANI too much, it would be nice if they noted the content of those posts. were they helpful, or did they show a battlefield mentality?

Jimbotalk:

Yes, I am interested in internal wiki-politics. Anyone who reads WP:CANCER can see that. I think the WMF spends too much, doesn't give enough details on what they spend it on, and refuses to take steps to protect our endowment from someone in a future WMF draining the principle to pay for Wikimanias. I also want the WMF to stop discriminating against blind people, and I want them to start producing high-quality software. (As I always do when I mention the software, let me be clear that the actual developers know how to make great software and have done so for other organizations. The problem here is management.) And Jimbotalk is a great place to get attention for these things. I will not apologize for posting "Two weeks One week to go before we reach the '14 years of discriminating against the blind' milestone"[5]

--Guy Macon (talk) 23:27, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

(Aside - If you stand you'll get my ivote, which will double the number of times I have taken part in the RfA process) -Roxy, the PROD. . wooF 14:39, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

That reminds my of an old joke: a politician paid off the teamster's union to help him get elected. The union boss asked "do you want us to announce that we are for you or against you?"  :) Not-even-slightly-seriously though, maybe we should invite some of the proponents of fringe theories mentioned at WP:YWAB to weigh in. I have had some pretty nasty off-wiki attacks from holocaust deniers, antivax proponents, and for some strange reason Jasker Power Systems,[6] despite me never writing about them on Wikipedia. Go figure. --Guy Macon (talk) 00:44, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

This RfA was on my watchlist before it was created. Usually that means I have something that I definitely wanted to say at an RfA, but that might have happened years ago and I can't seem to remember whether there was something really great or really bad that I wanted to comment on (ha ha). In this case, while we don't overlap too much, I can recall having both agreed and disagreed with you and things going smoothly in both cases. However, a heads up that I would intend to ask a question about this and what's different today. Dekimasuよ! 16:21, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

Good question! I pretty much feel the same way today as I did then, and part of me is hoping that the RfA will fail. Sometimes I think wanting the job should disqualify you from having the job... So what made me decide to accept the nomination? I do a fair amount of volunteering (I teach inner-city kids how to program) and I have seen too many volunteers take on too much, burn out, and quit. It seems like every time I report a vandal at WP:AIAV it is the same few admins who do the blocking. --Guy Macon (talk) 18:13, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

If I had thought of it before excitedly casting my support vote, I might have asked "What took you so long?" – bradv🍁 18:40, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

RfA Posted

Ok Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Guy Macon is live for you to answer the required questions. Let me know when it's done and I'll publish it live for you. RickinBaltimore (talk) 14:57, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

Also if you want, feel free to transclude and add the RfA once you answer the questions, in case I don't see it right away. RickinBaltimore (talk) 15:19, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

Thanks! I accepted and answered the questions. Not sure what magic needs to happen next. --Guy Macon (talk) 17:06, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

All done, and now the fun really begins! Good luck! RickinBaltimore (talk) 17:52, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

Does anybody know what "transclude" means? My supplementary question will be, "can you explain it to me?" Thx. -Roxy, the PROD. . wooF 23:39, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

@Roxy the dog: In terms of the RfA and how the term is used with Wikipedia newspeak, transclude in this case means to add the RfA subpage to the main WP:RFA page, just like a template. OhKayeSierra (talk) 15:44, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

• I gotta say, I admire your stamina in continuing to endure this pile-on character assassination. Reyk _YO! 10:01, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
  • If you want me to withdraw the RfA at any time Guy, let me know. I'm sorry it didn't go as hoped. RickinBaltimore (talk) 19:41, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

I posted something at the RfA under Neutral

Hey Guy,

It was a valiant effort. I'm sorry for you that it doesn't look like it will work out. It may not be the time now, but if you want to write an Op-ed for The Signpost about what it is like to go through the grinder, just let me know. Smallbones_(smalltalk) 19:12, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

A beer for you!

Sorry to see your RfA turn out as it did. Here's to another successful one in 6 months or so! Cheers. Puddleglum2.0(How's my driving?) 21:50, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

A cup of coffee for you!

I came to leave you a beer, but Puddlegum beat me to it. I wanted to wish you well after mess of an RFA. Wikipedia sucks sometimes. Hope you're well. Guettarda (talk) 22:38, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Sorry it was closed before I even coould look. I might have joined Iridescent in supporting. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:02, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
I am one of many people who failed on my first attempt at RfA. I think it is a crappy process, I am sorry that some of these people kept us (temporarily) from having your services as an admin --rogerd (talk) 05:07, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	For stepping up at RfA and your long history of contributions to the project. I was sorry to see it got so ugly. Ad Orientem (talk) 23:10, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Bounce back!

Primefac left the message that you've gone "offline". You've been here a lot longer than even I have, so I hope that eventually you will bounce back like I did after my own rather bloody RfA. Best of everything to you and yours! PI Ellsworth  ed. ^put'r there 04:19, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Yea. Although the community does not appear to think you would be suited to that role, your many contributions are appreciated. Have fun and best regards Govindaharihari (talk) 05:45, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

• Hi. I saw your RfA because I had an email from Doc James and he had confused the two of us. I'm deeply disappointed with the result and I hope you will not be too downhearted. There's a conflict right now between those who want Wikipedia to be cuddly and fluffy and those who understand the need for robust response to the assault from fringe advocates. Seems to me that not only are you Good People, you are also a tremendous asset to the project, and a far better editor of content than I am. Of course a lot of my attitude comes from being British, where casual profanity is normal and accepted: it amazes me that the US has a culture where people will actually write "d--n" rather than damn. Fuck that noise. Guy (help!) 10:44, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

• The only thing that's uglier than an ugly RfA is an ugly desysoping. At least you won't have to go through one of those! Take care my friend :) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 15:17, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

• Hi. Please dont get discouraged. I have always respected you, and your work. Just wanted to let you know that. Also, take a break, do some goofy things on internet and IRL, have good laughs; and then come back to enwiki. I hope to see you soon. Regards, —usernamekiran (talk) 19:34, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

• I don't care if you're an administrator or not, but would be glad to see you back too. —PaleoNeonate – 15:38, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
• Well ... I'm assuming you are doing what I have unashamed-fully attempted a multitude of times: Leaving this place, especially after a RFA such as yours. For some, their RFA results in them leaving permanently. For others, their RFA brought them down, but they eventually bounced back. I'm not sure which path is the best for you, but for what I've seen about you, you are not the type to let something like this get under your skin. You bounce back and fight hard for what you believe needs to be done! But ... what that means to you is obviously your own decision to make. Whether that means motivating yourself to get back to Wikipedia or motivating yourself to deal with other life matters is up to you. But, from what I've seen from most of those who are more familiar with you and were for you and even against you becoming an administrator (I'm obviously not part of that camp since I don't recall ever interacting with you or seeing more than what I mentioned in the RFA), you are a net positive to Wikipedia as an editor. Either way though, I wish you the best in this decision (since I empathize with my multiple attempts at retirement) and luckily ... Wikipedia's probably never going away, so if you feel the need to have months or even years to figure out if you want to come back here or not, no rush or hurry; this place only becomes a stressful time sink if you allow it to be. Be well. Steel1943 (talk) 19:08, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

Precious

one against many

Thank you for quality article work, beginning Fringe theories about the Shroud of Turin, for gnomish tasks such as avoiding redirects after a page move, and rescuing a stale draft such as Mark Estdale, for elucidating essays such as Yes. We are biased. and One against many, for "If we cover this topic at all we need to cover it as the Fringe Science that it is." - Guy, you are an awesome Wikipedian!

You are recipient no. 2354 of Precious, a prize of QAI, aka the cabal of the outcast. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:05, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

message from guy's wife

A dash of colour. Guy, you are in our thoughts. El_C 21:31, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

guy had a heart attack tuesday. no need to cancel anything. Final update later. --Guy Macon (talk) 20:25, 8 March 2020

Oh my God! Please send him our best. – Levivich ^{[dubious – discuss]} 20:32, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

As long as he's okay now. Crikey. ——SN54129 20:37, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

Tell him to get well soon. ~ RhinosF1_(Chat) / ^(Contribs) 20:38, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

Get well soon Guy. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 20:39, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

...OMG. Sending my best wishes for health and a quick recovery. Steel1943 (talk) 20:41, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

Quite worrisome to hear of such news. But, I pray he recovers quickly... and stays healthy for a long time to come. — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 20:42, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

Sending love. --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 20:39, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

Love indeed. -Roxy, the PROD. . wooF 20:45, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

Best wishes for a speedy recovery. El_C 20:46, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

Let me also send my best wishes and good hopes to Guy and his family. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 20:48, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

Get well soon Guy and hope you make a speedy recovery, Take care, –Davey2010^Talk 20:53, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

This is terrible news. Get well soon, Guy. – bradv🍁 21:01, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

Thank you guy's wife for letting us know. Thinking good thoughts, sending good vibes. Get well soon Guy - Here's to you having the best doctors & nurses possible - Shearonink (talk) 21:03, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

Health comes first. Then come back -- we need you. O3000 (talk) 21:03, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

• I'm sorry to hear this Guy, and whatever our past differences, I sincerely wish you the best for your recovery. Andy Dingley (talk) 21:27, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

My well-wishes to Guy and family. I hope your recovery is swift and comfortable. – Juliancolton | ^Talk 21:28, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

Wishing you a speedy recovery Guy. Take good care of yourself. - MrX 🖋 21:38, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

best wishes, El C brought the flowers already --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:02, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

Sending my best regards with hopes for a comfortable and rapid recovery. --Neutrality^talk 22:09, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

Oh no. 😔 Best wishes, Guy Macon. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:11, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

Oh my God. Hoping and praying for a speedy recovery. Joe Sutherland (WMF) (talk) 22:14, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for letting us know - praying he has a speedy recovery! ^Atsme _Talk 📧 22:16, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

Hope to see you back here soon! SarekOfVulcan (talk) 22:25, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

Awful news. Get well soon. Double sharp (talk) 23:08, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

Guy, you'll be in my prayers. Get well soon. SQL^{Query me!} 23:28, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

Oh goodness, I’m really sorry to hear. I remember seeing Guy around back when I used to edit here more often. Thoughts are with him at this time. Patient Zero^talk 23:40, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

Take whatever time off necessary, we'll be grateful for your return. —PaleoNeonate – 23:56, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

Guy get well soon! RickinBaltimore (talk) 00:22, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

Best wishes, I hope you get well soon! ZettaComposer (talk) 00:27, 9 March 2020 (UTC)