User talk:SMcCandlish

As of 2012-01-28 , SMcCandlish is Busy.
I might check Wikipedia, but I won't be actively participating or editing until 1 February 2012.

WikiStress level

Unresolved old stuff

Cueless billiards

Unresolved: Can't get at the stuff at Ancestry; try using addl. cards.

Categories are not my thing but do you think there are enough articles now or will be ever to make this necessary? Other than Finger billiards and possibly Carrom, what else is there?--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 11:12, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Crud fits for sure. And if the variant in it is sourceable, I'm sure some military editor will fork it into a separate article eventually. I think at least some variants of bar billiards are played with hands and some bagatelle split-offs probably were, too (Shamos goes into loads of them, but I get them all mixed up, mostly because they have foreign names). And there's bocce billiards, article I've not written yet. Very fun game. Kept my sister and I busy for 3 hours once. Her husband (Air Force doctor) actually plays crud on a regular basis; maybe there's a connection She beat me several times, so it must be from crud-playing. Hand pool might be its own article eventually. Anyway, I guess it depends upon your "categorization politics". Mine are pretty liberal - I like to put stuff into a logical category as long as there are multiple items for it (there'll be two as soon as you're done with f.b., since we have crud), and especially if there are multiple parent categories (that will be the case here), and especially especially if the split parallels the category structure of another related category branch (I can't think of a parallel here, so this criterion of mine is not a check mark in this case), and so on. A bunch of factors really. I kind of wallow in that stuff. Not sure why I dig the category space so much. Less psychodrama, I guess. >;-) In my entire time here, I can only think of maybe one categorization decision I've made that got nuked at CfD. And I'm a pretty aggressive categorizer, too; I totally overhauled Category:Pinball just for the heck of it and will probably do the same to Category:Darts soon.

PS: I'm not wedded to the "cueless billiards" name idea; it just seemed more concise than "cueless developments from cue sports" or whatever.— SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(^Õل^ō)ˀ Contribs. 11:44, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

I have no "categorization politics". It's not an area that I think about a lot or has ever interested me so it's good there are people like you. If there is to be a category on this, "cueless billiards" seems fine to me. By the way, just posted Yank Adams as an adjunct to the finger billiards article I started.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 11:57, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Cool; I'd never even heard of him. This one looks like a good DYK; just the fact that there was Finger Billiards World Championship contention is funky enough, probably. You still citing that old version of Shamos? You really oughta get the 1999 version; it can be had from Amazon for cheap and has a bunch of updates. I actually put my old version in the recycle bin as not worth saving. Heh. PS: You seen Stein & Rubino 3rd ed.? I got one for the xmas before the one that just passed, from what was then a really good girlfriend. >;-) It's a-verra, verra nahce. Over 100 new pages, I think (mostly illustrations). — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(^Õل^ō)ˀ Contribs. 13:41, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

If I happen to come across it in a used book store I might pick it up. There's nothing wrong with citing the older edition (as I've said to you before). I had not heard of Adams before yesterday either. Yank is apparently not his real name, though I'm not sure what it is yet. Not sure there will be enough on him to make a DYK (though don't count it out). Of course, since I didn't userspace it, I have 4½ days to see. Unfortunately, I don't have access to ancestry.com and have never found any free database nearly as useful for finding newspaper articles (and census, birth certificates, and reams of primary source material). I tried to sign up for a free trial again which worked once before, but they got smart and are logging those who signed up previously. I just looked; the new Stein and Rubino is about $280. I'll work from the 2nd edition:-)--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 14:16, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Hmm... I haven't tried Ancestry in a while. They're probably logging IP addresses. That would definitely affect me, since mine doesn't change except once every few years. I guess that's what libraries and stuff are for. S&R: Should be available cheaper. Mine came with the Blue Book of Pool Cues too for under $200 total. Here it is for $160, plus I think the shipping was $25. Stein gives his e-mail address as that page. If you ask him he might give you the 2-book deal too, or direct you to where ever that is. Shamos: Not saying its an unreliable source (although the newer version actually corrected some entries), it's just cool because it has more stuff in it. :-) DYK: Hey, you could speedily delete your own article, sandbox it and come back. Heh. Seriously, I'll see if I can get into Ancestry again and look for stuff on him. I want to look for William Hoskins stuff anyway so I can finish that half of the Spinks/Hoskins story, which has sat in draft form for over a year. I get sidetracked... — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(^Õل^ō)ˀ Contribs. 14:29, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

It's not IPs they're logging, it's your credit card. You have to give them one in order to get the trial so that they can automatically charge you if you miss the cancellation deadline. Regarding the Blue Book, of all these books, that's the one that get's stale, that is, if you use it for actual quotes, which I do all the time, both for answer to questions and for selling, buying, etc. Yeah I start procrastinating too. I did all that work on Mingaud and now I can't get myself to go back. I also did reams of research on Hurricane Tony Ellin (thugh I found so little; I really felt bad when he died; I met him a few times, seemed like a really great guy), Masako Katsura and others but still haven't moved on them.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 18:31, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Ah, the credit card. I'll have to see if the PayPal plugin has been updated to work with the new Firefox. If so, that's our solution - it generates a new valid card number every time you use it (they always feed from your single PayPal account). — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(^Õل^ō)ˀ Contribs. 18:37, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

PayPal Plugin ist kaput. Some banks now issue credit card accounts that make use of virtual card numbers, but mine's not one of them. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(^Õل^ō)ˀ Contribs. 19:49, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for trying. It was worth a shot. I signed up for a newspaperarchive.com three month trial. As far as newspaper results go it seems quite good so far, and the search interface is many orders of magnitude better than ancestry's, but it has none of the genealogical records that ancestry provides. With ancestry I could probably find census info on Yank as well as death information (as well as for Masako Katsura, which I've been working on it for a few days; she could actually be alive, though she'd be 96).--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 04:52, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Sad...

How well forgotten some very well known people are. The more I read about Yank Adams, the more I realize he was world famous. Yet, he's almost completely unknown today and barely mentioned even in modern billiard texts.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 13:47, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Reading stuff from that era, it's also amazing how important billiards (in the three-ball sense) was back then, with sometimes multiple-page stories in newspapers about each turn in a long match, and so on. It's like snooker is today in the UK. PS: I saw that you found evidence of a billiards stage comedy there. I'd never heard of it! — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(^Õل^ō)ˀ Contribs. 15:17, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Jackpot. Portrait, diagrams, sample shot descriptions and more (that will also lend itself to the finger billiards article).--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 01:34, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Nice find! — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(^Õل^ō)ˀ Contribs. 06:07, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Cite4Wiki

Unresolved: New version for FireFox 4.x not released yet.

Updates to this are very welcome, thanks. One thing though - it doesn't seem to use the vertical form any more, could this be fixed (or added as an option) in future releases? pablo 12:28, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Working on it. Probably won't release until FF4.x is out of beta (if it isn't already - haven't checked in a few weeks). Vertical format will be an option, but one that you have to manually enable. Have no had time to work out the code for actually installing an Otions menu and supporting functionality. Going with horizontal layout by popular demand, though I prefer the vertical format myself. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(^Õل^ō)ˀ Contribs. 01:21, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Every time I think about messing with it other stuff comes out, and or another version of Firefox hits public beta... — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(^Õل^ō)ˀ Contribs. 16:23, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Look at the main page

Unresolved: Katsura News added (with new TFA section) to WP:CUE; need to see if I can add anything useful to Mingaud article.

--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 03:37, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Since you don't appear to have seen this near to the time I left it, it might be a little cryptic without explanation. Masako Katsura was today's featured article on January 31, 2011.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 20:26, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Supah-dupah! That kicks. WP:CUE's (and your?) first TFA, yes?! And yeah I have been away a lot lately. Long story. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(^Õل^ō)ˀ Contribs. 01:22, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Indeed, my first, though I have another in the works (not billiards related). I think François Mingaud could be a candidate in the near future. I really wanted to work it up to near FA level before posting it but another user created it recently, not realizing my draft existed, and once they did realize, copied some of my content without proper copyright attribution and posted to DYK. I have done a history merge though the newer, far less developed content is what's seen in the article now. I'm going to merge the old with the new soon. Glad to see your back.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 16:15, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

My front and sides are visible too. ;-) Anyway, glad you beat me to Mingaud. I'd been thinking of doing that one myself, but it seemed a bit daunting. I may have some tidbits for it. Lemme know when your merged version goes up, and I'll see what I have that might not already be in there. Probably not earthshaking, just a few things I found in 1800s-1910s books. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(^Õل^ō)ˀ Contribs. 16:21, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Template:Cuegloss

Unresolved: There's actually still one bug going on there.

Hey Stanton. Something's going on with definitions linked through {{cuegloss}}. I see them as not very noticeably underlined with a dotted line, rather than linked in blue like a regular wikilink. Is it just me or is this some wider change?--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 13:00, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

That's something intentional being tried out with <dfn> markup. Most of the time (when cuegloss is used in an article outside of the glossary article itself), it should also be a blue link. If you are never seeing it blue-link, that's evidence of a problem... — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(^Õل^ō)ˀ Contribs. 16:44, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Below is a screenshot of what I'm seeing (an excerpt from Cue sports) containing 9 cuegloss links:

File:Problem with linking.png--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 19:56, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Not that bad, but not what was intended. It should look that way inside the glossary itself, since the links are not to another page. Anyway, the idea is to reduce the "sea of blue" effect a bit by having terms that need definition for some readers and marked up with <dfn>, either just have a definition in a mouseover tool-tip, and look like what you screencapped, a style that's becoming kind of a de facto standard around the Web, or be a link to a glossary entry if one exists (with a tool-tip in this case giving the glossary and entry name). What should happen in those latter cases is that it should show up as a blue link, since it is a link out of the article, but also have the subtle underlining and tool-tip since it is also a definitional item and not an indication of a link to a full-scale article on the term. But the blue's not showing up now. I think this means someone's messed with the cuegloss code or the code of the underlying meta-template or something since last I looked at it. The appearance we're seeing at articles like cue sports is what we should see at glossary of cue sports terms itself, since the cuegloss links are internal to the article, but this "minimalist" effect shouldn't happen in other articles. I think someone's made or making a template that works similarly for Wiktionary links; it would underline them like this to indicate a purely definitional link, but also use the light blue external link color like it would normally for an offsite link like that. Anyway, I'll look into the geeky details and see why the CSS isn't working right. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(^Õل^ō)ˀ Contribs. 07:52, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

If it helps at all, I'm seeing this in Firefox and Safari on two different computers, both macs. Are you seeing this as well?--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:37, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Yeah. Someone changed something. Whilethe underline should be there to indicate it's just a definitional link, the blue should be there too, outside of the glossary itself. At least that was the theory last time I looked. Probably not a huge deal either way - it all still functions. Will look into it shortly. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(^Õل^ō)ˀ Contribs. 16:22, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

It appears to be fixed now. Whether that's the result of your action or not, thanks for looking into it.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 18:20, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Some more notes on Crystalate

Unresolved: New sources/material worked into article, but unanswered questions remain.

Some more notes: they bought Royal Worcester in 1983 and sold it the next year, keeping some of the electronics part.[1]; info about making records:[2]; the chair in 1989 was Lord Jenkin of Roding:[3]; "In 1880, crystalate balls made of nitrocellulose, camphor, and alcohol began to appear. In 1926, they were made obligatory by the Billiards Association and Control Council, the London-based governing body." Amazing Facts: The Indispensable Collection of True Life Facts and Feats. Richard B. Manchester - 1991[4]; a website about crystalate and other materials used for billiard balls:[5]. Fences&Windows 23:37, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! I'll have to have a look at this stuff in more detail. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(^Õل^ō)ˀ Contribs. 15:54, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

I've worked most of it in. Fences&Windows 16:01, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Cool! From what I can tell, entirely different parties held the trademark in different markets. I can't find a link between Crystalate Mfg. Co. Ltd. (mostly records, though billiard balls early on) and the main billiard ball mfr. in the UK, who later came up with "Super Crystalate". I'm not sure the term was even used in the U.S. at all, despite the formulation having been originally patented there. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(^Õل^ō)ˀ Contribs. 21:04, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

WikiCite project in development

Hello SMcC, the m:WikiCite project proposal is gaining some interest again. Your insights and suggestions would be welcome. – SJ + 04:11, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Cite4Wiki and Jetpack

I saw Cite4Wiki mentioned on foundation-l and, on downloading it, noticed that it wanted me to restart and hadn't been updated to the latest Firefox. I'm going to go look at your code, but I thought you might be interested in Jetpack to help you with maintaining the extension since it would mean you wouldn't have to worry about Firefox versions or force people to restart Firefox to get it to run. I happen to be good friends with the guy who runs the project, so even if you aren't interested, I'm going to see what it would take to get Cite4Wiki ported to run there. — ☠MarkAHershberger☢(talk)☣ 16:44, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Sounds good! It needs work. For one thing, it needs a proper settings window that allows you to set options like whether to use vertical or horizontal formatting. I never did figure out how to do that (previous author apparently didn't either). — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(^Õل^ō)ˀ Contribs. 23:43, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Do you have a source code repository somewhere? I'd like to work from that if I could. — ☠MarkAHershberger☢(talk)☣ 00:18, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Not yet, but good idea. I still have a SourceForge account, so I guess I can use that. Is everyone using Git these days? They offer Git, SVN and Mercurial but not CVS any longer. Looks like I need new version control software... Any preference? — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(^Õل^ō)ˀ Contribs. 00:43, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

If you don't have a preference and don't currently use a VCS, then I'm going to say git. Not that it is easy (Torvalds isn't know for creating easy-to-use software), but it is pretty good. And we can pull from each other. I think I can get a repository set up in git hosted by the WMF. I'll probably end up putting it there anyway, unless you have some objections — ☠MarkAHershberger☢(talk)☣ 01:07, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

But, now that I think about it, would you mind if I put it in the SVN repo hosted by WMF? I can do that right now. I'm not sure if I can do gerrit right now.

Sure. I honestly don't even use SVN yet; I've been using CVS since the dawn of time. Which of the post-CVS alternatives to use isn't something I have a set mind about. :-) IIRC, the version that's publicly available is stable but missing some stuff I've added to it. I guess I can commit that stuff later as a beta. I haven't touched it in 6 months, so I don't remember where I left off anyway. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(^Õل^ō)ˀ Contribs. 01:15, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Ok, committed. Now, to understand Jetpack. — ☠MarkAHershberger☢(talk)☣ 14:53, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Also, you should apply for Commit_access. — ☠MarkAHershberger☢(talk)☣ 15:08, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Okay. And vice-versa, you should register as a Mozilla add-on developer, so I can give you access to the "official" distribution channel. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(^Õل^ō)ˀ Contribs. 15:15, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Cite4Wiki4Chrome...

Hi there! I was just wondering if a Chrome port of Cite4Wiki was on the cards at all? I tried messing with the source code but I have no real knowledge of JS, XUL and the rest so can't really do anything about it. — Joseph Fox 15:39, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

I hadn't thought of one, since I just use Firefox. Maybe after the stuff mentioned above is done a port will be easier. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(^Õل^ō)ˀ Contribs. 00:42, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

---

New stuff

MOS capital letters - religious doctrine

As the author of much of the language still extant in Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Capital letters#Doctrine, I am hoping you can help me understand its intent. Is the main purpose there to remind us to avoid capitalizing common nouns that are incorrectly capitalized by doctrinal adherents or is there more to it? Jojalozzo 04:52, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

That was the entire idea. Most often it ends up being adherents of schools of thought or professional practice that overcapitalize (Method Acting, etc.) rather than the religious faithful. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(^Õل^ō)ˀ Contribs. 07:45, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Some falafel and one canadian beer for you!

SMcCandlish , I learnt the death of the great skier Sarah Burke. It's crazy. The life is so fragile. Then thank you for being here and to work on the women sport project. Ce matin j'ai apprise le décès de la grande skieuse Sarah Burke. C'est fou. La vie est si fragile. Alors merci d'être là et de travailler avec moi --Cordialement féministe ♀ Cordially feminist Geneviève (talk) 20:34, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Original Barnstar
		This barnstar is awarded to everyone who - whatever their opinion - contributed to the discussion about Wikipedia and SOPA. Thank you for being a part of the discussion. Presented by the Wikimedia Foundation.

Notice concerning an action at ArbCom

A request has been filed for the Arbitration Committee to look at long-term issues with editing in the Article Titles and MOS areas at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#Article titles/MOS. I have added your name as a party, since it is clear that you have been involved at pages that are within the scope of the action. Noetica^Tea? 05:25, 28 January 2012 (UTC)