User talk:Cathfolant

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

If not directed otherwise I will respond to you wherever you have left your comment. If you want me to always respond on your talk page and not mine, please say so. If I have left a message on your talk page I may add it to my watchlist in case you respond there; though of course you don't have to.


Hey, not fantastic at this so forgive me if I'm putting this in the wrong place. If you're going to do podcast appearances for Jamie Kilstein, wouldn't you need all the other podcasts he's been on, as well as the other reactions to the JRE? Otherwise it isn't unbiased— Preceding unsigned comment added by Cdemere (talkcontribs)

You have a point there. I will stop putting the section back in that case. Thank you for explaining.
This is definitely the right place; the talk page for the article would have been fine as well. However, it would be good if you could type four tildes after your posts on talk pages so we can see who wrote them without digging through the page history. Cathfolant (talk) 21:55, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

User:Kittykitty[edit]

Hello, I just want to confirm that it was you who created an account at Communpedia, with the username: Kittykitty. Was it you? XXPowerMexicoXx (talk) 00:35, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Yes, it was. Thanks for asking. Cathfolant 01:09, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

What?[edit]

Why am I a new pages patroller? What on earth happened? I keep seeing these red exclamation marks in Special:RecentChanges. I'm so confused... Cathfolant 02:10, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Visual editor comments[edit]

There is a discussion at Wikipedia talk:VisualEditor#Call for audit and rollback that you may find interesting.--Paul McDonald (talk) 03:59, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Greetings and...[edit]

Greetings Cathfolant. Thanks for your note. I was worried for a moment that I'd trodden on your toes, but I see that they'd simply re-crated the article shortly after it had been deleted the first time. Cheers!--Technopat (talk) 05:28, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Oh, I see. I didn't notice it was deleted twice yesterday. That makes a bit more sense. Also thank you for speedy deletion tagging it the second time. Cathfolant (talk) 18:22, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi there,[edit]

I am rather new at this myself and will try to explain the best I can. I am writing regarding an edit you made and then the comment you left on the talk page for article Gangster by 187.194.184.244 . Great job by the way for spotting the vandalism on that page. I am in the process of completing adoption lessons and was just taught about dealing with vandalism myself. Normally after finding and reverting vandalism you would contact the original editor of the vandalism and leave them a warning notice on their talk page (if the talk page hasn't been created yet feel free to do so). You would choose the appropriate template for the warning from here: Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace. If you have any questions at all I am more than happy to help. There is always the teahouse too Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions and they are always very helpful (and prompt). Thanks again for helping to make wikipedia awesome. TattØØdẄaitre§ lĖTŝ tÅLĶ 18:52, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Just wanted to let you know that I added a warning template to the user page already but if you would like to take a look so you know waht I meant it is here warningTattØØdẄaitre§ lĖTŝ tÅLĶ 19:03, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. You are right that I should have left a warning - I reverted a whole pile of stuff yesterday though from recent changes, and I should have warned for all or most of it but I just didn't bother. Also I don't know about using generic templates when the vandal seems to actually have something to say but that doesn't belong in the article. In any case it was vandalism, and not that helpful of a comment, so yes I should have given some sort of warning. I have been trying to familiarise myself with the various templates and figure out when to use them. Cathfolant (talk) 20:22, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

W/E commie sure seems like wikipedia offers advice 50.80.146.188 (talk) 00:51, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

GO AWAY[edit]

get around noob 205.210.162.32 (talk) 19:48, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

I am not new here. I know perfectly well that you are not to blank out content for no reason and you ought to stop. Cathfolant (talk) 19:49, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Many thanks[edit]

Thanks for helping to revert and report 205.210.162.32. That was an absolutely incredible vandalism spree. Novusuna (talk) 20:18, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

You're welcome. It was indeed. Cathfolant (talk) 20:19, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

A kitten for you![edit]

Red Kitten 01.jpg

Thank you for reverting the HTV page back to good point the edits made after said point were pointless and took out ref details

Crazyseiko (talk) 20:30, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

You're welcome, and thanks for the kitten :) Cathfolant (talk) 20:32, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Article Feedback Tool update[edit]

Hey Cathfolant. I'm contacting you because you're involved in the Article Feedback Tool in some way, either as a previous newsletter recipient or as an active user of the system. As you might have heard, a user recently anonymously disabled the feedback tool on 2,000 pages. We were unable to track or prevent this due to the lack of logging feature in AFT5. We're deeply sorry for this, as we know that quite a few users found the software very useful, and were using it on their articles.

We've now re-released the software, with the addition of a logging feature and restrictions on the ability to disable. Obviously, we're not going to automatically re-enable it on each article—we don't want to create a situation where it was enabled by users who have now moved on, and feedback would sit there unattended—but if you're interested in enabling it for your articles, it's pretty simple to do. Just go to the article you want to enable it on, click the "request feedback" link in the toolbox in the sidebar, and AFT5 will be enabled for that article.

Again, we're very sorry about this issue; hopefully it'll be smooth sailing after this :). If you have any questions, just drop them at the talkpage. Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) 21:55, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. Cathfolant (talk) 22:22, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

September 2013[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to You Know How to Love Me may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • {{unreferenced section|dat

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 20:49, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Woops, thanks. Cathfolant (talk) 21:02, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Typography Refresh Override[edit]

I've seen your page mw:User:Cathfolant/typographyrefreshoverride.css and maybe you can help with an issue in ca.wiki. The middle dot character is not shown in italics with font Liberation Sans and Windows. This affects specially in Catalan languague as it is used in the group "l·l" (italics l·l). Do you suggest any solution for overriding this issue? --Vriullop (talk) 09:37, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

That's too bad. Other than using my override - no, I haven't got a solution. My code changes the content area font back to sans-serif, which should mean that the middle dot character displays properly in italics (and if it still doesn't that would be very weird) but I can't help with the fact that Liberation Sans doesn't have an italic version of the middle dot. You could suggest somewhere that a different font be used or try to get hold of whoever can fix Liberation Sans, I suppose. Cathfolant (talk) 14:27, 4 April 2014 (UTC)
Thanks. It has been reported to bugzilla.redhat. --Vriullop (talk) 16:46, 4 April 2014 (UTC)