User talk:Jesse Viviano

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

Orphaned non-free media (File:AdelphiaLogo.png)[edit]

Ambox warning blue.svg Thanks for uploading File:AdelphiaLogo.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 06:29, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

ECRI Institute[edit]

My entry still has alert graphics and notations on it - I have added many more references and am wondering why it still has all of these messages around ECRI Institute. What am I doing wrong? Kocherecri (talk) 20:33, 25 August 2009 (UTC)Carol

They need to be manually removed by an editor. I will read and see which messages need to be removed and what needs to be added. Jesse Viviano (talk) 22:52, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
I saw some issues with it. It seems to be an orphan article, it needs wikification, needs inline citations instead of footnotes, and needs to be globalized. I have changed the tags to suit the needs. You have fixed the notability issue, and you have provided some sources. Jesse Viviano (talk) 23:04, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the help on Conventional PCI#Connector pinout.[edit]

Just wondering, for my own future edification... what exactly was wrong? I don't quite understand the edit comment. All I noticed was a change from

bgcolor=#xyz

to

style="background:#xxyyzz"

The comment talks about changing the colors, but I didn't see any changes (to #66f, #999, #f69, #fc6, #ff9, #f9f), just making them larger. In what way does Firefox misrender anything?

I chose the bgcolor= form and 3-digit colors to produce shorter HTML. Can you help me understand what the advantage is? Thanks! 71.41.210.146 (talk) 17:22, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

The World Wide Web Consortium, which is the standards body that defines HTML and related standards, only defines colors as #RRGGBB as defined in this DTD or as one of the names found here. Therefore, the format #RGB is invalid, and browsers have to guess as what was supposed to be rendered. I was wrong about Firefox misrendering, because no browser can hope to render broken HTML or XHTML correctly with 100% certainty. You must use either the named colors or #RRGGBB only.
As for the syntax change, I changed it because Help:Table#Color; scope of parameters shows that my form is preferred because it causes MediaWiki to generate proper stylesheet code no matter what, while the other method can lead to generation of deprecated code decides to change the color of the text. Anyways, MediaWiki generates XHTML 1.0 Transitional, not straight HTML. Jesse Viviano (talk) 18:02, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
Um, okay. I thought if you are using the CSS background-color property, the #rgb syntax is supported. You're right that basic xhtml doesn't formally support it, so making one of the changes was necessary for standards compliance. But you could have picked one or the other...
As for style=background, the page says "preferred", but I don't see a reason why. Are you saying that it's not invalid, but might become invalid if someone mixed CSS for foreground colors and bgcolor= for background?
Thanks again. 71.41.210.146 (talk) 19:14, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
I get it now. The bgcolor attribute is HTML, not CSS. CSS allows #RRGGBB and #RGB, but HTML alone only allows #RRGGBB. The problem with the second method is that someone has to use the deprecated HTML font tag in order to change the text's color. Also, according to this document, the bgcolor attribute is deprecated as well. Jesse Viviano (talk) 20:49, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Cable modem[edit]

Re your edits and summaries here, are you saying a cable modem has a modem separate from the digital part to hook to a TV or the modem part also interacts with a computer? I know they carry the signals separately: TV, Internet, and phone (in that order inside to outside of the coax line). And I thought these were digital signals. Can you elaborate more? Tks. Post here is fine. RlevseTalk 22:39, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

The thing about "digital cable" that shows that it really is a hybrid system like most long-haul cable systems using metal wires is that pure digital signals monopolize metal cables and can carry very little data compared to what an analog signal on a metal cable can carry. Therefore, to reduce the bandwidth consumed and increase throughput, the digital message is transformed into an analog message at the right frequency and then sent. (I am using the correct meaning of bandwidth: the amount of frequencies taken up by a signal. Throughput is the term used for the speed of a digital message going through a channel, not bandwidth.) The receiver reverses the process and attempts to recover the digital message. The tricks that could be used to make this scheme succeed are the following: make each analog signal distinct enough from each other so that picking them apart is possible, adding enough redundancy to the message either in the digital domain (traditional forward error correction) or the analog domain (like in advanced methods of forward error correction like turbo codes) to make it possible to correct errors, and adding checksums to the message to allow the receiver to reject or discard messages that are so mangled in the transmission that they are too hopelessly corrupted to be fixed. The modem part only interacts with the coax in the cable system, and does not interact with the computer or Ethernet network attached to the cable modem. Therefore, the "digital cable" signals you are getting really have been transformed into analog in such a way that recovery of the digital data is almost guaranteed as long as there is no SNAFUs on the path from the cable head end to your cable modem.
This creates a lot of benefits. First, this allows legacy analog sets to continue receiving analog TV because the digital signals do not interfere with the ananlog TV. Second, the cable head end can create lots of physical digital channels to partition the cable system so that receivers only have to sort through a tiny portion of data being offered by locking onto the correct frequencies and ignoring the rest. This allows a digital cable set-top box to easily ignore the phone or Internet traffic by tuning it out. A cable modem can ignore the digital TV stuff by tuning it out. Third, if a physical digital channel gets maxed out, the cable company can add another physical digital channel to fix the situation as long as there is room on the cable for another physical digital channel. Fourth, this boosts throughput because analog signals can carry much more data than digital signals. However, analog is much more difficult to work with than digital, and that is why our computers are digital. Since Ethernet cables must carry digital data, they must be made much more carefully than an analog cable, driving up their prices drastically. Coax cables for cable TV cost little, but Ethernet cables can cost more because of tighter tolerances, which require more precise and expensive machinery to manufacture.
In short, in order to reduce bandwidth, boost throughput, partition the cable spectrum, and possibly remain compatible with legacy cable TV sets if the cable operator decides that doing so costs less than the cost of cable theft (which requires eliminating all legacy analog television signals on its plant to eliminate and forces the cable company to offer free rent on at least one cable set top box per customer to convert the digital cable to analog for older TVs), cable is by necessity mainly an analog system that makes it relatively easy to recover the desired digital data encoded within it while ignoring the irrelevant digital data.
As for where TV, Internet, and phone are placed in the cable; they are mixed together. They are not layered like you suggest. The beauty of an analog system where everything is on different frequencies is that the signals are designed to be tuned out by equipment that does not need them. Therefore, the legacy TV set could tune to a legacy analog signal. The digital set top box can tune to another channel and recover the digital HDTV signal and send it over to the MPEG-2/H.264 decompressor, which turns the compressed video into a displayable image. The digital phone and Internet traffic are necessarily mixed together in the same channel because cable modems sometimes do double duty for phone and Internet service, so they use one modem (which is the expensive hardware part) and split the phone and Internet data after they have been turned back into digital by software running on the CPU, which is cheap compared to having a second modem for both, as far as I know.
By the way, the only ways to mix multiple digital signals are as follows:
  • Transform them into analog signals using different carrier frequencies on metal cables or radio waves.
  • Increase the throughput and add overhead to the signals to allow them to be separated out after they have been mixed together.
  • Place them on fiber optic lines and use different colored lasers for each signal. Using color filters, the signals can be separated.
Cable uses a mix of the first two methods. Jesse Viviano (talk) 06:32, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
One other thing I forgot to mention is that even satellite is basically a hybrid system like cable. If satellite TV used digital signals only, the resulting signal would be too slow for TV purposes. Jesse Viviano (talk) 14:02, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
Quite interesting and by far the best explanation I've ever read. As for the separation of the 3 signals, that's what my local cable company has always told me. Could you perhaps distill this into the article? You've already made it better and I think throwing in some of this would help even more. I'm copying this to the article talk page too. RlevseTalk 15:19, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
This material would be better in the article Digital cable. Jesse Viviano (talk) 15:52, 24 September 2009 (UTC)


Happy Jesse Viviano's Day![edit]

Featured article star.svg

User:Jesse Viviano has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian,
and therefore, I've officially declared today as Jesse Viviano's day!
For being such a beautiful person and great Wikipedian,
enjoy being the Star of the day, dear Jesse Viviano!

Peace,
Rlevse
00:17, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

A record of your Day will always be kept here.

For a userbox you can add to your userbox page, see User:Rlevse/Today/Happy Me Day! and my own userpage for a sample of how to use it. RlevseTalk 00:17, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Thank you very much. I just do not have the energy to properly thank you now because I am still in the process of moving in, and things keep going wrong, so your bit of cheer helps.Jesse Viviano (talk) 05:10, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

RE: AIV Report of Bangedurdaughter[edit]

Apologies for the mistake, Jesse, I was using Twinkle and ARV 2.2 which I have, and I hit the wrong button. I have placed a report at UAA for their attention. Sorry for the confusion. :) Thor Malmjursson (talk) 19:29, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Recent IP block[edit]

You may wish to have a look at this diff concerning a threat of suicide by the IP and take any further necessary action albeit on or offline. I have also opened an ANI thread here. Regards, Jeffrey Mall (talkcontribs) - 02:24, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

I did not know anything about that threat. I saw that the last edit inserted a bunch of "Blah Blah Blah"s all over the place, that they were after a recent final warning, and then blocked the IP. I was totally unaware of the suicide threat. Jesse Viviano (talk) 04:50, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Re: Open proxies[edit]

I will do that very soon. Thanks for the nudge. Cheers! ---RepublicanJacobiteThe'FortyFive' 00:34, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

PAE mode[edit]

You seem to have ignored my reply to you on my talk page. I must ask that you continue the discussion on the article talk page before continuing. Jeh (talk) 02:52, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Quirks mode[edit]

hi, what the hell did you done with the Quirks mode-table? it is completely different! now we have 3 rows with exactly the same content! what shall this? mabdul 19:04, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

I updated it with the updates provided at the source that was cited for the old table. Don't blame me for the 3 rows with the same content because it is the same with the source. Jesse Viviano (talk) 19:20, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
OK, The easiest way is to shrink the table now. But explain me: why did you change the good explanation of gecko to the old unused mozilla (AS)? Or differently said: you shrink the table, lost information, and using browser name instead of layout engines! why the hell? mabdul 19:36, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
I did not find any information about that after the update. I could not corroborate the information on his page to the versions of Gecko used in those versions of Mozilla. Therefore, I ran up against a problem I could not solve and had to work around it. Jesse Viviano (talk) 19:39, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
which gecko version is used is already in the gecko article :p we should add links to the browsers/layout engines. Something against to revers you're edits and to integrate the new browsers? mabdul 19:49, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
It does not have a column for the original Mozilla browser before it got discontinued in favor of Firefox. That is why I could not rely on that table. Jesse Viviano (talk) 19:52, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

OK, you're right. that isn't covered by the article. as you can see here the gecko layout engine has the same version number as the mas. easy to remember ;) mabdul 20:21, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Abuse Response report[edit]

Crystal Clear app ktip.png Greetings! Thank you for filing an Abuse Report for abusive behavior originating from 142.22.186.13. We wanted to let you know that the case has been opened and is currently under investigation. --Darkwind (talk) 17:45, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Northland Cable Television[edit]

Ambox warning pn.svg

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Northland Cable Television. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Northland Cable Television. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:10, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Abuse report[edit]

Crystal Clear app ktip.png Greetings! Thank you for filing an Abuse Report for abusive behavior originating from 74.92.53.193. We wanted to let you know that the case for the report you filed for 74.92.53.193 has been closed. Thank you again for filing and alerting us of this IP's abusive behavior. Avicennasis @ 07:48, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Northland Cable.png[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Northland Cable.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

  • I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
  • I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
  • If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
  • To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
  • If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.


Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 04:30, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Please take a look at...[edit]

In response to prods I have added a Physical address details section to x86-64.

I also used the refs I found for that to support a near-complete rewrite of 3 GB barrier.

If you have some spare minutes I'd appreciate your comments and edits on each. Thanks in advance! Jeh (talk) 11:38, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Hi Jesse, I see that you tagged a page MetriQ as blatant advertising.. the software itself is used as part of numerous research projects, which was the point of putting up. How do make an entry in Wiki for this to happen. References were provided, but these were ignored. Cheers, nile. (nile.mosley@yahoo.com). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.154.6.105 (talk) 04:16, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

First, I did not tag your article as blatant advertising, and cannot find another work which I have tagged or deleted as spam similar to this. That was done by Dramatic. Second, you need to prove notability, preferrably with resources that are accessible by everyone instead of resources few can verify with a university library membership or or a direct subscription to those resources. Third, links to Amazon as references do not work as references. Use {{Cite book}} instead of links to Amazon if you want to cite a book. Jesse Viviano (talk) 07:04, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

IPsec[edit]

This articles seems to match my understanding of AH and ESP; ie, that AH and ESP can both be used in transport mode but only ESP in tunneling mode. But, the article doesn't explicitly state that. Is my understanding of this correct? If so, one of us can edit the article to explicitly state that. RlevseTalk 22:01, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

I think that I can come up with a counterexample. For example, Alice is in a US branch office of a company. Her computer needs to send a packet to Bob's computer in India. However, corporate policy requires that VPN endpoints must authenticate each other strongly and prove each others' IP address. Therefore, the VPN could be set up to use AH in tunneling mode to carry an ESP packet in tunneling mode, whose contents are the the packet that Alice sent. The rationale is that AH has strong enough header authentication that something that changes the IP address like NAT will cause AH to report an authentication error. ESP's integrity check only proves that the computer which created the packet was the one in the SA, but it does not check the IP address. This allows ESP to pass through NAT, but this means that future attacks that require changing the IP address will go undetected. Therefore, your hypothesis is wrong. AH can be used in tunneling mode to provide the IP-address sensitive header authentication possible to a packet encrypted with ESP if that is important. Jesse Viviano (talk) 23:27, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
Hmm. Interesting. Can you put that into IPsec in article-speak? Some very educated people are telling my AH can't be used in tunnel mode. RlevseTalk 00:19, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
I cannot do that now, because I have too much to do in real life now. Jesse Viviano (talk) 12:44, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Guyver page[edit]

Hi, I'm just inquiring about your recent addition to the guyver page, 'needs more references'. Almost the entire article is derived from the Manga of Guyver, I am sure it would not be appropriate to indicate references throughout the entire article pointing to the manga that the article is clearly about. I am wondering if it is appropriate to place a mark at the top of the page stating that it needs more references when the reference is clear in my view. thank you for your attention Drag-5 (talk) 15:08, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

An article is supposed to refer to specific volumes and pages of the manga if possible. Information about which manga compilation magazine is used and which pages of such a magazine is also acceptable. Jesse Viviano (talk) 19:39, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
I understand. thanks for explaining. I would find it difficult to insert those due to a learning disability but i will attempt to use such things when i do edits myself.Drag-5 (talk) 20:12, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Digital Visual Interface (DVI)[edit]

Just because a specification doesn't state a maximum speed, doesn't mean that you should call it "theoretically unlimited". Technically, each cable or wiring has capacitance / inductance / resistance / crosstalk / connectors / drivers and more that will limit every communications method, whether stated or not.

Technically my car has theoretically unlimited speed, because I could attach large rockets engines or other things to make it go crazy faster, but it sure doesn't make sense to state that my car has theoretically unlimited speed.

Saying "theoretically unlimited" isn't something that I would want to see in any specification.

It might be better to say "Not Specified" for the maximum speed. Sbmeirow (talk) 00:53, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

  • That is why I called it "theoretically". It is physically limited by the speeds and quality of the transmitter and receiver, and the quality of the cable. Jesse Viviano (talk) 03:17, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

AIV Question[edit]

Hey there,

Noticed that you declined several of my AIV requests. What is the status quo policy when dealing with vandals that have recently become un-blocked? I reported them straight-away to AIV -- should I 4im them first? Thanks, West.andrew.g (talk) 22:24, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

You need to warn them again. The warnings became stale. Anyways, the two I declined were school IPs, so no reasonable person could not assume that the vandals were the same person. As for the warning level, 4im is appropriate mostly for obscenities and worse, of which those two IPs were committing, so 4im is appropriate. Jesse Viviano (talk) 23:05, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

AR Open Case[edit]

Crystal Clear app ktip.png Greetings! Thank you for filing an Abuse Report for abusive behavior originating from 138.210.119.62. We wanted to let you know that the case has been opened and is currently under investigation. - Rich(MTCD)Talk Page 23:16, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
Crystal Clear app ktip.png Greetings! Thank you for filing an Abuse Report for abusive behavior originating from 138.210.119.62. We wanted to let you know that the case for the report you filed for 138.210.119.62 has been closed. Thank you again for filing and alerting us of this IP's abusive behavior. Rich(MTCD)Talk Page 01:08, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Are groups of people singular or plural?[edit]

Interesting edit here [1]. I believe this is a difference between American English and British English. Are you aware of anything in the manual of style for how to handle this? --Anentiresleeve (talk) 18:32, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Japan is a nation (which is an arbitrarily defined geographically area) and not the people inside its borders, so I would treat it as an object instead of many people. Jesse Viviano (talk) 22:58, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
I agree, in regard to that particular edit. However, to answer the other question – about whether there is a difference between American and British English with regard to plurals, and in regard to whether this is discussed in the manual of style – I refer you to MOS:PLURALS. It confirms that there is (sometimes) a difference. The issue seems to be particularly evident when using the name of a city to refer to a sports team of the city. In the U.S., you may find that Dallas is playing against Houston, whereas in the U.K., you are more likely to find that Manchester are playing against Sheffield. In MOS:PLURALS, it refers to WP:ENGVAR regarding how to handle such issues. —BarrelProof (talk) 17:42, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi[edit]

Hi, could you please check out IP 87.78.20.194 edits (for example my talk page history threat from the ip). It seems to be something going on there. Very hostile and im suspicious..--BabbaQ (talk) 19:40, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

I can only suggest Wikipedia:Dispute resolution at this time. I cannot find anything blockable so far. Jesse Viviano (talk) 20:00, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

That persistent XHTML myth[edit]

Hi Jesse, I noticed you've made some edits over time to bring HTML markup in line with XHTML standards. This is incorrect and is actually harmful in the long term. The truth is that almost no sites on the entire internet are XHTML. Certainly, there are a lot of sites that include the XHTML doctype at the top of their source and try to follow XHTML's formatting rules, but that effort is wasted, since in 99.9% of cases the page is sent by the webserver as text/html and not application/xhtml+xml. This means that the browser interprets the page in 'tag soup' style and not in structured XML style, completely losing all of the benefits. You can see this on your favourite XHTML-doctyped site of choice by looking at the properties of the page in your browser (Firefox makes this information available quite easily).

In fact, most sites will likely never serve its page as application/xhtml+xml, even if they're aware of this problem. Why? Because Internet Explorer, still used by the majority of internet users, doesn't support it at all. It won't even display. The first version of Internet Explorer to support properly served XHTML is version 9. Since there are still millions upon millions of users out there using IE8, IE7, IE6 and lower, Wikipedia is unlikely to ever serve its content as XHTML, since that would mean stopping all of those users from being able to view the site.

The problem, however, is that serving XHTML as text/html isn't just wrong, it's harmful. There's a good article on the topic here, but one of the big reasons is that /> actually means something in HTML4 (which is how a browser interprets text/html tag soup in the absence of a correct doctype) and what it means in HTML4 is very different to what it means in XHTML. In HTML4, a slash represents minimisation, a short-hand way of closing an open tag. So <br /> in HTML4 actually means 'a linebreak, followed by a greater-than character' in the interpreter.

There are plenty of other problems with XHTML as text/html and that link above is a good place to read about them. Long story short, Wikipedia isn't designed to serve XHTML, despite its doctype, despite Mediawiki supporting it. If, one day, Mediawiki finally moves on to something more productive (like HTML5), the database of page content is going to be filled with XHTML-formatted tags, written incorrectly because our own guidelines actually recommend just using standard HTML code.

So this whole block of text comes down to this: please don't convert HTML tags to XHTML tags in page content. It serves no benefit (and some actual harm in older browsers) right now, and when/if Mediawiki migrates to a HTML flavour later, all of those tags (which would have still been valid if they were HTML, as WP:HTML suggests) are now invalid, and require a big, long, tedious repair script to run through the database to fix. TechnoSymbiosis (talk) 01:36, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

First, you are wrong that Wikipedia cannot ever serve XHTML. It just needs to check the Accept header in the HTTP request field. If it sees application/xhtml+xml in such a header, then application/xhtml+xml can be served. Otherwise, it can serve text/html. Also, the XHTML doctype and its associated DTD tells the browser that the <b> tag needs to be closed like <b />. Therefore, an effort to meet XHTML should be made in the code. Jesse Viviano (talk) 01:58, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
Indeed, the accept header can be interpreted provided the browser correctly sends a full listing of what it supports, though this has been unpredictable so far in recent browser releases. I didn't say that Wikipedia can't ever serve XHTML, I said Wikipedia is unlikely to ever serve XHTML. The reason is there's simply no point. XHTML as a standards experiment is widely considered in web development to be a failure, and most skilled web development studios have reverted to HTML4 (or the emerging HTML5), largely because of the problems I detailed above. The reason Wikipedia will likely never transmit documents as XHTML is that any syntax mistake, no matter how small, causes the entire page to render an error. From a usability perspective, it's something that sites like Wikipedia, which can be edited by anyone, are unlikely to ever accept.
You're wrong that the XHTML doctype instructs the browser to interpret XHTML formatted tags. The doctype is largely useless in HTML, since the method of interpretation is dictated by the MIME type, not the doctype. As the W3C says here, 'XHTML documents served as 'text/html' will not be processed as XML', and no browser currently does this. The reason browsers accept <br /> from text/html documents currently is part of their error-handling code, internally 'correcting' it in the same way that it 'corrects' any malformed HTML document, such as unclosed <b> tags and so on. No browser in use at the moment interprets a text/html document as anything but HTML, regardless of whether a doctype is provided or not.
Again, there is no benefit to using XHTML formatted tags in Wikipedia's article body and there are a number of disadvantages particularly with older browsers and future compatibility. The changes are simply unnecessary, they increase the likelihood of users encountering rendering problems and they don't follow Wikipedia's own guidelines on the issue, as I linked above. TechnoSymbiosis (talk) 02:35, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
Then why do I see <br /> inserted whenever I use the newline button in the toolbar? I also noted that some mobile web browsers work much faster in XHTML mode than HTML mode when an XHTML page is properly served as application/xhtml+xml. Jesse Viviano (talk) 10:15, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
The whole Mediawiki software is written to support XHTML, irrespective of whether the deployment itself supports it. The Wikipedia servers themselves don't support XHTML, evidenced by checking the page MIME type in an XHTML-compatible browser. Naturally, any web browser that supports XHTML will parse it faster than tag soup since they need no error-handling code beyond standard XML parsing, but as you suggested this is dependent on the page being sent as application/xhtml+xml, which Wikipedia doesn't do.
To complicate the matter of the future of XHTML even further, there's an XHTML 2.0 specification in the works to attempt to fix some of the problems with the original specification, though interest in it has been minimal as most of the focus has been on getting HTML5 out of the gate. Personally I think that Mediawiki made the wrong choice in supporting XHTML over HTML, but the misconceptions about XHTML are extremely common even amongst industry professionals. It's a little bit like the web development version of the Monty Hall problem, in that it fools most of the people most of the time. I'm not sure what direction Mediawiki is currently moving in, but looking at the state of affairs at the moment I'd say they should put their money down on HTML5 being the de facto standard in the intermediate future. TechnoSymbiosis (talk) 22:45, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
I personally think that the server should check the browser's accept header and the user agent string. If it detects that the browser supports application/xhtml+xml, send that. If it does not do that, check the user agent string. If it is IE6 or another browser that cannot handle XHTML served as text/html, send a basic Wikipedia page with a warning to update to another browser. If not, send the full-blown XHTML page with text/html. I hated having my mobile phone take longer to render many pages than it took to download them because they were served with text/html when they could have been handled much faster as application/xthml+xml. Jesse Viviano (talk) 23:09, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
You'd still end up with the error problem then - XHTML is too strict to be used effectively in an openly edited environment like Wikipedia. One mistake, anywhere, would cause the page to fail to render altogether. How can you access the Edit link to fix the error when the only thing you get on your screen is 'XML parse error on line 123'? What if the error was in a template or transclusion? The Preview link would become almost useless because if there was an error in the source, the entire Preview page would fail to render and you'd have to click Back to fix it, rather than the preview page allowing it. Especially in pages composed from multiple snippets like Wikipedia pages, mismatched tags can be a serious problem. Plus there are things that some people won't even realise are errors, like <b><i>sample text</b></i> which fails because tags must always be nested, not overlapped. TechnoSymbiosis (talk) 23:24, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
The server should validate the code before accepting it. If it is invalid, return an error message and refuse the edit. If it is valid, accept the edit. Jesse Viviano (talk) 00:10, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
Given that a number of elements aren't allowed to be nested inside certain other elements, how could you validate a code change in a template or transclusion without validating every page it appears on? How would the server validate the code of {{archive top}} and {{archive bottom}}, neither of which are valid code because one opens tags it doesn't close and the other closes tags it doesn't open. When used, sure the server could try to validate the result, but what about when editing the templates themselves? There are countless examples through Wikipedia where code won't pass validation on its own, and if you introduce an exception (eg. templates don't need validation) then it defeats the purpose of validation to begin with. TechnoSymbiosis (talk) 00:23, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
I guess the only solution for these problems is to validate the pages every time the page needs regeneration. If they are good and the browser can accept it, send application/xhtml+xml. If it fails, send text/html and flag the page for fixing by adding them to a special page. For templates, some new MediaWiki syntax will be needed to allow the validator to take into account required template sequences and validate each template against each other. Jesse Viviano (talk) 14:17, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
Seems like a lot of effort when the software could just support HTML5 instead :) TechnoSymbiosis (talk) 23:40, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
Because I like the speed boost and simplicity that XHTML provides, I will generally try to write XHTML instead of HTML. If I learn HTML5, I will try to restrict myself to XHTML5 when possible. In fact, I think that it was a mistake to accept HTML5 as a plain HTML instead of require that it be a new version of XHTML. Because HTML5 is HTML and not XHTML, we will have to put up with poorly written pages. Jesse Viviano (talk) 01:24, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

MSU Interview[edit]

Dear Jesse,

My name is Jonathan Obar user:Jaobar, I'm a professor in the College of Communication Arts and Sciences at Michigan State University and a Teaching Fellow with the Wikimedia Foundation's Education Program. This semester I've been running a little experiment at MSU, a class where we teach students about becoming Wikipedia administrators. Not a lot is known about your community, and our students (who are fascinated by wiki-culture by the way!) want to learn how you do what you do, and why you do it. A while back I proposed this idea (the class) to the community HERE, where it was met mainly with positive feedback. Anyhow, I'd like my students to speak with a few administrators to get a sense of admin experiences, training, motivations, likes, dislikes, etc. We were wondering if you'd be interested in speaking with one of our students.


So a few things about the interviews:

  • Interviews will last between 15 and 30 minutes.
  • Interviews can be conducted over skype (preferred), IRC or email. (You choose the form of communication based upon your comfort level, time, etc.)
  • All interviews will be completely anonymous, meaning that you (real name and/or pseudonym) will never be identified in any of our materials, unless you give the interviewer permission to do so.
  • All interviews will be completely voluntary. You are under no obligation to say yes to an interview, and can say no and stop or leave the interview at any time.
  • The entire interview process is being overseen by MSU's institutional review board (ethics review). This means that all questions have been approved by the university and all students have been trained how to conduct interviews ethically and properly.


Bottom line is that we really need your help, and would really appreciate the opportunity to speak with you. If interested, please send me an email at obar@msu.edu (to maintain anonymity) and I will add your name to my offline contact list. If you feel comfortable doing so, you can post your name HERE instead.

If you have questions or concerns at any time, feel free to email me at obar@msu.edu. I will be more than happy to speak with you.

Thanks in advance for your help. We have a lot to learn from you.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Obar --Jaobar (talk) 07:22, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Happy Adminship Anniversary[edit]

Wikipe-tan mopping.png
Wishing Jesse Viviano a very happy adminship anniversary on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talkabout my edits? 00:40, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. Jesse Viviano (talk) 18:51, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 16[edit]

Hi. When you recently edited Vundo, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ransomware (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 18:12, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 19[edit]

Hi. When you recently edited APB (1987 video game), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Felon (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:42, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Deletion of "Download sites"[edit]

Hi, I see you deleted this page which was under construction. Would you tell me why? cheers Paul venter (talk) 09:55, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

  • It was marked as a test page for deletion. Sometimes people create test pages, and administratiors have to delete them. Articles must be strong enough to stand in the article space when they first appear, or they will be assumed to be garbage and dealt with. If you want to take your time, try creating it in a user space subpage and then move it to the article space when you are done. Jesse Viviano (talk) 10:00, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
It was intended as the start of a serious article on useful botanical download sites and was not meant to be seen as as a test site. It did have the "in use" tag up which I have always thought implied 'work in progress' and therefor not to be seen as anywhere near complete. The whole process of deletion took place far too quickly and did not allow me time to respond to any "test page" tag that might have been attached. Just for the record, I have created hundreds of articles directly in mainspace while using the "in use" or "under construction" tags and it is news to me that an article can be rapidly whisked off because some editor 'thinks' that it is a test page.... cheers again Paul venter (talk) 10:26, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
You might want to go to the Open Directory Project for depositing links. According to WP:ELMAYBE and WP:LINKFARM, we do not want pages that are mostly lists of links, but a link to the Open Directory Project on a relevant page using the {{Dmoz}} template is acceptable. Jesse Viviano (talk) 21:59, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Deletion of Fightback (Canada)[edit]

Why was this article deleted? The edit summary says CSD#G7 but that page states "provided that the only substantial content to the page and to the associated talk page was added by its author" which is not the case with this page. It has existed for years, has had many contributors, and has previously survived a vote for deletion (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fightback (Canada) (2nd nomination)). The article should be restored. Sickle and Hammer (talk) 19:06, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

The author said that the IP edits were him/her when he/she lost the password to his/her account, so I assumed good faith. I can be mistaken, though. Feel free to take it up with deletion review. Jesse Viviano (talk) 21:07, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
Also, the other authors besides the original and the IP seemed to be bots and minor corrections. Jesse Viviano (talk) 21:16, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
Sorry, I tagged the wrong article by accident. Please undelete Fightback (Canada). Vale of Glamorgan (talk) 04:22, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
Done. Jesse Viviano (talk) 05:38, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
It looks like I screwed up. I am sorry. Jesse Viviano (talk) 05:53, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Deletion of ±‡[edit]

I created the page ±‡, and you deleted it on 4 October 2012 at 06:17. ±‡ is the symbol for the <7> train of the New York City Subway. I copied it from the August 2007 service guide. I would like to recreate the page. Dhnlin (talk) 01:43, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Are you looking for ⑦? If so, is a redirect to 7. I think that one of the following cases applies: you have a case of mojibake, there is a printer's error, or you have misread the guide and that could be a link to some footnote or endnote somewhere. I doubt that a plus/minus sign and the double daggers have anything to do with the line. Also, I am unable to find any information about that in the current guides in the MTA's website. If you can find such a link showing that a plus/minus sign and a double dagger is a valid symbol, I would be willing to restore the page and stick a note in the talk page about that being a valid symbol. Jesse Viviano (talk) 02:02, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Please stop changing pages for Hostess products[edit]

You are changing the pages for Hostess products and stating that the company has liquidated and assuming that the brands will cease production without citing any sources. The company has not yet received permission from the courts to liquidate and is in the process of selling off its existing brands - which may very well continue production under a different company and distributor. Until there is news to say otherwise, I am reverting your changes. Thanks for understanding. Chrisbrl88 (talk) 14:02, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Extension:EmergencyDesysop[edit]

I noticed while browsing the Signpost archives that you suggested admins should be able to desysop other admins in an emergency. This ability does now exist, as mw:Extension:EmergencyDeSysop, though it's not enabled on any WMF wiki as far as I know. I'm not sure if that actually is the result of your suggestion or simply a coincidence but I thought it was interesting and wanted you to see if you didn't know it already. Soap 15:51, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

TLS[edit]

I added a comment at Talk:Transport Layer Security#Firefox TLS Widefox; talk 11:59, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi Jesse, I like the cipher details. Did you see my comment on the talk page about splitting cipher and website version adoption? Widefox; talk 10:32, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
I did not see the comment about splitting the ciphers apart. I saw a problem of trying to group the block ciphers as "secure" and "not secure" and realized that the table could not group them due to availability of some of them in some versions of TLS or SSL. For example, IDEA in CBC mode is secure if implemented properly, but only TLS 1.1 does that for IDEA. TLS 1.2 removed IDEA, RC2, and single DES. AES is also not available in SSL. Jesse Viviano (talk) 11:08, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
RC4 weakness / breakable. Oh gosh, not good news. Haven't read the paper but I presume nobody has demonstrated breaking it yet? Widefox; talk 11:58, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Wikipedia:Bypassing TPG Internet's open intercepting proxies[edit]

Wikipedia:Bypassing TPG Internet's open intercepting proxies, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Bypassing TPG Internet's open intercepting proxies and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Wikipedia:Bypassing TPG Internet's open intercepting proxies during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. the wub "?!" 22:29, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Talkback[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Jesse Viviano. You have new messages at Talk:Transport Layer Security.
Message added 13:06, 17 September 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Widefox; talk 13:06, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

BIOS[edit]

Hi Jesse,

The BIOS used to be stored on good ol' EEPROMs before flash EEPROMs became available (mid 1990s). NOR Flash is universally used today.

--gribeco (talk) 19:00, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

December 2013[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to V-by-One HS may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"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:
  • competitor to V-by-One HS that is promoted by the [[Video Electronics Standards Association]]]. It removes all DRM, the auxiliary data channel, allows the designer to use more lanes than

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 14:06, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

Editing problems[edit]

Hello.

I have reviewed your recent edits and I am afraid you were most careless. You have added operating system entries to |operating system= of Internet Explorer 10 and Internet Explorer 11 infoboxes while these items were already in |included with= parameter. You also claimed that Internet Explorer is discontinued! Well, I am afraid I am going to need a source for that one.

Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 18:42, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

P.S. Oh, I see you are an admin. I should have scolded you more severely then. Sorry. Face-wink.svg (Joke aside, that reduces the risk of my tone being perceived as condescending.) But seriously, I am the one using the figurative mop. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 19:05, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

I wrote that IE was discontinued on XP. I wrote that it was still active on IE7 and above for Vista and above. Second, I wanted to make the Windows 8 gap on IE11 and the inability to run IE10 on Windows 8.1 clear. Jesse Viviano (talk) 00:00, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
Hi again. When a software product is discontinued at version 6, it no longer receives version 7 or 8 (nor would it receive 9, 10 or 11). (See also: Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Computing § Collocation) Even by your own account, you must not have set the |Discontinued= flag for another year while it was still supported on Windows Server 2003. Using the wrong term can only cause confusion; imagine what happens when an AFD nominator uses "notability" instead of "due weight".
In addition, there is WP:NOTCHANGELOG and WP:DUE to consider: New versions of computer programs come and go all the time, dropping their support for older versions of operating system. We cover the change with a sentence or two. Hence, a detailed coverage in a table and another in the infobox is unwarranted, especially when they add no new info in exchange for the bulk of space they occupy.
Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 07:28, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
Windows Server 2003 does not have a Service Pack 3 and is still supported. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 07:30, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
If you are assuming there is no service pack between SP2 and SP3 for XP, I am afraid I must disappoint you. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 07:32, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
Administrator Jesse Viviano, WP:BRD violation notwithstanding, you are persisting one some seriously questionable edit: You are claiming that IE6 is no longer the sixth major version of IE and the default version shipped with Windows XP! If you have an astonishingly good explanation, please go ahead: I cannot emphasize strongly enough how eager I am to hear it. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 08:45, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
I am not saying that IE6 is no longer the sixth major revision. I am also not stating that IE6 is no longer the default version of IE in Windows XP! How are you coming up with that interpretation of what I wrote? Jesse Viviano (talk) 16:35, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
You wrote "Microsoft Internet Explorer 6 was the sixth major revision of Internet Explorer". That means it isn't anymore. What you wrote can be interpreted as "no longer sixth", "no longer major", "no longer a revision" or "no longer Internet Explorer". All of them are patently wrong. Also you wrote "It was the default browser shipped with Windows XP". Well, I don't agree this one is totally wrong, depending on how you look at it: Does "was" refer to "default" or "shipped"? Still, this sentence was not ambiguous before your edit but is ambiguous after your edit. Honestly, I came here to template you when I saw all this. Fleet Command (talk) 06:41, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Argentaria[edit]

Hi! Thank you for doing the revdeletion I requested at Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Argentaria. Unfortunately it has not been done as I expected, so I'm here to ask you to do something a bit different. The article as I left it was (I think!) clean; I'd removed the copyvio, but left a lot of subsequent edits in place (the categories, infobox, ratings and so on, eight years'-worth of them). What I'd hoped to find when I looked at it again was that the article was unchanged, but that the whole of the history from the offending edit in 2006 until the edit where I cleaned it up was greyed out in such a way that attribution was still correctly given for edits, but the diffs were not visible to us ordinary non-admin mortals. Could I ask you to do that instead? I'd be grateful. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:03, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

The problem is that if I deleted just the ones you requested, there would be a bunch of text whose attribution would be deleted. This would violate the CC-BY-SA-3.0 license and the GFDL, so deleting the versions like you asked would have left more copyright violations behind. Excision would work if the problem was contained to one author or if none of the excised edits would have contributed to the final product with the copyright violation removed. Unfortunately, many of the deleted edits contributed to the final work even after removing the copyright violation text. Deleting them would deny those authors' attribution. Therefore, straight amputation of all of the history infected by the copyright violation and what is after is the only solution. I am sorry, but I would have violated plenty of user's copyrights had I performed what you asked. Jesse Viviano (talk) 20:38, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
Er, no, I don't think so, what I asked for is just for you to do it the way it's always done (I'm a copyright clerk, I make quite a lot of these requests, I do actually know what the finished result should look like). Our page at WP:REVDEL starts off:

RevisionDelete (also known as RevDel or RevDelete) is an administrative feature that allows individual entries in a page history or log to be removed from public view. It is used for "Selective deletion", largely replacing the prior method (delete and partial undelete) which should not be used except for history merges and occasional other cases where it is needed.

I don't know how your admin tools work, but as far as I can see you have used that "prior method" when you should not have. Can you now fix it for me, or do I need to ping someone with more experience in this particular area? Your call, I don't wish to offend in any way, either way is fine with me. Thank you, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:34, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
Please ping someone with more experience. Jesse Viviano (talk) 00:30, 23 May 2014 (UTC)
OK, thanks, Jesse! I'll leave a note on MER-C's talk page. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 01:17, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

Request for comment[edit]

Hello there, a proposal regarding pre-adminship review has been raised at Village pump by Anna Frodesiak. Your comments here is very much appreciated. Many thanks. Jim Carter through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:47, 28 May 2014 (UTC)