User talk:Ned Scott: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
Ursasapien (talk | contribs) Reply |
||
Line 109: | Line 109: | ||
==Sorry for the confusion== |
==Sorry for the confusion== |
||
I know it could look odd or out of place. Kasuga just does such beautiful work, and I'd rather have that adorn an article than a deletable (and often contentious) live image. I just don't know how backlogged he is. Cheers, [[User:Kintetsubuffalo|Chris (クリス • フィッチ)]] ([[User talk:Kintetsubuffalo|talk]]) 05:42, 29 February 2008 (UTC) |
I know it could look odd or out of place. Kasuga just does such beautiful work, and I'd rather have that adorn an article than a deletable (and often contentious) live image. I just don't know how backlogged he is. Cheers, [[User:Kintetsubuffalo|Chris (クリス • フィッチ)]] ([[User talk:Kintetsubuffalo|talk]]) 05:42, 29 February 2008 (UTC) |
||
==Regarding [[User talk:Ursasapien#please consider this|this ( . . . a kiss is stil a kiss)]]== |
|||
I, too, want a good solution. Many editors (including yourself) from disparate points of view have been diligently working at FICT and WAF to resolve this problem. One editor I have not seen there is TTN. I have no personal grudge against TTN, other than the fact that he has been rude to other editors. As a matter of fact, I can not think of a single instance where we have had a conflict. Nevertheless, I feel that it is a good thing for the Arb Com to draw a line and say "this behavior is unacceptable." You may feel that they only did this two ''one side'', but I feel like the rest of the proposals (especially the enforcement by blocks) has the potential to draw a line with the other side's tendentious edit warring. I think this may be an excellent way to get back to work. Besides, if they close the case, the "problematic" injunction will be lifted. [[User:Ursasapien|Ursasapien]] <small>[[User talk:Ursasapien|(talk)]]</small> 07:03, 29 February 2008 (UTC) |
Revision as of 07:03, 29 February 2008
![]() Archives • ℹ | |
---|---|
1. 02/06 - 05/06 |
9. 05/07 - early 08/07 |
List of Armor Digimon (Part 2)
What's up here? This has been in this "sort of a weird middle stage" since mid-November. (ran across this while browsing Special:Random) —Random832 18:46, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
- Slow and steady wins the race? It's just something I haven't gotten around to. There's a lot of link cleanup for it, and I wanted to prevent articles from being recreated via redlinks that hadn't been removed. I also still need to import the history, but that's not really a big concern, since I've already exported the xml file, and technically a list of contributors satisfies the GFDL as well. I'm fine with completely redirecting it or taking it to deletion. -- Ned Scott 00:09, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
- That is, assuming arbcom won't block me for doing so. -- Ned Scott 00:47, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
- Was just making sure it (and anything else related) was still on your radar; I don't particularly care what you do with it at this point. —Random832 23:01, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
- It is, I'm just dragging my feet on that more boring clean up work :) -- Ned Scott 02:38, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
- Was just making sure it (and anything else related) was still on your radar; I don't particularly care what you do with it at this point. —Random832 23:01, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
- That is, assuming arbcom won't block me for doing so. -- Ned Scott 00:47, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
Japanese episode list updates
Hi. Can you take a quick look at Portal:Anime and manga/News to see if I summarized the changes to the Japanese episode list template correctly? Collectonian (talk) 03:30, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
- Sounds perfect :) -- Ned Scott 03:33, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
- Cool...and I just realized that with those new fields, I can now more easily use this template for light novel lists since the graphic novel one isn't quite working well. *grin* Collectonian (talk) 03:38, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
Have another question for you :) I'm working on the rather ambitious task of creating a List of Lassie episodes (588 episodes, 19 seasons). I remembered reading about what was done with Lost so that the episode lists were transcluded from individual season pages into the main List of Lost episodes, minus the summaries. I copied the code from the Lost episode list "hack" and made one for Lassie. It is all working great, except I can't figure out how to make it so it doesn't show {{ShortSummary}} if there is no summary to include (see the work in progress). With 588 eps, it will be awhile before they all have summaries. :P Do you know how I can fix the template at Template:Episode list/Lassie to tell it to leave the summary blank if there isn't one to show? Collectonian (talk) 08:05, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
Re
I have not understand your question. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 08:03, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
But in this line tons of nonsensical userboxes can be created. Then wikipedia will be mess. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 08:11, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
- I propose to create a new guideline which will restrict users from creating such nonsensical userboxes. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 08:16, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
Why you are so eager in these bogus and nonsensical userboxes. If you like this userboxes, then Uncyclopedia will be the right place for you. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 08:47, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
She's done! (I think)
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/7a/Wikipe-tan_full_length.svg/100px-Wikipe-tan_full_length.svg.png)
It's 5:18am here and I finally finished her. I've gone over the image a few times and tried to ensure all mistakes were fixed, and I've cleaned it up a little more several dozen times over, so it should be almost-perfect! You can view a larger version than the previews in the sandbox here. I'd like some feedback, tell everyone to nitpick it and point out things that should be fixed; I've been working on it so long I'm going blind so you guys might be able to find things I missed ;)
Also, the characters on her puzzle pieces; I'd like to be sure they're correct, since I was merely tracing over Kasuga's hand-drawn characters - somewhere in there there's likely to be small mistakes or such. If I can have the actual text characters to copy I can put them in as text and then convert that to paths for greater accuracy, as well.
I'm off to sleep, but I should be around again in 8 hours or so and will be free to fix any mistakes after then. All the best, -- Editor at Large • talk 10:49, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
- Oh - a friend and I went over her again and found a few little things I want to fix. I'm making a list on the talk page at Image talk:Wikipe-tan full length.svg, so if you and others can leave comments there I'll work on them this evening. Thanks! -- Editor at Large • talk 10:57, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
- Awesome!! I'll be sure to tell everyone. Again, thank you sooo much for taking this on. She looks great. -- Ned Scott 21:50, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
Request for Comment
Hi Ned. Since you expressed interested, I wanted to let you know that I have created a RFC regarding the temporary injunction so the community can attempt to reach a consensus regarding this issue. Please comment with your views at Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/Episodes and characters 2/Request for Comment. Cheers! Redfarmer (talk) 20:26, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
- That's actually different from what I had in mind, but I'll check it out. -- Ned Scott 01:38, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Porting Template:Navbox to other wikis
In this comment you say "However, with a little bit of tweaking, it can be used without changing Tidy." Can you give me some hints about what you changed to make {{Navbox}} portable to wikis not running HTML Tidy? According to this other discussion (and down a few paragraphs from the link point), templates that need HTML Tidy to run correctly are "poorly designed." I would like to learn what sort of template coding errors HTML Tidy is silently fixing up, so I can help make Wikipedia's templates easier to port to other MediaWiki wikis. Thanks. --Teratornis (talk) 00:56, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
- Tidy basically fixes when formatting gets mixed. For example (wikitag) (html) (/html) (wikitag) would work, but (wikitag) (html) (wikitag) (/html) will break. At least I think that's how it works.. it's been a while since I explored the issue. I've converted a bunch of templates for use on Digimon Wiki. When I first started exporting Wikipedia articles to there, everything broke. It drove me crazy for a week or so. Finally, after asking around, I was able to see how to write the wiki table code without it breaking. The reason we use HTML at all is because normal wikicode gets broken when used with #if functions, but the way around this is to use
{{!}}
to replaceI
(and{{!!}}
to replace||
). I already knew how to do this, but when I did I got extra line breaks in my boxes, a lot of extra line breaks.
- The trick that I found out was to use
<nowiki/>
after the #if statement, then go to the next line to start the table row or table cell. For example:
{{#if:|<nowiki/> {{!}}-
- In any case, I went ahead and made a version of {{Navbox}} that has all this converted already. Basically there's {{Navbox}} and {{Navbox/core}}. Navbox/core is the part that needs the update, and that can be seen on User:Ned Scott/Navbox/core. With this diff you can see what changes I had to make. Make sure that you have the templates {{!}} and {{!!}}, and everything should work.
- Let me know if you need any more help, or if it doesn't work right. -- Ned Scott 03:49, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
- As I mentioned on the template talk page, thank you very much indeed for the most impressive answer. --Teratornis (talk) 07:26, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
- Anytime :D -- Ned Scott 03:51, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
- As I mentioned on the template talk page, thank you very much indeed for the most impressive answer. --Teratornis (talk) 07:26, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
Could you explain further on the talk page for this image, specifically why it is "ineligible for copyright" ? Cirt (talk) 06:04, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
- Because it's just some text, common error message text at that. -- Ned Scott 06:05, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
- Yeah, but it's a screenshot that could technically include graphics/images what have you with a claim of ownership by Prolexic Technologies, no? Cirt (talk) 06:07, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
- But it doesn't include any graphics or images. It's a picture of text. -- Ned Scott 06:09, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
- Right, but with their style of text, font, etc. Don't get me wrong, I'm the one who uploaded the image and I'm all for its use, I just want to make absolutely sure we can safely say that it is free-use instead of fair-use. Cirt (talk) 06:10, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
- No worries. I tried to find a page to help describe it. I found Copyright#Typefaces and Typeface#Legal aspects that kind of explains some of it. Category:Public domain images ineligible for copyright also has a lot of good examples. Many images can also be trademarked, which can restrict how one uses something, but it's considered a different issue than copyrights. -- Ned Scott 06:26, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
- Can you just add all those links to policy pages also to the image's talk page, w/ some clarification as to why it is ineligible for copyright? Cirt (talk) 06:42, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
- No worries. I tried to find a page to help describe it. I found Copyright#Typefaces and Typeface#Legal aspects that kind of explains some of it. Category:Public domain images ineligible for copyright also has a lot of good examples. Many images can also be trademarked, which can restrict how one uses something, but it's considered a different issue than copyrights. -- Ned Scott 06:26, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
- Right, but with their style of text, font, etc. Don't get me wrong, I'm the one who uploaded the image and I'm all for its use, I just want to make absolutely sure we can safely say that it is free-use instead of fair-use. Cirt (talk) 06:10, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
- But it doesn't include any graphics or images. It's a picture of text. -- Ned Scott 06:09, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
- Yeah, but it's a screenshot that could technically include graphics/images what have you with a claim of ownership by Prolexic Technologies, no? Cirt (talk) 06:07, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
Notice
Dear Ned Scott, because of the open-mindedness and reasonability expressed here, the friendliness expressed here, and the apology expressed here, I have removed the bit on you in my evidence of the ArbCom case. Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des CitrouillesTally-ho! 06:09, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
- Thank you. Although, after your own explanation of why you listed it, I no longer felt insulted or anything like that :) -- Ned Scott 06:23, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
- You're welcome and that's encouraging to read. Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des CitrouillesTally-ho! 06:24, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
need a laugh?
See here. Cheers, Jack Merridew 12:28, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
The episode list template
Hi Ned. I think that the "Written by" field should appear before the "directed by" field, because that is how they are usually billed on the TV shows, whether it's during the action after the opening credits, or on the scrolling end credits. -- Matthew | talk | Contribs 06:52, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
- Hmm, I had not considered that. I'll see what the others think about it, but since we've only just started it would probably be an easy change. -- Ned Scott 02:40, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
- I started a thread at Template talk:Episode list#Order of DirectedBy and WrittenBy. Feel free to notify as many other people/talk pages as you want, since there really wasn't a lot of feedback on this the last time it was discussed. The more the better. -- Ned Scott 05:17, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
Hidden categories
Ned - I saw your question at the discussion about hidden categories. You may already have seen the note, but there is now a setting in the user preferences to toggle the display. It's under "Misc", titled "Show hidden categories". Cheers. --Ckatzchatspy 08:39, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
- Ah, nice. -- Ned Scott 02:40, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
WikEd for Safari
I have a little present for you :D User talk:Cacycle/wikEd_development#Safari. --TheDJ (talk • contribs) 02:31, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
- Kick ass! -- Ned Scott 02:41, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
- Note that you will have to set wikEdSkipBrowserTest for my version. --TheDJ (talk • contribs) 02:56, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
- Ah, thanks! But I notice the on/off thingie in the corner, next to "log out" doesn't work, so it always defaults to being on when I edit. -- Ned Scott 03:09, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
- Note that you will have to set wikEdSkipBrowserTest for my version. --TheDJ (talk • contribs) 02:56, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
- Yes there are still several smaller issues, but its already working a lot better then I had ever expected it to work. I'll be working on finding the remaining bugs in the next couple of days or so. --TheDJ (talk • contribs) 11:32, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
- Looking forward to it :D -- Ned Scott 03:51, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
Sorry for the confusion
I know it could look odd or out of place. Kasuga just does such beautiful work, and I'd rather have that adorn an article than a deletable (and often contentious) live image. I just don't know how backlogged he is. Cheers, Chris (クリス • フィッチ) (talk) 05:42, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
Regarding this ( . . . a kiss is stil a kiss)
I, too, want a good solution. Many editors (including yourself) from disparate points of view have been diligently working at FICT and WAF to resolve this problem. One editor I have not seen there is TTN. I have no personal grudge against TTN, other than the fact that he has been rude to other editors. As a matter of fact, I can not think of a single instance where we have had a conflict. Nevertheless, I feel that it is a good thing for the Arb Com to draw a line and say "this behavior is unacceptable." You may feel that they only did this two one side, but I feel like the rest of the proposals (especially the enforcement by blocks) has the potential to draw a line with the other side's tendentious edit warring. I think this may be an excellent way to get back to work. Besides, if they close the case, the "problematic" injunction will be lifted. Ursasapien (talk) 07:03, 29 February 2008 (UTC)