User talk:Kafka Liz

You reverted me

The fk? Dangerous Liz from hell. Ceoil (talk) 01:10, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Suck it up, beeyotch. Plus I am bold. Feel free to revert and discuss. Kafka Liz (talk) 01:14, 24 October 2011 (UTC) ;) (a wink to convey my humourous intent)

Ouch, but if you think that level of internet tough guy impresses me, than well, fk you dude. Also, I am a scientist these days obsessed with [1]. Ceoil (talk) 01:21, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Sheh. Pulled out the big guns so soon? Are you amplified to rock? Lord, I miss them; must've seen them at least a dozen times... And surely you're not discovering the glories of Leonard Cohen only so late? He's something of an eternal good, in my book. Kafka Liz (talk) 01:34, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Hes ok, but a bit obtuse and gay. And by the way, beeyotch, I'll b 21 in June, so fuck you on your merry way. Joke; I'm not actually 20, I'm 22 1/2. Ceoil (talk) 14:14, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

FYI

He spoke and wrote in Persian, and was born in Khorasan (no Turks there). So, please don't revert in future. Thanks. Dohezarsersdah (talk) 13:33, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

And your explanation of the fact that it is credibly sourced is...? Kafka Liz (talk) 13:36, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

I see the explanation in your edit summary; I'll review. Kafka Liz (talk) 13:37, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

He wrote in Persian, but the source is a reliable one and it does say he was from a Turkish family. Our opinions are really not very useful here, and how anyone can say there were no Turks there at that time is something I can't understand. Dougweller (talk) 17:01, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

New section

Greetings friend. I was told to pass the following message on to you: "Meowy is asking that you email him." With regards, --Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 06:41, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for letting me know, Marshal. I'm on it. :) Kafka Liz (talk) 21:10, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Potatoes

My last repsonce to you on my talk made no sence. Just just forget it. Ceoil (talk) 14:44, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Forget what? No idea what you're talking about. Are you off your meds? Kafka Liz (talk) 14:45, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

No its not like that; I just misread. Ceoil (talk) 15:19, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Already forgotten is what I meant, in all seriousness. Kafka Liz (talk) 15:21, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Seems like double jeporady and too many layers of irony. Lets start again, <adds deodirant> Hi I'm paul, how do you do? Ceoil (talk) 15:26, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Seldom say/write it, but LO-effin'-L. :D Kafka Liz (talk) 15:29, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Hey, that deodirant was imported from russia special, €0.35 a can. It might be cheap, but you cant say I dont have lots of it on. Ceoil (talk) 16:13, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

I refuse to answer on the grounds I may incriminate myself. Kafka Liz (talk) 16:19, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

The bear russian guy told me "women love that shit" (his exact words). I'm wearing €3.90 worth of the suff now. Enough to charm a woman or kill a cat or my money back. (Tabby is looking deciedly woozy bty) Ceoil (talk) 17:46, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

I'm a bit unclear on the desired outcome? Kafka Liz (talk) 18:04, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Me too, and I gave him 10 quid. Ceoil (talk) 18:39, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Cheers for all the help in the last few days. Ceoil (talk) 20:02, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Happy to help, as always. I'll carry on, but I only have one decent source on me at the moment. What else do you feel needs doing at the moment? I have a few visual changes I'd suggest, if they can be managed, and the "Range" section is currently a bit confusing (some brief notes in my sandbox), but is there anything in particular you think needs expansion?

Nice pic, by the way. Kafka Liz (talk) 20:14, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Its very early days yet, the page isn't even half written, so any changes you think are needed, knock yourself out. I want to just add for now, I'll worry about org later, but fell free to move things about if it pleases my lady. O and I know what source you have. A co-editor on this one would be welcome as its a fairly large undertaking, and I'm just not that energetic! By tks for the so far work, dear. Ceoil (talk) 20:42, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Hahaha, yes, that's the one. I'm actually able to remove it from the shelf, now that guardcat is gone.

I've been trying to figure out how to change the nasty colours on the timeline... The orange is better, but only just. Makes me feel like I have new messages from the lot of them. Kafka Liz (talk) 20:49, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

The timeline colour needs to be muted; so as not to enduce eplipetic fits on our readers. And sorry to hear about guardcat; her face looked a bit loke how I imaging Malleus. Ceoil (talk) 21:00, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

That, my friend, is the august Rumpole. He's been gone for a while now, unfortunately. I can see the resemblance, though :D

We should probably work on beefing up the "In Popular Culture" section as well... There's a sad lack of references to Monty Python usage, just for starters. Kafka Liz (talk) 21:07, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

I've been trawling the net for that and for Family guy references. And it would seem none of the works were ever used during a Rick Flair entrance. I expected better fromk Rick. The world is going to hell in a hat. Ceoil (talk) 21:17, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

[2]. Cheers. Much appreciated and nicely done. Ceoil (talk) 00:06, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Glad you think it works. It took a bit of mulling over & messing with. Kafka Liz (talk) 00:08, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

And I'm not sure I'm entirely happy with the way the last bit (on the French, Germans and Estonians) just sits there... haven't quite come up with a way to integrate it better yet. Kafka Liz (talk) 00:11, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Its a tricky one, but your solution to the very acquard word "range", that - I - put into the title, is far better, tks. And there was some very odd, vague, sentence structures in there, now gone, I guess some from the 1919 britinnaca. A lot of the primary sources are from the late 19th / early 20th c, so they can be hard to pin down as to exacly what it is they mean exactly; they tended towards verbiage, and them some. More recent writers tend to be clear almost to the point of bluntness; short sentences, fact fact fact. No coincidence I suppose. Ceoil (talk) 00:29, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks :). There were definitely a couple of things in there that I just couldn't make head or tail of; it was just too vague, and not always referenced, so I took it out. Kafka Liz (talk) 00:35, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

I hear your edit summary, so its good night from me. zz. Tune though. zz. [3]. Ceoil (talk) 00:41, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Lovely. My mind's blank for a good tune to send back... too caught up in the Netherlands ;). Kafka Liz (talk) 00:46, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

You'll have to try better than that with me. Well phrased excuse but I dont doubt that with a little effort you have a [4] up your sleeve. Anyway; seriously this time....zz. Ceoil (talk) 00:58, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

The only thing I have this evening - it's been in my head all day - didn't seem conducive to sleep. Both yours beat mine, at least for contextual tone.Kafka Liz (talk) 01:03, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Now thats scary. My first girlfiend was sister of that band's singers girlfriend (if you can follow that), and he was some nutter. He introduced us to Buzzcocks and PiL v early, and Viz Comic and the early electro bands when we were 16. V wierd mention, esp form a, well, bird. I cant, or am afraid to top that so, just, zz with [5]. Ceoil (talk) 01:16, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Nah, I loved those guys. I didn't realize they were quite so local to you, though I did know they were Irish. Trying to remember where I first heard them.... It may have been the "I'm Your Fan" Cohen tribute album. I have at least two of their albums somewhere. On cassette. Something quieter in the meantime [6] Kafka Liz (talk) 01:22, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Last post honestly; but like and hear where that tune is coming from, and can only say [7]. zz for real this time. 01:41, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Now I'm curious about Mr Mansions, but it can wait 'til morning. Kafka Liz (talk) 02:27, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Hemingway

I need to stop. My eyes are spinning! I'll copy over your changes tomorrow - I have a little free time this week because of the holiday, so can pick at this. Thanks so much for helping. I'm not too impressed with the writing, but it's hard to stitch together sources and overwrite an existing page. I need to do some work with the sources and will go in later for a major copyedit. Also, I'm finding some sections are gone, sections that I specifically remember writing, so I'll have to find those in history, and I'm finding sources I've never read or added. In other words, it's beginning to degrade quite a lot. But that's life here. Anyway, if we don't touch bases in the next few days, enjoy your Thanksgiving. Truthkeeper (talk) 02:21, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Happy to help! Actually, I need to knock off for the evening too - my phone was lost most of the day, and I just discovered that my Mom has literally called me 20 times. Probably nothing serious, but I'm guessing I ought to give her a call so she doesn't think I'm dead or something. I should have some time over the next few days, though, so I'll just pick up on whatever section is next. And of course, have a great Thanksgiving too! Kafka Liz (talk) 02:35, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Just to let you know that I'm blanking the page. I think everything else that needs to be done, can be done in mainspace. I probably won't get to it for a while - I'm taking it day by day but am inclined to be gone for a while. Just so you know and thanks again. Truthkeeper (talk) 02:31, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Ok, no problem. I'll try taking a poke at it now and then, but to be honest I'll probably mostly hold off until you feel like coming back. Stay in touch, and take care... Kafka Liz (talk) 14:03, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

SBAP! Mughal Lohar

Saw your post on my talk page, besides my email I replied there, time for ANI, best thing is to revive the old ANI whose url I've put there (sorry, copy and paste with this iPad seems hard and I've lost it or I'd paste it here). Dougweller (talk) 14:46, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Note from an admirer

What's your fucking problem to delete my "Erlkönig"-contribution without any explanation?? This one certainly isn't of less "importance" than most of the others in this section! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.154.17.23 (talk) 20:44, 27 November 2011

Actually, most of the list there adds very little at all to the article; I just haven't had the time to go through them all yet. In the meantime, please read our policy on personal attacks and guideline on trivia. Cheers, Kafka Liz (talk) 21:00, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Ok, you're right (about the policy) - but me as a user I'm interested in the information who did an erlking-version in "popular culture". I enjoyed reading this list. And whatever gives you the postion to change other people's wiki-contributions on a regular basis (some special moderator status?) - just think about its popular view, too. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.154.17.23 (talk) 22:54, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

No, I'm not a moderator or anyone special at all. If you've visited the mainpage, you may notice that Wikipedia bills itself as "the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit." "Popular culture" lists are tricky in that usually about 90% of the material doesn't actually add much to the understanding of the article's subject, which for me is the guideline as to what constitutes a useful contribution to lists of this type. A painting that is directly based on a particular poem, for example, or a noteworthy performance of a particular play (i.e., one that at least received substantial media coverage) would fit this description for me. Someone farting on a sitcom and then exclaiming "Erlkönig!" would not. That's an extreme example, obviously, and I am not equating your addition to such a case. But you asked, so I am trying to explain. Kafka Liz (talk) 22:25, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

proper structure

The cites on that other page are a lost cause. But the core issue is proper structure, so I'll illustrate with another example. Seen WP:HLIST? The recent press on it? This is mostly about {{navbox}}es and there are about 1.6 million pages using them. Most are *really* poorly structured. Consider a simple navbox; title says whatever, maybe a flag or other picture, maybe some groups, but most are simply about a dozen links. The links are separated from each other; the really old ones use the 'pipe' ("|") which looks really poor. Most use a middot, which is what that character is for. Semantically, what are these boxfuls of links? They're WP:LISTS of links. You know; like all the ones that start with *, except they run horizontally. The navbox template takes named parameters such as list1 = foo, which acknowledge this.

You've obviously seen many of these. See {{Islands and provinces of the Canary Islands}}, which I edited, just now. This is a simple one (here's one that's not simple). This about using proper structure. Most navboxes are full of nasty little templates like {{·w}}, and the {{nowrap begin}} {{nowrap end}} pair. The Canary Islands one is a very typical example; hundreds of thousands like it.

The ·w and nowrap suite are about keeping the middot from wrapping to the next line when things reach whatever full-width is. They generate a sea of horrid code that is sent to hundreds of millions of readers a month. This is a performance issue; it takes time to download the extra code. Far worse, though, it that the web servers have to generate all that code, over, and over, and over again. This is the core reason large pages take so long to generate and why many pages reach their two megabyte preprocessing limit (cite templates are a lesser culprit).

old:

|list1 = {{nowrap begin}} [[Fuerteventura]]{{·w}} [[Gran Canaria]]{{·w}} [[La Gomera]]{{·w}} [[El Hierro]]{{·w}} [[Lanzarote]]{{·w}} [[La Palma]]{{·w}} [[Tenerife]] {{nowrap end}}

new:

| list1 =
* [[Fuerteventura]]
* [[Gran Canaria]]
* [[La Gomera]]
* [[El Hierro]]
* [[Lanzarote]]
* [[La Palma]]
* [[Tenerife]]

The new form is obviously easier for editors to edit; it's vastly more approachable and familiar to anyone who has edited even a modest amount. Even more importantly, it is producing semantically valid markup that screen readers and search engines will much appreciate. The nowrap issues are handled automatically at a higher level. The code downloaded to readers is less weighty and it's far easier on the servers that have to generate it.

old served-code:

<span class="nowrap"><a href="/wiki/Fuerteventura" title="Fuerteventura">Fuerteventura</a> <b>·</b></span> <span class="nowrap"><a href="/wiki/Gran_Canaria" title="Gran Canaria">Gran Canaria</a> <b>·</b></span> <span class="nowrap"><a href="/wiki/La_Gomera" title="La Gomera">La Gomera</a> <b>·</b></span> <span class="nowrap"><a href="/wiki/El_Hierro" title="El Hierro">El Hierro</a> <b>·</b></span> <span class="nowrap"><a href="/wiki/Lanzarote" title="Lanzarote">Lanzarote</a> <b>·</b></span> <span class="nowrap"><a href="/wiki/La_Palma" title="La Palma">La Palma</a> <b>·</b></span> <span class="nowrap"><a href="/wiki/Tenerife" title="Tenerife">Tenerife</a></span>

new served-code:

<ul>
<li><a href="/wiki/Fuerteventura" title="Fuerteventura">Fuerteventura</a></li>
<li><a href="/wiki/Gran_Canaria" title="Gran Canaria">Gran Canaria</a></li>
<li><a href="/wiki/La_Gomera" title="La Gomera">La Gomera</a></li>
<li><a href="/wiki/El_Hierro" title="El Hierro">El Hierro</a></li>
<li><a href="/wiki/Lanzarote" title="Lanzarote">Lanzarote</a></li>
<li><a href="/wiki/La_Palma" title="La Palma">La Palma</a></li>
<li><a href="/wiki/Tenerife" title="Tenerife">Tenerife</a></li>
</ul>

Still with me? The new served-code is properly structured: an unordered list of links; it's properly structured and the crap about wrapping is simply gone. The now-absent templates take zero-time for the servers to parse. Readers get served a page that is smaller, and that their screen reader or mobile phone will have a better chance of presenting to them in a useful form.

This project is about building an online encyclopaedia for everyone. Sure, it needs content, and content writers. It does not need the endless inflated egos that get all encumbered with 'their' articles. It stops being any person's property when they hit save. It needs high standards using a lot of metrics, not just Brilliant Prose. Articles should not pass FA, or even GA, without *all* reasonable standards having been met. But Wikipedia is notorious for its political infighting. FA is a power-nexus, and those running that party are doing so on a platform of Content-is-King (or Queen). It's really a sort of demagoguery. And it's really entrenched and lashing-out at all criticism. Most recently that came from Sue Gardner. The FA fiefdom has good reason to fear her criticism. She owns the servers, and the WMF is intent on more openness and is determined to move forward at greater than the speed of consensus. It has to, because all this turf-defense is retarding the project. Alarbus (talk) 05:14, 3 December 2011 (UTC)