User talk:DePiep

		The Template Barnstar
		For repeated improvements on templates used in phonetics articles. Particularly admirable is the combination of seeking out explicit consensus and dutifully carrying out necessary changes once it is reached. — Ƶ§œš¹ [aɪm ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɛ̃ɾ̃ˡi] 14:51, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

		The Guidance Barnstar
		You're the hero of the day on this pickle of a problem. Thanks for the insight. VanIsaacWScontribs 23:50, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Careful with the taking out of content in articles into templates

Those templates may be whacked at TfD, because they could only ever be transcluded once and don't actually have that much content in them usually (with some exceptions, such as Template:Periodic table (alkali metals)). Double sharp (talk) 13:05, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

I know. Still for template maintenance, in many aspects, separating them is usefull. E.g. to make similar topics' tables actually look similar. Right now, it isd unorganised. I can add that linking to a template directly in the "footer"navbox as if it were an article (i.e. in reader space) may be subject to whacking too. -DePiep (talk) 13:40, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Which is why I expressed my reservations about linking to templates directly in the navbox earlier. I don't really mind the templates being separated out anyway, since they usually make it extremely hard to edit a certain section (Alkali metal's lead used to be terrible to edit), but sometimes they are extremely related to the article (e.g. extended periodic table). Double sharp (talk) 07:28, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Agree. Adding: 1) I skipped some when extracting templates (e.g. Period_6_element#f-block_elements_.28lanthanides.29) because of that reason: very article-specific. 2) Later on, when I have a more complete overview (in the category, and in {{Periodic table templates}}), we can try to make templates more look-alike, e.g. the block-ones. In the process, I already have turned into single some individual Pyykkö model tables into one template, which I think is an improvement. 3) About your example extended periodic table: could be a single-use template (today), but now I could wrap it in {{Wide template}} to keep in within the page (small screen issue; see the slider below when zooming out). Another argument for templating. -DePiep (talk) 08:29, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

On your reverts re {{Periodic table (Pyykkö model)}}: I do not understand most of them (really, the legend in the table title?), and I wrote Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Elements#No_squeezing. You referred to yourself: "I am NOT ... going to" in the es, which sounds like taking things personally? -DePiep (talk) 09:02, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

No, I saved it before realising that it could be misconstrued. :-( I just meant that it would be useful to have a link for consistency, but you couldn't really write an article about Period 9 (there's not much to talk about period 9 alone), so I wanted to clarify things. Double sharp (talk) 14:45, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

This edit re a Period 9 link is minor with me (although as I left it, it was linked to the right page & section). Most other edits in that model were layout related, a lot you did not address. Legend in the title row? Unbolding the essential elements? Reintroduce blockcolor legend separately while these colors are not needed as you write, here (as an unused legend)? Another irregular font-size in the bottom row? As you might get, I am not happy with the blanket-reversing. Especially since it was not broken. -DePiep (talk) 14:54, 31 May 2012 (UTC)-DePiep (talk) 14:54, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

I was reverting so that I could figure out how to change it and forgot to revert back the article. I've removed the unused legends. The font-size was another thing which I didn't notice. Sorry about all this. I've fixed it all. Double sharp (talk) 13:55, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Appreciated. -DePiep (talk) 13:58, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Metalloid templates

DePiep, thank you for your work on these. The use of legend boxes in the metalloids in the periodic system template is wonderful. Had been thinking about doing the same kind of thing for quite a while but was unsure how to do it without a lot of stuffing around. And lo and behold it happens just like that. Applause also for your use of the phrase 'periodic system' in the title. Sandbh (talk) 13:28, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for this kind post. Any other things you have been thinking of, re the periodic tabel?

Have been thinking that the way Wikipedia color codes the elements into different categories is a bit of a jumble, especially the way the non-metals are done. I particularly dislike the wooly category of 'other nonmetals'. I have some ideas, supported by the literature, as to how to address this but that's a project for another day. Want to get the metalloid article done first. Sandbh (talk) 10:25, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

Maybe you can check & improve the legend of {{Periodic table (poor metals)}}, period 7 looks incorrect now. -DePiep (talk) 13:49, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

It seems to me that in this template Ge, Sb and Po should be coded as metalloids (I think Po is better regarded as a poor metal, but that's another story) and 113 to 117 coded as unknown Sandbh (talk) 11:32, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

I don't understand the reason you gave for reverting my formating edit to the metalloid template: 'AGF. no squeezing of otsize'. Could you clarify what this means? Thank you. Sandbh (talk) 10:25, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

It should read: AGF. no squeezing of fontsize. In general, there is no need to change or set a font-size. It introduces another style, which clutters the look of a page. More so because those sizes are different: 90%, 85%, etc. used on one page (infobox and navbox do that too). Sometines even reduced fontsize is used (not in this template) to solve a layout problem (trying to get more text in a certain space). In all those periodic table templates, I have tried to introduce a single style (sort of). So that the templates have the same look. -DePiep (talk) 13:40, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

OK I understand where you are coming from. The practice on Wikipedia seems to be to reduce the font size in the text accompanying images and pictures. I gather this is a common typographic presentation technique, as well. The same approach has been applied to the metalloid border template a bit further down. The original metalloid template also had one font size, as far as I can see. At the moment this is not the case with the metalloid template, which currently has two different font sizes. Could you reconsider your reversion decision please. Sandbh (talk) 12:28, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

We are talking this edit in {{Periodic table (metalloid)}}.

First, what is not our topic here is the left-aligning of the asterisk footnote, the idle colspans removed, and the one period removed. (Nor the content-thing that bothers me: why so much descriptive code in the box?).

Above I explained that mixing font-sizes is a route that only rarely should be taken. As you write, it is done in text "accompanying" an image -- but only sometimes. It is not standard MoS. I even have considered to remove the font-size from the two text blocks. And foremost of all, the element cells in the table have another two font-sizes, <big> and <small>. So that is three alternative settings in one template (four in total).

Apart from font-sizes, there is another style setting (row-)height. Now this is a similar problem in itself and in conjunction. Of course row-setting changes the layout, possibly disturbes it. The eye is very sensisitve to that. One senses a difference or irregularity, even though one cannot point out what it is. Changing (setting) row-height should have a clear reason. The "250%" in the title looked like if by accident: no regularity to be discovered. I have removed that one, because the browser can very well adjust row-height to an actual font-size, best without us interfering. Further on, the "height:10px;", which was only in the second text block (why-oh-why that?), happend to have no or minor effect at all (to me, dependent on my zoom-factor). So it is an idle styling, that suggests an improvement, but is not. Just compare this with the table in this template: while using different font-sizes, the spacing in the cell (in many ways) is nicely done by the browser without extra so-called improvements.

Other style settings, like margins, borders and padding, can be disturbing too but I have not looked into that wrt this template.

Together, reverting the whole edit would reintroduce, apart from the font-size you request, these other styles, all unwanted as I explained here. For inspiration, I think of this. That said, if you reintroduce the 90% size (necessary manually) I have no killing argument to oppose it. -DePiep (talk) 16:42, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

To be clear: if you redo, set style="font-size:90%", I will not revert. -DePiep (talk) 23:18, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

DePiep, thank you for your considered response. I'll look again at the template, MoS, and some other articles, and get back to you. Sandbh (talk) 09:20, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Hello DePiep. Your last edit to the metalloid template removed some text describing the path taken by the metal-nonmetal dividing line. This text was there in order to fully meet the MOS specs re accessibility for visually impaired people. There is some discussion about this by RexxS here. Accordingly, I will restore this text. Sandbh (talk) 10:39, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

I agree on the accessability requirement, but I did not think current verbose was the right way to do it. The text descibes the whole table, and even more. I think the line-description should better be in an alt-text like structure, or in the main text. Adding accessability information is describing the Image, not redefine it in words. Note that "Image", and so this topic, usually means a file, not a table. -DePiep (talk) 12:47, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

I've carefully read your feedback about font sizing and broadly agree. Your comment about smaller text being used to accompany images only on a 'sometimes' basis is puzzling: smaller text size seems to be a standard Wikipedia practice hard wired into image templates, including those used in MOS. To improve the consistency of font sizing in the metalloid template I will extend the 90% sizing to include the footnote about the metalloid status of Al, Po and At. This will also help to more often keep the note on one line. Sandbh (talk) 11:57, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

"sometimes" refers to its usage in periodic table templates in the first place. Font reducing is not always used in similar places, and even when it is, different numbers are used (90%, 85%, 83%, <small>). My point is that it is not done consequently over these templates. Your note "... keep the note on one line" is irrelevant, since we should not use fontsetting to squeeze text. As you imply, it is not written in MOS (used in MOS it is), and that is what I wrote. Horribly, even highly usage templates use different fontsetting (eg navbox vs infobox). And, of course, you will have met my conclusion. -DePiep (talk) 12:47, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi DiPiep. I'm going to increase the bottom margin of the Periodic table (metalloid border) template, in order to improve consistency with the borders around other similar boxes. At the moment the main article text in the metalloid article crowds up against the bottom border of this template. Increasing the margin across the bottom border should address this and improve presentation. Sandbh (talk) 04:21, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Good plan, especially now that both left and bottom margins are set, equally, in a right-floating template. But maybe 1.4em is a bit much for border-lined templates (from the time when these templates had no border, all was in the white canvas?). {{infobox}} sets them at 1em. -DePiep (talk) 07:44, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

30,000

Hey, congratulations! You're well on your way to having no life.

** ONE OF US ** ONE OF US ** ONE OF US **

— kwami (talk) 23:02, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

Thank you! -DePiep (talk) 23:04, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

Superactinide

I've reverted your edits to superactinide. What you deleted was no duplicate, as you claimed it was, but was showing what the superactinides would be if the Pyykkö Model was correct. Please, look before you delete stuff like this! StringTheory¹¹ 03:07, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

OK. I was wrong. -DePiep (talk) 03:10, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

WP:ELEM/PTQ

The PTQ was much easier to read before you changed it. Before, I could see the legend and the PTQ on the screen at once; now, I can't. As such, I have reverted your edits. StringTheory¹¹ 20:39, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Before, I could not read it, for starters. Please rethink that probably you are used to this template, but not that many other readers.

There was no overview at all. It did hint to the periodic table, but nothing more. "All in one screen" is not a good design principle, because users have multiple weird screen and browser settings. Only he basic stuff (wikitables, CSS style, class, HTML) serves all these user situations well. What I added too, was the general periodic table layout & format we use everywhere here on WP. At least, now the pattern is the same as in the other perioic tables we have (any reader will recognise that). Apart from that, the colors in that PTQ table are screaming the reader into deafness. -DePiep (talk) 20:56, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Looks great now, maybe you'd love to hear this. Keep it up--R8R Gtrs (talk) 19:14, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Thank you! Double Sharp refined some things. It is stable now. -DePiep (talk) 19:20, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Compare: before and after. I like it. -DePiep (talk) 19:31, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Template:Largest Israeli cities plus an ANI case

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

I notice you are in the middle of an edit war, and on the edge of 3RR and the inevitable block that will follow. It doesn't take a 4th revert in 24h to block, so I strongly suggest you refrain from reverting and try to just cover the dispute on the talk page for now. As you are 3 edits into 3RR, you have to consider this a final warning. Hopefully, you guys will just work it out without the need for a block. Thanks. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 22:42, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

• Corrected myself, you were not on the verge of a 3RR or even close so this was certainly my mistake. It is still a slow, simmering edit war, and I still suggest WP:DRN, as it is still a form of warring. I have no doubt in your intentions or good faith, I'm simply stating that multiple reverts isn't the answer. If you think there is a sock at play, WP:SPI is the answer. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 14:17, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. But ... even the dripping is less than it looks: the edits by Jabobito48 were reversions of a sock puppet so do not count! And H8Gasma I did revert once! btw, the ARBPIA warning reduces it from 3RR to 1RR. -DePiep (talk) 14:22, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

I will trust you in this and just say that the lack of admins jumping in to help shows it isn't easy to block on content related issues, even when the content is a bit to the side of behavior. I did block him last time for the behavior, but this time, his talk behavior wasn't the issue. When there is a clear DRN or simple consensus on the page, then POV isn't even relevant if the edits are disruptive for being repeatedly added against consensus. If there isn't a clear consensus, many admins loathe getting involved as it looks like you are taking sides in a content dispute. It is probably obvious to you, but isn't as obvious unless one goes back and reads a couple hours of talk, diffs and user talk pages, which isn't always practical. Truthfully, when an admin is blocking, what we want is clear, obvious and simple reasons, without having to explain it afterwards. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 16:28, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

All right & crisp clear. I can only say I did not ask for a block at all (it looks "like "Block him!" is part of the question mark on that page). I asked to warn him according to WP:ARBPIA, by messaging {{Palestine-Israel enforcement}} on their talkpage & logging that. That way, the 1RR rule --which is imposed on every I/P page-- gives an admin more power when 1RR is violated, but only after the warning. The SPI I noted was just for completeness, not my own request. Anyway, the user is gone now. -DePiep (talk) 17:05, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

SPI case

You mistakenly included "User:" when you filed Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/User:AndresHerutJaim. I have moved your case to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/AndresHerutJaim, which was opened a few minutes later, and combined them into one. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 13:46, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Yes I noticed, but did not dare to edit much more. First time SPI, learned. Thanks for cleaning up. -~~

WT:ELEM header

Is this any better? Double sharp (talk) 09:50, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

I see not much diff. Go as you like. Yesterday I just flushed some ideas in the page, and described them to you, but they are not accepted. No problem, but I won't micro-puzzle with it any further. You can use any idea you like from my proposed version [1]. -DePiep (talk) 10:02, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

POV =

Hi DePiep. You recently made this change to the article Wars involving Israel, claiming that using blue instead of grey qualifies as POV-pushing. It is, however, normal to use color from flags or coats of arms in templates related to a specific country. For instance, see Template:Military ranks of Egypt, Template:Sierra Leone Civil War. Based on this, I don't think this constitutes POV-pushing. --Mikrobølgeovn (talk) 12:06, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Elementbox

Hey, saw your last change. Got two suggestions. First, to color the title (the uppermost line) the same as others. Second, to push the line (oxygen-fluorine-neon, etc) above the table again. What do you think?--R8R Gtrs (talk) 16:01, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Could do the color thing. But hey, it is a title, not a subtitle. I mean: I wanted to stress the title a bit, make it stand out. But I'll give it a go, since the title is bold already.

Then, putting the left-x-right text above I do not like. First, there it covers the three uninvolved graphs too (crystal, shells, ZsubSymbol). Not a good visual support for the information. Below the directions are visually more related to the horizontals of the periodic table.

Now that you are here, I left out a separate subtitle bar (colored) with "Periodic table". Looked too massive. And not a fully correct subtitle for that table section. -DePiep (talk) 16:13, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Also we could add Periodic table in smaller print on top of that box. I would like that, since it gives a title (and a link) to it. -DePiep (talk) 16:37, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Got your point, thanks! Just one more. Think that the lower left corner is a little empty. Don't you think that the horizontal element names line should be centered per the whole white cell, not just the table? (See Template:Infobox technetium for an example)

Agree, it could be useful (more for the link purposes than for anything else, though)--R8R Gtrs (talk) 16:48, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Actually I tried a lot of stuff to get it this way. The reason is alike: the hor and vert neighbour directions (we are talking) better be close to the structure they are about (the hor and vert periodic table directions). As it is now, they bot are right next/below their action (the eye likes that). Having a vertical neighbour below the periodic table breaks that good suggestive (subtle/subliminal) association. -DePiep (talk) 16:55, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Makes sense. You're good at explaining :) thanks--R8R Gtrs (talk) 17:20, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

A very, very nice compliment. Thanks. -DePiep (talk) 01:00, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Extra Parameters in Elementbox?

Hi DePiep, following your addition of the history section to template:elementbox, I've been slowly adding the discovery details to the elements. You mentioned that I could contact you if I had the need to repeat the "Named by" heading more than a few times. It now seems like it will occur reasonably often so I was hoping you could add the parameters "Named by" and "Named date" to the infobox? - to appear in a single row before the comment row, as shown below:

Prediction: Person (date)
Discovery: Person (date)
First Isolation: Person (date)
**Named by: Person (date)**
Comment Label: Comment text

Regards Nozzleberry (talk) 23:08, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

 Done

|named by=
|named date=

-DePiep (talk) 09:45, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi again. I've realised an extra parameter would be handy in the history section - "Recognised as an element by" (person and date). I was thinking of having it underneath the "Discovery" heading. What do you think?Nozzleberry (talk) 23:02, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

I've actually raised this point on the Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Elements as I've reealisd it would be good to get some feedback before putting it in. So please don't proceed with my request until I've cleared it with the community. Thanks Nozzleberry (talk) 01:00, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Category:Hatnote templates for names

Category:Hatnote templates for names, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Paul_012 (talk) 09:59, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Template:Infobox element ‎

Something went wrong with the top line (name parameter) in all infoboxes. Cheers. Materialscientist (talk) 01:54, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Please do not perform mass operations without discussing them first. Why do you uncapitalize Earth? Look in Earth-related articles, discuss this with the community first, please. Materialscientist (talk) 23:18, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

"earth" not "Earth" is trivial I'd say. Where do I discuss this? -DePiep (talk) 23:20, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Anywhere. Earth is capitalized all across wikipedia, and many of those articles are FAs. As I recall, it is only uncapitalized when you mean "soil", but is always capitalized as a planet. Materialscientist (talk) 23:23, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Unbelievable. -DePiep (talk) 23:26, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

All right. So it is. Could you please mass-revert my AWB edits in this? Can do, but me no admin, so would be more troublesome. -DePiep (talk) 23:31, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

They even write "the Earth", so we can write "the Venus"? "the Horror" I say. -DePiep (talk) 23:33, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

I've reverted edits that change caps, could you revise others like on helium? Thanks. Materialscientist (talk) 23:37, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Yes. Thanks, and I'll check my list. -DePiep (talk) 23:38, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Checked Category:Chemical elements on this, using AWB. Caught some other illegal "earth" writers, dammit. There also seems to be some "rare earth" stuff, I did not alter (I'd like to know more about this "rare earth", especially the uncapitalised version). This "the Earth" thing is interesting. -DePiep (talk) 00:14, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. Element articles are heavily watched, thus to avoid cluttering watchlists I usually don't correct one thing at a time everywhere, but read and apply several fixes (every article has lots of minor issues), but that's me. Materialscientist (talk) 00:29, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Here is the MOS on this: Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Capital_letters#Celestial_bodies. Afterwards, I could say that we are not talking astronomics in these, so bit of my intuition was right. I won't challenge though. -DePiep (talk) 00:32, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

So what now?

You insist on "BRD", but then you are too busy to actually join the discussion? You can't be bothered to actually read the arguments and "will do so later", but the pages must stay in your preferred version in the meantime? You are too damned lazy to at least cleanly revert your version back in without blanket-reverting unrelated constructive edits, and you expect me to just patiently sit and wait until you can finally be bothered to respond? Man, some kind of behaviour there. Fut.Perf. ☼ 23:01, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Sorry to have disappointed you in this. All I can say is that I want to reply seriously, so I'll have to save serious time for that. In general, taking some days to resolve such a thing is not unusual. -DePiep (talk) 08:44, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Oh, and if you might read this: do not ever force an editor into a React-Now threat. I'll revert you for this anytime anywhere. At least. -DePiep (talk) 00:09, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Apologies

I apologize for not linking to the DRN discussion from the get-go. It was an oversight that I tried to rectify as soon as I realized that nobody had actually done that yet. Again, my sincere apologies for dropping the ball on that. VanIsaac_WS^contribs 22:45, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Appreciated. I assume that you read my notes on this. For now, no cmts. -DePiep (talk) 00:30, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Music template

*laugh* Well, I did point out that I was worried more about third parties who might come along after the fact than I was about whether you understood my request or not. But I'll stop anyway (*grin*). Yeah, the sheer number of articles that would be affected by the change is obviously why we need to be careful to find the right solution here — although I did also catch a couple of individual musicians who had one of the templates applied to them unnecessarily. Anyway, I'll let you get on with it. Bearcat (talk) 23:29, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

I saw you edited {{USmusic}} out of three articles. All right. (So my check number went from 269 to 266! -- is the pulse where I have my finger on). But if you edit the template(s) involved, you lose me. -DePiep (talk) 23:35, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

And you moved it without discussion because? --Walter Görlitz (talk) 02:27, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Obviousness. -DePiep (talk) 08:20, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Braille-cell template

Hey,

Could you take a look at {{Braille cell}}? The coding is horribly inefficient, and with all the duplicated input tables, very difficult to update or maintain.

Thanks, — kwami (talk) 21:34, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Hm, the sizing doesn't seem to work w Unicode output. I've tried following the doc, but neither of the options makes any difference. — kwami (talk) 05:32, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Index to isotope pages

Can you change the template so that the periodic table of links to the isotope pages is open when the template loads. After being redirected from the deleted page it took me about 1.5 minutes to find and open the link table. Also how about making the default load so that the "Periodic table templates and files" section is closed. Unless you think that most people coming to the template page are looking for that information. I can only speak for myself, but I loved using the "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Index_to_isotope_pages" as a link to the isotope pages. I feel like I used that over half the time. Of course I and most other people also arrive at an elements isotope page from the link in the isotope section of the main article for that chemical element. See "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beryllium" the section "Isotopes and nucleosynthesis" and also the small table to the right "Most stable isotopes" When people are only looking up nuclear data for several different elements that periodic table in the "Index to Isotope Pages" was useful. It is still there in the template file, but harder to find. Thank you, Darian Jenkins — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.32.175.76 (talk) 22:47, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Re:
Can you change the template so that the periodic table of links to the isotope pages is open when the template loads.

- I did. Actually, I spend some time to get it folded, because I thought every WP:ELEMENT follower would know about hide/show. I could tell more about this, but further on this unsigned IP does not seem really interested.

After being redirected from the deleted page it took me about 1.5 minutes to find and open the link table.

- The page was not deleted. You were redirected. 1.5 minutes to find the "show/hide" button is much, especially since you claim you are using WP regularly. Anyway, this is Wikipedia. Things change. Oh and that index really is a template, not an article. Do not expect such things in main (article) space ever. The index as it was there, any one half editor could have had it deleted by AfD in a week for such good reason.

Also how about making the default load so that the "Periodic table templates and files" section is closed.

- Why? It is on the bottom half of the page. Why would you go there? You only seem to want one pictural page. What is wrong with, below there, an overview of other periodic table templates? How does it bother you?

- "Unless you think that ..." - oh shut up, "I can only speak for myself" -- keep doing so then. Now I predict a "but" from here.

- "but I ..." - see.

I loved using the "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Index_to_isotope_pages" as a link to the isotope pages.

- It still works. And it is not a link. It is an INDEX, having links. And again: your very first link you gave here worked.

Of course I and most other people [speak for yorself] also arrive at an elements isotope page from the link in the isotope section of the main article for that chemical element. See "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beryllium" the section "Isotopes and nucleosynthesis" and also the small table to the right "Most stable isotopes" When people [speak for yorself] are only looking up nuclear data for several different elements that periodic table in the "Index to Isotope Pages" was useful. It is still there in the template file, but harder to find.

-Better don't tell me where to find isotopes pages. Only a week ago I found this index, hidden & not linked anywhere. At last now it is in the overviews.

Thank you [what for then?] , Darian Jenkins [by IP]

Darian, if you are such an ardent WP user, albeit only for this one single page in one single expected/accepted view, why do you sign by IP (not even that)? And why do you "thank you" me? -DePiep (talk) 00:57, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Apologies, again (humorous)

I hope my contributions to the braille cell template discussion are comprehensible. I just realized that I am violating the rule about drunk editing of WP, so I may be a little less coherent than normal. VanIsaac_WS^contribs 12:00, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

:-). Is there a rule?! (a WP:wisdom I could understand). -DePiep (talk) 12:48, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

WP:EUI VanIsaac_WS^contribs 13:01, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Removing RC link

I fail to see why the RC link is "nonsensical". It links to changes that affect the project. StringTheory¹¹ 23:59, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Yes, the whole WP:ELEM project is stuffed with everything-is-important-so-we-link-everything-everywhere-anyplace. You would like this: Everything all in wikipedia on one big page solves everything. Why use two pages for wikipedia? You'd fail to see the problem -- even without looking, I'd guess. -DePiep (talk) 00:08, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

For your track record of posting sarcastic remarks on my talk page, I have banned you from my talk page. StringTheory¹¹ 00:28, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

You mean this? First time you meet an opposing breeze? -DePiep (talk) 00:32, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Music template

I'm not sure exactly what you mean by asking me if I'm a bot. I simply haven't actually been online here very much this week, having been busy with other things — and after my initial post I can't really think of anything new that I could really have contributed to the discussion besides paying attention to your progress. But do allow me to thank you for the assistance. Bearcat (talk) 04:15, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

template request

Could you check out template:Charmap and see if you can see if there's a simple reason the line that starts {{#if: {{numcr2namecr|{{{1|0}}}}}... doesn't output a row of the table, even though in my user space, the exact same code properly renders a table line. Otherwise, I'm posting my second help request in as many days to WikiProject templates. VanIsaac_WS^contribs 07:33, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Done. Strip whitespace added to {{numcr2namecr}}. Your user test did not input whitespace, so it worked. But the example on the /doc page did use whitespace (param 1), and so failed to recognise the number. -DePiep (talk) 11:24, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Excellent. Thank you so much for taking a gander. We've been fighting that stupid thing for a couple days now. VanIsaac_WS^contribs 21:39, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

When unnamed params are used, the input value is not trimmen (whitespace stays). Not so when named param is used. In earlier uses of the namedcr2-template there were always named params, so it showed OK. The template uses calculations, which are also sensitive to whitespace input. -DePiep (talk) 23:54, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Start Moved [2]

Thanks! (Did you see who made that template that had to be changed ...;-) ) -DePiep (talk) 23:54, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

I don't know, but I bet (s)he's the president of the Handsome Club. :þ VanIsaac_WS^contribs 00:22, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Template:Compact extended periodic table

I changed some of the shading at {{Compact extended periodic table}} and then noticed your edit summary. You said you made the shade lighter for predicted properties. However, the table itself says a lighter shade for "predicted [element]", and that's what I changed it to. Predicted properties is a good idea, but our charts are shaded per whether an element has been discovered or not. (Unless things have changed?) — kwami (talk) 20:23, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

My es linked to WP:ELEM, wich is where it was discussed. The outcome was as I edited: chemical properties. This I do not understand: However, the table itself says a lighter shade for "predicted [element]". The "table itself"? Anyway, these are bg colors for chemical properties, as the legend says. The bg color says "alkali metal", or "alkali metal (predicted)". That is what a legend does. It being an alkali metal is the prediction, and so for all others. There is no reference in this template on elements being discovered or not. I will revert, bc it was based on that talk. -DePiep (talk) 23:03, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Okay, I see how you would understand that if you read the table closely enough. A quick look, however, would suggest these are predicted elements.

Scandium and yttrium should be lanthanides, if we're going by chemical properties. And shouldn't (X-)actinides be merged with them as well? They aren't really a chemical group. — kwami (talk) 00:06, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

re scandium and yttrium: I cannot say anything about that. If there is a stable outcome, others at WP:ELEM talk will know. Some other elements are still in discussion likewise. I usually only check the outcome. Just keeping all these periodic tables synbchronised. -DePiep (talk) 00:12, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Rare earths include Sc and Y. Lanthanides don't. Double sharp (talk) 06:22, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Yes, actually, they do, at least in some classifications. Though since these are supposed to be chemical groups, not e-shells, 'rare earth' is the better term: is that ever used inclusive of actinides? — kwami (talk) 08:27, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

I've seen "radioactive rare earths" used for the actinides, though not in a very reliable source. Wikipedia states that "rare earths" doesn't include the actinides, anyway. But lanthanides still seems to be the more common term, at least within the context of chemistry. Double sharp (talk) 12:30, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Don't take them for bad

Hey DePiep... Just wanted to tell you the guys aren't that bad. They also think (seem to) be in favor of nice-looking things, but when it goes on the outside. In the inner zone... well, science men are so... their workplace may be trashed... but it's for the best for them as they know where's everything. They probably could organize into something like lettered archive... but it's easier for them to be trashed. You've said it right, they're used with it. It probably isn't the real best way, doesn't show the best of organization. But it's the way they like, they don't care. You are offering an innovation of which they don't see a point. Even if the idealized organization contains it. This is a workplace, and not a showcase anyway. (I'm holding a neutral point... I simply don't care about looks... It's not the point. It don't mean the thing should go trashed... I'm simply fine either way) Think both you and the others could be slightly more polite to the other side... To try at very least to look intellectually above the opponent. It's simply a piece of opinion. Let's just not discuss it...I only want your catfights to stop.

If you're feeling bad about it all... I will help you with an article if you want to write one. Just contact me. (Dunno what more I got to offer)

(A closer-to-your-specialization thing: Think that labelless atom images, if ever made, should also be sized properly (see lighter elements infoboxes, make too much free space). What do you think?)--R8R Gtrs (talk) 21:00, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for spending this time & thoughts & care & writings on this. I'll read this more closely later on. -DePiep (talk) 21:47, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

A funny and to the point description. Typically many of those at WP:ELEM show this behaviour! (I can make a mess too). Isn't it great then that the scientists, in their workplace organised this way, found the Higgins particle? There should be a Nobel for that too. I'll show more patience for them. -DePiep (talk) 09:40, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Re About these atom images. You mean: let's do File:Electron shell 006 Carbon - no label.svg, example in Template:Infobox carbon/sandbox. This no-label set is not complete yet. I've asked Niknaks to first make the eight higher ones (Z=118+) old style to get that series complete. To keep the fun in, I said there is no hurry. (Then Niknaks left, for a holiday maybe ;-) ). Afterwards we can make another complete series with the label removed (systematic, different filename).

Happy to hear that :)

Yeah. Exactly. I know it's not complete... Just don't want the size feature to be missing during new series creation--R8R Gtrs (talk) 23:02, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Isotopes index

I deleted it because it was a good example of R2. Mainspace titles should never redirect to userspace titles. Meanwhile, as I told Martin, I believed the mainspace title to be a good candidate for an article at some point, so I left the links in place per the first sentence of WP:REDDEAL. Your idea of taking care of them would have been at variance with the guideline, and because the page is now back at the original title, your idea would have meant either that my edits would need reversion or that the page would be orphaned. Nyttend (talk) 22:41, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

So...why are you unhappy with me because of my decision to delete the redirect per R2? I am completely uninvolved in the situation of the page itself and thus have no opinion of which namespace it should occupy; I only became involved because someone correctly tagged the mainspace-to-userspace redirect for R2 and I found it while going through CAT:CSD. The place for the page to occupy is a decision in which I will not participate; I was aware that the page had been moved around, so I deleted because it was plainly not vandalism and because the then-current state of the page warranted R2. I finally must ask — given the fact that the page has been returned to mainspace, and given the consequent lack of redlink status for the mainspace title, why does any of this matter? Nyttend (talk) 01:14, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

My apology — I thought you were an admin, and that's why I wasn't explaining more, since I figured you had looked at the deleted revisions. Here's everything for the two deleted revisions in the history of Index to isotope pages:

Extended content

(del/undel) (diff) 03:00, 2 August 2012 . . Matthewrbowker (talk | contribs | block) (108 bytes) (Requesting speedy deletion (CSD R2). (TW)) (del/undel) (diff) 20:13, 1 August 2012 . . Martijn Hoekstra (talk | contribs | block) (91 bytes) (Martijn Hoekstra moved page Index to isotope pages to User:Martijn Hoekstra/Index to isotope pages holding pen for double redirects: holding on to it for a bit to let the bot clear the redirects)

There are no deleted revisions in the history of User:Martijn Hoekstra/Index to isotope pages holding pen for double redirects or anywhere else. HOWEVER Please don't file an ANI or do anything else here yet, until I tell you that I'm done. The page history has gotten rather convoluted, and I need to delete and undelete pages to perform a history merge or merges; any links you give will become meaningless. I'll do this quickly and give you a fuller response as soon as I'm done. Nyttend (talk) 15:45, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Never mind; please go ahead with your filing. I misunderstood the situation, and now I realise that no history merges are needed. If I understand rightly, you moved the page from Article to Template, Martin moved Article to User (yes, he moved the redirect page! I'm not sure about the point of that), Matthewrbowker tagged Article for R2 speedy deletion, I deleted it, Double Sharp moved Template to Article, and finally AvicBot changed the double redirect at User from Template to Article. Finally, I'm slightly confused: you say that I don't see reason to revert my action. I dimly remember saying that, but I can't find where I said it, and now because of the current location of the page, there's really no way to revert, because the reversion has already been performed. Can you please point me to the diff for the "see no reason" comment? Nyttend (talk) 15:55, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

The only R3 attempt was the one you already linked: after you moved the page from Article to Template, an IP tagged Article for R3, but before any admins could come along to delete it or to restore it, Martin came along and moved Article to User and removed the speedy. Nyttend (talk) 15:58, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Actually, I think you're wrong in one spot: Martin never moved the content anywhere. Looks to me as if he only moved the redirect from one place to another. But yes, definitely begin with the RM. Nyttend (talk) 16:21, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Since you press me to respond: I disagree with your proposed move. Yes, it's not exactly a normal article, but it's no farther from being a normal article than are Gallery of sovereign-state flags or Periodic table (large version); you'll note that the latter page is actually featured, so having this type of page in mainspace has been well reviewed. Perhaps you could move it to "List of isotopes by element"? After all, a template is created so that you can insert the same code into lots of pages, but this page really isn't suited to being dropped into lots of pages. Also: Martin's edits didn't cause me to do anything to these pages; the only edits I made as a result of his message were all notes on his talk page explaining why I wasn't going to do anything. Nyttend (talk) 16:48, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

"Press" wasn't meant to sound hostile; I'm sorry. Nyttend (talk) 16:58, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

All fine today. Dust settled. -DePiep (talk) 20:34, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

question on cat

Hey,

So, what triggers Category:Language articles with unsupported infobox fields‎? Is it still being generated, that we should list it in the infobox doc? — kwami (talk) 18:37, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

(We could really use a tracking category for duplicate and unsupported fields. I have no idea how to do that. — kwami (talk) 20:35, 6 August 2012 (UTC))

Deletion will be fine. -DePiep (talk) 22:44, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

The code is in the bottom of the infobox. The construction is: {{#if:{{{param1|}}}{{param2|}}}| value when any input | value when no input at all }}. In this case: the returned value is the category adding, the 2nd return value (when not input at all) is empty. You can add another param to the list easily I'd say. Absolutely take care of the | pipe after the param-name (otherwise the if-logic acts different). Eg. Armeniamn is added to the cat because it has param protoname= used. Adding to the documentation? Can do, but it is more a sweeping template category, to be deleted or changed when the check is done. -DePiep (talk) 09:39, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

ANI on ANI

DePiep, To save you the trouble of reverting:

1. Yes, Robbie is being foolish (and others, evidently).
2. No, nobody is going to block Nytend.
3. Demanding 6 month blocks has pretty much guaranteed no one is going to take your complaint seriously. There was a way to have brought the subject up again, but you kind of spoiled that. I guarantee no one is going to act on it now. --Floquenbeam (talk) 00:50, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

You have a good understanding. 6 month block Nyttend was (a nonsense) to get attention. My primary question at ANI was more seriois. Problem is it was archived before closing. -DePiep (talk) 01:02, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

I would appreciate an explanation of why you continue to believe that I have done anything wrong here. I did my best to be patient with you, and all I get is a fake attempt to get someone to block me. Nyttend (talk) 02:02, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

It was a joke. Next time I should say 12 months to make it clear... Sorry Nyttend. -DePiep (talk) 03:41, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Your "never mind" comment at Penguin's Talk page has to be one of the best understatements of the year. Thanks for giving me a laugh.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:13, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Floq's talk

Forgive my intrusion, but what was the meaning of this edit changing the archive settings on User talk:Floquenbeam? Daniel (talk) 23:02, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

"95% retired"[3] and still this. Do you know him? -DePiep (talk) 23:11, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Don't really know him at all, was more just wondering why you were altering someone's archiving settings on their user talk page. Stood out as a very odd edit. Daniel (talk) 23:29, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

So. Then. How did he end up on my watchlist?[4] An admin who did not act when it was about something, and then only afterwards comes pushing me aroud. That is how F. is on my watchlist. And then retiring is lame. Lame. Now what are you defending? More lame than F. is such an admins "friend". Lame²-DePiep (talk) 23:46, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Daniel is an admin, and so is F. that says enough. Any admin will always cover an admin. Ordinary editors loose. Forget arguments. -DePiep (talk) 23:57, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

• Reverting Bishonen was not OK (no diff?). I have blocked you for six hours, because I am covering for my admin buddy Floquenbeam(self confirmed arrogance) it is not any of your business whether Floquenbeam chooses to reply, ignore, or auto-archive your posts while he or she is on vacation (neither yours, no reason to intervene). See WP:GAB if you wish to appeal. NWTalk 00:13, 19 August 2012 (UTC) -(edit conflict) my re, -DePiep (talk) 00:46, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

DePiep (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

a. "Reverting Bishonen" How or when? - not diff provided. b. "because I am covering..." - prejudice, personal opinion. Abuse of admin power. The fact that NW writes & strokes themselves is arrogance. c. "it is not any of your business..." - no reason for blocking except for personal opinion. The blocking admin shows personal emotional involvement and is prejudiced. Not even a diff. -DePiep (talk) 00:36, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Decline reason:

This is where you reverted Bishonen. NuclearWarfare's strikeout was pretty clearly in jest, so you can put your mind at ease - he didn't actually mean he was conspiring with Floqenbeam against you. At any rate, you appear to have been disrupting someone else's talk page to make some sort of point that escapes me, and this unblock request doesn't make me think you're inclined to stop doing so. Please use any future unblock requests to address your own behavior and how you intend to avoid problematic behavior such as what you were blocked for. A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 00:43, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

NW's jest was in his blocking mode, so not a jest at all (a preconceived attitude it was). NW was prejudiced beforehand. The diff, not provided by NW (does say something innit) was minor. Of course, an admin "joking" he is saving an admin (while actually saving an admin) is in low behaviour. -DePiep (talk) 01:03, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

DePiep (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

If I were an admin, I wouldn't have been blocked in the first place. Criticizing an editor is no reason for blocking. -DePiep (talk) 01:13, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Step back, take a few hours off, have a tea. Adding edits in the middle of someone else's comment, messing with the archives of another editor's talk page....come on. You've been here long enough to know these aren't acceptable things and acting out about it isn't making your case stronger. You are a better editor (and person) than this. You haven't addressed the reason for the block, so I don't have a choice but to decline as a matter of procedure here. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 01:16, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.