User talk:Docu: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
→Timestamps?: ok, but the question still stands... |
||
| Line 33: | Line 33: | ||
As with the editor above, I was wondering why you don't at least timestamp your signature? It helps others keep track of the flow of a thread. For example, in the RfD which I re-opened at your request, I didn't realize that the other editors hadn't had time to respond, because there was no timestamp on your comment. Is there a specific reason you object to the timestamp?--[[User:Aervanath|Aervanath]] ([[User talk:Aervanath|talk]]) 17:20, 3 April 2009 (UTC) |
As with the editor above, I was wondering why you don't at least timestamp your signature? It helps others keep track of the flow of a thread. For example, in the RfD which I re-opened at your request, I didn't realize that the other editors hadn't had time to respond, because there was no timestamp on your comment. Is there a specific reason you object to the timestamp?--[[User:Aervanath|Aervanath]] ([[User talk:Aervanath|talk]]) 17:20, 3 April 2009 (UTC) |
||
:I agree I should have timestamped that comment. Please excuse that you had to go through re-opening the request. -- User:Docu |
:I agree I should have timestamped that comment. Please excuse that you had to go through re-opening the request. -- User:Docu |
||
::I'm not that steamed about that in particular, but I would like to hear your reasons for not timestamping as a matter of course.--[[User:Aervanath|Aervanath]] ([[User talk:Aervanath|talk]]) 07:41, 4 April 2009 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 07:41, 4 April 2009
- Hello there, welcome to the 'pedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you ever need editing help visit Wikipedia:How does one edit a page and experiment at Wikipedia:Sandbox. If you need pointers on how we title pages visit Wikipedia:Naming conventions or how to format them visit our manual of style. If you have any other questions about the project then check out Wikipedia:Help or add a question to the Village pump. Cheers! --maveric149
- For more talk, see page history.
- For bot related questions, see User talk:D6.
WikiProject Check Wikipedia
Hi, I've a little request regarding error 25 "Headline hierarchy". I've found this: Organizing a page using headings on the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 (11 December 2008). Can you add it, with an explanation, to the description of the error on the project translation page? Also, I usually call a headline with "==" a "level 2" headline, matching the HTML "h2"; I think it should be explained better. Thanks. --Red Power (talk) 15:32, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
- "Be bold", you should be able to edit the description page. It's at Wikipedia:WikiProject Check Wikipedia/Translation. -- User:Docu
Signing posts
Hey, Please sign using ~~~~ - It then gives a proper link to your page, and a datetime stamp.
—Reedy 20:55, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
- I'm glad you found it anyways. -- User:Docu
- See Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive477#User:Docu.27s_signature. I don't think that the suggested RFC was ever opened. –xeno (talk) 17:38, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
Can you help us with WP:WikiProject Check Wikipedia? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Docu (talk • contribs) 17:41, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
- Sure, I can see if I can lend a hand. –xeno (talk) 17:48, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
- That would be nice. I'm trying to sort out what can be done by bot/AWB (at least its default settings) and what not, see Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Check_Wikipedia#Errors_suitable_to_be_fixed_with_AWB. If you want, you could also run a bot/AWB through one of the lists. BTW longer lists are available on toolserver. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Docu (talk • contribs) 17:58, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
- The problem with using AWB is that a good number of these fixes have no visible effect to the reader, and thus AWB is not supposed to be used (counts as an "insignificant edit"). –xeno (talk) 18:04, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
- I agree. See my note on the projects talk page. The question is: do we want to fix them and if yes, how. It's probably better discussed there though. -- User:Docu
- The problem with using AWB is that a good number of these fixes have no visible effect to the reader, and thus AWB is not supposed to be used (counts as an "insignificant edit"). –xeno (talk) 18:04, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
- That would be nice. I'm trying to sort out what can be done by bot/AWB (at least its default settings) and what not, see Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Check_Wikipedia#Errors_suitable_to_be_fixed_with_AWB. If you want, you could also run a bot/AWB through one of the lists. BTW longer lists are available on toolserver. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Docu (talk • contribs) 17:58, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
Timestamps?
As with the editor above, I was wondering why you don't at least timestamp your signature? It helps others keep track of the flow of a thread. For example, in the RfD which I re-opened at your request, I didn't realize that the other editors hadn't had time to respond, because there was no timestamp on your comment. Is there a specific reason you object to the timestamp?--Aervanath (talk) 17:20, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
- I agree I should have timestamped that comment. Please excuse that you had to go through re-opening the request. -- User:Docu
- I'm not that steamed about that in particular, but I would like to hear your reasons for not timestamping as a matter of course.--Aervanath (talk) 07:41, 4 April 2009 (UTC)