User talk:Jehochman: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 11:36, 8 January 2013

Welcome to Jehochman's Talk Page
Please feel free to put your feet on the coffee table, and speak candidly. Or for more better relaxation, stretch yourself luxuriously on the chaise longue in Bishzilla's Victorian parlour and mumble incoherently.

Template:UserTalkArchiveBox

Wikipedia Goes to the Movies in NYC this Saturday Dec 1

You are invited to Wikipedia Goes to the Movies in NYC, an editathon, Wikipedia meet-up and workshops focused on film and the performing arts that will be held on Saturday, December 1, 2012, at the New York Public Library for the Performing Arts (at Lincoln Center), as part of the Wikipedia Loves Libraries events being held across the USA.

All are welcome, sign up on the wiki and at meetup.com!--Pharos (talk) 07:20, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Can you enlighten me?

While investigating some issues with Konrad Henlein I have looked at the page history and came across this. So what is the story? Nothing that is in the visible contrib history gives me any hint. Richiez (talk) 23:02, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The offensive contribution was deleted. It won't show up in the public contributions. Any administrator can review the matter. I do not think it involved the article you are working on in any way. Jehochman ^Talk 03:44, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Was there a discussion anywhwere? I am not happy to see walls of secrecy at every corner. Richiez (talk) 10:51, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry that you are unhappy. If the editor themselves want to question the matter, they can raise it through the normal channels. I'm not going to undelete the offensive content to satisfy your curious pleasure. Jehochman ^Talk 01:22, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

RFC/User

Because you are an editor who has participated in previous discussions on the same topic (or a closely related one), I call your attention to discussion at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Rhode Island Red.2. Sincerely, GeorgeLouis (talk) 16:44, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Happy holidays!

	Happy Holidays!
	From the frozen wasteland of Nebraska, USA! MONGO 12:15, 25 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Mongo. Best wishes to you and any talk page lurkers. Jehochman ^Talk 02:29, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Day Celebration and Mini-Conference in NYC Saturday Feb 23

You are invited to celebrate Wikipedia Day and the 12th anniversary (!) of the founding of the site at Wikipedia Day NYC on Saturday February 23, 2013 at New York University; sign up for Wikipedia Day NYC here, or at bit.ly/wikidaynyu. Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues!

We especially encourage folks to add your 5-minute lightning talks to our roster, and otherwise join in the "open space" experience!--Pharos (talk) 02:22, 2 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Angled brackets

No way you would have reasonably known, but the angled brackets are due to this discussion. Carcharoth (talk) 08:27, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Angled brackets are for HTML code. There is something very unholy about using them that way. Jehochman ^Talk 08:30, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There is a technical explanation for that. Someone might post it. It went right over my head. Carcharoth (talk) 08:32, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

MediaWiki automatically encodes angle brackets when they are in a heading. Jehochman ^Talk 08:44, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Could you either do the brackets all one way or the other? Using them inconsistenly is sort of an invitation for somebody to come along and make them all be one way or the other, and there's at least a 50/50 chance the interloper will choose the wrong version. Jehochman ^Talk 08:47, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The two older requests are due to be archived really soon, which is why I didn't bother asking a clerk to change them.

The reason for using those is that MediaWiki automatically removes everything between < and > in the heading when it generates the automatic edit summary (it treats all of them as if they were HTML tags); this keeps the tally out of the automatic edit summary and made it possible to have them all direct to the correct section through a single {{anchor}}. T. Canens (talk) 11:36, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Revision as of 08:47, 8 January 2013 edit Jehochman (talk \| contribs) Extended confirmed users, Page movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers 46,197 edits →‎Angled brackets: request ← Previous edit		Revision as of 11:36, 8 January 2013 edit undo T. Canens (talk \| contribs) Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers 2,585 edits →‎Angled brackets: re Next edit →
Line 64:		Line 64:

	: Could you either do the brackets all one way or the other? Using them inconsistenly is sort of an invitation for somebody to come along and make them all be one way or the other, and there's at least a 50/50 chance the interloper will choose the wrong version. [[User:Jehochman\|Jehochman]] <sup>[[User talk:Jehochman\|Talk]]</sup> 08:47, 8 January 2013 (UTC)		: Could you either do the brackets all one way or the other? Using them inconsistenly is sort of an invitation for somebody to come along and make them all be one way or the other, and there's at least a 50/50 chance the interloper will choose the wrong version. [[User:Jehochman\|Jehochman]] <sup>[[User talk:Jehochman\|Talk]]</sup> 08:47, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
			::The two older requests are due to be archived really soon, which is why I didn't bother asking a clerk to change them.<p>The reason for using those is that MediaWiki automatically removes everything between < and > in the heading when it generates the automatic edit summary (it treats all of them as if they were HTML tags); this keeps the tally out of the automatic edit summary and made it possible to have them all direct to the correct section through a single {{tl\|anchor}}. [[User:T. Canens\|T. Canens]] ([[User talk:T. Canens\|talk]]) 11:36, 8 January 2013 (UTC)