User talk:Technical 13

This user has opted out of talkbacks

General

Journal

Bugzilla

Sand Box

Drafts

.JS

Templates

UBX

Logs

Shiny

Talk

TB

2011	2012	2013	2014	2015	2016
Jan - Mar Apr - June July - Sept Oct - Dec
Live Talk Page

TOC:   ↓ Go to bottom ↓     ↑ Go to top ↑

RfA candidate S O N S% Ending (UTC) Time left Dups? Report Asilvering 245 1 0 100 09:15, 6 September 2024 0 days, 2 hours no report RfB candidate S O N S% Ending (UTC) Time left Dups? Report Last updated by cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online at 06:15, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Retired

This user is no longer active on Wikipedia.

Talkback from Davykamanzi

Hello, Technical 13. You have new messages at Template talk:Infobox3cols.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Davykamanzi → talk • contribs • alter ego 11:07, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

Responding to protected edit requests

Hi, I've noticed several times in the past that when responding to protected edit requests, you are causing damage to other content on the page. This seems to be still occurring; the latest instance that I have noticed is this post from earlier today. Such damage often occurs in an entirely different thread, which suggests to me that you are editing the whole page, instead of the relevant section. Therefore, in future, please would you: (i) edit only the section that you are posing to, and not the whole page; (ii) use the "Show changes" button before saving, to make sure that you are not changing something else. --Redrose64 (talk) 16:05, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

• As I understand it Rose, it is a parsoid bug that is reflected in Jackmcbarn's User:Jackmcbarn/editProtectedHelper script. I catch it "most" of the time, but do occasionally miss one especially if it was way up or down the screen as when the page reloads after the fix, it takes me back to near where the edit request was, the top of the page, or the next edit request if there are more on the page. On long pages, it is easy to miss this issue. The only way to really fix it is to get the developers to fix parsoid. In the mean time, I thank you and appreciate any fixes to such issues that you catch I may have missed. Jack, do you think that the script could load a "last change" in a new tab until parsoid is fixed to make it harder to miss these? — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(t • e • c)} 19:28, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

If it's a script, then as with other user scripts such as WP:AWB, you are responsible for all edits made using the script. If the script is buggy (which it appears to be), either get it fixed or stop using it. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:31, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

• @Redrose64: The actual cause of these are a few minor bugs in mw:extension:Parsoid, the same thing that powers VisualEditor. As I see these bugs, I've been reporting them, but there's really nothing else that we can do about them. (After all, we don't have a rule against using VisualEditor, even though it has the same glitches as well.) Jackmcbarn (talk) 19:34, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
• It's not the script that is buggy, it is the MediaWiki software. So, it's nothing like AWB (which isn't a script, it's an independent program). Like I said, there isn't much that can be done until the developers decide to fix the MediaWiki software, and I don't expect them to get rid of parsoid or VisualEditor because of these bugs. — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(t • e • c)} 19:41, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

Same goes. If VE screws up the page you're working on, don't use VE. I don't. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:05, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

• Rose, it's MediaWiki that's screwing up, and if you expect everyone to quit using it, nothing will get done at all because that's all of Wikipedia. That seems a bit silly to me... Anyways, hopefully the developers will get MediaWiki and Parsoid fixed soon. — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(t • e • c)} 22:57, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

If the problem lies with parsoid, why do you think that MediaWiki is broken? They are not the same. How can you be sure that the bug isn't in your script? I don't see anything else screwing up pages in this manner. If it was a fault with MediaWiki, as you seem to be saying, I would expect the problem to be much more extensive; and I would expect that edits made by myself would exhibit the same problem - but AFAICT, they don't. Every single edit that I have ever made has gone through MediaWiki, so can you find one - any one - which has screwed up the page in the manner as your script?

And as I have explained before, talk page indenting is done with colons, not asterisks/bullets. See for example Help:Using talk pages (where asterisks/bullets are not mentioned at all); Wikipedia:Indentation (which only once mentions bullets, and doesn't say that they should be used for indenting); and Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines (which mentions bullets three times). Regarding this last, the three mentions are: once to show that the removal of bullets from discussions that are not consensus polls or requests for comment (RfC) is permitted; once to show that blank lines should not be used between lines within an indented or bulleted list; and once to show that colons are used for indentation, not bullet points, except in deletion discussions. None of these advocate the use of bullets for regular talk page indenting. --Redrose64 (talk) 09:49, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

• Parsoid is a MediaWiki extension, written by MediaWiki developers as part of the MediaWiki product. Therefor, it is a component of MediaWiki and if it is broken, MediaWiki is broken. It's like spokes of a wheel, if a spoke is broken, then the whole wheel is broken. It's not my script, so for details of how it is known to be a mw:extension:Parsoid issue instead of an EPH issue, you will have to ask Jack.
• As I have said before, WP:INTERSPERSE requires clear indentation, and using colons is unclear as all of the posts at the same level aren't distinguishable from each other. Also, it is not necessary to bring talk pages to publishing standards, so there is no need to correct typing/spelling errors, grammar, etc. It tends to irritate the users whose comments you are correcting. Finally, cautiously editing or removing another editor's comments is sometimes allowed, but normally you should stop if there is any objection. I've objected many times to you editing my comments, as such, you should stop because you know that TPO isn't an excuse to ignore my request for you to stop changing my bullet indenting to whitespace indenting on my own talk page. — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(t • e • c)} 13:52, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

You're still doing it. Please stop. --Redrose64 (talk) 14:48, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

This week's article for improvement (week 21, 2014)

The Battle of Varoux, part of the French Revolutionary Wars Hello, Technical 13. The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection: French Revolutionary Wars Previous selections: Forests of Australia • Travel documentary Get involved with the TAFI project! You can... Nominate an article Review nominations Have your say in future selections Posted by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of EuroCarGT (talk) 00:37, 19 May 2014 (UTC) •

Notification of a June AfC BackLog Drive

Hello Technical 13:

WikiProject Articles for creation is holding a month long Backlog Elimination Drive!
The goal of this drive is to eliminate the backlog of unreviewed articles. The drive is running from June 1, 2014 to June 30, 2014.

Awards will be given out for all reviewers participating in the drive in the form of barnstars at the end of the drive.
There is a backlog of over 1700 articles, so start reviewing articles! Visit the drive's page and help out!

The AfC helper script can assist you in tallying your edits automatically. To view a full list of changes, visit the changelog. Please report bugs and feature requests there, too! Thanks. Sent on behalf of (t) Josve05a (c) by {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(t • e • c)} using the MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:46, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

You sent the above mail to yourself... he he :D

Btw please let me know if you have anything else to send, my MMS extension is waiting :) Jim Carter ^(talk) 15:58, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

• Yes Jim, I happened to also be on that mailing list. Your MMS extension? — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(t • e • c)} 16:07, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

I mean, I have used my MassMessage rights only for three times till now. I want to use it more so if you have any more mailings please let me know I want to make use of my flag and send some mails :) Jim Carter ^(talk) 16:30, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

• I understand Jim. The best way to do that is to watch the talk page where requests for mailings are made. :) This request might have been a little tricky because the mailing list wasn't where the requester thought it was and required the template they wanted to use to send the message to be modified to accept a new parameter. But, if you watch that page, I'm sure you'll see some requests that you can fulfill. :) — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(t • e • c)} 16:34, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

Titodutta did you mean Who have... actually this user right generally given if you have grandfathered Edwardbot which is now replaced by this right. By this right one can send out messages to multiple users by a mailing list. You can also get this tools if you are coordinating a meetup or a WikiProject which sends newsletters and backlog drive notifications etc. I have coordinated WP:ORPHAN that is why I got this tool. Technical 13 thanks for the suggestion WT:MMS is now on my watchlist. Jim Carter ^(talk) 17:12, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

ACC:121747

Maybe that should of been a password reset ? Mlpearc (open channel) 20:59, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

• I considered that, Mlpearc, but based on the comment, I got the idea that wasn't the case. — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(t • e • c)} 00:27, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Tim Huelskamp

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Tim Huelskamp. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:12, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

IRC Bot

Hi T13,

Long time no see! How've you been? Yesterday, I got auto-Klined from freenode, as my IRC bot was spamming. I have sent them an email regarding the Kline, yet I have not received a reply yet. Now, the bot doesn't work at all. It is coded in Python. Would you be able to help me? If so, do you have Skype or something so that we can communicate (via messaging, not necessarily calling)? --JustBerry (talk) 20:38, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

• I know nothing about python just yet but I'm led to believe that Theopolisme, Hasteur, Legoktm, Cyberpower678 and ∑ might. — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(t • e • c)} 22:12, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

JustBerry, can you post the source code on GitHub or another code hosting platform so perhaps one of us can take a look? Theopolisme (talk) 22:20, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

Respect edit request

The Reliable Source IS the CURRENT source. Iliekinfo (talk) 23:26, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/MWML concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/MWML, a page you created, has not been edited in 6 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 17:28, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

YGM

Hello, Technical 13. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

This week's article for improvement (week 22, 2014)

Roger Ebert, well known for his contributions to film criticism. Hello, Technical 13. The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection: Film criticism Previous selections: French Revolutionary Wars • Forests of Australia Get involved with the TAFI project! You can... Nominate an article Review nominations Have your say in future selections Posted by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of EuroCarGT (talk) 00:04, 26 May 2014 (UTC) •

A barnstar for you!

	The Technical Barnstar
	For once again helping me in issues where I was far out of my depth. Thank you! Best, Matty.007 15:31, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

Your Teahouse photo

There is a red link instead of a photo, when your name is shown as one of the Teahouse hosts.— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 17:38, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

• That is because an image that should have been PD was deleted as non-free from commons. I don't personally care to fix it at the moment, but if you find a new image that you think I might like that suits my personality, feel free to change it. Thanks. — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 18:24, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

I don't know what you would like.— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 18:38, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

Dead

Am gone, I mean am dead! Adminstrators are going to eat me now... :'( Jim Carter ^(talk) 13:44, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

• Pfft, Jim, this is only Wikipedia. You'll be fine. I don't expect a block, although your mass message sender userright may be taken from you. Then again, there is a lot of discussion and there is enough disagreement about whether what you did was right or wrong that I'm not sure that will happen either. Just keep your chin up.  :) — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 14:27, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Technical 13, your comment was really encouraging; I hope they don't drop a block bomb at me. I'm really afraid O.o Jim Carter ^(talk) 14:42, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

• Okay Jim, since I feel the worst part of such things is the suspense, I've opened a new section to the discussion and supported that you just be reprimanded and limited (kind of like an inverted topic ban) to just WP:ORPHAN retention mass mailings. This should be a fairly quick decision by most, and I think you will be fine. Feel free to !vote yourself, and although I understand it will be difficult, try to keep your comment short and to the point. — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 15:26, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Someone closed the discussion???? :'( Jim Carter ^(talk) 15:48, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

• That's fine. The discussion was opened, and it was apparently decided nothing should be done. I wouldn't worry about it. — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 16:25, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Ooouuhh... At last I'm not dead. The credit goes to you. Infinite thanks. And how about adding your opinion on the proposal since I haven't added your name in the list. :P

I also promise to only use this right for the WikiProject Orphanage purpose only. Thank you again now am feeling good.  :) Jim Carter ^(talk) 19:07, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

RfA Proposal

Hello Technical 13, I would like to formally ask you: would you like an RfA? --JustBerry (talk) 22:57, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

• It's been suggested to me before JustBerry and I quite honestly do not have the time to go through an RfA and I'm not interested in accomplishing any of the page creation and page editing and AfD requirements anyways. I am also somewhat ill (extreme stress, depression, and anxiety about my fairly recent divorce, keeping up with school, and the well being of my daughter) so for now I wouldn't make a good candidate anyways. My only goals here at the moment are to try and escape some of the anxiety and work on technical aspects of the wiki in doing so (templates, JavaScripts, PHP on the backend maybe). I appreciate your offer however and the reason that I reverted your removal of the proposal is that you are not the first to offer (I've actually had other administrators offer to nominate me) and I think it will be good to leave this hear to prevent the next person from asking. Eventually this will be archived and perhaps by then I'll be a little more mentally capable of going through the process. Be well! — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 23:38, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

This week's article for improvement (week 23, 2014)

The Amazon Basin, pictured in yellow, holds the largest rainforest in the world. Hello, Technical 13. The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection: Amazon Basin Previous selections: Film criticism • French Revolutionary Wars Get involved with the TAFI project! You can... Nominate an article Review nominations Have your say in future selections Posted by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of EuroCarGT (talk) 00:03, 2 June 2014 (UTC) •

Discussion at Template talk:3D software#Classification added on 2 June 2014

You are invited to join the discussion at Template talk:3D software#Classification added on 2 June 2014. Thanks. Codename Lisa (talk) 11:23, 2 June 2014 (UTC)Template:Z48

I just made these...

Hi.

I just finished making these:

Hopefully, they will cover up your userbox losses, caused by recent killings in Commons. Some admin just deleted the 2002 logos in spite of the DR for the file having ended as kept.

Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 18:22, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

What browser?

What browser (and version) is this from? Jackmcbarn (talk) 00:31, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

• The latest Firefox (29 I think). Jackmcbarn. It may have something to do with I have the preference checked to disable forced https and use http. This can probably best be fixed by using relative protocols or detecting if the current page url is http or https. — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 00:57, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

I already do that. Jackmcbarn (talk) 00:58, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

I'm having trouble

Hey friend, I'm having a trouble. I want to add something in the script used by Page curation. I frequently use Page curation to review pages. And honestly I always use Page curation to request articles for CSD. But I often face a problem to keep track of those article. (I sometime have 100 edits per day) And I have 1800 articles on my watchlist. So, I can't track if the article is deleted or the deletion tag has been removed by the author. So I want to add some code to the MediaWiki script so that it can create a subpage similar to User:Jim Cartar/CSD log created by TW. And it will update whenever Page curation is used to add a CSD tag. How is my idea? I think it will also help other users to keep a record. Jim Carter ^(talk) 16:13, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

I'm asking you because I know you are an expert of Js related discussion. Jim Carter ^(talk) 16:16, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

• I know nothing of how page curation works really. Have you tried bringing up this idea on the talk page for page curation? I'm sure one of the developers would be happy to add it as an option? I like having the log too, and I do a lot of AfC stuff, so I talked to the developers of the AFCH and now it will log CSDs to the same page Twinkle uses (to keep them all in the same place and make it easier to track). If you need specific help in proposing the idea, just point me to the talk page for page curation (and or the talk page of the script they use) and I'd be happy to propose it. — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 16:33, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

I have started a thread here you can add something if you like to. BTW I think you are also a AFCH developer? Jim Carter ^(talk) 18:24, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Brilliant Idea Barnstar
	This is both two fold, for your original idea at RFPP (ahem, second paragraph), and your novel compromise, which think is is quite reasonable. Best of luck with the RfC, I will be watching from the sidelines. kelapstick(bainuu) 17:29, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Request Edit templates

Hey I noticed you were tinkering with the Request Edit template and was wondering if you could help with something User:Sphilbrick has been looking for a technical person for. Basically if you see the Fake Examples section here we need someone to work their magic to make it work.

I think it's the only thing needed before moving it live. CorporateM (Talk) 02:40, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

• Ping Sphilbrick and CorporateM. I'm going to need more details here... Make what work exactly, and what is the definition of "work". — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 02:46, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) It sounds like they want a script to make a list of all recent closes of COI edit requests, the same way AFCH makes a list of all recent article accepts. Jackmcbarn (talk) 02:48, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

• Well, if that's the case, then the need an EditCOIHelper that can log for them... :p You want that job since it should be a fairly simple adaptation of you EPH, Jack? — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 02:53, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Sure. Jackmcbarn (talk) 02:55, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Yuppers. We have all these categories for closed Request Edits[1][2][3][4], but with no way to sort them by date to see the recent ones or to see who is closing them, etc. It's sort of a black box system where nobody can see what's going on. The volume is much smaller than AfC or NPP, so the system is not well-developed yet. Volume is growing quickly, so we need something a bit more scalable. CorporateM (Talk) 03:07, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

At the recent Wikiconference USA, we had a meeting to talk about how to move forward. One aspect is finding a better way to keep track of what we are doing. User:CorporateM is using the AFC templates as a model for a project page, so it seems natural to recycle some of the tools used there for COI Request Edits. However,User:NativeForeigner also suggested that the table at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations might also be useful. Obviously, not all fields, but if there were a way to generate a table like that, identifying items such as:

• Location of request
• Name of editor making the request
• Time of original request
• Name of editor most recently working on servicing the request
• Time of most recent edits related to the request
• Interim resolution (not yet touched, open)
• Final resolution (fully implemented, partially implemented, declined, with reason)
• Time of final resolution
• Elapsed time between initial request and final resolution (or current time, if not final)

The table would have all recent items, with items closed over 90 days moved to an archive list.

The above is just off the top of my head, we are likely to identify additional information needed, but this should give you a flavor of what I was hoping to accomplish. I do not have strong feelings on whether the AfC or SPI model is the best starting point, just wanted to make sure it was considered.--S Philbrick(Talk) 12:54, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

• Okay, I think I'm starting to understand Sphilbrick, what you need is a bot like AnomieBOT or EarwigBot To check certain categories and build you a response table kind of like what already exists on User:AnomieBOT/EDITREQTable or more like Template:AFC statistics? — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 13:02, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Yes, something like the AfC Statistics seems fine. At some time, it may be useful to analyze some metrics - average length of time from request to resolution, counts of how many are implemented fully, versus partial, versus rejected, etc. I mention this in case it affects how it should be structured. --S Philbrick(Talk) 13:26, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Just to be clear, the existing AnomieBOT/EDITREQTable has some shortcomings. It doesn't identify who takes up requests, and once an item is handled, it disappears from the table. I don't want items to last in the table forever, but I would like old ones to be archived, so they can be viewed.--S Philbrick(Talk) 14:00, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

• I've tried asking Anomie about that, and iirc (my memory is horrible), he said he didn't know how to go about making it accurate information without developing a whole new system and he just didn't have time for that kind of project. All of his source code for that bot is available from the bot's userspace and if someone was to develop the rest of the system, I'm sure he would consider edit requests for the bot to be more efficient. — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 14:03, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

• Hmm, I'll check the code. NativeForeigner ^Talk 20:16, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

A Barnstar for you!

		The Computing Star
		For your all your awesome help here and here. --UserJDalek 04:38, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Merging drafts from AfC

Thank you for your comment at WikiProject Ireland. My problem is a technical one. Can draft articles at AfC be merged into other articles in exactly the same way as articles in mainspace? I don't know the technicalities of AfC and I don't want to "break" anything. I suggested to FoCuSandLeArN that he should go ahead and create the article, and then we can go through the normal merge process, but he seems reluctant to do that. Scolaire (talk) 09:08, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

• Yes, but it is probably going to require an administrator to do a proper WP:HISTMERGE and with it being four pages as such, it will likely be a complicated one, and administrators willing to do complicated histmerges can be hard to find. You can try posting it in the Wikipedia:Cut-and-paste-move repair holding pen, noting that it may get declined because there are slightly parallel histories, but you should not in the request that you are requesting this before any text-merging is done to make sure that you avoid any problems. I don't know a lot about history merging, it's not something that is done on the other wikis I'm an administrator at. — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 12:25, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Exists template

Regarding your curt edit summary: (a) You broke the template. Unintentionally, of course, but it was broken, and it's in use in hundreds if not thousands of other pages. (b) I am not an expert on the template or how to code it, nor did I have time at the moment to look into it. I just knew that it was broken, and I reverted it to a version that, for my test, worked. It may not have worked for the cases that you were attempting to fix it for, but it worked for cases that your version didn't work for. (c) I could have just contacted you ... but how would I have known whether you were still online, or when you would be next? It needed attention now and I took care of it as best I could for the moment. —Largo Plazo (talk) 14:30, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

• You misunderstood what I was saying. You knew that "Talk:Tony Hawk's Whatever" was a pagename, and you could see it was previously "{{{page|{{{1}}}}}}" and all you had to do was replace one for the other... I'm taking care of it now. Thanks for letting me know. Happy editing. :) I do believe it is fixed now.. — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 14:49, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

• OK, I get it. But macros are very delicate, especially when there are constructs like 12 consecutive right braces; and I really couldn't be sure that that's all there would have been to it anyway. I wasn't going to take the chance! Thanks. —Largo Plazo (talk) 15:02, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Please don't...

...hide the content of Bonkers's user page. It has survived MfD twice, so there's no consensus that it needs to be removed (or rather a consensus that it need not be removed), and doing it without a supporting consensus, and without a request from Bonkers himself, just seems like rubbing salt in the wound to me. I don't think it's necessary. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 22:39, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

• Writ Keeper, I see multiple requests on his talk page for it to be blanked and no opposition, this looks like a consensus to me. I still intend on fixing the coding on the page so it "can" be done, and am wondering if maybe just hiding it from unconfirmed editors would be okay with you (this should block random IPs and search indexers that don't follow robots.txt). — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 22:42, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
  • No, it's not all right by me (though I don't have any kind of final say about it, of course). It's his user page; I know he doesn't own it, but users have wide discretion on their own user page, and we shouldn't circumvent it without reason. The correct place to go to if people don't like that is MfD, and as I mentioned, the page has already survived two of those. If people want to try it again, they can file another MfD, but until then, I don't see the value of blanking their user page, even if it's only for non-admins. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 22:47, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
    • That's fine. I'll just fix the broken and missing code then. — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 23:17, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Final Appeal

Please stop being obstinate. Per Wikipedia:Template_editors#Criteria_for_revocation I have grounds to believe that you have fallen astray of multiple of the conditions for revocation (including a pattern of performing obviously controversial edits to protected templates without first determining consensus, used the permission to gain the upper hand in disputes, and performed any blatant vandalism). I therefore ask you to do the right thing and revert your controversial implementation. If I do not get satisfaction I will have no other option but to appeal to the appropriate venue (WP:ANI per Wikipedia:RFPERM). I would prefer not to do this as it would be a blunt club to deal with a issue and put a permanant stain on your template editing privileges, but your continued misrepresentation of consensus is not acceptable. Hasteur (talk) 21:33, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

@Hasteur: if you believe there is a pattern of misuse (and not just a few bad calls) then the best course of action would be WP:RFC/U. If, at the conclusion, there is firm consensus that some advanced privileges should not be held by this editor, this can be enacted. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:05, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Thank you

A quick sincere thank you for unlocking Adverse Childhood Experiences (study). FeatherPluma (talk) 01:01, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Archiving of Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)

Why did you manually archive these four threads? None of them were particularly old (one of them was last commented on yesterday); ClueBot III (talk · contribs) would have handled them eventually. It would also have put them into the current archive, and not an old one, which was last used for archiving in November 2013. --Redrose64 (talk) 09:56, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

They all appeared to be marked as resolved, and they were last commented on 6, 5, 4, & 4 days ago based on the last post. "Something" needed archiving because I was hitting some kind of page length limit that was preventing me from scrolling down to the bottom of the page on my mobile in desktop mode. I'd never had that problem before and archiving those sections fixed it. As far as where it got archived to goes, that should be looked into in more depth because Equazicon's archiver uses whatever the regular bot would be using based on the configuration on the page. Sounds like cluebot isn't updating the page counter like it should be. — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 13:36, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Once again you're blaming the system for errors that you made. Check your edits before saving. I have moved the threads to the proper archive - I would have undone your edits, because (despite what you put above), none of those threads were marked {{resolved}}, but subsequent edits to the page mean that "undo" is not possible. --Redrose64 (talk) 14:41, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

• Once again, you are telling me that I need to check my edits before saving when using a fully automated editing tool where checking my edits is impossible as there is no edit window. The final post in most of the threads is the original poster saying "thank you for your responses" which strongly implies that it is resolved. However, thanks for bringing it to my attention that cluebot isn't preforming all of its duties if it is not updating the count for the archive page number. I'm digging into that now. — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 17:19, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

CB3 never has and never does update the archive counter on the source page. That is how it was designed. It is not a failure of CB3 not "preforming all of its duties". The problem is that One Click Archiver (OCA) was designed specifically to function only with the MizaBot/lowercase sigmabot III style of bots using only numbered archives (lcSB3 does update the counter when moving to a new numbered archive). OCA was not intended for any other use, except for when a manually updated additional template was placed on the page to give it a counter reference. The real issue is that One Click Archiver is a script which works in a very limited subset of situations, but was released for public use without making it clear that it does not function properly under a large number of situations. Even if that issue had been made clear, I still disagree that it was appropriate to release it for public use with its current limitations. The current limitations are guaranteed to be encountered by most of the people attempting to use it and are guaranteed to cause issues when it is used in that manner. — Makyen (talk) 03:33, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

• By me removing the commented out and dead MB/LCSBIII config at the top of the page, no-one should be able to use OCA on that page anymore. Issue resolved itself by removing the unused and expired code from the target page. — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 03:40, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I had just looked at your changes on the VPT page and was making a similar statement that the changes should result in OCA failing on the page when I found there was an edit conflict. I agree that this is an acceptable solution as indicating failure to the user is better than archiving to the wrong page without informing the user.

The only other significant thing I was saying in that now non-existant edit is that OCA really should be re-designed to properly parse both CB3 and lcSB3 (MizsaBot) configs and handle date based archives in addition to just numbered lcSB3 archive schemes. — Makyen (talk) 03:58, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 7 June 2014

A purely procedural note, but I don't feel it was appropriate for you to close that edit request. The nature of the request was a disagreement that Hasteur had with an edit you made. That makes you involved (in a non-admin sense) and therefore, in the eyes of much the Wikipedia community, poorly placed to rule on matters of consensus or to use advanced permissions impartially. I'm not suggesting you re-open the request, but a better course of action would have been to let an uninvolved template editor or admin make a call on the request. Bellerophon _{talk to me} 10:47, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I was involved. I had considered that, but based on the frequent and disruptive requests from that user, and the fact that his basis for the request no longer existed, I felt it was the only logical conclusion that anyone would come to. Based on these facts, I remember vaguely there is a clause that says if it's the only reasonable solution IAR applies and and involved closure is fine. Anyways, I appreciate you stopping in to make sure I understood what I was doing and had justifable and sound reasoning. :) — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 13:25, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Technical 13, please do not close any edit requests where you are involved or any requests involving Hasteur from now on. Thank you. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:06, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Testing changes to individual Twinkle modules on wiki.

@AzaToth, This, that and the other, Amalthea, and Aaron Schulz: I have a change to the Twinkle friendlytalkback module I'm working on, and I'm wondering what I need to do to test that it works properly? The test code is on User:ShoeMaker/Gadget-friendlytalkback.js (which is a alternate account of mine that currently has the regular Twinkle disabled (because I reset it to site default settings for testing)). What do I need to setup on that account to have Twinkle load with my test module instead of the live one? I'm assuming that I need to load a modified main MediaWiki:Gadget-Twinkle.js (I can just through it in my "skin.js" file for testing) that calls my test script instead of the live one? Thanks. — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 16:18, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

We all have different setups to test Twinkle I think (personally I've set up a local web server and import a dynamically combined script from my hard disc, via my monobook.js). For that reason nobody has ever invested any time to make it easy for /everybody/ to switch to test modules even though it wouldn't be particularly hard to do so (we could even include the github HEAD files ...).
Anyhow, if you're only planning minor changes that won't require a whole lot of iteration something like this may be sufficient:

mw.loader.using(['mediawiki.user','mediawiki.util','jquery.ui.dialog','jquery.tipsy'], function(){
	mw.loader.load('//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=raw&ctype=text/javascript&title=MediaWiki:Gadget-morebits.js');
	mw.loader.load('//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=raw&ctype=text/javascript&title=MediaWiki:Gadget-morebits.css', 'text/css');
	mw.loader.load('//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=raw&ctype=text/javascript&title=MediaWiki:Gadget-Twinkle.js');
});

mw.loader.load('//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=raw&ctype=text/javascript&title=User:ShoeMaker/Gadget-friendlytalkback.js');

Twinkle.talkback();

You'll need to execute the three statements separately to give them time to load the scripts, and the first statement will throw errors since a number of Twinkle modules will be missing and the initialization code can't cope with that. But it will get your module loaded. :)
Amalthea 17:28, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Automatic archiving

Hey I noticed you archived posts on Talk:Yank Barry from a few days ago. You might already know this but wanted to mention that *any* thread that had a reply within the archival-timeriod (in this case which used to be 30 days) would still be kept on the main talkpage. The system was working so far as I can tell - it's just that some of those apparently older threads had very recent replies. I fixed the talkpage Notice so it is clear that the archiving will occur for threads that have no replies within the past 15 days. Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 21:14, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

• Shearonink, please see User talk:Equazcion/OneClickArchiver#Not working for me. I was tinkering around because there was a report that archiving wasn't working. I couldn't figure out why exactly it was giving that error (which means it must be a bug in the way the script handles the configuration I've been unable to dig into yet), so I tried an alternative measure so that it would work in the future. That thread was the most stale (no edits in something like 21 days which is over the 15 days you claim it should be now), and made a good testcase. Anyways. Happy editing and thanks for stopping by! — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 21:20, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

So far as I can tell, lowercase sigmabot was apparently working as it was supposed to, it was carrying over content from the main talk into the Archives every day until 8 June when OCA was used a couple of times. I guess I don't understand what you mean by "there was a report that archiving wasn't working" - is archiving in general having issues or was there a concern about that particular talk page? Also, will it make a difference that there are now two separate sets of code containing "archive = Talk:Yank Barry/Archive %(counter)d|counter = 1"? Thx, Shearonink (talk) 05:35, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

After I posted above, I saw that the redundant code has been removed by another editor. Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 06:28, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

This week's article for improvement (week 24, 2014)

File:Elmo-cockpit xltn.jpg The Tickle Me Elmo toy was based on the Sesame Street character Elmo Hello, Technical 13. The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection: Tickle Me Elmo Previous selections: Amazon Basin • Film criticism Get involved with the TAFI project! You can... Nominate an article Review nominations Have your say in future selections Posted by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of EuroCarGT (talk) 00:10, 9 June 2014 (UTC) •

Signature assistance

Hi T13, I noticed your offer at Wikipedia:Village pump (idea lab) to assist those wishing to bring their signature into the 21st century. I made an effort to do this recently but I'm not good enough at CSS. Generally, I want to keep the brown and blue colors and have a larger lowercase "t" at the beginning if possible. Thanks for your help. - tucoxn\^talk 00:27, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

• Hello Tucoxn! Welcome! I think you will be happy with:

- '''[[User:Tucoxn|<span style="font-family:Verdana;color:#522C1B">t</span><span style="color:#522C1B">u</span><span style="color:#417DC1">coxn</span>]]'''\<sup>[[User_talk:Tucoxn|<span style="font-family:serif">talk</span>]]</sup>

which is fourteen characters less than the length of your existing signature, looks nearly identical, and contains no deprecated code.

In order to have your <big>t</big>, simply use this code (which makes your signature code length identical to what it is now):

- '''[[User:Tucoxn|<span style="font-family:Verdana;color:#522C1B;font-size:16px">t</span><span style="color:#522C1B">u</span><span style="color:#417DC1">coxn</span>]]'''\<sup>[[User_talk:Tucoxn|<span style="font-family:serif">talk</span>]]</sup>

Existing: - tucoxn\^talk     New: - tucoxn\^talk     With <big> t: - tucoxn\^talk

Enjoy! — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 01:32, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

"a" vs "an" for acronyms

Ah, yes, maybe I should have begun by googling it. For reference, this is what I was looking for. Here's an excerpt on correct usage. It depends on whether the acronym is pronounced as a word, or as letters, and whether the first sound of the letter/word is hard or soft:

   a FASB rule; an FOB airfield
   a LAN schematic; an LAPD memo
   a MOMA exhibit; an MRI test
   a NICU nurse; an NPO order
   a SAM base; an SAT exam

Squish7 (talk) 02:42, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Help

Hey friend, I have done what you said here, but I'm still facing problem. I have installed the script here but the script is not working? What should I do now? Jim Carter ^(talk) 11:55, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Hey I it's working now. Thanks. Jim Carter ^(talk) 16:12, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

• Yeah, I saw this before I was awake this morning and forgot about it... My first thought was that you needed to WP:BYPASS your cache (and waiting a little time automatically did it for you. Anyways, happy editing! — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 16:27, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Signature

(Replying to what you said at Tucoxn's tp) How silly of me. Is there a tag I can use for the color that isn't deprecated? I've seen some kind of "span" tag that some use. --AmaryllisGardener ^talk 16:42, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

• Yes.

--[[User:AmaryllisGardener|'''<span style="color:#E0115F">Amaryllis</span><span style="color:#74C365">Gardener</span>''']] <sup>[[User talk:AmaryllisGardener|'''talk''']]</sup>

should give you an identical appearing signature to what you have now: --AmaryllisGardener ^talk

Happy editing! — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 16:53, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Replaced. Thank you! --AmaryllisGardener ^talk 16:54, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Second guessing other editors

I noticed before that you had added additional responses to one or two of the edit requests I serviced. (I check pages in my contributions list for which my response was no longer marked current to catch some of the replies where the requester fails to reactivate the template.) That behavior raised a concern on my part that you had some issue which you weren't bringing up in a direct manner. Now you've escalated to "calling me out" about a decision on an article talk page. That increases my concern to the point where I need to bring it up with you. You should voice any concerns you have about how I service edit requests on my talk page. If a mature conversation there does not reach an acceptable conclusion, feel free to try other forums for addressing user behavior. But you need to stop and think about the appearance of your current approach. The new editors who are asking for our help are instead treated to an unprofessional display of two editors bickering with one another. Please stop that and just bring up your concerns on my talk page. Thanks, Older and ... well older (talk) 17:42, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

• Older and ... well older, I apologize if it seemed like I was second guessing your responses, that is not my intention at all. I am not sure what the previous times that I have done that were, but I'm guessing the reason you are here is due to my asking if you saw the hidden reference that the user had offered. I don't see them when I'm responding most of the time, and that makes me question if other people have seen them as well, especially when the URL looks like something that may be considered reliable. I use Jackmcbarn's Edit Protected Helper script, which means that I respond most of the time right from the action=view for the page instead of from the action=edit edit window. This is why I don't see hidden comments or things hidden in <ref>...</ref> tags. I've requested that the script scan the section for those and report on anything that may be hidden I can't see directly, and I've come to the conclusion that I'll have to make the changes myself and request the script be updated. I'll try to remember that if I have any questions for you, that I should go to your talk page to ask instead of pinging you to the discussion to ask. Thanks for bringing it to my attention, and again I apologize if I've offended you in any way. Happy editing! — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 17:59, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the pleasant reply and I'm sorry for having misinterpreted the earlier events. At Talk:List_of_emoticons, I did go out to the link and it appeared to be a personal website, so I declined the request with an {{subst:ESp|rs}} plus a few words to that effect. If someone else had chosen to add the emoticon, it wouldn't have hurt the encyclopedia and the normal evolution would have either improved the source or removed the emoticon, so it's really no big deal. I'd just rather we give the impression that we are working as a team when we service requests. With that in mind, I'll improve my reply to you there. Regards, Older and ... well older (talk) 18:19, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

• Sure, no problem. I'm sure I'm fairly odd in my beliefs on what working as a team means. I believe it means that we should question each other when we are unclear on each others' meaning or if there is something that we see that the other may have overlooked. I believe it is good to not agree on everything each other does, and when that occurs, I believe that discussion and compromise to reach a consensus are paramount. Anyways. I'm glad you came here and we talked this out. :) — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 18:30, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, I've heard that description of a team. I like to think of it more like a baseball team, myself. Everyone is taking care of their own duties and trusting their teammates to be doing the same. Sometimes one sees that another player needs help and steps in, but nothing is as funny as seeing two outfielders run into each other and miss catching the ball. (Unless it is the sight of two outfielders stopping just next to each other while the ball drops between them.) As long as we both assume the other is doing their job correctly, there's nothing wrong with asking questions and making observations. Cheers, Older and ... well older (talk) 18:53, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Your draft article, Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/MWML

Hello Technical 13. It has been over six months since you last edited your WP:AFC draft article submission, entitled "MWML".

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, copy this code: {{subst:Refund/G13|Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/MWML}}, paste it in the edit box at this link, click "Save page", and an administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. JMHamo (talk) 22:51, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

• Thanks for the heads up. It's been WP:USERFIED and debannered. — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 23:39, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Commenting on draft submissions

Hello Technical 13,

I've seen you comment elsewhere that discussion related to draft articles should take place on the talk page, rather than the submission itself. This is something I agree with, in principle. (It was the matter of implementation that was the issue, I recall.)

So I when I attempted to bring discussion to the talk page in the case of Draft:Epigenetics of partner preference I was quite surprised when you and another reviewer kept posting comments to the submission page.

Do you have any comments on this? Regards — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:44, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

• MSGJ, the comment was posted by the script on my behalf as part of the decline. It's still just the issue of getting the technology updated to post comments to the talk page. — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 11:32, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Editnotice

Hi, I just saw your change at Wikipedia:Editnotice so that only those that actually can edit editnotices can see the create rows. Can you help me understand that? I have in the past week created an editnotice template as requested at the talkpgae of an article. There is consensus to use editnotice on that article and on the subarticles (hence the template). The visual appearance on the editnotice has been discussed at the talk and at realated wikiproject to for consensus how it should look. Now that I was about to add a request for this editnotice-template, the rows to create edit notice was gone. I would have used that to come to the correct page and then pressed the link on that page to create a template-protected edit request. It is a fast easy way to make request of your editnotice instead of trying to find the correct "name" and path for your own editrequest. QED237 (talk) 11:56, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

• Interesting, Qed237. I hadn't thought of that indirect use for it. I'll revert that template for now and see if I can find a way to revise the input box to only show a create button for those that can actually create AND show a button for everyone to go to the talk page for where an edit notice would be and request its creation. Thanks for bringing this to my attention.

While you're here on my talk page, are you aware that the <font> tags in your custom signature are deprecated and disallowed per policy? They were deprecated in HTML 4.0 Transitional, invalid in 4.0 Strict, and are not part of HTML5 at all.

As such, I suggest replacing:

<span style="font-family:Verdana">[[User:Qed237|<font color="blue">'''''QED'''''</font><font color="red">'''''237'''''</font>]]&nbsp;[[User talk:Qed237|<font color="green">('''''talk''''')</font>]]</span>

with:

<span style="font-family:Verdana">[[User:Qed237|<span style="color:blue">'''''QED'''''</span><span style="color:red">'''''237'''''</span>]]&#160;[[User talk:Qed237|<span style="color:green">('''''talk''''')</span>]]</span>

which will result in a 204 character long signature with an appearance of: QED237 (talk)

compared to your existing 222 character long signature of: QED237 (talk) — Either way. Happy editing! — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 13:06, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

• • Thank you for restoring it, there are always some things that is easy miss and this is certainly one. Maybe I am the only one doing it that way. However the solution you described above sounds great (if it is possible) especially if the editrequest template exists on the talkpage when you get there (as it is now) and it is only to fill in.

Regarding my signature I dont remember how I made it and I had no idea at all that it is incorrect. If i remember correctly I took signature from an other user and modified it (by looking at several signatures). I will make the changes you suggested and I cant even see any difference in the signature. Thank you! QED237 (talk) 20:44, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

Your input is requested at WikiProject Maine!

	Hello fellow WikiProject Maine members!
I'm trying to breathe a little new life into WP:WP ME and as such I have posted a few questions on the project's talk page that I would like to get some feedback from all of the project's members on! There are apparently a lot of inactive members on our participants list (and even a user that has been blocked for years). What do we as a project want to do about inactive or blocked users? I have some ideas on the issue, but would love feedback from others. Remove blocked users that appear to be no longer interested in participating in developing Wikipedia. Users with zero activity at all in three years are unlikely to come back. I suggest that we remove them from the mailing list and deactivate any categorizing feature of a userbox on their page. When doing this, we must make sure to leave a note on their talk page explaining that since they have been off-wiki for three years that they have been removed from the list as a purely technical measure and they are more than welcome to add themselves back to the list if they choose to start editing again. Users with zero activity on wiki for 18 months may come back, despite it being unlikely. I would suggest that we mark those users as inactive on our mailing list, and stop sending them messages like this one to prevent their user talk page from filling up with irrelevant notices. Users with zero activity on wiki for at least six months should be marked as inactive in the mailing list template, but should still receive mailings. I'm also trying to gauge some interest in there being a Great American Wikinic in Maine! If you are interested, possible locations might include Portland, Augusta, and or Bangor, please make a note in the appropriate section on our talk page! We should create a template to use for mass mailings from this wikiproject so all we need to do is enter our message and signature and the general format of the box and image and title and stuff will stay familiar. What is your opinion on this idea? Do you have any preferences to what that may look like (because I think this looks horrible compared to some I've seen from other projects)?
This message was sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of {{U|Technical 13}} (e • t • c) at 17:25, 11 June 2014 (UTC). To remove yourself from this list, please remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiProject Maine/members, remove the WikiProject's userbox/category from your user page (rarely used for mass mailings), or alternatively to opt-out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Opted-out of message delivery to your user talk page.

Article wizard

Thank you for answering my request and fixing Wikipedia:Article wizard. 2001:18E8:2:1020:114D:7C6F:FA83:BE0 (talk) 19:54, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

WT:TW / WP:VPT

Since it has already been noted at WT:TW that the problem is NOT Twinkle-related, the discussion at WT:TW should be closed and centralized at WP:VPT, not the other way around. As such, I have undone your mistaken close at WP:VPT the panda ₯’ 21:38, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

• I was just centralizing it where the topic was first mentioned. I don't care if you want to move and consolidate all of the half dozen or so different conversations to VPT. That is fine.

While you're here on my talk page, are you aware that the <font> tags in your custom signature are deprecated and disallowed per policy? They were deprecated in HTML 4.0 Transitional, invalid in 4.0 Strict, and are not part of HTML5 at all. As such, I suggest replacing:

<small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">[[User talk:DangerousPanda|<font style="color:#ffffff;background:black;"> the panda </font><font style="color:#000000;background:white;"> ₯’</font>]]</span></small>

with:

<small style="border:1px solid #000;padding:1px">[[User talk:DangerousPanda|<span style="color:#FFF;background:#000"> the panda </span><span style="color:#000;background:#FFF"> ₯’</span>]]</small>

which will result in a 196 character long signature with an appearance of: the panda ₯’

compared to your existing 221 character long signature of: the panda ₯’ — Either way. Happy editing! — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 21:53, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

I think it's kind of disingenuous to say one of your pet peeves is "disallowed by policy" when you're the one who wrote it into the policy. Just more signature nonsense that you agreed to stop when you were unblocked. –xeno^talk 22:33, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

• Written in 3830 days ago and apparently uncontested. I'd say that passes as a consensus. — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 22:45, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

• Rogue entries can sneak into policy pages and remain for years even if they lack consensus. See the ongoing RFC at WT:UP as an example. That no one has yet reverted your unnecessary and unilateral change does not mean it has consensus. –xeno^talk 01:08, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @Xeno: I'm not doubting you, but could you provide a link to where he said he would stop? --AmaryllisGardener ^talk 22:53, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

See here and work your way back. Though our host seems to be backpedalling and wikilawyering out of his commitment to leave signatures well-enough alone. He will probably catch a re-block sooner or later if he keeps it up. –xeno^talk 01:12, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

Indeed, even editing the sig policy page should have resulted in an immediate re-block the panda ₯’ 23:03, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

Emergency!

Moved to WT:Twinkle § unlinking issue

Deletion request of creator of article, Manggahan High School

Hey Technical 13, I'm sorry but I would like to say that I'm not vandalizing and I just want first to strengthen the article before posting it because other infos there have no reference so please don't state that I'm vandalizing. I'm the CREATOR OF ARTICLE and accdg. to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:How_to_delete_a_page that if you are the article creator, you can request deletion of it, but I don't vandalize.

Neilvin John Aventurado (talk) 19:42, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

• According to CSD:G7, which is the specific deletion criteria you are requesting deletion under, since you are not the only substantial contributor, this criteria can not be used to request deletion. You are more than welcome to improve the article (or request improvements on the talk page), but you may not request deletion using the {{Db-g7}} template. Since the deletion is controversial (the tags have been removed by multiple editors), it is also not eligible for a WP:PROD deletion. Your only possible way to get it deleted at this point is to achieve consensus for deletion at WP:AfD, which is going to be difficult to do considering it seems to meet the guidelines for inclusion that can be seen at WP:NSCHOOL. Happy editing! — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 19:53, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

Manggahan High School

You may want to take a look at User talk:Piguy101#Page Manggahan High School deletion regarding Manggahan High School. The page is now blanked with CSD G7 on it. I am not sure what is vandalism or not here. Thanks Piguy101 (talk) 19:45, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

Twinkle

Moved to WT:Twinkle § Not loading

Archiving

Hey, Technical! Hope you're OK. Do you know anything about MiszaBot? It stopped archiving my talk page and I was wondering if you'd heard anything about it. Will I have to change bots? How would I go about doing that while keeping my current order of archived material? Thanks for your help, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 20:39, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

• Lowercase sigmabot III (talk · contribs) took over archiving for MizaBot months ago. Many have noticed its archiving habits are sporadic at best most of the time. You might consider User:Equazcion/OneClickArchiver to fill in the gaps and get the sections the bot misses because of missing or bad timestamps. — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 20:55, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Jodosma and The Teahouse

Sorry I got this person so upset. I was trying to make sure the explanation was actually correct. I went to the proposals Village Pump and told them if a person doesn't post on a talk page then that person's signature shouldn't appear. I use a template where I have to manually include my signature and the time and date, but it's something a bot could do. The bot could do the notifying and say it is from the person who activated it (what Jodosma did), and the only response I got was a lecture on responsibility when using Twinkle, which is why I never intend to use it. But that response was worded in such a way as to suggest maybe the explanation was wrong. Thanks for clarifying.— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 20:51, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

• No worries. — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 20:55, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

This week's article for improvement (week 25, 2014)

The old buildings of the National Library of China house historical and ancient books, documents and manuscripts Hello, Technical 13. The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection: National Library of China Previous selections: Tickle Me Elmo • Amazon Basin Get involved with the TAFI project! You can... Nominate an article Review nominations Have your say in future selections Posted by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of EuroCarGT (talk) 00:22, 16 June 2014 (UTC) •

Your submission at Articles for creation: Pink Team Cleaning Services (June 16)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time.
Please read the comments left by the reviewer on your submission. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Draft:Pink Team Cleaning Services.
• To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the .

Thank you for your
contributions to Wikipedia!

• Please remember to link to the submission!

• You can also get real-time chat help from experienced editors.

— {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 23:46, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

Hello! Technical 13, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering or curious about why your article submission was declined please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! — {{U|Technical 13}} (e • t • c) 23:46, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

My signature

It keeps telling me my signature is too long.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions •
13:12, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Is this the one you wanted me to do, because it does look different.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions •
13:13, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

• Vchimpanzee, that's an improvement to me. :) Looks different in what way? The only difference in actual appearance is that instead of using bold ·s, you are using regular •s. — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 13:19, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

In the edit window. As for why my signature looked the way it did, I copied someone else's I liked years ago. That person doesn't seem to come here any more.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions •
13:46, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

User:Technical 13/SandBox/HTMLdump/Page 1

When you use media: links it generates a file usage. See the bottom of File:AngryParsley.png. Using the :File prefix enables a link, but does not create the file usage. Werieth (talk) 14:04, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

• We have a split discussion here, so to consolidate, I'll only reply here from now on. Linking to a file, does not violate NFCC#9, only displaying the image in an inappropriate location does. I've set the links back to the colon prefixed File: links because what the goal of that dump is to fix is actually on the File: pages anyways. Anyways. Happy editing. — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 14:08, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

The issue becomes that usage of the media prefix causes reports to flag the page as having non-free media. Converting them to [[:File prefixes avoids that headache. Werieth (talk) 14:12, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

• That's a headache that is the fault of the report, WP:NFCC#9 specifically says that uses outside of article space must be linked, it does not specify how they are linked or restrict it from being a link directly to the file. Using media: is exactly that, a link per NFCC#9 itself. I would be happy to look into how the reports that are mis-flagging that as pages having non-free media are set up and working to see if I can propose a fix for that, but that is a flagging error, not an NFCC issue. — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 14:19, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

• Its a core mediawiki issue, nothing to do with the reports. Mediawiki treats [[File usage links the exact same as [[media links. As it creates a file usage its more than just a link. A link is [[:File and does not create a file link. Werieth (talk) 14:23, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Brian Kennedy (businessman)

Hello and thank you for the review. I don't understand what you are referring to as copyright material in my article.? could you please clarify.

I'm new to Wikipedia and this is my first article.

Regards

Darran. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Darran Wilde (talk • contribs) 17:53, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

• Hello Darran and welcome to Wikipedia. copyrighted material is material that is copied (not necessarily word-for-word, just close enough) from another website onto Wikipedia. Because such copying of material is illegal, it can not stay on Wikipedia. That doesn't mean that the topic of the article you want to write can't exist on Wikipedia, you just need to very clearly state all of the facts in your own words and the more sources you use to do that, the easier it will be. Note that sources must be considered reliable in order for them to be considered towards establishing the topic's notability on Wikipedia (which isn't necessarily the same as notability in the rest of the world). Please check out all of the pages I have linked in blue text, and if you need further help, I would be happy to point you in the right direction. Thanks again for your interest in contributing! — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 18:00, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your feedback Technical 13. I have completely rewritten the paragraph in my own words taking care to not copyright or sound close to the original. I have now resubmitted the article with hope that it meets the Wikipedia criteria. Regards,

Darran.