User talk:Omniplex/steptwo

Please post new issues below as you see fit, or add your comment to an active topic.

If it's about a new comment from me on your talk page please answer it there, it's hard to follow discussions split over several pages. Please use e-mail for private messages.

File:Welcome-to-wikimedia.jpg

Welcome to wikimedia (screenshot)

Closed or moved topics

To be moved to an archive later

Template:Edi

Greetings, I see you are going around and swapping out examples of {{Tnavbar}} for the template you created {{Edi}}. Would you kindly refrain from doing that? The Tnavbar templates are more comprehensive than Edi as Edi only allows for access to edit a given template rather than allowing for a more complete access (viewing, discussion) also the template that Edi is based upon was originally developed with the (+/-) for cross-language portability on the international Mediawiki, not the English Wikipedia. I'm reverting your edits that counter my edits to include Tnavbar templates. If you had concerns that {{Tnavbar}} was too big, I've allayed those concerns by creating Template:Tnavbar-mini. Thanks. Netscott 11:09, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just to inform you, myself and a few other editors have produced some additional classes of Tnavbar since I left the above message which you might want to peruse at Template:Tnavbar. Thanks. Netscott 22:28, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

NAK, for various reasons {{Tnavbar}} is completely unsuited for the affected project templates - it's too big, not only the output, also the code with weird colours unrelated to any colour scheme on these project templates, it introduces unnecessary Unicode on pure ASCII pages, and for some cases like "policylist" I seriously doubt that a very visible edit link is a good idea. I fixed various things on those templates, also the width, broken <br/>, the height by eliminating unnecessary empty lines, and the floating align=right for old browsers, and I added a category for templates using the style (mainly colour scheme) chosen by Gareth Aus. Thanks for the credits for {{ed}} and family, but they were not my idea, I only tuned them to use "fullurl:" like I did with {{tnavbar}}. -- Omniplex 23:35, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Copied / moved to Template talk:tnavbar. -- Omniplex 23:52, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've responded on Tnavbar's talk page. Netscott 00:32, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cat:User kon

(from speedy renames) - Thats not really a speedy rename, tho changing Category:Category:Wikipedians who use the Yahoo! Widget Engine to Category:Wikipedians who use the Yahoo! Widget Engine would be. Did you ask Cyde why he deleted the cat after WAS' no consensus? --Syrthiss 00:01, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, it's obvious abuse, already reported on WP:ANI. Is there a better way to defrock rogue admins as fast as possible before they can cause more harm? -- Omniplex 00:20, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Background for others: Template talk:User kon, Template talk:Catfd, WP:AN/I (incident report about the rogue admin).

CSS Expertise

Hello, "the only User css-0 ;-)". I'm still laughing out loud as I type this! Cheers, CWC(talk) 06:45, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Haha! That's hilarious :)

So why are you(omniplex) using nn3 anyway, if ya dont mind my curiosity..? ;) --Quiddity 08:07, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's a kind of FAQ, the WP:HIDE warriors were also curious, I think I'll write an article about it later. I'm a REXX fan, that's a programming language ideal for scripting and strings used on old IBM mainframes. Later they also integrated it into OS/2 (an operating system roughly at the level of W2K, only six years earlier). Therefore on my first real box (not counting some horrible 8086 and 286 PCs), a "Dell omniplex", I installed OS/2 and was happy with it.

Omitting some stuff that's how I arrived in the Internet: Dell omniplex + OS/2 + REXX, my Fido node xyzzy was already history at this time. Then a dying fan killed the omniplex CPU, and I got a no name box with the same old SCSI 2GB harddisk. Netscape 4.x is a pain, its CSS is broken (still based on Netscape's proprietary "JSS", J = JavaScript). NN3 is small and fast, 2 MB binary, loading it takes less than 5 seconds, and its performance with 64 MB RAM is excellent.

In theory I should test if Firefox works on Warp 3, if not I should install Warp 4 (I've the CDs) and try again, for that I should reformat a FAT partition to HPFS (OS/2 version of NTFS), if that turns out to be too tricky I should get a bigger harddisk, save the old almost dead first harddisk, and try again, and ideally get some more RAM, but I doubt that this kind of Y2K DRAM is still for sale. So actually I might end up with needing a new box.

But OS/2 isn't supported anymore, I won't find drivers for some types of modern hardware. And I'm not really interested in MultiMedia and fast DSL connections, my V.90 modem is good enough for my interests: How stuff works, at the software / protocol level, not below (hardware). I just haven't the time and money for a huge upgrade adventure as long as I'm not forced to do it. The next box should be Linux or any *NIX with a 64bits CPU. OS/2 is a 32bits OS, so that would be also a point of no return.

Of course some NN3 limitations like missing UTF-8 and no inline PNG are annoying, but no CSS is actually interesting wrt Web design and accessibility. Does that answer the question? -- Omniplex 16:39, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely :) I've been running w98 since it came out, so fully understand reluctant upgraders.

(personally, i dream of having OSX running on my current AMD boxen (ha!). though linux seems to be getting almost user-friendly, and recent live-cds finally have fonts that don't look hideous, so maybe ubuntu is in my future.)

And that all helped me find Wikipedia:Accessibility, which i was looking for. I'm glad to see "Avoid using tables for layout purposes only" in there, as I kinda hope to recode the Community Portal, Help:Contents, and Main Page to not rely on tables (at some point before 2007...). But i'll investigate that further another time.

Thanks again for the prolific reply :) -Quiddity 18:31, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Images

Hey there! I've noticed that you were replacing a lot of instances of Image:Padlock.svg with a JPEG. May I ask why? Wikipedia policy is currently to use the most extensible and expandable file format, which is currently SVG. You mentioned browsers in your edit summary; what browser do you use? —BorgHunter ^ubx (talk) 04:27, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Discussed at WP:ANI, WP:DRV, and WT:CSD. For details about my platform see above. -- Omniplex 04:44, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Closed, JPG doesn't support transparent BG, so that was never a really good solution. Better (= smaller) GIF derived from Locke's PNG ~~not yet~~ installed. -- Omniplex 04:19, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Now done, it was ready since May 25, the WP:DRV etc. issues were closed weeks ago. Besides undeletion would now work. -- Omniplex 06:28, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Micronation cleanup

Thanks for your work recently cleaning up a few micronation messes. However, I'm going to restore the section you deleted at micronation concerning micropatrology, because this term has actually been used as described since the 1970s. --Gene_poole 03:39, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe put it at the end of the 1st section (definition) instead of the lead section. The "nation" vs. "state" issue is already confusing, adding "patrology" doesn't help, it's also not in wikt:micropatrology. -- Omniplex 03:44, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Done in Micronation and noted on its talk page after I finally found WP:NEO, closed here. -- Omniplex 04:16, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Citing to the Bible

As a recent participant in the TfD dicussion on whether {{Bibleverse}} and {{Bibleref}} should be deleted, I wanted to make sure you were aware of the new discussion at Wikipedia:Citing sources/Bible. The goal of these discussion is to resolve the concerns raised re GFDL, use of an external cite, etc. Additionally, this page should serve as a location for recording research about the different websites that provide online Bible information. Please edit the summary and join the discussion - thx Trödel 15:17, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kernel edit

I noticed you removed the no-kernel section in the articel Kernel (computer science). During two cleanups and housekeeping sessions which I performed recently on the article, I never noticed anything wrong with the section and think it should rest there, as not using a kernel in an OS is also an approach and due to the fact that most OSs do use a kernel, it should be mentioned in that very article.

However, I am completely open to any suggestions you may have, so I would like to hear from you about your reasons to remove that article. Regards, Candamir 23:52, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

PD: I've added your talk page to my watchlist, so we can continue our discussion here.

Mainly I was annoyed by this Unununium crap popping up in serious articles. My only clue what a "no kernel" OS might be would be a set of components with two or more working subsets, where these two working subsets have no component in common. Hard to tell if that's still one OS, for starters why does it have two completely independent ways to boot? -- Omniplex 05:03, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Strange template behaviour

See Template talk:CURRENTMINUTE. I reverted some changes you made to that template and 'CURRENTHOUR' because they were sometimes displaying negative values, seemingly at random. Probably some kind of bug in the mathematical evaluation 'behind the scenes', but it was causing havoc with other templates that use those two values for computations. --CBD 13:38, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I missed that comment somehow, therefore the 59/00 post on your page, move it here if you like. -- Omniplex 12:47, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As I understand the 59/00 problem it theoretically occurs when two time based 'magic words' are used in a subtraction at just the right nanosecond for the value to change between the evaluation of the first and the evaluation of the second. Before implementing the change I made I tested for that possibility by putting a thousand calls to 'CURRENTTIMESTAMP' on a page and reloading it fifty times... the seconds value never varied amongst the thousand instances. I have just done the same with 'CURRENTTIMESTAMP' subtracted from itself and received a result of 0 in all cases. Thus, if this happens it has to be exceedingly rare and since the method I used performs subtraction on hours and minutes rather than seconds it would be even less common. I think the '59/00' problem may in actuality be entirely the large modulus divide problem... have you seen an instance of '59/00' which didn't involve a modulus division? --CBD 12:09, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I thought that I saw them, as documented in m:Help:Variable#Varying_with_time (2nd of two text paragraphs after the table). It was plausible at this time, because Meta was extremely slow for some days. Therefore I started to fix this problem in several templates, CURRENTMINUTE / HOUR yesterday was only an afterthought, the serious stuff operating on one timestamp is Timestamp2MJD. It's certainly not wrong to avoid race conditions, but much less important than I thought until I saw your test result in CURRENTMINUTE here. That's when I debugged it and found 6356. For at least a week action=purge + action=render + action=purge always apparently cured all problems, it never occured to me that MOD could be broken. Intermittent errors are always ugly... :-( -- Omniplex 12:47, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mergeto

Would you care to explain why Mergeto is special compared to a large number of other in-article template in requiring that we cater to users with broken browsers? I pointed out in my edit that mergeto is breaking our standard practice, so you could at least have the courtesy to propose a counterargument along with your reversion. --Gmaxwell 12:07, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've given the reason, inline PNG doesn't work with my browser. Mergeto is used together with mergefrom, I use them sometimes, e.g. just today, and they are supposed to be visible with any browser. That's what they were until you unnecessarily changed one of them. It's a simple icon, nothing where the complete power of SVG is essential. -- Omniplex 12:21, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not created for your personal benefit. I have a hard time seeing how you can justify reverting against the project norm based on your personal preference. I'm not saying that there isn't an argument for leaving it a .gif, but rather that you have not provided one. If such an argument exists we need to hear it because it may also apply elsewhere. --Gmaxwell 19:31, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Forgive my intrusion, but I'd like to know what justification you have for switching one of the templates to an SVG file (which, incidentally, is sloppily drawn)? Apart from fulfilling your apparent desire to bureaucratically follow the rules purely for the sake of following them (which certainly isn't "the project norm"), what advantage does it provide in this case? —David Levy 19:51, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What 'rule' was I attempting to bureaucratically follow? Your overt hostility is unwarranted and unappreciated. This is a trivial matter which does not call for such rude treatment. --Gmaxwell 20:11, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize if my reply came across as hostile and rude, which wasn't my intention. I'm referring to our image use policy. Again, I ask you to please explain the advantage of switching the template from a GIF file to an SVG file. —David Levy 20:18, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Obvious reasons stated already in several places, see #Images above with a link to WT:CSD. FWIW I've now added it to the IUP talk page. Nothing's wrong with having the SVG, but in some cases it's not yet okay to actually use it. The process templates are supposed to work for everybody. -- Omniplex 07:13, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This discussion sounds strangely familiar. Netscott 02:21, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, not only my browser has issues with PNG, see User_talk:Jed.de for a second case, the general problem of older IEs with PNG transparency is a third example. -- Omniplex 04:03, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

CAT:CSD

I reverted your rework of this page, because I don't think the updated version is as useful. Please comment at Category_talk:Candidates_for_speedy_deletion#Category_Header_Information. Thanks, — xaosflux ^Talk 22:22, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Done, I've reverted it back adding the only potentially useful part you could have missed, the "quick reference". The first part was technically plain wrong. -- Omniplex 23:16, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion continued on CAT:CSD, this might be soon obsolete based on Help:DPL, test subpage waiting for action. -- Omniplex 11:09, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Diagram needed

I see you're working on {{Diagram needed}}. Why did you replace the "right" image tag with a right-aligned table? Also, please make sure that your changes do not alter the syntax. This template is in use, on many pages.--Srleffler 05:42, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Experimenting, for old browsers the other right has no effect. Two "right" should also work. I'm still unhappy with the thumb. -- Omniplex 05:50, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Works, talk page also fine, moved to done. -- Omniplex 09:30, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to wikimedia screenshot reply

Very well, ts not copyrighted windows software. Was Netscape/Mozilla 3 ever released under an open source license? If not, the design of the software is copyrighted, and the image would need to be fair use. While your contributions to the image may be released, the underlying image of the browser itself may not be freely licensed. Kevin_b_er 03:15, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't claim that I've the copyright of the design of Netscape navigator, so this point is moot. I also don't claim to have the copyright of the Web page on this picture. The screenshot is PD because I made it and say so. This doesn't cover the design of the buttons, the broken image icons, or any other visible detail, it's about the complete screenshot. -- Omniplex 03:32, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Copied / moved to User talk:Kevin Breitenstein.

Re:Template:Category

Oops - yes. Didn't notice that bit, sorry. I only changed it on two templates that looked like they had been proposed for deletion (they hadn't - the included {{Category}} had). Grutness...wha? 03:39, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the included TFD tag is a bit dubious, If you like to fix also the last affected template, that's {{temprot}}. -- Omniplex 03:50, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted, the bot got it of course wrong for {{temprot}}, adminbacklog added to protected edit requests after update. -- Omniplex 03:45, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

July is stocked with tips. Could you look them over please?

I've filled July with a selection of tips from the tip authoring page, revisions of previously posted tips, some brand new ones, and some combinations. If you would be so kind as to look them over before they hit the mainstream Wikipedian audience, I'd really appreciate it. --Go for it! 17:51, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Help:editing

Calling my edits vandalism is libelous. Do not call anyone's edits vandalism again.See:Wikipedia:Resolving disputes& [1]--Chuck Marean 03:45, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Background for others: Chuck Marean (talk · contribs) has his very own ideas how to rewrite Help:Editing ignoring all alternatives offered on Help talk:Editing. Moved to closed, I prefer to continue discussions where they start, this user is already at the state of legal threats. -- Omniplex 03:57, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Update your browser?

Greetings Omniplex, is your browser not a bit out of date? I see you're removing unicode characters from Template:Tnavbar-mini-nodiv and I can only surmise this is due to your utilization of an ancient browser as you are the only one that has edited/discussed such a "problem". Netscott 11:06, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See above, best game in town for my platform. It's autmagically good in catching such minor backwards compatibility issues. You can do lots of tricks with ASCII, <tt>,</tt> (monospaced comma) is only an example, also nice is a monospaced vertical bar. -- Omniplex 11:12, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You know when you are saying "my" platform you demonstrate ownership relative to the edits you are making. This isn't about "you" nor "me" but what is best in general for the community. Would you not agree that 99.9% of the Wikipedia users are utilizing modern browsers that have absolutely no problem with unicode and the like? Netscott 11:16, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You asked about my browser, if you're not interested to get an answer don't post here. Of course accessibility for "any" browser is good for anybody using such browsers. Where it's necessary nothing is wrong with Unicode, but the template cannot know where this is necessary, it depends on the page where it's used. The colours are also a bad idea, such decorative decisions should follow what's used / needed on the target page. -- Omniplex 11:31, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize for my somewhat agressive tone but you are the sole editor who has been editing relative to the Tnavbar templates who's talking about some sort of "problem" in this regard. Netscott 11:20, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's not really your fault, my browser would display · or • (as you used it) just fine, but the Wiki servers translate anything minus   to Unicode on the fly. If they'd just leave it as is it would work as expected. -- Omniplex 11:36, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What does the following show on your browser: · and •? Netscott 11:48, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It interprets the raw UTF-8 as windows-1252. I'm not sure what you sent, either NCR · and • translated by the server to UTF-8, or you used UTF-8 on your side, same effect from my POV. The middot (u+00B7, 183) as UTF-8 is C2 B7, what I see is Â·. The bullet (u+2022, 8226) is UTF-8 E2 80 A2, what I see is â€¢ (because windows-1252 hex. 80 is an Euro, the other UTF-8 bytes in your examples correspond directly to Latin-1 bytes as I see them). -- Omniplex 12:11, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've created a PURL for this, use e.g. [[purlnet:ucode/2022]] for info about 2022.

Greetings again, is there no way that your browser can display a bullet or middot? I notice you're using   in your signature, if your browser cannot produce a bullet or middot what is the closest corresponding characters that it can produce? Also, please answer me this question, what percentage of browsers do you honestly believe are affected in this regard? Your edits relative to this issue inclines me to perceive them analogously to the undue weight clause of WP:NPOV. Netscott 12:58, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As I said, my browser can display all Latin-1 char.s incl. middot / bull / nbsp as long as they arrive as Latin-1 or as entity, symbolic like • or decimal like ·. Any browser always supported Latin-1, that was the standard for almost a decade. But the server sends UTF-8, that's different,   is the only exception where it keeps a known entity as is (symbolic or decimal) working for any browser. But e.g. • or · are mangled into UTF-8, as shown above. Affected browsers include early Netscape 3 and other oldtimers. Guessing, below 1 permille. It affecs also users limited to 256 characters in text mode, where the upper 128 are NOT Latin-1, e.g. Cyrillic. Such users might visit English sites because they are mainly ASCII.

Your Wikilawyering makes no sense, NPOV is about content, not accessibility. Next time I stumble over one of those tnavbars I'll simply replace or remove them instead of trying to make them work for any browser. After all I don't like them anyway, one link to the relevant template is enough, no need to send 583 bytes vs. 116 for ed. -- Omniplex 13:47, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd understand your last comments re: Wikilawyering better if I had not used the term "analogous" as in, similar in nature. The analogy is perfectly applicable here when you're editing to make changes that will benefit in the neighborhood 0.001% of those using Wikipedia. As well your personalization of this discussion in terms of "like" is irrelevant. Is there not a combination of symbols that Wikimedia servers do accurately reproduce that would not affect that 0.001% of users (including yourself) in terms of middot and bull? Netscott 14:16, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OrphanBot + Popes

This blocked user has asked to be unblocked. The reason given is: User_talk:OrphanBot + Wikipedia talk:Bots apparently don't work, and Template:Popes is horrible (not adding IMO because whose opinion should it be. -- Omniplex 13:02, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Do not unblock without discussing the matter thoroughly in advance with the blocking admin; see WP:BLOCK. If there is no legitimate reason to remove the block, please leave a note to that effect here. Remove this line once you're done.

Omniplex/steptwo

Requests for unblock category removed, your block should have expired by now. Netscott 12:26, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

IMO you're not supposed to remove only the category, but the complete tag (or here its output line because I subst'ed and trimmed it). The presence of the category could alert other admins about this "interpretation" of WP:BLOCK in an active dispute, and it wasn't my intention to resume editing without that tag removed or turned into indefinite by an admin. I took it for granted that you are an admin and only checked it after editing, that spoiled it. I've now left a note on WP:AN as proposed by you. -- Omniplex 10:59, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you think that my having removed just the category was unwarranted then by all means re-add it. The category is meant for use for when an editor is blocked, not for block review after said block has either been lifted or expired. This is why I decatted your page. Your WP:AN post is less than clear to me as it's not immediately evident that you are discussing the fact that you were blocked. You may want to edit your post to be a bit more explicit. Thanks. Netscott 12:20, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re-adding it would be bogus because I've already edited some articles after you've removed the category. The category is meant for use when editors are blocked, only admins (or the user in question) should remove it as part of the WP:BLOCK process. I'm entitled to use the tag while I'm blocked and leave it at this state, if that's what I wish (and that was the case). And no, I'm not discussing the fact that I was blocked, but the case of an admin blocking a user who happens to disagree with him. -- Omniplex 12:51, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Forgive me for sayings so but your WP:AN post is rather meaningless for anyone outside of the "SVG controversies" (someone say like myself) and if you want proper review of your contention of misapplication of blocking powers I would strongly advise you to render the post a bit more explicit in that regard. Netscott 12:58, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Delete with indefinite ban for author. Not joking"? This seems particularly applicable relative to such commentary. Netscott 13:21, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the link, I didn't know that page not mentioned on WP:BLOCK. Bad faith doesn't match my ich subpage, the section here immediately above, and other occasions where I'm consistently against huge amounts of distractions from the real content of a page. Template:Popes is almost 20 KB forced on everybody who loads any page with one of the listed popes. Instead of the 100 bytes for a link. If that's no net abuse please make the block permanent, and I'd find greener pastures. -- Omniplex 13:45, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What is the problem? Seriously, Broadband anyone? Hello? Netscott 13:48, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Even on a dialup connection 20KB's going to take how much time? Netscott 13:49, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I can't guess what the costs for mobile users are, some cents maybe. Over here modem users pay by connection time (per minute), not volume (per MB). -- Omniplex 14:03, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well I suppose there's something to be said for those who endeavor to work on a project like Wikipedia using non-CSS compliant browsers through dial-up pay-per-minute modems. My imagination inclines me to think that the majority of editors are on broadband connections and aren't inclined to quibble with such concerns but I certainly could be wrong. You know what I think about CSS-0 browsers already. In this light, while your frustration about what you percieve to be KB-bloat is understandable your commentary isn't. Netscott 14:11, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Modem/ISDN is quite common here, nothing exotic like CSS-0, or being forced to use a text mode / speech browser. Something like 25% non-broadband of all German users maybe (?). Mobile devices are also common, but I've no idea how much are actually used for surfing and access on Wikipedia. Or how the situation is outside of Europe, e.g. Africa and parts of Asia. Web access by e-mail is possible. -- Omniplex 14:27, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My RFA

Thank you for your vote in my RFA, which succeeded with a final tally of 66-0-4. If there's anything I can help you with now that I'm an admin, please let me know on my talk page. Again, thanks! Mango juice^talk 20:53, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

PNG in messagebox replaced by a remotely related JPG for the reasons explained above ;-) -- Omniplex 21:09, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Numeral systems template

What's the deal with this edit? You've made the sidebar ridiculously wide without noticeably affecting its length, as the latter is mainly determined by the number of entries in the list. Also, I find the comment here about the sidebar "overwriting content" strange; surely content will flow around the sidebar, or at least should do so in any browser that isn't utterly broken. Unless you mean the blocks of preformatted text on that page, in which case the proper solution would presumably be to get rid of those rather than mess with the sidebar; they're ugly anyway, and could easily be replaced with normal text. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 14:02, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, the monospaced stuff doesn't fly with the huge floating right sidebar. I've fixed it, see Template talk:Numeral systems. -- Omniplex 14:09, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Third Opinion

On March 16, you placed a request on Wikipedia:Third Opinion for input related to a content dispute at Wikipedia:Categories, lists, and series boxes. The issue seems to have settled down, and there don't seem to be any recent comments on the page's talk page. Is the issue settled? I wanted to check with you to be sure before removing your request from the 3O page. Thanks very much. Kafziel 06:31, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, I still think that the other editor enforces technically dubious / incorrect points, revert warring on both "his" guideline and talk page, and I wait for a 3O as part of the dispute resolution. The long delay with this 3O indirectly indicates that nobody is really interested in this obscure guideline, but it won't work if I simply mark it as historic. The other editor fabricated a 3RR report resulting in a block. -- Omniplex 06:54, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Deprecation of Wikipedia:VSCA

Hi, I noticed that you have depricated the aforementioned shortcut, and I was wondering why, given that a large number of pages link to it.

Thanks --GW_Simulations_{|User Page | Talk | Contribs | E-mail} 15:45, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Clean up of category shortcuts, not yet ready, that's the part after WT, I moved all Wikipedia:xyz to deprecated, because as shortcut they're not convincing, e.g. WP:VCSA is shorter, and that's also what the destination says. Maybe move it to "R from abbreviation" (?), "R for convenience", or something new in this direction. Or leave it as deprecated shortcut. All other (deprecated or not) shortcuts are from the main to another namespace, these abbreviations don't fit into this scheme, they're not affected by WP:SHORT and "cross namespace redirect" debates. For the parent category shortcuts I want an obvious pattern, "use CAT, MoS, P, WP, WT, or" (two others), anything else might a bad idea and RFD-invitation. No problem with Wikipedia:VSCA, it only isn't like the normal accepted shortcuts, it's a normal redirect needing a better category. -- Omniplex 18:37, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

pointers to redirects and other problems in R from templates

Stop putting links in the R from templates. For example, in {{R from shortcut}}, you added both [[WP:]] and WP:SHORT.

First of all, they create HUGE transclusions in What links here of every single page that references the template, and every single user and talk that points to the pointer to the template.

Secondly, they both point to the same place, so you're pointing them multiple times to the wrong place.

It's one click on the category at the bottom of the template page for the instructions. For really esoteric stuff, it's one more click to the long explanation page. But most everybody only needs the first click.

Amazingly enough, there are other folks around here that might have done a few things, too....

--William Allen Simpson 20:03, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WP:WP and WP:SHORT are different pages, the same two links as in your 41682979. If you have a valid technical point explain it on the relevant talk page, it might interest others who added these links, too, why you removed them, just rv is no explanation.

The old text confused folks asking on Shortcut what "only WP" means. Please try to be civil when posting here, or simply explain the technical issue on Wikipedia:Redirect for all "R from / to" templates. I haven't touched any other "R from / to" template lately. -- Omniplex 20:44, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

While I certainly agree that WP:WP redirects to a different place than [[WP:]] and WP:SHORT, the edit you made uses the latter two, not the former, as I correctly stated.

[[WP:]] == WP:WP == shortcuts, WP:SHORT == shortcut, two different links, two different pages, the only state I know. The same two different pages as in early March, when you edited the template before removing these two links later.

You have misquoted my edits, as you are mistakenly one away from 43437510, "match related template descriptions, remove wikilinks".

No, I was talking about the two links in "Revision as of 2006-03-01 03:08:24; William Allen Simpson". There are no more links in your next revision.

Also, you are misquoting my edit history: "revert, removing links from template itself".

The incorrect / misleading / obsolete, pick what you like, statement was "Shortcuts are reserved for Wikipedia project reference pages (WP: namespace) only", in other words all shortcuts start with WP: going to ns:Project = Wikipedia namespace pages. That's what I tried to fix, clearly indicated by "generally, there's also CAT / P / WT, and a few help pages use WP".

I've made no comment what-so-ever about any "only WP" text used elsewhere in the past. That is not relevant here.

--William Allen Simpson 01:15, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, what's relevant for you is obviously unrelated to what's relevant for me, I wanted to update the old "WP only project" issue, best explained on the two linked pages. If you write revert I take it that you disagree with that reasoning, not that you're talking about a completely different issue, the effect of links wrt "what links here".

And in your older edit where you removed the important links first the edit summary match related template descriptions, remove wikilinks didn't explain what that's about. I've still no clue what the left hand side means, and that the right hand side was important is only now clear after you've explained it here.

We had completely orthogonal goals with those edits. I was worried about cross namespace redirect ASR issues and a Wikipedia_talk:Shortcut#WP_namespace_requirement debate quoting precisely the old misleading wording with "WP namespace only" from {{R from shortcut}}. -- Omniplex 02:16, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gif things

Your gif versions of current images have been deleted as redundant. Wikipedia has no obligation to support software that most of the world does not use, therefore as png and svg are standard, I seriously doubt that we would go back to gif format. Most of the world uses browsers capable of veiwing those. If yours doesn't I am sorry for the inconvenience, but going back to technology from 1995 for one user does not make sense. Thank you. pschemp | talk 02:27, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Welcome-to-wikimedia.jpg

I found the correct template for it. Its {{software-screenshot}}, for screenshots of copyrighted computer software. Sorry about having tagged it as specifically being software for windows before. Kevin_b_er 02:49, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Archives