User talk:Izkala

Gerda

... and thanks for all the box help --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:49, 19 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

L8RG8R

You will be missed. Another thing we need 'round here is template {{Go back in time}} (ref.), so there would be more "do overs"! Be prosperous! Paine 21:22, 19 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Roger that, ea6416fc. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 22:51, 19 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Peace

My review of 2015, secretly called the year with you, and the peace bell by Yunshui, with best wishes! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:20, 31 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year, Alakzi!

Happy New Year!

Alakzi,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:00, 1 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Happy New Year, Alakzi!

Happy New Year!

Alakzi,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. –Davey2010 ^{Merry Xmas / Happy New Year} 21:31, 1 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Welcome!

Or should I say welcome back? Nice to see you editing a bit. I took a prolonged break myself. ~ Rob^Talk 20:18, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Rob. Happy to see you're still around. Izkala (talk) 20:40, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Welcome back! (Funny is that I figured this was you before I even went to this talk page.) Steel1943 (talk) 17:18, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Shucks, I thought reversing my name was the perfect plan. ;-) Thanks Steel. Izkala (talk) 17:28, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Happy dance! remember the reflection pictured once on your user page! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:31, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I do believe I owe you a cat picture ;) Opabinia regalis (talk) 20:14, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Perfect, just what I had in mind! Will add to the QAIboxes. - What should I do about my edit notice? - Change or keep for history? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:26, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ha, I actually forgot I said that. It seems so long ago now. Izkala (talk) 22:09, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

don't forget because it's good ;) - "You are an emotional person and need to feel loved or surrounded." "Quite shy or reserved yet still valuing friends and communication." [1] --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:30, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"Cat sees you giving the victory sign and not to be outdone..." Izkala (talk) 22:09, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

How about archiving a bit, to have this cat show when people hover over the link to your talk, not the crying one?

Let's leave it the way it is for now. I don't wanna get too invested. :-) Izkala (talk) 13:49, 13 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You probably never got pinged here ;) - template talk below, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:58, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What do you think of introducing Izkala-colours here for the column "genre", making the hidden sort visible? Thinking of pale colours, as in List. Ideally, the works with WoO numbers, so far still listed, should go to the table. - Ideas for other improvement welcome. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:35, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It sounds like it might be useful. Do you need help with it? Izkala (talk) 23:56, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I first have other topics, articles to write, then beauty ;) - First step: integrate the other works, and there will be more. - Then: once decided which colour to use for which genre: there must be ways to not go field by field then when applying, right? - Different question: I need your eyes again, because I don't see why in the Precious on this page, the link from the number doesn't go to the id. (Usually it's misspelling or a forgotten underscore, but I am blind here.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:10, 22 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your assistance for the works box! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:48, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm delighted to see you back and look forward to working with you again. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:45, 13 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Andy - I look forward to it too. Izkala (talk) 13:49, 13 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Echo the good thoughts and feelings, it feels good that you're editing again! Paine 03:32, 23 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Paine! Izkala (talk) 10:27, 23 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Pleasure! Paine

!kcab emocleW .detiderc-er tog stide dlo ruoy lla tub nalp tcefrep eht neeb evah dluow tI Bazj (talk) 20:33, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

hahaha, thanks Bazj! Izkala (talk) 21:01, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox legislative election

Hello again. Is there any chance you could get the "New" output for parties in this template to display right-aligned? I recently updated Kosovan parliamentary election, 2014 with it, and whilst any numbers right-align, the "New" seems to left-align by default. I assume this means tweaking {{Infobox legislative election/row}}, but I can't see anything that may be causing that to happen. Cheers, Number 5 7 21:33, 12 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ugh. #ifexpr would print an error because 'new' isn't a number; the error included quote marks which would confuse the tokeniser, closing the style attribute early and cutting the text-align rule in half. Izkala (talk) 00:22, 13 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Doug's TFD close script

How the hell do I use this thing? I've got myself all worked up trying to figure out how to get this thing working. ~ Rob^Talk 00:15, 13 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There should be a new dropdown next to 'View history' on the tab bar. You need to be editing the section. Izkala (talk) 00:21, 13 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nope. Mind supplying a screenshot? ~ Rob^Talk 00:26, 13 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Emailed it to you. Izkala (talk) 00:31, 13 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Finally got the damn thing working by direct pasting the script into my common.js page. Go figure. There was nothing in the More tab before. ~ Rob^Talk 00:35, 13 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That's weird - might be it conflicted with another script? Whenever a script won't work, there'll usually be a related error in your browser console. Izkala (talk) 00:45, 13 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Unicode

Hi Izkala, I notice you closed the TfD for {{Unicode}} as "delete" the other day, and the bots are now busy to presumably prepare for the deletion. Now, I recognize I'm late to the party and your close was entirely justified by consensus, but could I still plead for an application of IAR and ask you to leave the template undeleted for the time being? I have no objections to phasing out its use, if, as people seem to have found, it's no longer needed, but if it gets deleted there will be huge swathes of article history that become unreadable. I have a lot of linguistics-related articles on my watch, and since this is an inline template, as soon as it gets deleted the actual content of old revisions will no longer be displayable. Can we please just keep the template around as "deprecated" or something? Fut.Perf. ☼ 17:23, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Future Perfect at Sunrise: According to its documentation, the template was always supposed to be SUBST'd. Perhaps a bot should do just that? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:32, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No, {{Unicode}} was never substed – the note to that effect was only added yesterday [2], and from my own experience I can safely say that it was routinely left unsubsted in most articles by most editors (for better or worse). It's being substed by the bots right now, which means it's basically just removed, because it was essentially vacuous in its most recent versions. That's fine, but it doesn't solve my problem: No matter what we do now, on a page like this [3], all old revisions before today will be forever unreadable, because every single occurrence of the template will be displayed as a redlink to the string "unicode" rather than the actual inline text content. This will effectively cut off thousands of pages from their page histories for all non-expert readers (i.e. everybody who's not adept at reading pages in source code). It's still >58,000 pages according to current transclusion count, and that even despite the ongoing removals. Fut.Perf. ☼ 17:43, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, this is exactly the same situation as with {{Polytonic}}, which was kept as deprecated for exactly this reason. Fut.Perf. ☼ 17:45, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

How about deleting it then recreating it as a redirect to {{Text}}? This would implement the close and preserve page histories. ~ Rob^Talk 18:08, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Fine with me, although I don't really see the point (apart from paying formal tribute to the procedural correctness of the close). Fut.Perf. ☼ 18:12, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for bringing this up. I've amended my closure. Izkala (talk) 18:32, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot. Fut.Perf. ☼ 19:27, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Future Perfect at Sunrise: The reason why I recommend deleting and redirecting (or just redirecting) is to prevent redundancy among templates. The reason I recommended deleting is just to get rid of the page history to prevent confusion, but that bit isn't too important. I'll redirect to {{text}} as soon as there are no transclusions. ~ Rob^Talk 20:57, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well, there is something misleading about redirecting Unicode, an obsolete template that used to serve one purpose, to Text, a template that serves a completely different purpose. I feel like redirects should bear an ever so slight semantic relation to their target. Izkala (talk) 22:16, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Carl Nielsen works

Hi. You have just added information about microformats to the documentation of {{Carl Nielsen works}}, but I've checked the generated html and I can see no microformats (stuff like <span title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rfr_id=info%3A..." class="Z3988"><span style="display:none;"> </span>) so can you please either explain why the information is needed (in which case I will learn something new) or remove it again? Thanks. --Mirokado (talk) 11:33, 23 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The title's been marked up as an hcard, though what purpose this serves I cannot tell. Izkala (talk) 11:51, 23 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the link. I was getting confused between hcard metadata and the COinS metadata used in citations. --Mirokado (talk) 15:29, 23 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2016_April_11#Template:FratMember

Hmm. I didn't 2 vs. 1 represented enough for decision in favor of deletion.Naraht (talk) 20:53, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a vote count and all that. (You're actually quite lucky to have received a third opinion at TfD... mumbles under his breath about the state of TfD) Redundancy is a strong reason for deletion. It was shown these templates are redundant to another set of templates, and I didn't find anything in your comments to explain why they should instead be kept. Specifically:

You said other templates in that same category are intended for chapters. A fair point, but chapter templates were not up for deletion.
Your second point was about how the chapter parameter is needed. Well, conveniently, {{Mem/f}} has all of the same parameters as {{FratMember}}.

If I've misjudged, I'll be happy to reopen the discussion; but I'm averse to do so simply to have a fourth or fifth participant echo what's already been said. Izkala (talk) 21:56, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

My larger concern is how is it made sure that the templates get replaced correctly?Naraht (talk) 21:16, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A template editor will replace all of them like this. If you see no issues with my replacement then there's nothing to worry about. Izkala (talk) 22:06, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Template:School block

Well, far be it from me to want to collide with the chip on your shoulder, mate, but closing a TfD in the middle of very active discussion and then interpreting 5:1 keeps as "no consensus" strikes me debatable, to say the least. Since I have little experience in dealing with such issues, I'll abide by what the other participants may have to say on that.-- Elmidae (talk · contribs) 12:33, 12 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Impossible! The chip on my shoulder defies the laws of physics. I've closed it as a 'no consensus' 'cause I thought the arguments on both sides were light on actual research; but this is one of those times that the more you write in your closing statement, the worse it is for everybody. It was clear that no consensus would develop for merging the two templates and I thought it best to put an end to the spat. These aren't getting merged - which is what most people wanted - so let's just all of us walk away from this dead horse. The newly-created set of templates is in the queue for deletion. Izkala (talk) 12:46, 12 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Very well; the close struck me as mis-timed and I don't much like this bombing into the middle of a debate when people may still have things to discuss, but you are presumably right re effective outcomes.-Elmidae (talk · contribs) 13:10, 12 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have a bit of a procedural "beef" with this close. This template had no TfD notice on it for all but the last 24 hours or so, because the nominator didn't bother to submit a template-protected edit request for quite some time. I don't disagree with your close, but would you mind procedurally relisting it? Lots of admins use and watchlist this template, and they should get an opportunity to weigh in on whichever side they fall. Maybe consensus will come out of that. I don't mean to be overly bureaucratic, but deletion notices are one of those things that we really should follow, because it draws in more eyes and more perspectives from the editors who actually use the template. ~ Rob^Talk 14:45, 12 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm gonna have to insist in this instance. It'd be far more productive to renominate with a clearer plan of action, addressing all of the concerns that have been raised and (their) adopting a more conciliatory tone. Maybe end on something like 'what do you all think?' to dissuade people from casting their !vote early. I'd have heeded your advice if my close had brought a change to the status quo, but - as it is - I see no good coming from reopening the discussion. Izkala (talk) 15:12, 12 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough, thanks for the response. ~ Rob^Talk 15:14, 12 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Favor?

Mind doing me a quick favor and making an edit to my sandbox? You can just blank the page. I want to test a recent change to the rollback function, but to do that, I need a test page in my userspace that doesn't have just my edits on it. Thanks! ~ Rob^Talk 02:44, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) @BU Rob13: Are you sure you want to roll back [4]? ;) Opabinia regalis (talk) 04:16, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I put it back when I was done. Unfortunately, this confirmed what I feared. The update to rollback has absolutely neutered the massRollback script that is extremely important when handling the few sockpuppeteers I keep track of. I need someone to yell at about this. Probably someone at the WMF. ~ Rob^Talk 04:28, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry Rob, I was sleeping. What have they changed with rollback? Izkala (talk) 09:25, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed this myself the other day when I went to use it. The best thing I could explain is that there is some rate limit on there now. But it doesn't explain why only one rollback tab opens instead of 50.—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 15:38, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

They originally changed it so rollbacking requires a confirmation if you directly access the URL, which meant you had to manually confirm every single tab that opened when you used massRollback. It became easier to just click the buttons. They've since rolled that back after it broke almost every anti-vandalism tool (Twinkle, Huggle, the various bots, etc). ~ Rob^Talk 15:40, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your username.

You know I just realized that your current username is just your old username backwards. LOL. Talk about my powers of observation. :p—^cyberpower_Chat:Online 15:33, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

most things are backwards and we never take notice, I wouldn't feel too bad about it. Izkala (talk) 15:58, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]