User talk:Sardanaphalus

This user is one of the 400 most active English Wikipedians of all time.

Barnstar

	The Working Man's Barnstar
	Your contributions to the finer details of Wiki markup on various articles, at a rapid rate, is noticed and appreciated by others. Leep up the good work! MezzoMezzo (talk) 06:25, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

• Thank you! Sardanaphalus (talk) 10:44, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks

Just wanted to say thanks for finding the simplest and best solution to the '1 were absent' (instead of '1 was absent') problem at Template:Infobox UN resolution, which I had earlier tried and failed to fix, having somehow failed to notice that dropping 'were' solves the problem. Tlhslobus (talk) 18:46, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

• Happy to hear when something small happens to put something to rest – it sounds like another example of the "fresh pair of eyes" effect. Thanks for passing on, Sardanaphalus (talk) 20:42, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

language template

Hey, good luck figuring out the language templates. It'll be good to have more people who understand them. — kwami (talk) 17:46, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

• Thanks for your good wishes. It's been a while since I looked at those templates, though, so I suspect I'll need to start again. Regards, Sardanaphalus (talk) 21:15, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

Technical move of Template:Kosovo-note

Hello Sardanaphalus. I declined this as a technical move, but you can still open a WP:RM if you wish. The name of Template:Kosovo-note is not visible to our readers since it is only transcluded and is never linked from articles. So removing the hyphen would not produce a reader-visible change. It has only internal significance (the name will still be seen by some people who are reading or modifying the wikitext). Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 23:34, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

• I added it merely for the sake of naming consistency. But, understood. Sardanaphalus (talk) 08:24, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

Example needed

Thank you for your edit to this template, but please be aware that certain features of templates have a function, even if you do not know it. I had to restore the previous version. Debresser (talk) 12:22, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

• Maybe note these features in and/or add cautionary comments to the template's documentation/code? Sardanaphalus (talk) 12:30, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

All maintenance templates have the remarks at the beginning and the end, and that is not mentioned anywhere. Template editors are supposed to know how templates work. And to understand that they shouldn't touch what they don't have to, per Wikipedia:If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Debresser (talk) 17:56, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

• Puzzled. Sardanaphalus (talk) 19:06, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

But I very much like your addition of the possibility to write "examples", and I restored that (with a small technical change). Sorry, that I didn't have the time to look into your edit in more detail till now. Debresser (talk) 23:05, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

• I think that was all I was trying to do, so my apologies if that caused a malfunction somewhere. Thanks for your repair, Sardanaphalus (talk) 23:19, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

Template:Campaignbox Mongol invasions and conquests

With al due respect, your merging and moving of Mongol activities has turned Template:Campaignbox Mongol invasions and conquests in a war ravaged territory. Is it possible to fix the two links to disambiguation pages (Battle of Bhamo, Mongol invasions of Burma) as it is now a rather complex matter. The set is now rather confusing. Thanks in advance! The Banner talk 22:21, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

• I don't recall changing any of the template's content, so I think those links must've been a rather complex matter before my contribution. (I see that one of them has just been amended.) I changed the template's layout as I felt it would be more useful if it presented something beyond a single undifferentiated list of links. Perhaps, though, there's a more appropriate structure than according to continent/region? Sardanaphalus (talk) 08:34, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Template:Infobox Bible translation

A piped link in Template:Infobox Bible translation isn't working correctly. I noticed in the infobox on American Standard Version that the wikisource link was formatted as:

s:Bible (American Standard)American Standard Version

It should display American Standard Version

It displays as if there were no pipe: Here's the line of template code:

| ''[[s:{{{wikisource|}}}{{{translation_title|}}}]]'' at [[Wikisource]]<!--

Should the pipe after "wikisource" be {{!}} instead? And why is there a pipe after "translation_title"? Perhaps the code should have the escaped-pipe in the middle, like this:

| ''[[s:{{{wikisource}}}{{!}}{{{translation_title}}}]]'' at [[Wikisource]]<!--

BTW: I don't think any of your edits caused the problem.
Thanks for your help with this. —Telpardec  TALK  20:54, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

• Thanks for spotting and mentioning this. Looking at the template's recent history, I think it is a "mea culpa" here, but I hope I've now removed the error. Sardanaphalus (talk) 21:07, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

Y All appears OK now. Thanks again. —Telpardec  TALK  00:36, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation pages

Hello, Sardanaphalus. When you changed Episcopate into a disambiguation page, you may not have been aware of WP:FIXDABLINKS, which says:

A code of honor for creating disambiguation pages is to fix all resulting mis-directed links.

Before moving an article to a qualified name (in order to create a disambiguation page at the base name, to move an existing disambiguation page to that name, or to redirect that name to a disambiguation page), click on What links here to find all of the incoming links. Repair all of those incoming links to use the new article name.

It would be a great help if you would check the other Wikipedia articles that contain links to "Episcopate" and fix them to take readers to the correct article. Thanks. R'n'B (call me Russ) 21:29, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

• Thanks for the alert – and yes, it didn't occur to me that replacing a redirection with a disambiguation page could create a problem. As there seem to be a lot of links to check, I've restored the redirection. Sardanaphalus (talk) 22:01, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

• I've just converted Floating into a disambiguation page (with material from Float) but it doesn't look as if any links need redirecting...? Sardanaphalus (talk) 12:45, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

Linewrapping

(Template:Branches of physics)

Line wrap was removed. That's why it malfunctions. Please revert your addition of those changes. --Izno (talk) 22:41, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

• Hello, Izno – Linewrapping will occur (unless a very wide screen is being used), so what I have in mind are those occasions when the start of a parenthesis (a sublist) is wrapped away from the preceding parent-like link because the righthand edge of the template has been reached:

• What
• I
• mean
• is
• something |←template edge
  (like
• this)
• ...

i.e. when there shouldn't be a break between the "something" and the "(like"

• but
• instead
• 
  something (like
• this)
• ...

Sardanaphalus (talk) 23:03, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

I am aware of the exact problem. The functionality was removed for all browsers. It's not that it doesn't work, it's that it's not even present. Introducing local changes to fix a global issue is not the correct way to fix the problem, if you even want to argue that such a problem exists.

Additionally, your changes introduce problems related to the semantic understanding of such lists and for screenreaders.

As I requested, please revert your changes regarding this. --Izno (talk) 02:22, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

• User:Frietjes has reverted the linewrap changes and invited me to join the related discussion at Template talk:Navbox, which I've now done. I hadn't realised that the current formatting didn't try to keep a link followed by the start of a sublist together. Thanks also for pointing out the semantics problem. Sardanaphalus (talk) 10:08, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I saw the invitation after I came to harass you some more. :) --Izno (talk) 04:07, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

Adoption notice

Hi Sardanaphalus,

Thank you very much, that's very kind of you! I didn't edit in the past few months, but I am still happy to be adopted. I'm glad you are interested in the same things as I am. Alma (talk) 19:53, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

• Thanks for your reply. Feel free to post a message here if/when anything remains unresolved and I'll see if I can help. Best wishes, Sardanaphalus (talk) 09:47, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Category:Germany external link citation templates

Category:Germany external link citation templates, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Ricky81682 (talk) 07:52, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Editing templates

Regarding this I think you did miss something - there is a link to "add request". Anyway, I'm fairly sure you meet the criteria so I've added it to your account. Just go carefully with it please, and read Wikipedia:Template editor. Regards — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 15:18, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

• That's generous and encouraging – thank you. Returning to WP:RFP/T, I realise I missed the "Template:95%" because I'd clicked on the "edit this page" tab rather than follow the "add request" link below the navbox. I think I'll add an {{fmbox}} above the navbox that steers applicants toward the link. Thanks again, Sardanaphalus (talk) 09:44, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Sandbox heading

Hi Sardanaphalus. I saw your edit to {{sandbox heading}}, and I disagree strongly with it. The sandbox header is long enough as it is; newbies are not going to want to read a huge slab of information before they edit. As a result, most will either ignore it or give up altogether.

Would you object if I went ahead and removed some of what I consider to be extraneous content from that template? For example, "To see and/or update the results of your editing, click the [Show preview] or [Save page] button. (Occasionally, some changes may not become visible unless the page is saved rather than previewed.)" could simply be reduced to "When done, click Save page." without a great loss of meaning. Another one: "anything added and/or edited here will not remain indefinitely (and other users' edits may mean it is removed sooner rather than later)." could become "anything placed in the Sandbox will not remain indefinitely and is liable to be overwritten" or something. — This, that and the other (talk) 07:13, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

• Thanks for your message. Having revisited the template, I agree – so please go ahead. Regards, Sardanaphalus (talk) 09:18, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
  • I had a bit of a go... if you think I went too far please feel free to revert or selectively revert my changes. Thanks for your response. — This, that and the other (talk) 10:56, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
    • Seems fine to me. I added italics to the "not" and also added the word "there" (although maybe it should be "here"). Sardanaphalus (talk) 14:24, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

Template:Infobox person

I have not investigated the edits at Template:Infobox person, but even if correct, the edits are wrong. Such templates should be changed after consensus emerges on the infobox talk page that the change is desirable. An edit summary such as How about this solution? is not the correct approach when using the template editor user right. Instead, please post on the talk page and explain what the proposed edit does, and describe the state of the sandbox. Then wait for responses before editing the template. Johnuniq (talk) 00:35, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

• Thanks for taking the trouble to leave a message. I'm puzzled by the first sentence, though.

If, by the rest of the message, you're saying I must do all it prescribes for the sake of correcting a fault in the template's formatting (in this case, a disproportionate gap between a heading and the parameter below it) then... am I misunderstanding you?

I can understand that an edit summary such as "How about this solution?", when read out of context, might look incorrect.

Regards, Sardanaphalus (talk) 01:04, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

The context is that there was a minor edit war, with debate-by-edit-summary. That happens in articles, but it should never happen in a template, particularly one which requires an elevated permission to edit. If a change to a template is reverted, the next step is to discuss on the template talk page, even if the original change is "correct". Johnuniq (talk) 02:23, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

• A "war"...?...!

I supplied a solution, via the sandbox/testcases pages, to a formatting problem. User:Pigsonthewing thought it undesirable, so I supplied the "How about this solution?" alternative (again via the sandbox/testcases pages). User:Frietjes then appeared to assume I was using the template as a sandbox – perhaps having not investigated a little – so I reverted the changes made. Is that a "war"?

Sardanaphalus (talk) 10:21, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

I would not call the edit at 23:52 edit-warring, but it was inappropriate as several users have tried to point out. The revert at 00:00 is clear edit-warring and would be wrong on any page, never mind a high-risk template. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:58, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

• How would you characterise the edit and summary at 23:53, i.e. the edit between mine at 23:52 and 00:00...? Sardanaphalus (talk) 20:11, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Sardanaphalus: this was appalling behaviour on a high-risk template. Please do not make any such edits without discussing and getting consensus on the talk page first. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 09:38, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

• "Appalling"...?

How would you characterise vandalism, threats, libel – and the angry, judgemental and sometimes abusive material on talkpages – ?

What happened to "assume good faith"?

Sardanaphalus (talk) 10:21, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

I chose to use strong words because your post above suggested that you did not appreciate why your actions were inappropriate. I thought a strong message from another editor might cause you to step back and rethink. Apparently this has not happened yet. I don't want to overreact and remove the user right, but right now I do not fully trust you to edit high risk templates. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:58, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

• I recognise the mistake I made and regret that all the above was triggered by no more than a wish to iron out a small formatting problem. I feel there has already been overreaction and some jumping to conclusions, although I realise this may be due to {{Infobox person}}'s history – I admit I hadn't looked at it before my own jumping in to edit. Please don't lose sight of assuming good faith, especially as you've perceived as well as assumed it previously. Meanwhile, I've resolved to be less eager around {{Infobox person}} and its ilk. Sincerely, Sardanaphalus (talk) 20:11, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

  Don't worry about it, and eagerness is not the problem. Let me share my idea of how a change should be initiated. If this case, it seems you omitted steps 2, 3, 5, 6, and 7. In other words, you went 1 -> 5 -> 8. See the difference? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 13:16, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

1. Have an idea
2. Share your idea on the template talk page
3. If there is a general positive response ...
4. Put your proposed code in the sandbox and prepare some test cases
5. Ask for feedback on your proposed change, linking to sandbox and testcases
6. Respond to any suggestions, tweak code as necessary
7. If there is firm consensus for the change ...
8. Make the change to the live template.

• PS, you don't need to keep mentioning "assume good faith". I've never doubted your good intentions. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 13:18, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Rename.

Hello, you renamed packing problem to packing problems here. Are you sure this should have been renamed? I don't see it fitting into any of the exceptions. Thoughts? ~a (user • talk • contribs) 14:56, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

• Looking at Wikipedia:Naming conventions (plurals), you don't think the article qualifies as an article "on groups or classes of specific things"...? Its Contents table lists specific examples of four different types (groups/classes) of problems, e.g. the packing of spheres into a Euclidean ball, of spheres in a cuboid and of identical spheres in a cylinder as three examples of packing in three-dimensional containers... Sardanaphalus (talk) 21:48, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Forcing line breaks

see this screenshot for an example of why it's a bad idea to assume everyone is using the same web browser. note, I am referring to the floating dot. Frietjes (talk) 16:29, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

• I don't assume everyone uses the same web browser. I do assume, however, that "em" units are, relatively speaking, the same (or very nearly the same) for everyone. That's probably a mistake. Does the floating dot occur regardless of zoom level? Sardanaphalus (talk) 18:08, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

Template:Parameter names example

Hi Sardanaphalus. I'm a bit curious as to why you created Template:Parameter names example. Now that we have Lua, we really shouldn't be writing templates that go {{#if: {{{1|}}} | foo1 }}{{#if: {{{2|}}} | foo2 }}{{#if: {{{3|}}} | foo3 }}... This kind of thing is easy to do in Lua, and a lot more efficient. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 14:07, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

If that's an offer to convert it into Lua, then yes please, I suppose – especially as {{str letter/trim}} trims numbers from the parameter names as well as spaces and newlines (I suppose the clue is in its name). I'd have to leave the implementation/development of possibilities such as those mentioned in the initial and incomplete documentation I've just added to yourself and/or other Lua speakers, though. In the meantime, do you know if there's a template I've missed that strips spaces and newlines from the end of a string but not numbers? Regards, Sardanaphalus (talk) 10:02, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

If you're still wanting to do things in templates and not in Lua, then the most efficient way is by using {{#if: 1 | {{{1|}}} }}. The #if statement will always be true, so it can be confusing from a logic standpoint, but that will strip whitespace the most efficiently of any template markup that I know. But it's not too hard to do this in Lua; for example, if you use Module:Arguments, it will trim the whitespace for you automatically. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 10:13, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the speedy response!

Regarding {{#if:1 |{{{1|}}} }}, are you suggesting that each

|{{{N|}}}=''{{str letter/trim|{{{N|}}}}}''

becomes

|{{{N|}}}=''{{#if:1 |{{{N|}}} }}'' ...? (for each N = 1 to 61)

Taking on Lua (in order to use Module:Arguments etc) seems a sea-change compared with a gradual accumulation of wiki, CSS and HTML experiences. I can see, though, that the time may come when I'll need to decide whether to invest the energy required to become conversant in it, otherwise forgo template editing. Sardanaphalus (talk) 11:37, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

Well, I decided to go ahead and convert it to Lua - take a look at Module:Parameter names example. Now the template can handle an unlimited number of parameters - but it will only process as many as were specified, so it will be faster than the template version too. If you want to know how any bits of the code work, just let me know, and I'll be happy to help. Also, if you want to add any other display styles, that will be easy now, so feel free to get creative. Best — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 13:39, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

That was quick. I imagine that what's likely to arise first is a case where overriding the default parameter's-value-is-its-name would be useful, i.e. for the template to be able to handle something like {{Pnex |A |B |C=(some text) |X |Y ...}}. Display-wise, though, a combination of braces and italics comes to mind, or, perhaps better still, braces and/or CSS styling (i.e. wrapping each parameter value in the Lua equivalent of a <span>...</span>?). On the other hand, perhaps that might be too open-ended. Thanks for your work. Sardanaphalus (talk) 20:16, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

If you were going to add named parameters, couldn't you just call the template itself with the arguments you want? (See example below.) It seems a bit strange to use a template to call another template when you could just call that template directly. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 23:26, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

This is the title

This is an image (kind of)
The first label	The first data field

I agree, although I'm imagining an override to be occasional rather than common. But it does start to undermine the point of the template. Adding means to include a <pre>-style list of the parameters beside/near the template (for e.g. the sake of a "Syntax and generic example" section on a /doc page) may redeem it, but ideally, I think, {{Pnex}} would work without needing parameter names as its own parameters – or, at least, only needing those to be overridden (so that the code above, for example, would be {{Pnex |C=(some text)}} rather than {{Pnex |A |B etc etc}}). Is it possible for Lua to do anything like that..? Sardanaphalus (talk) 09:10, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

I'm afraid not - we have to supply the parameter list manually. I have added support for custom parameter names though - have a look at the updated template documentation to see exactly what's changed. I figured that it can't hurt to add one or two custom values to an otherwise automatically generated template. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 10:27, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

• I've created a testcase and all looks in order – thanks for implementing/updating. I'm intending to start using the template on a few /doc pages soon, so look forward to seeing what happens. Sardanaphalus (talk) 11:37, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

PS Perhaps some future version of Pnex might mine TemplateData entries for the parameter names..? Sardanaphalus (talk) 12:08, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:If not

Template:If not has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 14:20, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Military portals browsebar

I believe your edits to {{Military portals browsebar}} have broken formatting at Portal:American Revolutionary War, by making the display box extremely wide, at least on Firefox (it seems to display OK on Chrome). Magic♪piano 19:17, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

• Thanks for your alert. I suspect you're correct, although the Firefox-based browser (Palemoon) I'm using here seems to display it without problem. I'll check the formatting and reformat or revert if nothing seems amiss. Sardanaphalus (talk) 12:33, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
• I've now reformatted and restored the Military portals browsebar at the Revolutionary War portal – hopefully all okay..? Sardanaphalus (talk) 22:32, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Yes, it looks much better now. Thanks! Magic♪piano 12:42, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
    • Glad to hear it. And thanks for your "thanks" notification. Sardanaphalus (talk) 10:48, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

July 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Gag bit may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• ; American gag {{nobold|(or '''elevator''' [http://www.horse-tack-and-equestrian-clothing.com/assets/product_images/thumbs/

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 10:37, 25 July 2014 (UTC)