User talk:Jeffro77/Archive2017b

Current 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023

Jan-Jun Jul-Dec

Hi!

I see you are knowledgeable about Witnesses. Are you an ex member? Just curious. Thanks! --ExperiencedArticleFixer (talk) 14:41, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

Nisan

Several years ago, on the Nisan talk page, you asked

"Article says "usually falls in March–April". Does Nisan ever fall outside of those two months?"

It always begins in March or April. It usually begins in March and ends in April. It sometimes begins in April and ends in May. Nisan begins in March or April and ends in April or May. It typically starts at the new moon nearest to the vernal equinox, with the start of Passover (and the middle of Nisan) typically falling at the first full moon after the vernal equinox. 47.139.42.134 (talk) 01:11, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of 2017 Islamic inspired bomb plot on Australian aeroplane for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 2017 Islamic inspired bomb plot on Australian aeroplane is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2017 Islamic inspired bomb plot on Australian aeroplane until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Sport and politics (talk) 19:03, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

Here is a heads up, in case you are interested in user script development...

Hi Jeffro,

It's me again.

The last time I contacted you, you answered with this:

Thanks. I'm not sure my limited foray into JavaScript specifically would be of much benefit to the project, but I could certainly learn a few things. I'll take a look around as time permits.--Jeffro77 (talk) 23:16, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

Since you mentioned interest in learning, perhaps you might find what I've been doing useful for this. I've been building user scripts and taking the extra step to carefully explain the source code (line by line in many cases), on the scripts' talk pages. I also provide convenient links to web pages that explain the concepts involved. The scripts use a lot of techniques that would be applicable to script writing in general (such as setting up clickable menu items, hiding or removing elements by class name, etc.). They might be helpful for someone wanting to improve their JavaScript skills, but they are also far from perfect, so if you notice anything that could be improved (such as my approach, programming style, ideas for cool new features, or even new scripts), I'd be very interested in your feedback.

So far, there is:

• User:The Transhumanist/OutlineViewAnnotationToggler.js – this one provides a menu item to turn annotations on/off, so you can view lists bare when you want to (without annotations). When done, it will work on (the embedded lists of) all pages, not just outlines. Currently it is limited to outlines only, for development and testing purposes. It supports hotkey activation/deactivation of annotations, but that feature currently lacks an accurate viewport location reset for retaining the location on screen that the user was looking at. The program also needs an indicator that tells the user it is still on. Otherwise, you might wonder why a bare list has annotations in edit mode, when you go in to add some. :) Though it is functional as is. Check it out. After installing it, look at Outline of cell biology, and press ⇧ Shift+Alt+a. And again.
• User:The Transhumanist/RedlinksRemover.js – strips out entries in outlines that are nothing but a redlink. It removes them right out of the tree structure. But only end nodes (i.e., not parent nodes, which we need to keep). It delinks redlinks that have non-redlink offspring, or that have or are embedded in an annotation. It does not yet recognize entries that lack a bullet (it treats those as embedded).

It is my objective to build a set of scripts that fully automate the process of creating outlines. This end goal is a long way off (AI-complete?). In the meantime, I hope to increase productivity as much as I can. Fifty percent automation would double an editor's productivity. I think I could reach 80% automation (a five-fold increase in productivity) within a couple years.

There's more:

• User:The Transhumanist/StripSearchInWikicode.js – another script, which strips search results down to a bare list of links, and inserts wikilink formatting for ease of insertion of those links into lists. This is useful for gathering links for outlines. I'd like this script to sort its results. So, if you know how, or know someone who knows how, please let me know. A more immediate problem is that the output is interlaced with CR/LFs. I can't figure out how to get rid of them. Stripping them out in WikEd via regex is a tedious extra step. It would be nice to track them down and remove them with the script.

I look forward to your comments, questions, ideas, and suggestions. The Transhumanist 08:03, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

P.S.: Please ping me so I don't miss your reply. Thanks. -TT

Nice to meet you.

We spoke briefly on the discussion page for the Jehovah's Witnesses article. The number of userboxes on your page is impressive. I almost hatted them when I saw them. Have a great day mate. Edaham (talk) 02:42, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

Hi. There will be no hatting of the userboxes—they are extremely important, for reasons that will probably occur to me at some point in the future. You have a great day too.--Jeffro77 (talk) 07:00, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

Creationism

Hello again. I noticed your recent edit, thanks for that. I remember rewriting the small sentence at Acceptance of evolution#US religious denominations that dispute evolution and it's quite similar, although the source it had (which was there before I rewrote it) was . I just added the two other sources from the Creationism article there. —PaleoNeonate – 04:09, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. The JW position is a little odd in that strictly speaking, they are gap creationists, holding that the universe could have existed for an undefined period (potentially billions of years in agreement with science), and they are day-age creationists, holding that each 'day' after Genesis 1:1 was thousands of years (never 'millions' or 'billions'), but with a typical 'young-earth creationist' view regarding the existence of humans for about 6000 years (as of today based on JW chronology, 6042 years and 47 days <facepalm>). But providing that information in sufficient detail in the relevant articles would probably constitute undue weight.--Jeffro77 (talk) 04:29, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

Yes —PaleoNeonate – 04:42, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

References

Abomination of Desolation

The (two faced) ban on my posting has now expired and Tgeorgescu is now reverting material on the talk page.

You assistance on getting him reported for disruptive editing would be helpful.

Dosclaimer: My IP has changed as I had shut off my DSL modem but the ban on me posting has expired.71.174.127.2 (talk) 17:57, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

No. I'm not going to help promote your theological opinions. Daniel never mentions Jesus. I'm not interested in superstitious Christian interpretations.--Jeffro77 (talk) 23:10, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

I've had a look at what has been deleted from the article Talk page, and I can see why. Wikipedia Talk pages aren't there for you to assert 'what you're taught as a Christian', they're for discussing improvements to article content. You may like to read the relevant policies and guidelines about reliable sources.--Jeffro77 (talk) 00:31, 7 December 2017 (UTC)