User talk:LiberatorG

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Welcome[edit]

Hello LiberatorG, and Welcome to Wikipedia!

Welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you enjoy the encyclopedia and want to stay. As a first step, you may wish to read the Introduction.

If you have any questions, feel free to ask me at my talk page – I'm happy to help. Or, you can ask your question at the New contributors' help page.


Here are some more resources to help you as you explore and contribute to the world's largest encyclopedia...

Finding your way around:

Need help?

How you can help:

Additional tips...

LiberatorG, good luck, and have fun.Aboutmovies (talk) 06:22, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

hi


URI schemes[edit]

Hi, thanks for explaining the reasoning behind your reverts on URI.

My reasoning for adding strange URI’s is to show the difference between webpage addresses and URL’s.

In practice, most people glance at Wikipedia and move on; they don’t follow all links. That’s why I want strange URI’s in the article.

Happy to reword or pick another place in the document to put these. I think they make the encyclopedia friendlier, funnier, and clearer.

There should be a way to do this that does not harm the clarity of your text or the rest of the exposition. Crasshopper (talk) 13:56, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

@Crasshopper: I'm not sure what you mean by "show the difference between webpage addresses and URL’s", or how a long list of obscure schemes shows that. Most of them are not even wikilinks; I don't see how anyone would know what something like "things" refers to in your list or how it would help them to have it listed with no link or other explanation. Three of your links point to disambiguation pages, which is also not helpful. Even the provided links are generally of no help; links like adiumxtra just take the reader to the Adium article which has no information about the adiumxtra scheme. IP over Avian Carriers is not only an April Fools joke but is also below the network layer and not even related to the URI scheme. There is already a table for schemes with articles in Template:URI schemes, which is already included at the end of the URI article. If you still think that listing obscure schemes in the URI article is appropriate, please bring it up on the article's Talk page; I am happy to follow whatever consensus is decided there. -LiberatorG (talk) 01:36, 2 July 2018 (UTC)


ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:05, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:09, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Jeffrey Tucker quotes[edit]

You are welcome to add the quotes you like — Preceding unsigned comment added by HHHIsMyHomeBoy (talkcontribs) 18:50, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Scale of justice 2.svgHello, LiberatorG. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Request for opinion[edit]

Sir, can I request your opinion on the discussion "Timeline of computer security hacker history" which is located on my talk page? Please leave your opinion/comments on my talk page instead of here if you have one. Mdikici4001 (talk) 02:49, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message[edit]

Scale of justice 2.svgHello, LiberatorG. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Code page 866[edit]

Thank you for that. I was, of course, purely thinking in terms of box drawing in existing text files in OEM-437 (hence "OEM box drawing characters"), and that 866 is the only encoding supported by modern browsers that will display them correctly. I had not noticed that I had made an incorrect statement (because, of course, the characters themselves are included in Unicode and thus UTF-8, just not in the same representations).

I'm somewhat considering adding it back with corrections, but suspect viewing old pre-Unicode text files with box drawing in a web browser is probably too niche a usage case to be worth mentioning. -- HarJIT (talk) 21:10, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

@HarJIT: If you want to share old pre-Unicode text files containing non-ASCII characters, it is generally better to convert them to a Unicode encoding first. That will work regardless of its code page, and you wouldn't have to verify that the only non-ASCII characters in use are the box drawing characters. You could then use the content with a wider variety of modern tools and editors, copy and paste into other Unicode files, etc. -LiberatorG (talk) 16:26, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Article Sarojini Naidu[edit]

Hello LiberatorG, this image is a clear portrait of the person. Don't you think so? --Gpkp (utc) 15:38, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

Sorry, I only intended to revert the IP edit before yours and your first edit which was fixing leftovers from that one, but you made another edit in the mean time. I've restored your second edit. Thanks for pointing it out. LiberatorG (talk) 15:42, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
That's ok. Thank you for restoring. --Gpkp (utc) 15:47, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

wth ?[edit]

'scuse me but did you get confused about what you were talking about or something ? cf ten-four-fox, I know Cameron a little, he is not the type of person to waste the little spare time he has on worthless junk. He didn't wake up one morning and think, "Oh gosh, I guess I'll write a browser for the older Mac systems !" and then discovered that by gosh, Mozilla is ending support for that platform ! What a coincidence !

He started the project BECAUSE of the end of old-mac support, not in parallel !

And that's not a biased point of view, it's simple fact and common sense. Why would anyone just accidentally decide to write an application for OS/2 if IBM were still doing it ?

I'ma gonna go back there and revert your revert, because I think you were not thinking clearly on this one. If you want to argue I'll ask Cameron to phone in on the subject.

thanks !

216.189.15.112 (talk) 14:52, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

The only part of your changes that I reverted is where you referred to modern Firefox features as "pointless dreck". It is fine for you to have that opinion but articles must be written from a neutral point of view. I did not revert your change from "in parallel" to "in response"; that was a good change and is still in the current article. LiberatorG (talk) 17:08, 28 August 2018 (UTC)