![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | → | Archive 5 |
Edittools can't use in Special:Upload page -- Watcharakorn 09:57, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
I'd like to add a line like the following to the bottom of this section:
I believe this will head off legal threats of all stripes, as the courts (in the U.S., at least) are keen to enforce arbitration clauses, thereby reducing their caseloads. bd2412 T 16:52, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
This is an unbelievably bad idea for many reasons. I will stop editing if it takes away my legal rights. FREEDOM ! FREEDOM ! FREEDOM! WAS 4.250 19:36, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
IANAL and you are... could you spell out, in basic terms, what such a change would do? Specific fuzzy questions come to mind: would it change the status of the ArbCom in any meaningful way? Does Wikipedia:No binding decisions come to bear at all? What kind legal cases could it in practice end up shielding Wikipedia from? And a non-legal concern: wouldn't it have a chilling effect, leading some people who might make edits to avoid doing so in order to keep legal options open? Take the Seigenthaler (sp?) case. Many have stated "well, he should have fixed his page". His reasons for not doing so were valid, but not compelling. If this text were there at the time, he would have had a compelling reason to not make any edits. — Bunchofgrapes ( talk) 01:09, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
So anyone can edit Wikipedia, except noobs, those who disagree with Snowspinner and anyone who doesn't think the cabal is always right? Jeez, what next? There used to be a wiki here, of sorts, now it's getting like Talibanistan. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.206.87.165 ( talk • contribs) .
Responses to points above:
This may be a silly question, but how broadly are we defining "disputes" here? I'm concerned, in particular, with cases like User:Amalekite—could the presence of this clause provide a defense for off-Wikipedia harassment of editors? — Kirill Lokshin 17:54, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
What problem do you think it would solve? No, that's not a rhetorical question. I can see that it might help with the people who contribute material and subsequently try to withdraw "permission" to use it when they discover that they can't control the subsequent editing of it. I don't think it would help with people who think their publicist should have the right to vet anything Wikipedia says about them. I don't think it would help with someone who loses money as a result of inaccurate information he got from Wikipedia and wants WIkipedia to make him whole. And, of course, it would give people a good reason for not trying to fix inaccuracies themselves: ("I was going to remove the nasty remark about me about me, until I realized that if I edited the article I'd be surrendering my legal rights...") Dpbsmith (talk) 19:19, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
I don't want this added, unless you've a got a definitive lawyer's opinion saying it will make a positive difference. Adding more text to the existing message ensures none of the text will be read. Also, I think there's no comparison to an internal informal dispute resolution system and binding arbitration (which involves an independent neutral party agreed by both sides, which can rule against either side, even awarding damages against the party that insisted on arbitration). If you want people to explicitly agree to individual terms, abolish anons, and force explicit "tick offs" of key terms in the signup/registration. If you're not going to do that, then live with the fact most people don't read most of what's in front of them. -- Rob 22:58, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
I'm not a lawyer, so sorry if I pretended I know the law, as I don't. But through my non-lawyer ignorance, I seriously doubt this approach. One obvious flaw in logic, is your use of the word "here" in "dispute resolution processes available here". Do you mean here or do you mean here or here. Where exactly is "here"? Of course, this page simply links to other pages, which also have many variations, even vandalized variations. I realize electronic documents have long been accepted in courts, but I'm rather surprised to learn that documents with no known single author, no standard version, and semi-anonymous persons are now accepted. -- Rob 19:45, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
Is there any chance someone with the relevant permissions could put a hash (#) into the 'insert' box? My keyboard doesn't have one and it's a bind to have to find one to copy when numbering references and so on. Thanks. -- Cherry blossom tree 22:25, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
Could someone add the unicode non-breaking space to the list? — Locke Cole 10:04, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
Not strictly true. Any GFDL-compatible resource can be. Terra Green 01:29, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
Is anyone opposed to color-coding the character sets, so that characters are easier to find? Nothing crazy, just make it so that a single set isn't the same color as those around it, I guess. — 0918 BRIAN • 2006-01-12 07:55
Possible colors are listed at the bottom of MediaWiki:Common.css. — 0918 BRIAN • 2006-01-12 08:29
You removed en-dash from the box. I just put it back. — Matthew Brown ( T: C) 08:51, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
It looks good, but the dropdown menu says "API" instead of "IPA". I tried to fix it, but it didn't work. Also, we don't need "AHD" since we don't use that transliteration system here. -- Angr ( tɔk) 14:25, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
This new format looks absolutely horrendous. Although I like that some extras have been included (#redirect, for example), please keep it compact.-- cj | talk 14:34, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
Works fine when using a mouse, but if you try to use the up/down arrow keys nothing happens. (Firefox 1.5) — Locke Cole • t • c 17:00, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
onkeyup="chooseCharSubset(selectedIndex)"
to the <select>
tag that gets created in addCharSubsetMenu
). And another suggestion that may solve the flicker problem when you load the editor: add style="display: none; visible: hidden;"
to each <p>
tag in
MediaWiki:Edittools. So, for example, <p class="specialbasic" id="Cyrillic">
becomes <p class="specialbasic" id="Cyrillic" style="display: none; visible: hidden;">
. —
Locke Cole •
t •
c
19:51, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
Maybe add __TOC__, __NOTOC__, etc? — Locke Cole • t • c 19:44, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
If someone can make a decent-sized list of math-related characters, a "math" section could be added. — 0918 BRIAN • 2006-01-13 22:50
people keep talking about a drop down box but i don't see one (i'm using firefox 1.0.7). Plugwash 23:47, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
I posted at first on Village pump, and I was directed here. The deal that now I have huge troubles contributing in my language (Lithuanian). I would like to see Lithuanian language having its own section in the drop down meniu with these symbols: Ą ą Č č Ę ę Ė ė Į į Š š Ų ų Ū ū Ž ž. Thanks, Renata 06:16, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
In Firefox 1.5, when I select Vietnamese special characters, I get a list of special Romanian characters instead. Romanian seems to have switched with something else. It seems to work as expected on IE. DHN 12:36, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
Most likely the problem is that your computer doesn't have the latest version of MediaWiki:Monobook.js, or of MediaWiki:Edittools. You need to have the latest versions of both for everything to appear right. You should be able to just hit CTRL+F5 on an edit page to get both of them, but if that doesn't work, do that at both of the pages listed above. — 0918 BRIAN • 2006-01-14 13:41
to tell people that if they have problems they need to do ctrl+refresh. Plugwash 14:51, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
Here are the special characters used in the Dutch language that are supported by Unicode — Ruud 18:29, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
ÄäËëÏïÖöÜü ÁáÉéÍíÓóÚú ÀàÈèÌìÒòÙù Êê IJij
Press CTRL+F5 to see Dutch/Frisian now. — 0918 BRIAN • 2006-01-15 00:11
<p id="Dutch/Frisian" class="speciallang" style="display: none; visibility: hidden;"> <charinsert>Ä ä Ë ë Ï ï Ö ö Ü ü </charinsert> · <charinsert>Á á É é Í í Ó ó Ú ú </charinsert> · <charinsert>À à È è Ì ì Ò ò Ù ù </charinsert> · <charinsert>Â â Ê ê Î î Ô ô Û û </charinsert> · <charinsert>IJ ij Ÿ ÿ </charinsert> · <charinsert>ſ </charinsert> · <charinsert>ƒ € </charinsert> </p>
No I don't really like to monospaced font. Also I think it very much depends on the kind of article that your are editing which will be the most used, further more, I think the wiki codes are used mostly by more experienced editors, who will know them by heart anyway, so they are not very useful as the default. Cheers, — Ruud 00:18, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
Here is an updated version of German and a new version for French (edit this section to copy them). — Ruud 02:18, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
The Korean alphabet doesn't really work linearly. The Korean letter for s is ㅅ, a is ㅏ, and k is ㄱ, but the syllable sak isn't ㅅㅏㄱ, it's 삭. So unless we want to add characters for every possible Korean syllable (I don't), it's probably best not to offer Korean as a menu option. -- Angr ( tɔk) 19:33, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | → | Archive 5 |
Edittools can't use in Special:Upload page -- Watcharakorn 09:57, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
I'd like to add a line like the following to the bottom of this section:
I believe this will head off legal threats of all stripes, as the courts (in the U.S., at least) are keen to enforce arbitration clauses, thereby reducing their caseloads. bd2412 T 16:52, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
This is an unbelievably bad idea for many reasons. I will stop editing if it takes away my legal rights. FREEDOM ! FREEDOM ! FREEDOM! WAS 4.250 19:36, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
IANAL and you are... could you spell out, in basic terms, what such a change would do? Specific fuzzy questions come to mind: would it change the status of the ArbCom in any meaningful way? Does Wikipedia:No binding decisions come to bear at all? What kind legal cases could it in practice end up shielding Wikipedia from? And a non-legal concern: wouldn't it have a chilling effect, leading some people who might make edits to avoid doing so in order to keep legal options open? Take the Seigenthaler (sp?) case. Many have stated "well, he should have fixed his page". His reasons for not doing so were valid, but not compelling. If this text were there at the time, he would have had a compelling reason to not make any edits. — Bunchofgrapes ( talk) 01:09, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
So anyone can edit Wikipedia, except noobs, those who disagree with Snowspinner and anyone who doesn't think the cabal is always right? Jeez, what next? There used to be a wiki here, of sorts, now it's getting like Talibanistan. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.206.87.165 ( talk • contribs) .
Responses to points above:
This may be a silly question, but how broadly are we defining "disputes" here? I'm concerned, in particular, with cases like User:Amalekite—could the presence of this clause provide a defense for off-Wikipedia harassment of editors? — Kirill Lokshin 17:54, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
What problem do you think it would solve? No, that's not a rhetorical question. I can see that it might help with the people who contribute material and subsequently try to withdraw "permission" to use it when they discover that they can't control the subsequent editing of it. I don't think it would help with people who think their publicist should have the right to vet anything Wikipedia says about them. I don't think it would help with someone who loses money as a result of inaccurate information he got from Wikipedia and wants WIkipedia to make him whole. And, of course, it would give people a good reason for not trying to fix inaccuracies themselves: ("I was going to remove the nasty remark about me about me, until I realized that if I edited the article I'd be surrendering my legal rights...") Dpbsmith (talk) 19:19, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
I don't want this added, unless you've a got a definitive lawyer's opinion saying it will make a positive difference. Adding more text to the existing message ensures none of the text will be read. Also, I think there's no comparison to an internal informal dispute resolution system and binding arbitration (which involves an independent neutral party agreed by both sides, which can rule against either side, even awarding damages against the party that insisted on arbitration). If you want people to explicitly agree to individual terms, abolish anons, and force explicit "tick offs" of key terms in the signup/registration. If you're not going to do that, then live with the fact most people don't read most of what's in front of them. -- Rob 22:58, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
I'm not a lawyer, so sorry if I pretended I know the law, as I don't. But through my non-lawyer ignorance, I seriously doubt this approach. One obvious flaw in logic, is your use of the word "here" in "dispute resolution processes available here". Do you mean here or do you mean here or here. Where exactly is "here"? Of course, this page simply links to other pages, which also have many variations, even vandalized variations. I realize electronic documents have long been accepted in courts, but I'm rather surprised to learn that documents with no known single author, no standard version, and semi-anonymous persons are now accepted. -- Rob 19:45, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
Is there any chance someone with the relevant permissions could put a hash (#) into the 'insert' box? My keyboard doesn't have one and it's a bind to have to find one to copy when numbering references and so on. Thanks. -- Cherry blossom tree 22:25, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
Could someone add the unicode non-breaking space to the list? — Locke Cole 10:04, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
Not strictly true. Any GFDL-compatible resource can be. Terra Green 01:29, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
Is anyone opposed to color-coding the character sets, so that characters are easier to find? Nothing crazy, just make it so that a single set isn't the same color as those around it, I guess. — 0918 BRIAN • 2006-01-12 07:55
Possible colors are listed at the bottom of MediaWiki:Common.css. — 0918 BRIAN • 2006-01-12 08:29
You removed en-dash from the box. I just put it back. — Matthew Brown ( T: C) 08:51, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
It looks good, but the dropdown menu says "API" instead of "IPA". I tried to fix it, but it didn't work. Also, we don't need "AHD" since we don't use that transliteration system here. -- Angr ( tɔk) 14:25, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
This new format looks absolutely horrendous. Although I like that some extras have been included (#redirect, for example), please keep it compact.-- cj | talk 14:34, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
Works fine when using a mouse, but if you try to use the up/down arrow keys nothing happens. (Firefox 1.5) — Locke Cole • t • c 17:00, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
onkeyup="chooseCharSubset(selectedIndex)"
to the <select>
tag that gets created in addCharSubsetMenu
). And another suggestion that may solve the flicker problem when you load the editor: add style="display: none; visible: hidden;"
to each <p>
tag in
MediaWiki:Edittools. So, for example, <p class="specialbasic" id="Cyrillic">
becomes <p class="specialbasic" id="Cyrillic" style="display: none; visible: hidden;">
. —
Locke Cole •
t •
c
19:51, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
Maybe add __TOC__, __NOTOC__, etc? — Locke Cole • t • c 19:44, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
If someone can make a decent-sized list of math-related characters, a "math" section could be added. — 0918 BRIAN • 2006-01-13 22:50
people keep talking about a drop down box but i don't see one (i'm using firefox 1.0.7). Plugwash 23:47, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
I posted at first on Village pump, and I was directed here. The deal that now I have huge troubles contributing in my language (Lithuanian). I would like to see Lithuanian language having its own section in the drop down meniu with these symbols: Ą ą Č č Ę ę Ė ė Į į Š š Ų ų Ū ū Ž ž. Thanks, Renata 06:16, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
In Firefox 1.5, when I select Vietnamese special characters, I get a list of special Romanian characters instead. Romanian seems to have switched with something else. It seems to work as expected on IE. DHN 12:36, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
Most likely the problem is that your computer doesn't have the latest version of MediaWiki:Monobook.js, or of MediaWiki:Edittools. You need to have the latest versions of both for everything to appear right. You should be able to just hit CTRL+F5 on an edit page to get both of them, but if that doesn't work, do that at both of the pages listed above. — 0918 BRIAN • 2006-01-14 13:41
to tell people that if they have problems they need to do ctrl+refresh. Plugwash 14:51, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
Here are the special characters used in the Dutch language that are supported by Unicode — Ruud 18:29, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
ÄäËëÏïÖöÜü ÁáÉéÍíÓóÚú ÀàÈèÌìÒòÙù Êê IJij
Press CTRL+F5 to see Dutch/Frisian now. — 0918 BRIAN • 2006-01-15 00:11
<p id="Dutch/Frisian" class="speciallang" style="display: none; visibility: hidden;"> <charinsert>Ä ä Ë ë Ï ï Ö ö Ü ü </charinsert> · <charinsert>Á á É é Í í Ó ó Ú ú </charinsert> · <charinsert>À à È è Ì ì Ò ò Ù ù </charinsert> · <charinsert>Â â Ê ê Î î Ô ô Û û </charinsert> · <charinsert>IJ ij Ÿ ÿ </charinsert> · <charinsert>ſ </charinsert> · <charinsert>ƒ € </charinsert> </p>
No I don't really like to monospaced font. Also I think it very much depends on the kind of article that your are editing which will be the most used, further more, I think the wiki codes are used mostly by more experienced editors, who will know them by heart anyway, so they are not very useful as the default. Cheers, — Ruud 00:18, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
Here is an updated version of German and a new version for French (edit this section to copy them). — Ruud 02:18, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
The Korean alphabet doesn't really work linearly. The Korean letter for s is ㅅ, a is ㅏ, and k is ㄱ, but the syllable sak isn't ㅅㅏㄱ, it's 삭. So unless we want to add characters for every possible Korean syllable (I don't), it's probably best not to offer Korean as a menu option. -- Angr ( tɔk) 19:33, 15 January 2006 (UTC)