|
|
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
119.158.58.205 ( talk) 12:53, 26 May 2023 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
June 12th, 2023 Jokic became a father to his second child, Jimmy Butler. 2600:1700:4C00:29E0:406:3C0B:410F:E7F9 ( talk) 13:23, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
An editor
reverted using the edit summary "what is the point of fiddling with this?
" That's obviously a poor reason to give for revert.
To the point, the edits that were reverted
Unless a reason is provided why those edits are bad, I will re-instate those edits. Up the Walls ( talk) 05:49, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
Although administrators can technically edit a fully protected page ... they're not supposed to abuse that privilege to impose their POV, it's also true that EC editors are not supposed to abuse their ability to edit ECP pages to impose their POV, nor are autoconfirmed editors supposed to abuse that privilege to impose their POV on semiprotected pages, and so on; none of that needs to to repeated in this table. Meanwhile, it's not true that, as you claim in the text you actually added to the table in the same edit,
Even administrators are not allowed to edit fully protected page without a consensus on the talk page, because if a BLP violation is found that should be removed without delay.
Sorry, but when I posted above I'd forgotten that the more obscure protections, including Office, are already listed at the bottom of the table. Given that, there's absolutely no reason to clutter the table proper with that one special case. I've reverted again (keeping one or two useful changes). E Eng 04:13, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Two things: one, what benefit do
MOS:SMALLCAPS provide in this instance? They are certainly harder to read, and thus less accessible. Two, my understanding of how {{
notelist}} works is we can use the |group=
parameter to show only specific references in a specific {{
notelist}}. So we can use something like {{
efn|group=protection-table-note}}
combined with {{
notelist|group=protection-table-note}}
to achieve the desired result and not mess with the notes on the rest of the page.
House
Blaster (
talk · he/him) 18:53, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
Would using bolding be acceptable to you? It really is more annoying to read something in small caps, and I don't see why bolding would not have the same effect. House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 04:43, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
It is true that presenting text in all caps will slow down all readers, especially those with certain types of visual and/or cognitive impairments, and what is good for the sauce (Stanford and Harvard) is good for the gander (Wikipedia). I am going to request a third opinion, because it is clear we are not going to convince one another. House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 19:16, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
To avoid the minor edit war, I have fully protected the template for a month. When consensus is demonstrated, ask me or any admin to restore the previous indefinite semi-protection. @ Up the Walls: You want to change the template. Therefore it is up to you to get agreement on this talk page. If there is objection, you need to demonstrate a consensus supporting your preferred version before changing it again. Leaving nonsense templates such as at User talk:EEng#March 2023 is not a substitute. Johnuniq ( talk) 01:46, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
|
|
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
119.158.58.205 ( talk) 12:53, 26 May 2023 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
June 12th, 2023 Jokic became a father to his second child, Jimmy Butler. 2600:1700:4C00:29E0:406:3C0B:410F:E7F9 ( talk) 13:23, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
An editor
reverted using the edit summary "what is the point of fiddling with this?
" That's obviously a poor reason to give for revert.
To the point, the edits that were reverted
Unless a reason is provided why those edits are bad, I will re-instate those edits. Up the Walls ( talk) 05:49, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
Although administrators can technically edit a fully protected page ... they're not supposed to abuse that privilege to impose their POV, it's also true that EC editors are not supposed to abuse their ability to edit ECP pages to impose their POV, nor are autoconfirmed editors supposed to abuse that privilege to impose their POV on semiprotected pages, and so on; none of that needs to to repeated in this table. Meanwhile, it's not true that, as you claim in the text you actually added to the table in the same edit,
Even administrators are not allowed to edit fully protected page without a consensus on the talk page, because if a BLP violation is found that should be removed without delay.
Sorry, but when I posted above I'd forgotten that the more obscure protections, including Office, are already listed at the bottom of the table. Given that, there's absolutely no reason to clutter the table proper with that one special case. I've reverted again (keeping one or two useful changes). E Eng 04:13, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Two things: one, what benefit do
MOS:SMALLCAPS provide in this instance? They are certainly harder to read, and thus less accessible. Two, my understanding of how {{
notelist}} works is we can use the |group=
parameter to show only specific references in a specific {{
notelist}}. So we can use something like {{
efn|group=protection-table-note}}
combined with {{
notelist|group=protection-table-note}}
to achieve the desired result and not mess with the notes on the rest of the page.
House
Blaster (
talk · he/him) 18:53, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
Would using bolding be acceptable to you? It really is more annoying to read something in small caps, and I don't see why bolding would not have the same effect. House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 04:43, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
It is true that presenting text in all caps will slow down all readers, especially those with certain types of visual and/or cognitive impairments, and what is good for the sauce (Stanford and Harvard) is good for the gander (Wikipedia). I am going to request a third opinion, because it is clear we are not going to convince one another. House Blaster ( talk · he/him) 19:16, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
To avoid the minor edit war, I have fully protected the template for a month. When consensus is demonstrated, ask me or any admin to restore the previous indefinite semi-protection. @ Up the Walls: You want to change the template. Therefore it is up to you to get agreement on this talk page. If there is objection, you need to demonstrate a consensus supporting your preferred version before changing it again. Leaving nonsense templates such as at User talk:EEng#March 2023 is not a substitute. Johnuniq ( talk) 01:46, 24 March 2024 (UTC)