Kevjonesin has given you a c ookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.
To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{ subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{ subst:munch}}!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Cookie
![]() |
Cookies! | |
Kevjonesin has given you some cookies! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can spread the "WikiLove" by giving someone else some cookies, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{ subst:Cookies}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{ subst:munch}}! |
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Cookies
- – — – — °″′≈≠≤≥±−×÷←→§·
hgf–hhh—ggj hgf—jhg – kjh
|
{{kjsml}}
: }
User:Kevjonesin/sandbox/kjsml
: }
![]() | This user is a WikiOtter. |
User:A Fellow Editor/sandbox
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Magic_words#Variables
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:PAGENAME
(in Dutch)
( 中華民國刑法)
Contrib search Kevjonesin filtered for files
See my user page on the English Wikipedia: User:Kevjonesin |
08:36, 03 July 2024 (UTC) (
)I feel at times that the game has superseded the goal. Editors playing rules and guidelines like Magic cards while forgetting to ask whether applying such in a given instance actually helps the reader parse what's trying to be conveyed. I don't see the readership mentioned very often in discussions at all actually. Yet isn't this ostensibly who the wiki is for? The process of operating the wiki sometimes seems to overshadow concerns about offering accessible and informative (preferably accurate) information to readers. [The process of operating the wiki sometimes seems to overshadow concerns about offering the wiki.] It would be nice if we could learn to treat ourselves with the courtesy we hopefully are aspiring to offer to our guests.
Hi <__________>,
Something I found useful when I started editing:
Cordial 'real time' advice can often be found via
Wikipedia:IRC.
Somethings I would have found useful when I started editing:
The editorial community is quite diverse and includes it's fair share of cranks and eccentrics ranging from domineering and contentious to just plain weird in addition to editors simply amiably enthused about sharing knowledge with the world and each other. Humor and emotional cues are often missed or misconstrued when communicating through text alone. A bit of cautious consideration applied to both what one 'says' and what one 'hears' (i.e. writes/reads on talk pages and such) may prove helpful. Regardless of stated ideals—in actual practice disagreements amongst editors may have a tendency to get 'litigious' with much citing of rules and guidelines frequently via acronymic
wikilinks.
As with making laws and sausages—making Wikipedia articles can get a bit messy at times. So I've offered a few—perhaps cynical—grains of salt lest expectations be overly tinged with rose colored sweetness. Basically, in my case I'd initially allowed myself to be overly enthused about lofty ideals which led to a sense of disillusionment when I realized that I was not in fact interacting in some sort of cyber utopia but within a culture of real humans with it's own associated range of quirks and protocols. If someone had 'talked me down' a bit initially I may have chosen to walk into the adventure with open eyes rather than running in with blind enthusiasm. That said, there are many interesting paths within the Wikipedia editorial community and I value my journeys here.
<__________>, good luck, and have fun.
-- Kevjonesin ( talk) 21:42, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
Regarding the recent reversion of a misplaced reference which is flagged as a 'minor edit' and lacks an explanation in the edit summary. Whazzup? With the 'how', not the 'what'. Removing a misplaced reference is sensible—not questioning that. But it seems clearly outside the bounds of 'minor edit' guidelines. And a quick "misplaced reference" comment—or some such—in the summary would be a courtesy to fellow editors. If this is an 'automated tools' thing—as it's posting under your name and reflecting on you—please petition the maintainers to adapt it so as to conform to the same standards asked of humans. Thanks for your time and attention, -- Kevjonesin ( talk) 19:01, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
Hi y'all, I'm wondering why move requests don't show up in the page's edit history?
I'd made an 'uncontroversial technical request' yesterday and dropped in here today to check on its status. When I saw it had been cleared I thought to check the page history for details ... and there are none. Nor for a preceding request I'd taken note of. I've since confirmed that my request has in fact been fulfilled, [1] thank you, but am still left wondering about the lack of page history anomaly? -- Kevjonesin ( talk) 12:08, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
![]() | Attention! This page is not for requesting moves. For technical (uncontroversial) requests, edit this page. For (potentially) controversial moves, edit the talk page of (one of) the page(s) you want to rename, following these instructions. |
==<span id="TR"></span>[[Wikipedia:Requested moves/Technical requests|Requesting technical moves]]==
==<span id="CM"></span>[[Wikipedia:Requested moves/Controversial|Requesting controversial and potentially controversial moves]]==
==<span id="C"></span>[[Wikipedia:Requested moves/Current discussions|Current discussions]]==
Kevjonesin, I think you do make a good point here. There are actually two related issues: yours with finding the history, and others who indeed have recently attempted to make requests on that page. While perhaps I'm the "primary overseer" of this system, I do not own it. Feel free to implement your ideas for improvement, per WP:BRD. I believe the rationale for making subpages was to more cleanly separate the move requests from the instructions, making it easier to track the history of changes to the instructions. Thanks, :-) Wbm1058 ( talk) 15:25, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
Kevjonesin, One way to get notified when your technical request is implemented is to put the page you asked to have moved onto your watchlist. See Help:Watching pages. Typically, if your request is contested, or viewed as potentially controversial, it is converted to a discussion section on the article's talk page. Should editors automatically get notification pings when their technical requests are converted to controversial requests? Wbm1058 ( talk) 15:43, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
"Edit the page Wikipedia:Requested moves – the entire page, not a section of it. Now do you see the notice?"
I found the Photography workshop's—now green—button ... as on page ... and source code
== <center>'''Photography workshop user requests'''</center> ==
<center><span style="font-size:1.2em">''Submit a new request by pressing this button:''</span> [[File:Perspective-Button-Go-icon.png|48px|link=http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia:Graphics%20Lab/Photography%20workshop&editintro=Wikipedia:Graphics%20Lab/Resources/Photography_Advice&preload=Template:Graphics%20Lab/new%20request/preload&action=edit§ion=new&create=New%20request]]</center>
<!-- --------- requests start from below here -------------------- -->
Seems like it can probably be adapted. Suggestions on how to tweak the targeting for use here on WP:RM would be welcome. -- Kevjonesin ( talk) 18:32, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
p.s.— For now I think I'll go ahead and implement 'plan A', section wikilinks, as discussed previously. Button is 'mission creep' but seems well worthwhile if some folks are using the full page 'edit source' option instead of going to the (sub)sections as directed. -- Kevjonesin ( talk) 18:41, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
Further examples (from image link code above):
-- Kevjonesin ( talk) 22:52, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
{{WikiProjectBannerShell|1= {{WikiProject Egypt}} {{WikiProject Arab world}} {{WikiProject Human rights}} {{WikiProject Organizations}} }}
Kevjonesin has given you a c ookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.
To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{ subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{ subst:munch}}!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Cookie
![]() |
Cookies! | |
Kevjonesin has given you some cookies! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can spread the "WikiLove" by giving someone else some cookies, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{ subst:Cookies}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{ subst:munch}}! |
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Cookies
- – — – — °″′≈≠≤≥±−×÷←→§·
hgf–hhh—ggj hgf—jhg – kjh
|
{{kjsml}}
: }
User:Kevjonesin/sandbox/kjsml
: }
![]() | This user is a WikiOtter. |
User:A Fellow Editor/sandbox
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Magic_words#Variables
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:PAGENAME
(in Dutch)
( 中華民國刑法)
Contrib search Kevjonesin filtered for files
See my user page on the English Wikipedia: User:Kevjonesin |
08:36, 03 July 2024 (UTC) (
)I feel at times that the game has superseded the goal. Editors playing rules and guidelines like Magic cards while forgetting to ask whether applying such in a given instance actually helps the reader parse what's trying to be conveyed. I don't see the readership mentioned very often in discussions at all actually. Yet isn't this ostensibly who the wiki is for? The process of operating the wiki sometimes seems to overshadow concerns about offering accessible and informative (preferably accurate) information to readers. [The process of operating the wiki sometimes seems to overshadow concerns about offering the wiki.] It would be nice if we could learn to treat ourselves with the courtesy we hopefully are aspiring to offer to our guests.
Hi <__________>,
Something I found useful when I started editing:
Cordial 'real time' advice can often be found via
Wikipedia:IRC.
Somethings I would have found useful when I started editing:
The editorial community is quite diverse and includes it's fair share of cranks and eccentrics ranging from domineering and contentious to just plain weird in addition to editors simply amiably enthused about sharing knowledge with the world and each other. Humor and emotional cues are often missed or misconstrued when communicating through text alone. A bit of cautious consideration applied to both what one 'says' and what one 'hears' (i.e. writes/reads on talk pages and such) may prove helpful. Regardless of stated ideals—in actual practice disagreements amongst editors may have a tendency to get 'litigious' with much citing of rules and guidelines frequently via acronymic
wikilinks.
As with making laws and sausages—making Wikipedia articles can get a bit messy at times. So I've offered a few—perhaps cynical—grains of salt lest expectations be overly tinged with rose colored sweetness. Basically, in my case I'd initially allowed myself to be overly enthused about lofty ideals which led to a sense of disillusionment when I realized that I was not in fact interacting in some sort of cyber utopia but within a culture of real humans with it's own associated range of quirks and protocols. If someone had 'talked me down' a bit initially I may have chosen to walk into the adventure with open eyes rather than running in with blind enthusiasm. That said, there are many interesting paths within the Wikipedia editorial community and I value my journeys here.
<__________>, good luck, and have fun.
-- Kevjonesin ( talk) 21:42, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
Regarding the recent reversion of a misplaced reference which is flagged as a 'minor edit' and lacks an explanation in the edit summary. Whazzup? With the 'how', not the 'what'. Removing a misplaced reference is sensible—not questioning that. But it seems clearly outside the bounds of 'minor edit' guidelines. And a quick "misplaced reference" comment—or some such—in the summary would be a courtesy to fellow editors. If this is an 'automated tools' thing—as it's posting under your name and reflecting on you—please petition the maintainers to adapt it so as to conform to the same standards asked of humans. Thanks for your time and attention, -- Kevjonesin ( talk) 19:01, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
Hi y'all, I'm wondering why move requests don't show up in the page's edit history?
I'd made an 'uncontroversial technical request' yesterday and dropped in here today to check on its status. When I saw it had been cleared I thought to check the page history for details ... and there are none. Nor for a preceding request I'd taken note of. I've since confirmed that my request has in fact been fulfilled, [1] thank you, but am still left wondering about the lack of page history anomaly? -- Kevjonesin ( talk) 12:08, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
![]() | Attention! This page is not for requesting moves. For technical (uncontroversial) requests, edit this page. For (potentially) controversial moves, edit the talk page of (one of) the page(s) you want to rename, following these instructions. |
==<span id="TR"></span>[[Wikipedia:Requested moves/Technical requests|Requesting technical moves]]==
==<span id="CM"></span>[[Wikipedia:Requested moves/Controversial|Requesting controversial and potentially controversial moves]]==
==<span id="C"></span>[[Wikipedia:Requested moves/Current discussions|Current discussions]]==
Kevjonesin, I think you do make a good point here. There are actually two related issues: yours with finding the history, and others who indeed have recently attempted to make requests on that page. While perhaps I'm the "primary overseer" of this system, I do not own it. Feel free to implement your ideas for improvement, per WP:BRD. I believe the rationale for making subpages was to more cleanly separate the move requests from the instructions, making it easier to track the history of changes to the instructions. Thanks, :-) Wbm1058 ( talk) 15:25, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
Kevjonesin, One way to get notified when your technical request is implemented is to put the page you asked to have moved onto your watchlist. See Help:Watching pages. Typically, if your request is contested, or viewed as potentially controversial, it is converted to a discussion section on the article's talk page. Should editors automatically get notification pings when their technical requests are converted to controversial requests? Wbm1058 ( talk) 15:43, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
"Edit the page Wikipedia:Requested moves – the entire page, not a section of it. Now do you see the notice?"
I found the Photography workshop's—now green—button ... as on page ... and source code
== <center>'''Photography workshop user requests'''</center> ==
<center><span style="font-size:1.2em">''Submit a new request by pressing this button:''</span> [[File:Perspective-Button-Go-icon.png|48px|link=http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia:Graphics%20Lab/Photography%20workshop&editintro=Wikipedia:Graphics%20Lab/Resources/Photography_Advice&preload=Template:Graphics%20Lab/new%20request/preload&action=edit§ion=new&create=New%20request]]</center>
<!-- --------- requests start from below here -------------------- -->
Seems like it can probably be adapted. Suggestions on how to tweak the targeting for use here on WP:RM would be welcome. -- Kevjonesin ( talk) 18:32, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
p.s.— For now I think I'll go ahead and implement 'plan A', section wikilinks, as discussed previously. Button is 'mission creep' but seems well worthwhile if some folks are using the full page 'edit source' option instead of going to the (sub)sections as directed. -- Kevjonesin ( talk) 18:41, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
Further examples (from image link code above):
-- Kevjonesin ( talk) 22:52, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
{{WikiProjectBannerShell|1= {{WikiProject Egypt}} {{WikiProject Arab world}} {{WikiProject Human rights}} {{WikiProject Organizations}} }}