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 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | → | Archive 15 |
I was still trying to get things to play nice with the flatlist and you cut the grass below my foot! You quite surprised me, but hey, I won't complain, it seems to work fantastically. I'll test it some more, but it looks good. Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 22:24, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
Seems to work a lot better now. There's an issue with an empty |Notes=
though.
Headbomb {
t ·
c ·
p ·
b} 23:20, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
The Technical Barnstar | |
For this and the associated voodoo magic that came with it. Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 23:30, 2 April 2019 (UTC) |
Please acknowledge your previous use of the banned Technical 13 account, to save me the tedium of an SPI. I was prepared to ignore this obvious socking, and have done so until now, because your new account seemed to have good intentions, until you started being a dickhead at Rexx's RfA. You're not going to squirm out of this, so just admitting it seems most prudent. There might be ways to avoid having you indefinitely blocked if you co-operate. -- Begoon 15:17, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
Centralizing/redirecting discussion to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Technical_13/Archive#08_April_2019. ~ ToBeFree ( talk) 21:21, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
For the record, the SPI closed as unlikely. {{3x|p}}ery ( talk) 16:01, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for catching that mistake. I thought I was marking the page pertaining to featured articles, but I was actually marking the page for all April Fool's items. As best as I can tell, "Did You Know" is still (semi-)active with respect to April Fool's day items, but all other categories (featured article, in the news) are defunct. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 00:31, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
I just wanted to let you know that the SPI that was opened against you has been closed due to lack of evidence. I've also archived the report just a bit ago. Reading the discussion on the talk page of RexxS' crat chat, some users are debating whether or not someone should message you and apologize for any hardship, frustration, stress, or disheartened feelings that the accusations, the SPI, and other related discussions have caused upon you. I personally believe that if such an apology even becomes a debate in a related discussion, one should be given - even if the goal is to try and end things on a positive note so that everyone can move on.
I obviously can't speak on behalf of other editors directly; I think that those who actually made the accusations and/or caused any stress or frustration upon you should be the ones apologizing - not someone such as myself and in an attempt to speak on behalf of others. However, I will express my sincere feelings of sympathy and compassion to you regarding the situation, and encourage you to not take the accusations personally, and to move on from this as positively as you can. My talk page is always open to you, and you're welcome to message me there any time you need any input, advice, assistance, encouragement, mentoring, or if you just want to talk... please don't hesitate to reach out to me. I'll be more than happy to help you with anything you need. Keep your head up, move forward from this, and everything will be okay. :-) As you already know: How you act and behave following such hardship will be what the community will see and judge in the future - significantly moreso than the accusations themselves.
I hope you have a great day, and I wish you happy editing. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~ (talk) (contribs) 13:35, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
The Special Barnstar | |
The Special Barnstar is awarded to a user as a gesture of appreciation when there is no other barnstar which would be appropriate. ~ ToBeFree ( talk) 20:46, 10 April 2019 (UTC) |
The Purple Barnstar | |
I'm surprised there are only three apologies on this page. Thank you for all of your contributions. You are valuable to the Wikipedia community, and I hope the recent events don't discourage you from staying with us. — Newslinger talk 06:55, 11 April 2019 (UTC) |
Sorry to have seen the "inquisition" you faced at the recent RfA SPI, which was unfair in my view [1]. There was another editor User talk:Woshiyiweizhongguoren, who had been only 14 days in WP and entered the RfA, asked a full RfA question [2], and logged their RfA !vote [3], without any SPI concern. However, they have only now been revealed as an SPI and blocked. I thought you would appreciate the irony and it might give you a laugh. All the best. Britishfinance ( talk) 22:31, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
Just FYI: I'm not new here. I was going to redirect Pilgrim (song) myself-—after fixing the incoming links, so it wouldn't set off the WP:DPL bot. Maybe chill while another editor is still working. -- ShelfSkewed Talk 22:21, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
Sorry about this. It wasn't intentional; I was viewing an old revision and mistakenly edited it instead of the current one. — Eru· tuon 21:53, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
Hi Pppery. You know it's sort of a new development that folks are also tagging the template to merge into. Our instructions at TfD don't really say to do it. That being said, I don't mind, but wanted to call your attention to that. Maybe it's something that ought to be changed? -- Bsherr ( talk) 12:48, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
heh, I agree - i wish there was a better shared docs system :(. So far we have translate wiki (great from translation perspective, but absolutely horrible for actually creating content itself -- all those special comments keep breaking, section tagging get mismatched, and very few people actually understand how to use that tagging system. I hope the TNT-based alternative is better -- adding a {{#invoke:TNT|table|message}} is fairly readable for any person who uses mediawiki templating language, and easy to trace who uses what. Thx for editing. -- Yurik ( talk) 02:05, 27 April 2019 (UTC)
There is a discussion about the merits of the article you thanked me about on Talk:Criticism of the Catholic Church, so if you want to weigh in, be my guest.-- Epiphyllumlover ( talk) 03:18, 29 April 2019 (UTC)
<onlyinclude>...</onlyinclude>
(which I've been on-and-off crusading against sicne July 2016), and unrelated to the content of the article. I've never been interested in actual article content, instead focusing on the technical side ...
* Pppery *
has returned 03:27, 29 April 2019 (UTC)RE Template talk:Infobox settlement#Requested move 28 February 2019:
What do you think about "Infobox place", matching Wikipedia:List of infoboxes/Geography and place#Place
Furthermore, it
78.55.183.64 ( talk) 13:04, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
Hi, there's no problem with moving the name of this, it's just the first move made the module non-functional and I had to revert it. I thought I had made that clear in the summary. Hope this helps. Onetwothreeip ( talk) 22:19, 1 May 2019 (UTC)
Thief! — 烏Γ ( kaw) │ 00:22, 08 May 2019 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Portal:No Escape. Since you had some involvement with the Portal:No Escape redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. UnitedStatesian ( talk) 12:30, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
I re-instated the code that calls the sub-page with some style.css stuff in it. It is needed to make the graph templates work on the mobile version of any page - otherwise it comes out as a blank space. There was quite a one-sided discussion by me at the mediawiki page and the solution finally emerged via phabT216431. RobinLeicester ( talk) 18:54, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
I don't believe this was a problem; it would have been removed in the parsing process. But this definitely was. Another error by me; I could have done the simple step of creating a sandbox and testcases when updating commonly used templates; that is my takeaway here. But perhaps I should just take a break.
This is one thing I generally appreciate about coding: it exposes one to the undeniable truth of human fallibility (or at least my own fallibility). Retro ( talk | contribs) 02:24, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
Just wondering, since I know you know how to develop Lua modules: Do you know he likelihood that {{ Calendar}} can get "Lua-ized" via a module at Module:Calendar? Asking since ... something I'm trying to do ran across issues. Steel1943 ( talk) 22:39, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
Just as long as we're all aware that comprehension is futile. InedibleHulk (talk) 00:37, July 15, 2019 (UTC)
Please don't alter my additions to WP:FRS, as you did here. They might not be necessary to you, but they are to me, to help me manage what I've signed up for. As I'm sure you've noticed, when in preview mode, the list is long enough that you have no idea what sign-up element section you are looking at, when you search for yourself. I will be adding these back again; please leave them. Thanks. Mathglot ( talk) 21:59, 20 July 2019 (UTC)
Three years! |
---|
-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 07:07, 29 August 2019 (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 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | → | Archive 15 |
I was still trying to get things to play nice with the flatlist and you cut the grass below my foot! You quite surprised me, but hey, I won't complain, it seems to work fantastically. I'll test it some more, but it looks good. Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 22:24, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
Seems to work a lot better now. There's an issue with an empty |Notes=
though.
Headbomb {
t ·
c ·
p ·
b} 23:20, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
The Technical Barnstar | |
For this and the associated voodoo magic that came with it. Headbomb { t · c · p · b} 23:30, 2 April 2019 (UTC) |
Please acknowledge your previous use of the banned Technical 13 account, to save me the tedium of an SPI. I was prepared to ignore this obvious socking, and have done so until now, because your new account seemed to have good intentions, until you started being a dickhead at Rexx's RfA. You're not going to squirm out of this, so just admitting it seems most prudent. There might be ways to avoid having you indefinitely blocked if you co-operate. -- Begoon 15:17, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
Centralizing/redirecting discussion to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Technical_13/Archive#08_April_2019. ~ ToBeFree ( talk) 21:21, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
For the record, the SPI closed as unlikely. {{3x|p}}ery ( talk) 16:01, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for catching that mistake. I thought I was marking the page pertaining to featured articles, but I was actually marking the page for all April Fool's items. As best as I can tell, "Did You Know" is still (semi-)active with respect to April Fool's day items, but all other categories (featured article, in the news) are defunct. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 00:31, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
I just wanted to let you know that the SPI that was opened against you has been closed due to lack of evidence. I've also archived the report just a bit ago. Reading the discussion on the talk page of RexxS' crat chat, some users are debating whether or not someone should message you and apologize for any hardship, frustration, stress, or disheartened feelings that the accusations, the SPI, and other related discussions have caused upon you. I personally believe that if such an apology even becomes a debate in a related discussion, one should be given - even if the goal is to try and end things on a positive note so that everyone can move on.
I obviously can't speak on behalf of other editors directly; I think that those who actually made the accusations and/or caused any stress or frustration upon you should be the ones apologizing - not someone such as myself and in an attempt to speak on behalf of others. However, I will express my sincere feelings of sympathy and compassion to you regarding the situation, and encourage you to not take the accusations personally, and to move on from this as positively as you can. My talk page is always open to you, and you're welcome to message me there any time you need any input, advice, assistance, encouragement, mentoring, or if you just want to talk... please don't hesitate to reach out to me. I'll be more than happy to help you with anything you need. Keep your head up, move forward from this, and everything will be okay. :-) As you already know: How you act and behave following such hardship will be what the community will see and judge in the future - significantly moreso than the accusations themselves.
I hope you have a great day, and I wish you happy editing. :-) Best regards - ~Oshwah~ (talk) (contribs) 13:35, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
The Special Barnstar | |
The Special Barnstar is awarded to a user as a gesture of appreciation when there is no other barnstar which would be appropriate. ~ ToBeFree ( talk) 20:46, 10 April 2019 (UTC) |
The Purple Barnstar | |
I'm surprised there are only three apologies on this page. Thank you for all of your contributions. You are valuable to the Wikipedia community, and I hope the recent events don't discourage you from staying with us. — Newslinger talk 06:55, 11 April 2019 (UTC) |
Sorry to have seen the "inquisition" you faced at the recent RfA SPI, which was unfair in my view [1]. There was another editor User talk:Woshiyiweizhongguoren, who had been only 14 days in WP and entered the RfA, asked a full RfA question [2], and logged their RfA !vote [3], without any SPI concern. However, they have only now been revealed as an SPI and blocked. I thought you would appreciate the irony and it might give you a laugh. All the best. Britishfinance ( talk) 22:31, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
Just FYI: I'm not new here. I was going to redirect Pilgrim (song) myself-—after fixing the incoming links, so it wouldn't set off the WP:DPL bot. Maybe chill while another editor is still working. -- ShelfSkewed Talk 22:21, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
Sorry about this. It wasn't intentional; I was viewing an old revision and mistakenly edited it instead of the current one. — Eru· tuon 21:53, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
Hi Pppery. You know it's sort of a new development that folks are also tagging the template to merge into. Our instructions at TfD don't really say to do it. That being said, I don't mind, but wanted to call your attention to that. Maybe it's something that ought to be changed? -- Bsherr ( talk) 12:48, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
heh, I agree - i wish there was a better shared docs system :(. So far we have translate wiki (great from translation perspective, but absolutely horrible for actually creating content itself -- all those special comments keep breaking, section tagging get mismatched, and very few people actually understand how to use that tagging system. I hope the TNT-based alternative is better -- adding a {{#invoke:TNT|table|message}} is fairly readable for any person who uses mediawiki templating language, and easy to trace who uses what. Thx for editing. -- Yurik ( talk) 02:05, 27 April 2019 (UTC)
There is a discussion about the merits of the article you thanked me about on Talk:Criticism of the Catholic Church, so if you want to weigh in, be my guest.-- Epiphyllumlover ( talk) 03:18, 29 April 2019 (UTC)
<onlyinclude>...</onlyinclude>
(which I've been on-and-off crusading against sicne July 2016), and unrelated to the content of the article. I've never been interested in actual article content, instead focusing on the technical side ...
* Pppery *
has returned 03:27, 29 April 2019 (UTC)RE Template talk:Infobox settlement#Requested move 28 February 2019:
What do you think about "Infobox place", matching Wikipedia:List of infoboxes/Geography and place#Place
Furthermore, it
78.55.183.64 ( talk) 13:04, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
Hi, there's no problem with moving the name of this, it's just the first move made the module non-functional and I had to revert it. I thought I had made that clear in the summary. Hope this helps. Onetwothreeip ( talk) 22:19, 1 May 2019 (UTC)
Thief! — 烏Γ ( kaw) │ 00:22, 08 May 2019 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Portal:No Escape. Since you had some involvement with the Portal:No Escape redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. UnitedStatesian ( talk) 12:30, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
I re-instated the code that calls the sub-page with some style.css stuff in it. It is needed to make the graph templates work on the mobile version of any page - otherwise it comes out as a blank space. There was quite a one-sided discussion by me at the mediawiki page and the solution finally emerged via phabT216431. RobinLeicester ( talk) 18:54, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
I don't believe this was a problem; it would have been removed in the parsing process. But this definitely was. Another error by me; I could have done the simple step of creating a sandbox and testcases when updating commonly used templates; that is my takeaway here. But perhaps I should just take a break.
This is one thing I generally appreciate about coding: it exposes one to the undeniable truth of human fallibility (or at least my own fallibility). Retro ( talk | contribs) 02:24, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
Just wondering, since I know you know how to develop Lua modules: Do you know he likelihood that {{ Calendar}} can get "Lua-ized" via a module at Module:Calendar? Asking since ... something I'm trying to do ran across issues. Steel1943 ( talk) 22:39, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
Just as long as we're all aware that comprehension is futile. InedibleHulk (talk) 00:37, July 15, 2019 (UTC)
Please don't alter my additions to WP:FRS, as you did here. They might not be necessary to you, but they are to me, to help me manage what I've signed up for. As I'm sure you've noticed, when in preview mode, the list is long enough that you have no idea what sign-up element section you are looking at, when you search for yourself. I will be adding these back again; please leave them. Thanks. Mathglot ( talk) 21:59, 20 July 2019 (UTC)
Three years! |
---|
-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 07:07, 29 August 2019 (UTC)