Jump to content

User talk:Sardanaphalus

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by DPL bot (talk | contribs) at 08:53, 11 January 2015 (dablink notification message (see the FAQ)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Barnstar

The Working Man's Barnstar
Your contributions to the finer details of Wiki markup on various articles, at a rapid rate, is noticed and appreciated by others. Leep up the good work! MezzoMezzo (talk) 06:25, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Some baklava for you!

Hi sardanaphalus you have some good history and it is nice thanks for doing history and making it look nice. hope we can be friends thanks jalyn.. Jlynn13 (talk) 20:39, 13 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Today's articles for improvement/Tabbed header

Hi Sardanaphalus. I'm not exactly sure what you are trying to do at the above page, but if you want to test whether the current page is an archive, the following code should work: 

{{#ifexpr: {{Str find|{{SUBPAGENAME}}|rchive}}<0 | value if not an archive | value if it is an archive }}

Cheers, Evad37 [talk] 13:00, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Missing includeonly

Hi, just a FYI that some of the templates where you had added the sandbox suppression code are missing the first "includeonly". It was accidentally removed in your edit here. I've found a few of them and have corrected the error; however, you may want to go back and check the other templates that were also altered. Thx Funandtrvl (talk) 22:25, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks for this alert and the corrections: it looks like a copy-paste error I've missed. If there are any more instances, they may be on pages I'm intending to prune from the watchlist here, so I'll try to spot them. Regards, Sardanaphalus (talk) 22:50, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please add back curly brackets

You are invited to join the discussion at Template talk:Collapsible option#Please add back curly brackets. Thanks. Funandtrvl (talk) 23:55, 4 December 2014 (UTC) Template:Z48[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Template:Tli

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Template:Tli, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as at articles for deletion. Under the specified criteria, where an article has substantially identical content to that of an article deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. — {{U|Technical 13}} (e • t • c) 18:34, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Enjoy!

Happy Holiday Cheer
Season's Greetings! This message celebrates the holiday season, promotes WikiLove, and hopefully makes your day a little better. Spread the seasonal good cheer by wishing another user an Awesome Holiday and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone with whom you had disagreements in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Share the good feelings! Joys! Paine

Category:Example

Yes, I did see the message and that helped convince me that it was a test page. Categories in the main space, as this was, are for encyclopedic purposes and clearly this one did not fit that guideline as I understand it. Vegaswikian (talk) 18:12, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks for your response:
    1. When you say "the message", do you mean Template:Namespace example page or the talkpage post – or both?
    2. My understanding is that "main space" = article space, i.e. not including categories etc. Is this incorrect..?
    3. If Category:Example should not exist, does that mean pages such as Template:Example should be deleted..?
Regards, Sardanaphalus (talk) 09:59, 21 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

December 2014

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Template:Village pump page header‎‎. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

  1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
  2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing.
Please also see WP:WHEELWAR, which also apparently applies to  Template editors. — {{U|Technical 13}} (e • t • c) 00:34, 21 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's not template protected so wheel war doesn't apply (though it would be good to avoid edit warring anyway). Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 00:40, 21 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I can't think where that would be supported by policy (though I haven't looked for the discussion to remove the right from you), an admin can make three reverts on an article or an unprotected template and not breach policy (3RR, forgetting EW more broadly) but if they do it on a fully protected page they have definitely breached policy. The same should apply to template editors, however that page was template editor protected so it would apply. Anyways, should probably move this discussion to one of our talk pages. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 00:49, 21 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Nah, not that important to me. I just wanted to make sure that this user was aware that they needed to be much more careful about re-reverting like this. Especially since a lot of their other TE required edits have been "questionable" to say the least. — {{U|Technical 13}} (e • t • c) 01:04, 21 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Explanation of revert

Template:Sisterlinks
I rolled back only so you would see the revert on Special:Notifications. The formatting that you introduced broke the template so that it was displaying blank fields and the no input wasn't working. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 08:29, 21 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

To answer your question... Parameter values that should not be used as classnames should not leak into the class attribute of the generated HTML; that may potentially cause classes being triggered which shouldn't. The logic I implemented prevents any parameter value to leak through. -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 15:37, 21 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Understood (though I'd hope it unlikely a parameter such as this case's collapsible would be set to a valid but unrelated/inappropriate value) and thanks for amending; I've now updated the main template accordingly. I've also noted mw-collapsible as a class. Sardanaphalus (talk) 08:57, 22 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I also retained the previous formatting for the template's title in order to prevent "Find more about" from being offset and moving when [collapse/expand] clicked. "mw-collapsible collapsed" doesn't seem to be working here, however – the template's instance on the Category:Contents page, for example, isn't collapsed when the page first appears..? Sardanaphalus (talk) 09:15, 22 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Testing

I can only be certain in the wild, so to speak. It's not a problem for the template to be broken for a few seconds while you try it out and check some transclusions of it. Thanks for working on it. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:20, 21 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It is a problem if in those few seconds the job queue happens to reach the template and puts the test version into live articles. A bad template edit on 14 November 2014 (which existed for just eight minutes) was still causing trouble nearly three weeks later (see User talk:Mattbuck#it broke everything on this page), and I have no way of knowing if bad versions are still out there. Live templates should never be used as testbeds; there are at least two ways of testing templates without compromising live articles. One is the template's sandbox and testcases. The other is to make your edits in the live template, do not save this, instead go to the bottom below the Save page button where you will find a box titled "Preview page with this template" within which is an entry window; in that enter the name of an article which is known to use that template, and whose present behaviour is also known; to the right of that you will see a second Show preview button - click that. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:20, 21 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I entirely agree with Red here. I will note that if you click the second show preview button (you need to specify a test page) without having clicked the regular preview or changes button first, you will loose your changes in the edit box (at least I do). — {{U|Technical 13}} (e • t • c) 22:40, 21 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Has this been reported as a (possible) bug / undesirable feature..? (I haven't tested it here yet.) Sardanaphalus (talk) 08:57, 22 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Testing by editing and saving live templates is not a bug; although undesirable, it is not the fault of the software but bad practice on the part of the user. --Redrose64 (talk) 15:00, 22 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • "...if you click the second show preview button [...] without having clicked the regular preview or changes button first..." – is that bad practice, or perhaps something the software might handle..? (Did you mean the above to be less indented..?) Sardanaphalus (talk) 15:11, 22 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • I actually believe it is connected to the fact that I use WP:wikEd. No, I haven't reported it to Cacycle (wikEd guy) or Anomie (expand templates guy) yet as I haven't had the time to try and track down any details that I can about how or why it happens and I generally prefer to give as many details as I can or I don't expect the developer to be able to fix the problem and I'm not wasting time filing a report if they can't fix it. I know, it's a bit convoluted in my head on these things, but... — {{U|Technical 13}} (e • t • c) 15:22, 22 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      • If wikiEd works like I expect (replacing the standard edit box with its own and hooking the normal submission buttons to sync the contents of the two before submitting), I'd guess the problem is that wikiEd is somehow not hooking the submission via the TemplateSandbox preview button so wikiEd's edit form never gets synced into the standard textbox. Anomie⚔ 15:38, 22 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keeping any descenders in title away from infobox border

Hi.

I remember we had a chat about one of your edits simiar to revision #640004486. Again, I'd like to ask: Why don't you implement this in Template:Infobox?

Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 23:21, 28 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hello, Lisa – hope Christmas has been / is peaceful for you. Two reasons, mostly, re the above: Infobox is (understandably) a protected template and it's written in Lua, a language with which I'm not familiar. If you're able and would like to amend whatever would need amending, please go ahead – and I'd also suggest adding a padding-right:[0.65 – 1.0em]; to the default labelstyle so that there's more of a gap between longer/unwrapped labels and subsequent data on the same line. Yours, Sardanaphalus (talk) 09:23, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks. Same for you. (And thank you, Edokter, for the CSS.) Now, as for the padding-right issue, I am not sure I am fan of such gaping amount of padding. Please see the sandbox and testcase, where I have eliminated the padding and set the alignment to right. Can you show me a screenshot that persuades me towards more padding? Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 22:12, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    Rather than a screenshot, I've placed the March version of {{Infobox programming language}} in its sandbox and added a "Labels–data gap test" to the testcases page – what do you make of the "Typing discipline" and "Major implementations" entries (with "Preview release" a close third)..?
    Edokter suggests, however, that increasing labels' default padding-right would affect nesting, i.e. perhaps this issue best left as case-by-case. Yours, Sardanaphalus (talk) 09:31, 30 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oh, I am seeing alright. I am okay with it, in fact I prefer it. Of course, I have bad eye sight (severe astigmatism) and unless wearing contact lenses, I could definitely use things being bigger, proportionately. Spacing however, I have no problem with. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 03:35, 1 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Understood – although preferring something that can blur the distinction between label and data is intriguing. Happy New Year etc, Sardanaphalus (talk) 10:18, 1 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Start div col listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Template:Start div col. Since you had some involvement with the Template:Start div col redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 15:15, 1 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox company

Hi Sardanaphalus. It appears that the changes you made at Template:Infobox company caused the parameter location_country became non-functional. That parameter is used in a lot of articles. Was it intentional? If that's the case, sorry for bother you. Regards. Urbanoc (talk) 06:21, 2 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

OK, it seems to be working fine now. Thanks for your time. Cheers. Urbanoc (talk) 16:33, 2 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Stop now!

Unless you can cite a very good reason to revert my edits, you reverts have absolutely no basis in any policy, and you are the one edit warring! -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 15:33, 2 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your own user and talk pages messed up on 1024 width display

Just for interest, on my 1024 width display, the TOC on this talk page overlaps and obscures content on the left, and your user page is a real jumble. I noted you attempted to enforce hard-coded widths on the Theistic evolution page - have you done the same on your own pages, causing these illegibility issues? -- Jmc (talk) 18:36, 2 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks for passing on your observations. The ToC here will indeed overlap content if it's left expanded, while the user page has, over time, come to include/combine various page/section/line formattings as I happened to test them alone/together/etc. (It looks fine here at 1680 by 1050.) I'm puzzled, though, by the second part of your message – I don't believe I've tried to enforce anything anywhere, nor intended (or intend to try) to do so. Yours, Sardanaphalus (talk) 19:46, 2 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You can't assume everyone has a 1680x1050 display! That seems unnecessarily inconsiderate of your readers. And your reinstatement of a hard-coded width on the Theistic evolution page after it had been reverted by an admin gave me the impression of an attempt to enforce. -- Jmc (talk) 22:12, 2 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm still a bit puzzled as I don't understand why you think I'm assuming everyone has a 1680x1050 display..?
As regards Theistic evolution, it sounds like you have the edit I made today/yesterday in mind, in which case you might not be aware that it was a restorative action taken in the context of a user (User:Edokter)'s... erratic behavio/ur. (That situation is awaiting resolution<aside>cf here if intrigued</aside> so the article may yet see further related amendment.)
If, though, for the sake of smaller/mobile/etc screens, tables and table-style columns are discouraged and {{Div col}}-style columns can only be used in ways that produce overly wide or shallow columns on desktop screens, then that does seem to be a problem. Am I (hopefully) misunderstanding/missing something..?
Regards, Sardanaphalus (talk) 00:45, 3 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You said, "It looks fine here at 1680 by 1050". I'd pointed out that it didn't look fine at 1024 px wide (to say nothing of narrower screens). My inference from that was that you approach layout with the assumption that other readers also have 1680 px wide screens (and too bad if they don't and are consequently unable to read parts of your pages).
In a wider context, I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on achieving responsive layouts that enable all content to be readable no matter what the screen dimensions. -- Jmc (talk) 08:50, 3 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I mentioned that the page looks fine here in case you were wondering whether it didn't but I hadn't sorted it out yet, or it didn't but was part of some experiment, or... (etc).
Re responsive layouts where all content is always readable regardless of screen, I don't know whether that's asking the difficult, impractical, improbable or impossible, but restricting structures as fundamental as tables, grids and columns to full-width {{Div col}}s<aside>if that's what's required</aside>seems a heavy price to pay. Might a version of Wikipedia somewhere between here and the mobile version be needed..? Regards, Sardanaphalus (talk) 09:03, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Shall we start over?

You obviously like "Start div col", then here's my proposal:

  1. I withdraw the RfD.
  2. Your request a move of Template:Div col to Template:Start div col.

The outcome of the requested move discussion will determin the primary name of the template, and consequently how the template will primarily be invoked. You should know I have no preference either way; I only have a problem with the way you push your preference (using a self-created redirdct). This whole affair is why WP:RM exists in the first place. -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 14:29, 3 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks for posting the above. I've no particular regard for Start div col other than as an alternative name for Div col (for the reason here) and, since the template can be used by itself, it's probably best to keep "Div col" as its name. If you feel more than one alternative is too many, perhaps instances of Template:Tnf and Template:Tnf could be replaced by Template:Tnf and Template:Tnf..?
More importantly, though, do you think characterisations such as "...the way you push your preference (using a self-created redirdct)" above, or those here, for example, suggest good faith and an authentic intent to cooperate..? Before posting something, for instance, do you imagine it is by someone else and for your attention – and then, perhaps, reconsider how it's phrased..? (My first thoughts here aren't as to whether something might be taken personally, but as to what it can suggest about the sender's thinking and its origins.)
Yours, Sardanaphalus (talk) 12:28, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Good faith only goes so far... and is easily abused. I can have all the faith in your intentions, but is is your actions that ultimately count. And to be frank, your actions show a degree of disregard of some core policies. Playing the good-faith card is not going to change that. I say it like it is, and I may be crude in my phrasing. But that only happens if I am not being understood, or worse, being ignored. And if that comes across as lacking good faith, then we simply have a communication probem.
Now, when you start replacing the template name with what you call an 'alternative' name, and trying to get it into the documentation, then it isn't actually alternative; you consider it the primary name. Even though your reasoning for wanting to start the name with "Start" has not convinced me, I would not oppose a move that is backed by consensus, So by all means, start a move request. But I will maintain that creating a new redirect and seeding it into articles is a non-valid method of bypassing a move procedure, and I cannot allow that. Do not take this as anything personal; one of the jobs being an admin (being responsible for technical matters) is to prevent a wild-growth in templates and their names, and it is sometimes a thankless job. So my question remains... Are you going to request a move? -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 13:07, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hint

Check the template talk page before you continue discussion with dummy edits... You may find I already started a discussion there. -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 22:25, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template editor right removed

I just noticed the ANI thread open involving you and Edokter, and I see that there still currently concerns about your template editing. There have been several similar concerns in the past, e.g.#Explanation of revert further up the page, and more looking back through your talk page history.[1][2] I've removed your template editor rights until we can be reasonably sure that similar problems won't occur in the future. Please take to heart the advice given to you in the ANI thread - whether Edokter was right in his reverts or not, you could have likely avoided all of this drama by considering all the technical implications of your edits. Best — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 10:48, 6 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Philippine Stock Exchange, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Run-off. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:53, 11 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Sardanaphalus&oldid=641986170"