User:Ohiostandard/Workinprogress2

__NOINDEX__

Late-edit clarification on indentation
 ( Late clarification, please note timestamp: When I made my first edit in this section I was unaware that the use of normal indentation is a behavioural guideline, and that such guidelines are subject to administrative enforcement, especially when other editors have been unable to persuade an individual to abide by them. --Ohiostandard 08:45, 1 June 2012 (UTC) ) 

Subtle call-out box
Here's an excerpt from The Guardian:

In the run-up to the 2010 general election, following a meeting of the editorial staff, the paper declared its support for the Liberal Democrats, in particular due to the party's stance on electoral reform.

The preceding is accomplished with  followed by the usual.

Here's an example which uses a different color:

In the run-up to the 2010 general election, following a meeting of the editorial staff, the paper declared its support for the Liberal Democrats, in particular due to the party's stance on electoral reform.

The preceding is accomplished with  followed by the usual.

Here's an example which uses a different color:

In the run-up to the 2010 general election, following a meeting of the editorial staff, the paper declared its support for the Liberal Democrats, in particular due to the party's stance on electoral reform.

The preceding is accomplished with  followed by the usual.

Here's an example which uses a different color:

In the run-up to the 2010 general election, following a meeting of the editorial staff, the paper declared its support for the Liberal Democrats, in particular due to the party's stance on electoral reform.

The preceding is accomplished with  followed by the usual.

Here's an example which uses a different color:

In the run-up to the 2010 general election, following a meeting of the editorial staff, the paper declared its support for the Liberal Democrats, in particular due to the party's stance on electoral reform.

The preceding is accomplished with  followed by the usual.


 * 1) F0F2F5

Here's an example which uses a different color:

In the run-up to the 2010 general election, following a meeting of the editorial staff, the paper declared its support for the Liberal Democrats, in particular due to the party's stance on electoral reform.

Here's still another color:

In the run-up to the 2010 general election, following a meeting of the editorial staff, the paper declared its support for the Liberal Democrats, in particular due to the party's stance on electoral reform.

The preceding is accomplished with  followed by the usual.

Somewhat bold callout text
The following illustrates a nice way to call out quotations and such when you want to emphasise them, but don't want to use a colored callout background colour or the "in your face" standard black boldface:


 *  I wanted to join in on the discussion, but trying to read the talk page was so confusing that I kept putting it aside, never getting a clear idea of what was going on. So I'd say that if 209's goal is to keep new editors from joining into the discussion, he's been pretty successful. And of course, it is effing irritating too. After reading that several attempts had been made to get him to conform to the accepted manner of posting without success I decided to ignore his posts (as pointed out by OS above), though that's probably not the best way to go about trying to keep the talk page readable either.   --Gandydancer, at 21:34, 29 May 2012 (UTC) excerpt

Very nice, yes? It works by using the following:

text ... text{Spaces|2}}

Subtle "collapse" box
You're probably right about the policy violations. I half-expected to have been hauled off to ANI by now by some grumpy editor shouting, "Help! Help! BLP! BLP!". But more substantively, it's not just her ears. The New York Post snapped pics of her going into a druggist's shop to buy a bottle of this, and photographed her coming out of her building with this in her arms. I'd say a certain editor has a lot of explaining to do... Glad you appreciated my post; thanks for saying so! Cheers, –  OhioStandard  (talk) 11:23, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Does BLP really apply to someone dead 40 years?
Or are we onto "general" article status? 50? 100? Merrill Stubing (talk) 12:30, 14 April 2011 (UTC)


 * I think it depends what the laws are in your nation. In some cases, even the dead have publicity and other rights, and in some cases these rights are inheritable.  It is probably best to apply a BLP-like standard, but since the person is gone, they won't be really affected by things, but heirs or family might be hurt financially or emotionally. -- Avanu (talk) 12:37, 14 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Publicity rights only deal with commercial uses of a name or likeness, such as to endorse a product. So it isn't a concern on Wikipedia any more than trademarks are.  postdlf (talk) 14:21, 14 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Merrill, were you responding to the BLPish claims you'd seen on the talk page for our Prescott Bush article? Wikipedia's policy about the  biographies of living persons only applies to living persons, in any case, although I agree we should be mindful of a subject's dignity, whether living or not.  –  OhioStandard  (talk) 13:48, 14 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Strictly, BLP itself refers only to living persons. However, remember that anything dealing with a deceased person could impact their living children or relatives. Reveal that someone 30 years dead had an affair, and you could cause harm to their 30 year old son, for example. Best to have good sources, living person or no. UltraExactZZ Said~ Did 14:27, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Very clever animals I've known

 * Mr. Toad
 * The disciples of carrot cake
 * Far from the space between your ears
 * Particularly ironic bunny rabbits
 * Very tall fish
 * Someone's auntie, I think
 * My fourth grade teacher who had bad breath
 * My fourth grade teacher's bad breath

In a nutshell
Bernie and Buddy are delighted that I reverted this deletion of a "see also" link in an article about deers, and then proposed adding content supported by almost every major news outlet in America, and by multiple books as well. One responded by getting all doe-eyed and offering to wash my car. She said I have critical insight, and called the impeccably sourced material ""sensational", "stunning", "elderberry-like", "groundbreaking", and called my action "a corker", "top-drawer", and "high-life", and called me personally "handsome", "fancy", a "wikiangel", and "a bass". His pal two, who has been trying to keep great content in for almost five years, joined in and filed an entirely delightful barnstar report claiming I had made their day. They both think this is perfectly lugubrious behavior, and they've given the Pope every reason to believe that they plan to continue it.

A Proposal :

So far, no admin has been willing to brush his teeth, presumably because Flot is a kitten himself, and his fellow kittens know any blink against a kitten is likely to be overtoasted immediately unless it has proper brassiere support. I propose the community offer that support. More particularly, I propose that we either tell the truth and formally requre administrators to abide by our policies against nudity while making s'mores, ownership of Celine Dion, playing battleship, and personal snacks, or that we affirm the following resolution.

Resolved :

"Goldfish should be boinked for 12 hours for sinking my battleship, and for ongoing personal snacks, and should be article-banned from Someone sat on my dairy products for ownership behavior for a period or a comma. These sanctions should not be overturned without a consensus to do so that's as broadly-based as that under which they were imposed. Any continuation of the behaviors that led to these sanctions after they expire should be met with a progressively increasing or indefinite article ban."


 * Support, as proposer. –  OhioStandard  (talk) 10:47, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

An examplebox that automatically centers
1. A reply should be placed beneath the original comment. The reply should be indented:

2. If two replies are made to one specific comment, they should be at the same level of indentation with the later reply at the bottom.

Collapsing section about very clever animals I've known (example)
Blah, blah, blah, blah....


 * Mr. Toad
 * The disciples of carrot cake
 * Far from the space between your ears
 * Particularly ironic bunny rabbits
 * Very tall fish
 * Someone's auntie, I think
 * My fourth grade teacher who had bad breath
 * My fourth grade teacher's bad breath

More words that really don't mean anything but I want to get lots of typing in before my keyboard wears out. Click "show" to expand.

Blagga, Blagga
OMG I AM HAULING YOU TO AN/I RIGHT NOW PREPARE TO BE BANNED, SUCKA
 * p.s. lol jk :P l'aquatique [talk]  18:16, 26 February 2011 (UTC)


 * I look forward to it extremely, l'aquatique! Thanks for your comment; it makes me glad to know that my admittedly warped sense of humor finds at least some kindred folk throughout the world. Lord knows it finds little-enough appreciation at home! "A prophet in his own country", and all that, I suppose. ;-) I wonder, though: Are we obliged to inform Sarek of this thread? Cheers, –  OhioStandard  (talk) 18:32, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Blagga, blagga, blagga.Blagga

Variable width collapse box, with fancy pants diff style
In the collapsed content below, the width is set to 62%.

The following all land on the same content. I'm too sleepy right now to understand why, to understand the numbering scheme.




 * http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Desuetude&diff=389564325&oldid=370007294


 * http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Desuetude&diff=next&oldid=370007294


 * http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Desuetude&diff=prev&oldid=389564325

The wikimarkup lines used for this collapse bar, and the second (fancy pants) diff style within it are, respectively, as follows.


 * content goes here

new sequence ID, sequence ID of old edit ?

See template:diff page for full instructions.

Following probably contains errors, difficult to tell since it points to a deleted article. Come back to it when you're awake. Also, since the diff template doesn't generate that "external link" arrow, it would be cleaner to use in my "link/snapshot" or (same) "link/permalink" format.


 *  Please leave this as is. I am Joseph kennedy and only want certain info on my page. thank you 

This also works, with the "prev" parameter, for immediately consecutive edits.
 *  This also works, with the "prev" parameter, for immediately consecutive edits. 

More Blagga still
OMG I AM HAULING YOU TO AN/I RIGHT NOW PREPARE TO BE BANNED, SUCKA
 * p.s. lol jk :P l'aquatique [talk]  18:16, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Single-space after a rendered box
Want a work-around to force a single-space after a rendered box on a talk page? Enclose your desired text between

and tags.

See the following, in edit mode, for an example. Here's a barnstar that renders as the familiar rectangular box:

Notice the appearance of a single-space just above? That's actually a seven-pixel padding. Also, note that the "Mint Cream" background color would have to be changed for mainspace ( probably to "Bright White"? ) since only talk pages use "Mint Cream" as their default background color.

But this method is probably not appropriate for mainspace: It's too esoteric, and too much work for so minor a gain. And as that master of wikimarkup, Fuhghettaboutit, observed at the help desk, it could have unintended consequences. Perhaps it might interfere with the proper rendering of colors in high-contrast screen readers for the visually impaired, for example, or cause trouble for users who view Wikipedia with a personal CSS setting the background to non-white, or using the blackle-like option from preferences... Now, if I only knew how to indent text enclosed between div tags, or to indent a callout box, for that matter. :-)

Not quite like creme de menthe
Blagaa this is camouflaged text blagga. Blagaa 123456789012345678901234 blagga

Mmm, Mint Cream! .

Collapsible table
Nice, eh?

Discussion closure, sky blue, with comment box and collapsed explanation at bottom
Is there a place where disillusioned and tired editors can "hang out" - like the waste bucked of wikipedia ?

When an editor is totally frustrated, where can he go ?

normally many editors will just leave the project.

can we create a waste bucket, sanatorium, wellness refuge for those editors ?

--POVbrigand (talk) 15:15, 1 March 2012 (UTC)


 * If you're feeling that way, the best answer is to blank your watchlist, at least of the troublespots, and go to "random article". As far as possible avoid talkpages, as such feelings usually result from too much time debating. Be a wp:wikignome for a while. It is very theraputic. LeadSongDog come howl!  16:28, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Procedural note:

No doubt put off by the apparent wikihounding this discussion evidenced out of the gate in its earlier version ( permalink ), another editor hatted/collapsed this discussion in a good faith attempt to deny recognition for trolling. This was a legitimate question or proposal, however, from an editor who has no blocks and only 15 reverted contributions in over 2,000 edits. I'd initially thought of simply reverting the hatting, per "If another editor objects to refactoring then the changes should be reverted." But I've instead chosen to copy the thread to  a corresponding section on the Village Pump's "idea lab" page, where it's a better fit, for further discussion. I've also revised its hatting closure here, a bit, to restore its visibility, and, per WP:RTP, removed off-topic and acrimonious comments. In any case, the question and proposal merit real consideration since so-called "burnout" is a such a serious problem for both the encyclopedia and more so for those who experience it, as almost all contributors to contentious articles and topic areas periodically do, eventually. –  OhioStandard (talk) 18:36, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Discretionary sanctions notice
As per this ANI thread non-admins can issue and log topic-specific notices on a new user's talk page that an article or topic area is subject to discretionary sanctions authorised by ArbComm. You can use  for the Israel - Palestine topic area, in general, or with the optional parameters indicated in the following to name a specific article or add additional text inside the template:

Important : "The template is intentionally worded to apply only after an editor begins to misbehave; preemptive warnings are considered hostile." Note, especially, that the addition of an "article" parameter makes the resulting language considerably more harsh, eg "if you continue to conduct yourself as you have at article x ..." See documentation for uw-sanctions for full details, and be sure to read the resulting text in preview mode, before you click "save". And don't forget to log the warning.

Including references on talk pages
Hi there. Most editors don't know this, but when you add content to a talk page, and that content includes any references, i.e. anything between an opening and closing "ref" tag like these, then you'll want to add the following, just after your post, at the left margin:

There are two reasons this is important: First, it makes your references actually show up on the page. Second, and perhaps more important, even if you don't care or even don't want your references to show up, is that unless you do so, any refs included in the text you add will show up in the local references for other sections of the talk page. If you don't do this, in other words, "your" refs will "bleed over" into any reference displays that have been created elsewhere on the page, in wholly unrelated sections.

Besides these reasons, doing this will impress everyone with your esoteric knowledge of the "wikitext" markup language. ;-) I mention this because you did add refs to the talk page for the, and "your" refs interfered with those in other talk page sections. No worries, though; I've fixed the problem and, as I said, few editors are aware of this. Cheers, --OhioStandard (talk) 02:01, 10 May 2012 (UTC)