User talk:Alanbly/Archives/2008/May

Schools template
I went ahead and transferred it without a move. Hope everything is fine. Warm regards, SorryGuy Talk  01:00, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks Adam McCormick (talk) 01:01, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Ug. Sorry about that, I see you even tried to make it easy for me and I still goofed it. Suffice to say coding is not my thing. SorryGuy Talk  01:18, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
 * That should take care of it. SorryGuy Talk  04:45, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Bot
Hey, i think weve hit a snag. In Category:Unassessed school articles click on the letter Z, and heaps of pages are sorted into a sub-section entitled " { ", is this some sort of bot mess up or the category being slow to update. Thanks. Five Years 18:08, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Actually this is probably a template issue, I'll track it down and get back to you. Adam McCormick (talk) 04:08, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * It was a template issue and I think I've got it fixed. I've requested a bring over from my local copy which includes this fix along with the other changes we've been working on. Adam McCormick (talk) 04:50, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your help. Five Years 05:32, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * The change has been moved over and it seems to have fixed most of the pages but some still seem to be mislabled. However, If I replace the template with the version in my sandbox then go back to the project version it fixes the problem. I think this means that the server needs to catch up to the database or something like that. It's breaking my bot as well as being generally annoying so i feel your pain. Adam McCormick (talk) 05:51, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Golden ratio
Dear Alanbly. In Golden ratio, you added a fact tag to the following:
 * The secretive Leonardo seldom disclosed the bases of his art, and retrospective analysis of the proportions in his paintings can never be conclusive.

I think the statement is so undeniable that no tag is needed. Will yo ureconsider?--Noe (talk) 14:31, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I only restored a fact tag removed by an IP. The way it's worded I think it needs to be cited. As I said in my edit summary, there are ways of rewording it that might eliminate this need maybe:
 * "Leonardo seldom disclosed the bases of his art, and, as such, retrospective analysis of the proportions in his paintings is not conclusive."
 * or
 * "Retrospective analysis of the proportions in da Vinci's paintings is not conclusive evidence of the bases of his art."
 * But I am always hesitant to make most edits to Golden ratio without discussion as it is a hot topic. Would you agree with either of my rewordings? Adam McCormick (talk) 16:57, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Re:Thank you
No problem. It's my job! ... disco spinster   talk  16:18, 20 May 2008 (UTC)