User talk:Technical 13/2013/1

   &dArr; Go to bottom &dArr;   &uArr; Go to top &uArr;

Speedy deletion nomination of Shadow network


A tag has been placed on Shadow network requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article or image appears to be a clear copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website or image but have permission from that owner, see Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that your 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. Grammarxxx (What'd I do this time?) 21:09, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Signature
it would be great if you could change your signature per Signatures. thank you. Frietjes (talk) 18:50, 4 March 2013 (UTC)


 * If you are talking about my single blinking purple middot between "Contributions" and "Message", I don't see it as an issue. It is minor, minuscule, and well within the limitations of Signatures. I suggest if it bothers you, that you simply add:

to your Special:MyPage/common.css and turn off ALL blinking text for you, not just my simple middot. Technical 13 (talk) 19:40, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Basically,  Technical 13 (talk) 14:12, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
 * No. Editors should not need to adapt their system to avoid "look at me" signatures. Please fix your signature. Also, there should not be an external link in a signature, although I don't feel like checking what the guideline says about that at the moment. There are lots of things that should not be done, and guidelines do not attempt to list all of them. Johnuniq (talk) 21:35, 4 March 2013 (UTC)
 * One blinking pixel with well within reason. If any blinking what-so-ever is offensive to a person, they should shut off all blinking.  My coding example above shows how to do it on a wiki.  "P. S.: Among statistically noticeable browsers only Firefox supports blinking, and even there it may be disabled globally in about: config."

Something else made me wonder about the signature guideline, so I checked. There is a specific prohibition against an external link in a signature, see WP:SIG. Wikipedia is not a bureaucracy where rules dictate exactly what happens, and there is no scope to claim "it's only a guideline". I see a lot of talk page commentary and do not recall ever seeing an external link in a signature—blinking and external links are just not part of the way things are done here. Johnuniq (talk) 05:36, 5 March 2013 (UTC)


 * That is fair, and I would be happy to fix the external link. Technical 13 (talk) 14:12, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
 * The external link has been removed as you can see in my signature on this post, but I fully intend to leave my one blinking pixel. You may wish to join the discussion I have opened about it on the "Signatures" talk page. Technical 13 (talk) 14:30, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Posting to user talk pages
Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Your recent talk page comments were not added to the bottom of the page. New discussion page messages and topics should always be added to the bottom. Your message may have been moved by another user. In the future you can use the "New section" link in top right. For more details see talk page guidelines. Thank you.

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button or  located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you.

This is in relation to. -- Red rose64 (talk) 16:13, 7 March 2013 (UTC)


 * I am adamant about signing my posts. I assumed by the way that the page at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents is written requiring that I add   to satisfy the statement You must notify any editor who is the subject of a discussion.  that the associated template would sign it for me.  Apparently this is not the case, and the instructions to use that template should be re-written to reflect how to properly use the template or the template itself should be modified to properly sign all usage for the inserter.


 * Due to the above situation, I am at fault for not spending time to properly visit the documentation page of the template and using it properly on your page or any of the others. I apologize for this thoughtlessness of mine to consider inconveniencing myself to have to hunt down the usage of a template that is referred to on a page that is intended to resolve disputes and not create more. Technical 13 (talk) 16:29, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Fix your signature
I've read the discussions at AN/I and Wikipedia talk: Signatures. I see that several people have explained to you that the content of Signatures, which reads Your signature must not blink, scroll, or otherwise inconvenience or annoy other editors (bolded in original) enjoys a strong and longstanding consensus. I see no evidence of any incipient move to reverse this consensus. You are therefore out of line and you are beginning to become disruptive. If you wish to argue to change this consensus then you may, (though I suggest that you would be wasting your time) but you must do so only after changing your signature to conform with our norms. If I see you continuing to sign with any signature that contains a blinking character or image then I will block you pending a resolution of this. I do apologise if this comes across as heavy-handed, but we really all do have better things to do than fight this battle with you. Here's hoping you will move on from this and do something more productive. Best wishes, --John (talk) 17:26, 7 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Nb Technical 13 has changed the signature and replied . I hope this will be permanent.  —Sladen (talk) 18:33, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

March 2013
Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia, as you did to User talk:Talax. While objective prose about beliefs, products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not intended to be a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion. Thank you.

''You've left spam messages on a number of pages: stop. '' Drmies (talk) 17:58, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

When creating new articles...
I have a couple tips for you based upon Not My Turn to Die: Memoirs of a Broken Childhood in Bosnia:


 * Do not use a section header for the lead (or only) section.
 * Do write at least one comlete sentence, not just a fragment.
 * For an article about a book, try to find and include information about reviews of the book. Notability of books must be shown as for any other subject.

If you have any questions, please let me know! Lady of  Shalott  01:36, 8 March 2013 (UTC)


 * I'd almost forgotten about that page. I tried to find reviews for it, but everything I found was copyrighted and I opted to not include it on the page.  I'm not entirely sure that the image of the book cover I found is fair use, and you may want to review it as I would not to be cause of any action against the wiki.  I'm an extremely person at the moment dealing with the separation process with a child involved and losing a loved pet. When I have some more free time, I will likely go back and write a summary or something on the page; I do worry that if I do that it will be reverted as original research and a waste of my time as it seems I currently have a group of admins that intend to harass and attack me at the moment. Technical 13 (talk) 02:04, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, yes, reviews are generally going to be copyrighted. You don't copy them into the article; you choose salient points from them and cite them. I'm sorry about your losses. I suggest you drop the stick on the signature business - that is not going to go the way you want. Lady  of  Shalott  02:18, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Your signature
I see you've already been pestered a bit over your signature, but don't worry! – this is just a niggling minor little thing...

I notice your signature contains. Since each ID should be used no more than once on a page, technically you should post no more than once on a page using this signature. (Using an ID more than once is invalid HTML, though most browsers seem to handle it fine.)

To use your personal CSS to apply special formatting to your own signature, I suggest you use  instead of. HTML permits a class to be used multiple times on a page. In your CSS, use a dot instead of a hash to refer to the class (i.e.  instead of  ). Though since you've already used the ID in a lot of places, you might want to use both in the CSS (i.e. ), so you retain your personal formatting on older talk page posts. – PartTimeGnome (talk &#124; contribs) 23:11, 8 March 2013 (UTC)


 * class didn't fit in the character restriction on my preferences page and it says that I shouldn't put my sig in a template and call that so I used id which was the best I could do with creating my own xhtml style attribute which I'm not sure would work... Technical 13 (talk) 23:32, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Ah, right. So, to replace  with , we need eliminate three other characters to stay within the character limit. How about changing the   part to  ? The appearance will be the same.  – PartTimeGnome (talk &#124; contribs) 23:58, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I suppose I could do that; although, I was thinking of lightening the color to try and be a more pastel purple color from (#FF00AA) to (#FA88AF). Do you think the xhtml name would work?   and then css of   Technical 13 (talk) 00:35, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
 * OH! Maybe I could change my signature to   and my css to  Technical 13 (talk) 00:42, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Okay, so my sig would have to be... and my css... Technical 13 (talk) Message ) 00:58, 9 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Your final version looks fine to me! (Your first suggestion of using  would not have worked, because MediaWiki strips HTML attributes that are not on an approved list.   would work, but is even longer than using  !) – PartTimeGnome (talk &#124; contribs) 01:19, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Encylopedia
Why are you still adjusting your signature? For example, changes a signature made nearly a year ago. The edit changed #1 to #2:



The resulting signature (minus the four links) is:


 * — T13 ( C • M • Click to learn how to view this signature as intended ) 23:30, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

That signature gives no indication of understanding that this is an encylopedia where editors should be discussing how to improve articles, and should not be spending time wondering why someone has Click to learn how to view this signature as intended in their signature. That link goes to a page that is nothing to do with the encyclopedia, via a redirect.

Quite a lot of disruption occurred due to your previous signature, as seen at WT:Signatures. Any reading of that section shows that people were getting quite exasperated, yet just a couple of hours ago you made to change the WP:SIG guideline to allow transclusions like   in a signature. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and editors who waste other people's time with unhelpful ephemera are regarded as WP:NOTHERE and are encouraged to spend their time at other websites. Johnuniq (talk) 19:25, 12 March 2013 (UTC)


 * I've spent quite a bit of time to make my signature conform to all of the rules. The Click to learn how to view this signature as intended in my signature is to allow people to see my signature as I originally wanted it and satisfies User:Kusma's statement on Wikipedia talk:Signatures: "However, I would not mind if you write a custom CSS that makes your signature blink for those who want it (it must be off for anyone who is not logged in, not only for those who take active measures)" and is permitted as it is not disruptive within the limits of WP:SIG.Technical 13 (talk) 19:52, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Iapprove
Template:Iapprove has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. — Hex    (❝  ?!  ❞)   13:55, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Don't test things in article space
I know you undid, but please don't do that again. You can use your sandbox to test editing in. — Hex    (❝  ?!  ❞)   14:36, 15 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Testing that in my sandbox wouldn't have worked because it was a caching issue specific to that page (and others that had not had purged caches like it) having to do with being in C: Articles with no/broken ref tags or something like that. If it is something I can test in my SandBox, I usually do. ;) Technical 13 (talk) 15:10, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
 * If you have a problem that appears to only exist in article space, ask about it on the technical pump. Never, ever, make test edits in article space. Okay? — Hex    (❝  ?!  ❞)   15:32, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh, so editors aren't allowed to make null edits or dummy edits on Wikipedia.. Got it. Technical 13 (talk) 16:24, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Null edits do not leave any evidence in the article history. dummy edits are discouraged. Werieth (talk) 16:32, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
 * is not a dummy edit, and it is certainly not a null edit. — Hex    (❝  ?!  ❞)   18:45, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

VPT
I added a span tag to make the watchlist link work. Werieth (talk) 14:37, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

MediaWiki Markup Language listed at Redirects for discussion


An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect MediaWiki Markup Language. Since you had some involvement with the MediaWiki Markup Language redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so).

Yes, it's me again. Nothing personal - it's just that having had a look at your recent contributions, there are several things that need addressing. — Hex    (❝  ?!  ❞)   15:25, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Article Feedback deployment
Hey Technical 13; I'm dropping you this note because you've used the article feedback tool in the last month or so. On Thursday and Friday the tool will be down for a major deployment; it should be up by Saturday, failing anything going wrong, and by Monday if something does :). Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 23:33, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Roman2dec
Template:Roman2dec has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. WOSlinker (talk) 19:16, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:SupportSection
Template:SupportSection has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page.

As I point out at the TfD, you recreated your earlier template under this new name within two minutes of requesting speedy deletion for the first one. With this, following the argument you had earlier about your signature, and, I am starting to think that you are not here to build a encyclopedia.

This is a warning: if your behavior here becomes disruptive, you will blocked from editing. — Hex    (❝  ?!  ❞)   19:18, 16 March 2013 (UTC)


 * I am here to build an encyclopedia, it is just getting harder and harder to do when people keep taking my tools away. It's like saying, "I want you to build me a regular standard wooden house, but you can't use lumber, hammers, nails, screws, or glue. " My intentions here ARE of good faith, for the development and growth of the wiki.  I don't mind building and working on pages, and I LOVE to manufacture useful tools to make the job easier.  The dispute about my signature came to me, and quite frankly I still think it was biased and I was unfairly treated by the administrators that I was attempting to discuss it with but they didn't want to discuss and give fair resolution.  So, I have to suffer with inconvenient unicode that fails to load, shadowing of text, userpage links that in no way resemble the user name they go to, etc but was still forced to remove a • that blinked in a color that was 2.28:1 contrast ratio which means it blends in and a good number of people can't hardly see it anyways if their browser knows how to blink in the first place.  I digress on the matter.  I removed it from my signature, created a page to allow people to modify there display to see what I see, and linked to it in my signature as is allowed by WP:SIG. I've responded to your most recent set of nominations to basically delete everything by me just because I made it. Technical 13 (talk) 21:34, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Not because you made it. Because you didn't need to make it, and when you did, you made it poorly. — Hex    (❝  ?!  ❞)   22:04, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Card of Thanks
Thank you for the hint you provided at the village pump. I still don't know why it works one way on Wikipedia and differently on my wiki, but I don't really care as your response let me to the right path and from there I was able to stumble my way to the answer. Thank you. River Styx 23 17:25, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Follow-up
Hey, Technical 13. Please ping me back after you've had an opportunity to look over Template:Infobox NFL player. Thanks. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 01:47, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

File source problem with File: UMA-logo.png


Thank you for uploading File:UMA-logo.png. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a [ list of your uploads]. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Eeekster (talk) 19:29, 28 March 2013 (UTC)


 * I've added the source; however, due to the content of the logo, it is not eligible for copyright alone because it is not original enough, and thus the logo is considered to be in the public domain. Technical 13 (talk) 19:45, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Teahouse host
HI! Great suggestion for the Teahouse host profiles, I made the change permanent in the templates. Much better! Than you, :) heather walls (talk) 23:13, 29 March 2013 (UTC)


 * What did I do now? I'm confused, what did I suggest? LOL Technical 13 (talk) 23:27, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Sure, go ahead and change it (per your edit summary). This is how I originally intended it but I started liking the smaller white box as well. Thanks!! heather walls (talk) 23:36, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't know if I mentioned this (I'm sure I did, I've got it everywhere on my User page and in my lounge/landing description), I love improving templates and writing logic scripting/code.  Technical 13 (talk) 23:49, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Richard France/sandbox


Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that the page that you created was tagged as a test page and has been or soon may be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

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, you can place a request here. Kumioko (talk) 01:22, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Richard France/sandbox


Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that the page that you created was tagged as a test page and has been or soon may be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

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, you can place a request here. smileguy91talk 02:48, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Chess PGN Viewer: build from scratch vs. adapt kipod's thing
I'm totally going to regret asking this, but is there a reason why you want to build a chess viewer thing from scratch rather than adapting/fixing kipod's one? You're obviously a very skilled programmer and perfectly capable of doing things on your own. I just wonder whether that's the best approach here. Mattj2 (talk) 07:31, 31 March 2013 (UTC)


 * No reason in particular. I just can't see the current one very well with the chosen color scheme and being that I'm not "REALLY" "REALLY" into chess, it is hard for me to follow who's doing what... Technical 13 (talk) 12:35, 31 March 2013 (UTC)