@HansWobbe: You are welcome. The table errors you had were fostered content issues due to the missing closers </td></tr> and the few missing |. All opening tags in a <table> style table need a paired closing tag. And for the {| style of table, |- creates a new row for the table, but | creates a cell to allow that content to exist in that new row. All very easy things to drop or miss one. Cheers, Zinnober9 (talk) 00:33, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My sandbox
Hi, regarding editing my sandbox, please do consult me before doing any changes as I do not like it being so messy and like to know what changes are done beforehand. Hope you understand my position on the matter. Suomi2023 (talk) 07:31, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
While I do respect your position, if I were to contact every user with syntax errors beforehand, the fixing of the 3 million remaining errors would be much slower and more difficult. Its been easier to edit first and ask for forgiveness later if an editor objects. Generally few editors interact when asked beforehand, and few editors interact after a correction, be it an objection, comment, or a thanks. While I thought my corrections were keeping your content more or less identical in display, and reduced some of the messiness in my eyes, the multiple unclosed bolding tags made a few placements a best guess and I'm sorry if any adjustments were not your intent. Sorry for the inconvenience, and if I come across any other pages of yours that have any syntax errors, I'll try to contact you first. Best wishes to you, Zinnober9 (talk) 13:56, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Z – after a few editors expressed surprise or dismay at User-space edits, I changed my default User-space edit summary to "Fix Linter errors. I hope you don't mind this minor cleanup edit in your user space." It has worked very well, resulting in fewer complaints/reverts and numerous thank-yous. You might try it. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:06, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Jonesey95 — I don't get much interaction either way with my current edit summaries, though I certainly get more thank yous than questions/complaints/reverts.
While I have been stating in my summaries the Linter link and the type of error(s) that was the reason for the edit so far (ex "Fixed Lint errors on this page (table tag errors)"), I certainly see the benefit of adding a little something like yours. Will consider. Zinnober9 (talk) 18:34, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I see. I thank you for responding nicely on the matter and thank you for clarifying with me. I totally appreciate the efforts involved. Suomi2023 (talk) 16:19, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Anyway, let me just inform you info on my sandbox is just for practice so do not have to worry if info is different from actual visa policy. Suomi2023 (talk) 01:47, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wasn't worried about that at all, and hardly noticed. Linter only permits us wikignomes to edit the syntax issues anyway, so wasn't focused on the content itself and was only focused on the wikimarkup syntax around it. Also, I've come across lots of various sandboxes with various purposes, and have used my own sandbox as a test place for hundreds of things, so well aware that sandboxes (and other user subpages) are a respected content space to test out stuff like basketball scoring tables for Oprah vs Mozart if you so wanted to.
Unless the content is clearly vandalism or egregiously WP:NOT content, I tend not to pay attention to the content that much. And if I did spot a content issue, then I'd certainly ask about it or mention it to you. Best wishes,
I was going through the url=value drafts and saw that you had moved this one from mainspace. I get why - the translated page's citations aren't placed inline correctly. I'll try to fix that, but this is actually a duplicate posting. The article already exists in English, just not as detailed as this.
The other en page: Al-Nabi Yunus Mosque; the ar page that was translated: جامع النبي يونس It's in the language drop downs on that mainspace en page.
I don't know how to request a merge in draft space (I don't think I can) since @Loukus999 did all the work on the translation. How do I request this to be fixed so there isn't a duplicate article once the citation issue is rectified? OIM20 (talk) 14:27, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@OIM20: Drafts and article creation are not my Wikipedia area of focus, so I'm not the best person to ask. I had come across this page because of a tracked syntax error, then saw it had some critical reference issues, so I Draftified to allow for those to be fixed.
That said, doing a little digging, it looks like WP:PROPMERGE outlines this sort of situation and can be initiated by anyone. My assumption is that it's a type 2 merge given the page names are different, but I don't know for certain and recommend checking either on the Propmerge project's talk page, or at WP:HELPDESK to verify that Propmerge is the correct action to take.
Dear Sir, Thanks for your edit to the table I made here - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:MyNameIsAnthonyGonsalves
I had realized immediately, that I had done some mistake. But could not tell what. I compared it with some tables made at other pages [studied their code], but could not discover what mistake I had done. Today, I suddenly found the table corrected by you. I again studied its code, but cannot discover what did you do make it good. In your edit, it says, as below:
“Removed table breaking indents (fostered content error)”
I cannot understand this. Can you please tell me? Thanks. Otherwise, I would never learn. Thanks.
Regards
MyNameIsAnthonyGonsalves (talk) 05:34, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@MyNameIsAnthonyGonsalves: Sure, thanks for asking. You had each line within the table indented with : and doing so deactivates/breaks the wikitable markup, or pipe syntax. Tables should be treated, regardless of number of lines, as one unit, not to be altered or interrupted between the opening and closing brackets, unless it's a new cell or row led with a pipe | . Tables very rarely are indented, since most tables are wider than yours and typically are the width of the page, but on the rare occurrence you do want to, this is one of two ways I can think of to how you'd do it.
As for the fostered content error I made reference to, an example is explained and displayed here.
Regarding Deletion of Vishuddhanda Paramahamsa Page
Hello Sir,
We added few reliable sources link to this page to resolve citation issues. I request you to not delete it. Please kindly consider our request. Akhila257 (talk) 08:08, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You made an edit to my user page without messaging me first and getting consent. Please explain why you think that was ok for you to do. Chrisbrl88 (talk) 04:37, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hope you are doing well. The page WP:Lint gives me permission (with clear boundaries) to make corrections of specific tracked syntax errors on all pages of Wikipedia, and without needing prior permission for pages in userspace. The general summary of these rules are that I can't change the words of other editors (ie the displayed content) or change the page's layout/display (barring the exception that an error is breaking the page's visual layout).
Your page had a fostered content table error (missing a | for "housing" the cell content), and I swapped out the {{boxboxbottom}} tag for |} since it mismatched with the first table opening statement style.
While I DO appreciate the diligent work you do on database cleanup, common courtesy kinda warrants a, "Hey - there's X issue on your user page and I'm gonna take Y action to correct it; just a heads up that you're gonna get an email," message.
It kinda felt like someone moving my couch without asking if I was OK with it. That's all. I hope I didn't come across the wrong way!
And I hope you have a wonderful Easter, as well! Christmas and Easter are the only times my mom makes deviled eggs and her unique macaroni salad. It's a comfort for me 🤣
Thanks for cleaning up some fostered lint on my user page! I've had some weird display probs there for ages, but have been too busy to track them down, so I appreciate your help.
You have an elegantly clean set of userboxen. I just might emulate your style ... if I ever find the time to clean up my user page! ;) yoyo (talk) 08:13, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You're welcome! Table errors are pretty frequent an error, real easy to drop a tag.
Thanks! Feel free to copy the layout style. I wanted flexibility with the collapsing and the section headers, and the wikitable style wasn't giving me what I wanted. Zinnober9 (talk) 13:14, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Need to undo
Hello! You recently adjusted my user page explaining that there were "lint errors" (which I am completely unfamiliar with). Perhaps there were, but I must undo your edit, as it threw off everything to where the side bar overlaps with everything else, obscuring it. My guess is that my retaintion of the former default desktop layout conflicts with the changes you made. I found the new default to be absolutely horrible, not in the least since it seemed to happen overnight, without sufficient warnings to all users who might protest it. I wouldn't have minded, but man, it was needlessly confusing, and also just looked really bad! But, beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and, after much searching I was able to change it back for my own use without this affecting anyone else.
So, just so you're aware, whatever the lint error changes you made were, they apparently don't have a universally uniform effect on all pages. Mine ended up appearing like one of those pages we sometimes happen upon that haven't been updated since 1999, with everything scrambled over everything else. I know no harm was meant, so please accept that, though it's somewhat irritating, I have no personal issue with you. Please let me know if there's a way to fix lint errors without it scrambling the page. But also know I am no longer up-to-date with all the current jargon as I was in, say, 2012, and will likely be easily confused. I still edit, but no where near at the rate I used to (I might've been making 100-300 edits per day at one point; now it's just a few times a month).
Zinnober9, I worked on this broken user page for a while and abandoned my edits. I don't know if there is a way to preserve the rather unusual layout while fixing the Linter errors. I'm going to take another look. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:09, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Jonesey95,
Both of the sandbox edits that I came up with this evening (presented in my reply below) preserve it fairly well, (the main difference being the tables with broken syntax being the blue boarders, that appear when corrected), but otherwise keeps the same visual placement/layout of the rest of Hamamelis' content intact. Certainly not one of the more clear cut Wikitable errors I've fixed recently, but certainly one that has a potential for a satisfying, syntax-free solution for both parties. Zinnober9 (talk) 04:28, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your efforts! Hopefully all will be well now. (Explained in my response to Zinnobef9, below.)
@Hamamelis No worries, thank you for the kind message. Some corrections aren't as straight forward and take some assumptions, as the way the code is written indicates one way, but displays in another way due to the issues present. I leaned more towards how the Wikitable code presented on yours and missed that the Inline cleanup tags table expanded so big.
Would something like this or (alternately this) satisfy you? Both of these have all the syntax errors corrected and look pretty similar to your current layout. If either does, edit that version's source code, copy in full, and paste into yours to keep it (or I can copy and paste it to yours). Zinnober9 (talk) 04:16, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hamamelis: I have fixed some of the syntax errors on your page, leaving at least two bits of invalid table formatting. One way you can tell that the table formatting is invalid is the two horizontal blue lines to the right of the loon image. Another way is that the userboxes do not form a normal vertical stack. Maybe you could experiment with the formatting to get things to look the way you want them while also providing valid table formatting. The main problem is that you have tables that do not use a pipe (|) character to introduce cells; they just go from the table opening to content. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:25, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! The alternative version you showed has the identical overlapping problem I wrote to you about originally. However, the first example appears to be perfect! I know from interractions even a long while back that knowing how something looks on one person's screen doesn't tell much about how it looks on other people's.
I think I can do the cut and paste of it as you've described. Thanks again, for your caring and understanding, as well as your efforts. If I may, I'll let you know if I have any questions or difficulties.
Hi once more! Just checked and wanted to report that your last edit to my user page corrected everything just fine. No need for me to cut and past. So... success!
Hi! Just wanted to say thanks for fixing a closing tag on my userspace. Although, I do have a question: How did you find my userpage? I haven't done much yet on Wikipedia.
You are welcome. The missing closing tag was triggering a "Multiple unclosed formatting tags" syntax error, which is a tracked error type found on Special:LintErrors. I enjoy fixing syntax errors here on Wikipedia, and while I've been focused on fixing another type of error recently, I occasionally clear off any error types that are no longer zeroed out, and your page was one of a few with this error last night. Zinnober9 (talk) 16:17, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Lint errors
Hellow @Zinnober9, last time you edited my userpage many days ago mentioning "lint errors" in summary. I don't understand what type of error it is. Can you fix it on my userpage if there is any error like that one? Last time you solved my problem in my userbox, I thankful to you for that. ZenDragoX(User) | (Contact)15:13, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Zendrago XLint errors are various syntax issues like a missing closing html tags, misnested tags, or obsolete (HTML5 non-compliant) tags. A list of all 19 tracked error types are here, with each link going to a page that describes each specific error in more detail. Your user page has no errors right now and looks good. Do you ask because you can't get something to display as you want, or some other reason? Happy to help if I can. Zinnober9 (talk) 03:00, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am having some error in my userbox, In my userbox, I have put the red box in black. But there was a gif along with it in the last red box, but that gif is being shown above instead of being shown on it. I meant that Gatto zzz.gif, which I added in both boxes and the red box is in black, but red one is not showing, can you please fix that error. Thanks. ZenDragoX(User) | (Contact)03:31, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm. I'm seeing each gatto gif at the bottom of their box color, so wondering if you are looking on mobile, or since the red gif is missing, I'm wondering if it's something like a caching issue on your end that would be corrected for you with clearing your browser's cache. This is what it looks like (at one particular moment) on my laptop: https://i.imgur.com/3VcCm8S.png , which sounds like what you want.
@Qwerty284651 I do admit I edited in error with today (May 5, 2024)'s edit, the ONE AND ONLY edit since our March 24th conversation on your talk page where I stated I'd ignore your page, and hoped that someone else would clear the errors in a way that satisfied you. No discussion or agreement was conversed prior to that March 24th discussion, so Level 2 and Level 3 warnings are not justified, not to mention "requiring your consent" is not a valid justification in regards to the rules of Wikipedia, as consent to edit another user's page is explicitly NOT required per WP:LINTER, SO LONG AS the edit is "for the correction of tracked syntax errors", such as those I corrected on your userpage.
However, I do admit I made an error with you from the social courtesy aspect of Wikipedia editing, (Cautiously editing or removing another editor's comments is sometimes allowed, but normally you should stop if there is any objection per WP:TPO), as I forgot our March 24th conversation. I've edited over 1800 pages since then and had forgotten. Sorry for that.
How can we proceed without further frustration towards each other? I'd like the errors resolved, and you'd like your page to remain as is.
I realize at this moment that my edit unintentionally adjusted the width of your time section a little bit. Is that the heart of your objection? If a fix were to keep that display width identical, would a fix be permitted?
Greetings, @Zinnober9. I understand your intentions, but I want you to not edit my userpage again moving forward, even if it has linter errors per WP:NOBAN (If an editor asks you not to edit their user pages, such requests should, within reason, be respected.). Go fix lint errors elsewhere, but lay off my userpage. Qwerty284651 (talk) 10:57, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I want to delete my Wikipedia account permanently due to certain reasons. But I can't do it. It would be really nice of you if you could help me on this. So can you please delete my account or block my account permanently.
@BhikhariInformer I have no authority or ability to assist with any account actions, so not really able to help you with this other than share some info.
One of the admins listed here would be more knowledgeable than I for requesting a selfblock/page delete sort of request, so I'd suggest contacting one of them and they will be able to help you out.
I was wondering if I could get you to answer the question about where an appropriate place would be to take the concern about "bogus". I've been vaguely waved in the direction of the ticket system, which seems to have a whole process for signup that is probably a time sink unless I want to do unpaid software development, which I do not. If you don't know, that is an acceptable answer, but an answer would be nice. Thanks Elinruby (talk) 05:57, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I had not replied since you had replied to Jonesey95 where they had unambiguously answered that, and I didn't feel I could add anything more to the conversation(s). While I don't have first hand knowledge of Phabricator, I agree with Jonesey95's clear response that Phabricator would be the place to do it and WP:PUMPTECH also directs people to that per the second sentence Bug reports and feature requests should be made in Phabricator.... You could certainly try posting to WP:PUMPTECH first, but you'll likely told Phabricator there as well.
I don't agree with you on this phrasing objection, but I'm not attached to the term either, so if it changes, it changes.
A word of caution though, stop with the charged commentary about Jonesey95 and stick to root of the matter, that you don't like the term Wikipedia uses for Invalid image syntax and want that changed. Leave any and all personal feelings you have about Jonesey95 out of it. Otherwise it might look as though your motive for filing the request is personal grudge instead of subjective motion. Zinnober9 (talk) 13:27, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
/me stares. According to you the stuff about my delicate feelings is just fine and *I'm* the one that's making it personal? I have nothing against Jonesey95 except their tone of voice. And the fact that this is the second time they have done something like this, but that's over a period of at least two years. I do give them credit for changing their edit summary. I think you are being defensive of someone who is not being attacked. But in any event, moving on, I was hoping for something a bit more specific, but fine, you don't have first-hand knowledge of Phabricator. I appreciate the answer. Have a nice day. Elinruby (talk) 21:11, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Draft for the Battle of Kinugasa
Thanks for helping with the external image syntax in my draft, i just wanted to know how did you find the page considering its a draft? im new to wikipedia (to creating pages atleast, i have done a few edits before) so im not knowledgeable on these things. And what do you think of the page as a whole? thanks again, have a nice day :) BeamLSB (talk) 17:57, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I tend to edit for syntax issues rather than content, so I didn't really pay attention beyond seeing that it looked normal for a draft. Looking at it now, overall tone seems fine. I do see that it doesn't currently have any sources stated. You will need to add reliable sourcing before it has any chance of passing AFC, but I think it will have potential if you get the sourcing in.
I found the draft from this page which uses the error report data from Wikipedia's reports here. There were a few EIS syntax issues ("Bogus file options") in various drafts, so did a quick little minor cleanup of this and a few other pages.
Ah alright, good to know. Also i usually add references/sources at the end, and i finished adding them yesterday night and have submitted i to AfC now. Thanks again BeamLSB (talk) 08:38, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the help, but...
Hey uh, thank you for doing some minor changes that may or may not've needed to've been done to my user page. However, the change you made to the My other fun section, while I can tell was good-intentioned, also broke the section somewhat (the roll to the other rooms :P part was the most broken), so I had to revert the changes you made to that section whilst leaving the minor changes you made to my custom userboxes. Thanks for trying to help though, I appreciate it. AuroraANovaUma ^-^ (talk) 17:04, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, my apologies, I took the intention to be as how it was written instead of as it displayed since fostered content is a display error. Since the portion you reverted was the portion with the fostered content errors I was most interested in clearing, would either of these be an acceptable fix with the display you seek? I'm not sure if you want the head bouncing statement centered on the page or not, which is why I've done two options here. Thank you for your feedback. Zinnober9 (talk) 18:01, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I take it you don't like either possibility? Is there a detail I'm overlooking that is important to you that if I got right would please you? If I can, I want to make you happy and the clear the syntax errors, but if that is not possible, I can also leave the page alone for another experienced editor who might have better luck finding a solution that pleases you. Zinnober9 (talk) 21:16, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I appreciate your help. Maybe i'll consider either one of your possibilities in the future, but I'd really appreciate it if you could just leave my user page alone for now. AuroraANovaUma ^-^ (talk) 21:27, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please keep off my user page. It seems you've messed up others' User pages. I'm sure you are trying to be helpful but you don't have the skills. Charlesjsharp (talk) 19:49, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That is a big accusation verging on slander to be throwing around without examples. My considerate edit to your page corrected the tracked syntax errors on your page so that it complies with HTML5 and displays as your writing indicated. You page was missing a table closing bracket, a closing bold, and the gallery tag does not allow thumb or any individual image sizing parameters to exist within (they trigger invalid image option errors), so those were removed, and your page looks and displays identically before and after my edit, as it should.
My edit was in full compliance with WP:LINT, which allows me to make these edits on all namespaces of Wikipedia and which strictly limits what can and can't be changed.
As for my skills, I've been doing this type of editing for 2-3 years and have made tens of thousands of corrective edits, and have gained the trust of multiple admin (Primefac, Courcelles, HJ Mitchell, Juliancolton) (evidence) who have granted me (at my request) temporary access to various full protected pages to correct a numerous thousands of syntax errors on their own, and other admin's, talk page archives and many other pages. I do not claim to be perfect, and I'm always learning something new or a better way of correcting an issue, but to say I'm unskilled is offensive. Zinnober9 (talk) 20:47, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Zinnober9, Primefac, Courcelles, HJ Mitchell, and Juliancolton: I've just found another of my user pages User:Charlesjsharp/Featured pictures of mammals on English Wikipedia (and others like it) that Zinnober9 edited and left with errors on 24 May. He states above that for me to state he is unskilled is offensive. He has left the text for every image on the pages unreadable; not intentionally of course, but leaving pages as he has demonstrates, without doubt, a lack of skills. His claim "page looks and displays identically before and after my edit" is simply not true. Can the admins listed please review your endorsement of his work and ask him to correct all my pages without delay. Charlesjsharp (talk) 02:09, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Your page prior to my edit. My initial correction. They were the same, near identically displaying pages, with the exception of the text color for the captions. The fostered content error on the page allowed the gallery's captions to ignore the table opening parameter (emphasis mine) {| class="wikitable" align="center" valign="center" style="margin: auto; background:Black; COLOR:WHITE; border: 0px" in the following:
This made the first correction allow what you had written to be applied to all text without a stated color within the gallery to be white as stated by the table, and not just the headers outside of the gallery where previously it had not entered the gallery portion. And since the text color from the table statement was still in effect and had not been dictated to change or end at this point, continued on within Gallery as it had been written.
Since you alerted me and were more descriptive of the issue this time around, I've made this correction, and have come to realize your complaint of the other page, so a similar correction to your userpage that had I first edited last week has now been made to now that I know the dark background (as written) was undesired.
Your userpage's table had a fostered content error which allowed the gallery to ignore the uncontained table commands and stay with a white background, instead of displaying the black background as written, and brokenly displaying the written table's black background as a tiny black square at the bottom of the page in the before version. Removing the background:Black; color:white; line that dictated this has restored the original visual display (minus the broken tiny black square).
Both of these pages were the fault of a judgement call, where I had a crossroad of various, equally viable, options and chose a differing solution that wasn't the same vision as the user wanted. My train of thought had been "The user wrote it to display this way, so it is assumed the user wants it to display this way". I appear to have made the wrong judgement call on this detail for both pages and I apologize. I hope both pages are now displaying as you wish them to be?
We don't need any drama when a simple note explaining the issue and your wished outcome will suffice. I can be reasonable and am happy to work with you, or any user and make you/them happy if I can, but don't insult me or my skills, and be clear (descriptive) with what the issue is. ("Thing X is/isn't doing expected Y") is very helpful in understanding the issue instead of trying to figure out vague "the page is all broken" sorts of statements.
Admin: If any admin takes issue with my judgement process in these crossroad decisions I made, or my promptness in correcting these issues once better described and the issue understood, I'm happy to chat. All my edits have been in accordance with Wikipedia rules as I know them to be for these sorts of corrections, and while I'm not perfect, I do act with respect and good intentions, and strive to understand any issues encountered.
My edits attempt to correct all Wikipedia's tracked errors on a page, while in keeping with Wikipedia's strict rules for editing other's pages for these error corrections; using the approved, regularly used by many, list for HTML-5 clean, equivalents. Where things occasionally get a little bit less defined is when the way a user wrote the page conflicts with how the "broken" page displayed, and something doesn't work/display the same after a command is corrected or closed. Various things that were ignored by the code suddenly come to life and become controlled by earlier/outer code (think onion layers), and choices need to be made. Do you stay with perceived intent of the code, or the perceived intent due to current display? This was the case here, and I went with intent of the code. I believe with my second edits to both of Charles' pages that I have corrected each to the presumed user desired display unless told otherwise.
There clearly was a perceptible difference to the page after your edit so it's not unreasonable for Charles to take offence (editing another's userpage is generally considered discourteous at best). If someone asks you not to edit their userspace, don't. Continuing to do so could push it from discourtesy into the realms of disruptive editing. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts?10:45, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
All reasonable things I try to adhere to. I enjoy peace and calm, and correcting issues without ruffling any feathers. Not always possible, but generally works out smoothly. My mistake (for his userpage) was I had my browser's dark mode on, which, from what I've been hearing is similar to Wikipedia's upcoming dark mode feature, and it had displayed the table's stated black background the same way as it would for a standard white background on my screen (both black) so the issue was not initially apparent to me until last night where more details were shared. My initial reply based on this detail does make me look a bit blind to that clear difference and I regret that oversight.
Regardless, I still would have edited their userpage in the same way, with the same justification, "They wrote it with these desired colors, so it is assumed they intend for it to use these colors as written". The only difference in this course of events, had I been editing in light/standard mode, would have been that I would have understood the complaint sooner and remedied the issue the other week instead of now.
When errors affect the display and change from the original when corrected, some decisions need to be made on which to keep-- do you keep "The intent from how it was written", or "The intent from how it was displaying when found"? With my experience of addressing the many thousands of Tidy Font errors last fall (the link colors defaulting to the standard blue instead of the written user-stated colors), I've tended to favor how it was written over how it looked, since how it might not be displaying now how a user had it initially viewed a few years ago due to various updates through the years with Wikipedia's Mediawiki changes and HTML versions improving or slightly adjusting some things.
Since Charles requested below that I correct the remaining display issues, I've done those edits as requested. I have no further interest in interacting with them, and I don't foresee any such need to. If they wish to initiate anything further, my door is open, but I won't touch their pages further unless directed to.
Comment: Thank you for editing my user page Zinnober9. But yet again, the work is not without error. You have restored the text but you have left a white box on the mammals page and white lines on it and the other pages, none of which I want. I also had the gallery images centered but you have changed them all to align left. Once you have restored these pages, I would be very grateful if you would agree to leave my pages alone as you have previously agreed to do with another user. What you need to understand is that amateurs like me try to create nice-looking pages (in my case galleries) by copying and pasting what we find on other users' pages. We have no idea how the syntax /html/whatever works. So if you change anything doing housekeeping tasks, we are stuffed. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:17, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Due to the width of the flags on your profile being roughly the width of most of the country names, they filled the width allotted to each and displayed similarly, with only the shorter, (4-5 letter names) shifting some, so it was not immediately obvious on my laptop. For the Mammals and Birds galleries, I've addressed your stated concerns. Your Insects and Frogs galleries were not edited by me, but had similar assumptions made by another well respected editor back in April, so I've notified them of this issue. Zinnober9 (talk) 21:54, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ciotti edits
I have added a source, which was redirected to Les Republicains X account, which CLEARLY STATED that Ciotti is still the president due to the fact that the political bureau failed to follow the necessary procedure and rules to remove a sitting party president. Maybe if you would read the EDIT DESCRIPTION WITH THE SOURCE, before intervening, you would know why I did all those edits.
Thanks VosleCap (talk) 22:25, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding your recent edit to one of my user pages, User:Ingratis/BayrKloster2, you actually introduced a further error in your eagerness to fix another. I understand the good intentions behind your efforts but find this sort of unasked-for "help" quite irritating, so am asking you, politely, not to intervene further on any of my user pages. Best wishes, Ingratis (talk) Ingratis (talk) 07:25, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for irritating you. I don't agree with your assessment of my edit. I introduced NO errors, and was fully accurate in my correction of the fostered content syntax error. The part that you appear to have taken issue with was that you had had "St. Faith's Priory" bulleted prior to my edit, which, sure, was inconsistent with the other entries in the table, but also was not causing any syntax errors. And while I did notice that it was bulleted and didn't match the rest of the table, I felt that changing that would be a content change and not a syntax change; I'm not permitted to change a user's content in the rules of WP:LINT, so I left it alone.
Not my reading of it, but, as said, I accept entirely that your edit was in good faith. Nevertheless, I'd be grateful if you'd not make any more such on my user pages. Ingratis (talk) 18:00, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/May the odds be ever in your favor until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.
I did not create the article, I have no interest in the article. Do with it as you wish. I cleared a bolding error and removed the redirect, as a page can't be both a redirect and an article at one time. Please contact the article writer Kuzeyas (talk·contribs) instead. Thank you. Zinnober9 (talk) 00:45, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My personal interest on Wikipedia is to fix specific, tracked, syntax errors (in accordance to the rules of WP:LINT), and I go where the syntax errors take me. If that's someone's sandbox, so be it. My current error of interest is Wikitables, and we are down to 300 or so fostered content errors remaining, which are now predominantly in userspace. Once those are gone, I'll focus on a different tracked error that will probably be in a different namespace of Wikipedia. Best wishes, Zinnober9 (talk) 19:59, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Yopienso regarding your table usage, note that |+ is meant for a table caption so your current table produces incorrect syntax there. It will also look visually better to replace that with regular cells (|). Gonnym (talk) 07:52, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know waht a table caption is and don't know how to code. I just think it's a waste of time to correct picky little things in a user's sandbox. But thanks to both of you for your kind responses that were intended to be helpful. Just call me Grumpy Granny? Best to both of you, YoPienso (talk) 16:00, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A pie for you!
Thank you for fixing my page. I have no idea what I'm doing most of the time. I generally copy code from somewhere electronic and keep my fingers crossed that the person I copied did it correctly. Much thanks Smkyle1 (talk) 22:47, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I kindly request the retention of the Wikipedia page on Hari Ballabh Narayan Singh.
I kindly request the retention of the Wikipedia page on Hari Ballabh Narayan Singh. The subject has made notable contributions in his field, warranting an encyclopedic entry. Deleting the page would overlook the significance of his achievements. I urge you to close the AfD discussion in favor of keeping the page, ensuring valuable information remains accessible.
It is not my opinion you need to convince, but the community's. We've also been very clear in what critical issue the page has. We do not question his works, we question his notability, and that MUST be from OTHER people talking about him/his works. If you are able to address that issue, then great, I'll change my vote if/when the notability criteria is met. Until then, the community of Wikipedia is unable to accept the draft in its current state. If more people write or discuss him in reliably sourced ways, or more sources that show his notability are found, then the page could be reconsidered at that time. I appreciate your enthusiasm for creating an article (one of the very hardest things to do on Wikipedia), but arguing that he is notable because he wrote multiple books is a nonstarter argument, and the charades you'd done surrounding this discussion, constantly moving the page, focusing on me and my view instead of the community's view as a whole on this community discussion, blanking my talk page, has soured my view of you on this, and I ask that you do not contact or notify me again. Thank you. Zinnober9 (talk) 17:44, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Care to join me in User space to fix bogus image options?
I'm working on the 4,000 bogus image options in User space. An edit summary that has been working well for me in User space is "Fix Linter errors. Fix invalid image options. I hope you don't mind this minor cleanup edit in your user space."
Sure! It's one of 4 sets I'd been eying as a possible next. I had been scoping out the HTML5-incompatible misnesting errors in (Article) Talk, but those I've fixed since yesterday have been annoying and fiddly so far with nested italics gunking stuff up. The Image Bogies will be more straightforward and almost certainly be likely to be eliminated in full (assuming those 9 puzzles in Template get cleared); something the HTML5-inc misnests likely won't. Zinnober9 (talk) 22:34, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Great work!! We cleared 4,000 errors in 20 days. The one remaining error in User space appears to be due to a feature request I submitted for a module. If the module gets fixed, the error will go away on its own.
And I figured out a workaround for what appears to be a Linter-error-parsing bug. Rather than file a bug that will sit in Phabricator for years (cf T275074), I just hacked ten WikiProject templates. Now all we have to do is get Portal space deleted; it's a dumpster fire for so many reasons. – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:18, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Helped that most were on pages with very few other errors. Was hoping the template issues would be reasonable for you, nice. Ran across this odd but simple case yesterday and thought I'd share since I hadn't seen it before. Not real sure why it was problematic, but solution was easy.
Maybe Portal space can be overhauled one of these days to have some smarter behavior instead of holding onto, or creating, long gone or nonexistant issues. Until then, yuck.
Other than a few unresolved popups of some previously cleared off types, nice to have only five main error types left. Just wish those remaining five types weren't all so well populated in each namespace. Zinnober9 (talk) 11:49, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that's a cute one. I posted it on the sig page one or two Halloweens ago when there was a sudden influx of "new" errors on the firefly table. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:31, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Does that mean that October 31, if they aren't addressed by then, there will be a population of those 800 some image errors for the day? I'm tempted to say since it's the same thing 800 times, that it could be an easy one time only bot run task. But I suspect it would be more effort, or take longer, to get that in as an approved one time task than it would be to just hit them manually with a find and replace. Zinnober9 (talk) 17:44, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Roughly, yes, a batch of bogus image options will appear on October 31 and then disappear on November 1. Because not every page is refreshed every day by the job queue, some of them will not appear in the Linter error list. A manual find and replace, or someone with AWB permission, should be able to make quick work of the batch. A bot approval may be necessary if using AWB, since this would technically be a cosmetic edit (i.e. no change to the rendered page). – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:41, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your help with a table I'd messed up
Thank you for your comment] describing the error I had made on my user page, and for showing me how to fix it.
You are welcome. Diffs are always "external" links, but you can surround your link with <span class="plainlinks">[yourlink yourlinktext]</span> to make it display without the trailing popout square like so: diff. If you are doing that for a multilined section, use div instead of span so the tags don't get stripped. This page: H:LINK explains most everything you can do with links. Cheers! Zinnober9 (talk) 16:27, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Awesome! Thank you again!! I appreciate your helpfulness.
While your edits to my user page were beneficial, I consider it inappropriate to alter someone else's user page without asking. Before you alter anything further in my slice of the User namespace, as per the WP:USERTALKSTOP project content guideline, I ask that you ask me first on my talk page before correcting any other lint errors.
While I do appreciate your viewpoint, the reason I generally don't preemptively communicate is that it doubles the notifications the user would receive, and would require them to take time out of their day to think about and understand my coldcall request. Also when I have previously tried contacting people prior to editing, I've found that most people don't respond, or those that do, were either bothered by the request and wanted me to just do my thing and get out, or had very little idea of what I'm talking about and were more likely to object. With my current procedure, I generally don't get much interaction from others, be it positive, neutral, or negative. It also seems to impact them less and generates less objections since they can see that their content didn't really change and the page still looks the same, or fixed the thing they didn't know how to fix. The few people that do interact with me based on my corrections either comment as you do with questions or some send a thanks notification, but both are generally low percentage rates, so contacting prior just hasn't been worth my time. If the rate of feedback changed, I might reevaluate, but right now, it's more effective and less bothersome to all parties to not ring each doorbell and just go ahead and make the edit explaining the changes made. Zinnober9 (talk) 09:47, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Adjacent Notice conversation
I agree with the above comments by Peaceray. It is not appropriate to mess around with the positioning of images on an only-just-begun article in my sandbox, especially when you admit to seeing my previous comment objecting to this behaviour. Knowingly forcing edits onto a partly-written article in a sandbox without the editor's permission, when you know the editor has already objected, amounts to bullying and intimidation, in my opinion. Partly-written articles are in sandboxes for the very reason that they are not yet ready or suitable for mainspace. When such articles are ready, they will be put in mainspace, and then you can reasonably correct any genuine errors in them. While they are in the sandbox, editors may reasonably move all the images to a gallery at the bottom of the page while they prepare the paragraphs - even if they only have one image so far, but are planning to obtain more images. That is what a sandbox is for. You have no right to edit sandboxes where no law is being broken, without asking first. Thank you. Storye book (talk) 08:29, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My gumption to go forward with an alternate solution was spawned by the nearing completion of addressing all pages with invalid image option errors. I don't see how my single edit with a polite explanation of the issue and my hopes that my alternate solution satisfying you counts as bulling or intimidation.
We respect your userpages and your userspace creations, but correcting a known and tracked syntax error of how an image was written does not infringe upon your rights or your creations, and per WP:UOWN, where it states your user rights to these pages, ALSO clearly permits allowances in specific cases for corrections of issues when necessary. The corrections of invalid syntax is one of these expressly permitted actions.
Jonesey95 and my interest in your page was to address the invalid usage of the parameters |thumb and |right in Gallery. Help:Gallery_tag#Loading_in_images expressly forbids the usage of thumb in gallery, and using any position on page parameter is nonfunctional, and appear in none of the example usage cases of gallery, because it is not a recognized gallery parameter. It also is clearly ignoring your intent, since it is displaying the image on the left side of the page and not on the right as you wrote. If you do not like @Jonesey95's solution, or my solution, can we work together on how that image can be displayed without issues and make us all happy, with either Help:Gallery_tag or WP:EIS syntax? Happy to figure something out with you, but need more info on how you want it I guess. Zinnober9 (talk) 10:25, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
" but need more info on how you want it I guess." That's the whole point. That article is still under construction and under research, and until I get the rest of the pictures and the rest of the information, I won't know. Just leave it alone. It is doing Wikipedia no harm. Irritating editors by interfering with their research and notes on that research is doing harm. I will not know "how I want it" as you put it, until the article is ready to be moved to mainspace, because I create articles in the following order: first find sources (and images where possible), second write out facts from sources, third, arrange facts in readable form, fourth wikify according to form and content, fifth move to mainspace if and when good enough. That can take me years (seven years was my longest set of articles, because I wanted to be absulutely sure it was correct - it was worth it, the research prompted a blue plaque in a city near to me). That is why it is in a sandbox, because stages 1-3 are not acceptable in mainspace. I do it in that order to make absolutely sure that I cannot and do not create any content which is not properly sourced. I suggest that you just step away from that set of mere article notes in a sandbox, and get on with other more important things. Storye book (talk) 11:10, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So you think having a Lint error intentionally in your sandbox for multiple years just because it's "your way" is no problem? Good luck trying to argue that in front of multiple people. Nobody (talk) 11:49, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, I hadn't realised that it was all about a lint error. I never checked the markup - I just assumed that the two editors just wanted to move an image from a gallery on the grounds that it only had one image in it, and that for that reason they moved the image to the right. Then finally, following Zinnober9's above comment I finally decided to remove the gallery, just to keep the peace. It was when I did that, that I realised why there had been all that mention of "thumb" and "right", which had not made sense to me before. So now the image is removed from the gallery, and the "thumb" and "right" markup no longer constitutes a lint error (if that's what "lint error" means - I am not a techy). Of course you must realise that after being here for nearly 20 years, I would never intentionally write stupid markup; nor would I defend stupid markup. It was a clumsy copy-and-paste error that I must have made years ago. I apologise for assuming bad faith on the part of Zinnober9 and Jonesey95. Storye book (talk) 18:44, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Storye book: Thank you for the kind note. We try to explain things in our edit summaries, but in making dozens, sometimes hundreds, of these syntax-fix edits every day, there is only so much explaining we can do about these often very picky syntax changes. Even following the links to find out what a Linter error is can lead to a bunch of jargon and gibberish that regular editors can find baffling. I make mistakes here every day and try to admit readily when I get something wrong; it's good to see that others are willing to do the same. It's all part of being human. Happy editing! – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:57, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Storye book Thank you for your kind reply. I'm glad there's been a revelation of understanding and that we are all on the same page now. While I do make an effort to explain the error at hand and the changes made in a way that is clear and succinct, it can be a bit challenging at times to convey that knowledge in an edit summary for all cases due to the error(s) present, or the terms used for the errors. I was a bit baffled why you were defending the use of, as you call it, stupid markup and wondered how its usage was needed for your creative process, but I'm glad everything's all resolved now with no issues or bad feelings. I hope you have a great rest of your week! Zinnober9 (talk) 00:04, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hey. Yesterday, you reverted one of my reverts from an IP user. My apologies, I was under the assumption that the IP user was vandalizing the page. Cheers, TeaLoverHistoryGuy (talk) 19:01, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No worries, thanks for the message. I was unaware of any sort of issue until after my edit, and afterwards, I determined it was probably just a simple misunderstanding.
In July, a previous image of Xolo was deleted and removed, and looks as though the IP was just adding a new/different image of him back to the article since various people are highlighted in that section. They then adjusted the image to correct some syntax, which had caught your attention, and then my attention after your edit. All good now I think, but I have no objection if you think there is an issue with the addition of that image to the page. Zinnober9 (talk) 19:51, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That page you "fixed" ten minutes ago was my Sandbox. I don't know how you failed to recognize that, it seems rather obvious. WQUlrich (talk) 06:38, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It appeared on my radar due to syntax error reports I follow, and the appearance of the Multiline HTML table in list error (otherwise eradicated from en.wiki) being reported from the SBL template being bulleted. It's a navigation box for a basketball league here, I can only assume it's a cite sort of template elsewhere given the context.
Due to your message, I've reviewed my edit and I see my tools and I overlooked that I had dropped a closing div tag in one of your div boxes. I've since corrected this and apologize for the oversight, and I wish you the best on your article translations. Zinnober9 (talk) 07:07, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! Thanks for the message. I don't think the missing end tags interest me at this time. The other errors over there interest me some, so I might go after those in a few days, but my main interest at the moment is dropping a different Wiki down to empty (ignoring the "dark mode conflict" issues), and I'm getting close to that. Just need to wrap up the obsoletes, figure out a template issue, and get admin assistance on some full protected pages. Zinnober9 (talk) 07:44, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, Wikivoyage. I'd been talking with WOSlinker about the possibility of adjusting the various eat/see/do/etc templates instead of fixing the article/user pages as I was thinking that it was a possible wrong variable type used for the contents parameter, since it seemed logical that a user would likely add manual line breaks in their content. Hadn't reached a conclusion yet. My fallback plan was to just remove the manual line breaks and add break tags where needed, but felt that was more a remedy than a solution.
Your solution seems fine, but adding templates to public pages and on other people's subpages that lack template documentation explaining how it works makes me a bit uncomfortable. Would you add some documentation to those templates so that people can confidently understand their usage? Thanks. The first one gives me the impression that it's similar to the {{pb}} (paragraph break) template here on en.wiki, but would be nice to know for certain that impression is correct. Zinnober9 (talk) 00:26, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Was starting to line up some pages for going after the span tag specific issues of HTML misnestings here on enwiki, but thanks for the reminder that the Tidyfonts on Wikisource interested me when we talked previously. They still look like a good set to go after, and I'll go after those some this week. Zinnober9 (talk) 00:38, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A barnstar for you!
The Invisible Barnstar
This one is for nothing too crazy, but I would like to acknowledge your personalized edit summary for something even as minor as a quick technical fix. I think less than one percent of all of my edits have edit summaries and they're usually only for ones where I completely overhaul an article. I've been inspired! Panini!•🥪15:29, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's not personal..
Sorry, if I came over a bit harsh on Wikisource, but it was based on past experience I had with certain contributors when delinting. I will understand if you do not want to continue repairs, even though the ones you did undertake have considerably reduced the backlogs, for which you deserve thanks.
Your sudden aboutface was surprising, and I wasn't sure why the mood with you had changed. Especially since part of the puzzlement was that I knew the editor Encyclopetey seemed to hold you in high esteem for your delinting efforts based on his reply to Jonesey95 on J95's talk page on Source a few weeks ago.
I figured I'd just leave the situation on Wikisource alone for few days and get back to clearing things over here. I've only gotten feedback from you and one editor on Wikisource (You were far, far nicer and were open to discussion/explaining the issue, which I respect and appreciate). The other user reverted my fix, and when I tried to engage them in discussion, they reverted that and refused to engage in any discussion, which pisses me off. I don't know what changed in the atmosphere over there with you and others, but I'm not interested in creating any drama, so I'm going to stick with editing here on enwiki for a little while. If anything changes with the conversation we've left on Xover's talkpage, I'll reevaluate at that time.
If species is a welcoming environment, and the admin are supportive of Linting in all namespaces, I'll consider going after some errors, but I'm not dying for a new playground to play in. Zinnober9 (talk) 01:14, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've found Species open minded. However, editing outside of content namespaces typically needs admin consent..Which you already have here, were able to obtain on Wikivoyage, and which I would encourage you to try gaining on Wikisource, despite my somewhat seemingly abrupt reactions. The issues isn't so much the technical fixes, more that some users treat talk pages as unchangable record and get concerned when someones makes any changes, even when they are stable, well thought out and good faith ones, in line with original commenter intents. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 02:16, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I had another thought. I am still happy with the idea of resolving the tidy font issues. More than happy. One possible way forward is to submit a request to do the repairs to the Wikisource Scriptorum, formatted the way you would write a Bot Approval Request. That way the community can have input in what's happening, hopefully allying the concerns a hold out of users have about 'talk' page modifications :). ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 13:08, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, you might have corrected a HTML table I put on the Talk:Context-free_grammar page "(Removed table breaking internal-indents. Don't indent lines within a table.)"
I'm not very experienced with wikipedia, and would like to understand what I did wrong, so that I don't do it again.
I tested my HTML table in a browser before pasting it into the page.
The diff is a bit mis-aligned, but it seems that the '::::' prefixing the table and tr tags (that the editing software adds automagically, presumably to show what is a reply-to-a-reply-to-a... in the talk) have been removed.
I notice there is a Wikipedia:Linter - should I be using that, or similar tool?
Hmm, that's the first time I've seen a table with internal indents not display in a visually broken fashion. Normally it would look like this when each line in the table has been indented instead of looking like this without in a clean example.
I take it you added the table from hitting reply? That might have done it with the reply auto-indenting and what you manually wrote was fine. If you are going to add a table to a reply on a talk page, maybe edit that section with "edit source" instead of hitting reply, that way you can manually control your indents. You can have :::: before the {| only, but anything between that and the closing tag |} should only be table structure/contents.
Wikipedia:Linter is the rules/guidelines/community for Wikignome editors to follow for corrective editing. As for tools, you can add Linthint to your common.js page (and do a hard refresh on your browser to see it). It will add a yellow box (sort of like a topicon) in the top right corner of pages, and tell you what errors (if any) exist on the page and where each is. Add it if you want, it isn't a requirement though, and don't be too bothered by the occasional error, we all make them. Zinnober9 (talk) 16:43, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Commons
Are you active on Commons? I was looking through some misnested SPAN's , and some of them to be rather simple instances of tags in Log entries that need nowiki adding. Can you consider adding these to whatever tools you use to fix errors? Have a look at some of my minor edits at Commons for possble approached to resolve them. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 12:58, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've done a little, mostly gone after the things that brought an error over here, or didn't have a lot of errors in any large section on Firefly's chart. Got caught up in the edit filters on a few fixes (too low an edit count to be editing other users' sub pages or something), so hadn't been over there for a while. Zinnober9 (talk) 15:39, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I was running around here and on Species a little bit for the higher priority errors while I waited for a reply to my Scriptorium post... nothing so far which is odd, so just hadn't wandered back yet. Everything remaining on Species that isn't Missing/Stripped/Obsolete/ID/Darkmode is on a full protected page, or is template related or a page with RtoL language; 19? errors or so. It's in very good shape.
Migrations? What do you mean? Or are you talking about delinting in general, and changing font to span style with an edit like this?
Looks good. I'm a little surprised you skipped the font color size 2 tags in Birg's sig, but if size isn't something you like dealing with, that's fine. I've been changing B's sig to: [[User:BirgitteSB|<span style="color:#9966FF">Birgitte</span>]]<span style="color:#CC99CC; font-size:small">SB</span>. I have not run across any variations, but I still diligently check.
And flipping Zhaladshar's to have the statements inside is correct, since they have color stated (they should be triggering a tidy font in the before case, but for whatever reason aren't).
You know about this page, correct? It's my goto reference sheet for all Obsolete tag issues and covers most everything. Fonts are fairly straight forward, but centers and tt have the most specific case variety and are explained well. Zinnober9 (talk) 21:12, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I now about that page.. I found some size=2.5 which I'd left as I wasn't sure how to convert them. If you want to fix up the Brigette tags feel free. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 22:48, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, 2.5s (and other inbetweeners), that makes sense. I have in the past typically changed 2.5s to font-size:14px since there isn't an exact in-between value, but I see that em would get me a hair closer and font-size:1.04em would likely be the best equivalent for a 2.5. There isn't a real noticeable difference between 14px and 1.04em until you put them next to each other though. ABC vs ABC Regardless of that, I would not mix the styles within a single signature though, either all px, or all em, but not both. Zinnober9 (talk) 16:58, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@ShakespeareFan00 Haven't gotten any reply yet on the Sciptorium post. Any thoughts about the possibility of my crossposting (linking to it) on WS:AN? So far I've posted to Xover, EncycloPetey, and Scriptorium, and not a word. Don't want to be pushy, but I don't want to be forgotten either. Zinnober9 (talk) 17:28, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This may seem small but having been falsely accused, without evidence, multiple times in recent history of being a sock, I appreciate the explicit pointing out in your edit summary that my edit was in good faith. I will say that I published the edit, in spite of declaring at the WikiProject that I'd have to consider the time I'd have to volunteer to continue, in order to show an example in case someone else decides to take up the task; I decided to publish rather than sandbox it because it was decided that it needed to be done, so it made more sense to actually publish it to at least get the ball rolling. But I just wanted to say thanks again for the civility within the revert. Greenday61892 (talk) 16:37, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nothing wrong with being bold, I just saw it as inconsistent with the set of pages, and your edit summary didn't hint at any group consensus or decision for changing it, so thought you were making a personal choice for the page against the status quo. Apparently there was a discussion and consensus here, so I am in error, and have no objection to the colors being removed. Thank you @Dmoore5556 for informing me. That said, I'm not sure why are Wisconsin and Indiana's links are a grey #777777 color? I didn't see any key or reasoning on the page. I did fix them to remove the tidy font error and converted them to HTML5 compliant span style coloring, but not sure why these two are the only cases. Any enlightenment? Zinnober9 (talk) 17:07, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Actually unsure why...? I hadn't changed any font colors besides replacing all the non-head CollegePrimary templates (I can't remember the documentation naming for the teams template) with a standard [[article|display]] format and hadn't noticed any color differences when I previewed before submitting. Thanks for the heads up on that though, I'll keep an out for that on any future iterations. Greenday61892 (talk) 18:12, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you
Thanks for fixing Wikipedia talk:Collaborations. I didn't touch anyone's signature, only deleted the lower portion of the page (the misplaced draft article), but I can see the sig changes in the diff of my edit. I don't use Visual Editor so I have no clue how that happened, but I appreciate you restoring them. Schazjmd(talk)23:22, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My guess is that you were editing within/from one of the October 16, 2018 versions and published from that and not from the current version. If you edit from a noncurrent version and then publish your changes in that old version, it wipes out/reverses any edits made between that earlier version and the current version. Very helpful in intentional cases, a little puzzling in cases when it isn't.
No worries. Just was surprised to see some Tidy font errors popup on my radar after those were all existing cases were cleaned up and corrected last year. I appreciate your removing drafts from pages where they don't belong. Hope you are having a great weekend! Zinnober9 (talk) 23:55, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My Userpage
Hi, Zinnober9 ! I noticed that you [edited] my Userpage. I wholeheartedly believe your intention was benevolent, but the end result completely destroyed my decorative formatting. Drive-by editing other Wikipedians' Userpages sans notice is also generally frowned upon. (My User account is new-- as in, created today-- and I'm actually still working on formatting it as we speak). In the future, it would be polite to give me the opportunity to do so personally. (It is my Userpage, after all). If you'd like to propose a change to my Userpage, feel free to leave a comment on my Talkpage. | TL;DR I've reverted your edit, but no hard feelings! Saffronsilk16:37, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome, and thank you for your kind message! Per WP:LINT, corrective edits to fix tracked errors and invalid syntax within userspace is permitted, and prior permission is (generally) not required. That said, Wikipedia have strong rules for me/editors who fix these errors-- Don't change the words of other editors, Try to preserve the appearance and It is OK to change the appearance in some cases if it preserves the original intent. Anytime a page makes use of invalid parameters that don't display as they were written, that makes it hard the determine the which intent is more important, how it was written, or how it displays. Sometimes it's clear from context, but in this case it wasn't and I chose how it was written. Apologies. Since Jonesey95 has in the meanwhile fixed the same tracked errors that our little community has eradicated from Wikipedia and has preserved your intended layout, I think we'll both be happy. Best wishes, Zinnober9 (talk) 17:11, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's actually so cool! I'm glad the Lint got cleaned up. Thank you for bearing my srcutiny with grace, bwahahaha. It was a 50/50 coinflip, and easily remedied. Saffronsilk17:20, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have no objection to it being updated, but you left no edit summary explaining your changes, and drastically changed the style of data in the women's squad away from the style using the {{player}} template in both squads and broke the table by removing the table closer bracket. Your intentions were not clear, so I reverted the changes.
Unless there's a reason to change styles of data presentation, use the style existing on the page, and please use edit summaries. Thanks, Zinnober9 (talk) 18:35, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There are no current informations to have these structure in the future for example T-shirt number or position. These infos are not available anymore. If you don't like my editings, you should update then this 4 years old squad and structure.
My edit was very clear and you should ask and help to correct the other's work befor you destroy something. Its better for everyone and the Wiki. Pressburg10 (talk) 17:14, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't review drafts, so I'm not a person best suited to make that determination. I mentioned WP:BIO1E as the draft left me with the impression that that might be a potential hurdle in the WP:GNG criteria, like some other drafts I've wandered across while fixing various syntax issues. I commend you on your efforts, WP:BLP drafts are notoriously the hardest draft subjects to clear AFC due to their stricter qualification guidelines. I wish you well. Zinnober9 (talk) 22:40, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
WIkipedia haiku
On the haiku of Wikipedia policies, the poems, which are in "<code>" keeps reverting to its original state even when I put all kinds of "br" into it.
What do you mean reverting to its original state? Each haiku appears to follow the three line 5-7-5 rule with or without the break tags. If they need the break tags, that's fine, no issue. The use of code however is incorrect useage; none (in the edits I fixed) had any closing tags, and they appeared abitrarily placed; start of line one, at the ends of other lines. Unclosed tags are a tracked syntax error, and I and some other editors are seeing them on the error reports, and not understanding why they were used, and removing them to match preceeding haikus in display/format. Are you trying to use code to "trigger" the box around each haiku, or what's the intended purpose? If it's the box, it's due to each line of the text starting with a space, which triggers the box around the text--
Like so here on this line.
I'm not against the usage of code, I just don't see it's purpose on this page, and the way you've used it doesn't clue in other editors on why it's being used, especially since none of the other haikus use it.
Could you explain a little about why you using code the way you were and what you were hoping for it to do? I might be able to assist you in achieving what you were intending with clean syntax if I understand your point of view a little better. Zinnober9 (talk) 07:18, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for acknowledging. I have never used syntax before and always expected the blank spaces would disappear by the time I ad " ", or " " and " " Spongebob796 (talk) 10:15, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There are like 20 people on this page that have complained about this user editing their personal user page. This guy also has edited and vandalized my talk page. And then summoned like 10 admins to harass me, when I never even edited a wikipedia page. And for the 19 people that became before you, this guy has always been argumentative and stood behind his edits. Ther is literally no way this guy will ever stop. 86.84.200.125 (talk) 07:43, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The IP editor has shown clear disruption by repeatedly breaking WP:TALKNEW by posting comments and unblock requests at the top of article talk pages and their IPs' talk pages. Despite everyone else telling and quoting policy stating why this IP editor is being disruptive and acting contrary to standards, still accuses me and other highly regarded editors of "breaking the rules" without citing any policy to support their empty claims whereas we've all stated and quoted policy for why this IP editor's edits are problematic. Abundant evidence here. Collapsing as this IP's accusation is false and irrelevant to NRP's request. Zinnober9 (talk) 16:37, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for bothering you, NRP. While my intent has been to minimize botherment to users by clearing all tracked syntax errors on their pages in a one and done method so that future visits by others won't be necessary, it does lead to larger/busier looking edits. Thank you for the message. Zinnober9 (talk) 16:32, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Removing personal attacks in unblock discussions
Hi there, could you actually leave personal attacks, swearing, etc, alone when they're blocked editors shouting at admins? If you really feel something must be removed (particularly horrible slurs or something), can you leave a note that you've redacted something? I suppose I can only speak for myself, but I'd actually rather prefer to know that someone is making personal attacks, without having to go digging in the edit history. -- asilvering (talk) 18:31, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My Dec 9th edit I take it? Sorry, I should have noted it's removal on the page also and not just in the summary. Would you like me to add a "[PA removed]" statement, or undo my edit? I had thought that since they had enough disruptive violations on them to warrant remaining blocked, that a PA wasn't make or break the case against them and could be removed without changing the outcome, but you make good point here that knowing it existed is important. Happy to correct, just let me know how you'd like it corrected. Zinnober9 (talk) 19:44, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No reason to change anything you've already done, just suggesting that you leave them in the future (or redact less silently). Cheers. -- asilvering (talk) 01:21, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Draft: May-Li Khoe
Thank you for fixing the syntax errors and addressing the other issues on the May-Li Khoe draft page. I really appreciate your help! I’m currently working on this page as part of a project for my Digital Technology course at LIUC University, and it will be evaluated. The page needs to be approved by December 28, ideally with a very high B rating. I was wondering if you could offer some advice on how to further improve the article to increase its chances of receiving a high rating. If you have any suggestions on refining it or if you could assist with the approval process, I would be very grateful. Thanks again for your assistance!
Creating articles and improving article content is not my specialty, so I'm not the best person to ask about that. I can point you in the direction that for your draft to pass Wikipedia's criteria for creation, it will need to meet the criteria stated at WP:BLP (Bio of Living Person), but beyond that, I don't know how to assist . I'd suggest asking your questions at Wikipedia:Teahouse as they see this sort of question regularly I'm sure. Best wishes on your draft and studies! Zinnober9 (talk) 01:09, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Tausch draft (reworked)
I just tried to delete a double mentioning of the JCPA website in the external links section, and the system told me that you already work on the draft. Excellent, no edit war, just pax, salam, shalom Bibliographer social science (talk) 21:52, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
