Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 14:26, 21 April 2008

Misplaced Pages ads	file info – show another – #269

Welcome to my talk page!

• Please use the Reply button to reply to a message, or add topic (+) to start a new section.
• If I have left a message on your talk page, please DO NOT post a reply here, instead, reply there.
  • Mention me using the "Mention a user" button in the Reply box or type out {{ping|AzaToth}}.
  • I will have your talk page on watch and will note when you have replied.
• If you prefer to manually edit the page to post:
  • Use an accurate and appropriate heading.
  • Indent your comment by using an appropriate number of colons ':'.
  • Sign your post with four tildes (~~~~) at the end.

CSD Stuff

Hi AzaToth,

On the template called DB-A7 there is a note that says:

Please use a more explicit template - {{db-person}}, {{db-band}}, {{db-club}}, {{db-inc}} or {{db-web}} where possible.

Could you add those in the Twinkle CSD function please? SwirlBoy39 22:21, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

PS: Love the tools!

Hmm, though I've done that (or someone else). A bit late atm to fix it, so poke me tomorrow on IRC for priority queue. _→AzaToth 23:13, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

New policy on confusing usernames

On WT:U, we have finally come to a compromise about confusing usernames. The new policy requires discussion with the user before blocking them for a confusing username, and also allows for confusing usernames to be taken as part of a larger pattern of disruption.

Given this, it does not make sense to report confusing usernames with TWINKLE anymore. Can you remove it from the list? rspeer / ɹəədsɹ 22:42, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

I cant see much of an compromise there. Has there been consensus for yet another policy change? _→AzaToth 23:11, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes. Are you reading the same page? A whole lot of users left comments in favor of ending the practice of blocking of confusing usernames on sight. The usual opposition came from Until( 1 == 2 ) and Ryan Postlethwaite. Until has withdrawn from the discussion, and after compromising on a new process for blocking users who aren't doing anything wrong except clinging to a bad name (a situation I find rather improbable but others worry about), I swung Ryan Postlethwaite, and he's helping to develop the new process. I'd call this even more consensus than Mangojuice had for his simplification of the policy. Please don't try to veto it with TWINKLE. rspeer / ɹəədsɹ 07:46, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

At the moment the section about confusing usernames are too confusing and paradoxal, I'll hold on making an change until it's defined what part of that section holds. _→AzaToth 18:26, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, I find the reasons people give for blocking users over "confusing usernames" paradoxical. The difference is that I have argued my position on WT:U and gotten people to support it. TWINKLE is already held in low regard by the people who actually deal with UAA. Apparently it never even tells its users that when they click the "inappropriate username" button it's going to go to UAA and recommend a block, and it certainly doesn't warn its users when the block they request is going to be controversial. Usually when I talk to TWINKLE users in this situation they're caught completely by surprise. I know TWINKLE is your tool, but please try to make it a tool for working with the username policy and not fighting against it. rspeer / ɹəədsɹ 17:57, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

I would say the consensus is still in flow for that matter. _(1 == 2) 19:08, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Where is it flowing to, may I ask? What's happened recently on the page hasn't been a backlash, it's been old Wikipedians like Kim Bruning showing up (because single user login brought their attention to it) and pointing out that the username-blocking culture is still bad for the project, and we're still not being inclusive enough, even after the long-discussed reforms. rspeer / ɹəədsɹ 17:57, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Twinkle Help Please

I don't quite understand the instructions for installing Twinkle on Firefox. The directions mention a monobook.js file, where can I find that and how would I edit it? Thanks for the help.Xenosagian (talk) 13:37, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

You can find it at User:Xenosagian/monobook.js. Click edit to edit the page. Ths link is red because you have not yet created it. SwirlBoy39 14:45, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

morebits.js

What's with this line of code (part of qString):
qString.replace(/\+/, ' ');
As far as I know, qString.replace is never defined, and so it throws an error for me when creating a new QueryString object. paranomia (formerly tim.bounceback) 00:15, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

It's implied that qString is a string object. Perhaps that should be checked though. _→AzaToth 06:42, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

OK, I see. This can be checked via typeof, and maybe I'll submit a patch if I get time. paranomia (formerly tim.bounceback) 21:41, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

This should do it (untested). This:
if( qString.length == 0 ) {

return;

}

Should be changed to this:
if( typeof qString != 'string' || qString.length == 0) {

return;

}

paranomia (formerly tim.bounceback) 21:49, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

salam

salam lala —Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.30.66.246 (talk) 13:15, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Coding

I was wondering if you could help me with some JS coding. I have been trying to make a tab at the top of any page, that when clicked, tags the page with an {{rfd}} tag. This is because I commonly list 4/5 redirects in one nomination and it is getting tiresome to tag them manually.

I have come up with this, but it doesn't work, and in fact stops ANY tabs from working. As I have very little knowledge about JS programming, could you have a look over it and make the changes necessary to make it work? It's probably something glaringly obvious and I'm being stupid, but I thought that it can't hurt to get advice from an expert! Thanks in advance. ><RichardΩ612 15:08, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:50 öre SEK.png}

Thank you for uploading Image:50 öre SEK.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Misplaced Pages:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check:

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's escription page for each article the image is used in.
• That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 14:26, 21 April 2008 (UTC)