User talk:Encephalon: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous edit Next edit →Content deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 23:08, 28 September 2005 editEncephalon (talk \| contribs)Extended confirmed users5,729 edits +reply Tess← Previous edit		Revision as of 11:34, 30 September 2005 edit undoEncephalon (talk \| contribs)Extended confirmed users5,729 edits →Re: Godmode script: f1.0.7 fails too.Next edit →
(3 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 68:		Line 68:
	Thanks for your work on improving and testing {{tl\|Nn-warn}. ] ] 21:56, 28 September 2005 (UTC)		Thanks for your work on improving and testing {{tl\|Nn-warn}. ] ] 21:56, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
	:My pleasure.—23:06, 28 September 2005 (UTC)		:My pleasure.—23:06, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

			== Re: Godmode script ==

			Hi. I am sorry but I am unable to reproduce the bug you are describing. I tried with the following browsers:
			* Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.12) Gecko/20050922 Firefox/1.0.7 (Debian package 1.0.7-1)
			* Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.11) Gecko/20050914 Galeon/1.3.21 (Debian package 1.3.21-6)
			* Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.11) Gecko/20050914 Debian/1.7.11-1
			I am afraid I don’t really know what to try in order to debug this... ] 20:41, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
			:Hello Sam. Thanks for trying to help me with this. I use Firefox—I recently switched to F 1.5 Beta 1 (Deer Park). I believe it happens with the standard release F 1.0.6 as well. After your message, I tested the tool on a piece of vandalism—with . I guess for some reason godmode is unsafe (for me) to use. I'll test using it with F 1.0.7 and IE, but don't have much hope it will work. Incidentally, if you google "ampersand bug" or "amp & bug", you'll find quite a few hits: most seem to concern blogging software like Wordpress etc. There's apparently been an ampersand bug on Wiki as well that was fixed, but it's an old issue that I can't currently find reference to. Regards—07:11, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
			:Have tested on F1.0.7. Same problem. On, IE, godmode wouldn't revert—it just stopped midway. Sometimes that happens with very large articles, so I'll try again later.—]] 11:34, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

Revision as of 11:34, 30 September 2005

User:Encephalon/TalkTemp

—encephalon εγκέφαλον

εγκέφαλον: history

Template:Ent Template:Ent

On responses

I respond on my own page, unless there is good reason to respond on yours. Kind regards—encephalon εγκέφαλον

RfA

Just to say thanks for supporting my RfA. Please let me know if you see me screw up anytime. --Doc (?) 19:22, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

Sig

Thank you very much for fixing my sig. I do appreciate it. :^) Maltmomma 14:06, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

My pleasure.—22:33, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

Talk archives

'Lo, I was just swinging by, and I noticed that your talk archives are more or less history diffs. I figured that maybe that's just how you wanted to do it, but what's standard is to cut-and-paste your old talk page into a subpage (in this case, something like ]). Take a look here for the nuts and bolts. Just so you have it. --Blackcap | talk 15:07, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

Thanks Blackcap. I've archived pages before so I know how to do them (although I don't remember actually creating one). The decision to use histories is actually deliberate, for three reasons:

Using the archive method necessitates the creation of new pages. While these are often not large, or if large often not numerous, they do represent an additional burden on WP servers. With my method I'm simply providing a link to a resource that's already there, and you get to see both diffs and the last version of the page before I refactored (ie. the version of the page you'd see on an archive page).
The archive pages come with their own histories and diffs, but these are not as informative as the "real" Talk page diffs because everything is dumped on the pages at once. If you wanted to locate the diff of a comment to reference, you'd have to compare dates and flip back and forth between the archive page, the "real" Talk page, and the Talk page's history page. With my method you'll only have to work off the history page.
I like it.

—22:33, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

Talk:Evolution

"What a beautifully clear-headed statement. All what Seeker said." — I just wanted to say thanks; that was a very nice thing to say. — Knowledge Seeker দ 07:27, 27 September 2005 (UTC)

Lol. Dude. I made that comment ages ago. (PS. You do realize I now hold a diametrically opposite view of your statements, don't you? ;-))—09:59, 27 September 2005 (UTC)

Itako Otako

I pasted a copy of the orignally deleted text into the VFU thread so you can judge for yourself whether it is a biography, as some claim, or whether it is an article about a 4chan event, as I have argued. Dragons flight 15:13, 27 September 2005 (UTC)

Thanks. Will comment soon.—08:29, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

Thanks

I want to thank you very much for your vote of support on my RFA, and another big thank you for twisting Alan's arm. Greatly appreciated. If you need any favours, just ask. →Journalist >>talk<< 23:26, 27 September 2005 (UTC)

Pleasure.—08:29, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

AFD/Spam court

I responded to your comment on my user talk, on my user talk. Here's a copy for your convenience

I wasn't trying to make a WP:POINT. It's not that nomination that was annoying me, it's a pattern of similar ones. And, I didn't speedy keep it because it annoyed me; I did it because we should only allow nominations made in good faith, and where the person actually *looked* at the article first. If you looked at the article, then making a short summary of why it should be deleted should be no problem. Two letters and the word delete, or three letters, are not acceptable. Lazyness is no excuse. Would we accept an RFC that says "<someuser> is a <something>", even if it has two people to certify it, and there is evidence and proof that dispute resolution hasn't worked? And, certainly we wouldn't allow that on rfar? Anyway, I won't do it again...it's obvious there's significant opposition. But, if I could get the afd policy adjusted... --Phroziac 15:21, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

Thank you Phroziac, it's kind of you to reply. I don't doubt that you were not trying to make a WP:POINT, as I said on your page, and I do not at all suggest that you did. As to the larger question we're talking about, perhaps I should be clearer: I'm not disputing that you may have very valid reasons for feeling as you do—in fact in this AfD we're talking about I agree with you that a longer explanation of the rationale is desirable. I'm just suggesting that the way you're registering your disagreement may not be ideal. Instead of closing off mikka's page, it would have been more productive for you to have spoken to him—that way, if he had a good reason for doing as he did you'd learn it, and if he didn't he'd learn a useful thing from you and improve the way he writes AfDs. If you unilaterally take action without talking to the other party first, there is greater potential for needless disagreement and conflict. Don't you agree?

As to your final thoughts, please understand that no one is "opposing" your contention that AfD noms should be clearly written—both Chris Parham and I would agree with you. There is also no need to "get the afd policy adjusted". We're only saying that it will be helpful for you to communicate with those around you whom you may disagree with: at the very least it's good conflict management. Wadya say? :) All the best—16:02, 28 September 2005 (UTC) Ref Phroziac's Talk page.

Sig

Thanks for the help Qaz 18:43, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

Paid Editing Project

Hi: My name is Tess and I work for a global independent research firm in New York. I am interested in hiring you for a Misplaced Pages editing project, based on your technology and medical experience and expertise. I attempted to email you through your user page. If you received it, please read it over and contact me with any questions. If you did not receive this email, please let me know and I would be more than happy to tell you more about this project. (You can call 512-651-1797 or email tfurman@glgroup.com). Thank you and I hope to hear from you soon! Tess - Gerson Lehrman Group 19:08, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for your kind invitation, Tess. I've replied your email—23:08, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for your work on improving and testing {{tl|Nn-warn}. DES 21:56, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

My pleasure.—23:06, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

Re: Godmode script

Hi. I am sorry but I am unable to reproduce the bug you are describing. I tried with the following browsers:

Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.12) Gecko/20050922 Firefox/1.0.7 (Debian package 1.0.7-1)
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.11) Gecko/20050914 Galeon/1.3.21 (Debian package 1.3.21-6)
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.11) Gecko/20050914 Debian/1.7.11-1

I am afraid I don’t really know what to try in order to debug this... Sam Hocevar 20:41, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

Hello Sam. Thanks for trying to help me with this. I use Firefox—I recently switched to F 1.5 Beta 1 (Deer Park). I believe it happens with the standard release F 1.0.6 as well. After your message, I tested the tool on a piece of vandalism—with disastrous results. I guess for some reason godmode is unsafe (for me) to use. I'll test using it with F 1.0.7 and IE, but don't have much hope it will work. Incidentally, if you google "ampersand bug" or "amp & bug", you'll find quite a few hits: most seem to concern blogging software like Wordpress etc. There's apparently been an ampersand bug on Wiki as well that was fixed, but it's an old issue that I can't currently find reference to. Regards—07:11, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

Have tested on F1.0.7. Same problem. On, IE, godmode wouldn't revert—it just stopped midway. Sometimes that happens with very large articles, so I'll try again later.—enceph alon 11:34, 30 September 2005 (UTC)