Misplaced Pages

Column-generating template families

The templates listed here are not interchangeable. For example, using {{col-float}} with {{col-end}} instead of {{col-float-end}} would leave a <div>...</div> open, potentially harming any subsequent formatting.

Can template handle the basic wiki markup {| | || |- |} used to create tables? If not, special templates that produce these elements (such as {{(!}}, {{!}}, {{!!}}, {{!-}}, {{!)}})—or HTML tags (<table>...</table>, <tr>...</tr>, etc.)—need to be used instead.

Column-generating template families

The templates listed here are not interchangeable. For example, using {{col-float}} with {{col-end}} instead of {{col-float-end}} would leave a <div>...</div> open, potentially harming any subsequent formatting.

My talk page is also my "to-do" list

No really, I do read all my messages in a timely manner. I also archive fairly regularly once the subject of the message has been resolved. I keep things on my talk page until they've been addressed, so stuff tends to be out of date order. Consider the top half of this page my to-do list. Some things just take time. See also User:Risker/Copyedit Requests. Risker (talk)

Attention talk page watchers

Lots of hardworking editors have dropped by my page asking for assistance in improving the quality of the encyclopedia. It doesn't look like I am going to get very far into the list below for a while, but you (yes, you!) can help, even if it is grammar correction, cleaning up typos, fixing refs, or simply giving some feedback to the editors. Here's the list of requests I've received in the last little bit that I've not yet addressed. There's not much doubt our colleagues will appreciate any support you can provide.

Crown Fountain (Torsodog)
Dredg (Ars Sycro)
McGill University (Sunsetsunrise)
Sideshow Bob (Scorpion)
Belldandy (Bilby)
The World Ends with You (MASEM)
Avatar: The Last Airbender (season 3) (Parent5446)
Literature in the Hoysala Empire (Dineshkannambadi)
Pilot (30 Rock) (User:Jamie jca)
Félix Houphouët-Boigny (Nishkid64)
Bone Wars (David Fuchs)

So...what are you waiting for? Click on a link and go for it! There's a bit of everything here, from history to literature, places, people, television shows, video games, and even a band. Give it a whirl. And thanks. Risker (talk) 05:50, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Photo of dead combatants

I posted a notice at MILHIST about the discussion . In my opinion, using photos of dead combatants is fine. Reliable source is the aplicable policy relevant to whether a photo should be included. Bottom line, war is about achieving goals by killing people and breaking things. So, such images are appropriate for war articles. I've used several such images in articles I've written. See Battle of the Tenaru, Battle of Edson's Ridge, Actions along the Matanikau, Battle for Henderson Field, and here (don't look if you're real squeamish). I'll post this comment in the discussion somewhere also. Cla68 (talk) 02:33, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

Willking1979 (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Don't eat yellow snow!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:Flaming/MC2008}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Congrats, friend

I'm do glad you changed your mind and ran. We need minds like yours on the committee. Looking forward to seeing the job you do on the committee. SDJ 04:53, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Congrats. :) Good luck on the Committee. GlassCobra 20:49, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Happy Risker's Day!

For a userbox you can add to your userbox page, see User:Rlevse/Today/Happy Me Day! and my own userpage for a sample of how to use it. — Rlevse • Talk • 00:40, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Is Google Making Us Stupid?

Hi: Thanks for the compliments. I'm fixing it up right now based on a GA review from Skomorokh. I hope you enjoy reading the article and if you see any way to improve it please let me know.Manhattan Samurai (talk) 02:30, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Sorry Risker

It seems our illustrious arbs must take an age to decide the simplest of things. Quite why contributors in general are held with such contempt around here, rather than supported and defended is an absolute mystery to me - too many kids running around suddenly feeling empowered with positions way above what they might achieve in real life, but still harbouring their adolescent anti-authoritarian rebellion - it might be ok for Britney Spears articles but makes for a pretty poor environment for serious academics. Oh look - Giano's just been blocked again by his tormentors! FFS.......--Joopercoopers (talk) 17:11, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

• I think they're really trying to chase him off now. Sometimes the paranoid are actually being persecuted. SDJ 17:15, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Seriously, gentlemen...what would the holiday season be without a bit of pageantry, and the attendant excellent editing that seems to attend with it? This time last year, Queluz National Palace was the article so graced - and a fine article it is. As I recall, it was the epitome of collaborative writing, with over 20 editors participating in its final form, not to mention the brilliant photographs, and the technical expertise required to best organise them with the text into a coherent whole. It's a bit more complex this time because of the editing locale, of course. Risker (talk) 20:48, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

1. Gage Canadian Dictionary, 1983. Definition 3.

You should take a look

I noticed you on JW's page, and I thought you might find this very interesting. It was posted after your last there, so I wasn't sure you had seen it yet. SDJ 20:29, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations on your appointment to arbcom

It is apparently official. Viridae 21:55, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Ermm...nothing official at this stage, Viridae, but thank you for your good wishes. That just means I identified to the Foundation. I am sure that something a bit more official than that will show up in the next day or so, provided Jimbo hasn't been stranded in some airport with the nasty weather we're having in the Northeast. :-) Risker (talk) 22:09, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

The essence of judgment

In this interval between the close of Arbcom voting and whatever comes next, this could be a timely opportunity to share a bit of wisdom attributed to Tokugawa Ieyasu, the founder of Japan's Tokugawa shogunate. I modestly offer a translation of the calligraphy -- with an emphasis not in the original:

Life is like walking along a long road shouldering a heavy load; there is no need to hurry.

One who treats difficulties as the normal state of affairs will never be discontented.

Patience is the source of eternal peace; treat anger as an enemy.

Harm will befall one who knows only success and has never experienced failure.

Blame yourself rather than others.

It is better not to reach than to go too far. --Tokugawa Ieayasu, 1604

I hope this becomes helpful in the year ahead. --Tenmei (talk) 04:38, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

"editprotected"

Regarding WP:VPP#New individual access level: editprotected: I generally carefully avoid "badgering the opposes", and I practice DGAFism religiously, but because I'm aware of how many people are deeply affected in one way or another by RfA, this is one issue where I do GAF, and if it's okay, I'd like to talk about that. I'm concerned that an oppose by the guy who just came in 2nd in the Arbcom elections might have a chilling effect ... which is fine if we need to be chilled, but I'm not convinced that there's no safe way forward.

When I see things like "Strong Support - I could use this tool now and then, though due to the immense hostility at RFA I'd be unlikely to pass. ~the editorofthewiki", it makes me sad. We don't need all that many admins on Misplaced Pages, so we can afford to be choosy, and people are choosy at RfA ... nothing wrong with that ... exactly. But this leaves us with a big pile of very earnest people who probably can't pass RfA yet who would like to contribute, who deserve a community "thumbs up" for the work they've done so far, who are left with the feeling that RfA people are hostile and don't appreciate them. In theory, it would be a win-win if we could break off one or two less-dangerous admin tools for these guys. For them, the experience of trying to convince an admin to grant the tools, and trying to use them correctly, could be a very useful baby-step towards adminship. (I think people are leaning towards relying on individual admins to grant the mini-tools, but if so, we need to get medieval on any admin who doesn't train and watch the people they give the tools to.)

Even if you don't buy any of that, we do have a steady stream of people like User:lustiger seth who need to be able to edit something that's protected (in his case, the spam blacklist), who we (in theory) really need to help us, who probably shouldn't be an admin and doesn't even want to be an admin, he just wants to edit the spam blacklist ... but it looks like we're about to hand him the mop, solely because we need him. It would be nice if we didn't have to twist and warp RfA to try to get it to fit this purpose.

You make a very good point that this tool is currently a dangerous thing to be handing out. I think the supporters are saying that of all the admin tools, this is the one that people most often ask for when they aren't ready for and don't need all the other tools, and the one tool that we most often want to give people so that they can do us a favor. It seems to me, in theory, we could select out the set of protected pages that wouldn't break the wiki if someone screwed around with them, only give access to these, and, as I say, get medieval with any admin who doesn't pay attention to whether the tool-user is misbehaving or not.

A couple of people have said "Nice idea, but the ability to edit protected pages isn't going to be so incredibly useful that it's worth the extra process and the extra headache." If this idea is persuasive, then I think we should throw in one or two other admin tools that aren't going to break the wiki, such as the ability to semi-protect pages. Watching how someone does with that job would be a great way to figure out whether they'll make a good admin or not.

Thoughts? (I'm watchlisting for a few days.) - Dan Dank55 (send/receive) 22:57, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi Dank55. I appreciate your popping over here to discuss this, because you have some good points too. I share your frustration with the RfA process; in fact, after I read the discussion on the Village Pump, I went right over and read the RfA for lustiger seth, and supported his nomination, just as I have done for other editors who have specialised skills and needs for the tools. My main concern with respect to handing out editprotected access is in the article space, where I can foresee editors simply editing through protection to carry on an edit war; and in template space, where an ill-considered edit through protection can affect thousands of pages at once. Having individual administrators hand out this tool worries me; there will be no agreed-upon standard (just look at rollback, where some admins hand it out after as few as 20 edits), and it could lead to admin-shopping or worse.

I agree that we do have to find a way to reduce the pressure at RfA, and if there was a way to do some sort of RFA-lite for individuals who clearly need (or will effectively use) one or two tools, I'd probably support it. I do have some concerns that we place far too much emphasis on the importance of adminship generally, and the RFA process specifically; even in the less than a year since my successful nomination, the toxicity of the RFA process has significantly increased. I don't have a good answer as to why.

It might take me a while to get used to the idea that doing some particularly icky scutwork will mean my opinions could be inflated to something more than that of an experienced editor; please bear with me while I make that transition. My opposition to handing out "editprotected" is based on my experience as an editor and an admin, and is certainly not any kind of "official" position. I've also taken a gander at MBisanz's talk page, and he certainly explains some of the technical points far better than I ever could. Thanks again for touching base, because I appreciate the opportunity to discuss it with you. Best, Risker (talk) 04:11, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

You're the 4th person (including myself) who would prefer RfA-lite to having individual admins hand out a new userright; if we're not getting anywhere with the current proposal, I will try to sell this approach to my cohorts. I have pointed some people to Matthew/MBisanz's reply, which seems really helpful. If not "editprotected", which of the admin userrights would be not too dangerous to hand out, useful for reducing backlogs, and good practice for eventual adminship? - Dan Dank55 (send/receive) 04:41, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

2 more deletes

Thanks for deleting one of my old archives. I had tagged three total, but it looks like ClueBot remove the tags on these two:

• User:ClueBot III/Master Detailed Indices/User talk:Jwy/Archive/Apr. 2006 - May. 2007‎‎
• User:ClueBot III/Master Detailed Indices/User talk:Jwy/Archive/Dec. 2005 - Mar. 2006‎‎

Could you delete them as well? Thx (John User:Jwy talk) 05:58, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Happy to help, they've both been deleted now. Risker (talk) 06:04, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

cool. thx. (John User:Jwy talk) 06:06, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

NPA

May you want to comment? See Wikipedia_talk:No_personal_attacks#Addition. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 20:06, 20 December 2008 (UTC)