Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Ritchie333 (talk | contribs) at 15:30, 8 January 2013 (→Office shortcuts: fix link). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Dogmaticeclectic, you are invited to the Teahouse

Hi Dogmaticeclectic! Thanks for contributing to Misplaced Pages. Please join other people who edit Misplaced Pages at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space on Misplaced Pages where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Misplaced Pages and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Jtmorgan (I'm a Teahouse host) Visit the TeahouseThis message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 01:20, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your contributions to Misplaced Pages. Please make sure to include an edit summary. Please provide one before saving your changes to an article, as the summaries are quite helpful to people browsing an article's history. Thanks! Jim1138 (talk) 08:42, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 11

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

List of features removed in Windows XP (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Domain, NIC, DLC, Registry and Stub

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:28, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

The Dating Guy

I'm not an administrator any longer so I don't have access to deleted articles and can't help you, sorry. BigDom (talk) 18:38, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Misplaced Pages pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button or located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 21:52, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

November 2012

Welcome to Misplaced Pages. Please do not replace pages with blank content, as you did with this edit to User:Brightify/Jimmy Two-Shoes, as this is confusing to readers. The page's content has been restored for now. If there is a problem with the page, it should be edited or reverted to a previous version if possible; if you think the page should be removed entirely, see further information. Thank you. Jim1138 (talk) 21:52, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

The recent edit you made to User:Brightify/Jimmy Two-Shoes has been reverted, as it removed all content from the page without explanation. Please do not do this, as it is considered vandalism; use the sandbox for testing. If you think the page should be deleted, see here for what to do. Thank you. Jim1138 (talk) 21:58, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Blanking pages

They are someone else's sandbox. Work in progress. Don't blank. Jim1138 (talk) 22:00, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Misplaced Pages, as you did to User:Brightify/Detentionaire with this edit, you may be blocked from editing. Jim1138 (talk) 22:01, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Blanking pages

They are not stale. Work was done last month. Jim1138 (talk) 22:02, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Features removed articles

The 'Features removed' series for Vista/7/8 were written from point of where there has been a significant functionality loss. Just a change like "Line up icons" changed to "Align to Grid" doesn't count IMHO as significant functionality loss. Others like Deluxe CD Player, Imaging etc certainly do. Or why would anyone not want to show icons using all possible colors? Do I propose you do not count every little change made as a "removed feature" but only put those features which are substantial and major. Another example "Minimize All Windows" was just renamed to "Show the Desktop". Kernel-mode printer drivers are still supported. OS/2 subsystem is really obsolete. Very few features are substantial. You can't count every change as removed feature. Just my opinion. - xpclient 22:13, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

• I created the List of features removed in Windows XP article to bring some semblance of WP:NPOV to the series, and knowing that you are by far the most vocal proponent of the existing articles, I was expecting some sort of reply like this - but not for you to use the "every little change" argument. The number of such "little" removed features in the Vista and 7 articles is too high for me to even bother counting it. Also, I could classify quite a few features in the Vista and 7 articles as obsolete.

As for your more specific points:

• The Line Up Icons/Align to Grid change is very carefully explained in the article.
• There are performance-related reasons to disable showing icons using all possible colors - just as you can adjust Performance Options to disable certain effects. The other reason I included this is the "by design" wording in the MSKB article - quite possibly the earliest existing example of it.
• Minimize all windows was not renamed to Show the desktop. This is clear if you note that Windows 2000 included both. The features are different because the first one actually minimizes all the windows, while the second one just allows you to view the desktop without minimizing them. It's why you don't get the window restore animation when you click on a taskbar button after using Show the desktop.
• The kernel-mode printer drivers change is also carefully explained in the article.

Hmm. Fair enough. I realize the finer differences between Line up icons vs..., icon color issue, Show desktop vs.., You are free to reinstate the content I removed. I will not remove it again. :) Nice job btw on the article. Your knowledge seems to exceed the xpclient. :P - xpclient 23:11, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Teletoon

I reverted your edits because you were causing the template to make a redlink (i.e., nonexistant) category. Your edits caused 71 articles to be in a category that didn't exist. Ten Pound Hammer • 07:13, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Marcus Qwertyus. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Windows Mail without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Misplaced Pages with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 09:15, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Content without source...

Hello, Dogmaticeclectic

In Misplaced Pages, contents without source may be challenged or deleted. Editors may choose to use template {{Citation needed}} when the issue is not grave and when they wish to be polite. But there is absolutely not mandate to indulge a contributor and his unreferenced contribution with this template. In fact, the burden of the source is on the contributor. It is completely acceptable to delete unreferenced contents, especially in serious cases like a Windows article that already plagued with said problem.

Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 10:21, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Hello again

I investigated a little bit and found sources that actually say you are wrong. Windows Media Player 10 was part of Service Pack 2 for Windows Server 2003 and Windows XP x64 and was never shipped with Windows XP x64. I have included my sources in the article talk page.

Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 11:11, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

File:Mahjong Titans 7.png

Please stop "size warring" over this image. To be suitable under fair use, the image must not be any bigger than absolutely necessary. I have reverted your change. If you continue to "size war" here, I will protect the image and block your account. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:23, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to Misplaced Pages. You appear to be engaged in an edit war with one or more editors according to your reverts at File:Mahjong Titans 7.png. Although repeatedly reverting or undoing another editor's contributions may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Misplaced Pages this is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, and often creates animosity between editors. Instead of edit warring, please try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to be blocked from editing. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. While edit warring on Misplaced Pages is not acceptable in any amount, breaking the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. Thank you.  — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:08, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Futz! for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Futz! is suitable for inclusion in Misplaced Pages according to Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Futz! until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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 template from the top of the article. -- Patchy1 02:00, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Your philoshopy

Hey, Dogmaticeclectic. Welcome to Misplaced Pages.

I read your user page and I see you have written: My editing philosophy can be summarized as WP:IAR. So, I am here to give you a warning: The first and most important factor in Misplaced Pages for deciding whether to break or to adhere to a rule is whether or not it makes you more popular.

WP:IAR says:

If a rule prevents you from improving or maintaining Misplaced Pages, ignore it.

But somehow, a lot of people think IAR says:

If a rule prevents you from having your way in Misplaced Pages or annoying others, ignore it.

Without millions of friends and a reputation of lovable person, life can be intolerable in Misplaced Pages.

Fleet Command (talk) 11:01, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

-- Patchy1 00:40, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 14

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Fugget About It (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Danny Smith and Richard Weston

Spliced (TV series) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Tim Burns and Richard Elliott

Detentionaire (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Charles Johnston

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:36, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 21

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Silverwing (TV series), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Michael Dobson and Richard Newman (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:38, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

WinSxS and XP

Which source exactly do you mean? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 120.63.16.72 (talk) 13:08, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

From what I know, Side-by-side component sharing (codenamed "Fusion") wasn't fully complete in Windows 98 and Windows 2000. These operating systems allowed loading a private version of the DLL if it was placed in the application's folder, instead of the system directory. This requires the developer to place the private DLL in the app's directory. (Fusion 1.0). What Windows XP introduces is a centralized store called WinSxS (Fusion 2) for versioned side-by-side components, and also COM+ and .NET support for Fusion. COM+ 2.0, COM classic, and Win32 components (C Runtime, GDI+, Common Controls all now have an Activation Context API. An elaborate system of manifests and the assembly version number are used by the OS PE loader to determine the correct binding of assembly versions to applications. As such Fusion was rolled out gradually across Windows releases but it really bore fruition in Windows XP. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 120.63.16.72 (talk) 13:40, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

I reverted it again but this time clarified the difference between side-by-side component sharing by globally registered private DLLs in each app's directory vs side-by-side assemblies used to describe shared DLLs in a central folder without using the registry. :)

Hello, Dogmaticeclectic

I think we have already covered this before but you seem to have forgotten: In Misplaced Pages, everything needs a source. Edits not backed up by a source may be contested or reverted. (This holds true even if you are right.) You are removing well-sourced information from articles without supplying a source of your own or discussing it in talk pages in spite of the fact that your action is previously contested. Please note that there is no second R in WP:BRD.

Now, why don't you start making amends right now? Throw me a few clues here and I will help you patch things up. How about it?

Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 21:50, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi.

So, I looked at DLL Hell#Running conflicting DLLs simultaneously (as the edit summary of your revert says) and it seems WinSxS really existed, is meant to help alleviate DLL Hell issues and you agree with it. But I am still at a loss: If you agree with it, why did you delete it from Windows XP article?

Best regards,

Codename Lisa (talk) 16:35, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

As clearly stated both at the source and in the section, this feature was already included in Windows 98 Second Edition and Windows 2000. Dogmaticeclectic (talk) 14:08, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi

You are being silent, so I went ahead and added only changes to WinSxS in Windows XP. Hope that's okay with you.

Best regards,

Codename Lisa (talk) 14:15, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 3

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

BBC Kids (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to K9, Silverwing, Trapped, Minuscule and Sorcerer's Apprentice

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:13, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Edit-warring at Windows XP

Instead of constantly reverting other users, which is the very essence of edit-warring, please discuss the changes at the article's talk page. Your talk page is really not an appropriate place for this discussion. --AussieLegend (✉) 02:48, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Windows 8

Hi.

First, you do know that Windows 8 cannot run 16-bit device drivers, right? Hence the difference between "program" and "application".

And in case you have not studied our verifiability policy, please do. Statements without a source may be removed.

Finally, when someone says something that is already said (in a better shape) in the next paragraph, it is better to remove it.

And by the way, you seem to like to hit revert button without actually verifying the merit. Frankly, if you do it again, I will report you to WP:ANI.

Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 17:56, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Hello again, Dogmaticeclectic

I do not normally comment on contributors unless necessary; and right now, I think it is necessary. Misplaced Pages is a place that runs on team work and consensus is a critical part of it. However, I am afraid you are not a team worker at all because you – for whatever reason – do not communicate and cooperate with your fellow team workers.

Please discuss with your fellow Wikipedians, especially when they come to you and ask "what is the problem?" When someone disputes an edit (not just your edit), cease all editing activities in that regard and discuss it. Discussion is the key. And remember: Always discuss the content, never the contributor. Nothing good results from hostility.

In fact, why don't you start with our Windows 8 problem? I am ready to listen. Given all above, why do you still think the edit is sanctioned?

Best regards,

Codename Lisa (talk) 08:35, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

January 2013

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Windows 8. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware, Misplaced Pages's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing.

Fleet Command (talk) 18:21, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at User talk:FleetCommand shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. GB fan 19:00, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

• Let me be more clear: Do not edit his user page. If you continue this silly edit war, you will be blocked. Your view of "policy" on that issue is not shared by everyone. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 19:58, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at Product activation shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Sailsbystars (talk) 22:25, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Edit warring at Product activation

A complaint about your edits has been filed at WP:AN3#User:Coin Operation and User:Dogmaticeclectic reported by User:Sailsbystars (Result: ). It looks to me that you've been edit warring to restore a section to the article which has had no sources sine 2009. Can you say whether you have any plan to provide sources in the future? You can respond at the noticeboard if you wish. Per WP:V, "Any material lacking a reliable source directly supporting it may be removed." Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 23:11, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

I think the key phrase here is 'directly supporting.' It is within your power to link the sources more carefully to the statements that need verification. You are already at three reverts. If you do another simple revert you may be blocked. EdJohnston (talk) 06:19, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Office shortcuts

Hi. I've undone your CSD tags on Office 95, Office 97, Office 2000 and Office XP as I believe all four of these shorthand terms are queries that a user is likely to enter in the "search" bar, and attempting to speedy delete them would be controversial (see WP:RFD#KEEP). If you want to contest this, you should list them at Redirects for discussion instead. --Ritchie333 15:30, 8 January 2013 (UTC)