Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 05:09, 4 November 2014

This user is one of the 400 most active English Wikipedians of all time. This editor is a WikiGnome. This user is a participant in WikiProject Ice Hockey. This user is a participant in WikiProject Editor Retention.

Hello to all fellow Wikipedians. GoodDay 22:40, 17 November 2005 (UTC).

This user has been on Misplaced Pages for 19 years, 1 month and 25 days.

You may be wondering why my archives only start at August 2007. The reason: I didn't archive my pages before that date, I merely deleted them (as I didn't know how to archive). Therefore, if anyone wishes to see material before August 2007? check out this talkpage's 'history'.

Awards

I've an Awards page, where I keep a list of Misplaced Pages awards bestowed upon me.

Edit count & Pie chart

Edit records

Archives

Aug-Sept 2007 Sept 2007-Feb 2008 Feb-Apr 2008 Apr-Jul 2008 Jul-Oct 2008 Oct-Nov 2008 Nov 2008-Jan 2009 Jan-Feb 2009 Feb-Mar 2009 Mar-May 2009 May-Jun 2009 Jun-Jul 2009 Jul-Sept 2009 Sept-Oct 2009 Oct-Nov 2009 Nov-Dec 2009 Dec 2009-Jan 2010 Jan-Feb 2010 Feb 2010 Feb-Apr 2010 Apr-Jun 2010 Jun-Oct 2010 Oct-Nov 2010 Nov 2010-Jan 2011 Jan-Feb 2011 Feb 2011 Feb-Mar 2011 Mar-Apr 2011 Apr-May 2011 May-Nov 2011 Nov 2011-Feb 2012 Feb-May 2012 May-Aug 2012 Aug 2012-Feb 2013 Feb 2013-May 2014 May 2014-present

This page has archives. Sections older than 14 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present.

Site-Ban Proposal

I was saying that I respectfully disagreed with you that those were the only grounds (vandalism, sockpuppetry, threats) for site-bans. However, as you will notice, I didn't support the site-ban. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:57, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

No prob. I've withdrew from that ANI discussion anyways :) GoodDay (talk) 00:58, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Responding to question about ban

Regarding this question that was posed to you—just a suggestion: I think it would be best if you would avoid getting into a long discussion on this topic. Not because of how anyone else would react (I think you may be overestimating what potential effect this may have, if any), but because you seem to be overly focusing on various negative interactions you experienced. In actuality, you had (and I believe continue to have) a number of supporters of your points of view; the problem was that you engaged in edit warring. The editing community, for better or worse, is unable to agree upon standards for amicable behaviour, but edit warring has a direct impact on readers and the ability to hold any discussions at all about a proposed change, and so a clear consensus on reacting to edit warring has arisen. I think you've already made your opinion clear regarding the influence of an editor's supporters, so I suggest that there isn't any further need to express this point within the current discussion threads. isaacl (talk) 19:29, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

I've never breached 3RR. Anyways, there's nothing further for me to add to the discussion-in-question. GoodDay (talk) 20:30, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

As you are aware, edit warring can occur without breaching the three-revert rule; in particular, slow edit wars can take place spaced out over months. isaacl (talk) 00:06, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

My probation expires May 21, 2015. I'd rather not discuss this topic any further, alright? :) GoodDay (talk) 00:08, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

WT:AN question

In response to your question on WT:AN, assuming you're referring to Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/GoodDay#GoodDay_topic-banned_from_diacritics the answer would be WP:ARCA (amendment request). If I may offer advice in addition to answering your question -- I advise against it at this point. Let your other restriction (the probation) expire before pursuing lifting the diacritic ban -- I sincerely believe you'll need a drama free year before folks will be willing to lift the ban, and a premature request tends to reset the clock. By that I mean asking unsuccessfully asking now will make it less likely a request will be successful next spring. NE Ent 16:04, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Hello friend

Hope you are keeping well. A pity we no longer banter the way we used to. Misplaced Pages's got very dull.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 13:47, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Howdy. I fear my bantering days are over. I suspect I'm on alot of editors watchlists, these days. GoodDay (talk) 19:56, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

WP:MOS

The MoS you cited say for lead image

Size

• "upright=1.2" (or "|frameless|upright=1.2" for plain pictures) resizes an image to approximately the given multiple of a user's preferred width. An image should generally be no more than "upright=1.8" (defaults to 400 pixels) wide; an image can be wider if it uses the "center" or "none" options to stand alone. e.g.

]

• Alternatively, a fixed size can be specified in the form |XXXpx, where XXX is replaced by a number of pixels, although this should be avoided where possible, since it overrides the user's default. For example:

  ]

  • As a general rule, images should not be set to a larger fixed size than the 220px default (users can adjust this in their preferences). If an exception to the general rule is warranted, forcing an image size to be either larger or smaller than the 220px default is done by placing a parameter in the image coding.
  • Lead images should usually be no wider than "upright=1.35" (defaults to "300px").

This means 300px is quite OK. Actually most lead images are 300px. Regards. Hafspajen (talk) 11:58, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

These image rules are a pain. GoodDay (talk) 12:30, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

It's equally a pain when someone tries to enforce "250px" on an image already formatted with "upright=1.2", especially when the guideline referred to states that fixing the pixel width "should be avoided where possible, since it overrides the user's default." Sincerely, SamBlob (talk) 12:41, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Fair enough. GoodDay (talk) 13:01, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Hafspajen and SamBlob, I reverted GoodDay here, citing 220px as the general rule. I don't see that most lead images are 300px. 220px is the general rule for a valid reason. And it seems because of this discussion, GoodDay is now going around changing lead images to be above 220px. This should not be done without valid reason. GoodDay, why do you feel that you need to go from article to article deciding on the size of the lead image? Flyer22 (talk) 23:56, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

Also, this talk page is currently on my WP:Watchlist, so there is currently no need to ping me back to it via WP:Echo. Flyer22 (talk) 23:58, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

Speaking of this images matter, I saw Ryulong here, here and here minutes ago stating, "per MOS:IMAGES should not force image size and let template take care of it." And looking at his recent contributions, he's been tweaking other articles in this regard as well. Flyer22 (talk) 04:25, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

There's a user evading his block and reinforcing deprecated formats so I'm following him around and restoring the pages to what they were before he edited them.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 04:26, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for explaining, Ryulong. Very quick response. If it's not clear from above, I was simply citing you as an example of those of us who stick to the general rule on this matter. I don't mind forgoing it at times, though. Flyer22 (talk) 04:29, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Infoboxes set a size on their own so it just seems pointless to make sure that it stretches to the full width, or stretches the template beyond its default.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 04:30, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Which is the top-image size requirement? Or shall I just leave'm inconsistent. PS: I edit articles via the random button & therefore don't seek out 'incorrect' top-image sizes :) GoodDay (talk) 05:09, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

You were mentioned

You were mentioned here regarding the hasty block on Ihardlythinkso. KoshVorlon Rassekali ternii i mlechnye puti 20:10, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

I'd recommend (for IHTS's sake) that you don't challenge his block. I know from personal expierence, that it's best to let it run its course. GoodDay (talk) 20:13, 19 October 2014 (UTC)