Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 10:15, 18 March 2011

Random acts of baking

Diannaa has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can Spread the "WikiLove" by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

Terima kasih. Cheers, Gold Hat (talk) 13:13, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

LOL

heh Jclemens-public (talk) 05:45, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

MZM's title should have had ", at ArbCom's restaurant." appended. Cheers, Gold Hat (talk) 05:51, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Well, the community's getting their public spectacle...they're just putting arbcom on trial instead of taking potshots at rod.... N419 BH 07:09, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Used to be, the villagers were gathered in the square for the public executions, witch burnings, &c. The veneer of modernity we affect, lately, curbs that a bit. But the mob still loves tehir blood sports, and this website offers all sorts of virtual blood sports for teh players.

The model is flawed; too many people in the world are idiots, are assholes, have little to offer but are needful of a fora that lets them be something. It's no different than our ancestors in Olduvai Gorge seeking the highest branch in the tree... for their toilet. Still damned, Gold Hat (talk) 07:20, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

I summarized, got a wonderful explanation from Xeno, suggested a clarified wording for the policy, and now it's a shitstorm. Methinks someone needs to put a giant fish on the page. N419 BH 07:32, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

I'll get right down to Fulton. Give me 100 uncontestable, unevadable bans, and I'll sort this place right out. After the first dozen or so, I'd get very careful and always hold some in reserve. Damned, Gold Hat (talk) 07:47, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

File:Lokasi Gorontalo Kabupaten Bonobolengo.svg and File:Northern Gorontalo Regency Location.svg

For consistencies, I suggest to rename File:Lokasi Gorontalo Kabupaten Bonobolengo.svg to File:Lokasi Gorontalo Kabupaten Bono Bolango.svg and File:Northern Gorontalo Regency Location.svg to File:Lokasi Gorontalo Kabupaten Gorontalo Utara.svg. Thanks! --Ewesewes (talk) 07:16, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Certainly. I'd noticed the second had been renamed and intended to get to it. It's a job for Commons. Cheers, Gold Hat (talk) 07:21, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

ANI

Please stop disrupting conversation by sticking large cartoons in the middle of an active conversation.

That's not OK behavior. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 00:56, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

It's quite relevant to that 'conversation' — part of the whole history of things. Gold Hat (talk) 01:03, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Online Ambassador Program

Please take a look at this project page and see if you can be a mentor to one of the many Areas of Study. If you can, please put your name in the "Online Mentor" area of the Area of Study of your choice and then contact the students you will be working with. As the Coordinating Online Ambassador for this project, please let me know if I can be of assistance. Take Care...Neutralhomer • Talk • 04:08, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of season one episode articles of House for deletion

The article will be discussed at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Paternity (House) 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 good 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. _Xeworlebi  13:57, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Welcome

Welcome to wikipedia Gold Hat! Glad to have you back!♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:14, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

meh; this place is fucked-up ;/ Gold Hat (talk) 18:17, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Service award

Hi, Gold Hat. Thank you for helping out with that request for help on my Talk. By the way, are you aware that since you have one months service and over 200 edits, that you are allowed to display this service badge !! {{Novice Editor}} Since you are all about the badges... --Diannaa 02:56, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Well, I've been raining on the feckin' badges for years. Back in they day we called it WikiProject Penis Measuring. Too many symbol-minded editors here. Damned, Gold Hat (talk) 03:02, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Jeebus help us. (OOOhhh that diff template is pretty. I will be tryin' that out.) --Diannaa 03:24, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

See also

user:snottywong/diffconverter

It does {{oldid}}s, too. Damned, Gold Hat (talk) 03:54, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Ah so desu. I thought you made it manually. This is even better. Thank you --Diannaa 04:07, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

I've been using {{diff}} a lot longer than that tool's been available ;)

See also

user:js/urldecoder

Damned, Gold Hat (talk) 04:14, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

That one will be handy, I think; I will add it too. --Diannaa 05:16, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

The real point of using such templates in lieu of hard coded links is that they're neutral re the secure server; all teh time teh "experienced" editors are revealing their IP by editing a page after they've followed a link to a server they're not logged into. The trolls watch for such things and exploit it (but the Pho Nam patron keeps it in check); the merely observant usually already know where the big fish are. Damned, Gold Hat (talk) 05:36, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Hmmm. There are certain ppl I wish to remain hidden from. A sleeper sock created in 2008 --Diannaa 06:14, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

↑ fixed w/fullurl... Damned, Gold Hat (talk) 18:25, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

All part of the feckin' game; we AGF too much and assholes exploit it. Over, and over and over again. I remember wik and teh boy with teh micropenis' first time at ArbCom. The cycle of whacking the retuning nakal anak shapes the project's culture; for the worse. The project has been in decline for years, and the bad actors are never purged. Those who care are swamped by the endless new accounts, the IPs by the millions; it's the same stupid shite each year. We say it's not a game, and it's not supposed to be, but we let people play their games without end. Rod made a comment about offering up his 4500-item watchlist to anyone interested; want one with 9,791 pages on it? I stopped watching. It's not the returning socks and IPs that are the real problem; it's those that have been here for years and are 'established' editors (with serious problematic behaviours) that are the problem. What really needs to happen is about a hundred admins get banned and a thousand established accounts, too. The wiki can't do this; the structure to do so isn't there and the mob resists any effort to rein them in. Go read root's page. This is not an encyclopedia; it's a zoo. The time is ripe for a new fork; someone will take the best 10% (mebbe teh 0.8 cut) and start a new project with a better structure. This place will continue, of course, but I'm seeing all roads leading off into the mud. Damned, Gold Hat (talk) 06:43, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

I agree with most of what you say. I am not convinced that watch-listing as a vandalism tool is the best way to go, though. Perhaps for some articles, and for some types of vandalism: at some point the best articles become "finished" and should be semi-protected and watch-listed. If new valuable new information needs to be added to an article it will get added. An example of how Misplaced Pages can and should work is the collection of high-quality articles being produced and maintained by the WP:MILHIST wiki project. I think that certain parts of Misplaced Pages are thriving and MILHIST is one of them.

So one day I added full protection to the article on Justin Bieber. There had been no edits in over a year that were not some variation of adding "...is gay." Well what's the point? what a waste of everyone's time to have to keep reverting this over and over every day. But no, since Misplaced Pages is the encyclopedia anyone can edit, I was told that this would never do. The article now has semi- and pending changes- protection; most edits are refused. It's part of the American ethos of freedom: the encyclopedia anyone can edit; you don't have to open an account to edit. Some restrictions on these criterion would go a long way to stopping the vandalism problem. It's what they do on de.wiki. You have to basically apply to edit an article unless you are a member of a smallish group of trusted editors. But in America, land of the free, this restriction on the constitutional right to vandalise Misplaced Pages would constitute the thin edge of the wedge. Well here in Canada we are unlikely to say "we hold these truths to be self evident"; we are a lot more likely to say "why doesn't the government do something about it?" After all in 2004 we elected Tommy Douglas as The Greatest Canadian in a poll initiated by the CBC. He was the father of Medicare.

The behavioural issues: I agree with everything you said there. --Diannaa 19:52, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

• The Abandoned; a must
• The Sound of Waves
  absolutely lyrical boy meets girl story
• Life of Pi
  a boy and his tiger go to sea
  --Diannaa
• Mountains Beyond Mountains
  a great doctor in Haiti
• A Fine Balance
  India in the seventies
• A Suitable Boy
  a thousand characters in India
• The White Tiger
  letters to the leader of the world
• King Leopold's Ghost
  genocide in the Congo
  --Diannaa
• The Rape of Nanking
  a book by a family friend
• Paradise Lost: Smyrna 1922
  the Turks burned Smyrna
• Oryx and Crake
  the perils of biotech
• The World Without Us
  would be a better place
  --Diannaa
• Highways to a War
  Cambodia
• In the Heart of the Sea: The Tragedy of the Whaleship Essex
  the true story that inspired Moby-Dick
• A People's History of the United States
  teh true version
• The Lord of The Flies
  missing manual 2 teh toxic wiki
  --Diannaa

Oooo... I'd not read about his thesis; seems a tad relevant to our problem editors. Damned, Gold Hat (talk) 21:22, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Wow. 1933 was a great year for that particular POV. I had not heard that tale before either. Misplaced Pages, educational and entertaining in so many ways. --Diannaa 22:03, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

ya, big year for March Violets — worldwide.

See also

The Plot Against America

;) Damned, Gold Hat (talk) 22:12, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

We have the Philip Roth in our collection but I will have to look for March Violets at Chapters. Not that I don't already have a stack of stuff sitting around waiting to be read. This, this, this --Diannaa 22:29, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

I read March Violets as part of the Berlin Noir collection; they're all fine. Try Joe R. Lansdale on some dark night. Damned, Gold Hat (talk) 01:01, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

No one deals with the disruptive users, it's all fun and games and we're supposed to AGF. When children don't find behavioural limits, they go further, seeking them; wiki-culture encourages this and we get a negative feedback loop: ever more poor behaviour.

The vandal-whacking is just more game-play, they're not really being dealt with, they're being fed. Dealt with would imply a resolution of some sort, but most stupid shite is simply prolonged. An account that vandalizes shouldn't be given 24h, it should be give a month; indef'd if that's all they're up doing. I'm known for raining on pop-culture 'articles'. They're an attractive nuisance; they attract low-caliber editors that really belong on Wikia watching the adverts there.

• Bieber lulz

Watchlists are not a vandalism-tool; vandal-fighting as a wiki-career should be blockable because it's not about building the project, it's about playing an online video game with live targets. Where do you think all the piss-poor admins came from? 'Good vandal-fighter' was *the* RfA meme about 4 years ago. Same goes for sock-hunting; that's just s:The Most Dangerous Game except Zaroff has a block button (or WP:SPI bookmarked).

You mention 'a waste of time' — *that's* the key currency of wiki; people's time: they give it freely so that's what their time ends up worth. You're spot-on about the Americans; a poorly educated bunch of couch potatoes with a worldview centred on their being 'exceptional'. Throw in the gun-culture, economic disparities, conspicuous consumption, racism, and the hyper-partisan politics, and it's no wonder the place is toxic; the wiki-community is just a mirror of the cultures editors are from.

The Germans had the snot beat out of them, last century; they learned from the experience and they now run a decent country and a proper wiki. Full pending-changes is a no-brainer for teh toxic-wiki, which is of course why the rabble won't have it, and to manage pending changes requires a mature and dedicated cadre of reviewers. The Americans need to learn the lessons the Europeans learned a long time ago. And don't forget that most sent across the pond were being ejected as unsavory. It's no accident that in the late eighteenth century, the crown had to find a new dumping ground for societal dreck.

I've long had a dim view of wikiprojects and have explained why. The nutshell is that they are often about ownership and a local faction seceding from site-wide norms. All sorts of walled-gardens are out there run by local-consenses. MILHIST does seem to do better than most. Mebbe all their understanding of battles keeps them from having more of them on-wiki.

Damned, Gold Hat (talk) 22:23, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

The MILHIST editors actually have the discipline to make a plan and follow it through. Example: Operation Majestic Titan. You are right; if you just let kids run around doing whatever they want, it won't end well. But I don't think the Milhist people are kids; they're adults. People of all ages are more productive with a bit of structure.

Vandal hunting with automated tools can be like you say, an online game, but it doesn't have to be. In fact I think it is a better way to detect and correct vandalism than using watchlists. If I make a revert on an article I haven't watchlisted or previously edited I feel differently about it than if it's one I put a lot of time into. That's why people get into such lame edit wars—they get too much of themselves vested into the article. Or in Rod's case, the whole watch list. --Diannaa 22:40, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

I expect most MILHIST types are historians, at least armchair ones. Can you see them editing articles on video games? Or episodes of Aqua Teen Hunger Force? I believe that most of the MILHIST articles are pretty core to the overall goals of the project. The others belong on wikia; most of those editors, too. For most editors, there's no structure at all and no one is much enforcing anything on them; they just boldly do whatever the fuck they want. That's another appeal of this place; No Rulz; and what few there are can be edited! Some of the most toxic editors are those that re-grade the rule book. Endless petty tyrants setting up camp over some 'rule' they want to wield as a weapon in their game-play; "rv per WP:Rulz". One of ArbCom's problems is that they can't acknowledge that they've borked some cases, especially back in the day when they had trolls aboard. It's interesting to review what former arbs are *not* still on the mailing list; the functionaries list has been trimmed, too.

'Vandal hunting' has its intent on the vandal, not the vandalism; in that 'mode' the 'hunter' is using the vandalism as a means to find their prey. It's a blood-sport. If the focus were on the vandalism, one would revert it and simply deny the vandal any recognition. Far more effective means of dealing with most vandalism are the edit filer mechanism and bots. These have reverted far more vandalism than our bands of hunters have and they take all the sport out if it. It's a buzzkill, I know, but do we really want editors getting a buzz off their having scored a kill?

WP:Watchlists are supposed to be for "pages you have created or are otherwise interested in". Most regular editors will revert outright vandalism to a page that pops-up on their watchlist, at least if they actually look at what happened. And if the vandal has made other edits, some will look at those. That's what contrib logs are for. But if it's not outright vandalism, one runs the risk of harassment or failing to show required courtesy. That's what got me in trouble, even though the other editors were flagrant POV warriors. A bad edit should always be reverted; editors who make lots of bad edits should be indef'd pretty quickly. Problem is many editors don't have much of a clue about what's good and what's bad. Half of all people are, after all, of less than average intelligence. In the end, edit wars typically involve both editors who are right and editors who are wrong. If there are more editors who are wrong, it doesn't make the wrong version right, it just proves that there are a lot of wrong people underfoot.

Damned, Gold Hat (talk) 00:01, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

WikiProjects do fall into the trap of ownership, cliqueism, overriding project wide guidelines for what appears a good reason from inside the project, but not from without. However it's a mistake (usually) to assign these results to overwhelming stupidity, often they are very smart people making the running, with a simple blindspot, and the broad "loyalty" of their projects where they do much good work. Oh, and more than half of all people are less than average intelligence, but, by and large, intelligent editors make most of the real problems. Rich Farmbrough, 17:17, 10 March 2011 (UTC).

I've seen ] many times. It is usually a matter of divergent goals, and inflated egos. I've said that Misplaced Pages is a unitary state, not a federation of wikiprojects. The abdication of central authority has led to an ingrained state of chaos, and all the little shits run amok. Bands of WP:CONLIMITED should not be allowed to secede from site-wide norms and perspectives. But they do it all the time, and we've very poor means of coercing the lost back to the proper path; there's no real authority, but there's always moar game-play. While I see dumb people, I also see that 'smart' people are usually behind the worse messes, which leaves us with quite a bit less than half of 'us' pulling in the proper directions. Damned, Gold Hat (talk) 17:58, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Taiwan High Speed Rail

If you have a minute could you have a look at the table in Taiwan High Speed Rail#Tickets and fares and give me your opinion? The article will not be able to pass FA in this state as the table is using colour to convey information. What do you think is the best way to alter the table to avoid the use of colour? Will it have to be split into two tables? If you are not interested in helping out that's ok. Regards, --Diannaa 21:45, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Yup, it's quite a mess; they must have let anyone edit it. That table is probably mimicking some real-world table that used the colours. A simple note that the top-right side was business class would help. But seriously, most of those tables and graphs are at odds with WP:IINFO; all that's missing is the dinning car menu and the pay levels of the various employees. Wikis have a serious trivia problem. Damned, Gold Hat (talk) 22:35, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

I am going to leave it alone. There is no point re-working a table that the FA reviewers might ask the author to delete. Thank you for having a look. --Diannaa 02:24, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Huh? The FA-crowd passes all sorts of improper stuff. They're using a comb with a lot of missing teeth; really most of that is about where the commas go and just what gets italics. Damned, Gold Hat (talk) 02:33, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Opinions on deletions

While trying to help Lil-unique with a crappy table under the ownership of someone with no concept of accessibility at Talk:American Idol (season 10)#Tables and accessibility, I realised that the finalists in the table had wiki-links – have a look at American Idol (season 10)#Finalists, which seems to be the most egregious violation of WP:BLP1E that I could imagine. What's worse is that all the articles I checked are unreferenced stubs. So what I'd like advice on is: should I prod them or go straight to AfD? Cheers --Famously Sharp (talk) 00:49, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Prod is for uncontroversial deletions; I expect someone would object. It's a wiki, anyone can do that, for any reason that pops into their head. And mass AFDs usually fail, and that there are 13 of them bodes ill. And if you do individual AFDs someone will bitch that they're not being grouped so that editors with opinions can opine just once. Who teh fuck watches shite like that? Oh, ya, teh people Rod was talking about.

Thanks for the protest ;) Damned, Gold Hat (talk) 01:04, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Hehe, you're welcome as always. The culprits should not think that I'll forget, and sooner or later, their mean-spiritedness will come back to haunt them – and I want to be there to revel in it. Anyway, I might try out the {{prod blp}} route for the unsourced ones. I found one with a source, so I can try that at AfD (with a good excuse for not nominating the others). Let's see how it goes. --RexxS (talk) 01:17, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

I doubt it; they can't *ever* admit to mistakes; that would undermine their credibility. You read wut root wrote? *They* were supposed to be the solution to... something. I used to think that we needed to delete about a third as dross, but now I think forking about 10% would be better. Mebbe tehy should recast the 'founder' bit per another meaning and hand it out like your first hit in the schoolyard? You read the paper; WYSIWYG will allow the automated addition of gratuitous markup without regard to semantics or accessibility and will open the project to ever lower-skilled editors while offering the skilled ever larger amount of stuff to fix and ever more WP:RANDYs to bitch about it. Damned, Gold Hat (talk) 01:39, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

OOOO SHINY!!!!

		The Barnstar of Good Humor
		I've been in stitches ever since I started reading your page tonight. Only funny because it's true. Thanks so much for everything you do on the wiki, Mr. Gold Hat! N419BH 01:50, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

No but yeah but no but yeah but no but... teh truth is supposed to hurt, not be funny ;/ Damned, Gold Hat (talk) 02:28, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

More of a nervous laugh...what should that redirect to? N419BH 02:55, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

You're supposed to know that before you post a redlink; for example:

• Theoretical genetic mutations that would have arisen if Leia had married Luke
  (do click to see teh log; bonus for finding the link to it from AC-land)

And you've little reason to be nervous; you're not off the reservation. Damned, Gold Hat (talk) 03:04, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

that was easy N419BH 03:32, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

↑ fixed ;/ So, you would have found Misplaced Pages:Votes for deletion/Endorian Holocaust, too... That was before Vfd was deleted, of course. You can still read teh fanwank. Damned, Gold Hat (talk) 03:43, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

<lazy> Got a script for that? I have to copy URLs and then manually convert them to wikitext to get that to work. N419BH 04:05, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

wikia:starwars:Endor Holocaust, too.

• user:js/urldecoder &&
• user:snottywong/diffconverter

:0 Damned, Gold Hat (talk) 04:29, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Regencies

Can you sort out the infoboxes for Java and ensure the articles are linked correctly on the list of regencies page. Also Sanggau Regency needs to be separate from the article on Sanggau city. I'll resume creating the others.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:51, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

color and fontsize

For the Golden Guides quotes, could you please set the color and fontsize to match that of my quotebox in state reptile?TCO (talk) 20:29, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Hm, there's no good reason to force non-standard colours like that. Damned, Gold Hat (talk) 20:38, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

I mostly want them to look the same. So at least we have that now. I do like the bigger size as it really makes a difference for 40+ readers, and that's not just a short caption, but a section of text to read. I donno about the "non standard" color, but I do like the "pop" when it is different than the rest of the page. Can we have a "standard blue"? I don't really see these as normal tables, so much as boxed asides like in a magazine or new article. Using tables for layout, rather than as a data organization device. Like if you look at your barnstar on this page, the tan really helps set it out...and it does have standard size font. That said...don't hurt me Hammer. I'm a newbie.  ;) TCO (talk) 21:37, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

The issue of font-size I'm sympathetic to because too much of the wiki is forced too small. This really should be addressed site-wide. There certainly should not be a 'standard blue' unless it's in something like shared.css. This is the whole point of the default look of things like wikitable; they're the standard, and they're grey because that's maximally accessible. Tables should *never* be used for layout; we tried that in the 90s and billions of web pages later, that bad idea still lingers.

• Misplaced Pages:TABLE#Page layout

Damned, Gold Hat (talk) 21:16, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Technical Question

Rewriting United Airlines Flight 232 I'd like to add some plain old footnotes (not references) in order to explain a couple things in the lead. How would I go about doing this? I think I've seen it before where you have text needing explanation{{some template}}. The template places "Note 1" in superscript with a link. Then at the bottom of the page you get something like this with another template: "Note 1: Explanation of text". I've been looking for a while through the templates but I have no idea. Right now the explanations are in parenthesis in the article which really messes up the flow. Got any ideas? N419BH 02:27, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

You have a couple options, one is to use {{ref}} and {{note}}. A second option is to use <ref group="lower-alpha">some note</ref> to create alphabetical footnotes. Then create a corresponding {{reflist|group="lower-alpha"}} (TPS) Plastikspork _―Œ 02:33, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

I read about both of those but I can't quite understand how to use them. Can you show me please? BTW awesome username. N419BH 02:35, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Example 1:

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.

Notes

1. This text is nonsense

Example 2:

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.

Notes

This text is nonsense.

Example 3:

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.

Notes

1. This text is nonsense

See the examples in the wikitext above and I am glad you like my username. Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ 02:45, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

There are some detailed instructions available at User:Diannaa/My Templates#Ref Group Notes. --Diannaa 02:53, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

I got it, thank you very very much. Now to get this thing to GA. N419BH 02:55, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

The new predefined list groups (lower-alpha, lower-roman, lower-greek) are very useful (see Example 3). There are also more details in the reference groups section of the documentation for {{reflist}}. Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ 03:03, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Alright, I need eyes now...mind looking through the article? N419BH 06:26, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

I'd not seen the lower-alpha group and such. Ever notice that encyclopedia is not a GA? Damned, Gold Hat (talk) 07:39, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Lower-alpha et al are fairly new, so not common yet. No doubt they'll be resisted as a "change of style" per wp:ownership. As for the encyclopedia, it fails WP:GACR#5. --Famously Sharp (talk) 14:44, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

both are due to entrenched battleground mindsets. fyi, The World Without Us has rather detailed predictions of the, ah, fallout of the recent tsunami in Japan. Damned, Gold Hat (talk) 21:27, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

And the implementation is broke. In HTML tags, all values of attributes are quoted (because they are of type 'string'). As Plastikspork realised above, <ref group="lower-alpha"> doesn't work. Buggered, –RexxS (talk) 03:53, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

I find it quite disturbing that the group fails to support quotes. Strictly speaking, this is not an (x)html attribute; it is, arguably, subject to xml's well-formed rules (which would require the quotes. It's a template argument, and it's being passed along to a div's style attribute as a css property value. That's disturbing, too, as divs don't really have a list-style-type, ordered lists do (which is specifically "inheriting" it); forward-looking to html5 and orthogonality, I suppose. Plastikspork was quite right-thinking when he quoted "lower-alpha" and that this was "wrong" is simply another bit that bodes-ill for this place. Damned, Gold Hat (talk) 04:54, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Indeed PS was spot-on, as the proper behaviour would be to expect quotes. If there is any ambition left to have the content here easily exportable, then tags really need to be XML-compatible. Probably time for an overhaul of cite.php to make quoting these sort of attribute values mandatory. --RexxS (talk) 14:37, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Add it to the stack:

• Misplaced Pages:Centralized discussion/Citation discussion#Specific proposal

Damned, Gold Hat (talk) 20:10, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

FYI, <ref>...</ref> and <references>...</references> will work with and without quotes for the name and group parameters, but the problem is with {{reflist}}, which is the template setting the style for <ol>...</ol>. See my recent edits to the reflist template. I am actually fine with this, since most templates don't take quotes, but tags do, and this is one case where we are mixing the two. Plastikspork _―Œ 02:02, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Interesting, but you were reverted. I agree that template args syntax doesn't normally use quotes; I've often seen reflist use the group arg with a quoted value, though; I do it and it works. I expect it came from copy-pasting from a ref-tag and it 'looks right' to me. See my prior comment; the list-style-type's being set on a wrapping-div, not on the ol-element, which is odd, at least. Damned, Gold Hatthis user is a sock puppet02:37, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

reference displaying with brackets and url

Will you please fix ref 92 at state reptiles? I can't figure out why it is misbehaving.TCO (talk) 09:15, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

 Done ;/ Damned, Gold Hat (talk) 20:02, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks.TCO (talk) 20:56, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Cool that you're fixing up the links.

Not too many people want to take the time and it helps out. Geofferybard (talk) 23:23, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

after about six edit conflicts... Damned, Gold Hat (talk) 23:29, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Just found out the radiation plume is headed my way. The price of Potassium Iodine just went through the ceiling.Geofferybard (talk) 00:12, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Your sig

Hey, Gold Hat. I just noticed your extremely massive signature. You should probably change it per the signature guidelines. It states that "Images of any kind must not be used" along with "Keep signatures short, both in display and in markup." It also says that links that can be seen as canvassing are undesirable. Your signature fails to meet any of those points. I'm sure an admin will have dropped by eventually, so I figured I'd spare them the trouble. Regards, Swarm 07:56, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

that's not my sig, it's a one-off I pasted ;/ Damned, Gold Hat (talk) 08:11, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

It's not a one-off, it's seen above on this page as well as here and here. Anyway, looks like it's no longer in use so I won't bother you further. Swarm 08:20, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Ah. That's what you meant. Meh, I guess the message is "don't do that, then." Regards Swarm 08:27, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

oops, Damned, Gold Hatthis user is a sock puppet08:34, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

WHACK! Swarm 08:39, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Be as immature as you want, I'm not taking the bait....SQUISH Swarm 08:48, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

lol; you bit when you first posted here. Damned, Gold Hat (talk) 08:51, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

20 years, 2 months and 8 days

(←) While I assume you're not blatantly trolling, my point is completely serious. The sig's a vio of the guidelines. That's all I want you to understand. I don't care what you fuck with on your own talk page, but it should stop on other pages. Regards, Swarm 09:06, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

yet i'm not taking you seriously; you're not really paying much attention. please stay off my talk. Damned, Gold Hat (talk) 09:09, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Come on now. There's no need for incivility. This isn't a big deal. Swarm 09:18, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

nah, your rv'ing me as a vandal on your talk was funny. now drop teh stick. Damned, Gold Hat aka david 09:25, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

polls

Hello there. You seem to have undone my edit here. I did not see the edit as being helpful to Misplaced Pages. If you disagree, could you please explain? Thanks.  Chzz  ►  09:49, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

don't remove my post. easy-peasy. Damned, Gold Hat (talk) 09:51, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

I happen to agree with Chzz. This is not about "polling", this is about a person who has taken a broken process badly. Pushing a polling comment in on a user talk page in these circumstances appears to be disruptive to prove a point. Worm · (talk) 09:52, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

you're entitled to an opinion. Damned, Gold Hat (talk) 09:55, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

March 2011

Please do not attack other editors. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Misplaced Pages. You accused My76Strat with the comment, "this user is a sock puppet" - if you have evidence for that, file WP:SPI. If not, please desist. Thank you.  Chzz  ►  09:57, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

lol; epic-fail. Damned, Gold Hatthis user is a sock puppet10:01, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Please do not reinsert this again. It is obviously causing disruption and you are edit warring to keep it there. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:08, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

This is a bunch of folks missing most of the picture. Damned, Gold Hat (talk) 10:10, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Maybe. And I can't see what all the fuss is about either. But perhaps you should stop edit warring and talk about it instead. Cheers — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:12, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

I should scuttle this account, too. Jack Merridew 10:15, 18 March 2011 (UTC)