User talk:Phlip

Welcome!

Hello, Phlip, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! -- Longhair | Talk 11:30, 7 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Removing blank lines

Please do not remove non-printing blank lines between segments of text unnecessarily, as you did for Twin Peaks. They make it easier for editors to find the text they are attempting to work on, and ease of editing is a primary goal of Wikipedia. Thank you for your cooperation. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 20:43, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, OK... It's just a habit I've picked up from gnoming on other wikis where keeping all the list items inside the same <ul> is considered a "good idea" (XHTML and semantics and all that jazz). Having blank lines between them makes them come out as seperate <ul>'s in the rendered page, rather than one <ul> with several <li>'s, which is... well... wrong. And causes a gap between the list items on certain skins (namely Cologne Blue, the one I use)... and messes up if you try it with nested bullets... but if that's the way Wikipedia does things then I'm happy to leave it as it is. I looked just now on WP:STYLE and couldn't find anything saying one way or the other... Phlip 00:45, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Argggh! So that's why those nested bullets don't work right! I hadn't realized separate lists were being generated. Very tacky. However, I would maintain that this is a coding failure, requiring non-programmer editors to write like 1970s-era programmers to accomodate flaws in MediaWiki. I'll put in on my list of bugs to file with MediaZilla. And you're right that there's no specific prohibition; it's just that far too many people forget that the purpose of Wikipedia is to make it easy for anyone to contribute useful material, not to conform to coding limitations or to squeeze every last byte out of the database. As a professional programmer, I really hate it when my fellow programmers attempt to force ordinary folks to sift through obfuscated text, especially when the markup itself is simplified precisely so they don't need to perform other code-like writing acrobatics. Oh, well. Thanks for the explanation. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 03:32, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

sourcerer

That's not exactly "unfix" (revert) since you're providing an alternate/more-direct link. --Belg4mit 03:11, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]