Jump to content

User talk:RexxS/Archive 18

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 15Archive 16Archive 17Archive 18Archive 19Archive 20→Archive 25

Fish

Oh my god! You are the coolest person who has ever existed. THE COOLEST. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 22:50, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Sellers, again

Hi RexxS, Thanks very much for all you assistance on the Peter Sellers on stage, radio, screen and record article. The article is now at FLC and this is due in no small part to your efforts. Thanks again. - SchroCat (^ • @) 08:38, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

I think I've explained the missing heading and I've applied a fix to the Discography tables for you. I'll try to keep an eye on the FLC, but feel free to ping me if you get stuck. --RexxS (talk) 17:21, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
That's great RexxS, amny thanks indeed. Thanks also for tweaking the non-sorting rows too! Cheers - SchroCat (^ • @) 17:23, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

removed replies

hey, my replies to you were removed:

try these:
Br'er Rabbit (talk) 23:52, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

and

See:
Br'er Rabbit (talk) 04:29, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

rescued for ya; Br'er Rabbit (talk) 17:07, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks - it looks like Alexandr just moved them into your section in two separate edits. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 17:37, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
I know; I reverted his edit to "my" section. Those replies to you are not part of my "statement". See this thread, too. Br'er Rabbit (talk) 18:17, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Nitrogen narcosis and Decompression sickness

These are screaming to be FAC-ready. wink wink. PumpkinSky talk 23:57, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Rabbit

I'm not going to continue this there, but what he may have done on USS Ironsides or any other article selected by you or him was not my point. I only had to go 3 or 4 edits back on his contribution history as it then was to find a clear breach of WP:CITE (or if you prefer WP:CITEVAR), which may be a policy you don't like, but is still a policy. I think you know how trying to change it would go. I notice neither you nor Wehwalt have taken me up on my invitation to provide any examples of adding text by him in any of his incarnations. Johnbod (talk) 02:41, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

I didn't select the article. Raul did. I was simply drawing looking at the first set of diffs that was already in the section. More broadly, I am unable to find any instance of Br'er forcing a change of citations against a consensus on the talk page. "Silence is consent" is the legal maxim and it applies just as much here. We are meant to be bold and a lack of reversion is the simplest way to measure consensus - see WP:CON - which is policy, unlike CITEVAR. If you think his edits don't improve the article, take it up there - or at the very least give a diff to illustrate your point and I'll debate the particular.
Why does an editor have to add text to demonstrate his value to the project? Don't you see that is just the problem I was complaining about? I don't go around inviting you to provide any examples of Raul developing a template or having a change to common.css implemented, do I? --RexxS (talk) 03:02, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
Really? The Coral Island springs to my mind. And like it or not, Johnbod does have a valid point. Malleus Fatuorum 03:13, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
You have me at a disadvantage there, Malleus. I thought the fight at The Coral Island was Br'er trying to remove a template, but I'll take your word about the references, of course. It looks like I owe you an apology, John. One pint is enough? or perhaps more: I've been pretty mean to you lately. --RexxS (talk) 03:26, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
(ec) That is not what the policy says - he should at least ask on the talk page first and wait a while. I don't say that everyone needs to add text, but a complete absence of doing so is something of a handicap if you're trying to take over the FA process. I don't believe that drive-by policy breaches of this kind are positive contributions, any more than forcing infoboxes where they shouldn't go. It doesn't help that he dismisses all content editing at FA as "the beautiful prose" thing. One pint will be fine, thanks!Johnbod (talk) 03:32, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
If I see a referencing problem I ask the rabbit. Its not my article, he doesn't "own" any, but helps knowledge and future editors, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:22, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Yet another request

Automatic insult tool much enjoyed! RexxS put a button on my page for purging page, like on Bishapod's? Good-looking button if possible, please, /my god I used the p-word/ not plain like Bishapod's. Buttony-looking, with rounded corners. darwinbish BITE 10:39, 23 August 2012 (UTC).

+ Done ;> Br'er Rabbit (talk) 13:41, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

United States Military Date Proposal

A discussion on the encyclopedic need for the use of military dates on United States military related articles is taking place at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers#Proposal to strike out the requirement that American military articles use military dates. Please join in.--JOJ Hutton 23:28, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

No thanks. The format used simply doesn't matter as anybody can understand either dmy or mdy, and we have an agreed a way of doing things that the vast majority of editors are happy with. Arguing over minor changes to which format is used where simply isn't a productive use of an grown adult's time. --RexxS (talk) 00:00, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Essay on accessibility

Hi RexxS. I started a conversation here about your essay on using rowspans in tables. If you could please chime in, I would greatly appreciate it. Thanks! BOVINEBOY2008 21:30, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Sure. The problems still exist but for fewer people as time goes on. I've left a few thoughts at WT:ACCESS. --RexxS (talk) 23:18, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

List of Grey's Anatomy cast members

Hi RexxS. Another favour if I dare? How do the tables pan out accessibility-wise on the above list? The Rambling Man (talk) 10:09, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi TRM. Unfortunately the information shown in the key (starring, recurring, etc.) is completely unavailable in the main table to anyone using a screenreader (and possibly unavailable to others who have colour vision defects). It fails WP:COLOUR: "Ensure that color is not the only method used to convey important information. Especially, do not use colored text or background unless its status is also indicated using another method such as an accessible symbol matched to a legend, or footnote labels. Otherwise, blind users or readers accessing Wikipedia through a printout or device without a color screen will not receive that information."
I'm (naturally) also not keen on the massive use of colspans which make the table unsortable, as well as the concept of breaking the table into two sections (main and recurring) which creates peculiar section editing which doesn't work with the preview. If the idea of 'starring' vs 'recurring' is a fundamental distinction - even though characters like Addison Montgomery are starring for 2 seasons and recurring for 6 but appear in the 'Main' section - then I would have expected there to be two tables. If the distinction is not that important, I would not have expected the section headings to be so prominent that they stop a screen reader from accessing the actual column headers (i.e. the season). Is there a reason for the 'Season' header to duplicate the 'Season' in the Season N cells below it? Finally, all of the column headers have been give a scope of "row" which is nonsensical. I'm sorry to be so negative, but the table is so far away from being accessible that I can't see anything short of a complete re-write being able to rectify that. --RexxS (talk) 13:55, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
I thought you might say that! I've left my own comments (including about WP:COLOUR) and directed the nominator here as well, hope you don't mind. Thanks for your comments and time (yet again!)... The Rambling Man (talk) 13:58, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
Are there any ideas you have to make it accessible? Thanks, TRLIJC19 (talk • contribs) 16:31, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
Hi, TRLIJC.
  • First decide if you really want to distinguish between 'starring' and 'recurring'. If so, make two tables - the first for starring and the second for recurring. That will make the whole thing much easier.
  • Then decide on what information for each character you want - I'd have suggested character, actor, and their status in seasons 1-9. That's 11 columns. You can make the column widths the same in each table so that they line up.
  • Work out how you want to show the status without making the table too wide. I'd use S1 for season 1, etc. as the headings; then 'S' for starring, 'R' for recurring; 'TBA' for To be announced and '—' for no appearances in the body of the table. But that's all your choice.
You could then make a table a bit like this:
Main cast of Grey's Anatomy
Character Actor Season
S1 (2005) S2 (2005–06) S3 (2006–07) S4 (2007–08) S5 (2008–09) S6 (2009–10) S7 (2010–11) S8 (2011–12) S9 (2012–13)
Addison Montgomery Kate Walsh[1] R S S R R R R R TBA
Callie Torres Sara Ramirez[2] — R S S S S S S S
Once you have simplified so that it can be read without any colours at all, you have a table that is accessible. After that you can add the colour and other embellishments that help make it attractive for sighted viewers. Use style="background-color: whatever;" for each cell that you want coloured. Try to pick light background colours so that there is good contrast for those with colour vision defects.
Main cast of Grey's Anatomy
Character Actor Season
S1 (2005) S2 (2005–06) S3 (2006–07) S4 (2007–08) S5 (2008–09) S6 (2009–10) S7 (2010–11) S8 (2011–12) S9 (2012–13)
Addison Montgomery Kate Walsh[1] R S S R R R R R TBA
Callie Torres Sara Ramirez[2] — R S S S S S S S
And so on. You still need a Legend of course, but it will have the letter abbreviations in it as well as the colours. None of this compulsory, of course, but it would give you a way to make a table more accessible. I hope it's a help to you, and please feel free to come back to me if I can be of any further help. Cheers, --RexxS (talk) 17:21, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
That looks like a great idea. Unfortunately, I just spent an hour adding accessible symbols into the table. If they are not okay, then I will do the example you displayed. Let me know and thanks again, TRLIJC19 (talk • contribs) 17:28, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
Ouch, you spent a lot of time doing that, but unfortunately used two symbols († and ‡) that the commonest screen reader doesn't recognise. You probably need to have a look at WP:NOSYMBOLS for some ideas of how to fix that. --RexxS (talk) 18:15, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
I've already started making the table the way you showed, and it looks much better. TRLIJC19 (talk • contribs) 18:16, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Is there any other light color you can recommend? I need a 'guest' one. TRLIJC19 (talk • contribs) 19:13, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Well, almost anything that has E's and F's in it should be fine:
#FFF #FFE #FEF #EFF #FEE #EFE #EEF #EEE
HTH --RexxS (talk) 19:23, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for everything. How does the list look? TRLIJC19 (talk • contribs) 19:30, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
It looks fine, but just as importantly it will sound fine too. An added bonus is that it will be simple to update the TBAs when the time comes - and adding an extra column for season 10 will only need the extra cells adding (along with increasing the colspan in just one place: 'Seasons'). I should add that you could make the table sortable as well now - but only if you wanted to. Cheers, --RexxS (talk) 20:00, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
How do you make them sortable? TRLIJC19 (talk • contribs) 20:41, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
There are lots of variations on what you can make sortable, but I've done a simple demo in this edit to the list - which I've self-reverted to your last version. Have a look at the changes in that diff and see what I did. --RexxS (talk) 20:59, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
I see. Is it compulsory to make the table sortable? TRLIJC19 (talk • contribs) 21:05, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
No, of course not. I think you've probably set the order to be that of the starring characters first, and that's perfectly legitimate. I only mentioned it for sometime in the future when you make a table that would benefit much more from being sortable. --RexxS (talk) 22:23, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Coventry meeting

Hi D., It was good to meet you today, and to be able to put a face and personality to a user that has long had my respect. I hope there will be further opportunities. I think Jacob and James represented us superbly and deserve out thanks. I can see the afternoon session, which I had to miss, was a success too. Best wishes, Graham. Graham Colm (talk) 21:30, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

It was a real pleasure to meet you too at last, Graham! I am a firm believer that coming face-to-face with other Wikimedians in meatspace brings big benefits to our interactions in cyberspace, and I had the pleasure of meeting some wonderful people today. Moves are afoot to make this an annual event! --RexxS (talk) 22:11, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
I can vouch for that. But when we met back in February I had no idea that you and several others had travelled from far afield, whereas all I did was to hop on a tram. :-) Malleus Fatuorum 22:22, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

AHRC workshop

AHRC Wikipedia Workshop 2012-09-03

Hi --Andrew Gray (talk) 13:48, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Hello! --Nmeddy (talk) 13:49, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Hello --Chantryjean (talk) 13:50, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Helo! --Isar2000 (talk) 13:52, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Hello!--Polly Toney (talk) 13:52, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi!--YeshiUK (talk) 13:54, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

hi again --Erik (talk) 13:57, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

hi again--Chantryjean (talk) 13:58, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

hi--Owls365 (talk) 13:59, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

hello--Wikiedit111 (talk) 14:00, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

hi! Gwenanneji (talk) 14:02, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

The Olive Branch: A Dispute Resolution Newsletter (Issue #1)

Welcome to the first edition of The Olive Branch. This will be a place to semi-regularly update editors active in dispute resolution (DR) about some of the most important issues, advances, and challenges in the area. You were delivered this update because you are active in DR, but if you would prefer not to receive any future mailing, just add your name to this page.

Steven Zhang's Fellowship Slideshow

In this issue:

  • Background: A brief overview of the DR ecosystem.
  • Research: The most recent DR data
  • Survey results: Highlights from Steven Zhang's April 2012 survey
  • Activity analysis: Where DR happened, broken down by the top DR forums
  • DR Noticeboard comparison: How the newest DR forum has progressed between May and August
  • Discussion update: Checking up on the Wikiquette Assistance close debate
  • Proposal: It's time to close the Geopolitical, ethnic, and religious conflicts noticeboard. Agree or disagree?

--The Olive Branch 19:25, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

FBI Ten Most Wanted Fugitives

Hi Rexx,

TRM recently recommended here that FBI Ten Most Wanted Fugitives be run by you in hopes that you might reformat the table to be accessible. Would you be willing to reformat the table in question?

Neelix (talk) 18:46, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi Neelix,
Yes of course, I'll have a go at trying to make the table more accessible, but I'm just back from a WMUK Board meeting and I'm too tired to give it my proper attention tonight. I'll be at the second part of the meeting tomorrow, so it will probably be Monday before I can do any justice to the article for you. Is that ok? --RexxS (talk) 21:12, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
I've made two versions for you to pick from and commented on the submissions page. Cheers, --RexxS (talk) 15:33, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Dive planning opinion request

Hi RexxS, User:Banej has requested a second opinion on Dive planning. Could you take a look at your convenience? Thanks, • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 19:40, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

I've had a look, done some editing, and left a comment on the talk page. --RexxS (talk) 14:20, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the comments and the additional links, I will sort out the clarifications over the next day or two. Much appreciated, • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 20:47, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

David Lynch filmography

Hi Rexx, the aforementioned list is currently at FLC and I've raised a concern about the structure of the tables. This indicates that it should be formatted the way I suggested, and as discography tables were changed to a similar format I personally think filmography should follow a similar path. As I'm not entirely clear about how this will affect users per WP:ACCESS, I thought I best ask you for your view as you certainly know your stuff. Any feedback would be much appreciated, cheers NapHit (talk) 15:26, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

All done now. Thanks for pinging me - any time spent is very much worthwhile when another editor sees the reasoning behind the changes for accessibility. --RexxS (talk) 20:20, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Potential win

Hi RexxS, there's a discussion about WP:ACCESS over at Template talk:Track listing. I think this template is used in tens, if not hundreds of thousands of articles. I was wondering if you had a spare moment to take the chance to contribute there; if they're prepared to update the template then perhaps we have a chance to get it much better rather than just better? The Rambling Man (talk) 16:40, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi TRM, I think I must have looked at this in February as I have copies of the templates in my userspace, and there's my request at Template talk:Track listing/Archive 8#Column scope which added column scope to the headers. I think I gave up on trying to make row headers because it looked odd against the zebra-patterned rows, and I tend to shy away from getting into those sort of aesthetic arguments because the potential for hassle is endless. I'd be happy just to get the small fontsize increased a bit, so I've supported Lil-unique1 there. --RexxS (talk) 20:03, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

“Anyone who attempts to generate random numbers by deterministic means is, of course, living in a state of sin.”

Much pleasure garnered from insult generator! But middle term is a bit wonky; it's quite often repeated several times. A while back I got the same middle term through ten consecutive page purges! (Don't know how long that would actually have gone on — clicking the purge button over and over got old.) NUMBEROFPAGES not working right? darwinbish BITE 19:48, 11 September 2012 (UTC).

It's because the number of pages doesn't change often enough for you. So I've amended it to use the sum of NUMBEROFPAGES and CURRENTTIMESTAMP which means that the offset between the first and second terms won't change very quickly, but it should be often enough that you won't see any pattern. --RexxS (talk) 20:14, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
:-) Rex still in state of sin, though. :-[ darwinbish BITE 20:56, 11 September 2012 (UTC).

Request for fixie dust in ankle-biter space

cc to User:Br'er Rabbit

Trying to create insult template in my sandbox, teach everybody a lesson. Difficult, need lots of coding! Wheelbarrow-load of fixie pebbles, please? (Page looks terrible, contains many commented-out shouts of despair.) darwinbish BITE 15:10, 12 September 2012 (UTC).

Maybe works a bit better now? --RexxS (talk) 17:16, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
I should have looked at history first ;) On User:RexxS/Shakespearean insults, mebbe don't use CURRENTTIMESTAMP (0-59) with a batch of 0-49? It won't display them evenly. How about NUMBEROFUSERS:R? That clocks along pretty fast and sorta-random. Br'er Rabbit (talk) 17:27, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
I tried NUMBEROFUSERS:R when developing. It only changes every few seconds, so impatient Darwinbish gets the same words on consecutive refreshes and would complain. However, ({{NUMBEROFUSERS:R}} + {{CURRENTTIMESTAMP}}) changes every second and moves the 0-59 sequence of CURRENTTIMESTAMP by a pseudo-random offset, thus eliminating the bias over a minute or so. The real problem is that we need three pseudo-independent pseudo-random numbers, but I've incorporated ({{NUMBEROFUSERS:R}} + {{CURRENTTIMESTAMP}}) now, so it should perform rather better. --RexxS (talk) 18:18, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
Improvements work very good, see hidden comments! [Db considers creating a Monty Python taunt generator. "I expose myself to your aunt!" "I fart in your general direction!" ] [Should you really be encouraging her? Bishonen ] darwinbish BITE 18:52, 12 September 2012 (UTC).

I may take that '+' trick for jAckspace use. We haz lots of teh lurid colourz, now. {ec}-city all around. Br'er Rabbit (talk) 20:25, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Use of italics for certification titles

Hi RexxS,

I am looking for a second opinion on the use of italics for diver certification titles, as in Scuba Diving International. The bulleted lists are in a way definitions (incomplete in many cases) for the titles, and it seems appropriate to use italics here. In other certification organisation articles, such as Technical Diving International, PADI, and Technical Diving International they are all plain text.

Also. all the PADI certification titles ar prefixed PADI, which is probably accurate, but not done on the other articles.

Do you know of any policies which cover these items? My feeling is that some form of emphasis for the term in a definition is appropriate, but not for the use of the term in a normal sentence. I have looked at WP:ITALIC, and this seems to fit.

Cheers, • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 10:21, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

I wouldn't agree that any emphasis is required for those terms, so I wouldn't italicise them - but that's just my feeling (although most lists of this form on Wikipedia don't use italics). There's nothing in WP:ITALIC that implies that we should be emphasising the first term in these sort of lists. On the other hand, the template {{dfn}} marks the term as the defining instance of the enclosed term, so it would be appropriate to be used like this:
  • {{dfn|Open Water Scuba Diver Course}} - Entry-level certification to scuba diving
which displays as:
  • Open Water Scuba Diver Course - Entry-level certification to scuba diving
If consensus ever emerged that such terms should display formatting, then it would be included in the template and work site-wide.
However, none of that would apply to the items in the Scuba Diving International #Specialty Courses section, as they are not definitions. I really dislike that list as the emphasis of every term looks completely over-the-top to me. I'd have to say that once the italics are removed from that section (and they really have no justification there), it weakens the case for having them in the other lists, doesn't it?
As for PADI, I guess that the full title would be "PADI Open Water Diver" and so could be justified. Personally, I'd just use "Open Water Diver", of course, since the context makes it clear that it is the PADI course we are discussing, and the repetition of "PADI" seems overly-promotional and unencyclopedic to me. I'm afraid there are no hard-and-fast rules for this sort of thing on Wikipedia; I can only give you my opinions in these cases - and those carry no more weight than anybody else's. --RexxS (talk) 14:08, 15 September 2012 (UTC)
True enough, and if the format in SDI hadn't bothered me I would probably never have token any notice. • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 16:00, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

Greetings, thou goatish rude-growing skainsmate

cc'd to the other impertinent knotty-pated apple-john

I've tried to change my templates, User:Darwinbish/looting, User:Darwinbish/teeth and User:Darwinbish/Stockfish to say [[User:{{subst:REVISIONUSER}}|]] where it says "Darwinbish", to make templates more useful for all. But it won't take!!! It won't even save! Mean ole thing! I got the code from one of the silly "Welcome" templates, but I shortened it, because my templates aren't supposed to extend an invitation to yammer on the person't talkpage like the welcome templates do, with "[{{fullurl:User talk:{{subst:REVISIONUSER}}|action=edit&section=new}} ask me on my talk page]". I just want it to say the name of the poster (linked).

What code should I put? Or can't it be done? The change I'd typed in User:Darwinbish/looting wouldn't save at all. The other two templates only saved the other small changes I made at the same time. darwinbish BITE 16:19, 15 September 2012 (UTC).

I have a wonderful solution to this; unfortunately the margin is too small to hold it. There may be a few ideas at User talk:Darwinbish #Darwinbish/looting. --RexxS (talk) 17:39, 15 September 2012 (UTC)
Rp on my page. RexxS' ideas prolly excellent, but fortunately I got out of doing any of the work. :-) Back to staring at the great Insult Spout template I go! darwinbish BITE 19:40, 15 September 2012 (UTC).

A barnstar for you!

The Brilliant Idea Barnstar
Thought I gave you this earlier - thanks for all the help with List of Grey's Anatomy cast members. TRLIJC19 (talk • contribs) 16:27, 15 September 2012 (UTC)
Also, I have a question. During the FLC, two users wanted brighter colors, so they were changed. Do those colors meet accessibility guidelines? Thanks, TRLIJC19 (talk • contribs) 16:28, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

Fucking turquoise

cc as usual

OK, I'm keeping my sandbox as is, as a monument to the ornate, the baroque, the florid, the gaudy, and making a simpler template at User:Darwinbish/insultspout (without fucking turquoise). Bishonen has already used a proto-version of it at User talk:Ched. That was interesting, because there's a problem that only shows up when it's actually placed on a (longish) usertalk page: clicking the white "here" link reloads the page, i.e. it returns the top of the page. Well, of course it does, I just hadn't thought of it before. Not a slick and fast way of getting multitudinously insulted, then. :-( But I suppose it can't be helped?

Minor thing: right now, there seems to be a little too much air above the header. I just don't know where the code for it is, sorry. [Don't go all mellow, Darwinbish! ]

Another thing, especially for Rex: your insult template currently appears in both the header and the text. Naturally, it returns the same insult in both places. That's awright.. but think how way cool it would be if they could be different! darwinbish BITE 14:58, 16 September 2012 (UTC).

Don't blame me. I never put any turquoise in there in the first place, and you took a dump on my 'brick-red'. Anyway, figured way to do it:

Any sensible fawning unchin-snouted boar-pig would naturally copy-pasta the page and then mix up the PRNG, ya goatish dismal-dreaming bladder.

It doesn't like being indented though (problem is with <dd>...</dd>). --RexxS (talk) 16:23, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
Naw it isn't, thou goatish dismal-dreaming bladder. It's because it had newlines instead of spaces. --T-RexxS (Rawr) 16:29, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
Hehehe, moah insults. :-D (P. S., that mewling and puking brick-red was yours? Yuk yuk.) darwinbish BITE 22:11, 16 September 2012 (UTC).

Varlet, thou liest; thou liest, wicked varlet.

In these cases
We still have judgement here, that we but teach
Bloody instructions, which being taught return
To plague the inventor.

Just had a scan of the Gutenberg Shakespeare – your insult-o-matic has "varlot" for the spelling, which appeareth not. There are 29 "varlets" however.  pablo 10:22, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

The source missed out "harlot", too. "Varlot" is perchance a portmanteau? darwinbish BITE 11:55, 17 September 2012 (UTC).
Perchance? Nay, and most like. pablo 13:07, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
Bah, it's kinder to let sleeping dinosaurs lie. Nevertheless, I dusted off my collections of Furness, and blew cobwebs from my trusty concordance, then set about checking for "varlot". Either Will was a worse speller than I thought or someone had blundered. Old Bartlett believed the Bard made less than two dozen uses of varlet, almost half-a-dozen varlets, a single varletry, and even a varletto (as the host of the Garter Inn addresses Bardolph); but nary a varlot. I concede. Mayhap we might use "varlet" on one generator and "harlot" in the other? Give me your hands, if we be friends, and RexxS shall restore amends. --RexxS (talk) 19:31, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
If it were done when 'tis done, then 'twere well it were done quickly. Fortunately Pablo already did, since I have no spur to prick the the sides of my intent. --RexxS (talk) 17:20, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
Exit, pursued by a Bear. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 17:26, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
Coincidentally, I was just looking another of my favourites: "Exeunt Devils with Faustus". I might make a template to generate random damnations, just to supplement the insults. --RexxS (talk) 17:34, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
Do it; detain no jot, I charge thee.. 'Tis a consummation devoutly to be wished. pablo 20:39, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
It is to be all made of fantasy, All made of passion, and all made of wishes.
  • {{User:RexxS/Damnation}}
  • Damn thee, lewd minx! O, damn thee!
'Tis but thy name that is my enemy; it is nor hand, nor foot, Nor arm, nor face, nor any other part Belonging to a man. O, be some other name! What's in a name?
  • {{User:RexxS/Damnation|name=Pablo}}
  • Damn Pablo, lewd minx! O, damn Pablo!
Now you are heir, therefore enjoy it now. --RexxS (talk) 15:52, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

My thanks and duty are your Majesty's. pablo 08:11, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

It's pronounced "Rex-ess" like "Malcolm-ecks" :D --RexxS (talk) 10:41, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
Meh. No-one gives a Puck. pablo 11:03, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Hey there

I think you should post your comment at WT:MED to Talk:Secondary_source#RfC:_Dubious_statement_in_section_In_science_and_medicine. Best. Biosthmors (talk) 04:30, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, but the concern at Talk:Secondary_source#RfC:_Dubious_statement_in_section_In_science_and_medicine is about a lack of sourcing. I agree, of course, that articles should be sourced - although I really don't think we need an RfC to determine that. My comment was merely aimed at heading off an attempt to change WP:MEDRS (not an article) in the mistaken belief that it required sourcing. Cheers, --RexxS (talk) 06:20, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
Sorry if I didn't make myself clear. And maybe I'm mistaken, but I think you replied to someone notifying WP:MED about the RfC, but if you really want your comment to count, shouldn't it be made at the RfC? (At Talk:Secondary_source#RfC:_Dubious_statement_in_section_In_science_and_medicine?) Best. Biosthmors (talk) 04:22, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
It's ok, you were clear enough; it's probably my reply that was insufficient. The situation is this: At the RfC, Stillwaterising pointed out that a sentence in that article has no sourcing. The sentence is
  • "Unlike in the humanities, scientific and medical peer reviewed sources are not generally considered secondary unless they are a review or a meta-analysis."
He then raised an RfC, noting that a book he found on the subject does not refer to medicine or health, and indicated his intention to mark the sentence as disputed. He doesn't need a RfC to do that (which is one of the reasons nobody has commented there yet).
The problem came when he posted at WP:MED. His post was not just a notification, rather a statement of his opinion that the book he found should be used as a source for our guidelines at WP:MEDRS. That is a fundamental misunderstanding of how we develop guidelines, and it has nothing to do with the RfC. So my comment was apposite for WP:MED, but irrelevant to the RfC - which is why I chose not to post there. Hope that is clearer now. Cheers, --RexxS (talk) 11:34, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for explaining this. And I'm sorry you had to! Best. Biosthmors (talk) 17:03, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

This Month in Education: September 2012



Headlines

To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.

If this message is not on your home wiki's talk page, update your subscription · Distributed via Global message delivery, 22:11, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

accessibility of ship infoboxes

Hi. I think you've notice me editing a large number of ship articles. The infoboxes used leave a lot to be desired. No captions, for example:

and see:

Thank you. I've pointed the debate to HTML Tables with JAWS and MAGic to try to explain why captions are valuable to those using screen readers. Hopefully it will help crystallise the views. --RexxS (talk) 12:09, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Edit window tidying

I've just noticed that the proposed revamp of the edit window affect the cheatsheet link, on my mind for reasons you can guess. I've left a comment[1] and wondered if you agreed. Charles Matthews (talk) 12:53, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

I've added a couple of thoughts. Thanks Charles, --RexxS (talk) 15:51, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
  1. ^ a b Ryan, Maureen (February 21, 2007). "Paging Dr. Montgomery: She's starring in the new 'Grey's Anatomy' spinoff". Chicago Tribune. Tribune Company. Retrieved July 4, 2009.
  2. ^ a b Cite error: The named reference fullRcast was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:RexxS/Archive_18&oldid=1144419897"