Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by John (talk | contribs) at 13:14, 2 April 2013 (→Final warning: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Signature

it would be great if you could change your signature per Misplaced Pages:Signatures#Appearance and color. thank you. Frietjes (talk) 18:50, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

If you are talking about my single blinking purple middot between "Contributions" and "Message", I don't see it as an issue. It is minor, minuscule, and well within the limitations of Misplaced Pages:Signatures#Appearance_and_color. I suggest if it bothers you, that you simply add:
* { text-decoration: none !important; }
to your Special:MyPage/common.css and turn off ALL blinking text for you, not just my simple middot. — T13   ( C • M • Click to learn how to view this signature as intended ) 19:40, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

No. Editors should not need to adapt their system to avoid "look at me" signatures. Please fix your signature. Also, there should not be an external link in a signature, although I don't feel like checking what the guideline says about that at the moment. There are lots of things that should not be done, and guidelines do not attempt to list all of them. Johnuniq (talk) 21:35, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

One blinking pixel with well within reason. If any blinking what-so-ever is offensive to a person, they should shut off all blinking. My coding example above shows how to do it on a wiki.

P.S.: Among statistically noticeable browsers only Firefox supports blinking, and even there it may be disabled globally in about:config.

— Dmitrij D. Czarkoff, http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia_talk:Signatures/Archive_8#Simplifying_signatures

Basically, browser.blink_allowed=FALSE — T13   ( C • M • Click to learn how to view this signature as intended ) 14:12, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Something else made me wonder about the signature guideline, so I checked. There is a specific prohibition against an external link in a signature, see WP:SIG#EL. Misplaced Pages is not a bureaucracy where rules dictate exactly what happens, and there is no scope to claim "it's only a guideline". I see a lot of talk page commentary and do not recall ever seeing an external link in a signature—blinking and external links are just not part of the way things are done here. Johnuniq (talk) 05:36, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

That is fair, and I would be happy to fix the external link. — T13   ( C • M • Click to learn how to view this signature as intended ) 14:12, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

The external link has been removed as you can see in my signature on this post, but I fully intend to leave my one blinking pixel. You may wish to join the discussion I have opened about it on the "Signatures" talk page. — T13   ( C • M • Click to learn how to view this signature as intended ) 14:30, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Posting to user talk pages

Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Misplaced Pages. Your recent talk page comments were not added to the bottom of the page. New discussion page messages and topics should always be added to the bottom. Your message may have been moved by another user. In the future you can use the "New section" link in top right. For more details see talk page guidelines. Thank you.

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.

This is in relation to this edit. --Redrose64 (talk) 16:13, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

I am adamant about signing my posts. I assumed by the way that the page at Misplaced Pages:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents is written requiring that I add {{subst:ANI-notice}} to satisfy the statement You must notify any editor who is the subject of a discussion. that the associated template would sign it for me. Apparently this is not the case, and the instructions to use that template should be re-written to reflect how to properly use the template or the template itself should be modified to properly sign all usage for the inserter.

Due to the above situation, I am at fault for not spending time to properly visit the documentation page of the template and using it properly on your page or any of the others. I apologize for this thoughtlessness of mine to consider inconveniencing myself to have to hunt down the usage of a template that is referred to on a page that is intended to resolve disputes and not create more. — T13   ( C • M • Click to learn how to view this signature as intended ) 16:29, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Fix your signature

I've read the discussions at AN/I and Misplaced Pages talk:Signatures. I see that several people have explained to you that the content of Misplaced Pages:Signatures#Appearance and color, which reads Your signature must not blink, scroll, or otherwise inconvenience or annoy other editors (bolded in original) enjoys a strong and longstanding consensus. I see no evidence of any incipient move to reverse this consensus. You are therefore out of line and you are beginning to become disruptive. If you wish to argue to change this consensus then you may, (though I suggest that you would be wasting your time) but you must do so only after changing your signature to conform with our norms. If I see you continuing to sign with any signature that contains a blinking character or image then I will block you pending a resolution of this. I do apologise if this comes across as heavy-handed, but we really all do have better things to do than fight this battle with you. Here's hoping you will move on from this and do something more productive. Best wishes, --John (talk) 17:26, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Nb Technical 13 has changed the signature and replied . I hope this will be permanent. —Sladen (talk) 18:33, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

March 2013

Please do not add promotional material to Misplaced Pages, as you did to User talk:Talax. While objective prose about beliefs, products or services is acceptable, Misplaced Pages is not intended to be a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion. Thank you. You've left spam messages on a number of pages: stop. Drmies (talk) 17:58, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

When creating new articles...

I have a couple tips for you based upon Not My Turn to Die: Memoirs of a Broken Childhood in Bosnia:

• Do not use a section header for the lead (or only) section.
• Do write at least one comlete sentence, not just a fragment.
• For an article about a book, try to find and include information about reviews of the book. Notability of books must be shown as for any other subject.

If you have any questions, please let me know! LadyofShalott 01:36, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

I'd almost forgotten about that page. I tried to find reviews for it, but everything I found was copyrighted and I opted to not include it on the page. I'm not entirely sure that the image of the book cover I found is fair use, and you may want to review it as I would not to be cause of any action against the wiki. I'm an extremely person at the moment dealing with the separation process with a child involved and losing a loved pet. When I have some more free time, I will likely go back and write a summary or something on the page; I do worry that if I do that it will be reverted as original research and a waste of my time as it seems I currently have a group of admins that intend to harass and attack me at the moment. — T13   ( C • M • Click to learn how to view this signature as intended ) 02:04, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Well, yes, reviews are generally going to be copyrighted. You don't copy them into the article; you choose salient points from them and cite them. I'm sorry about your losses. I suggest you drop the stick on the signature business - that is not going to go the way you want. LadyofShalott 02:18, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Your signature

I see you've already been pestered a bit over your signature, but don't worry! – this is just a niggling minor little thing...

I notice your signature contains <span id="SigShoe">. Since each ID should be used no more than once on a page, technically you should post no more than once on a page using this signature. (Using an ID more than once is invalid HTML, though most browsers seem to handle it fine.)

To use your personal CSS to apply special formatting to your own signature, I suggest you use class= instead of id=. HTML permits a class to be used multiple times on a page. In your CSS, use a dot instead of a hash to refer to the class (i.e. .SigShoe instead of #SigShoe). Though since you've already used the ID in a lot of places, you might want to use both in the CSS (i.e. .SigShoe, #SigShoe), so you retain your personal formatting on older talk page posts. – PartTimeGnome (talk | contribs) 23:11, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

class didn't fit in the character restriction on my preferences page and it says that I shouldn't put my sig in a template and call that so I used id which was the best I could do with creating my own xhtml style attribute which I'm not sure would work... — T13   ( C • M • Click to learn how to view this signature as intended ) 23:32, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Ah, right. So, to replace id with class, we need eliminate three other characters to stay within the character limit. How about changing the <span style="color: #FF00AA;"> part to <span style="color: #F0A;">? The appearance will be the same. – PartTimeGnome (talk | contribs) 23:58, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

I suppose I could do that; although, I was thinking of lightening the color to try and be a more pastel purple color from  (#FF00AA) to  (#FA88AF). Do you think the xhtml name would work? <span sig="Shoe"> and then css of

span { ...snip... }

— T13   ( C • M • Click to learn how to view this signature as intended ) 00:35, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

OH! Maybe I could change my signature to

— ]&nbsp; &nbsp;( ] <span class="BlinkingBull" /> ] )

and my css to

span.BlinkingBull:before { text-decoration: blink; color: #FA88AF; content: "•";}

— T13   ( C • M • Click to learn how to view this signature as intended ) 00:42, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

— ]&nbsp; &nbsp;( ]<span class="BlinkingBull">&nbsp;</span>&nbsp;] )

span.BlinkingBull:after { text-decoration: blink; color: #FA88AF; content: "•";}

Your final version looks fine to me! (Your first suggestion of using <span sig="Shoe"> would not have worked, because MediaWiki strips HTML attributes that are not on an approved list. <span data-sig="Shoe"> would work, but is even longer than using class=!) – PartTimeGnome (talk | contribs) 01:19, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Encylopedia

Why are you still adjusting your signature? For example, this edit changes a signature made nearly a year ago. The edit changed #1 to #2:

1. ] (]) 23:30, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
2. <span class="ShoeSig">— ]   ( ] • ] • ])</span> 23:30, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

The resulting signature (minus the four links) is:

— T13 ( C • M • Click to learn how to view this signature as intended ) 23:30, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

That signature gives no indication of understanding that this is an encylopedia where editors should be discussing how to improve articles, and should not be spending time wondering why someone has Click to learn how to view this signature as intended in their signature. That link goes to a page that is nothing to do with the encyclopedia, via a redirect.

Quite a lot of disruption occurred due to your previous signature, as seen at WT:Signatures#Blinking and Other Signature Customizations.. Any reading of that section shows that people were getting quite exasperated, yet just a couple of hours ago you made this edit to change the WP:SIG guideline to allow transclusions like {{User:Name/sig}} in a signature. Misplaced Pages is an encyclopedia and editors who waste other people's time with unhelpful ephemera are regarded as WP:NOTHERE and are encouraged to spend their time at other websites. Johnuniq (talk) 19:25, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

I've spent quite a bit of time to make my signature conform to all of the rules. The Click to learn how to view this signature as intended in my signature is to allow people to see my signature as I originally wanted it and satisfies User:Kusma's statement on Wikipedia_talk:Signatures#Blinking_and_Other_Signature_Customizations.: "However, I would not mind if you write a custom CSS that makes your signature blink for those who want it (it must be off for anyone who is not logged in, not only for those who take active measures)" and is permitted as it is not disruptive within the limits of WP:SIG#DL.— T13   ( C • M • Click to learn how to view this signature as intended ) 19:52, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Hello there

Hello Technical 13, Eduemoni has given you a shining smiling star! You see, these things promote WikiLove and hopefully this has made your day better. Spread the Shining Smiling Star whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or someone putting up with some stick at this time. Enjoy! Eduemoni 03:43, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Iapprove

Template:Iapprove has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. — Hex (❝?!❞) 13:55, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Don't test things in article space

I know you undid your edit to Loveeeeeee Song, but please don't do that again. You can use your sandbox to test editing in. — Hex (❝?!❞) 14:36, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Testing that in my sandbox wouldn't have worked because it was a caching issue specific to that page (and others that had not had purged caches like it) having to do with being in C:Articles with no/broken ref tags or something like that. If it is something I can test in my SandBox, I usually do. ;) — T13   ( C • M • Click to learn how to view this signature as intended ) 15:10, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

If you have a problem that appears to only exist in article space, ask about it on the technical pump. Never, ever, make test edits in article space. Okay? — Hex (❝?!❞) 15:32, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Oh, so editors aren't allowed to make null edits or dummy edits on Misplaced Pages.. Got it. — T13   ( C • M • Click to learn how to view this signature as intended ) 16:24, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Null edits do not leave any evidence in the article history. dummy edits are discouraged. Werieth (talk) 16:32, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

This is not a dummy edit, and it is certainly not a null edit. — Hex (❝?!❞) 18:45, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

VPT

I added a span tag to make the watchlist link work. Werieth (talk) 14:37, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

MediaWiki Markup Language listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect MediaWiki Markup Language. Since you had some involvement with the MediaWiki Markup Language redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so).

Yes, it's me again. Nothing personal - it's just that having had a look at your recent contributions, there are several things that need addressing. — Hex (❝?!❞) 15:25, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Article Feedback deployment

Hey Technical 13; I'm dropping you this note because you've used the article feedback tool in the last month or so. On Thursday and Friday the tool will be down for a major deployment; it should be up by Saturday, failing anything going wrong, and by Monday if something does :). Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 23:33, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Roman2dec

Template:Roman2dec has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. WOSlinker (talk) 19:16, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:SupportSection

Template:SupportSection has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page.

As I point out at the TfD, you recreated your earlier template under this new name within two minutes of requesting speedy deletion for the first one. With this, following the argument you had earlier about your signature, and this signature-related dispute you had, I am starting to think that you are not here to build a encyclopedia.

This is a warning: if your behavior here becomes disruptive, you will blocked from editing. — Hex (❝?!❞) 19:18, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

I am here to build an encyclopedia, it is just getting harder and harder to do when people keep taking my tools away. It's like saying, "I want you to build me a regular standard wooden house, but you can't use lumber, hammers, nails, screws, or glue." My intentions here ARE of good faith, for the development and growth of the wiki. I don't mind building and working on pages, and I LOVE to manufacture useful tools to make the job easier. The dispute about my signature came to me, and quite frankly I still think it was biased and I was unfairly treated by the administrators that I was attempting to discuss it with but they didn't want to discuss and give fair resolution. So, I have to suffer with inconvenient unicode that fails to load, shadowing of text, userpage links that in no way resemble the user name they go to, etc but was still forced to remove a • that blinked in a color that was 2.28:1 contrast ratio which means it blends in and a good number of people can't hardly see it anyways if their browser knows how to blink in the first place. I digress on the matter. I removed it from my signature, created a page to allow people to modify there display to see what I see, and linked to it in my signature as is allowed by WP:SIG#DL. I've responded to your most recent set of nominations to basically delete everything by me just because I made it. — T13   ( C • M • Click to learn how to view this signature as intended ) 21:34, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Not because you made it. Because you didn't need to make it, and when you did, you made it poorly. — Hex (❝?!❞) 22:04, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Card of Thanks

Thank you for the hint you provided at the village pump. I still don't know why it works one way on Misplaced Pages and differently on my wiki, but I don't really care as your response let me to the right path and from there I was able to stumble my way to the answer. Thank you. RiverStyx23{_submarine} 17:25, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Follow-up

Hey, Technical 13. Please ping me back after you've had an opportunity to look over Template:Infobox NFL player. Thanks. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 01:47, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

File source problem with File:UMA-logo.png

Thank you for uploading File:UMA-logo.png. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Misplaced Pages. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Eeekster (talk) 19:29, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

I've added the source; however, due to the content of the logo, it is not eligible for copyright alone because it is not original enough, and thus the logo is considered to be in the public domain. — User:Technical 13   ( C • M • Click to learn how to view this signature as intended ) 19:45, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Teahouse host

HI! Great suggestion for the Teahouse host profiles, I made the change permanent in the templates. Much better! Than you, :) heather walls (talk) 23:13, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

What did I do now? I'm confused, what did I suggest? LOL — User:Technical 13   ( C • M • Click to learn how to view this signature as intended ) 23:27, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Sure, go ahead and change it (per your edit summary). This is how I originally intended it but I started liking the smaller white box as well. Thanks!! heather walls (talk) 23:36, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

I don't know if I mentioned this (I'm sure I did, I've got it everywhere on my User page and in my lounge/landing description), I love improving templates and writing logic scripting/code. — User:Technical 13   ( C • M • Click to learn how to view this signature as intended ) 23:49, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

For your work with that new editor at the Teahouse

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		For going above and beyond the call of duty in helping an editor rescue their deleted article at the Teahouse, I give you this "Random Acts of Kindness" Barnstar. Jayron32 18:15, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Richard France/sandbox

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, and welcome to Misplaced Pages. This is a notice that the page that you created was tagged as a test page and has been or soon may be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Kumioko (talk) 01:22, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Richard France/sandbox

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, and welcome to Misplaced Pages. This is a notice that the page that you created was tagged as a test page and has been or soon may be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. smileguy91 02:48, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Chess PGN Viewer: build from scratch vs. adapt kipod's thing

I'm totally going to regret asking this, but is there a reason why you want to build a chess viewer thing from scratch rather than adapting/fixing kipod's one? You're obviously a very skilled programmer and perfectly capable of doing things on your own. I just wonder whether that's the best approach here. Mattj2 (talk) 07:31, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

No reason in particular. I just can't see the current one very well with the chosen color scheme and being that I'm not "REALLY""REALLY" into chess, it is hard for me to follow who's doing what... — User:Technical 13   ( C • M • Click to learn how to view this signature as intended ) 12:35, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Talkback: you've got messages!

User talk:Launchballer#Your Signature

I started the conversation on your page, I'm moving your talk there and will continue to discuss it there as need be. — User:Technical 13   ( C • M • Click to learn how to view this signature as intended ) 16:00, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Regarding template userboxbreak

Please see the problems in my userpage most probably due to the edits you made to the template - Userboxbreak. Please correct it immediately. It has destroyed not only my user page, but also that of several others. - Jayadevp13 15:24, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Technical 13, whatever you think you're fixing is not actually fixing things, and is breaking everyone else's use of the template. If you edit that template again, I am going to have to block you for disruption. Anomie⚔ 15:32, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

No, it is broken without my change... See User:Technical_13/Userboxes/OS/Examples and User:Technical_13/Userboxes/Browser/Examples. — User:Technical 13   ( C • M • Click to learn how to view this signature as intended ) 15:44, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Requesting mediation on the subject of User:Launchballer's signature.

Requesting mediation on the subject of User:Launchballer's signature. I see you've had discussions with this user before, and since the user informed me that he had previous issues and my issue was never brought up then, I have decided to research this. I've so far found you have had issues there before, and would like you to help mediate this to make sure the user understands there is no "grandfathering" as it were of signatures. You may find the current discussion here. Thank you. — User:Technical 13   ( C • M • Click to learn how to view this signature as intended ) 16:08, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

I don't wish to get involved regard disputes with other users. Please refer to WP:RFC or WP:AN. Stifle (talk) 19:23, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

A few things...

If you don't want to read this, you don't have to; I won't bug you again unless you want me to. :)

I just wanted to drop a note about your last post to the ANI thread (since it's been closed, we shouldn't post there more). Of course admins are supposed to assume good faith and be civil. But, admins are human; we get frustrated like everyone else from time to time and sometimes let things slip. It was in that spirit that Anomie made his first post to you, which as I said was too...gruff, I suppose is the closest word I can come up with. It honestly wasn't all that bad.

But for the rest of his post, you have to understand where he's coming from, and that based on what he saw, the "troll" conclusion was not unreasonable. Yes, assuming good faith is part of our core ethos, but "assume good faith" is not a suicide pact; if there's compelling evidence that someone is a troll, we are not required to tap-dance around the fact that we think he's a troll; it's not uncivil or a personal attack to simply call it like we see it. It's not often a good or wise idea to do so, since we can always still be wrong, but it happens. And Anomie wasn't totally unreasonable to think so from his perspective, and nor were the other people who posted in that thread; in their point of view, your contributions (particularly the blanking of the redirect and its edit summary) really did look like those of a troll, even if you didn't mean them that way.

As far as WP:BITE goes, that's not a suicide pact either, and it doesn't extend indefinitely. You've been around Misplaced Pages for coming up on two years now (longer than I have, in fact!), so it's hard to argue that this is a case of biting a newbie. You see, the whole point of WP:BITE is that we shouldn't punish or reprimand people who are breaking rules that they don't know. But you've been around long enough to know something of them, at least. More importantly, though: the editing of a high-use template presupposes familiarity with Misplaced Pages and its software. If you're a newbie, you shouldn't be editing templates like that anyway. If you had just done it once, and left it be when Anomie reverted you, that would've been one thing. But when you were alerted to the problems your edit caused and still insisted on pushing it through, that's where the problems happen, and you can't in justice claim biting of a newbie for a complex action on an obscure page for which you had been previously warned.

If you need to take a break from Misplaced Pages, that's fine; I'd encourage you to do that (though it's completely up to you). Sometimes we get all wound up in what we're doing, and we lose ourselves in the heat of the beat and the light. A break is great for fixing that. When you come back, maybe try to see if you can put yourself in Anomie's shoes, and try to honestly figure out how you would've responded if you were them. Maybe that'll give you insight into why your ANI thread was received the way it was. Consider why we'd like someone who has themselves admitted that they're not experts with coding to get their edits vetted before they're made. Keep in mind that it's not a statement about you, your abilities, or your potential; only your current knowledge. It's not permanent, and neither is your lack of expertise; both can be changed in time. Give it some thought, and come back if and when you're ready, if you like. Writ Keeper (t + c) 20:05, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

I came here to say roughly the same thing. I noticed a few off your edits today, some off which game me the impression you are lashing out to things you may see as inconsistent. From that, I'm getting the impression you are upset with how things went today. If you are, it might be better to stop editing for the day, and come back again tomorrow. If I'm completely off the mark, feel free to ignore this comment (or remove it altogether if that makes you feel better - as long as it hasn't been replied to, or has been restored by another editor). Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 20:18, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

• I don't have time to read it this moment, but promise to do so when I can. I've posted a new comment at the bottom of User_talk:Anomie#Template:Userboxbreak_is_broken_without_my_modification. That I'm hoping will encourage a civil discussion. Feel free to read it and leave me comments here or there... I'll be following both in hopes to reduce negative feelings on both the main participants feelings in this matter. — User:Technical 13   ( C • M • View signature as intended) 20:22, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

• Okay, I've had some time to read it. I was extremely upset, for him to say "rv breaking change. Test things in a sandbox before screwing around with live templates used on many pages." THEN me to waste an entire week of my time, to not find what he was talking about because it did not come out that the documentation for {{Usbkbottom}} was wrong and poorly written (because it was the doc for a page that it shouldn't have been redirected to in the first place). After five days of research and experimentation with "Show Preview" in my sandbox, "09:45, April 1, 2013‎ ShoeMaker (talk | contribs)‎ . . (243 bytes) (+8)‎ . . (Undid revision 547144933 by Anomie (talk) Putting fix back. Template is broken without it. Now it works.)" because based on my testing and research, I was in the right. Almost two hours later "11:30, April 1, 2013‎ Anomie (talk | contribs)‎ . . (235 bytes) (-8)‎ . . (Undid revision 548144962 by Technical 13 (talk) - No, your edit broke it.)" to which I immediately responded with a comment on his talk page "11:44, April 1, 2013‎ ShoeMaker (talk | contribs)‎ . . (51,707 bytes) (+489)‎ . . (→‎Template:Userboxbreak is broken without my modification.: new section)" to avoid an edit war because even after all of my testing, I still assumed good faith on his part. In my post, "No, it is broken without my change... See User:Technical_13/Userboxes/OS/Examples and User:Technical_13/Userboxes/Browser/Examples." I explained I thought it was broken and then offered him examples of it being broken. Then for him to be that rude and short with me was very upsetting. — User:Technical 13   ( C • M • View signature as intended) 21:37, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
  • I wanted to save real quick, had to run and get the baby... As far as time as an editor here. I've only been an active editor on this wiki for less than two months (about six weeks to be more specific) consistently. From my first day editing on April 24, 2011 until I started editing regularly in March of this year, I had an average of just over six edits per month. I would hardly say that I am a regular here. — User:Technical 13   ( C • M • View signature as intended) 21:45, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
    • Okay, but here's the question: why didn't you ask Anomie why he reverted you? If you look through and can't find what's wrong with your code, the next step shouldn't be, "Well, I guess that other guy was mistaken"; it should be, "Well, I better ask that other guy what he saw that I didn't." Really, it's better to just ask right away before even looking through your code, since it'll help you narrow your search. I know that "screwing around" is a harsh phrase, but I know that I get pissed when people mess around in my code without actually testing their changes, and that must've been what it looked like to Anomie. If you had swallowed your pride and asked Anomie why they reverted you, I can pretty much guarantee the entire tone of the conversation would've been different. Writ Keeper (t + c) 21:54, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
      • Took me awhile to find it while dealing with my 18 month old simultaneously... Ever since I complained about his unicode rendering ⚔ as 9426 (template doesn't perfectly resemble what I see as is noted on the talk page for the template), all communications and contact with him has been negative, and I don't need more negative in my life. I figured if he had information he wanted me to have, he would have offered it and not made me guess or ask. I didn't expect him to ask or guess, I sent him my links and evidence that my fix for the template was truly a fix and his fix was breaking it. He immaturely insists that he doesn't remember me complaining and requesting him change his signature and it has nothing to do with that. It was barely a month ago and I find that hard to believe. — User:Technical 13   ( C • M • View signature as intended) 23:04, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

• • There are so many articles that could benefit from improvement, the time and thought might be better spent in article space than here. —Sladen (talk) 23:17, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Well, collaborative editing sometimes means that you have to deal with people you'd rather not. You don't get the luxury of ignoring people you don't want to talk to when it comes to editing high-use templates. If it really, really bothered you, then you could've asked someone else to be a go-between; it's silly, but so is not wanting to ask them in the first place. As for your complaint about their sig; how do you know they ever even saw it, much less took enough note of it to remember about it a month later? The last time they edited the page you linked was in November 2012, and they never participated in the ANI thread either! I don't know why you would assume they're immaturely holding a grudge over something that we have no reason to think they ever even read. Writ Keeper (t + c) 00:11, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Actually, now that I look at it, it doesn't look like you've ever interacted with Anomie on Misplaced Pages before you ran into each other over this template. When you talk about "all communications and contact with him negative", are you mistaking Anomie for someone else? Writ Keeper (t + c) 00:27, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
    • That discusion about my signature was spread across a few diff discussions and in one of them he replied and I remember it as being "pound sand you friggin moron I'm not changing my unicod character even if it is an annoyance to you to have to figure out what it is suppose to be" although those weren't the exact words, that's what I remember was the tone. AnywayS, I would have to look it up and I'm in bed for the night as I have to take my 18 month old to a surgeon tomorrow to find out about getting a cyst removed from her forhead. My email keeps dinging and waking me up, I've now shut the ding off. Good night. — User:Technical 13   ( C • M • View signature as intended) 00:45, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
      • I have looked into this and I can confidently say that that is 100% untrue. Writ Keeper (t + c) 00:56, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

At #Encylopedia above I suggested that WP:NOTHERE may apply, and this latest disruption makes me feel that some more formal discussion of Technical 13's future may be warranted. I am particularly irritated because I have wanted to pester Anomie with some technical questions, but have purposefully not done so because I realize that (a) Anomie is very busy and has more useful things to do than answer my questions; and (b) I have not yet done the research to allow me to ask a decent question. Now I see Anomie's talk lit up with misguided accusations. Many editors confuse the community's open nature and high pain tolerance as a sign that they can continue without regard for others indefinitely, so disruption continues. However, Technical 13 needs to learn how to get along with people, very soon. BTW, the discussion at User talk:Launchballer#Your Signature is surreal. Johnuniq (talk) 01:35, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Final warning

I saw the closed AN/I thread you started. Coming right after this and in the light of this and this, I am here to warn you that if I see you involved in any capacity with signature-related shenanigans I will block you indefinitely. We are here to write an encyclopedia, not bicker over sigs. This covers resisting reasonable requests to regularise your own sig, complaining about others' sigs, and anything like that. I very much hope you can find more productive areas in which to work; if you need suggestions, I can definitely help you. In the much-unwished-for event that I had to block you I would take the block to AN/I for review. Please, please, let's not go there. --John (talk) 13:14, 2 April 2013 (UTC)