User talk:SoftlySaid

From Wikisource
Jump to: navigation, search

Original welcome message moved to User:SoftlySaid/InitialWelcomeMessageWithLinks

Protection[edit]

The template does not appear to be locked, let me know if you still are unable to improve it. Cygnis insignis (talk) 18:14, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

I've restarted my firefox, and I still get that error message when I try editing the template. Please note that I'm not (nor wish to be) an administrator. And my userid is brand-spanking new. -- SoftlySaid (talk) 21:05, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
A new feature I think, I now realise what the problem was. Does the template now show what you requested? Cygnis insignis (talk) 21:26, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for your fast responses! If you mean, "Can I edit it yet?", sadly, "No." And, I don't think I'm supposed to be able to: the same page includes code that needs to be frozen. billinghurst has created a new & different template that can prevent this issue in the future, but I haven't figured out how to get it to help me now. (I'll put more up on his talk page, once I figure out what I need to say.)(Although I must confess that just plain giving up is starting to look very attractive right about now.)  :(
  • I unlocked the pages protecting the template for an hour, you should be able to make the edit. Try not to break it :-) Cygnis insignis (talk) 21:56, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
Thanks very much for doing that! But... Billinghurst has already gone into the page, and split the documentation into a new (presumably unprotected) documentation (sub)page. I had inferred from his response that that was what he thought the long-term fix should be for the issue. Which solves half of my problem. Now all I have to do, is figure out what the subpage naming convention is(and hope that it isn't protected). It isn't at http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Template:Hyphenated_word_end/doc , and I suck at reading template code. Near as I can tell, there just some magic somewhere which knows where to go. I also suck at mind-reading. Then I can add updating Template:Documentation to my list of things to do, to let people know what the naming convention for the default is.
I wasn't helping much, but I added the same {{Documentation}} to the "end" template. You might like to try merging the two instructions, we only need one. Cygnis insignis (talk) 22:47, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
Thanks very much!! I'll cross off adding the directive to the ...end template. And it turned out I just needed to clear my cache to see the /doc page. Once I'm reasonably happy with the start doc'n, I'll see about adding a redirect into the ...end docn'. -- SoftlySaid (talk) 23:00, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
  • Cygnis, Thanks very much for doing the redirect!! (You should be able to uncross your fingers now.) I've merged the two together & hopefully made it a bit easier to understand. Thanks very much for all your help and encouragement! -- SoftlySaid (talk) 00:53, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Documentation change reverted for template documentation.[edit]

Hello SoftlySaid. I've removed your explanation on Template:Documentation/doc for finding the documentation subpage, since the template page has a prominent link to the subpage immediately under the "Documentation" header (example). Also, the documentation page is not necessarily at */doc since it can be specified. —Pathoschild 23:38:45, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

I put that in, because the template defaults to that page, and without the no-redirect, I was unable to see the page for quite some time. There should be some way for people to find the page directly. Can you suggest a better wording? -- SoftlySaid (talk) 23:48, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
You can specify the page to transclude like {{documentation|Foo}}, to transclude Foo instead of */doc. Why are you creating redirects? —Pathoschild 03:46:47, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Why indeed, am I doing anything with redirects?

  • All I *wanted* to do, was a bit of proofreading to while the time away, while I get over my flu.
  • But the page I was reading, needed markup.
  • So I went looking for the right templates, and found them.
  • But they didn't have concrete code examples, nor cut'n'pasteable samples. (Especially irritating if you're just using a wireless mouse, clicking letters one-by-one from the onscreen keyboard, because the computer keyboard doesn't reach your bed.)
  • So I decided to try to help by adding samples & examples to the documentation.
  • I got some done, but two of the templates (a pair) were locked. (Locked documentation???)
  • So I found out how they were locked, and asked Billinghurst (who locked them in the first place) for help.
  • He was kind enough to put up the generic documentation template and (although it wasn't visible to me at immediately) modify the markup templates to split the code from the documentation, and transclude the documentation back in.
  • I tried to edit the documentation directly, by just adding /doc to the template URL.
  • But I got an error indicating the page didn't exist.
  • I couldn't find anything to show that the default location *really* was /doc for this wiki.
  • There was a point in time, when using the link from the modified template worked, but the direct link didn't: The only difference was the &redirect=no parm from the template's link. (They both work fine now: either clearing my cache, or enough time passing for something to propagate, has fixed this.)
  • I don't know why the redirect parm made a difference, but to soothe the headache caused by banging my head into the wall, I decided to update the documentation template to reflect what I'd needed to do.
  • Which you reverted out.
  • I totally understand your concern that the documentation doesn't have to be at the default location, and I've tried to reflect that with my latest wording about explicit locations. If you can think of a better wording, please use it. But something somewhere, should tell people what the default evaluates to. (ie. /doc).
  • As for the added redirect, each of the templates in the pair had cloned (and slowly diverging) documentation. Cygnis insignis was kind enough to help me by redirecting the second one to point to the first, so that the pair now share the same single transcluded document. (The right thing to do.)

Hopefully this explains enough of the situation to you. -- SoftlySaid (talk) 12:24, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry you're frustrated. If you're having difficulty editing something, you can ask on Wikisource:Scriptorium and someone will help you promptly, avoiding the frustration you've experienced. If you use IRC, you can talk with other editors in #wikisource who can guide you through anything you're having difficulty with.
Looking through the edit history for Template:Hyphenated word start, I cannot find a revision where the template's link to the documentation didn't work. Did it occur on a different page? I've shorted your addition to the documentation; it still mentions the default location and how to get to it, but not how to access it through the URL since that should never be necessary.
(I'm watching this page, so you don't have to add {{talkback}} to my talk page.) —Pathoschild 06:20:12, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
I'm sorry you're frustrated. If you're having difficulty editing something, you can ask on Wikisource:Scriptorium and someone will help you promptly, avoiding the frustration you've experienced.
I'm sorry I dumped all my frustration on you. I'm not a believer in posting a question looking for help, until after I've read everything I can find. There's a truly amazingly long list of nincompoopy things I got stuck on (would you believe page status?) that I'm totally glad I didn't ask about. It's always frustrating trying to learn something you know absolutely nothing about. I prefer to try to channel my frustration into upgrading documentation to help the next person out, rather than disturbing people with questions I should have been able to figure out on my own. But I think I'm getting close to a point where I will take you up on your suggestion, & will post a bunch of metaquestions I'm still struggling with. Eventually I hope to get to a point where I actually know enough to feel like I can contribute on the proofreading end of things. (You may yet regret your encouragement re: scriptorium :) )
If you use IRC, you can talk with other editors in #wikisource who can guide you through anything you're having difficulty with.
Sorry, I'm not on IRC, nor wish to be.
Looking through the edit history for Template:Hyphenated word start, I cannot find a revision where the template's link to the documentation didn't work. Did it occur on a different page?
The break wasn't in the documentation, but in a main namespace page. Cygnis was kind enough to figure out that a different tag had broken my haplessly chosen example, and fixed it. Thanks, Cygnis!! He's also updated the history in hws discussion, (apparently before you posted this), so I don't know why it didn't show up for you.
I've shorted your addition to the documentation; it still mentions the default location and how to get to it, but not how to access it through the URL since that should never be necessary.
Thanks for rewording the documentation template documentation, instead of just reverting it out! 3/4 of the world's population learns best with concrete examples (although geeks like us are disproportionately (but not entirely) drawn from the remaining 1/4 more comfortable with abstractions); what would be a good wording for a concrete example (as opposed to the abstract example of Title/doc)?  :) I did check: Template:Title/doc doesn't exist. :)
(I'm watching this page, so you don't have to add {{talkback}} to my talk page.) —Pathoschild 06:20:12, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for letting me know you're watching it: I totally didn't want to assume anything like that. (Interspersed) -- SoftlySaid (talk) 16:35, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
Template:Documentation/doc is a concrete example, fittingly enough. —Pathoschild 21:41:38, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Edit affecting template[edit]

Your edit here made a change with a wide impact, please don't do that again. Improvements to the documentation are welcome, but changes to a one of set is not the way to go. The documentation can be created anywhere and moved to the appropriate space, you have seen how this can be done and you should review that before making changes. Creating an account and making a series of unwelcome edits to templates is considered impolite, please contribute with more caution. Cygnis insignis (talk) 21:19, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
Oops, sorry!! I had no clue that changes to the doc part the set of font template examples could break anything! What should I have tested? (I had assumed that if is was being included in something else, the change would get picked up there too, but not be a problem). I've changed a few other templates too: I'll back them out if you haven't found them/backed them out yet. (Maybe there should be a comment in the template source, if just changing the doc can be a problem. The wiki I run doesn't use templates, so this is all actually new to me.)
The rest do not seem affected. My crude understanding of templates is the everything outside the tags <noinclude></noinclude> is 'live', triple check the consequences of changing anything outside that or you will be wasting the community's time. Create the documentation and ask someone to attach it, or clarify the help files, this is one of the solutions you have been shown. We are well aware of the problems and welcome contributions to solutions. Perhaps proof-reading would be more relaxing if you feeling the effects of the flu, this is what the community generally (and quietly) works on. Cygnis insignis (talk) 22:17, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
Once we have the buglet fixed, we can get to better documentation. We have not been the best at our documentation, and it is great to see someone with the patience and enthusiasm to manage it. When I get a chance, I will have a look at what was the issue with the changes and give you some feedback. At the moment there are some bigger priorities that are attracting my attention. billinghurst (talk) 04:34, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
Quick look says that you didn't break the templates, though by making a change to popular templates it aggravated the buglet and had cosmetic consequences. You did nothing wrong, it just had an impact, hence my request below that I added earlier. Things are okay, and proofreading is probably the go for all of us, and even I have hands off the templates. billinghurst (talk) 04:41, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Pause to template modifications[edit]

Hi Softly. For the moment can we please put a halt on template modifications. Due to a bug in the Proofread extension, changes in templates that are widely used is affecting the proofread status of pages. Until the code update takes place (whenever that may be) it is probably better that we don't make changes. If you want to note a proposed change, especially in the more widely used pages, then make a note on the talk page, and maybe add the talk page to a maintenance category (not the template page! for obvious reason). We can then get back to the pages. Thx. billinghurst (talk) 00:05, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi Billinghurst! Thanks ever so much for explaining this to me: I was trying to figure out just how on earth my change could have had any impact at all, & without knowing that, whether it was safe for me to make any more changes to anything at all. I'm totally happy to wait for the bug fix before going anywhere near anymore templates. Do you think they should be locked to avoid anyone else goofing like this (or would locking them be a change?), or should a news item get posted, or post something at scriptorium or just leave it as a trap for the next newbie, :) or...? -- SoftlySaid (talk) 16:34, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
(Are you watching this page too, or would you prefer a talkback?)-- SoftlySaid (talk) 16:34, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
I have been pondering both of those thoughts for a day, and still equivocating. I was partly waiting on an indication of when the next code update may might be. I will probably do a bit of both of announcement and target some critical control points when I get the time.
Watching your talk page, though talkbacks are okay too. So if it is urgent or a waving flag, I am happy for a talkback, if it can wait, then no necessity. Isn't fun the differences people have. -- billinghurst (talk) 21:05, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
We should be right to go again as we have had the code update. Can I suggest that we hasten slowly and see if we break anything before we get onto a massive update. Thanks. billinghurst (talk) 11:56, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Feedback[edit]

You have new messages
Hello, SoftlySaid. You have new messages at Ineuw's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.