Open main menu


Small tag is not allowed to modify normal-sized infobox textEdit

Re our reverts at WWNR: the <small>...</small> tag is not allowed to modify normal-sized infobox text. See MOS:FONTSIZE. Take your objections to WT:MOSTEXT. The most recent RFC on the question is here. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:06, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

@Jonesey95: My objections are being addressed to you, since you are wrong. Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Text_formatting#Font_size shows nothing about the <small>...</small> tag. - NeutralhomerTalk • 20:23 on February 25, 2019 (UTC)
Avoid using smaller font sizes in elements that already use a smaller font size, such as infoboxes, navboxes and reference sections. Jonesey95 (talk) 20:56, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
@Jonesey95:Yes, it says "avoid", it doesn't say "they are not allowed". That is two VERY different statements there. Avoid is "only use when absolutely necessary", not allowed is "don't use under any circumstance". See the difference. In this case, this case, it was necessary to differentiate between the callsign meaning and the reason behind that callsign meaning. - NeutralhomerTalk • 21:05 on February 25, 2019 (UTC)
I figured that maybe you would be able to read the subsequent sentence, which is clear and proscriptive: In no case should the resulting font size drop below 85% of the page's default font size. The small tags that you desire are contrary to that statement. Please remove them. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:17, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
The font size of the infobox is about a 10, with the small tags they are a 9. So, 85%, I think not. That would be 8 1/2 or lower. It still doesn't say "not allowed" which was your original argument. You are changing your argument to fit however you can keep the small tags off the page. You're wrong, you know it, stop now. - NeutralhomerTalk • 22:08 on February 25, 2019 (UTC)
I'm afraid that you are incorrect, which is why the text I quoted exists on the MOS page, and why the RFC outcome is phrased the way it is. I have no interest in going back and forth with you removing disallowed tags from a single page, but you should not be surprised when small tags continue to be removed from infoboxes by other editors. – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:37, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
No, Neutralhomer, you're wrong. ―Mandruss  06:21, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
@Mandruss: Would you like to expand on that or is this just a "drive by 'you're wrong'"? - NeutralhomerTalk • 19:20 on February 27, 2019 (UTC)
@Mandruss: Cute! So, you both change MOS:SMALLFONT so it reads how you want it to, so you can revert without consequence. Yeah, don't think so. I'll give you a chance to change it back, before I take you both to ANI. - NeutralhomerTalk • 19:25 on February 27, 2019 (UTC)
The SMALLFONT changes were mere clarification and there was nothing improper about that. The previous language was clear enough for all but you, as far as I know. I don't know how much you know about accessibility, but you're effectively saying that it shouldn't matter whether the visually impaired can easily read everything in media article infoboxes. That argument is never going to fly because Wikipedia takes accessibility seriously, but feel free to waste your time at ANI. I credit you for at least having the sense not to edit-war this, and I appreciate that. ―Mandruss  19:42, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
@Mandruss: I have Aspergers, so don't lecture me on "accessibility". A 10 point to 9 point font size difference is not going to make any difference for someone who is visually impaired. A 10 point font, which is want is used in infoboxes, will be hard for those with visual challenges to see. A 9 point font size, which is what a small tagged text is, will be just as hard for someone with visual challenges to see. So, accessibility is not really the question here unless we make all infoboxes at least 24 point. - NeutralhomerTalk • 19:47 on February 27, 2019 (UTC)
The guideline is what it is, it has been in place for years, and it has very wide support. I have removed smalls from hundreds of infoboxes in the past year or two. If you have an issue with the guideline, ANI is hardly the place to raise it. Go ahead and dispute it at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Text formatting; if you are successful in getting the guideline changed, I will go directly to that article and revert myself. Until then, please observe the guideline as written. I think that's fair. ―Mandruss  19:55, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

───────────────────────── The previous MOS text about the font size never dropping below 85% of the page's default size was clear to me, but since you were apparently having trouble interpreting it (or possibly having trouble using your web browser's Inspector feature to see the rendered font size, which is understandable), I thought it might not be clear enough for other editors as well. I chose to make it say the same thing, but in a more explicit and prescriptive way that more editors would be able to understand. Thank you for bringing this lack of clarity to light.

In your ANI report, please also note that I clarified the text at Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Accessibility#Font size as well, since at the root of the problem with nested small font formatting is the issue of accessibility. Text that is too small contravenes the WMF's policy on non-discrimination against people with disabilities.

As for your estimates of font sizes above, here is how infoboxes and small tags interact in the English Wikipedia. Normal text in infoboxes is rendered at 88% of the browser's default size. Small tags reduce text to 85% of what it otherwise would be, so a small tag used on normal infobox text ends up at 1.0*0.88*0.85 = 0.748. That's too small, per our accessibility guideline. You are welcome to include these calculations in your ANI report. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:00, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

FWIW: For another editor (an admin who has been editing heavily since 2009) who feels these changes are both correct and worth their time, see Special:Contributions/Muboshgu. So there are at least three experienced editors who don't know what we're doing, according to you. ―Mandruss  20:24, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

WXTZ 87.9 NorwichEdit

I nominated the above for deletion, & I noticed you had commented on an earlier proposal for deletion, so I wanted to make you aware of this.Stereorock (talk) 11:07, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Stereorock: No worries. :) Thanks for letting me know. - NeutralhomerTalk • 19:04 on March 15, 2019 (UTC)

Today's Wikipedian 10 years ago, again!Edit

Ten years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:51, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

Precious anniversaryEdit

Seven years!

Great performance ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:55, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Radio expert: I translated a radio resenter article, Carmen Thomas, and her weekly show was Hallo Ü-Wagen, Ü-Wagen short for Übertragungswagen [de], the car broadcasters use to move with equipment - can't believe there's no English article. What is it in English, and is there also a similar colloquial abbreviation? - See my talk for trust pictured ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:00, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Hey Gerda Arendt, first off, sorry for the delay in saying Thank You! for the Barnstar x10 Years and the Precious x7 Years. Very much appreciated! :) Second, "Übertragungswagen" translates (according to Google Translate) to "Radio Van" and "Hallo" is, easy enough "Hello". So, "Ü-Wagen" is a shortened version of "Radio Van", so "Hallo Ü-Wagen" is "Hello Radio Van". :) German Wikipedia does translate "Übertragungswagen" as "broadcasting trucks", but I feel comfortable with "radio van". - NeutralhomerTalk • 11:47 on April 8, 2019 (UTC)
Thank you, that helps, - and no need to feel sorry ;) - Is it right to say "a radio van", but Hello Radio Van, as kind of "person"? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:58, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
Again, I'm going by Google Translate, which isn't always the best. I did ask a German speaker here on English Wikipedia (Llez) for some translation help. So, we'll wait and see what they have to say. - NeutralhomerTalk • 12:22 on April 8, 2019 (UTC)
Hallo, according to my dictionary, an "Ü-Wagen" is an "outside broadcasting van" (or also possible "broadcasting van"). I hope this will help you, otherwise contact me again. --Llez (talk) 13:09, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
Thank you Llez. Much appreciated! :) Gerda Arendt, there ya go. So much for Google Translate. :D - NeutralhomerTalk • 13:12 on April 8, 2019 (UTC)
Deeple also gives "broadcasting van" or "broadcast van". I think the "outside" is competely redundant, or would you drive inside with a van. I think "radio van" is perfect for my purpose, because the series is radio, not tv, and the shortness matches "Ü-Wagen" best. It also can't be too wrong as we have Packet Radio Van. Thank you, both. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:20, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
Gerda Arendt: You could mention both in the article if you wish. That way all bases are covered. :) - NeutralhomerTalk • 13:29 on April 8, 2019 (UTC)
Thanks, but I only have to translate the show title, and don't think radio van would be misunderstood. What would Broadcasting van redirect to? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:31, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
We used to have a page for broadcast live trucks, but we don't anymore. So, radio van will have to do. :) - NeutralhomerTalk • 13:53 on April 8, 2019 (UTC)

Next question: that type of show, when the radio van goes to a place, and local people are invited to discuss one announced topic with experts - is there a name in English? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:37, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

I would go with "travelling talk radio". I would link it as Travelling Talk radio. For a more in-depth lede sentence, I would go with "Hello Radio Van is a travelling talk radio show, featuring local residents of the ever-changing weekly(?) location, discussing a wide range of topics with experts." - NeutralhomerTalk • 13:53 on April 8, 2019 (UTC)
Very good! - Could you support my friend's RfA? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:10, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
The show is on the Main page now, DYK, with Carmen Thomas? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:16, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

Notice of noticeboard discussionEdit

  There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "Concerns Regarding User:Bbb23 and Possible Misuse of Admin/CU Abilities". Thank you. Notifying you as I started a subthread and you may assume it is closed. Nil Einne (talk) 10:27, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

A beer for you!Edit

  I'm sorry about your pet, losing one is like losing our family. I'm worried about my older dog who probably has about a 3-4 year window if we are lucky :(. Don't give up, take a break and then continue on Wikipedia needs good editors and you've shown dedication for many years. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 20:01, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
Hell in a Bucket: Thanks. She passed on Thursday morning. She beat the vet, actually. She went out on her terms. I'm still in shock. I keep looking for her, made chicken and bowties for dinner last night and pulled a couple pieces of chicken out for her before I realized what I was doing. I'm a mess. I hope your dog makes it way longer than those 4 years. Sometimes they surprise us and keep on going. We have one cat (the only one we have left now), she's 19, she's just a 5 pound fluff of fur. We thought she'd be the first to go cause she was always so thin and she has feline dementia. Nope, she keeps on going. So, animals will surprise you. :) - NeutralhomerTalk • 14:30 on April 15, 2019 (UTC)


  I'm so sorry
Losing a pet is devastating. I'm so sorry about your cat! Schazjmd (talk) 20:40, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
I was very sorry to hear about your cat; one of life's sorrows is going through generations of pets. FWIW, we've always gone straight to the animal shelter; it's not a replacement, but something constructive to do with your grief. Take care and all the best, Miniapolis 22:41, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Schazjmd and Miniapolis: Thanks to you both. I don't know if I'm ready for another. All her stuff is exactly where it was on Thursday when she passed away. I can't bear to move any of it. Maybe one day, but for now, I just can't. But I'll keep the idea open. :) - NeutralhomerTalk • 14:30 on April 15, 2019 (UTC)

I felt the same way when my dog died, Neutralhomer, it's a wrenching pain at first. Give yourself all the time you need to grieve. If there are times when you feel like you really need to express your pain but don't want to impose it on friends or family, try the boards at Rainbow Bridge -- it really can help. Schazjmd (talk) 15:09, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
I understand; we all grieve in our own way. Take care and all the best, Miniapolis 15:39, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
I'm so sorry about your cat. They always break our hearts. We lost the best cat EVER a year ago next month, and I still miss her daily. --valereee (talk) 11:51, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
Valereee I am very sorry for your loss as well. Though, we never really lose them, they just go on a journey and we see them again later. Until then, they are always with us when we need them. :) - NeutralhomerTalk • 23:56 on April 21, 2019 (UTC)

File:WMAL-AMandFM 2014.pngEdit

bsd. Hi. I saw you reverted my edit to the above mentioned file. Separate rationales are only needed for non-free images. Since I changed the license to PD-text (which basically means it's ineligible for copyright) all it needs is a file summary, not a rationale, and can therefore be grouped into a single template. --Ben Stone 02:24, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

@Benstown: OK, I don't think some will see it that way. There are a few that are real sticklers for FURs on everything, but I, personally, have no issues with it. I'll revert my revert. - NeutralhomerTalk • 03:02 on April 17, 2019 (UTC)
Thank you! --Ben Stone 03:06, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
You're Welcome. :) - NeutralhomerTalk • 03:08 on April 17, 2019 (UTC)

Meant to ask...Edit

I don't remember why it was that I tripped across it, but I noticed that you'd deleted your To-Do List and Pages Created sub-pages a little while back. Surprised me a bit, and of course I'm not around nearly as often as I used to be, so I just wanted to check in and see how you'd been doing. Mlaffs (talk) 03:17, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Mlaffs: Yeah, I just decided to take a much less visible and much needed step back after getting attacked by an anon user and when I took that user to ANI, everyone came to that user's defense. The anon vandalize numerous pages left and right, edit-warred, was in violation of 3RR, and then when he got his way, he stopped editing. Then, as I was deleting my pages I got blocked for 24 hours for "clumsiness". I was ultimately unblocked, but that just added insult to injury. This and the thread below.
Then, just last week, I tried to take care of a sockpuppeteer and was stonewalled by an admin (actually a long-standing stonewalling), I tried to deal with it in person and later at AN. Got attacked even more. The whole thing blew up but went away because my cat passed away on April 11. I think they left me alone after that. Just the whole thing with the anon and getting attacked every 4 seconds, I don't do much but some gnome-ish edits here and there. It isn't fun anymore. - NeutralhomerTalk • 04:57 on April 21, 2019 (UTC)
Man, I'm sorry to hear that. Your cat especially, but all the drama too. Nobody needs that. You're absolutely right — this should be fun. Mlaffs (talk) 12:55, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
Thanks! I'm still lost without her. She'd sit on my lap (making my legs go numb) and I'd edit whatever or watch TV on my computer. She was my constant companion after my orange cat passed in 2015. I'm taking it really hard. :( As for Wikipedia, I can do gnome-ish edits and be OK with it. I don't really mind. - NeutralhomerTalk • 23:59 on April 21, 2019 (UTC)


Nice work. Thanks for the disambiguation page. I see the necessity! Zaslav (talk) 22:27, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

Zaslav Thanks, glad I could help. :) - NeutralhomerTalk • 22:42 on April 30, 2019 (UTC)
Return to the user page of "Neutralhomer".