User talk:Omegatron/Archive/October, 2006

Proposed UniModal page

(Sorry if you're reading this for the second time, I thought you might have missed it - I moved this from above - 22:22, 2 May 2006 (UTC)) Hey, I've created a page at UniModal/proposed in which I tried addressing all the NPOV and verifiability issues that JzG put up. I was wondering if you could endorse the page so we could put it up in the correct spot again. Fresheneesz 02:39, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I saw it. I don't have time for this right now, but when I did look at it the other day, it seemed quite biased. — Omegatron 01:25, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Why do we have so few engineers as Wikipedians?

I am trying to understand why there are so few Wikipedians who are graduate engineers. Once I get a grasp on that, perhaps I may be able to formulate some ideas on how to attract more experienced engineers to become Wikipedians. It would be very helpful if you would respond to these a few questions:

• Are you a university graduate engineer?
• Please indicate in which of these engineering disciplines you obtained your degree:
  1. Aeronautical or aerospace engineering
  2. Bioengineer or biological engineering
  3. Chemical engineering
  4. Civil engineering
  5. Electrical engineering
  6. Environmental engineering
  7. Mechanical engineering
  8. Petroleum engineering
  9. Other
• In what year did you obtain your degree?
• What attracted you to participate in Wikipedia?

Please respond on my User talk:mbeychok page. Or you may respond to me via Wikipedia's email which I have enabled on my User:mbeychok page.

If you would rather not respond at all, that's fine also. Regards, - mbeychok 04:28, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Engineering analog for load rotational resistance

Sorry to disturb you. User:Lightcurrent and myself are having trouble with finding an analog definition for load rotational resistance and internal rotational resistance As a person with expertise in engineering if you are able to help clarify the matter it would be most useful. Regards, Sholto Maud 04:30, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Wikilinks in headings

I noticed you linked the word hydraulic in a heading on Analogical models. I thought I read somewhere that this was not recommended. Could you expand on the rule please? 8-)--Light current 03:50, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Yes, it's certainly not recommended. Feel free to change it. — Omegatron 14:18, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

THank you 8-)--Light current 14:19, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Images as Links

I see you have a fair amount of know how when it comes to images... Is there a way to use an image as a link in the current wiki system? What I mean is, have the image inline yet have it link to another article that is not the image page. Thanks for any help. →ΣcoPhreek_Δ 02:05, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

There's no simple way. What are you trying to accomplish? There are two ways I know of to do it, but one is kludgy/buggy and the other is a major change to the site, so neither should be done unless really needed. — Omegatron 14:18, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm running an office wiki and we were wanting to use Images from the main page to go to other sections. →ΣcoPhreek_Δ 21:26, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Aha! Well, if it's on your own wiki...  :-) There is the {{click}} template, which is relatively simple to use, but only works sometimes, for some browsers, and is a bad hack. Or you could use CSS with a background image, like we do for audio links. You could configure the CSS method to have the text underneath the image, but it needs some text to work in IE. I'm not sure if whitespace could be used, though... The only problem with the CSS method is that it requires a separate line for each image in your Mediawiki:Common.css, and is slightly harder to modify, because Mediawiki:Common.css is protected. I can help you with the CSS method if you'd like. — Omegatron 22:03, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

OK, could a seperate .css file be created and loaded as needed to handle the images? Instead of having to mess with the Common.css? Also we're not needing text below the image, just the image. I looked at the audi link and that is what we need, just finding it a little difficult to figure out the usage and what gets called. →ΣcoPhreek_Δ 02:35, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, you could create a separate css file. Here's the audiolink class:

/* Class for links with loudspeaker icon next to them */

.audiolink a{
    background: url("http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f7/Loudspeaker.png") center left no-repeat !important;
    padding-left: 16px !important;
    padding-right: 0 !important;
}

You'd need one of these for each image. What you're doing is creating a text link, and putting an image in the text link's background, and stretching the boundary of the text link to fit the image, too. You'd probably want to use padding-top instead, and put the image above the text. (You should use text for accessibility reasons, and also simply because I don't know of a way to do this without it.) — Omegatron 02:49, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Floating left nav and fixed tabs

I'm trying to insert some site navigation headers and footers into my wiki (i'm adding the wiki to a site with an existing format centered around phpBB). I need to make the top tabs affix to the content - as a default. Where would I add this in my standard monobook code? My site is - http://www.widescreengamingforum.com/wiki/

Thanks Ibrin 20:44, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Summaries

When editing an article on Wikipedia there is a small field labeled "Edit summary" under the main edit-box. It looks like this:

The text written here will appear on the Recent changes page, in the page revision history, on the diff page, and in the watchlists of users who are watching that article. See m:Help:Edit summary for full information on this feature.

Filling in the edit summary field greatly helps your fellow contributors in understanding what you changed, so please always fill in the edit summary field, especially for big edits or when you are making subtle but important changes, like changing dates or numbers. Thank you.

Ardenn 06:14, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

This talk page is becoming very long. Please consider archiving. Ardenn 06:14, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Current limiting

Hello Omegatron,

I have added some stuff to the article current limiting. Please have a look at it to see if its ok. Thanks!! Rohitbd 08:35, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Where are the Wikitables listed and defined?

Hi, Omegatron:

I have spent over an hour trying to find where the various Wikitables are listed along with an explanation on how to use them ... written in plain English that a non-computer science person can understand? Can you help me? Thanks in advance. - mbeychok 17:32, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Do you mean the wikitable CSS class? Changing this:

1	2
3	4

into this?

1	2
3	4

— Omegatron 17:38, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

That is exactly what I mean ... and including style or other parameters that follow class="wikitable", if any. Please remember, in plain English for those of us who are not computer science people. I don't understand why something that is so widely used in Wikipedia is something for which an explanation is so difficult to find. - mbeychok 18:31, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Well, it hasn't been widely used for that long.  :-) It was originally a style template ({{prettytable}}, which still works) and was converted to a CSS class in the Great Anti-Template Purge, which isn't necessarily a bad thing. But then it was mandated that it be substituted for related reasons, and now the documentation doesn't really exist other than Template talk:prettytable, which isn't very obvious, is it? You are absolutely right that it belongs somewhere. Which places did you think of to look for it? (Because those places are probably where it should be.) I added a mention to m:Help:Table#Style_classes a while ago, which has filtered over to Help:Table#Style_classes, but it's apparently not very visible, and not very detailed, either. — Omegatron 18:44, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

m:Help:Table#Style_classes is one of the [places I looked, but it doesn't explain how to use or to vary the wikiclass table. For example, if I want to have only the top row in the darker grey (rather than the top row and left-hand column), how do I do it? One other key point, the m:Help:Table doesn't allow us to look at the edit page for each section (as most Wikipedia article do), so we have to look at the edit page of the whole thing and scroll down until we find #Style_classes section in order to see how the Wikitable class is created. We shouldn't have to do that. The display page of the Style_classes section should explain how to use it and how to vary it. Also, sending us non-computer science people to MediaWiki:Common.css as is done in Meta:Help:Table is no help ... we don't understand the language spoken on that planet.

As to where I would suggest having a how-to explanation, I think both Wikipedia:How to use tables and Meta:Help:Table. Redundancy is needed and useful at times. Is such a how-to something you could do ... or perhaps something you could persuade others to do? - mbeychok 19:56, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

I don't have any problem editing sections for Meta:Help:Table. Can you describe your symptoms more specifically?

Oh, I see. Help:Table has section editing disabled, with a magic word __NOEDITSECTION__ in one of the help templates. I can't even figure out which one. I left a note on m:Help_talk:MediaWiki_help_policy#NOEDITSECTION. I will add the source code for the examples inline.

Note that the en.wikipedia.org version is just a mirror of the meta version, and the NOEDITSECTION thing was added so that people don't mistakenly edit it. Edits to that page would just be overwritten when the page is automatically updated from the original.

I will gladly expand on the examples. Sometimes we just need to know what people are looking for...

You say you want the top row in darker gray. What you probably really want is to use table header cells instead of regular table cells:

This:

{| class="wikitable"
| Here's || some
|-
| regular || cells
|}

Makes this:

Here's	some
regular	cells

But this:

{| class="wikitable"
! Centered !! headers
|-
| Regular || cells make this wide enough to see centering
|-
| See || what I mean
|}

Makes this:

Centered	headers
Regular	cells make this wide enough to see centering
See	what I mean?

The "pipe syntax" is just a shortcut for HTML table syntax, and I don't like it. You have to understand the HTML before you can use the pipes, so it's almost useless in my mind. I made a proposal for an easy-to-use table editor, but I don't know how to code it, so it's just sitting there stagnating. Lots of people like the idea, but without someone building it themselves, nothing ever gets done around here. — Omegatron 21:34, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, Omegatron. It took me a few minutes to figure out what you were really saying is that cells starting with ! instead of | will be "table header" cells having the darker grey background and centered, bold text ... cells in rows starting with | will be "regular" cells. This re-wording is what I meant by a plain English explanation.

Please excuse me for adding another row to your example, but I think it helps explain the example. Anyhow, thanks again and I will await someone writing up a really understandable explanation in both Wikipedia:How to use tables and Meta:Help:Table. - mbeychok 23:23, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm doing a huge update to m:Help:Table. It's been a mess for too long. I haven't gotten to the styles yet. — Omegatron 03:32, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

I tried. See m:Help:Table#Style classes. It still needs some work, but maybe it's clearer now. I mostly got sidetracked reformatting the entire page. I made a tutorial at the top to try to lubricate the passage of pipe syntax into human brains a little. Let me know what's still unclear and I'll add it tomorrow. Time for me to sleep. — Omegatron 04:57, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Omegatron, I think you did a tremendous job! It is very much better now. I only have 2 more suggestions; (1) Do the same thing in Wikipedia:How to use tables or at least include a very prominent link sending readers to m:Help:Table#Style classes, and (2) the Gallery section lost me ... are those names meant to be captions for a gallery of images or what?? Once again, thanks for a great job. - mbeychok 05:31, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

1. I don't even know what Wikipedia:How to use tables is for. I've added a merge tag.
2. The gallery is lost on me, too. I suggested in my edits that it be deleted, but I'll put a note on the talk, too. — Omegatron 14:13, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Hi

Re this: I can see Help:Table, but it seems to appear red in your template. Weird! (btw I agree, and I think most users will miss the content of the proposed article to be merged with...)  NikoSilver  ^{(T) @ (C)} 14:30, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I know. I put a note on Template talk:merge. I'll subst the template so it works.

I also think m:Help:Table should be condensed; it's pretty large and has a lot of internal redundancy. I did a massive reformat last night, but it still needs work. — Omegatron 14:40, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Wow! Btw, if you have time, is there a way we can vertically align (top) the Ancient Macedon/Roman Province maps in Macedonia (terminology) intro table?  NikoSilver  ^{(T) @ (C)} 15:30, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

It's because of the floated image markup. Can't you just put both floated images in the same cell? If their total width is smaller than the cell, they will line up next to each other. — Omegatron 17:37, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll try that.  NikoSilver  ^{(T) @ (C)} 22:53, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

I just tried it, actually. They seem to have fixed that. There are ways to make it line up, but they'd require lots of code... — Omegatron 22:58, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the help, we'll need to add one more map, anyway. Btw I'm "they". :-))  NikoSilver  ^{(T) @ (C)} 23:38, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Hehe. What I meant to say is "images one right after the other used to float next to each other, but they seem to have fixed that so they end up one below the other, which makes articles better but makes this idea not work." — Omegatron 23:48, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

User:Jeffrey.Rodriguez

I don't suspect he's a sockpuppet of yours at all. :-) However, I do find it funny that so far his only contribution is to support a merge. --Ardenn 23:45, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

I agree completely. Especially as no one else has commented on the page. Seems an awful lot like a sock to me...  :-) — Omegatron 23:49, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

If it's not your sock or my sock (why would I vote against myself?,) then who's sock is it? Bob's? Think he'd actually take the time out of his extremely busy schedule to wiki, except maybe when he's on air? (Did you listen to the program with Wikipedia on it?) Ardenn 23:51, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Important: This talk page is becoming very long. Please consider archiving.

Ardenn 23:52, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

I've never heard his show. — Omegatron 00:42, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

You poor, poor deprived person! Ardenn 01:27, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Life Online with Bob Parsons

There's gonna be more strange domain names on tonight's show! Whee! Ardenn 23:55, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Re: math markup

Why did you do this? Do you do that regularly? — Omegatron 23:08, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

I don't do this regularly, but yes I do prefer using plain HTML where possible instead of math markup - atleast for in-line notations (single letter with sub/superscript, for example), the image generated is usually larger than the accompanying text and that disturbs the line-spacing. That said, if it is unacceptable then I shall revert it back. Rohitbd 08:16, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Well,

1. The image is only larger than the surrounding text on some screens. On mine it works perfectly with the text, for instance, so I turn it to "always render as PNG".
2. The examples you changed don't render as images on the default setup, anyway. With the default user preferences, they are rendered as HTML. You might want to try that if you don't like the inline images.
3. There have been lots of fights about TeX vs wiki markup for simple inline formulas, and no resolution or standardization, but I believe the consensus is to not change it except to make an entire page consistent, as alluded to in Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(mathematics)#Very_simple_formulas: Either form is acceptable, but do not change one form to the other in other people's writing. They are likely to get annoyed since this seems to be a highly emotional issue. Changing to make an entire article consistent is acceptable.
4. In the future we will have mathML, thanks to m:blahtex, and I imagine the scales will tip towards the "always use math tags" crowd (of which I am a member). — Omegatron 14:33, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

I have reverted back the math markup in the differential amplifier article. Rohitbd 16:30, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Missed one

Template:Video still uses the old style. Can you fix it? Raul654 17:18, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

I don't understand. I changed that one at the same time as the audio and multi-video templates. — Omegatron 19:36, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

No, you changed template:multi-video start. There are 4 media templates:

• single audio (template:listen)
• multiple audio (template:multi-listen start + template:multi-listen item + template:multi-listen end)
• single video (Template:Video)
• and multiple video (template:multi-video start + template:multi-video item + template:multi-video end)

You got 3 out of 4. Raul654 05:08, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Ummm... I got all four. On March 13th, 18th, and 19th: Listen Multi-listen Video Multi-video Maybe you're talking about something different? — Omegatron 14:58, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Oh, I see, you did fix them. The problem I noticed was that the video and multi-video templates should use the same icon, which they do not. Can you rectify this? Raul654 19:42, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Oh, ok. I believe they've always used different icons from each other. I presume this is to set them apart; the single video clip gets a single frame of film icon, and the multi-video gets a whole reel of film. They can easily be changed to both use the film reel, though, if that's what people want. — Omegatron 19:53, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Yep, pretty much. Raul654 19:56, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Poke. Any progress? Raul654 23:29, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I misunderstood what you meant. I can change it easily enough. Just didn't know if it had consensus. I will change it. — Omegatron 01:12, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Done. — Omegatron 01:18, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Table: namespace and editor

I just stubmled upon this. I believe it is a very worthy cause: has there been any progress on it recently?--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 17:13, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Nope. None at all.  :-/ You know of anything we can do? Someone who can code? ... — Omegatron 18:13, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Wait, I don't get it.

Whats wrong with wikitables like the one my comment is in? Fresheneesz 22:55, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

I don't know. What's wrong with them? — Omegatron 21:02, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Contezero from italian wiki

Hi Omegatron, I am Contezero sorry for my terrible english. I am a member of italian wiki and i have a problem what is the correct symbol for kibibit, mebibit, gibibit ecc?? In the english article the simbol are Kibit, Mibit, Gibit bat in internet i have found other simbol Kib, Mib, Gib, Tib. What are the correct symbol? Kib or Kibit? Mibit or Mib? Can you help me to solve this problem?--87.0.216.77 04:39, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

The IEC, who standardized the prefixes, uses MiB and Mibit, but I don't know if they actually standardized that.[1] NIST uses KiB, MiB, GiB, MB, GB, and kbit, Mbit, Kibit, Mibit, Gibit.[2] The IEEE standardized on the same prefixes as the IEC, but standardized on the abbreviation "b" for bit, if I remember correctly. — Omegatron 21:14, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Autocorrelation

Two years ago when you changed the definitions of autocorrelation, you said "i hope i'm not removing information by converting this probability terminology to signal processing language." Well, I think you did. That article, and others, have been in a horribly inconsistent state for about that long. See if you grok my fixes. Dicklyon 06:13, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Good. I'm glad someone is finally doing this. — Omegatron 15:58, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Hysteresis diagram

Nice diagram but actually 'O' I think the curve starting at the origin in the LH diag should not be parallel to the major loop curves but should bend over to the right earlier and meet the other two curves at their intersection Do you agree? --Light current 19:36, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

It's not meant to be exact. There are more on Commons now. — Omegatron 19:58, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

• 
  Hysteresis loop: magnetization (M) as function of magnetic field strength (H)
• 
• 
• 

Yeah I think the one at the extreme right is more accurate but yours (extreme left) is prettier. Would you consider amending yours please? 8-)--Light current 21:20, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

I based it on a stylized graph like this, but there are a lot of other shapes for real magnets. I'm not sure which curve to use. — Omegatron 23:01, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Well just having had a quick look at some of the samples you referred to, I think this one is the best so far. [3] Also, this ones ok. [4] Unfortunately, the one we have ATM is not actually correct (sorry!) 8-(--Light current 23:16, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Those two are completely different. I think it varies quite a bit between different types of magnets. — Omegatron 23:40, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes but both give the general idea of the hysteresis effect and show the initial magnetisation curve from the origin correctly. BTW its not a magnet as such -- just a bit of iron being magnetised. I think the first one is prefereable. 8-| --Light current 23:47, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

aerophone

There is no universal way in which sound is sreated in aerophones. Sometimes a current of air blown over a hole causes a cavity to resonate. Sometimes the lips of the player vibrate in a circular mouthpiece (as is the case with brass instuments). Sometimes a moistened reed vibates between the mouth and the instument, as is often the case with woodwinds.

63.231.227.39 02:56, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Multi-listen start et al.

It looks like this change will break templates like {{Multi-listen start}} and {{Multi-video start}} that you worked on. Can you think of a workaround? I thought of transcluding interface messages, as terrible an idea as that sounds, but I'm not sure if it'd work. [5] – Minh Nguyễn (talk, contribs) 06:49, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

The change seems misguided. They should be providing a way to leave open HTML tags properly, instead of just saying "nope you can't do that". I don't think there is a solution. Going back to the old table markup won't even work. — Omegatron 13:50, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Electromagnetic suspension

Nice edits! :O) Whitepaw 16:12, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

:-) — Omegatron 17:56, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Your .js shifts added content in diffs

Hey, I was experimenting with your massive .js page, but I noticed something odd and disconcerting. When I look at a diff, if a user adds content (stuff generally highlighted in green), then it's on the left, in the "original" version, and not on the right, in the new modified version. (I'm fairly sure this is happening because of your JS, since it appears even when I strip out all other js and css from my per-user files.) It's kind of annoying. If it's a bug, I'd greatly appreciate you fixing it, since otherwise I rather like your compilation of js, and if it is deliberate, could you tell me which section is responsible so I can strip it out and copy the remainder into my own js? --maru (talk) contribs 04:11, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Are you saying that the left and right sides of the diff screen are reverse? That's really weird. 04:36, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, isn't it? For instance, the diff for your reply here, your reply is on the left. But it's only reversed for adding content. Removing or modifying look perfectly normal. --maru (talk) contribs 04:42, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

I don't see that at all. I got the diff code from Wikipedia:WikiProject User scripts/Scripts/Fix diff width — Omegatron 05:44, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Mm. Well, it was definitely that script, anyway. I excised that (and a few Omegatron-specific portions) and copied it into my js, so the problem is temporarily solved. Well, now I know who to complain to. --maru (talk) contribs 16:11, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

nbsp

"Why'd you remove the non-breaking space"

It looks ugly? It makes the wiki-side hard to read. Does the nbsp matter? I mean, normal spaces in normal sentences also produce a space, and make the english language much easier to read. Don't you think? But maybe theres a good reason for the nbsp? Fresheneesz 22:41, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Ahh I see. Thats not a very obvious thing to do. Anyways, I replaced the NBSPs. Fresheneesz 23:22, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Drinibot

I don't think it's nice to block a bot for doing what it was approved to do. Furthermore, what's your point about blocking way after it stopped? It wasn't substing anymore, why did you block it? If it wasn't doing anything anymore, don't you think it's better form to discuss rather than go straight blocking? It's not like it was an emergency, the bot was off.-- Drini 17:33, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Who approved it? {{Clear}} doesn't seem to be on the WP:SUBST "should" list, which should be reason enough for any bot to leave it alone, especially in the user namespace. Blocking bots whose actions are unclear is the recommended course of action, currently active or not, until the owner responded. It is a necessary safety measure and has nothing to do with courtesy. Femto 18:22, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

I've responded on your talk page. I don't think you know enough about bot policy to be running one. — Omegatron 18:55, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Sysops should block bots, without hesitation, if they are unapproved, doing something the operator didn't say they would do, messing up articles or editing too rapidly.

It was approved on Requests for bot approval at 18:08, 20 April 2006: [6]

At that time, the bot's talk indeed state specifically that iwas going to do this kind of stuff: 1. substing templates, 2. Creating capitalization redirects [7]

So I dispute the bot's actions were unclear. I also dispute the block is doing something other than it was stated it was going to do. Moreover,I think that the substing it performed was a styllistical change, and it did not mess up articles.-- Drini 19:02, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

The operator should be at, or logged into, the machine the bot is running on to terminate it if necessary during the debugging phase, or the bot is liable to be blocked without notice.:

As far as I know, your first comment was:

[8]:

# (cur) (last)  02:25, 13 June 2006 Omegatron (→clear - «+"I blocked it for a second."»)
# (cur) (last) 02:21, 13 June 2006 Omegatron (clear)

The bot's last edit was

01:47, 13 June 2006 (hist) (diff) m Portal:Germany/Anniversaries/March (Robot: Substituting template: clear)  

And my last edit yesterday was

01:46, 13 June 2006 (hist) (diff) User talk:Essjay (→Image:Admin mop.PNG)

So I did was around while bot was running and logged into the machine running it, so I could have terminated if it was necessary. So to your comment: You didn't respond to my comments very quickly. Were you around while the bot was running? You say I blocked it after it was finished, so maybe that's all that happened. But I saw a lot of substitutions on my watchlist and blocked it as soon as possible. I answer:

I didn't because I wasn't around, but also the bot wasn't running anymore. So yes I was around when the bot was running. -- Drini 19:02, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Anyway, I don't have much problem with the bot being blocked. It's just that you were a bit trigger happy and blocked when it was unneeded without giving me a change to asnwer you back with feedback. 19:02, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Can you undo a strange edit to a page you had previously edited correctly?

I was just at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Beat.png and couldn't make heads or tails of the diagram as described. When I looked at the history, however, I realized you had corrected the image once before, but, now, for some reason, someone else has come in and reverted the image to one that does not match the description.

Can "we" (i.e., you) either re-correct the image to match the description, or make the description match the image that keeps getting placed on the page . . . and then LOCK the entry so it can't be messed up again?

151.118.3.108 18:30, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

There's no way to lock it. Ask Stubblyhead why he changed it. — Omegatron 18:54, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Monobook

Hi,

I used the code in your unitformatter.js and modified it. It has been very successful. So thanks for that.

Feel free to take a look and use any of the code in there. See User:Bobblewik/monobook.js. Regards bobblewik 16:10, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

I've got a list of things I haven't implemented yet on User_talk:Omegatron/monobook.js

I guess we should really be doing these with nbsp's in between the numbers and units. I wish there were a less ugly solution... — Omegatron 20:59, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Biefeld–Brown effect

I just wanted to let you know that I think your custom sptag at Biefeld–Brown effect is a little harsh and really not in the spirit of the semi-protection policy. I would like to ask you to tone down the rhetoric of the tag with an eye in mind for WP:AGF, WP:CIVIL, and WP:BITE. I don't doubt that you acted in good faith by adding the tag and it certainly appears that the vandalism problem on this article has been pretty severe. However, I still feel that such a harshly worded tag is inappropriate and possibly damaging to the encyclopedia as a whole. savidan^{(talk) (e@)} 17:46, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

It was approved on the Village Pump and is hardly "harshly worded". This is because of a user who repeatedly adds the exact same text to the article from many different IPs and ignores (or doesn't see) attempts at contacting him/her. I've stretched and strained and assumed good faith, and made this message in the very remote chance that this user simply doesn't realize we're trying to contact them and get them to discuss their changes. After sprotection is removed, if the user persists, we'll just revert them as vandalism until they get tired of it (which will probably never happen; I wouldn't be surprised if it was a bot). If you have a better solution, I'd love to see it. — Omegatron 18:05, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Fully agree with Ωtron. --Pjacobi 18:37, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Image deletion: SigmaDelta.png

Hi Omegatron, I would like to inform you that I moved to Commons all the images from Delta-sigma_modulation, including Image:SigmaDelta.png as commons:Image:DeltaSigma1.png. But I upload my version on my PC, and I noticed you slightly modify it when I request to remove it (with {{NowCommons}} template); which is the correct procedure? Shall I upload your version to Commons, with you as author and your copyright, and then put the {{NowCommons}} template in the page? Thank you and best regards Katanzag 12:25, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

I don't know. It's a little difficult with GFDL because you have to keep a history of the modifications, but since this picture is PD, it doesn't matter. I'd upload both versions to Commons as different revisions, use the later one, and delete the en version. — Omegatron 14:13, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Moving images to the Commons — Omegatron 07:11, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Omegatron, sorry for this stupid question, but how can I upload a new version of an image in commons without passing through ee.pl, like in en.wikipedia? I was not able to make it fully working with gimp in windows, and I've got some troubles with linux on my pc (I installed the new Fedora5 and something is not fully working), while at work I don't have perl-gtk2 on my workstation in order to configure it. BTW, the correct name il commons:Image:DeltaSigma1.png. Thank you and best regards Katanzag 14:27, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Hi Omegatron, today the link appears (??) on commons and I upload the new version. Sorry for the annoyance. Best regards --- Katanzag 12:03, 19 June 2006 (UTC)