User talk:Johnuniq

I'll reply to messages here, unless requested otherwise.

Archived stuff of personal interest

• Comments re free speech
• Jagged misuse of sources progress
• Jagged misuse of sources progress
• Re Talk:Galling

Shakespeare Authorship Question

I have no intention of engaging in any edit war and I apologise if you feel my previous action was in some way discourteous.

I have commented on the main talk page for the Shakespeare Authorship Question.

I should be obliged by your early response.

Wightknightuk (talk) 13:40, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Issues about an article should be discussed at its talk page: Talk:Shakespeare authorship question (I do not need a notification). The topic is a well known WP:FRINGE issue that is under Arbcom discretionary sanctions, see WP:ARBSAQ. Johnuniq (talk) 01:32, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your advice

Thanks for your advice.

However, I will like to inquire if there exist a page section on Wikipedia where such configurations can be added?

I wish I could add such configurations to help readers have a practical understanding of what they're studying. I just wanted to make the wiki a one-stop-place all the details necessary in understanding certain networking topics.

Well, that's what I think. In case it doesn't fit or it should not exist, I will take it off. But since encyclopedic contents should be verifiable and practical, i thought of doing something like that.

On networking topics like, OSPF, EIGRP, RIP and other routing protocols do not have their basic configuration settings explained. I don't intend to make the explanations a 100% tutorial teaching page. However, some basics that will give the reader a fair idea of what is being discussed.

Thanks for your interest. Let me know of anything else.

Best regards --Nkansahrexford (talk) 07:53, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

It's difficult, sorry. I have responded at your talk. Johnuniq (talk) 08:27, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Archiving

I am fucking useless when it comes to figuring out Wikipedia's instructions about technical matters. Would you be so kind as to add another page to the archive of Talk:The Tempest? Much appreciated. Tom Reedy (talk) 14:50, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Done, glad to be useful. Johnuniq (talk) 01:23, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the welcome

Thanks a lot for your kind welcome. I'm a long-time consumer of the wiki, and can't help putting my oar in occasionally. Hope it goes to helping the real, excellent work users like yourself do. Red banksy (talk) 10:59, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. I haven't been much editing lately but monitor a few articles and noticeboards. If you ever want my comments on an issue, please ask. Johnuniq (talk) 11:27, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

WP:DENY

Hardly applies to an old school guy like Willy. And he is called a troll at least one of those sources (forget which, lulz). Anyhoo please don't reply to me here, take it to article talk page if ya wanna revert.

cheers,

Egg Centric 00:21, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

This refers to Troll (Internet) where my edit removed a claim added to the article that a certain vandal was a "troll"—the claim was not supported by the sources. This note is for my interest, and of course I will join a discussion at the article talk page if warranted. Johnuniq (talk) 00:29, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

My apologies..

You're absolutely correct, they don't mention anything about trolling. I really thought they did - but I can't deny reality! Egg Centric 00:30, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

No problem, thanks for your message. Johnuniq (talk) 01:07, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

Just a quick note to thank you for all your help and support over the last few of weeks with the various Transit of Venus articles. It was a long, hard slog but the traffic stats for the articles made it all seem worth while. Richerman (talk) 20:01, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

You did all the work! I'm sorry I didn't get involved earlier—congratulations to you for the great result. Johnuniq (talk) 23:56, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Template:Retired

Hi, you should probably remind User:Nishidani that if he's returned to Wikipedia as an active editor he needs to remove the Template:Retired from his Talk page that indicates he's no longer active. I'd do so myself but don't have the time to get involved in the semantic and philosophical discussions that inevitably will ensue, so I apologize in advance for asking you to take care of this instead of doing so myself.—Biosketch (talk) 09:09, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

LOL! I do not know, but I suspect the "retired" tag is an expression of disagreement with some of the more absurd features of Wikipedia (such as endless POV warring from people who are quite clever with rules but less so with accurate content). Perhaps it indicates his heart is not really in his editing? I agree it should be removed or replaced with {{semi-retired}}, but I'm not sure it's worth pursuing the matter. I'll think about it, and would willingly raise it with Nishidani if I thought, on balance, that it would be desirable. Johnuniq (talk) 10:54, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Just noticed this. Uh, alzheimers strikes again. It should be either 'retarded' or 'semi-retarded'. Will do. Biosketch. It is true, Johnuniq is my mentor in the best Odyssean sense, but really I don't take it badly if chaps just tell me directly to pull my finger out on my page. Nishidani (talk) 16:23, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Maestro! Help

Is there any way one can put apicals into letter, so that they turn up that way on page. There is an Egyptian verb 'ș3s where that '3'(slightly italicized) is actually a phonetic symbol. I can't see any relevant help for this on the Egyptian Language page, since mojibake has bedevilled things. Sorry for the bother. Nishidani (talk) 16:23, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

I was cheeky enough to do some copy editing at Donald B. Redford, but apicals are way above my reach. However, if you can provide a little info on where this verb would be used (and, without going to any trouble, is there a website where the word can be seen?), I would be happy to look at it because I can't say no when encountering interesting things. One place to ask (I would do this if I had a bit more info, and I couldn't see it in your contribs) would be at WP:VPT. Another would be to track down someone who has done this sort of thing before. If the word were central to some topic, rendering it correctly would be warranted, but if it's just a mention, the result might not be worthwhile if the solution involves using a specific font or feature that most readers will not have installed (that is, they would get a form of your mojibake—thanks for another interesting word!). Johnuniq (talk) 01:20, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

what's that line from Intimidations of Immorality by Woidswoif? I seem to blunder through edits trailing crowds of gory errors.

Dunno about websites, but you'll get a fair crack at the notion if you throw a shufti at the Aleph article, this section. It's the double 'aleph' written with the vulture sign, you see, represented by a slightly tilted 3 at Transliteration of Ancient Egyptian twice at this section and further below. here, first symbol.

The article I thought of using it was at Shasu, where there is a request for its pronunciation, which is conjectured to be shaswe). The article I see does use the '3' symbol' but it should be an apical, as would be the final 'e' of shaswe. I suppose this looks like a bit of fananny-whacken, and perhaps it's not worth straining the boffin bean, since as appears today, while looking round, wiki generally ignores it or just uses the '3'. It's a pity though that apicals can't be used in here. One loses a lot of neat distinctions. Yor 'umble soivent.Nishidani (talk) 12:57, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

I am thinking about the issue, but meanwhile am dumping some thoughts. Re Shasu, you may like to review these two edits from May 2011: diff and diff. The removed text did look like it should be removed, but since it involves Redford I thought I would mention it (I was looking at diffs wondering who put the "3" in "š3sw" in the lead). The edits since then have partially restored the text (search for "Redford" and "Dever" in the current article to see the claims). I see that Special:Search/š3sw finds Shasu and nothing else, so there might only be one article where this word needs fixing. That is both an argument for ignoring the problem as inconsequential, and for fixing it because correctness is good and a kludge is needed in only one place. If I had a sample of the word correctly rendered, I could trace it into a png or even svg image, and that could be used in the article (as is done with File:Egyptian 3 symbol.png). Johnuniq (talk) 05:08, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

While exploring I encountered an amazing feature (see Help:WikiHiero syntax): the wikitext "<hiero>A</hiero>" renders as . I am just recording that for my interest. Apart from WP:VPT, I'm thinking WT:WikiProject Writing systems might have someone who knows what is possible, but I'm getting a feeling that making an image of the word might be required. Johnuniq (talk) 11:21, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

That's all fascinating, but I got a guilt complex reflecting on how much of your ntime I wasted with the question, and paid off the guilt-debt as the German says, by trying to improve that article, but calculating I think it took me less time than what my question wasted of yours. In any case, it looks far too complicated to get this into wiki. The efficient solution would be to allow some apical writing template or thingamejig into the wiki markup box, and apply it to a 3 orthographically tilting to the right. Thanks a million, but don't worry it, otherwise I'll call into the Franciscan monastery behind me and ask some pals there if they have a spare whip so I can flagellate myself for the sin of pedantic harassment of a fellow wikipedia:) Nishidani (talk) 11:34, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Do not worry on my account—this sort of thing is what I find enchanting about Wikipedia because it is causing me to explore what for me is unchartered territory—a virtual holiday. Applying "superscript" gives: "the Egyptian word š^ꜣsw (or šs^ꜣw if preferred)" and there is possibly some dirty html trick that could be used so at least some browsers put the superscript more over the required character. I guess I will leave it for now as I suspect that an image is the only good solution. Johnuniq (talk) 12:09, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

F^anks, guv. Examining the tricks you use above I see the Egg of Columbus that was staring me in the face. Š³sw is virtually a spitting image of how Redford prints it (p.271). The pity is that that '3' apically located can't be made just a smidgeon, a wee tad smaller, and that wikipedia has its conventions, of which this ain't one, so I'd be revoited per WP:ORthographical or awfulgrafical.. Well, now that we've nagged that bone to death, I'll check around to fine another bone to test my graveyard chompers on. Nishidani (talk) 13:18, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

It's easy to adjust font size, what I am unclear about is adjusting the position, although I suspect that some ugly html would manage that. Following example uses a superscript three ("3") at 80% font size Š³sw and similar fiddling could be done with the Unicode character (although all browsers should handle the three, but some might not show the Unicode character?). Johnuniq (talk) 01:27, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

By the way, if the character were wanted in several places I could make a template to easily insert the required wikitext, as I did for {{rn}}. Johnuniq (talk) 03:10, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Š³sw. Effme if that ain't clever. That's just what the doctor ordered. Don't think one need 'frenetise the insignificant', to adopt a wonderful phrase from an opprobrious French book, more than that. D'ya think, policy wise, I could dump that on the Shasu page, and just quietly wander off without being hauled to AE for some infraction?Nishidani (talk) 16:29, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

I see you've fixed Shasu—it looks a bit strange to my pagan eyes but no doubt you will dodge any incoming slings and arrows. Some wikignome is going to stick a fat CITATION NEEDED somewhere in the lead, but there are lots of worse cases so I think we can move to the celebration phase. Johnuniq (talk) 04:08, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Authority Control Integration

Hi, I've been researching the intersection of Wikipedia and Authority Control, and have just recently made a Village Pump Proposal to create a bot to expand the usage of a template. I've identified you as someone in the sphere of interest to this project and would appreciate your input at the Village Pump. Thanks, Maximiliankleinoclc (talk) 18:36, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Interesting. I have responded and am watching. Johnuniq (talk) 05:08, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks very much for your comments on the proposal. We've refined it and worked out some more details after the discussion, and there is now a community Request for Comment to approve it being implemented. Any comments gratefully received! Andrew Gray (talk) 10:00, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

OK, I'm watching and will comment if it seems warranted. Johnuniq (talk) 10:27, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Rape_culture#RFC_-_Multiple_Factors

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Rape_culture#RFC_-_Multiple_Factors. 4 Points for consideration - Synonymic Usage, Quotations, Sources. Media-Hound 'D 3rd P^) (talk) 20:22, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I have commented and am watching so do not need further notifications. Johnuniq (talk) 05:08, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

{{talkback|Scottywong|Editor Interaction Analyzer}} -Scottywong| spout _ 14:09, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Responded. Johnuniq (talk) 03:58, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Query

Is it possible to search a particular term in a person's contribution, for example, "yogesh" in user:Sitush's contribution.? There have been many instances of him having heckled me and those of his discussing me unfavourably with other editors, like the one I mentioned in the ANI. Thanks in advance. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 16:03, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

All I'm doing is searching the contributions as listed in the normal manner (you can get them 5000 at a time by editing the URL to change the limit to 5000). I added the results here, however, the search is not really a useful way of evaluating anything because those involved are not using blatantly bad edit summaries. I did not include user talk pages so you would have to search for them if wanted. Johnuniq (talk) 03:43, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Oh thanks. Did you do it the hard way, using "Find" to search for yogesh in the page, with 5000 contributions, and then copied it in another file to create a list? Yogesh Khandke (talk) 08:59, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

I manually copied each list of 5000 contribs, appending them to a single file (fairly tedious). From there, I have tools that make it reasonably easy to list each line containing wanted text, or to change each line in a similar way. Johnuniq (talk) 10:59, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Boy, you'll regret you ever read the SAQ page!

In the citational template of cite book/last=/first=/authorlink etc., what happens when as with John Roy Carlson you have no authorlink to that name, because it is a pseudonym for Arthur Derounian, for whom there is a wiki bio?

If I put |last =Carlson|first=John Roy|authorlink=| Arthur Derounian etc. my experience on the SAQ page was that the book author comes out as Arthur Derounian, which however is not on the physical book's cover.

The problem arose at Azzam Pasha quotation, but without risking life and limb there, could you tell me here if there is a technical way of getting the author's name John Roy Coulson (pseudonym) but atttributed author linked to his real name Derounian? Thanks in antic.Nishidani (talk) 19:17, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

---

Did you try that? I just did a quick test (see next para) and the authorlink seems to work without changing what is visible. Another approach would be to use a redirect (creating it if necessary). On the principle of "least astonishment" (I'm sure you don't need the wikilink which I don't feel like finding), it might be better for an author displayed as Example to link to "Example", even if the latter is a redirect to the real name. In this case, I see that the redirect already exists at John Roy Carlson, so I would be inclined to use the pseudonym as the authorlink.

Sample for testing from Azzam Pasha quotation

However, by 1952, many publications, including one published by the Israeli government, had moved its date to 1948, specifically to May 15, 1948, shortly after the outbreak of the 1948 Arab–Israeli War. This dummy text has a ref using the redirect as the authorlink.

All that is needed to fix the article is to insert "authorlink=" in the text "|John Roy Carlson" which is currently doing nothing in the reference (it looks like someone added the entry but forgot to insert "authorlink="). Johnuniq (talk) 08:31, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

References

Thanks a lot, Johnno, you're a rrrrreal fff . .fucken tr. . oo ...ppper, as King George VI said to Lionel Logue when he awarded him a Logie for his logotherapy. I tried to do the edit several times before calling on you, to no effect. It's another Egg of Columbus, or a matter of my own scotoma with regards to computer code, even the simplest.Nishidani (talk) 10:41, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

deletion & bad faith assumption

Regarding your deletion of my edit, contrary to your assertion, that edit was not done "to suit a desired outcome in an active discussion". It was done because that addition is very much needed in general, a conclusion I have reached over more than a year of (on and off) editing sex-related articles. Please don't assume bad faith.--TyrS 03:05, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

It is well known (not an assumption) that it is not desirable to edit a policy when one is relying on that policy in a discussion on another page. I have replied at WT:What Wikipedia is not#Proposed (re)edit - Instruction manuals. Johnuniq (talk) 04:34, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Johnuniq, your edit summary stated your assumption about my motives for making the edit. I simply repeat that you were wrong about my motives.--TyrS 05:00, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

I will have to take your criticism on the chin because I see that you are correct and my edit summary ("please do not tweak the wording on policy pages to suit a desired outcome in an active discussion") was not properly expressed—sorry. I should either have given a routine but uninformative message, or inserted more words to indicate that one should avoid the possibility of being misunderstood by editing a policy page when relying on that policy in an active discussion in an article talk page. Johnuniq (talk) 07:22, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

I appreciate that and can see how bad my simultaneous participation in the discussion and making of that edit look, so I understand you interpreting it that way. It was a matter of inadvisable timing rather than nefarious intentions.--TyrS 07:40, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Registered agent

John, I think we're losing the war. I'm taking it off my watchlist and thought I'd let you know, since you're the only other regular who ever seems to drop by. I'm sick of reverting these people. If you want to fix it one more time and then see if you can get someone to protect it long-term, go for it. Rivertorch (talk) 06:05, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Errk, I see what you mean. I think that leaving silly stuff like this is a good strategy and I am doing that myself with a few articles I've encountered (I mutter to myself that if that's how the powers-that-be want it, who am I to question their wisdom—what counts is getting new editors!). However, I'll stick with these for a while. Another approach might be to drop in once every month or two and "revert to last good version", however, worrying will lead to burnout. Thanks for the info. Johnuniq (talk) 07:15, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Jimmy Wales Talk Page

Yep. Completely off topic - but not the first, not the last, and a little ingenious for the newbies :) EeBee (talk) 23:47, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

OK, thanks for your understanding. Johnuniq (talk) 02:00, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Line breaks

Hi. I've noticed that you've reversed my edit on C++, where I introduced line breaks to the article's markup. The line breaks that were added don't have any influence on how the article is presented, which means that there is no visual change to the article. Yet, as the display of diffs is limited to the paragraphs in the markup code which have been altered, these innocuous line breaks significantly reduce the size of any diff of any subsequent change to the article. Hence, not only is the user presented with a concise summary of the changes, which in turn makes it simpler to read, but it also requires less data to be sent by wikipedia's servers. So, it's a win-win for all.

So, what about it? Can we agree to keep the line breaks in the article? Take care. -- Mecanismo | Talk 01:07, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

I reverted because just about all articles have single-line paragraphs. Article issues should be raised on the article talk page, not here. I have copied your above comment to Talk:C++#Line breaks and will see any replies there. Johnuniq (talk) 01:58, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia essay

Wikipedia:FLAT

Found this tonight, you've probably read it before but I found it very relevant to a lot of the discussions which have occurred on the female genital mutilation talk page. Cheers. Vietminh (talk) 04:33, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, but yes, I have seen that before. I seem to wander into corners of Wikipedia where that kind of essay is highly relevant! Johnuniq (talk) 05:17, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

James Randi

Hi, John. The Devil's Advocate has alerted me and some others about the GA review of James Randi that he has started. Perhaps you should know about it as well. Bishonen | talk 19:50, 9 July 2012 (UTC).

Thanks. I'm currently having a bit of trouble doing more than reverting bad stuff, but I'll have a look. Johnuniq (talk) 00:04, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

A bit of an invitation to a slugfest, I'm afraid. :-( Bishonen | talk 10:25, 10 July 2012 (UTC).

WikiScience

	5-star rated
	I will see of I am able to arrange a wiki-science as soon as possible.. Might be quite interesting to set up such kinda wikipedia VinneOverwinner (talk) 06:10, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

I guess you noticed that I reverted edits at Earth's orbit by B4C4RD1980 and Phenomenomal and VinneOverwinner. Happy editing, but please stick to improving the encylopedia. Johnuniq (talk) 08:55, 11 July 2012 (UTC)