User talk:Down10/Archive 2

This is an archive of past discussions about User:Down10. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Your edits to {{Copied to Wikibooks}} on 2006-01-07 were causing pages that use the template to print "[[:Category:|Category:]]" beneath the boilerplate. The problem was this portion of the coding:{{category|[[Category:Articles copied to Wikibooks in need of cleanup]]}}. I removed the bolded portion and it is now working correctly. If you were planning on building some kind of {{category}} to perform some sort of category-related task, I apologize for reverting that portion of your edit but I suggest that you not employ templates until they're built and functioning properly. Anyway.. holla drumguy8800 C T 17:18, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

30-April-2007: I like your ideas for improving the aesthetics of the "Template:Year_nav_topic" but it becomes too tall (pushing images/text out of alignment), so I have reverted the changes (for now). The template is used by about 2,000 articles (thus far), so it handles many duties, as is. Functionally, I think it needs more than 2 other centuries as choices. I have created the "Discussion" talk page with topic "Talk:Aesthetics" to discuss how it should be improved. Making nav-boxes taller pushes images down in hundreds of articles, causing unusual wrapping of text and images. As tall nav-boxes push images down, often some huge, wide gaps in text can result, which leaves gaping holes in articles that previously appeared well-formatted. I think, 2 lines could be added to Template:Year_nav_topic, but not much more. (Things to ponder). More later. -Wikid77 11:38, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Your code at User:Down10/monobook.js creates a category called Category:",". While this appears to be completely unintentional, it has begun to aggravate some people at WP:CFD. Could you please comment at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 May 3 and possibly fix the code so that this problem does not occur in the future? Thank you, Dr. Submillimeter 09:05, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

What is up with your edits to What's the Time Mr. Wolf?--Migospia 03:05, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

They're quality edits to an album article on Wikipedia. Thanks for writing! —Down10 ^TACO 07:18, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Okay explain how?--Migospia 07:56, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure why you're pushing this, but okay:

• Fixed syntax of dates to display properly according to Wikimedia's date format.
• Added track times and formatting to meet the track listing style established by WikiProject Albums.
• Removed a few of the record reviews—two were duplicates—from 13 down to a more reasonable 8, though there really doesn't need to be more than 4 or 5 reviews listed. I took out the unprofessional reviews from lesser-known publications and music blogs. Are they all notable sources?
• Rewrote opening sentence to make more logical sense, and added that the album was released in the U.S. on Universal Records.
• Added "Rock music" to genre. (I'm not sure if it's still "indie" if they're signed to a major label.)
• Put song titles in quotation marks, as per WikiProject Songs.
• Put an en dash between the recording year dates.
• Added city names to the studio locations.

You kept reverting these changes for no reason, so I undid them. I didn't vandalize the page, remove much (any) hard content or even break any WP standards of editing, so there shouldn't be any reason to revert the page. Is there some problem you have with my so-called "ridiculous" edits?

If so, please explain your reasons why you're making reversions before wiping out my (or other editors') hard work. Wikipedia is for everyone to freely edit, not for one editor to make any personal claims on articles. Try assuming good faith from other editors, or else start your own Wiki if you want total control of its content. —Down10 ^TACO 23:06, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

But by doing so it made it appear a mess and I never said you vandalize the page and yes Wikipedia is for everyone to freely edit, and not for one editor to make any personal claims on articles, but if you edit articles, edit them in good faith and not such a mess or unclear, because although it is free to edit, you should not edit for you, but for other readers as well, I edited it to put both of our edits in there and hope you agree with it, if not we can talk about the changes--Migospia†♥ 05:59, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

I thought my brief notes in the edit summary were enough to indicate my actions on the page to other editors. I'm sorry if you got the impression that my edits had "made it appear a mess" (not sure what that means)—perhaps I failed to properly document my edits according to protocol. After the first reversion, I did attempt to clean up my previous edits on a second pass, but that didn't seem to make the cut with you until I posted my rationale here.

Still, I think it would be in your own best interest to understand the motivation behind other wiki edits before summarily deciding that an edit isn't acceptable and reverting the whole page, without citing any particular violations of wiki style. These actions can cause a rift between you and other editors, so do keep that in mind in the future (I will too!).
P.S.: Noisettes are an awesome band, aren't they? I'll be at their show in SF next week! —Down10 ^TACO 07:17, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Okay, next time I will do that, thanks for the advice. And yes Noisettes are amazing, seems like they are getting bigger I remember when they were fairly unknown--Migospia†♥ 07:45, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

A template you created, Template:Lorum Ipsum-50, has been marked for deletion as a deprecated and orphaned template. If, after 14 days, there has been no objection, the template will be deleted. If you wish to object to its deletion, please list your objection here and feel free to remove the {{deprecated}} tag from the template. If you feel the deletion is appropriate, no further action is necessary. Thanks for your attention. --MZMcBride03:54, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Template:Talk page has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. –sebi 23:40, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

In regard to {{notenglish}}, your recent edit placed the information about "How to add this article to the list of Pages needing translation into English" in hiding. I tend to think that this will reduce the number of "notenglish"-tagged pages that get placed on WP:PNT since some editors who tag pages will forget or not bother to show those instructions. I don't know how well that will go over with the pro-translation crowd.--Metropolitan90 (talk) 05:27, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

I've removed the {{hidden begin}} template. It's probably too drastic a change. —Down10 ^TACO 06:40, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

The date syntax is: {{Templatename|other arguments|date=November 2007}}, but if you leave the date off it will be added by a WP:BOT. Rich Farmbrough, 21:58 13 November 2007 (GMT). Rich Farmbrough, 21:58 13 November 2007 (GMT).

if i add a "1:" and than music artist, ie "Carlos.Santana" it redirects me to the homepage! pls help-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 17:11, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

I believe AllMusic has updated the patterned of their page URLs in the years since I worked on that template. Consider it obsolete.—Down10 ^TACO 07:14, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Template:Navigation/doc, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Template:Navigation/doc and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Template:Navigation/docduring the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:12, 2 May 2011 (UTC)