User talk:Bomazi/Archive 1
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. 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. |
Thank You
|
Thank You |
Thank you for reverting the vandalism on the Hod Stuart page. I did not see you had already reverted the article. I thought you were the vandalizer, and I clicked "undo". Thus, I ended up reverting it to the vandalized version. I deeply apologize. I would never intentionally do that to a Wikipedia page.
Johnny 42 (talk) 14:57, 24 November 2011 (UTC) |
References
Please don't change from inline references to grouping all of the references at the bottom in articles. For many users that makes it difficult for them to add new references and discourages adding of references. I believe the guidelines suggest that you leave the articles style for this alone. I personally find this form impossible to use and manage. Also, please stop changing the formant of the reference display from multi column to single column. This wastes space for many users spreading the references out over many screens rather then a single screen in some cases. Finely please stop removing the usage of {{reflist}} which supports smaller text and other common formatting in references unless you have one of the few cases where <refrences> is required. Vegaswikian (talk) 18:26, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
Area 13
Yea, it is not on the map and some of the wording that I had read did not make that distinction clear. I think that leaving the short blurb in the NTS article pointing to the range is good since the number is in the range for the other areas and it makes clear that not all of the tests were within the boundaries of the NTS. Feel free to adjust the content to make this clearer if you think that is needed. Vegaswikian (talk) 20:56, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
COMP128
Hi. Just to let you know that I posted a reply to your comment are User talk:Lfstevens#COMP128. Rgds, --Stfg (talk) 10:49, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
Like. The way you rewrote it today is much better. Ordinary non-techie mortals like me can understand it now, as well as it being grammatical. --Stfg (talk) 20:53, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
Comparison of layout engines
- Quote from top of article
- The following tables compare general and technical information for a number of layout engines. While these are mainly used in web browsers, they are also used in email clients for rendering HTML email, and used to render EPUB e-books, for example. Discussed here.
- The names of layout engines described in the article are Gecko, Presto, Trident, WebKit etc. These layout engines are used in email software like Thunderbird (Gecko), eBook readers etc., as shown in the table, and not just in web browsers like Firefox, MSIE, Chrome etc. LittleBen (talk) 17:55, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
Web browser engines are the layout engines used by web browsers. Despite the name, they are, as you point out, also used by other programs like mail readers. What defines them is not the type of programs they are used in, but the type of content they can render. A perhaps better term would be HTML/CSS layout engine.
The point I am trying to make is that these engines are limited to rendering HTML/CSS. This article does not cover engines that render other type of marked up content. For example ghostscript is not a web browser engine, not because it is not used by a browser, but because it renders postscript instead of HTML.
To sum up, a web browser engine is a software component, used by web browser and other software, that renders web (i.e. HTML/CSS) content. The fact that they are restricted to web content is not made sufficiently clear hence my attempt to clarify this point. Bomazi (talk) 18:24, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
PPPoE
I hope you find the PPPoE article more usable. I see from your plea in the discussion section that you weren't happy with it, and you were not alone. Please let me know either way.CecilWard (talk) 23:40, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of ITE Tech. Inc.
Hello Bomazi,
I wanted to let you know that I just tagged ITE Tech. Inc. for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.
If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.
You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks, Travelbird (talk) 05:05, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
- I have tried never to delete by a7 articles too rapidly after they were written unless they are on their face utterly impossible, (most of us interpret too quickly as less than about a half-hour, but I prefer an hour). However, the speedy tag was placed 10 hours after the only edit. There is nothing stopping you from trying again, but I would strongly advise you to make sure from the first edit not just that there's some clear claim to importance by market share, or size, or something, and it would also help if there's at least one good 3rd party source that verifies it. DGG ( talk ) 21:06, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
Article Feedback deployment
Hey Bomazi; I'm dropping you this note because you've used the article feedback tool in the last month or so. On Thursday and Friday the tool will be down for a major deployment; it should be up by Saturday, failing anything going wrong, and by Monday if something does :). Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 22:30, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
Removing categories
When you changed Area 5 from a redirect to a dab page you also removed a category. This category should have also been moved to another article or redirect. This type of error is hard to find since your edit comment is basically correct. Any chance you can review your changes to find where you did this and fix them? Vegaswikian (talk) 19:43, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:26, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
Hello, Bomazi. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
ArbCom 2017 election voter message
Hello, Bomazi. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
ArbCom 2018 election voter message
Hello, Bomazi. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article COMP128 you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. 
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Newslinger -- Newslinger (talk) 22:41, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
The article COMP128 you nominated as a good article has failed 
; see Talk:COMP128 for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Newslinger -- Newslinger (talk) 23:22, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
ArbCom 2019 election voter message
| Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add |