User talk:ShakespeareFan00

See Also: /Sfan00_IMG

ISBN conversion

This is something that can be done fairly easily by bot (and will be done in the future). DTLHS (talk) 23:07, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

What would be helpful is you could give me a list of templates that use it? Mostly probably R: prefixed ones? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 23:08, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

{{cite-meta}} probably has a lot of them. DTLHS (talk) 23:09, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, Over on wikisource, someone updated citation/core to use {{ISBN}}, you might want to get someone to look into this, as cleared a LOT of entries from the relevant category. 23:11, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

Done, but as you can probably tell our citation practices are insanely inconsistent so this project might take a lot of manual work. DTLHS (talk) 23:18, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

I'd also strongly suggest getting someone to do some analysis for simmilar ISBN's cropping up. (Usally an indication something should be template, which I've found over on Wikispecies, and which you've done already for some sources here on wikt: )ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 23:21, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

Do you know what the correct ISBN is for {{Template:R:SOED3}}? DTLHS (talk) 23:23, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

I don't sadly :( ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 23:23, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

{{ia-conj}}

I reverted your edits because it was causing everything subsequent on the page to be removed (see dormir). DTLHS (talk) 05:25, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, Now to determine why it was breaking? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 08:16, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Noting appropriateness of usage

In response to your suggestion: I usually use labels like {{lb|en|now|offensive}} or {{lb|en|potentially|_|offensive}} if something may be considered less appropriate in current-day usage. A slightly different way of doing it can be seen at archaic, now inappropriate term like blackamoor. If it is not as clear-cut I prefer usage notes, such as here. I'm not sure that a specific proposal is needed, it seems to me that this is already the established way of handling this. ←₰-→ Lingo ^Bingo _Dingo (talk) 10:15, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

wiki text

Hi - I think '''bold text''' is the usual way of emboldening text, rather than "style span bold" — Saltmarsh. 08:53, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

Yes. but if you do '''{{{1|}}}''' and there's no supplied parameter you end up with errors. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 08:56, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

On a related note ''{{{1|}}}'' also leads to mismatched tags as it tries to resovle ''''' which doesn't work.ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 08:56, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

• In Chinese entries, please don't remove linebreaks in template calls, like you did here at 乖張. Editors have deliberately included the newlines to make the wikitext easier for editors to read and maintain.
• In Japanese entries, please don't add unnecessary (and in this case, nonexistent) templates for bold formatting, like you did here at 先生. The usual '''triple apostrophe''' works just fine.

Thank you, ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │^{Tala við mig} 17:55, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

@Eirikr Well perhaps YOU would like to resolve the lint errors present yourself then? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 17:58, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

• Thanks Bard — I have experimented and see what you mean! Thank you seeking such errors. — Saltmarsh. 10:54, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

Admin

Hey dude, fancy becoming a sysop? --Kriss Barnes (talk) 23:06, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

@Kriss Barnes Thank you for the kind offer, but I lack the technical experience for a viable RfA to pass. Was your message intended for another user entirely? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 07:24, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

I periodically spam long-term users with similar questions. This time you were the unfortunate candidate. --Kriss Barnes (talk) 09:34, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

Template:ux and reverts

In case you're wondering why I keep reverting you: {{ux}} requires a language code (for instance, "en" for English). If you leave out the language code, you end up with a module error. In other words, you've converted a passage that's readable, but flagged by the system, to one that's unreadable, displays alarming bright red error messages, and shows up in CAT:E. If you're not aware of this, you're not checking your work. Some advice: if you sneak in to fix a neighbor's faucet, don't set off the fire alarm... Chuck Entz (talk) 20:32, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Edits to quotation templates – please stop temporarily

Hi, I'm assuming you saw my posts at "Template talk:RQ:Homer Chapman Iliads"? Would you please temporarily stop updating quotation templates until the issue has been resolved? Otherwise there will be a lot of cleaning up to do if the edits need to be reversed. — SGconlaw (talk) 14:50, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

I will stop. Do you want me to undo the attempts at cleanup, so someone can implement a proper repair? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 14:50, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. No need to revert now. I think we just need to have the module experts @Benwing2 and @Erutuon look at the issue first, so they can see how to get Module:quote, and {{nb...}} and {{...}} to work together. But could you explain why you are making the edits anyway? It's not clear to me what problem you are attempting to resolve. — SGconlaw (talk) 14:53, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

@SGconlaw

See the note I left on {{nb...}}, but essentially :

1. when {{...}} is used inside itself or {{nb...}} it trys to do a construction like <span title=" <span>...</span>>[...]</span>
2. The parser (or more likely the quote module) is getting confused by the use of [] bracket for anything other than an actual link, It's seeing.

   <span>[</span> Some text <span>]</span>
   

   and trying to treat it at as an external link [</span> some text <span>] with a span wrapped round it which it is apparently seeing as mismatched tags I'd tried previously to nowiki the brackets, but that exposed a simmilar parsing problem on many other pages. Hence the approach taken to fully escape the brackets in the code I'd implemented for {{...}} and {{sqbrace}}.

Ideally {{nb...}} and {{...}} should be escaping the [ ] in the relevanat portion of their input.ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 15:24, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

I'm not fully understanding this, so I hope Benwing2 and Erutuon can help. But is the current setup generating some incorrect output or error message? If not, why does it need changing? — SGconlaw (talk) 15:26, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

It's generating badly formed HTML, which the linter extension is detecting. Trying to italicise or not italicise the brackets in the portion/tooltip generated by the title parameter of a SPAN is not possible in HTML /CSS, you would need a proper tooltip for that. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 15:42, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for explaining that HTML errors are being generated (though is it a big problem if there isn't any visible output effect?). It's not the italicization in the tooltip that is the issue. Module:quote checks for square brackets in the titles of works and unitalicizes them, but your recent changes prevent the module from doing that. — SGconlaw (talk) 16:44, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

SPECIFIC example of an entry where the changes to a SPECIFIC template actually broke something, please. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 17:00, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

I think that problem was caused by this edit to {{nb...}}, which you have since reverted. So it looks like it's not related to the {{sqbrace}} template which you've been adding. — SGconlaw (talk) 17:57, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

@ShakespeareFan00, Sgconlaw ShakespeareFan00, it sounds like what you're doing is trying to hack around an issue rather than fixing it at the source, which is never a good idea. However, I'm confused as to what the exact issue is. Can you explain it clearly with an example, showing what is currently generated and what should be generated? I will then fix the module accordingly. This is the first time I've heard of this issue; rather than waiting to bring it up for two years, I think it would have been better if you pinged me when you first noticed it. I would recommend undoing your attempted work-arounds in the meantime. Thanks! Benwing2 (talk) 17:47, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

@Benwing2 See the note I posted on the talk page for {{nb...}} which is the issue on forespeak ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 17:50, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

@ShakespeareFan00 OK. Does the issue *only* occur when you use {{nb...}} inside of brackets? Does the issue occur with brackets alone? What is the need for {{nb...}} in the first place? This is the first time I've seen that template. Benwing2 (talk) 17:54, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

@Benwing2: {{nb...}} and {{...}} insert ellipses within square brackets, but more importantly they also allow for the creation of tooltips that can display omitted text. See, for example, {{RQ:Doyle Lost World}}. — SGconlaw (talk) 18:00, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

I am considering removing {{sqbrace}} on the reasoning that other modules can't "see" what's it outputing necessarily, or process it conveniently. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 18:24, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

@Benwing2: , The actual page that has an issue with a[ url text {{nb...|continuation}} ] situation is forespeak and the problem there is that the quote module is constructing an external link using the chapter paramater, and the chapter URL paramater.

because the chapter param using {{nb...}}, itself contains a [], what happens is a "link within a link" ie [chapterurl chaptertext <span>[</span><span|title="continuation text">... </span>]</span>] and the parser can't cope.

(Aside: This is not just an issue with {{nb...}}, Any sequence that contains [] will be problematic.)

If the [] are escaped or nowikied in {{nb...}} the link within a link issue gets resovled. However, this exposes the second issue, namely that <span title="<span>...<span> some text"</span> is not valid, yet that's what the code for {{nb...|{{...}} some text}} would generate.

Solving both of these will I understand take some time? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 18:24, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

@ShakespeareFan00 If I'm not mistaken, the handling of single-bracket external links is done by the MediaWiki software itself, which we don't have control over, so making it respect nested brackets isn't easy to do. However, it should be easy to fix this just by replacing raw left-bracket characters with [ i.e. an HTML escape sequence, and similarly raw right-bracket characters with ]. Using the nowiki tag is probably not the right thing to do. As for the second issue you mention above (<span title="<span>...<span> some text"</span>), how does it come about? I am still confused. Benwing2 (talk) 20:03, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

The HTML escape sequence was attempted previously, by another contributor but reverted because seemingly Module:Italics didn't process the entities in the same way.

@Benwing In respect of the second issue..

{{nb...|Example {{...}} }}

Generates:-

<span class="q-hellip-sp">&nbsp;</span><span class="q-hellip-b">[</span><span title="Example <span class="q-hellip-sp">&#32;</span><span class="q-hellip-b">[</span>…<span class="q-hellip-b">]</span><span class="q-hellip-b">&#32;</span> ">…</span><span class="q-hellip-b">]</span><span class="q-hellip-b"></span>

This is because {{...}} wraps a span around the {{{1}}} parameter brackets (which should probably be escaped anyway). The inline option forces them to not be wrapped.ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 23:01, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

BTW Template:nb.../sandbox exists, which is using the escaped version of the brackets.

The pragmatic way of solving the first issue (in the one mainspace entry it was showing up) was to simply remove the {{nb...}} template, and write the title in full. This is until someone solves it more thoroughly. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 23:01, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

@Benwing2: from what I can see, the difficulty that formerly arose at the entry forespeak was that {{nb...}} had been used in |chapter=, but then |chapterurl= applied an external URL to it, causing a clash.

I’ve not come across a case of nested templates like {{nb...|some text {{...|other text}} some text}}, but I have manually typed an ellipsis within brackets inside the template to indicate an omission, like this: {{nb...|some text [...] some text}}. Does the latter cause problems? I hadn’t noticed any issues with it. — SGconlaw (talk) 04:21, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

replacing {{topN}} with {{desc-top}} in reconstructed terms

I don't think it's a good idea. The very reason for anyone to click on a blue-link of a reconstructed form is to see the descendants. So hiding them under a spoiler isn't really heplful. Allahverdi Verdizade (talk) 18:27, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Yes, please stop doing that. --{{victar|talk}} 23:51, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

English rhymes...

Hi, I've replied to your comment on my talk page. — Paul G (talk) 07:42, 2 March 2021 (UTC)