User talk:Siskus

From Rosetta Code



Sorry, stop jelling, control yourself. I only marked a contribution as written by a novice because it doesn't met my quality standard. I get blamed because I should address somebody, which is absolutely isn't the case.

In that marked REXX contribution there is:

  1. Notice of Garbage collector, which is to my idea a lie.
  2. Mal-formed meta-code, which IMHO must be of a novice.

I will consider to stop with my contributions.

Have fun, --Siskus (talk) 10:43, 21 August 2014 (UTC)


As for me I would appreciate to learn what you consider "Mal-formed meta-code" but you won't probably answer that either. --Walterpachl (talk) 11:13, 21 August 2014 (UTC) (admittedly a novice in Metacode)

Siskus (in reference to your comments above starting with the "jelling"):

It is unfortunate that because a contribution doesn't meet your quality standards, it has to be marked by you as being written by a novice.   That is not the definition of a novice (writer).   Of course, it would help immensely if you could list what your quality standard are.

The second issue is calling someone a liar.   I believe that English is your second language, so I am going to presume that you don't know that the   telling of a lie   is the   intentional   telling of a non-truth and not just the stating/telling of something inaccurate.   Stating that someone is lying, at the very least, is both inflammatory and insulting, and it impugns my reputation (by accusing someone of deliberately stating a falsehood).

The third issue would concern your definition of malformed meta-code.   I would assume even experts, at one time or another, aren't perfect and produce what you may call   malformed meta-code.   However, what is at issue here is your definition of malformed meta-code (and stating that it is malformed and using that as a basis to flag an entry as being written by a novice), and in particular, how I have used   hard blanks   (also known, among other names, as non-breaking blanks) in my various texts.   I do not believe your assumption that only a novice would use hard blanks.   It's easy to toss around labels like that without defining or pointing out why you think that the use of non-breaking blanks belong to the domain of novices.   I can't believe that the creators of HTML sat around and thought of features to include in HTML just for novices to use.   I would think that every feature in HTML has a use, even by non-novices.

I, for one (and I suspect everyone), don't want you to stop with your (programming language entry) contributions, but your inflammatory and insulting comments have no place at Rosetta Code.   On reflection, it's not for me to say that (but that is what I believe as led by observations and by the understanding of Rosetta Code's intent and philosophy).

I'm not sure if you meant to be snide in   having fun,   but that sort of (past) behavior isn't fun for anyone and causes much discord and the least of which, much wasted time and effort to address, not to mention it leaves a bad impression for everyone who may visit these pages on Rosetta Code in the future.   Those sort of insults, name-calling, and bad behavior will hang around a long time and besmirch Rosetta Code.   I know the administrators of Rosetta Code consider time a very much precious resource (and ditto for me as well).   (In my opinion), nobody has time to waste on this sort of name-calling and insulting statements.   I have been thinking that you may have raised in a different culture (where maybe confrontational behavior was the norm and challenging someone else's beliefs/methods were the methods used to address differences), but you've repeatably refused to answer my (and others) queries for clarification, direct questions, or polite requests for more information on your thinking and postings.   You have called me (on Rosetta Code) a novice, stupid, and now a liar.   You have yet to address/retract/apologize for any of those grievances.   I'm trying to remain as civil as I can under these libelous circumstances, and I remain in giving you the benefit of the doubt. -- Gerard Schildberger (talk) 21:03, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Bold textHi Siskus, you seem to have annoyed REXX contributors. Could you answer their polite questions rather than just deleting them as I think they are worried that you will make further edits of the sort they would like to have a dialogue with you about. --Paddy3118 (talk) 17:31, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

P.S. There is also a question on the talk page of this page you created: Form:TaskImplmented. Could you have a dialoge about that too? Thanks. --Paddy3118 (talk) 17:31, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Annoying REXX contributors

Hi Paddy3118,

Congratulations you are the first inquirer on this page. Those gentleman are not so polite as you think. They are completely unaware about Wiki and Wikitext and even HTML is a struggling. They really think that they own the code that is committed. Maybe could you teach them a lesson about Intellectual Property under GNU. Furthermore they are so funny; they are the Statler and Waldorf of Rosetta Code and there pure monoglot contibution is a show called REXX. The right name for a dinosaur. :-)

Truly, you are first on this page, Have fun. --Siskus (talk) 20:36, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Yes, some users on Rosetta Code have ongoing(!) difficulties with wiki formatting and, occasionally, ettiquette. They are not, however, habitually rude or obnoxious. They have also not insulted other users' wiki ettiquette while at the same time showing a total lack of respect for other users, their langauges and their code. You had one warning already. Because I simply don't have time to deal with the barrage of complaints I get about you (despite the complaintant's curteously acknowledging my lack of time and clearly extended execution of patience), and because you didn't seem to get the message the first time I banned you, I'm banning you again. This time, for one month. This *is* your final warning; if I have to ban you again for any reason, it will not be a temporary ban. Congratulations would be in order, too; in the seven-year history of this wiki, you would be only the second non-spammer I'd have ever felt the need to perma-ban. Please shape up. This wiki is fundamentally built on cooperation, congeniality and respect. If you cannot manage to imbue those attributes most of the time, or at least fake them, then there will be no place for you here. --Michael Mol (talk) 22:17, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
As for me I am truly shocked and appaled by this unbelievable reaction!

This is far off the behavior I am used to on this Wiki! Siskus, you need not respect REXX but at least stay awy from it! --Walterpachl (talk) 22:26, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

By the way, If you think that adding my request on your user page was inappropriate you could have told me (politely). (I apologize if this annoyed you.) Either there or on my user page or via email which you find on my user page. Permit my not sharing your kind of humor. --Walterpachl (talk) 23:26, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi Walter,

At last you reached it, this discussions page. Q: Is that supposed to be a punishment, to stay away from that "Stick a fork in it, we're done" goings-on? (That phrase is essential code for the successful execution of the program. Deletion the phrase would ruined the program, I learned from an expert.)

Please keep off my user page and stay in your "own" REXX cellar. I must congratulate you that you have noticed the humor. We had a big laugh about it.

Have fun. --Siskus (talk) 12:12, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

A: Consider it a blessing (for you)
B: Look for another expert! What she or he told you is rubbish
C: Good for you that you can laugh. I can't
D: You have still not answered the question in the Rexx solution to ranking languages by popularity (or removed the 'invalid' note you placed there. Would you be so kind?
--Walterpachl (talk) 12:23, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
Can I have your suggestion how to communicate properly and professionally? --Walterpachl (talk) 12:23, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

In case you "forgot":

This example is incorrect. Program does not properly ranks tied counts, counts are not accurate, PARI/GP is missing. Please fix the code and remove this message.

--Walterpachl (talk) 12:30, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

flagging of REXX entries

(The following was deleted from Siskus' user page (and should've been posted on the Siskus User Talk page).   For the posting to the wrong webpage, I apologize.   If you had just made a note of it and transferred the posting here, it would've been appreciated.) -- Gerard Schildberger (talk) 23:05, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Siskus: your numerous flagging of various REXX programs and/or section headers has been very disruptive and time-consuming to fix and re-instate. You have repeatedly flagged REXX for omission when if fact, an example (solution) of the REXX language was present in the task.   This is ridiculous.   If a solution provided the answer(s), then it shouldn't be marked for omission.

Previously, you had marked the REXX entry in Rank languages by popularity to be omitted because REXX doesn't have web access.   Nowhere in the task requirements did it state that web access was to be used (or even necessary);   indeed, the REXX section header has such a statement, and furthermore it stated how it accessed the web page data.

You further went on to delete a REXX solution three times, and changed two other REXX program solutions (within one task) so that the comments are no longer true (they had references to the deleted REXX programs), and you later added a version which was garbage; it had numerous syntax errors in the program and it even could/would not run (execute), nor produce any output.   Yet you cut and pasted text, and included part of the program in the output (which was part of a comment).   This act of vandalism (my opinion) has no part on Rosetta Code.   Too much time and effort was spent in repairing your malicious efforts (and not just by me).

It is clear that you don't know the REXX language (not even as a beginner), and further, you apparently don't have access to a REXX interpreter, otherwise you'd have noticed how badly your version was written/coded (as far as syntax of the language).

As for the latest round of flagging, you marked REXX as incorrect (for Rosetta Code, Rank languages by popularity) you cited three reasons:

  • program does not properly ranks (sic) tied counts,
  • counts are not accurate,
  • PARI/GL is missing.

REXX is one of two solutions (the other is Icon and Unicon), as far I can tell) that does proper ranking of tied counts, and as a matter of fact, no other solution even addresses the tied count issue.

Counts are accurate as of the time of the program execution and the numbers are obtained from the CATEGORY page and filtered through a list of languages (from the language page).

PARI/GP is in the ranking and it's ranked 30 with 358 members.   Did you mean PARI/GP instead of PARI/GL?   There is no PARI/GL in the Rosetta Code list of languages. -- Gerard Schildberger ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 09:28, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

As for the need review flagging, what is or isn't unnecessary HTML is a matter of opinion, and there is no need to flag entries on your beliefs that there is too much.   What is important is the rendering of the HTML.   Is it presentable?   Is it readable?   Is it viewable?   Is it accurate?

Whether there is special MediaWiki code for formatting (or not) doesn't mean that everybody is aware of it (or not), and there is no requirement that it has to be used, and that's especially true if it isn't known how to use it properly.   There is nothing wrong with making a section header as readable as possible, in whatever method is used to format it. The viewer doesn't see any of the HTML tags.

Your main thrust (as far as I can see) is to remove whitespace and make short readable lines longer, in fact, way too long.   There is a reason why magazines and newspapers use columns --- to reduce line length.   Shorter lines are easier to read than lines that go across the whole page.   All your efforts do, in fact, is to make the section comments less readable.

There is no requirement to use special or specific MediaWiki code for formatting (regarding comments in the section headers, this is excluding the titles, versions, and the like).

It's a matter of opinion if too much unnecessary HTML is used or not.   It doesn't matter, as long as the output is presentable.   What was used is different than what you would use.   There is no need to make a big deal of it and flag it for review.   Whatever HTML tags are used, they're not part of the program and are essentially invisible to the viewer.

I feel that you may be fixated a bit too much against certain entries, there are other programming examples that specifically mention languages that aren't even languages, and yet you don't flag any of those.   It appears then, your flagging is beginning to appear to border on vindictiveness.   Almost all entries have inaccurate counts, as those change daily, even hourly.   Who can say which counts are inaccurate?   All counts will become inaccurate as new entries are added to Rosetta Code. -- Gerard Schildberger (talk) 22:37, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Not always do I share Gerard's strong opinions ( :-) ), but this time fullheartedly. As to your messing up the task mentioned above, I asked for your motivation(s) and never got an answer. Is it REXX you are up against or just Gerard??? --Walterpachl (talk)

The following has been moved from to here.   In the process of moving the text here, I think some of the signature tags' times have been updated.   I also added one signature of mine where it wasn't obvious who was talking.   Also, the original flagged incorrect had PARI/GL instead of PARI/GP, and both I and Walter Paschl responded to that original incorrect tag text. -- Gerard Schildberger (talk) 02:29, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

This example is incorrect. Program does not properly ranks tied counts, counts are not accurate, PARI/GP is missing. Please fix the code and remove this message.

Siskus, if you think REXX doesn't properly rank tied counts, show an example. (signature added.) -- Gerard Schildberger (talk) 02:29, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

--Siskus (talk) 14:13, 11 November 2013 (UTC) Despite of over 350 solutions PARI/GL is not listed, Icon, C++ and PHP, ALGOL 68 are both ex aequo (Unicon, Scala and PL/SQL apparently does the job right.), too much whitespace, (I am not to only one who is complaining), using the wrong pages... In short, the REXX section and the contibutor clearly sucks...

If you think that the counts are inaccurate, show which one you think is inaccurate. -- Gerard Schildberger (talk) 02:29, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

--Siskus (talk) 14:13, 11 November 2013 (UTC) E.g. Vim script.

What's the point?
In the output I see rank: 478 (tied) (1 entry) Vim Script
Pages in category "Vim Script"
This category contains only the following page.
Largest int from concatenated ints
So, WHAT'S wrong?? And (again) where should PARI/GL be??? --Walterpachl (talk) 09:51, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

PARI/GL is not in the Rosetta Code languages list (on the web page). -- Gerard Schildberger (talk) 09:23, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

actually I see no PARI/GL but PARI/GP in rank 30 --Walterpachl (talk) 09:13, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

I believe Siskus never even visited the REXX output page at the time he flagged (as incorrect) the REXX entry   (the output of the REXX program clearly contains every computer programming language used on Rosetta Code which is 501 entries as of November 19th, 2013).

The output for the REXX (RC_POP.REX) program is included here ──► RC_POP.OUT.

That web-page has indeed all the programming languages that he stated weren't listed.

  •   (tied for 20th place)   Icon   and   C++
  •   (tied for 35th place)   ALGOL 68   and   PHP

(Rankings above are as of November 19th, 2013.) -- Gerard Schildberger (talk) 03:03, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Using Category:Scala Implementations

I don't think your usage of Category:Scala Implementations is correct. AIUI this category should be used for implementations of the language (e.g. a compiler or an interpreter; compare with e.g. Category:C Implementations or Category:Java Implementations). When you use the Header template (i.e. {{header|Scala}}) then all the necessary categories and properties to mark the solution as implemented in Scala are set automatically. So you don't need to add anything manually. --Andreas Perstinger (talk) 13:15, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

This is yet another reason why you shouldn't blank your talk page without reading/discussing the items.
I indepentantly noticed this and added Category_talk:Scala_Implementations and fixed some recent instances of this. —Dchapes (talk) 17:43, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Delete "Starting a web browser"

It might be best to delete Starting a web browser as you have unanswered questions for some time in the draft task you link it to: Talk:Separate_the_house_number_from_the_street_name#The Rules?. --Paddy3118 (talk) 19:43, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Themed edits

Hi Siskus, could you possibly do more focused edits, where one edit is for one purpose to split up a couple of large edits you have done to a page over multiple languages. For example, If you are flagguing multiple language examples for one of two reasons then you might have separate edits for each type of flag you apply. This will make it easier to change just one. Thanks. --Paddy3118 (talk) 20:32, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

Adding: "Category:Scala examples needing attention" to task examples

Hi Siskus. We tend not to add the category in that way as you have left no comment on what is deficient in the current code. It would be better to mark an example as incomplete or incprrect as those templates allow a reason for their use to be added and displayed whith the offending example. Thanks, --Paddy3118 (talk) 13:53, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

marking REXX entries as novice

Hi Siskus:   Please refrain from marking descriptions in REXX entries as "novice" and let people more familiar with the REXX programming language pass judgement on whether or not it was entered by a novice.   I've been noticing that you are sniping at various REXX programming language entries and have never responded to any queries by me or others concerning your inflammatory and sometime destructive behavior regarding said language.   If you could be more specific in your comments and justify your actions instead of just flagging some REXX entries in a capricious manner, including marking numerous REXX entries as omit even though there was an existing REXX solution.   Marking a language as/for omit when there is already a solution entered or marking it as such when one doesn't know the capability of a language is just inappropriate.   I know the REXX programming language very well and I would never mark any task as inappropriate for the REXX language, there are always programmers that can find a solution to most tasks.   I certainly wouldn't mark a programming language as omit when I barely know the language. -- Gerard Schildberger (talk) 01:54, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

wholeheartedly seconded. can you tell us what you meant by your (inappropriate?) flagging and/or provide a better "solution" to this task? --Walterpachl (talk) 07:02, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
Siskus, Could you please answer my question?--Walterpachl (talk) 18:02, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
BTW Further up there is another one you never responded to --Walterpachl (talk) 19:50, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
It seems to me that the author of the task is not "hindered by any knowledge". For as I know, REXX has NO garbage collector. Take also in account that the writer makes ill-formed metadata (causing problems on other browsers then MS Internet Explorer) without knowing the difference between a breaking and non-breaking space (as shown in the _<space> and several double space), then the contributor must be a novice.
There is no reason to level ad hominem attacks against the author (or anyone else) by what you seem to know.   Even if you know it to be true, Rosetta Code isn't the place to resort to that sort of behavior.   Write what you know, and don't make assumptions about the depth of another's knowledge.   The REXX computing programming language has garbage collection.   What I know or don't know about HTML formatting shouldn't be used as a reason to resort to personal attacks about my depth-of-knowledge of another computing programming language (REXX).   The   &nbsp;   HTML tag is called a non-breaking space and is also known as a no-break space, a hard space, and a fixed space.   It is a mechanism to prevent multiple-blank collapsing and it allows the HTML coder to force inclusion of extra blanks in HTML code when more white-space is wanted.   The   &nbsp;   HTML tag also has other uses, such as being used for actual non-breaking space as between name titles, addresses, and other situations where a non-breaking blank is desired, in particular, as in cell (table) creation.   I don't want to write a tutorial on the how-comes and why-fors of its use.   The inclusion of white spade (one or more extra blanks) causes no problems with web browsers, it's their job to render HTML code.   I hope that clears up your misunderstanding of breaking and non-breaking space(s).   Also, I can't see why you make the decision to call that ill-formed metadata since you can (hopefully) see the results of why it is being used (and its results).   Again, there is no reason to start throwing insults around for a lack of understanding of why I use particular HTML tags.   In any case, that has nothing to do with writing REXX code and has no bearing on my knowledge of the REXX computing language.   It is akin to me calling your programming skills deficient because you rollerskate badly. -- Gerard Schildberger (talk) 19:36, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

It also not fair that missing functionality is called oovice" utside the program language. If REXX is not "internet-fahig" then the language has to be ommited for such tasks. It give a distorted picture of the matter.--Siskus (talk) 12:08, 20 August 2014 (UT

Er, no, Siskus.   That isn't a valid reason to mandate that a language has to be omitted from such tasks.   The REXX language has no trigonometric, hyperbolic, or logarithms (or for that matter, even a square root function or a power function), but that isn't a reason to mark REXX to be omitted for that lack of features.   I differ with you on how to deal with missing functionality.   That's what programming languages do, if a language can use the host's functions, they can take advantage of that interface to perform a specific task; that's what an operating system is used for (among other things).   Exactly what is the distorted picture of which you speak? -- Gerard Schildberger (talk) 19:36, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
looking at the task's description it seems to me that Scala is not really addressing it and neither is REXX. Anyway, calling a Rexx expert "novice" is an inappropriate insult. We all try to teach and learn and avoid calling colleagues names. --Walterpachl (talk) 18:49, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
For those readers who are in the dark, the Arena storage pool is the Rosetta Code task being discussed. -- Gerard Schildberger (talk) 19:36, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

blanking of entire user page


The blanking (erasing) of your entire user page isn't going to solve your problems, or for that matter, answer the questions raised here.   So far, you've not addressed any of the concerns raised here by me or others who posted disagreements and questions about your actions and behavior.   All our actions are accountable.   Please try to make an effort to address the concerns raised here, and also (at least) try to answer the queries posted here. -- Gerard Schildberger (talk) 16:50, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Edits to pre blocks in output sections

Could you please stop replacing existing markup like this:

… program output here …
Line 1
Line 2
Line 3


 … program output here …
 Line 1
 Line 2
 Line 3

(avoiding <pre> by using leading space wiki formatting)

Although in some respects they are just different ways of doing the same thing, the former is used here for a reason. Namely, it allows trivial cut-n-paste of program output without further modifications (unless it happens to contain &; or </pre>). Since the HTML produced by both is the same there is no benefit to avoiding <pre>. However, since doing so makes it more difficult to update program output in the future, it does have a negative impact.

In general, making changes to existing markup that has no effect on the semantics of the HTML output should be avoided (unless perhaps it's while making other useful changes to the same text). This would include some recent changes you've made to existing text changing only white space.

(Of course, things like changing "Output:" to "{{out}}" are different and fine since even if they currently produce the same output the template might change in the future.)

Thank you. —Dchapes (talk) 17:40, 1 September 2014 (UTC)


You've been using a really ugly colouring for emphasis in tasks. Merely using <em> is enough; it looks better and it is much more semantically correct too. (It will usually get rendered as italics, but you can use a user-style to fix that if you prefer. Yet most won't.) –Donal Fellows (talk) 09:31, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

FYI (and for anyone else coming to this page to comment), Siskus has been blocked/banned from RosettaCode and therefore will not be commenting here. (Thank you admins) —dchapes (talk | contribs) 14:25, 7 September 2014 (UTC)