Anonymous user
User talk:Siskus: Difference between revisions
Use {{subst:}} for {{incorrect}} so talk:Siskus isn't on "Examples needing attention"; could use <nowiki> but I don't think that is what was intended
(Use {{subst:}} for {{incorrect}} so talk:Siskus isn't on "Examples needing attention"; could use <nowiki> but I don't think that is what was intended) |
|||
| (14 intermediate revisions by 5 users not shown) | |||
Line 7:
In that marked REXX contribution there is:
# Notice of Garbage collector, which is to my idea a lie.
# Mal-formed meta-code, which IMHO must be of a novice.
I will consider to stop with my contributions.
Line 14:
===END.===
:: As for me I would appreciate to learn what you consider "Mal-formed meta-code" but you won't probably answer that either. --[[User:Walterpachl|Walterpachl]] ([[User talk: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 <u>every</u> 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. -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 21:03, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
-----
'''Bold text'''Hi 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. --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] ([[User talk:Paddy3118|talk]]) 17:31, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
Line 55 ⟶ 74:
In case you "forgot":
<br>http://rosettacode.org/wiki/Rosetta_Code/Rank_languages_by_popularity#REXX
<br>{{
==flagging of REXX entries==
Line 105 ⟶ 124:
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. -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 02:29, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
{{
Siskus, if you think REXX doesn't properly rank tied counts, show an example. (''signature added''.) -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 02:29, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
Line 142 ⟶ 161:
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 [[Template:Header|Header]] template (i.e. <code><nowiki>{{header|Scala}}</nowiki></code>) 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. --[[User:AndiPersti|Andreas Perstinger]] ([[User talk:AndiPersti|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. —[[User:Dchapes|Dchapes]] ([[User talk:Dchapes|talk]]) 17:43, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
== Delete "Starting a web browser" ==
Line 170 ⟶ 191:
:::: For those readers who are in the dark, the '''Arena storage pool''' is the Rosetta Code task being discussed. -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 19:36, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
==blanking of entire user page==
Siskus:
<br> 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. -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 16:50, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
== Edits to <nowiki>pre</nowiki> blocks in output sections ==
Could you please stop replacing existing markup like this:
<pre>
{{out}}
<pre>
… program output here …
Line 1
Line 2
Line 3
<­/pre>
</pre>
with:
<pre>
{{out}}
… program output here …
Line 1
Line 2
Line 3
</pre>
(avoiding <nowiki><pre></nowiki> 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 <nowiki></pre></nowiki>).
Since the HTML produced by both is the same there is no benefit to avoiding <nowiki><pre></nowiki>.
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 "<nowiki>{{out}}</nowiki>" are different and fine since even if they currently produce the same output the template might change in the future.)
Thank you. —[[User:Dchapes|Dchapes]] ([[User talk:Dchapes|talk]]) 17:40, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
== Emphasis ==
You've been using a really ugly colouring for emphasis in tasks. Merely using <em><nowiki><em></nowiki></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.) –[[User:Dkf|Donal Fellows]] ([[User talk:Dkf|talk]]) 09:31, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
:FYI (and for anyone else coming to this page to comment), Siskus has been [http://rosettacode.org/wiki/Special:BlockList?wpTarget=Siskus blocked/banned] from RosettaCode and therefore will not be commenting here. (Thank you admins) —[[User:dchapes|dchapes]] ([[User talk:dchapes|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/dchapes|contribs]]) 14:25, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
| |||