Anonymous user
User talk:Thundergnat: Difference between revisions
→massive changes to Heronian triangles: added a bunch of comments.
Thundergnat (talk | contribs) m (→massive changes to Heronian triangles: some cursory investigation) |
(→massive changes to Heronian triangles: added a bunch of comments.) |
||
Line 41:
:I really doubt that the change was malicious, and certainly not targeted at the REXX entry. It looked to me like he (I assume he) was looking at an earlier version of the page, made some edits to it and saved it without realizing the implications. It wasn't only the REXX and Ring entries affected; The ALGOL 68, ALGOL W, AutoHotkey, CoffeeScript, EchoLisp, Elixir, Fortran, FreeBASIC, Go, JavaScript ES5, Julia, Kotlin, Lua, Pascal, Phix, R, REXX 2nd version, Ring, Scala, Sidef and Tcl entries were deleted completely and several other implementation had edits rolled back.
:::: I hope you don't think that I implied it was malicious, just damaging (which required a bit of work to re-instate essential "by hand" and viewing the before and after screens, which are a royal pain in the ole neckhole for cut 'n paste). --- I didn't dare to revert such a massive change (having used up my silver bullets long ago). I had no idea that so many others programming entries were deleted completely. -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 05:01, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
:For what it is worth, if you notice such a large scale destructive edit in the future, don't try to fix it piecemeal, bring it to my or one of the other admins attention and we can roll back / undo the edit with one click. However, we can only easily roll back the '''last''' edit without higher permissions, so once further edits have been made to the page it becomes much more tedious. I generally try to check the recent changes page at least 4-5 times a day to catch spam and unintended edits before they get out of hand. I can't be here all the time though. Cheers --[[User:Thundergnat|Thundergnat]] ([[User talk:Thundergnat|talk]]) 00:28, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
:: Will do. I didn't try to fix the massive changes, I only tried to fix the (two REXX) entries that I authored; that way, if it didn't get rolled back, at least I corrected what I could. -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 05:01, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
:After a cursory investigation, it looks like it had been reverted to the [http://rosettacode.org/mw/index.php?title=Heronian_triangles&oldid=200527 17:52 13 March 2015 version] of the page, which tellingly is exactly the same size.--[[User:Thundergnat|Thundergnat]] ([[User talk:Thundergnat|talk]]) 00:53, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
<br>
-----
<br>
For what it's worth department:
Perusing around some odd and dusty corners of the ole Google-net, ... er, I mean internet, I came
across several negative comments about the various tasks (and formats) concerning the Rosetta Code
website; some of the negatory statements were complaining about the loosey-goosey task
definitions (and the various flavors on how the tasks/problems are presented --- that is, not having a
more strict format, or even not having a common format), and also that the task requirements
are "all over the place" and most requirements aren't rigorous enough, and/or some such
words to that effect, and other minor complaints. That's why I argue about people
using ''number'' instead of ''integer'' and the like. I don't believe
I've ever won any of those changes (some task author defend their original wording as if their
first born's life depended on it).
To that end, I've been making minor changes (I assume you or others may have noticed) to
some (well, OK, OK, a not small number of) Rosetta Code task's preambles, mostly in the
manner of:
::* trying to have each task contain a ''';Task:''' section header --- this is more dangerous than ya think
::* changing ''';C.f.:''' to ''';Related tasks:''' whenever noticed
::* changing '''See also''' to ''';See also:''' section headers
::* using a larger font for most mathematical formulae, especially when:
:::::* Greek symbols are used
:::::* sub- and/or superscripts are used
:::::* when other hard-to-read glyphs are used
::* removing pronouns from the preamble: ... Your task is to ...
::* removing superfluous wording: ... The purpose of this task is to ...
::* more use of highlighted numbers and variable names instead of: ... where "x" is equal to b or c and ...
::* more use of bullet points (either plain or numbered) instead of long comma-separated continuous lists
::* separating all the multiple <nowiki> [[xxx]] and {{yyy}} </nowiki> thingys into distinct lines
::* adding whitespace for visual fidelity
::* adding whitespace where it makes the reading of the text easier, and adds fluidity to your perusing
::* adding whitespace before the first text, this ensures that the (above) stuff won't be abutted with the task preamble
::* adding whitespace before the TOC (table-of-contents)
... Regarding this last bullet, this has become a concern (in my mind) ever since the last major change
to Wiki's upgrade. Previously, the TOC (on my screen, using FireFox, FireFox Aurora, and/or Microsoft's
Internet Explorer), the list in the TOC was always a very light blue. Now the TOC list is white,
with nothing distinguishing it from the regular (the background, so to speak) Rosetta Code task
preamble.
It was this "sameness" that prompted me to add more whitespace before most TOC's to make it easier to find
the TOC when scrolling. The best of all worlds would be to have the "old" very light blue color
reinstated somehow. I have no idea where to change the TOC list color, but I'm sure it's possible.
<br>By the way, that very light blue is the same color as
the "box" for the <nowiki> <lang xxx> </nowiki> thingy.
I would like to add much more thingys (er, I mean '''Related tasks''') for a lot of
Rosetta Code tasks, but that's 'nother kettle of fish. (I used to do this kind of documentation for a
living for quite a few years --- and most programmers get quite territorial about "their"
wording (documentation) and don't take lightly to improvements and/or changes --- no-siree bob). Some
tasks already have a template, but I don't think I have the proper authority or permission to update those
templates, and even add one, for that matter. '''Primes''' are one such "category". There are
many others. It helps curious people to find other ''birds-of-a-feather'', especially
if they don't know the wording to use to perform searches for (maybe) obscure (or hard to define) algorithms
or procedures.
There has been some kickback here and there (reverts, but mostly deletions), and when it happens, I
don't push it further, as I've said, I've used up my silver bullets earlier. I also like to
add appropriate JPEGs to a task's preamble, but several have been deleted by one person, even
though those images on the right-side of the preamble don't use up real estate on the preamble part of
the Rosetta Code task. Ya can lead a horse to water, but ya can't push a rope. One guy
(same as above) is reverting more than a few of my preamble changes, so if it gets worse, I'll probably
just fade away from further changes. No sense in wasting time if I try to make improvements to
some task's preambles if it ruffles his feathers (or steps on his toes). Sometimes it feels
like pushing a chain uphill.
-- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 05:01, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
| |||