User talk:HappyDog

Extension categories
Gday HappyDog I'm pretty keen to get started categorizing the extensions, I think they require a much needed sorting out in definable groups. Is there any progress on the template yet? as soon as you set it up I'll gladly follow the ruleset you make. Cheers Bouncingmolar 23:15, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Hi, I've run out of stuff to do with the extensions. Maybe while i wait I can help with the extensions on meta somehow? or if you have another job? Bouncingmolar 14:29, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
 * hi Happydog, Can we please add the subcategory fields? I'd like to update the categories and make changes that matter. Cheers - Bouncingmolar 13:15, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
 * hi again, I'm getting itchy fingers. I now have a basic understanding of how to manipulate templates, Have we agreed to use "extensions by subject"? i don't think anyone else seems to be too worried. If we have agreed, I can add it in if you have other things to do :) Bouncingmolar 01:24, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Dear HappyDog,
One anonymous user:220.245.163.27 created some unnecessary edits to Extension:Anysite. (Making microsoft.com to apple.com and others). Please notify that anonymous user. Thank You. (Also I thank you for fixing my non-sense sentence about my help page! I really thanks!) --Gabeyg 12:32, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

crudeProtection
Im trying to use this extension to allow certain members to view a page and keep others out. After I add the name to a page and click save, it will display the message it should when it keeps someone out, but then that page will be blank from their on. Any ideas? I am using version 1.10 of mediawiki.

Template reversion
Hi happydog,

I recently made some changes to the template which have since been reverted by user:Voice of All. I thought that I provided sufficient discussion in agreement with you on the template page to document these changes. Voice of all has not participated in the discussion at all, but I have not yet commented on Voice of All's talk page nor reverted his changes, as I would like to know first if you also disagreed with my changes. because if so there is no point arguing. Bouncingmolar 05:36, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

MainPage Problem
Hey HappyDog

I've got a question. I want on my Wiki a Mainpage,which looks like the one from MediaWiki. So I designed 5 Templates, and put them on the main page.

I made a little screenshot of my problem. http://img112.imageshack.us/my.php?image=testnm8.jpg

The first template is very well.. its 100%wide so its over the whole browser.

Then I have 2 templates next to each other, They share the browser together. Under them are again 2.

and here's my problem:

Between these 4 template isn't a horizontal blank line..

my source code:

&#160; &#160;

how did you do this? ..

btw sry my English is not so well. I'm German ;)

Thanks for Helping!!

a question on comprehensive technical manual for the MediaWiki software
Hi HappyDog,

I have a question. I am conversant with PHP, but being a newbie to MediaWiki coding, I find the documentation overwhelmingly overwhelming to customise MediaWiki code to suit my needs. Googling for 'customise mediawiki' led me to your post/comment on the Library Web Chic Page where you have mentioned that mediawiki is working towards a comprehensive technical manual.

I wanted to know if there is one available (preferably as a book instead of a wiki). It would be good to have it modeled on the Learning Perl Book, littered with enough code examples that makes one feel confident to make/break MediWiki code - of course on their own installations!!

Thanks in advance for your time.

Anand

Moving Manual:Skinning to Manual:Skins
Could you please move Manual:Skinning to Manual:Skins? Skinning is much more relevant to developers. I moved the old Manual:Skins out of the way but I can't delete the old redirect. Thanks. --Cneubauer 16:07, 27 August 2007 (UTC)


 * No - the manual is not just for developers. Manual:Skins should be a general page about skins in MediaWiki.  Manual:Skinning should be a more specific page about creating/editing skins.  I have reverted your move.  Note that there is a clear link at the top of Manual:Skins which directs people looking for skinning to the correct place. --HappyDog 16:11, 27 August 2007 (UTC)


 * No doubt, but currently Manual:Skins is essentially a FAQ with information on three configuration changes. That doesn't help developers or users at all, only administrators.  What I want to do is merge the administrator information on Manual:Skins into the developer information on Manual:Skinning.  There is already a Help:Skins which is information for generic users.  I can move content manually too but Manual:Skinning is a much better starting page.  --Cneubauer 16:16, 27 August 2007 (UTC)


 * These pages should be kept separate, but I see your point about Manual:Skins. I would suggest that a new Manual:Skins be created from scratch, and to contain a brief introduction plus links to appropriate help pages for (separately) users, admins & developers, as follows:
 * User links: Help:Skins (I think that's the only useful link at present, but there may be more, e.g. to User:Monobook.css)
 * Admin links: New page Manual:Skin configuration which is where the current Manual:Skins should be moved. This page should be reworked to be a bit more readable while we're at it.  There should also be links to all the relevant config. settings and any other pages that admin users would find useful.
 * Developer links: Manual:Skinning, the various parser hooks that apply to skinning, links to Manual:Code and any other relevant code bits.
 * Also, we should link to the Sites using MediaWiki/gallery somewhere - maybe in one of the above or perhaps separately.
 * That would be my suggestion - thoughts?
 * --HappyDog 16:27, 27 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I think that's a really good idea. Something similar could be done for the extensions pages.  Right now, Manual:Extensions is more or less information on how to install extensions.  Manual:Tag Extensions and Manual:Parser Functions which used to be Extending wiki markup are developer information.  There are about 5 other pages that have various duplicative or extra information that could be linked too.  I'm heading to lunch but I'll be back in an hour or so.  --Cneubauer 16:44, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Moving Manual:Special pages
Could you please move or delete Manual:Special pages and then move Manual:Special Pages to Manual:Special pages. If you want to keep the content on the current page, you could move it to Manual:Special pages/old or something and I'll merge it in later. I think most of the info covered there is already in the much more robust Manual:Special Pages. Thanks. --Cneubauer 23:16, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Done. I moved the original to Manual:Special pages/old for merging. --HappyDog 23:21, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Manual:Installation_guide
Hi, I left you a note on the talk page here: Manual_talk:Installation_guide. Thanks. --Cneubauer 18:14, 29 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Ah, sorry, I forgot about sentence case. --Cneubauer 18:16, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

GFDL
Ugh, so GFDL'd stuff has to be kept? Is that because we merged some of the content into other pages and we have to maintain the history? Is there anyway to archive pages like that so they are still around but not anywhere that a user would run into them without specifically looking for them? --Cneubauer 20:16, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Yup, that's why. To be honest, if anyone goes to "some page/old" and then sees a massive banner that says THIS PAGE IS OLD and is still under the impression that it is current information, then I don't think there's much we can do to help them. In short, I think it's fine to leave it where it is. --HappyDog 20:53, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Westcoast Tafe wiki pages
Hi, Last night I created a few wiki pages: Hospitatilty and Tourism, and one called Hospitality. I was wondering why these pages had been deleted? Was there something I should have done differently?

I'm a library technician from Westcoast Tafe, and these pages were created to help our students find resources that they need.

I would love to know what I could have done differently? Thanks.

Kirsty Oxwell Westcoast Tafe Joondalup.lrc@westcoasttafe.wa.edu.au


 * You are on the wrong wiki, that's why! See the comment on your talk page by Mormegil. I hope find your home soon! --HappyDog 02:06, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

HI Happy, so how do i go about deleting my user account? as I don't need it?

Thanks.


 * I'm not sure you can - or at least you can't do it without some developer digging into the database. Why not just stop using it?  You can go to your preferences and remove your e-mail address if you're worried about that, but otherwise I don't think there is any personal information that you need to worry about. --HappyDog 02:18, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Hiding Categories
Under Help talk:Categories, you mentioned a CSS trick for hiding the display of categories. I presume this is a wiki-wide or possibly user-level modification? Can one hide the display of categories for a specific page? Even better, can one prevent specific categories from being displayed within a specific page?

A bit of context: This issue arose on the French Wiktionary, where the translation template (used to specify the translations of a French word into another language) categorises the page where it appears under various categories such as "Category:Translations into English", etc. The category pages thus created are very helpful in enriching the vocabulary for the target languages, as translations into that language will usually be far more numerous than Wiktionary entries for those same words. However, the typical Wiktionary word page's listing of categories quickly becomes very cumbersome and hides more relevant categories in the resulting clutter (e.g. "huit", where 24 of the 28 categories are translation ones). I was hoping there existed a means for the template to categorise the page whilst at the same time preventing the display of this categorisation (using a magic word similar to DEFAULTSORT, maybe).

I looked into using the "backlinks trick", which would indeed solve the display problem, but since there is apparently no way to sort the resulting list of backlinks, it makes the pseudo-category listing nearly useless.

Please help.

Urhixidur 18:46, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Nad
He's still doing reverting legitmate bugs like http://www.mediawiki.org/w/index.php?title=Extension_talk:Simple_Forms&curid=13860&diff=126573&oldid=126570 and I tire of it. —Eep² 04:47, 1 September 2007 (UTC)


 * It doesn't matter it was not removed again after eep put it back, I've just done a strike-out on an incorrect statement and added responses to suggest a solution. --Nad 09:02, 1 September 2007 (UTC)


 * No you just didn't, Nad--you also removed a link to an old page revision that details a bug. See http://www.mediawiki.org/w/index.php?title=Extension_talk%3ASimple_Forms&diff=126625&oldid=126615 for proof (link to revision since Nad will most likely edit/delete parts he doesn't like again). Your games aren't fooling anyone... —Eep² 10:52, 1 September 2007 (UTC)


 * And now Nad is doing similar things on DPL's website... —Eep² 03:38, 4 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Eep - I have reviewed the original discussion that led to this situation, and here is my understanding based on this revision:
 * 1. You reported a bug on the extension's talk page.
 * 2. Nad attempted to trouble-shoot the problem with you via a few modifications to your wiki.
 * 3. You refused to allow him access to your wiki, which he needed to debug the problem (which is your prerogative).


 * No, he did/does not need access to my wiki in order to debug the problem; it would just make debugging "easier" (or so he claims). However, I think otherwise and offerred to try anything on my wiki that he would--I would be the "middleman". —Eep² 04:50, 4 September 2007 (UTC)


 * 4. Nad said that without this help he wouldn't be able to do anything more to help you (which is his prerogative).
 * 5. You began getting angry and accusing Nad of 'lying' about being away and making other personal attacks.


 * You forgot the reasons why I got angry at Nad: for ignoring me while responding to others (all the while claiming to be on vacation). —Eep² 04:50, 4 September 2007 (UTC)


 * 6. Nad stopped responding to you.


 * Because I wouldn't give him access to my wiki and he thus deemed me a "timewaster" because I continued calling him out on his hypocritical antics (responding to others and not me--and claiming he was on vacation as his excuse), posting bug reports, etc. —Eep² 04:50, 4 September 2007 (UTC)


 * 7. Nad tidied up his extension's talk page.


 * Gee, what a "pleasant" way to put him removing legitimate bugs from the talk page, Happydog, after he allegedly "moved" them from his wiki (which he did he only moved the "undefinedundefunedundefined" bug, leaving many others out). —Eep² 04:50, 4 September 2007 (UTC)


 * I have not yet seen anything on this wiki that, in my opinion, puts Nad in the wrong. I am not involved in the other wiki you mention so can't comment on that - nor should I be expected to.  If you have a problem on another site then take it up with the administrators there.


 * I will if it becomes a further issue (which I suspect it will given Nad's attitude towards me). However, I feel it is relevant as support for his actions on this wiki. —Eep² 04:50, 4 September 2007 (UTC)


 * It seems that you have certain expectations of the volunteer open-source developers who work on these extensions, which are at odds with the reality of the situation. As volunteers, developers choose how they want to spend their valuable time and they are unlikely to choose to spend it helping people who, in their opinion are unhelpful or do not treat them with respect.  In fact, they are under no obligation to provide any kind of support at all, so any help they do offer should be treated as if it were a favour from a stranger, not as a public service to which you have a right.  Nad offered you this help, you turned it down and then got angry with him.  I don't think I would have responded much differently, to be honest.  --HappyDog 04:17, 4 September 2007 (UTC)


 * See above for why your "review" is flawed and simply incorrect. —Eep² 04:50, 4 September 2007 (UTC)