User talk:Happy-melon

__NOINDEX__  Dear, Welcome to MediaWiki.org !

Yes, Welcome! This site is dedicated to the documentation of the MediaWiki software, the software behind many wikis, including that of Wikipedia and the Wikimedia Foundation projects.

Please, take a look at the following pages. They might prove useful to you as a newcomer here:
 * About this site
 * How does MediaWiki work?
 * Help:Editing pages
 * Help:Navigation
 * Manual:FAQ

If you have any questions, please ask me on my talk page. Once again, welcome, and I hope you quickly feel comfortable here, and find this site a beneficial documentation of the MediaWiki software. Thanks, and regards, Sir Lestaty de Lioncourt 22:30, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Help:Extension:ParserFunctions
Hello, imho, we should import meta:Help:ParserFunctions and merge it with Extension:ParserFunctions rather than creating one new page which seems to be a duplicate of the page currently on meta. i Alex  16:34, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
 * The page on meta shouldn't be there; all help content should be here at mediawiki.org. Once we've found a place for the content here, we can soft-redirect the help pages at meta and the various wikimedia wikis to that content and have it centralised in one place.  I've posted on Project:Forum about maybe making another help namespace for content related to extensions. Also, we can't just "import" content from meta if we want it to be freely-distributable help content, as there are license issues.  Similarly, help content can't go in the Extension: namespace. Happy ‑ melon 16:58, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Extension: namespace is fine for help about extensions, and there's already a lot of help in extensions pages (such as Extension:InputBox). It would be a pain for extensions writers to have to split documentation in two different pages (one in Help: and the other one in Extension:). i Alex  17:06, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Hey there, I am used to using wikipedia, and was having trouble creating a few templates there because of a problem with the #time parser function when getting a 2 year date. I listed my question here, but I noticed you were the person who edited the page most, so I thought I would write on your talk page. 2 questions: 1) if the problem were fixed would it automatically apply on wikipedia too? (I am unfamiliar with the relation between mediawiki and wikipedia), and 2) would you have any suggestions on how to fix it or workarounds if not? I have an account on wikipedia if it is easier to communicate over there, but I don't have one on here, so I will just sign with an IP address, I suppose. Feel free to respond here, or on the ParserFunctions talk page link I asked on as well. (I gave more specific examples of the problem there) I'll check back later. Thanks! 24.236.101.233 07:27, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Request
Please can you block my old account, for me, with the edit summary "Abandoned account". --Blackline1000 21:06, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Why do you need it to be blocked? Wouldn't redirecting its user and talk pages to your new account suffice? If you do want this done, you'll need to confirm that you are the owner of the old account too, by making an edit with it. Happy ‑ melon 21:11, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I just did make an edit with it before creating this account. I wanted it blocked to prevent it being compromised. Anyway, I'll redirect user and talk pages now. --Blackline1000 21:13, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Done. Enjoy! Happy ‑ melon 21:18, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Another minor change to #switch:
Hi, Happy-melon. Being I a bit cautious, can you please add this another minor change to Help:Extension:ParserFunctions for me? I relized that "This function compares one input value against several test cases, returning a string associated whith the first match found "
 *   &rarr; 

I supposed that it could have been Bar Baz or BarBaz. Thanks, Gustronico 04:42, 24 May 2009 (UTC)


 * No need to be cautious, go ahead and add it yourself. Please don't think from my consistent tweaks over your edits that I don't think they're valuable; they are, very much so, we just have to try very hard to avoid the bloat of "oh it does this too" that's turned meta:Help:Template into such a horrible mess.  As long as they're structured properly, pertinent functional details like this are very important. Happy ‑ melon 09:12, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Typo of the day
Thanks. --Ed Poor 22:39, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Auto-archiving on Project:Support desk/Sections/Formatting (and perhaps elsewhere ...)
Hello, Happy-melon! Nice idea, but first there are some other archives (have a look at Project:Support desk/Archives), and second there have been a lot of questions without any answers or suggestions for solutions, including mine. Possibly some of those questions have been answered by the questioners themselves, but I think the good way would be: First asking if it's answered, waiting for an answer, and then archiving if there is a positive answer or if there is not an answer after some days (and of course not archiving, if there is a negative answer and the questioner is still waiting for a solution). Best regards -- JörgM 84.156.133.80 18:41, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Hi, and thanks for the comment. I'm hoping that having this autoarchiving to clear out old threads will actually encourage us to be more consistent with handling new questions in the first place.  I'd consider anything that's not answered after three weeks to be 'stale', in as much as the OP is likely to have given up and no longer cares if they get a response (either they've worked it out for themselves, worked around it, or just given up).  Of course there will be exceptions, as you've pointed out.  Feel free to restore any questions that you are still monitoring; hopefully clearing out the 'dead wood' will allow us to focus on them more effectively. Thanks, Happy ‑ melon 21:12, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I've moved the archived threads to the proper archives. Happy ‑ melon 21:26, 27 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Have still found Project:Support desk/Sections/Formatting/Archive 1 (see also ). By the way: The bot took away the second part of Project:Support_desk/Sections/Formatting, probably because of problems to recognize the pre-tag correctly and/or to recognize the correct next headline outside the pre-tags. Best regards -- JörgM 84.156.135.187 09:25, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

hello
About this magic word question. Why have they been talking of my nickname there: 49575 ? --almaghi 15:24, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
 * All the comments are using the magic word.  In certain situations, such as that, the software doesn't have a sensible value for "who edited this page last" (because it's not really a page, per se) and so it falls back to the default value, which is the current user, whoever that might be.  So wherever you see "Al Maghi", I see "Happy-melon", and other users see their usernames.  It's extremely confusing, I agree. Happy ‑ melon 16:30, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
 * All right! Yeah I was really confuse by the way, thanks for those explanations.

Tz database
I have a problem in the en Wikipedia, described at Help_talk:Magic_words. Assuming DISPLAYTITLE is set, using this value could be a nice solution. Couldn't calling just return it's current value, and if not set returning PAGENAME? TimeCurrency 15:01, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
 * PAGENAMEE solves the problem. Still it might be nice to be able to access DISPLAYTITLE in other cases. TimeCurrency 02:33, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Joe Gazz84
Thank you.Very Much Joe Gazz84 21:57, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Will you please add me to administrators as well. Being an editor does not give me the full ability to work with users. I have 2 parents who work as customer service and I am very helpful. I appreciate the editor but will you please add me to administrators. You won't be disappointed.


 * Please post to the bottom of talk pages.
 * Administrator rights are not required to add or edit content in our documentation, but only for lower-level maintenance tasks, which you do not seem to have the familiarity with MediaWiki to be effective at completing. Why do you want admin rights, other than for the extra badge? Happy ‑ melon 22:34, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

I am sorry for the top post. I would like to be able to help revert and keep vandalism out. I also see broken redicts and need admin rights to fix them. I would like to help patrol edits (which as an editor I cannot). I would also like to help with requests, and preforming lower-level maintenance tasks. Please give me a chance. I will do what the staff and users need, quickly and efficiently. I do know about Media Wiki. Joe Gazz84 22:38, 21 March 2010 (UTC)


 * You have 43 edits across all WMF projects; the remaining 16 of which are on enwiki where all bar one of your edits have been reverted. You are very enthusiastic, and that's great, but you do not have the knowledge of MW needed to properly administer a site, nor the editing history needed to convince the bureaucrats that you can be trusted with the admin bits.  Admins here are like Wild West sherrifs: unlike a large wiki like the English Wikipedia, admins here are essentially vetted on nomination and then let loose with no ongoing scrutiny; so it is important that we are confident that you will make a trustworthy and competent admin.  Build up a history of competent and constructive edits here, and then ask for admin status.  Happy ‑ melon 22:59, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for Your advice and I will take it into consideration. Will you please explain what an "editor" does then, and how to properly do my "job"?


 * Editors edit pages :D More seriously, this site is for documentation of MediaWiki functions and features; and so the 'job' of an editor is to improve that documentation. Happy ‑ melon 23:13, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

So for any reason like grammar or making things make sense and things like that. Like a newspaper editor? Also is it OK if I remove deletion notices if the page is CLEARLY not for speedy deletion or deletion. (Wiki Media Images and Manuals)

Well said
Tisane 06:40, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Extension:Oversight_2
Hi Happy-melon, did you notice my comment at the talkpage? I think Oversight 2 is not duplicate to Oversight - and it works fine. :-) --Steevie 07:36, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

e unary operator
Could you please review this change? -- Hamilton Abreu 23:19, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Rather than just undo
Gday. This undo. You may have thought that it as a random place, then maybe rather than undo, start the conversation to see what is meant. A straight undo is just plain unhelpful and gives a rather imperious overtone with that commentary. I believe that it was relevant as the use of magic words in the parser section there that where an internal pipe is used that it won't work unless it is protected by. While it may be bleeding obvious to the superior hackers, some of us mortals need a little more reminder and instruction. — billinghurst  sDrewth  01:04, 11 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Something like enwiki's BRD principle applies. Whether or not the note is useful overall, tacking it on to the end of an entirely-unrelated sentence is definitely not the right place to put it; it is in fact a "rather random place".  Since the principle of pipe-armouring applies to all brace constructs, not just parser functions, the note probably belongs at Help:Templates if there isn't one there already; at the same time, it needs to be clarified or expanded to properly cover the issue.  I would be happy to engage in a discussion on this subject, or to review a further edit; but the onus is on you to initiate that dialogue.  Which you've done here, so thanks for that.  Happy ‑ melon 09:47, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Interested in a trip to improve MediaWiki documentation?
Did you know about the Doc Camp this October?

"Individuals with a passion for free documentation about free software may apply to attend by filling out the application form and submitting before 5 August, 2011.... Accommodation and food will be covered by the GSoC Doc Camp. Part or complete travel costs can also be applied for as part of the application process."

I'm going to send a proposal to get MediaWiki into the Doc Camp and to have us do a Quick Sprint to improve MediaWiki's documentation. Please let me know if you know people I should include in my proposal.

best, Sumanah 17:04, 22 July 2011 (UTC) Volunteer Development Coordinator, Wikimedia Foundation

revision report "lies"
Re: the "lies" of the revision report, I think you'll find that the number is correct if you don't count revisions that have more than one tag (like r86714 and r87284) more than once.