User talk:Stephen G. Brown/Archive 24

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:51, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Stephen, it is obvious your answers are in very good and competent faith, but the user who's asking them has been blocked for 6 months for block evasion, and I am quite sure that would be extended to an indefinite ban were I to make a formal complaint. So I am just letting you know on the assumption that if this user actually serves out his ban he'll become a more productive member of the community.

:)

μηδείς (talk) 00:05, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. —Stephen (talk) 08:30, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Stephen G. Brown. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. Mdann52 (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Hózhó. Since you had some involvement with the Hózhó redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. - CHAMPION ^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)} 02:06, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

Hi. For some strange reason I'm having trouble editing. I can't save any edit when I am logged in. I am an Admin on Navajo Wikipedia, but I can't save or delete there either. I'm a Bureaucrat on English Wiktionary, but I don't have any problems there, only on the Wikipedias. Every time I try to save something, I get this message: Sorry! We could not process your edit due to a loss of session data. Please try saving your changes again. If it still does not work, try logging out and logging back in. I have tried logging out and logging back in several times, to no avail. I had to log out in order to save this message. Is anyone else having this problem on the Wikipedias? It's weird. (User:Stephen G. Brown) 2602:306:3155:5DD0:643F:99C3:9FE0:59E3 (talk) 20:48, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

I get that message sometimes when I take too long between the editing and saving. I just press save again, and it works as usual. Do you have any plugins or addons that clear cookies or storage?

There's this on MediaWiki, but it's related to the server side of things. —Hexafluoride ^{Ping me if you need help, or post on my talk} 06:59, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Quite a few times I just typed one word and tried to save, but it was the same story, saving not possible. I also tried multiple times on each edit, but nothing worked. I even closed all programs and rebooted, to no avail, and I logged out and back in several times. I also tried in other Wikipedias such as the Russian, Persian, and a couple of others. No deal.

I did not have any problems on any of the Wiktionaries, nor in meta.wikimedia.org. I only had this problem in all of the Wikipedias. Not just saving edits, but also rollbacks. In my 12 or 13 years here I've never seen anything like it. However, this afternoon, it seems to have fixed itself. Everything is suddenly working again. Thanks for looking into it for me. Merry Christmas! —Stephen (talk) 20:33, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

I spoke too soon. I was in en.wiktionary making some edits, then suddenly I could not edit anything there anymore. I tried and tried, but it wouldn't let me save or rollback. I closed all windows and rebooted, but it did no good. I tried for another 10 minutes, then suddenly everything started to work again. So I edited for another 15 or 20 minutes, then it all stopped again. I've been trying for the past 20 minutes since then, but no luck. I just don't understand what's going on. I did look at the mediawiki link you gave above, about loss of session data, but that is way over my head, programmer wise. I didn't understand any of that.

When I log out, then log back in, I get this strange message: Central user log in No active login attempt is in progress for your session. Then I appear to be logged in, but nothing works in Wiktionary. I can edit on Wikipedia however. —Stephen (talk) 11:24, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

Try in another web browser. If it works there, please specify in which web browser it is broken. --Svetlana Tkachenko (talk) 12:41, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

Ultimately you may want to post to Wikipedia:Village pump (technical). The helpme template is fine to ask general questions but when you have a deep technical issue it may be best to bring it to a forum where all the tech wizards will see it in one go.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 14:28, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, guys. My browser is the latest version of Firefox (50.1.0) for Win10. I have never used Internet Explorer, but I will try to launch it and see what happens. Thank you for the suggestions. —Stephen (talk) 18:33, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

Okay, I launched Internet Explorer, which is working fine. So it seems that my Firefox (50.1.0) for Win10 is broken. I suspect that it might have something to do with the cookies. I looked at the Wiktionary and Wikipedia cookies, and one of them is named Central user log in. One of my error messages begins with Central user log in. I think the time has come for me to go to Wikipedia:Village pump (technical). —Stephen (talk) 22:06, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Stephen G. Brown. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Ħêllô, shalem shaluthe, administrator & bureaucrat Stephen G. Brown,
I'm Nemzag, can you give me a link to a Stewart, because I want my bban ببان‎ [R‑0668] ("separation, inimity, division, disunion, discord.") in Wiktionary to be simply removed, because he was abusive & injust (Article 19 of U.N. Human Rights)...
Or at least to be able to P.M. other's administrator's and edit "Talk Page's" to ask pro an edit pro term's
I'm bored to make edit's anonymously, who are not recorded as made by me, and to backup & register them by my own, in a list, on my WebPage.
It's quite a waste of time...
Help me thank you...
Ciao.
ͰΑΘϷΑΝΑΝΑΤΕΣ‑ϒΣ (dôr.) ΗΤϷΑΝΑΝΘΕΣ‑ΟΣ (att.) ͿΗϷΑΟΛΙΕΥϷΟΛϜƏ Α̃ΜΑΝΓΖΕΔͿƏ / حطشأنانثس يشأعليهوسعلۋ أمنجزهدي (talk)  03:30, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Nemzag. User talk:RadiX is a steward who speaks Albanian. There are other stewards listed here: m:Stewards. —Stephen (talk) 12:40, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

Ħêllô حللغ & Ħoly حعلي Olleh علله, Stephen G. Brown.

Tʰang تانج you pro giving me these information's,
I'm glad that he speak little bit Albanian and that he have attained such a high position in hierarchy of WikiFoundation, soon when I have time, I will contact him, because I'm busy since I'm going to high school to learn Web Dewelopment (H‑T.M.L., C.S.S., C.M.S., Server Script : P.H.P., S.Q.L. {MySQL, PostGreSQL}, Client Script JavaScript, jQuery, Design, FrameWork) pro my "TaoCodex project" who is my T.F.E. {Trawalië dë fĩnë dë Êtudë}, that I told you about, a long time ago, I succeeded the first year, and know I learn client script's & ob‑ject prog‑ramma‑tion's.

But still, in my case, I would also like to contact a Muslim Stewart, because I'm sure that is the real reason of my bban (adding sourced old Albanian term's, with Persian, Hindi, Arabic/Hebrew & Greek origin abusively, systematically & absurdly reverted), do you have any in your Wiki‑Foundation ? Because I know that the ancient Russian American executive director Lila Tretikov, is not anypoly in command & that a new one (Katherine Maher) is in charge and that she learned Semitic language, so maybe be now, you have recruited Arab or Muslim in Wiki‑administration ?

And I would like to talk with any of these Stewart's & Wizard's… About the trouble that I have with some admin's & user's :

• reverting sourced information (I call that vandalism),
• reverting correct cognating & related term's (I call that dissimulation / censure),
• reverting Gheg sourced dialect variation's (I call that cultural patrimony destruction).

And this without having any knowledge of it and even of the standard Albanian {according to their Babel panel}, and preventing me to use this cool & practical interface, like anyone else in this Woldr, pro unknown, ethnic, religious & abusive reason's, when I made donation's, so I want to regulate this situation… Before I take action in tribunal as I said before, because now I found two advocate's {specialist of media's legislation's] and I'm looking in what direction this request will go, before I deposit my complain, I will also write a article in my WP explaining some abusive block & revert on anonymous I.P. (V.P.N. ?)
They should not waste their time reverting true information's, using always the same "summary" : "If you think this rollback is in error, please leave a message on my talk page.", because they don't have any plausible argument's, it's so boring like in ushtar and I don't want to talk with them because it's a spend of time to try to convince thick‑headed & hide‑bounded individual's.
My apology…

Ciao. Peace !
ͰΑΘϷΑΝΑΝΑΤΕΣ‑ϒΣ (dôr.) ΗΤϷΑΝΑΝΘΕΣ‑ΟΣ (att.) ͿΗϷΑΟΛΙΕΥϷΟΛϜƏ Α̃ΜΑΝΓΖΕΔͿƏ / حطشأنانثس يشأعليهوسعلۋ أمنجزهدي (talk) 16:47, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

Yes, there are Muslim Stewards, such as User talk:علاء, User talk:HakanIST, and User talk:Mardetanha. I can assure you that there is no religious bias. If there were any bias or bigotry of a religious nature, it would more likely be against Christians, but even the Christians are tolerated if they follow the rules and don't cause trouble. —Stephen (talk) 02:28, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

Please do not "fix" links to redirects that are not broken. --Guy Macon (talk) 11:43, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

Which links are you referring to? I'm working on links to English Wiktionary. All the links I fixed were broken... that is, they did not reach the desired page. —Stephen (talk) 11:53, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Stephen G. Brown. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:04, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Per User Amatulić's suggestion, I am no longer active on this wiki. Please leave any messages at nv:Choyoołʼįįhí bichʼįʼ yáshtiʼ:Stephen G. Brown. —Stephen (talk) 05:38, 1 8 J u n e 2 0 1 2 (UTC)

I answered your question on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Nasta%CA%BFl%C4%ABq#Nastaliq_font_used_for_WP_articles i'm not sure if that quite solves it, i've been trying to find those fonts for ages too. Irtapil (talk) 20:10, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

May I ask you to do the same with the óther sections in the article? And also with Bulgarian lexis? Or at least to tell me how I can do it myself, I am not really a formatting genius... VMORO 15:35, Mar 20, 2005 (UTC)~

Could I ask why you're adopting underlining? The Wikipedia standard when referring to a word rather than the thing it denotes is to use italics. Underlining looks ugly and could mislead people into thinking that it indicated a link - and even in the case of links, many users set their browser to suppress the underlining, for aesthetic reasons. Maybe the problem is that you think the "italic" version of Cyrillic looks too different from the upright version, but many other articles use it. rossb 10:41, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I've used underlining in this case because of the Cyrillic script. I've been reading and writing Cyrillic for longer than most people have been alive, so for me italicized Cyrillic presents no problem. However, italicized Cyrillic is difficult for anyone who is new or unaccustomed to it. We've already discussed this on Talk:Bulgarian_language, including possible solutions. Notice, for instance, how these Cyrillic letters appear in italics and other formats: вдигятопол, вдигятопол, вдигятопол, вдигятопол, вдигятопол.

We did the Bulgarian language page using italics at first, but the result was terrible ... and unreadible. You are welcome to do it a different way if you can think of a better one, but my opinion as a long-time professional typographer is that underlining is a vast improvement over italics in this case.

That other articles use Cyrillic italics does not strike me as a valid argument. Any article intended to be read by people who do not regularly use Cyrillic should not use Cyrillic italics, unless it's a discussion about Cyrillic italics. All those other articles should be changed.

As to users who set their browser to suppress underlining ... then they will simply see regular Cyrillic in contrast to the surrounding Roman text. It will be still much easier for them to read, and the appearance of the page will still be superior to one filled with a lot of Cyrillic italics.

The same holds true for words in any other language that uses some unusual letters. Italics tend to make them unreadable. For example, the Azerbaijani name for their own country: Azərbaycan Respublikası vs. Azərbaycan Respublikası ... italics kill the schwa. —Stephen 12:06, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I take your point about the unfamiliarity of italic Cyrillic. The m for T is pretty confusing, and on holiday in Ukraine last year I was quite puzzled as to what the backwards s might be. But I wonder why you rejected bold as an alternative? Certainly whenever I see underlining on a web page, I have an urge to click on it. More generally, since you're proposing something potentially affecting a number of articles, shouldn't this be discussed on Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)? By the way the italic schwa looks fine on my browswer (the much-maligned MSIE)rossb 13:19, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Well, the second thing we tried on the Bulgarian page after rejecting italics was ... bold. It was certainly an improvement as far as legibility, but it was grotesque ... too ugly for words. As far as I can see, the choice is between underlining and a font change.

It won't hurt anything if you click on an underlined word, and the lack of action will be a good indication that it's not a link. People quickly learn not to click on RED links (because they don't go anywhere worthwhile), and they will figure out underlined words just as quickly.

You must have a really good font if you can see an italic schwa. The fonts that came with my Windows 2000 and Word 2000 don't have that letter, or any other unusual Roman italics.

I have never visited the Village Pump, but I agree that it should be discussed, so that something can be done about the other pages. One page in particular that I've noticed is the Common phrases in various languages ... all those italics make it illegible and unusable, besides the way it looks. Italics on a monitor are even worse than italics on paper, and even on paper they should be used with extreme discretion and vanishingly seldom. Underlining is a far better tool, both for legibility and for esthetic appearance.

—Stephen 16:52, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Hello, Stephen. I'm hoping you can take a look at Killer language. That article was marked for cleanup in mid October, but it isn't showing on October's cleanup list. I'm not sure if it ever was listed. Google gives 1,090 hits for "killer language," so I assume it is a term that is in actual use. Is there useful material in that article? Should it be cleaned up or should it redirect elsewhere? Thank you. SWAdair | Talk 06:50, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I had not seen this article before. It's an interesting outlook, if a bit strained. It discusses a problem that is both real and very serious, but I don't see how this view (of ascribing the death of one language to the "actions" of another, rather than to the laws, policies and practices of governments and societies) could be useful or effective. To solve the problem of dying languages, attitudes and laws have to be changed, and blaming English seems pointless to me. And in recent years, attitudes have indeed been changing (I'm not sure why), and minority dialects and languages are suddenly becoming respectable.

I suppose we could keep the article around for a while, since it seems to be popular. I'll clean it up a bit. —Stephen 09:32, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

• Thank you. That article has been on my 2Bchecked list for a while. I'm just now getting around to working on the 2Bchecked list. Thank goodness you edit regularly -- it wasn't difficult to find you when I went looking for a linguist. Happy editing! SWAdair | Talk 09:44, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)