User talk:Verdy p/Archive 2015

From OpenStreetMap Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Archives ± : 2012, 2015, 2016 Jan-Jun

Hello!

Just friendly notice that you can edit wiki content more efficiently/robust using semi-automatic wiki editors. But we careful and check your edits for correctness. Sometimes I'm using http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser:

1. Options-preferences (CTRL+P):

Project: custom http:/ wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/

2. File-login (CTRL+L)

Add

Username: Verdy p

You may also store wiki password but this is insecure/up to you. Xxzme (talk) 00:09, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

I have tried it in the past in other wikis, and really don't like this tool (too much insecure and very errorprone). Thanks anyway for the suggestion.
On the opposite I use sometimes PyWiki scripts on some wikis. — Verdy_p (talk) 00:10, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
Sometimes you spend more time than manually editing, but sometimes it prevent thousands of boring edits.
Yes, not tool is perfect or for all use-cases, I just wanted to make sure you aware of these options. Xxzme (talk) 00:14, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Please save your time doing edits about Category:Administrative and it's variants

It was massive and useless for any purpose/task. Currently it contains 1/3 of unsorted information. For example, there nothing administrative in Category:Quality_Assurance. It is about tools/services we use. Xxzme (talk) 02:28, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

There's a cleanuop requested at top of page, and grouping pages by languages helps maintaining them (notably because their actual page names are translated and their languages navbox are not always working correctly due to missing links.
This is not a lot of edits to do, even if it takes some time; these edits are simple to do. — Verdy_p (talk) 02:30, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
Yes, this was really massive cat and I placed label. Okay then, but don't forget to {{hiddencat}} language versions and copy {{Cleanup}} request in language versions too, or at least refer to changes in Category:Administrative. Xxzme (talk) 02:41, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
Ok I'll add the template in those few categories.
Sorting pages by language is needed, as well as filling the many missing categories and solving interlanguage links spread everywhere.
This caetgory is just the first one I experimented to perform cleanup (in addition to the top level one that is now correctly structured).
This is not overcategorisation: the intent is to use same categories are used in English and other languages, and they reproduce the same existing structure.
But still paintin the English categories clean and more easily maintenable (this is difficult when there are various translated page names filling them and we don't really know how they are categorized without following various links. I just consider what is existing now: it is also easier to perform maintenance and recategorisation by topic when titles are using a single language in a category, and easier to see some naming conventions (this still does not prohibit renaming pages for showing an alternate localized title: languages navboxes are working even if the listed links are redirects to a translated name. — Verdy_p (talk) 02:48, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
and we don't really know how they are categorized without following various links yes, thank you for participation! Xxzme (talk) 03:02, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Language templates

Hello, I've noticed that you added the name of the page as a parameter to several instances of Template:Languages. Isn't that only necessary if the page name is different from the canonical (English) name? --Tordanik 09:42, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

That's to make sure it is kept before the page is renamed, to preserve interlanguage links. Many translators also forget to incldue the origianl name before renaming their pages (and then have interlnaugage links no longer working: you did the same error while renaming some English pages!). In fact such use is documented since long in the translation guide (linked from the Languages box). — Verdy_p (talk) 09:44, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
Surely if the English page is moved, the other languages' pages should be changed to avoid the redirect? But ok, I understand that it makes problems less likely. --Tordanik 13:18, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
This concerns all renamings: either when renaming a translated page, or renaming the English page: the Languages will still continue working even if you forget it or leave the redirect on purpose (for example pages in different languages do not have the same title, there's a common English name that will redirect to them from any page in the Languages bar.
In summary, it's best to include it even in the English version, directly at the beginning, so that translations will be created by copying the name, and links will continue to work (otherwise we don't know exactly what was the title to which the new name or the old names were refering to, we have to look in page histories...). — Verdy_p (talk) 13:23, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

I have suggestion that we should utilize data from Template2 when we sort software

I'm not sure why it wasn't done before: Template:Software2. Probably not many editors can edit template so it place categories (Category:Software by supported platform) after you split |platform= value by ';'

I suggest not to use for-loops in template (I don't think there more than 8 platforms per program). Can we use explode 4 or 8 times per each Template2 - what is your opinion on this? Will it work? Xxzme (talk) 12:31, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

I also don't like "for-loops" emulations in templates, they are extremely costly/inefficient/slow. It is best to expand them when the number is known. This is a very old fashion of doing things, that does not really help.
However, when unrolling loops, we can still use a subtemplate to simplify, but we should avoid excessive expansions.
I have not looked for "Software2" about how this could be done, though. The are strange uses of the language code (this is also true for the template used to decribe tags in multiple languages as they generate categories without prefixes, which are not easily navigatable).
Verdy_p (talk) 12:35, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
Actually I don't have concerns about performance, probably WM is fast enough nowdays. I will take little break from wiki today, if you have interest in this you can sort everything by platform here: Category:Software by supported platform.
[1] [2]. But our Special:Version says there no loops enabled. Xxzme (talk) 12:53, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
I was speaking about the for-loop emulation that still exists in Commons or in some cases in English Wikipedia (which are being phased out due to their huge cost and using real tricks of the MW syntax).
This wiki server is still outdated (an old version) and not very performant enough to use loops (and we still don't have the Lua extension deployed here to make it more easily). — Verdy_p (talk) 12:56, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

weeklyOSM

Hey, are you mad? We are currently building up a wikisite and category for our newsblog, why do you delete this?? --Ziltoidium (talk) 15:19, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

I am not "MAD" (why being insulting) ?
Because there's another category using capitals.... See "Category:WeeklyOSM", not "Weeklyosm" with lowercase (which has NO content, has been blanked, is not categorized, and has no links to it).
I have NOT asked the deletion of the correctly named category which has contents, has links, is categorized...
So the all lowercase named category is empty and is a clear duplicate (that is why it was blanked, when it should have been request-deleted).
This is standard cleanup: blanking pages is NOT enough, we ask for deletions. — Verdy_p (talk) 15:26, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi! Sorry, i didnt mean to offend you. Really sorry for that. I now see and understand what you meant. weeklyosm vs weeklyOSM. In this case you are right! It´s just that i got this email, that someone deleted my categories, we are currently working on. I didn´t know there is one wrong misspelled category. That´s ok, this one can really be deleted. I simply thought someone is destroying our current work. Sorry! --Ziltoidium (talk) 15:42, 9 May 2015 (UTC) I simply prefer to write on the discussion page and don´t edit without asking. My way..--Ziltoidium (talk) 15:45, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Breaking changes

Hello. In future, before making significant changes to templates used across the entire site, can you please check with wiki admins? You can easily find some in the IRC channel. You have a history of making sweeping changes that break a good chunk of the wiki's content, including the most recent edit to the Tags template. Thank you. --Dee Earley (talk) 16:25, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Can you point a page where there's a problem? I used many tests and previews before submitting and I made sure that it would work across languages, but may be there's something I've not seen. — Verdy_p (talk) 16:47, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
Oh I forgot to remove a final test code AFTER the template (this "find" code was part of a final preview test and I should have removed it before submitting, after previewing it, as it was below the doc part I did not see it).
My goal was only to unify the translated versions of this template and make them point to it (already I made the French version use the generic version) because we don't need translated versions that have to be maintained separately or that generate inconsistant cateogorization. — Verdy_p (talk) 16:55, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
I understand your intention but that doesn't change the fact that you are making sweeping changes to templates that are used in over 50% of the 30K content pages on the wiki. My request still stands, please check with other admins or on IRC before making such sweeping changes. Thank you --Dee Earley (talk) 19:31, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
These are not "sweeping changes": I have not removed any existing working functionality and the aspect of the site is not changed. Linking on the site is also not changed. and the 30K+ articles are still written the same way and continue working as intended.
There is still a lot of cleaning to do in many articles because of the red links that are generated or that go to the wrong page, or that are incorrectly categorized, or categorized to inexistant categories... but not because of this template (in fact there are many other old and broken templates that should be unified to use this maintained template).
If you look at what I did in the recent week, there was lot of cleanup (including for correcting the many errors that Xxxzme left all around when he ignored all other languages than English and when he restructured and renamed many pages without even looking for broken redirects).
The few bytes that were left in this template were unintentional and by accident, and extremely easy and fast to remove (anyone could have done such accidental error, even you and all admins; the result was also not dramatic, just some small garbage displayed after the links), as they were clearly separated; there was no severe "downtime", the site was still fully functional even if there were some extra characters displayed: they just demontrate to you that I was performing various tests before submitting, because I know that this wiki has some differences with wikis of Wikimedia, and notably the version of MediaWiki, and the set of supported extensions and their own versions) — Verdy_p (talk) 19:40, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
While you may not have changed page content this time, you are making (breaking) changes to templates that are used in every page of the wiki, and HAVE caused problems. Changes that affect a large proportion of the wiki are, by definition, sweeping. (And making changes while awaiting a reply isn't helpful) --Dee Earley (talk) 19:50, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
You are linking to things dating from 2012, where Translation of this site was completely incoherent, non functional. At that time, Only English was usable and navigation was broekn in many other places than the few ones that were working but partly broken in a short time. After my change, there were tend of thousands NEW links suddenly working and many more pages could be translated !
Almost all the current translation system comes from my work on this wiki. I have greatly helped cleaning up the situation. Even in that time, I reacted very fast (and you were not present at that time, and there was in fact nobody, except me, here to understand how to even start the cleanup process for translations!).
That work is still not terminated (and very few people understand how to do it or how to perform a compatible transition: they prefer rewriting or adding new ways for doing the same thing... and stopping to maintain it because they don't care about the later maintenance) — Verdy_p (talk) 19:54, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
As I said, I understand what you've been doing, and thank you, but you did just break 15K pages. That is fact. All I;m asking is that you run these changes past an admin or IRC first. Simple. --Dee Earley (talk) 19:58, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
I did not break 15K pages in such a way that they become completely unusable. The fix was extremely easy. Even admins hare are making tons of errors (without discussing them anywhere). I have corrected many of them (invalid CSS, bad assumptions, incorrect support for RTL languages by assuming English behavior everywhere...). Most of these problems are unknown to them, they are not experienced in them; it's not something that I condamn, nobody can know everything and there are always things unsuspected; everyone can do things that may break accidentaly but which is extremely minor compared to the improvements added. I assume good faith.
So excuse me for this very small perturbation that was not so dramatic (and no, 15K were NOT all affected even if 15K pages use the template).
If you are not convinced, look at how I recently fixed all the Map Features in Azerbaijani (I chose this language first because it has low volumes of visits and it was less risky, but it allowed making sure that the solution would work before going to more major languages)...
Finally to facilitate the maintenance of these smaller languages, it is needed to merge the solutions into a more centralized one, so in fine, this will require some changes in the templates used in the English versions to support some featutes, or to facilitate the transition (with additional temporary code added for compatibility).
Some templates do not need to be specialized by language, and notably Template:Tag (My intent is to redirect the specialization to the central basic version working also for English). — Verdy_p (talk) 20:08, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for understanding, I look forward to the further discussion on IRC. --Dee Earley (talk) 09:54, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
I have never used IRC for anything, I also don't chat, don't send SMS, don't chat. All for the same reason, I do not like instant communication that I consider garbage thrown immediately and without any history. Also It's not possible to manage time. Such use is extremely limited to basic administrative tasks (like confirming codes). — Verdy_p (talk) 11:35, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Stats page

I see you edit warring on the Stats page. Please don't make a nuisance of yourself so soon after we've gone through hassle of dealing with User:Xxzme. Just give us a break please. Stop editing the wiki for a while if you can't do it harmoniously. -- Harry Wood (talk) 09:01, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

I've not done edit warring, I've discussed it with someone already... Give him the time to reply if he wants. The old 2007 page is still there with its history, but separate from the redirects.
And if you are talking about Xxxzme, no admin has replied to my comment about him since its blocking... You are using a hurry solution against me here for something that was completely minor, I had made many fixes, removed broken links an fixed some layout in the Statistics page, they were completely blanked and none was applied to my changes in the page with newest name (which is "Stats", not "Statistics" the historic name created months before, but that is now in "Statistics/old").
I really suggest the renaming ("Statistics" can be safely deleted now, it only contains my own history, no real edit, the 2007 history is fully in "Statistics/old"; once this deletion of "Statistics" is done, with its dummy talk page also redirected with only one dummy edit from me, we will be able to restore the name that "Stats" should have kept, by renaming it finally to "Statistics", and then the new "Stats" redirects will be deleted onve the remaining old articles and talk page will reference either "Statistics" or possibly "Statistics/old" for a few ones, if we want to keep this 2007 early content and history) — Verdy_p (talk) 09:03, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
No hurry solution. I'm not telling you to stop editing the wiki. I'm telling you to stop editing the wiki if you can't do it harmoniously. -- Harry Wood (talk) 09:32, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
What "hamrmoniously" means here ? My corrections were effective, and BOTH names were are are still referenced, and some of them were even linked by double redirects that I had fixed.
Even the content was linking to a blocked abusive exernal site ("j.mp"): I had removed it. It was also linking to old sites that are not even reachable now (dead servers since long): these are clean now with my changes.
I had restructured the top of the page to give links to internal pages before the OSM-wiki-made reports and separated the reports that are no longer maintained since 2011.
Then I grouped the reports by nature of the statistics (registered users, contributions/changesets, geographic objects/GPX).
All sites in osm.org are linked to the top menu of the page, without havint to scann the long page to find them in various places in the middle of reports. This required a few tries to find the best grouping but also to decipher the ambiguous descriptions displayed within images themselves.
All images also have a descriptive heading allowing to locate them from the TOC (some of them are hard to differentiate, given that unrelated topics were mixed).
External sites are also separated between those that are active with updated statistics, and those displaying only old stats.
Was I wrong? And these changes was not an "edit war", they had just been blanked blindly... for non obvious reasons. — Verdy_p (talk) 09:40, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
Yeah all of that's fine, but I read the edit history as suggesting you're edit warring a little bit with Tordanik. Sorry if I got that wrong. Xxxzme has been testing my patience. -- Harry Wood (talk) 09:46, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
But Tordanik has not replied to my question on his talk page... How would he justify an "edit war", given that apparently he has still not read it (and he just performed a single blind blanking).
And this question is absolutely not related to my edits on the page itself, only about its "prefered" name selected via redirects. Tordanik did not care anything when he banked every correction and checks I did. He blanked that blindly by overwriting a redirect on everything, and by just keeping the old unmaintained content of "Stats" (now it shows my own corrections that were in the other page, nothing has been destroyed in the interim, nobody has contested these changes for now, so this is not an "edit war". — Verdy_p (talk) 09:51, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Description template

The template has to set a page title because any underscores in the key and value names are displayed as spaces otherwise. Also, what’s the point of a language box when the same template is used in every language?--Andrew (talk) 09:34, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

The language box was there, I did not add it. Or we are not talking about the same template. — Verdy_p (talk) 09:35, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
OK I see, it is part of ther generated code, but it is just not needed for the Template page itself (which is not a tag page and lacks some parameters). I've put it in includeonly. — Verdy_p (talk) 09:41, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
Note that there are still some problems to solve. For the capitalization problem I think I can find a solution for it, even if the DISPLAYTITLE is used. — Verdy_p (talk) 09:42, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Template:Collapse

see also: Template:Diskussion and Template:Popup and Template:Public Transport in Austria and Category:Navigational templates and ... --Reneman (talk) 16:00, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

What do you want I do there ? For now I've just unified the French version and the English version, but may be these templates you cite could use the English version as well? — Verdy_p (talk) 16:02, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Also I'd like to make a further request to admins on the content of the Javascript so that it will no longer display "hide" or "show", but black triangular symbols, with an additional hint (title="" attribute) when hovering them, displaying translatable words (these translations would be generated by Mediawiki on the server side at data-hide="hide" data-show="show" attributes on elements with class="Navframe" which can be set by translatable templates.
  • Finally the Javascript currently only looks for elementsByType('div') to then check if it has the class="NavFrame", when it should just look for elementsByClass("NavFrame") so that we can also use the same Javascript for collapsible table elements, or collapsible lists (including indented blocks which are in fact definition lists, i.e. "dl" elements in HTML)... It would also allow us to also collapse horizontal lists (spans with class="NavFrame" that can contain collapsible subspans in their direct children). There's no need of new CSS classes.
Verdy_p (talk) 16:13, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Template:Documentation

1 The margin shows where the template is over! The large margin is correct! 2px is too little! --Reneman (talk) 18:33, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

It's impossible for the doc part to collide with the content given its margin is still > 0, and given that the doc part uses also a thin contrasting border with its content.
We use such thing to measure margins create by the template (too many templates are forgetting to hide final newlines that generate additional paragraphs, and this tiny (but sufficient) margin helps diagnose it instantly. — Verdy_p (talk) 19:13, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
Note: we are not talking here about margins that separate two paragraphs of text or heading. he intent is to measure the vertical space visually and 2px is largely enough (it could even be 1px, but some browsers are overflowing a box border of 1px in the wrong direction and could eat 1 outer pixel. That's why there's an extra pixel.
In fact when you put text in a box, lines of text already have their own leading and training in the line-height, and here also we need minimum vertical margins (2px) after a contrasting border, but 0.5em of horizontal margin.
This is a general rule: don't add more vertical margins than necessary, otherwise they look very unbalanced. — Verdy_p (talk) 19:18, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
  • .template-documentation {clear: both; margin: 1em 0px 0px; border: 1px solid #AAA; background-color: #ECFCF4; padding: 1em;} source: w:Template:Documentation
  • Element {clear: both; margin-top: 1em; border: 2px dotted #666; background-color: #ECFCF4; padding: 0.6em;} source: w:commons:Template:Documentation
  • Element {clear: both; margin: 1em 0px 0px; border: 1px solid #AAA; background: none repeat scroll 0% 0% #ECFCF4; padding: 1em 1em 0.8em;} source: w:fr:Modèle:Documentation
These are bad examples! Excessive top margin but no bottom margin at all! And this causes lots of problem with layouts creating boxes within boxes (the top margins are adding up!). Due to these styles, almost all boxes are forced top cancel these default styles with style="" attributes in lots of places. (and most people also forget that with any non-zero margin, border or padding, the width 100% overflows the container box (and we start seeing horizontal scrollbars, or unaligned margins, and contents that can't even fir the screen width!). — Verdy_p (talk) 20:13, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Any use "margin: 1em"! We do that too! For this we need no discussion! Please no editwar! I do not want to protect the page ;o) Thank you for your understanding. --Reneman (talk) 19:53, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

This is not a template meant to be used in articles, it is specifically for developoing templates, documenting them and previewing them. 1em is also largely excessive with templates that have no preview at all but that only just their doc page, which is dense, it should remain near the top of page.
Major wikis don't use excessive margins for such technical template, where the thin border is used on purpose to create a visible delimitation (which is much clearer than a mere margin between two paragraphs.
Verdy_p (talk) 19:57, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
The use of the template is in Wikipedia exactly the same as here! --Reneman (talk) 20:03, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
Not all Wikis. With 1em margin you will never almost never know by looking at the preview if the inclusion of the template includes a margin or not because it will collapse within the margin of the doc part (this is something on which people loose a lot of time looking for where are the dangling margins in their template code. — Verdy_p (talk) 20:10, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
I think you do not understand. I said, I will not discuss! This is a template from Wikipedia. We use the template exactly as Wikipedia. The function and layout stay identical to Wikipedia. If you want to change it, change it first at Wikipedia! --Reneman (talk) 20:23, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
Since when this site behaves like Wikipedia ? Its design is extremely far from Wikiepedia in all pages, it cannot even use the same extensive set of templates because here there's lot of extensions not installed and this site also runs an old version of MediaWiki.
And once again, this is not a template for formatting the content, but to separate the doc from the template to preview; the doc page is completely separated by its already very visible contrasting border and decoration.
We cannot import lot of things from Wikipedia and we are not docuemtning Wikipedia here ! This is not the same project. And there's not jsut Wikipedia. Why don't you believe me when people complain about margins that are impossible to measure and predict in templates and that are dangling everywhere (all admins here do not even know where to place newlines or how to use correctly the noinclude sections... — Verdy_p (talk) 20:35, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Breaking Templates (again)

Today the Template:RelationDescription doesn't work.

I (and many others) have noticed that you make many changes to global templates without adequately testing them. You have a personal user space which is the appropriate place to test the changes you are making before amending pages which affect many others. I would strongly suggest sending emails to the global talk list before unleashing such changes. The effect is to make hundreds of wiki pages unusable as documentation.

In addition it is noticeable that you consistently fail to engage with criticism. As well as breaking useful documentation you make lots of unnecessary work for other wiki contributors, users and specifically for wiki admins. I dont expect you to pay any heed to this comment, but if this behaviour continues I will raise it formally on the main OSM mailing list. SK53 (talk) 09:41, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Without testing ? I did a lot of tests. Please be more specific because I have not seen "hundreds" of pages affected. What I did was to allow more pages to be translated. — Verdy_p (talk) 09:42, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
OK the last change was to put a noninclude section to drop the language links on the template page itself, and there was a single / missing, This is not a huge change, it is extremely easy to see and fix.
And definitely this is is not "many changes".
If only you were looking at the server history you would see that I effectively make LOTS of tests and previews before submitting, and even after that I visit pages using the templates to detect other poossible impacts. I just forgot to do it when I added the 2 characters noinclude section to remove language links, this was a typo and effectively I had not tested it immediately.
I do many fixes that you don't see but that you are profiting. I have solved thousands of pages that were not working and not linking properly since long.
So, when I show you the beautiful moon with my arm, you are just looking at the tip of my finger... — Verdy_p (talk) 09:45, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
In fact there was really a bug in the template even before my change: I see that you have attempted to revert my change by it did not work, and you also reverted your revert.
My change in the template was documenting correctly the purpose, I did exactly what was described, and this was definitely not "lot of changes".
The problem of this wiki is that it has NO central place to discuss things, every one has its view about what is the appropriate place for discussing. In fact the only thing that works is talk pages with those that are present . Some want to use some specific IRC chjannel, some want the global list (which is relaly overpopulated, and does not discuss about the wiki, I have unsubscribed it since long as it is not enough focused). Even only the French talk list has a lot of trafic. And within it talks about the wiki are also a very small minority.
In addition not all admins on this site are following all lists. So we only do best efforts with those that discuss with talk pages. And we just want description about what we are doing and when.
Even you, you have made lots of errors in this wiki that I have fixed. Your history shows your own errors, with very few you have corrected yourself. We just collaborate, but if you don't understand the issues, please remain calm and ask, don't just send such alarm with excessive words for criticizing everything. we are here to help each other, not to criticize what the others do. Everyone makes small errors that are easily solved. — Verdy_p (talk) 10:04, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
But it keeps happening over and over and over again. I've already asked you to discuss changes to global templates on IRC. --Dee Earley (talk) 19:44, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Specifically on the topic of IRC, I would prefer discussion on the respective wiki talk pages. On IRC, only people who are online at the time will see it, but on the wiki, everyone interested in a template will see discussion happen on their watchlist. Moreover, many wiki contributors don't use IRC, but all wiki contributors use the wiki. --Tordanik 09:14, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Complicating my work

Hi Verdy p,

it seems that you for a reason which I still do not grasp insist on destroying a category Czech_Documentation. We, Czech translators, use it and need it. Why do you believe that this category needs to be removed, when someone else is telling you that we need it? Does the server suffer from having one category more?

You write "This category is no lognert needed (there's already a parent Czech category)." Where is this category? And even if it exists whats wrong in having the page in two different categories if we want it so?

Like English it is in Category:Cs:Data standards (fell free to rename "Data standard" in Czech). You can populate it exactly the same way as English or others. — Verdy_p (talk) 14:18, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Also take an example on the German and Japanese categories that are very populated (notably Japanese). Cross-language navigation is very important notably becauze there's not of missing translations and creating separate trees just creates more maintennce nightmare and cause the site not being used enough by people not reading English. 14:22, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Chrabros (talk) 14:11, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

I do not destroy it, it is being reparented just like all other documentations by language, Czech is not an exception. Categories uses language prefixes jsut like pages, and templates.
And there's no ,need to maintain a dual structure (overcategorizartion in this wiki is a several problem, it does not really help discovering which contents are available in one language or another, we want the same structure across all languages, as muc has possible, except for things that are not translatable).
Don't you see that you want to keep this overcategorization and jsut keep your category that mixes ALL topics in one category? This won't work for the long term and already this is a problem with many pages in Czech that an't be found where you seem to expect them. — Verdy_p (talk) 14:15, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
All categories in Czech so will have the same structure as English or other languages when they are translations. — Verdy_p (talk) 14:16, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
OK, but until all the work is done and the categories will settle. Would it be possible to keep this category intact even when you consider it overcategorisation? As we do not have a full language space on this wiki, there is no other way I know how to track new Czech translation other than to keep it in one category. Chrabros (talk) 14:24, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
You can track the work by seeing migrated categories. the Czech documetnation is already within "Category:cs:Categories", but all other topics are being recategorized per language with identical structure.
I am not destroying the content, but keeping the dual structure does not help seeing what has been done or not. Everything reamins in a category in Czech, except that once migrated to the appropriate place, there's no need to keep a duplicate entry. Slowly, the "Czech documentation" mix can be reduced, topic category by topic category, page after page, without creating new red links.
THis new strcuture allows easier transaltion in fact, becaues you can predict where to put pages and avoid mix lot of things with the English content.
If you want a tracking category for translations in progresses or mising, there already exists templates and tracking categories for that. — Verdy_p (talk) 14:30, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Maybe I'm butting my nose where I shouldn't, but I agree with Chrabros that there is no problem with Category:Cs:Czech Documentation. It's not even an abandoned category. If the czech community wants it, they can have it. Even if there may be some overlap. --Jgpacker (talk) 16:22, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
I have not said that it was an abandonned category... — Verdy_p (talk) 16:22, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Let's try it from the other end. Could you point me to a place on this wiki where it is said that it is prohibited to create and use a new category if I want it? I do not believe that there is such a rule. I repeat that we need this category to maintain our translation effort and you are currently messing with it. Please stop vandalising our work. Chrabros (talk) 17:34, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
I have not said that this prohibited (but the wiki documents since long how to sort languages corectly, the link for that is in EVERY languages bar; first start reading it, the rules have not changed and since long this is the correct way to do, and all other languages are follwing it: if you want a good example look at Japanese, French, German, and partly Russian; but the same is also used for all other less important languages and this works).
This is also the SAME model used in Wikimedia for its international sites (Commons, Meta), so this is nothing new (except if Wikimedia uses suffixes, but this wiki uses prefixes instead).
And as I said I'm not "vandalising" but sirting the contents and making lots os links working as expected.
None' of the pages are left uncategorized and all your pages in a Czech category.
However this wiki WANTS that we use language prefixes (otherwise it's simply impossibly to make interlanguage links working without extreme maintenances everywhere, and finally all gets mixed.
Look at the current categories now and if you remeber what it was before, it was simply impossible to navigate in any other language than English.
Normalizing the prefixes has greatly helped increasingt the number of translations (evern your workj has been facilitated) because we could find easily where to create links from/to, and we can now see which pages are missing transaltions and which have a translation. They are all managed in the same group.
Stop accusing me of vandalizing because this is definitely not vandalism. I have not destroyed or removed any functionality, I've added functionalities in a very clear way, I've even simplified your maintenance work, and fixed many non working links in Czech pages (but you don't see them simply because this is working now; before these links were red or going only to English pages)!
So I really don't understand why you way that I complicate your work (unless you want a private list of pages, but categories are not user pages: you can create these lists for you in your user page if you wish), but there's no interest in maintaining in general categories a duplicate system that requires additional maintenance (alsso because this is the "lazy" solution where you collect random pages on all topics, and don't want to sort them or even allow them to get outside of this small world where English is one one side with all other languages interlinked correctly, and Czech left appart and links going nowhere). — Verdy_p (talk) 17:43, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Another note: this wiki is not just made for Czech translators. It is a distribution site where translations are expected to be read by a lot more users that can't translate the content and can't read English reliably.
What you want is jsut a private collection of pages four your isolated work as a translator to Czech (mostly from English, I doubt you translate anything from German, Russian, or Japanese).
Interlanguage links (in all directions and between any pairs) is an important feature of international wikis and for international projects like this one. — Verdy_p (talk) 17:53, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
It seems that you do not understand me. I do not care what you do with the categories on Czech pages. It was mess before so you probably are improving it. I only care about ONE category which you keep deleting from Czech pages. There is a reason why we want this category and I still do not understand why you have to delete it. It does not interfere with your re-categorization efforts. Does it? Chrabros (talk) 17:57, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Another note, if this is not clear : I am NOT the one that posted the idea of deleting the "Language Documentation" categories and that removed all its parent categories. I have reparented them however in the "Category:xx:Categories" where they should remain, and there's lot of work to do to sort what they contain in order to allow all these pages to be navigatable either by language with the language bar, and by topic.
I have not restructured completely the wiki like Xxxxzme did (he left red links and interlanguage links not working, everywhere he did that, and it was hard to follow him to correct what he was never verifying).
But if a Czech page is the translation of an English page, it should have the same categories to allow the same navigation and the same maintenance.
I do not touch pages that are untransalted or specific to a language (most of them are only for Wikiprojects by country, and these pagers are just TODO lists which have no interest for being translated.
Also if pages do not contain any language specific content, it is left in the English categories (most of them are utility templates, to resolve links or that just generate some presentation layout; if we can avoid translations by making them smarter, these tempaltes are modified so that they'll be reusable in all languages, without complicating the task for translators). — Verdy_p (talk) 18:02, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Also you have NEVER exposed the reason why you (only you) want to keep this list of pages? If this is important for your own work, jsut create a list of pages in your User pages. This won't pollute the rest and nobody will break your list. You've admitted it in, the title of this topic, you're speaking of "my work", but this wiki is collective and does not belong to you only. May be this complicates a bit your work, but this is the tradeoff to do (I do not overcomplicate things, I simplify them instead, but a few things have to be made by admitting that we are never alone and others will not use your method). My method of sorting things on the opposite is used now extensively also by others since long and documented (it is then approved), evne if it requires many incremental changes to be applied where it is still missing. — Verdy_p (talk) 18:07, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Could you please answer my previous question? Why we cannot have one category containing all the pages in Czech language? What harm does it make? Chrabros (talk) 18:12, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
The reason is that I need it as a category. If someone from Czech translators translates tag or key page it is added automatically to this category so we can see what was done. It works automatically without any other effort. BTW to your ad hominem attack: I wrote "I" because I have translated vast majority of Czech pages. Now there are two of us and we use this category to collaborate. Is it clear now? Can you just leave thsis one category alone? Chrabros (talk) 18:12, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
And for now I have not even touched the Key:/Tag: pages which will require work later. In other words, the categories that you want are completely unrelated.
But of course there is work to to also on these many Key:/Tag: pages because they are effectively incorrectly categorized (including in English).
If there are missing translations in Czech (for a translatable page in English) you can find them in a dedicated category (but still not Tag:/Key: pages which use an old system that still does not work correcctly across languages). — Verdy_p (talk) 18:16, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
All others are using Wikiproject pages when they cooperate on a task on this wiki. Why not you (I have left Wikiprojects where they are, even if a few have transaltable pages in multilingual countries like Swizterland, or Italy, Belgium, Canada, or Ukraine). — Verdy_p (talk) 18:18, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Again, can you answer me a simple question why am I prohibited to create and use one single category on this wiki when I find it useful? Chrabros (talk) 18:23, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Again, (I have already replied to you about this!), this is NOT prohibited, and I do not propose to delete the existing one. But populating the generic space is completely unnecessary (it would be specific to Czech and cannot be automated for others).
But please avoid polluting the main translatable space. (Nobody can see the pages you want to keep an eye to: please create a wikiproject page for the pages to follow, otherwise you will continue to work alone and you will complain against everybody else that has NO view about what you need). There's a Czech Wikiproject, why don't you use it to list pages to work on or create your TODO lists ? — Verdy_p (talk) 18:28, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
OK. So to not populate the generic space - if I use category Cs:Documentation then it would be OK with you? BTW I do not need a to do list neither any other kind of manually edited list, the beauty of the category is that it wors automatically. Chrabros (talk) 18:45, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Ideally yes, using a prefix is still prefered to using an adjective. It correctly instruct other templates that can detect in which language it is populated (language names are complex, they vary depending on sources, or on their context of use with variations caused by grammatical rules).
But if you need them for your own Wikiproject I suggest using "Category:Cs:Wikiproject Czech XXXX/..." so that you can still have generic pages for progresses, to do lists, copperative talks. You can even name the project "Czech XXXX" in Czech, provided you keep the prefix for keeping the main namespace clean. The other benefit is that it is easier to extract all the content in Czech or search in it when it has the same "Cs:" prefix. (the remark applies in all the 3 common namespaces: Main, Category, Template, where we want to separate languages from English)...
But if this is just to list all contents available in Czech, there's a root category for that: Category:Cs:Categories: you can translate the later term "Categories" in Czech, by renaming the category page into "Category:Cs:XXXX" (preserve the prefix, but make sure that the English category name (after "Cs:") is preserved, and that it is linked to your translated category name, as it will be used by interlingual links). — Verdy_p (talk) 19:12, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Avoid creating so many revisions

You create far too many revisions for your changes. Have a look at this, the 7 version history is dominated by the changes you made within an hour. The version history is an important tool, and you should take care not to spam it. A lot of that is simply you changing the text again which you wrote a few seconds earlier. Use the preview button, not the save button, and only save when you are confident that you don't intend to change that page again that day. In addition to that, please give descriptions of your changes. --Tordanik 09:37, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

I gave the description but the rest were minor typos corrections when rereading more carefully. The diffs are clear and tiny about these changes it you are interested in following them. This is not what we generally call "spam" (whose definition is *massive*, 7 is not, submission of undesired content, to many users, I did not target any user, and there was no junk). There are many other users on this wiki that can also make these changes, you would have to follow them as well if you are interested. There's absolutely nothing in wikis that forbids doing incremental changes. — Verdy_p (talk) 16:44, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
And note that you also perform multiple edits to the same page (look at you own history). Like me, this occurs more frequently when we are updatings pages with small incremental changes, than when creating completely new sections (there are much less things to check, with the exception of finding targets for possible links). Your edits in several "news" pages show similar behavior with multiple incremental changes (it's much harder to do everything in just one edit without breaking many others). — Verdy_p (talk) 20:04, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
But you'll be looking to improve this style of wiki editing in the future following Tordanik's polite suggestions I assume -- Harry Wood (talk) 17:01, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
Even if this is not evident for you, I almost ALWAYS use preview except in talk pages where it does not matter; this would be evident if you had accesss to the server log and not just the page history. For some caes the preview alone is not enough when there are links to checks, or dependent pages to verify after the submission: I also view them when there are inclusions. And this can require a few other incremental edits.
My number of previews largely outweights the number of edits by several factors. (And please note that I have some vision problems now, it's hard to see typos even when rereading: the preview only gives a global view of the edited section, but does not focus on looking at the whole page or at specific zooms for details. Unlike many users here, I correct my own typos and do not leave them for long. But frequently I detect other typos made by others that are corrected in further edits on which I was initially not focused as they were not part of my initial intended change. — Verdy_p (talk) 17:08, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Template: Stammtisch Wien

Please stop redirecting that template to another page. This wiki is a resource for the whole OSM community and not your private playground.--Andrew (talk) 07:08, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

I have not redirected it to another page, I have reverted an overwrite that was done recently that wanted to kill active links. This page was in "DE:" since long (it is effectively purely in German language even if it displays mostly digits, all links are to German pages and the tempalte is only usable in German pages as well).
The attempt by a user was to kill active links by *replacing* the page bn an invalid deletion request banner (and this effectively breaks pages referencing it).
It was also incorrectly removing the correct catefoization polluting the English or multilingual space and also was in a geenric Template category that required subcategorization.
I followed the rules about categorization per language and more precise categorization but one user does not see that (or refuses to just read the reasons).
I have NOT killed any reference, all links were preperly working. So it is not for my own "playground" but really because there are too many categories mixing languages and that are overpopulated. — Verdy_p (talk) 08:14, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

Reason for moving wiki articles and categories in Portuguese

Your edits have renamed an article and its associated category causing the main article in English to not link to the Portuguese version of the article anymore. Is there a reason for doing this? I think navigation across languages is now broken as a result. Apps are likely to link to the English page or to the language-specific page whose name is the same as in English (just an extra prefix), apps can't know the localized name of the article. The OSM wiki runs an older version of MediaWiki that does not support interlanguage links.--Fernando Trebien (talk) 00:54, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

After taking a closer look, it seems the edit at fault is this one: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Automated_edits&diff=1147878&oldid=1147866 The english page name was modified, without the proper update of the other pages. Cheers --Jgpacker (talk) 02:02, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
Yes, but not only. The Languages template called at the top of pretty much every article in the wiki creates links to prefix:{{PAGENAME}}. The {{PAGENAME}} call is actually a magic word which cannot translate the original name of the article to a localized name, thus, language-specific articles must retain the name in English. Interlanguage link support in more recent versions of MediaWiki (as in Wikipedia) is supposed to solve that problem.--Fernando Trebien (talk) 02:36, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
The actual trouble was that the English page was moved from Automated Edits with a capital E to Automated edits in March, so that the redirect pt:Automated Edits wasn’t found. I've created a redirect that let's you navigate from English to Portuguese.--Andrew (talk) 06:15, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
Conclusion: I did not make anothing wrong. This was caused by someone renaming an English page and not checking the redirects that were needed also in translations. All was correct when I just forwarded the previous English name to the portuguese name. The reason given for renaming the English page is based by someone that did not realize that here, this is NOT Wikipedia and this wiki uses other rules (notably, renaming pages must be made carefully to check the redirects and interlanguage links (he did not bother about that, causing the trouble).
I have absolutely no responsibility for this recent issue that was caused by someone else. — Verdy_p (talk) 05:15, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
Good. And no doubt you'll join me in giving a friendly "thank you" to Fernando Trebien for spotting the problem, and Jgpacker & Andrew for investigating and solving it... Problem solved.... Happy collaborating. -- Harry Wood (talk) 11:54, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Category:Company vs Category:Companies_that_are_involved_in_the_OSM_project vs Category:Manufacter of GPS chips or units

Xxzme (talk) 19:00, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Mixing Category:GPS (single instance of GNSS) and Category:GNSS was bad idea.

your edits here. Complex topics like Accuracy of GPS data belong to GNSS category. For some users "GLONASS" or Galileo is used **instead** of GPS and why we should call them "GPS"?

Instead of "GNSS" you may use "Satellite": "Satellite unit", "Satellite receiver", "Camcorder with satnav". Xxzme (talk) 07:33, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

: for indention

Hi Verdy, please note that I have undone your change from last May to Quality assurance. The ":" is not meant for indention on normal text pages as it produces a definition list in html which is semantically not right here. Could you please tell me why you wanted to change the syntax of this page? Happy mapping! --Aseerel4c26 (talk) 20:06, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

You're wrong, because now you've broken the bulleted list (introduced by the *) : using a "p" element breaks the list by inserting a separting paragraph. Here the ":" was appropriate to keep the correct indentation level **within** the same bullet item. yes it generated a dl/dd, but that's the same as in talk pages where dl/dd is fine without any leading dt. If you don't like dl/dd, then the only choice is to use a "br" element (but then you cannot include any newlines in the bulleted list item as it would also be broking the bulleted list) or use a second asterisk to create a sublist. But here dl/dd is a complement adding definition to the leading bulleted item.
Unfortunately, this is the wiki syntax (we don't write HTML elements, but the wiki parser still generates dl/dd for ":" even if there's no leading "dt" (i.e. line starting by ";"), when it could generate of course an indented block within the existing list item. The ":" is the standard on MediaWiki for indented blocks, they preserve the lists in which they are inserted !
Your fix is a bad trick and dl/dd do not have any impact and are safer here (including semantically). — Verdy_p (talk) 20:15, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
Hi Very, thanks for your reply. Hmm, I do not see that I break the list. Look in source here:
There is exactly one list item for the one "Notes" entry. This list item just includes a paragraph in its text. Could you please have a look again where you see "breaks the list"?
Yes, the ":" works in media wiki and is used on talk pages, but only there (which is still not nice). It results in the insertion of a definition list inside the list item - where there is no definition list in reality.
Could you please tell me where my "trick" is "bad" or more bad? --Aseerel4c26 (talk) 05:23, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
By "bad", I mean that it requires you to type everything on the same line, without eny newline, and including when there are multiple paragraphs. And you absolutely need to use only HTML tags (but you cannot include any div, including for floating elements). We are far from the wiki editing facility.
The dl/dd is effectively still generated by MediaWiki but it does not hurt at all there, even if the list is redused to a list of dd (definitions, introduced in fact by the container element which is the bulleted list item just above that acts as a title. And it's much simpler to edit.
There is still a request in MediaWiki to generate the ":" lines in a blockquote when they have no leading line with ";" (dt). But it was still never done. Anyway this is the way indented blocks are editing in MEdiaWiki, everywhere, not just for this page. Semantically it still does not hurt and the semantic containment in the parent list is still not broken.
So your way of doing that is just a "dewikification", that complicates edits. The generated effective HTML tags are still invisible, even if dl/dd is not the best choice here (where they should be blockquotes and not even paragraphs as you want to do). You won't reinvent the fact that ":" is used for indented blocks within a larger container, even if there is no dt (";"-leaded MediaWiki lines). Also look at the page, the indepent blockeffectively follows a bold heading line, and this line should then be the "dt" item, the "*" bullets should not even be present: everything there is effectively a definition list.
You want to be pedantic, but your pedantic way of writing is not even correct if you follow this logic. It is only a more complicate syntax for editing (with still restrictions on the contents you could place there (such as positioned blocks that add complements to a bulleted list item). Using explicit "p" elements is strongly discouraged in MediaWiki (also they introduce extra vertical paddings that separate them from the preivois block for the list item, even though it is not separate but contained as a subpart of it.
Verdy_p (talk) 13:11, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
Thank you, I will get back to you in a few days - I want to think about it again. --Aseerel4c26 (talk) 18:12, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
I Verdy_p, you might have seen that I have set the page back to your version again. I am not really clear myself about where to go. Still on my Todo list do think about it. Happy mapping in the next two sunny days! :-) --Aseerel4c26 (talk) 21:24, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

double redirects

Hi Verdy, just by chance, really (I was trying to open Key:roof:shape), I was stumpling over double redirects as a result of your pave move. Double redirs do not work. In case you are not aware of this problem: Please try to fix such redirects by editing the original link. See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Special:WhatLinksHere/Simple_3D_Buildings&hidelinks=1 --Aseerel4c26 (talk) 19:45, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

Where are there double redirects. I have always checked them after moves, may be there was one edit not recorded in the list of links. If I forgot one (may be the list of links was too long and it was in another page), sorry this is easy to solve. — Verdy_p (talk) 20:36, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
OK, this is fixed. I did not see one level of indentation in the long list, and I had fixed only one, but not all of the existing aliases. — Verdy_p (talk) 20:41, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
Okay, thank you! :-) --Aseerel4c26 (talk) 04:51, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

User blocked for 1 Week.

From: Verdy p <verdy_p@***.fr>	31. Oktober 2015 um 11:20
To: Reneman <rene******@***.de>
I absolutely oppose your accusation of "vandalism" and the reason you give "delete contents from pages".

Here is what you have done this morning:

* 31 octobre 2015 à 11:00 Reneman (discuter | contributions) a bloqué Verdy p (discuter | contributions) ; expiration : 1 semaine (création de compte interdite) (Removing content from pages: Your changes are not discussed!)
* 31 octobre 2015 à 10:56 Reneman (discuter | contributions) a automatiquement marqué la révision 1236457 de la page Historic.Place/News comme relue
* 31 octobre 2015 à 10:55 Reneman (discuter | contributions) a déplacé la page Historical Objects/News vers Historic.Place/News (Undo by Verdy p (talk) VANDALISM!) (rétablir)
* 31 octobre 2015 à 10:55 Reneman (discuter | contributions) a supprimé la page Historic.Place/News (Duplicated page: content was: "#REDIRECT Historical Objects/News" (and the only contributor was "Verdy p"))


I have absolutely not deleted any content. all pages on this subject (except the "/News" subpage had already been renamed). There were missing links. But now you've created broken links to these news page in existing translations.

Even links from the external website for this project were ALL tested.

In addition there were several double redirects that I had fixed on these pages (caused by a few page renamed since long, I am not the auhor of this old renaming of the base page).

I had just rebased it the way it should be. I had properly checked all links. ABSOLUTELY NO content was removed, there was nothing to discuss these were genuine corrections.

And I had discussed these related changes.

Visibly, you use the "revert and block" too speedily without even thinking about what you do.

Now I'll have to contact another admin because you are acting on this wiki as if it was only yours, because your sanction against me is ONCE AGAIN, completely unjustified. But you do not want to discuss anything even on the wiki, when you accuse me of not discussing. May be you may oppose one or two things, but I've always been contactable.

You are completely wrong.
  1. "Historical Objects" ist ein Projektname. Niemand übersetzt Windows in Fenster, den einen Eigennamen kann man nicht übersetzen!
  2. Wiederholt hat dir die Community mitgeteilt, dass du deine Änderungen vorher absprechen sollst! Für das Projekt "Historical Objects" sind alle Ansprechpartner im Wiki benannt, auch ich! Du hast aber nicht gefragt, ob du Seiten umbenennen darfst!
  3. Das Projekt befindet sich in Überarbeitung und hat einen neuen Projektnamen "Historic.Place". -> Eigenname, nicht übersetzbar!
  4. Wie bereits angemahnt, sind Unterseiten bei der Berbeitung zu berücksichtigen! Das Projekt hat davon sehr viele!
  5. So lange du nicht bereit bist, vorher deine Änderungen zu besprechen, wirst du von mir erzogen! Erziehungsmaßnahme: Sperren deines Accounts.
  6. Das Aufräumen nach dir hat mich 3 Stunden gekostet!!!
  7. Wer nicht lernen will, muss fühlten!
Mit freundlichen Grüßen René aus Mainz vom Team "Historic.Place". --Reneman (talk) 12:09, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
You have absolutely not replied to the concern about your false accusation of vandalism. I did not delete anything.
You have never told anywhere and with anyone with the restrictions you wanted to apply. If this ever occured, the place of those discussions can't be found (it is documented nowhere on this wiki)
You acted completely alone and abused your privilege for a single edit you reverted and causing me to be immediately blocked without discussion.
You've not talked to anyone about the sanction you applied to me.
In fact you don't talk with anyone on this wiki, your just force your own point of view.
You also make lots of hard deletions of pages without discussing them. You also delete many redcirecting links that are kept for historical reasons (for external links to this wiki) or because they are needed for the interlanguage navigation.
You have stated, without proving it, that the name "Historical Objects" was a formal untranslatable project name. However this name was ALREADY translated on the relevant pages. And they are not even the name of the external web site, which is out of control from the OSM Foundation and that you do not even own and administer yourself.
All my edits were genuine, not abusive. Your sanction was clearly disproportionate.
You refuse to learn and use the common practice which is on this wiki to use the resources available to users on this wiki (we are not bound here to policies required by other external sources, the external wiki may havbe a policy but I have not used it and not even broken it: that external website has 3 links to this wiki, and these links were completely functional, I did not break them).
Things could have been easier if you had first attempted to contact me or create an appropriate discussion place. But there was none. You just blocked me for "educating me", but you did not give any hint about what I could have missed and there was absolutely nothing to learn from what you did or said. You only acted alone.
In fact you don't even know the meaning of the term "Vandalism" and you have breached the policy related to abuses on services hosted by the OSM Foundation, developed by the foundation and published on its wiki when you used your privileges on this wiki. Visibly you need to learn something. Refer to this Foundation wiki which clearly states what must be done if you think there's a real abuse. As you did not notify it formally, you are completely wrong.
Finally you persist in replying only in informal German, using wortds that are probably offensive/insulting, even when people write you in English (I know you understand and write English). German is only a secondary language but I know it much less than English, and most users on this wiki can't read German, and notably not your informal level of German which is nearly untranslatable (tyhat level of language may be used when chatting/emailing privately within a German-only community, but this wiki is definitely not German-only). Most users on this wiki, including admins from the Foundation, do not understand German and can't read you. You were granted some privileges only to perform some basic cleanup on the wiki or to block **evident** abuses such as spammed contents or deletions, but this is absolutely not what occured here. And there was absolutely no situation of emergency (in fact when you reverted the pages, you broke many of them and made many errors).
I'm not at all responsible about the time it took for you to correct your own errors after your reverts. You did not even asked to anyone for help, and did not ask me what could be wrong. I could not help here because you had blocked me from doing anything or replying to you on this wiki. The time it took for you is enterirely your fault and NOTHING was broken when you started reverting me and blocking me immediately without discussion. You've just transformed this wiki in a set of proprietary pages where you do not accept any edits except by you, and you don't want any help.
You should also learn about how to design a page. You've made pages containing section titles without any content except a link with the same term to another page. Waht I did was only to format it, but all links were kept. The page I updated was much more readable. And I was about to discuss it because the contents were ALREADY desynchronized in the German version. That'd another place where you need education/training. There was nothing wrong in what I did.
The last time you blocked me, it was for a single term which was ambiguous in German but distinguishjed in English and other languages. Alone, you took the decision to merge the two terms (including one for which I gave a correct translation, you've kept it). Nowhere you discussed this merge and now you've created a new desynchronisation of German with other languages. Visibly you want to create a German-only version of this wiki and don't care at all about other languages, but you have also a too strong point of view of what should remain in German or what will remain in English: your edits make a wiki that uses a mixed language, too technical, and not targetting real users, but only a few users like you. And you don't want any newer users coming here to cooperate. Your action is completely anticooperative.
I did not breach any policy, you did it twice, very abusively. You destroyed legitimate edits. If there's a vandal here, you are the vandal, your destructing actions are damageable for this wiki and cause many users to not participate as they know you abuse your privileges and will do whatever you want here.
Verdy_p (talk) 13:31, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

Tile formulas

Hello Verdy. Your recent changes to the tile name formulas have introduced some errors. We've found at least one in the Java implementation ("the tile2lon function always returns -180, instead of a correct lon"), and you've made mass changes to every other language making it very difficult to pick apart. I've rolled them all back for now, but can you please separate formatting and content changes, and if you still want to change the formulas do each language as a single distinct edit with your reasoning in the description after consulting with an expert in that language. Leaving the descriptions blank is of no use to anyone. Thank you for your cooperation. --Dee Earley (talk) 14:41, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

I did the edits language per language.
But yes there was a minor error in the Java due to the replacement of pow(2,z) by (1<<z) (which was correct except the result was an int instead of a double) but only because it caused the division using it to occur only between integers and truncating the result of the division.
This page is very long in fact, but not very readable. It does not help much to have over long developed formulas which are not even very optimal when they don't reuse some common results.
My error in a single Java function which was done in a DISTINCT edit, but you reverted everything without much care.
Verdy_p (talk) 16:05, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
You are mistaken. This is a single edit touching pretty much every example, which you followed up with a number of other random edits across the page. If you roll back my revert again, you will be banned. Final warning. I am fed up of fixing what you break on our wiki. Separate format and content changes and provide description and verifications of any changes. --Dee Earley (talk) 16:14, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
The Scala example also seems to be broken in a similar way:
((lon + 180.0) / 360.0 * (1<<z)).toInt
to:
(1 << z) * ((lon + 180.0) / 360.0).toInt
--Dee Earley (talk) 17:12, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
I've not rolled back everything, like you did without any caution.
Yes the missing promotion from int to double was forgotten in Java (unexpectedly due to change or order between operands), but it was in the fix you reverted with all the rest.
And there's absolutely no error in the scala code you quote here, simply because (1<<z) is an integer, given z is an integer ! You don't know what you're speaking about. — Verdy_p (talk) 19:10, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
The scala code always returns 0 for the lon. As you take the int of ((lon + 180)/360), which will always be between 0 and 1. Whereas the original code multiplies it with the zoom factor before converting it to int. So I don't know how you can say that the Scala code doesn't have bugs. It simply shows that you don't test your changes before making them. It's impossible to know all those languages in all detail, so it's just as impossible to edit all those languages with "trivial" changes and expect everything to still work. In short, you shouldn't modify well-tested code before making sure that your version is an improvement. Reverting was the only option here, as we can't test every change you made, and already discovered 2 mistakes with the little programming knowledge we have. --Sanderd17 (talk) 19:50, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
I warned you not to redo the exact same changes you did last time, so you go and do them again. As you refuse to stop making unilateral changes to all the examples in a single edit, the ban has been applied. The page has been reverted yet again so formatting and code changes can be separated and verified individually. You have broken two language's examples already, who knows what else until ALL your changes are verified. --Dee Earley (talk) 21:30, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
Just to be clear, some of the changes you were making were reasonable and useful, but you were mixing significant format changes with code changes making it VERY difficult to actually verify the code changes don't break things (as you have done to two of them despite your claim that you hadn't). I say again that you can make the changes, but they MUST be individual, described, verified edits. anything else will be rolled back, no questions asked. Related reading: If you’re going to reformat source code, please don’t do anything else at the same time --Dee Earley (talk) 10:08, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
But I made them separately, you reverted them in a group without taking any care. You reverted also all those individual edits that were not reformatting, and that were properly commented, and blocked me for that.
I had taken into account the two bugs, but corrected others, you simply ignored everything.
Really you don't know how to read a diff, you're puzzled just by whitespaces, those edits were really small, Blocking me for that is really unfair, unless you are too lazy, or too tired.
Next time, please take some break and have a sleep. Blocking me for two small issues that were corrected easily and after I took inbto account the discussions here will not help anyone, unless you feel you are the only owner of the wiki and don't want any one else to do something on it.
There are tons of small or big errors on this wiki (including from you, and I corrected many of yours, without alarming you unfairly as you did, everyone makes some errors even when they play fairly) but people will not correct them or will not improve it, and this wiki will become a large bin of garbage thrown by anyone that thinks he is proprietary of all pages and ignores some work for coherence. With this type of speedy action you did, people stop working on the wiki after their first time.
I'm "fed up" (your term) with the way this wiki is administered and how you frustrate many people here that try to do someting useful and when such admins just simply stop all kind of discussion and don't even follow the rules they expose like you did above, treating me as if I was the smae kind of spammers that broken many pages yesterday (the way it was managed by blocking the wiki for everyone, was really bad, with pages tagged for deletion that were in fact the original modified ones, and lots of errors by admins themselves and then a very long recovery time... Note that you have forgotten several accounts of the spam bots seen yesterday and left several pages around, you did not read the activity log scrupulously)
Verdy_p (talk) 01:07, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
As a reply: the changes appear as a big diff on the wiki. Such a big diff is not easy to read, and you didn't give an explanation for every change you made. Also, you admit you were mixing reformatting and code functionality, which is exactly what shouldn't be done on a big scale like this. Next to that, the issues were not corrected easily. It takes a lot of time to simply read a diff like this in detail, and I knew there would be issues with such a big change, it was only a matter of finding them. Lastly, if you correct errors, please do so in a small edit, while mentioning exactly what you corrected, so we, and other wiki readers can learn from it and check it was a valid issue. A big change mixing text with code formatting changes and code functionality just messes up the history of a page, and a former correct formula can become incorrect, as we've shown you twice.
Now, as a general remark, I don't get why you want to do style changes. Every project has its own style on where to put whitespace and how operations should be formatted. It has no use to uniformise the style here on this page as programmers using it in their own project will have to modify the style anyway. As such, when you change code, please say what was wrong with it on a functionality level (like the new version being x% faster, or more precise, or handling an edge-case better). Big changes without explanation just can't be included in code where multiple people already worked on. This is common knowledge in any programmer's team, and as the wiki page is mostly code, the same should hold for the wiki page. --Sanderd17 (talk) 07:44, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
Once again you don't read: you have reverted MULTIPE separate small edits which contained the comments. That was a big revert where your did not read anything.
You don't even follow the "advices" you give me here. Thaty's just lazy. You've blocked me even if I had applied "your" rules (in fact you have a vision of these rules, otheres want exactly the opposite, and editing whitespaces is not a big deal when diffs are easy to read. Not my edits were definitely NOT big, much less than your grouped revert.
You've even canceled TRUE corrections (onve code is definitely wrong notably in C#... you've reverted my evident correction which was done separately exactly the way you described above, and blocked me for that !)
Rethink about it, if you're too tired, avoid such speedy reverts you did withour thinking. It is evident you did not read anything. Smll or big you simply did not want any change on the page, you would have blocked any one else on the same terms. — Verdy_p (talk) 08:21, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
So you accuse us of not reading anything, while we found 2 mistakes in your changes? Most project maintainers won't even go through the hassle of reading such a diff and simply don't accept it. The remark that the C# WorldToTilePos function should return an integer point is indeed a valid remark, and that change should be accepted (however, the change is not complete, as even in your version the reverse TileToWorldPos function still accepts floats). And the change came after the massive diff, which means it had to be reverted all together. Next to that, editing whitespace can be important in whitespace-sensitive languages. Adding or removing whitespace in a bash script can cause big issues, the same holds for changing the indentation of a python script, and there's even an esotheric language purely based on whitespace. Then there are also many language sensitive about where newlines can happen. So saying whitespace changes are harmless for all languages is just wrong. Whether you're talking about a wiki or about code, it should follow an iterative process, where every step is explained and shown to be an improvement. --Sanderd17 (talk) 09:07, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
Yes, I reverted multiple edits as you had made a huge edit with formatting changes and code changes. Every single time. As the "small" edits were on top of this big homogenous edit, it's impossible to pick them apart and revert just the initial one. As I've said several times, you can make formatting changes (not to the code layout or structure), but they MUST be an individual edit. I will also call out anyone else that makes unilateral, breaking changes to pages. My contributions mostly consist of fixing up your and Xxzme's edits. This is the last time I will say this and any more homogenous edits will be rolled back. Thanks for your compliance and understanding. --Dee Earley (talk) 09:14, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
Your rule of "individual edits" is apure inventioçn you have added to this wiki. And there are opponents to this view, with other adminbs that don't like multiple small edits as well and criticize those that do it.
It's accepted practice in pretty much every computing environment. See the link I gave earlier.
There's absolutely no concensus on this rule which is written NOWHERE, and that you apply only to me on this case, based only on your own preferences.
I apply it to breaking changes I see or am alerted to.
Various people read the diffs in a different way than you do. But even if you don't admit it, you did not read anything, and you don't know how to use proper reverts when you cancel everything blindly. I am MUCH more careful than what you do. Next time I will report all the many errors you did in the past, because there's lot to say about them.
Go ahead.
You've just blocked me on two errors that I took clearly into account, this is the NORMAL way to work on a wiki: in many small changes by the same person there are always small errors. This is the overal account of what is good. and further things needing corrections that allows all wikis to progress.
I blocked you for making homogenous changes with no suitable description.
And don't compaare me to "Xxxzemy" that made deep content changes. I have never supported him and not acted like what he did. But on a wiki where there's few active editors there's little place to discuss everything (in wikis ther's a term for that: "be bold", then discuss problems when someone will find them and there's a conflict of versions. But here there was NO conflict of view, and accepted the two small errors but you rejected blindly the errors I reported.
There is a conflict of view. You're making changes against accepted industry behavior and common sense.
If you want this wiki to be managed oinly by you, then don't open account creations, and create a closed wiki. This wiki is not like that, we're open to more people than a few admins that have some privileges only for really problematic cases when damages are more important than benefits.
What, like breaking example code hidden in a mass edit?
I have not rejected your comments, yuou rejected everything. You've closed yourself the discussion by your own contradictions and inventing a rule that you don't even apply to yourself. — Verdy_p (talk) 09:33, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
--Dee Earley (talk) 09:39, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
Add to this, the fact that I am not the only person that has called you out on your mass edits and breaking changes of the wiki. Just scroll up and look at the fact that your talk page has an archive! --Dee Earley (talk) 09:43, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
You don't know the meaning of "mass edit", all the edits were actually small but you don't see that. I've kept almost all, I've not removed contents. I've not added a lot.
And this wiki page is to explain things and showing things more evidently, this has no impact on the code used in tools that is managed separaterly. This page shows some examples to comment them. And the presentation is more important and should make things obvious to the reader. without extra garbages like excesses of parentheses.
Also I've not broken the indentation rules, but made them more visible, using a common practive used in lots of development projects for indenting the code correctly. If you call that "mass edit"... — Verdy_p (talk) 09:46, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
For reference, the don't make many edits related to small typo correction. Not distinct, described atomic edits. Also, this is not a small edit. The Diff is just as long as the page content itself, and even when picked apart in a proper merge tool, contains many changes even when ignoring whitespace changes. --Dee Earley (talk) 09:53, 17 December 2015 (UTC)