User talk:42.book.addict

introductions

Just replying to your message (also dw no big deal for bothering me) You click on your username and there should be an edit box. --1234231587678 (talk) 04:58, 7 February 2024 (UTC)

it says that i dont have permission to create the page…

There is currently no text in this page. You can search for this page title in other pages, or search the related logs, but you do not have permission to create this page. it says 42.book.addict (talk) 19:33, 7 February 2024 (UTC)

I think you might have to wait some time (like a timer) until you can edit your own page... I think I only got to edit my page after 1 month of creating my account.--1234231587678 (talk) 21:31, 7 February 2024 (UTC)

ok, thx 42.book.addict (talk) 21:52, 7 February 2024 (UTC)

My guess on where you live is somewhere in the GMT zone, so United Kingdom.--1234231587678 (talk) 03:43, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

nope, im a california girl :) (talk) 05:04, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

lol you never know with utc times --1234231587678 (talk) 16:52, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

citation needed tips

You seem to be taking to heart the punctuation-before-the-Citation-needed standard (which is good, only sometimes it's even more complicated^{[citation needed]}),^{[citation needed]} but I see you recased an example of {{citation needed}} to {{Citation Needed}}, earlier. Now, it doesn't really matter because there are templates for "citation needed" and "Citation Needed". And also "cn" plus "fact" for the really lazy editors. ;) Anyway, all of these (maybe more, I'd have to check) redirect to the main "Citation needed" one. (Reflected in {{Actual citation needed}}, where "actual citation needed" plus "acn" redirect there, although {{Actual Citation Needed}} - "for completeness" - is actually a 'copy' template in its own right.) I wouldn't bother only changing various CN variations to "Citation needed"s (there is also a {{Citation neededs}}, but that's a struckthrough version of "Citation needed" rather than an ungrammatical "Citations needed"!), but if you're already editing anything else, it would not at all hurt to get everything to capital-C small-n version. It gives the server very very slightly less work to do. ;) Probably. Not that it matters. But, as you seem to be a 'details person', I thought I'd pass on a detail you may not have already known... :p 172.69.195.156 02:11, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

You have not read the above (properly, at least). The {{Citation needed}} is the 'proper' one (for xkcd version of 'proper'), whilst {{cn}} is a lazy version that redirects. There's no reason at all to change "Citation needed" to "cn". (Not much reason to change the other way, either, but could be justified if one is editing something else..)

I reverted the one where you made the "SIGHTation needed" into a CN, as that was clearly a deliberate variation by some past wag. No point changing it to the (not-quite-)standard one. 172.69.194.115 17:31, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Oh, I’m so sorry. I didn’t read your message until now. I’ll start using “Citation needed” instead of cn. Thanks for the heads up! 42.book.addict (talk) 17:35, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

And if you expect me to reply to you immediately, sorry! I’m at school right now, and it’s completely impractical to be listening to a lecture and editing ExplainXKCD at the same time. 42.book.addict (talk) 17:35, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

No worries. I was busy myself, and already a bit slow to jump in and let you know, just knowing you'd probably see the above better/sooner than a revert-edit summary. ;)

Functionally, all identical. Just the practical need for it was balanced the other way. Can't fault you for identifying the need to shift the punctuation. (I may do that in passing, with some other edit in mind... had to specifically redo it on the reverted SIGHTation article, i.e. on the true Citation one that was wrong, because I'd meant to keep that valid change but got distracted by a phone-call...)

Anyway, welcome to the community, I just hope you do more helpful things than troublesome ones. (Heck, I still hope *I* do that, even after a number of years. ;) 172.71.242.207 18:00, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

thanks! (btw, are you saying that my edits are troublesome?) 42.book.addict (talk) 18:01, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Well, I wasn't. Just hoping that (through errors/misunderstandings) you still end up on the right side of trouble/not-trouble, on average. But just would like to point out that creating Jupitale's home page was not a good move. See my edited comment. I'm willing to believe you did it accidentally (visited their non-existing page, thus ended up creating it), and some mod or other may be along to clean it up at some point. Before or after that whole login is 'looked sternly at'. But shouldn't concern you if you're just being helpful and don't do too much of that. Anyway, enjoy your time here. (Not too much, obviously. Y'know, do your scholwork/don't vandalise wikis/all the other usual social necessities. :p ) 172.71.242.220 18:20, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

oh shit ok I didn’t realise that Jupidale’s was a vandal ill be more mindful 42.book.addict (talk) 18:30, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

My homepage is now fine thank you very much Jupitale (talk) 18:34, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

New User and User Talk pages

You're trying to be helpful, but... Anyone who really wants them will probably ask (or wait until they have page-creation rights themself). Looking at all the ones you've made for people, how many have even then been used (by the user concerned)? I suggest you don't need to create them, not even to un-redlink someone's comic discussion .sig links. It's normally not a big concern, and there's enough people who can help out if someone actually asks for it when you're not paying attention.
As for the rest of us: ironically, I slightly wanted to drop a note to a long-term user the other day. (Comparatively, i.e. that they've been around for a bit longer than yourself.) They didn't have a User Talk page, so I resorted to a different way of commenting. They can create their own pages, if they want (and, if I was a username myself, I definitely could have by now). Yet I definitely wouldn't consider it valid to give the whole historic userbase any such 'missing' user-spaces.
I'm no authority on this matter, or even a 'real user' in any properly identifiable way, but please do consider my advice that comes from long but informal experience of this kind of matter. You're not the first eager new contributor to try to help out like this. And you're not the first to have made the odd error (giving a spam-only account a Welcoming page ...which thankfully never got used to further the spamming, the account seemingly abandoned by that point anyway), but of course this was probably before you even started lurking here (certainly before your current username, perhaps even prior to any IP-only-editing you might have done before that). Heck, some 'helpful' people even created the occasional User and/or User Talk spaces for IPs (don't do that, either, it's at best neutrally useless - even from my own IP-wise perspective).
You at least seem to be doing it from a genuinely helpful position. For that, I thank you, and maybe also some of those actual new users do (if they've notice. But maybe no more. Unasked for, at least? 172.71.242.29 16:13, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

postscript - even while I was writing this, it seems that one of the users who hadn't seemed to want to use their page actually went and did so. And, elsewhere, proclaimed they weren't vandalising any more. I leave it up to others to make judgements on what's happening there, and the timing with respect to other recent interactions, but still not being particular auspicious. Time will tell how this all turns out. Anyway, just to note this. 172.70.90.29 16:29, 11 March 2024 (UTC) (Same contributor as above, regardless of what the IP may have changed to.)

newline tips

Just a note from a perpetual observer about the newline thing.

Using one or more : (at the start of a line) gives indents. If you are already indenting, then a simple newline and : (or multiple ::s, the same numbed as you were on) handles the textflow properly and renders it as a linefeed, rather than 'merely' a simple whitespace that continues. I'm doing that here.

I can also use other markup, like the ; I used here...

...but that's not how that is meant to be used, and...

...only lines up with ";:", in this case...

...and not with ":;" in this other. ;)

Honestly, though, that's not what ; is to be used for. It's actually really more for ";Item:Definition of some kind", like:

Item

Definition of some kind

Though is often repurposed as ";Unofficial 'header' title", within Talk pages, that doesn't create a TOC entry. Just just so gou know. :p

If you're writing at the 'zero indent' level, then a double-linefeed in the wikisource forces a line-break in the HTML, but it looks messy in viewing/re-editing the markup, so one way to avoid that is to invoke the <br>, even in the middle of an actual wikisource line! (But that can be confusing, so don't do that without good reason.

I also prefer to use "<br/>" (it adheres to standard non-container extensible HTML tag notation better) and like to put it at the start of the new line text rather than at the end of the old one's (but this is practically the same – I just find that seeing <br/>s at the start of every intended new line is easier to visually check than having them at random column positions according to the paragraph length that precedes it, hence it's my preference only).

Another useful note is that when you're in a wikitable markup, the 'contents' of a cell can have linebreaks. Whether a line-started "|" or a successive midline "||" (trust me, when you're used to wikitabls markup, you'll know what I'm saying!), the very first newline in the wikisource is understood as a renderable newline (because it's not the "|"-at-start-of-line of the next column's cell, or the "|-" tween-line, otherwise expected), but you need to invoke any second, third, etc linebreaks with one or other of the br-tag/double-newline/etc methods. Otherwise it'll just be treated as whitespace and 'unwrap' into a continuous second-para. (As always, if in doubt use the Preview button, check it appears like you think it ought to.)

But there's loads of different ways to wikimarkup various conceptual layouts, and all kinds of different styles that you could adopt. This is just a "the more you know..!" infodump, which may or may not be useful to relatively new editors like yourselves. So take note or ignore, or ignore until you suddenly realise you might need to know these things, then try to make sense of it. Or maybe I'll be around to answer further questions! 172.70.86.11 20:34, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

trying to process the infodump right now-but thank you! I’ll slowly process it. 42.book.addict (talk) 21:17, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

Goddamn preview button

I always forget about that God damn preview button too :( Apollo11 (talk) 16:24, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

hey, higher edit score tho! 42.book.addict (talk) 16:26, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

True.... Welp who needs the preview button anyway Apollo11 (talk) 16:38, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

Oh boiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii The orange crewmate ඞ (talk) 19:24, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

Depends what you wanted to do...

Is the following what you intended?

	[[This user is trans.]]

...or is even the [[]] part not what you want?

	This user is trans.

As brief a guide as I can manage:

• URL links use []. Although literal https://www.google.com will self-link without any wikimarkup, you probably don't want it to look like that most of the time.
  • Just give the URL, as in [https://www.google.com], to get a [1] (i.e. a reference number), not the best way to do it. It can be organised better with a 'References' section, but we don't do that here (they do on wikipedia, but usually with other bits to it.
  • Better to give the URL and the text to use (after a space, a character that never appears raw in any proper URL). This can be [https://www.google.com Check It Out On Google!] or even [https://www.google.com https://www.microsoft.com (only kidding!)], to give Check It Out On Google! or https://www.microsoft.com (only kidding!)... But perhaps best not to do the latter too much (I really didn't want to post that without the "(only kidding!)" part, in fact.)
• Internalised wikilinks use the [[]]s.
  • Anything that can be found under the title, e.g. "2: Petit Trees (sketch)" (or, because of redirections, "2" and "Petit Trees (sketch)" go to the same spot, so [[2]], [[Petit Trees (sketch)]] and [[2: Petit Trees (sketch)]] gives you the literal links 2, Petit Trees (sketch) and 2: Petit Trees (sketch)
  • Or use [[2: Petit Trees (sketch)|that comic with the little trees]], additional text separated by the 'pipe' symbol (i.e. "|"), to link to that comic with the little trees
  • You can also link across to articles on other 'wikimedia family' sites, but I'm not going to try to summarise that, as the primary reason to do that is to go to an actual Wikipedia article, and there's a template set up to do that very nicely, already (and also a few other places, like Wiktionary, and some not-really-wikis with a similar philosphy like TVTropes). If in doubt, do it as a URL link or find a place where someone else has clearly markuped a link to the same site as you want to link to.
• So, anyway, Wikilink templates use the {{w}}-template, with one or two paramaters (pipe-separated). (It shortcuts the thing you'd maybe use [[]]s for
  • Using {{w|article}} gives you a link to "Article" (it capitalises the first character, even if you don't)
  • Using {{w|article|with alternate text}} gives you a link there but "with alternate text"
  • If the article name has whitespace (or other 'URL-unfriendly' characters) in it, those characters in the URL (which you wouldn't want to use) will be rendered as something URL-friendly. The URL for "Whitespace (programming language)", for example, is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whitespace_(programming_language) but you wouldn't normally use that so literally in any case, and definitely not when you can significanty shorten it with the {{w}} notation.
    • What you can do is (without 'alternate link text') render it as {{w|Whitespace_(programming_language)}} - i.e. Whitespace_(programming_language) - but that's not nice to see 'rendered raw' when you want the spaces. You could give it alternate text via {{w|Whitespace_(programming_language)|Whitespace (programming language)}} to give Whitespace (programming language) ...but that's wasteful and unnecessary.
    • Instead, just do {{w|Whitespace (programming language)}} (that's the literal copy of the article's own page title, from the rendered page) - and shows as Whitespace (programming language) - which is good. Although {{w|Whitespace (programming language)|the programming language called Whitespace}} might be the best way to seemlessly link to the programming language called Whitespace ...depends what you want to appear there.
    • And you can link to header anchors pretty much like the URL of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whitespace_(programming_language)#History by using {{w|Whitespace (programming language)#History|the history of Whitespace}} to have you show the history of Whitespace or whatever else you might want to use.
  • Also, for the use of a link which is singular but which you would like to include as the plural (usually the "...s" or "...es" version), you could use article-name first parameter and pluralised article name as second, but instead of {{w|Plural|Plurals}}, for a link to the Plurals, you can save yourself a lot of effort by doing {{w|Plural}}s to also give you a linke to Plurals. Magic, eh? And it also works with {{w|Ox}}en to link the different standard plural of Oxen to the article for "Ox" (better than linking to the word for Oxen, which ends up redirecting to Ox anyway).

...so, anyway, that's the basics. And a few not-so-basics. So if the solutions to your tagging issue aren't already solved (or even if they are!), you might have enough info here to kludge it into whatever form of infobox info text you really wanted to use. Ok? Probably far too much info for you to absorb in one go, but covers loads of interesting possibilities. About the only thing you don't want to do is wikilink straight to the word "trans", at that'll be a disambiguation page. And there's also no way (or reason?) to use the terms "trans man"/"trans woman" as the pluralised "trans men"/"trans women" versions via the "directly add the plural suffix" thing, of course. :P Anyway, FYI. 162.158.38.217 20:40, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

oh my god thank you so much 42.book.addict (talk) 19:38, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

gold (Gold)

You do know that we don't have a redirect specifically for "gold", right? We have one for "Gold". And if you search for "gold" you get sent to "2826: Gold" anyway. Why would we need a "gold"->"2826: Gold" redirect as well as "Gold"->"2826: Gold"? Ok, so that "gold" link is red-texted, but you always have the option to relink with alternate text like "gold" if you absolutely must use it wrongly-cased. So, the next question is why you'd want to write cueball or hairbun links instead of Cueball or Hairbun. Either you mean their 'proper names', in which case you're supposed to capitalise them, or you're not refering to the characters but the general hairstyle or snooker/pool/billiards ball, which means you don't want to link to the character at all. ...anyway, someone's re-added the intent-to-delete, but I thought I'd suggest why humouring wrong-cased 'fallback' redirects doesn't really help, since there are subtleties you may not have appreciated. 172.69.194.206 00:09, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

Testing e-mail alerts

Hi 42.book.addict
As promised in my reply here I would post a note here to see if you actually got an e-mail alert even though your e-mail doesn't seem to be confirmed. My guess is you do not... --Kynde (talk) 06:30, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Navbox addition

I can't edit it (must be semi-protected), but your good catch of adding Harris to the list really needs to be shifted over one position, Kamala being alphabetically after John. Or you could always rearrange the whole lot of politicians in a different order, like chronologically. Or from "left" to "right", or vice-versa, which is clearly not the case with Adolf Hitler and Ron Paul at either end. ;) 172.70.160.251 00:31, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Cheers! (And really editing to say that I should have said Ronald Reagan, above, but it doesn't really change my humorous point all that much. :p ) 141.101.98.82 01:46, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

You're doing several edits of signed Talk contributions.

Don't do that. Insofar as any edit 'belongs' to anyone, if you write a contribution to a Talk page (or the community portal) and sign it properly, and it isn't actual span or vandalism or similar idiocy, then you don't expect someone to 'correct' what you wrote.

In at least one case, you didn't even understand it enough to correct it (by the standards of your own attempted correction). So perhaps just a better idea not to. 141.101.98.87 22:54, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

I’m cleaning up the maintenance pages and I did those edits so that we don’t have dead links on the wiki. 42.book.addict (talk) 01:07, 24 September 2024 (UTC)

also, I’ve added a comment clarifying the ^{[citation needed]} thread 42.book.addict (talk) 01:26, 24 September 2024 (UTC)

There are plenty of dead links. Sometimes for practical reasons. I note that you have done a lot of editing, recently, and cleaning up articles is good, but I think you're being told that you're taking it too far to mess with other people's words that are supposed to be their own, rather than the more collaborative pages.

For the Citation needed, perhaps the editor did not want that page to have a "Pages with Citation Needed" link to it (could have used the more literal ^{[Citation needed]}, or similar). Or perhaps they didn't even want the meta-tag appearing in superscript and italics at all. You don't know their mind.

For the Padlock, the (apparent) original author came back and corrected your so-called correction back again. Not reason to be edited, anyway, even if they hadn't been sure what they intended. (I note some minor typos in that explanation. But I wouldn't dive in and make such corrections either, in a Talk namespace page like that.) Trivial, and not your concern anyway. 172.70.86.131 07:22, 24 September 2024 (UTC)

Duly noted. 42.book.addict (talk) 17:10, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

Misleading username

Your username sounds as if it's spam. Would you mind having it changed? 172.68.186.59 07:55, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

I’m not making a whole new account because some anon thinks that it sounds like spam. I don’t spam and I think I contribute in a helpful manner. 42.book.addict (talk) 20:13, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

CG acounts

Hi 42.

I have now had time to look into the whole CG account situation and have reacted and commented both to them and to the message on my talk page. Thanks for the good work. I will give the CG a week to react. Then I will decide next week what to do about them based on their reactions. You are welcome to let me know if they do something stupid in the mean time and also if you know of more CG accounts than the ones I have been alerted to (as seen in my newest reply.)

I did change your talk page because it was made so it was easy to see what comments where left but hard to find them. And it also hid new edits and I do not think a users talk page should hide what people have written, also not if complaints. Seems you have been editing a bit too much on talk pages... But also that you have learned what not to edit?

Best regards --Kynde (talk) 10:48, 29 September 2024 (UTC

Great-glad that’s resolved. I changed back the “hidden comments” thing because it doesn’t make it impossible to access again-you just need to scroll down and click “old squabbles”. I have made a habit of moving comments out of it whenever I receive a message-that’s less tedious than having such a long and irrelevant talk page. 42.book.addict (talk) 15:30, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

It's apparently that different CGs are in charge of different parts of the wiki. e. g. GonscriptGuide and GonscriptGlossary are for language-related pages. 172.69.194.71 02:53, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

I want to re-raise and join the concern raised by others that the "hidden comments" / "old squabbles" thing is a bad idea, and possibly completely unacceptable. It makes your page hard to navigate and unlike every other Talk page, and generally makes it impossible to find things for anyone not extremely familiar with your particular mechanism, which seems to be unique to you. Even knowing you have an "old squabbles" link to click, I have trouble finding it and get annoyed and frustrated, and that makes me annoyed and frustrated with you, even if I should not be. I do not think you want people annoyed and frustrated with you. I strongly recommend you remove it. Put your "old squabbles" on an archive page or remove them entirely, but please don't veil them in this fashion. Thank you. JohnHawkinson (talk) 21:54, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

Hi, personally I don't really give a shit about the "old squabbles" like I see why people are annoyed by it (see one of the converstions in "old squabbles) but I don't really see why its a a big deal. This is what I'd do. If you REALLY don't wanna get rid of it, I would make it bigger, like a heading, and put it were the "old squabbles" used to be. That way if someones looking for it, the link is obvious and is were the origanals used to be. I think that would be a pretty good compromise, but you can take what I've said with a grain of salt as I'm not one of the people whom have a problem with it. Apollo11 (talk) 14:02, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

Alsos just saw your break post, good for you!! :) Apollo11 (talk) 14:07, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

Archived. 42.book.addict (talk) 17:17, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

Help me make my user page

How do I do it Caliban (talk) 10:51, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

step 1: wait for 7 days and make 50 productive edits to be autoconfirmed. step 2: create a user page. step 3: bask in the fact that you aren’t red-linked anymore-wait no your signature is a bright red. 42.book.addict (talk) 03:27, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

Thanks :)

I just wanted to thank you for creating my user page for me. I really apreciate it--Pego (talk) 16:06, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

Adding the "please sign"/etc comments.

I really wasn't suggesting that anyone go into every Talk page and 'update' it just with the guide comment. It's the kind of thing I have tried to do if I (think I) have good cause to be editing the page (usually to fix someone's very recent non-signing).

Like I said, it's all just a partial/sticking-plaster solution, and often enough seems not to be read/remembered anyway. The returns on blanket-editing pretty much everything are low, probably not really worth spending your time on. (Something else may 'need' to be done tomorrow, which means loads of premature edits were done that could have waited a bit longer and saved server-resources.) You're eager to help, I know that. You might be being overeager. Pace youself, perhaps? ;) 141.101.98.23 18:23, 10 October 2024 (UTC)

didn't your user page originally say she/they?

Why did you remove it Caliban (talk) 06:58, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

Does it matter? Anyone can say anything and (page history aside) unsay anything. It shouldn't bother you to have been said, nor to have had it (and anything else) removed.

42: Sorry to interject before you do. You can remove this bit (definitely my reply, if not CC's whole question) if you consider it an issue not worth persisting on your pages. 141.101.99.202 08:23, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

What I put on my user page my choice. I can remove it if I want, I can add things if I want. If you want to know the reason why, please check the editing history of my user page. Thanks, 141.101.99.202. 42.book.addict (talk) 15:20, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

I can't edit it, myself, so...

In this edit, you shuffled up a 'demonstration' version of {{Citation needed}} into the preceding word, as if it were an actual one rather than a demonstrative one. Actually, I think that the proper change would be to (with a space to both sides) make it {{template|Citation needed}}, like I did just here, but I'll let you decide. 172.70.90.108 05:42, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

Oops. Fixed now. 42.book.addict (talk) 18:02, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

"get a life, impossible"??

don't give up on that :) Caliban (talk) 10:30, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

its a joke about my mental health, dont take it seriously. 42.book.addict (talk) 15:17, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

User page edit query

Hey, saw you had text on your bios, i was wondering how you do that? I want to and i can't figure out how to. Thanks in advance SomeRandomNerd (talk) 04:17, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

What do you mean? Could you elaborate? 42.book.addict (talk) 22:06, 20 October 2024 (UTC)