User talk:DePiep

		The Template Barnstar
		For repeated improvements on templates used in phonetics articles. Particularly admirable is the combination of seeking out explicit consensus and dutifully carrying out necessary changes once it is reached. — Ƶ§œš¹ [aɪm ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɛ̃ɾ̃ˡi] 14:51, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Template:CatSucceeding

DePiep, I went back a couple of versions with Template:CatSucceeding because it was broken at the pages that used it. It seems to be working now, although whether the documentation will catch up after a server lag, or whether that needs more fixing, I don't know. Perhaps you can fix what I've stuck a plaster over? Yours, Shem (talk) 23:03, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

Restored old one with bugfix -DePiep (talk) 10:25, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Tirhuta

If you are interested in adding Unicode encoding proposals to script articles, there's always this. -- Evertype·✆ 10:28, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Great link, thank you. Describing a proposal here on WP is a bit difficult for me, since I'm not familiar with any writing system's backgrounds. First and only thing I did is to remove code points from the infobox (Tirhuta, Khoj), because these code points are not allocated. Full stop. Any proposed allocation could very well be described in the text indeed, but should not be published here as being "almost" in Unicode. So they are well separated in Category:Unicode proposals. Is my opinion, I thought you are with me in this. -DePiep (talk) 10:52, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Armenian dram sign

I replicated the bars on the right and put them on the left side too. See these variations I made:

• Image 1 (PNG)
• Image 2 (PNG)

I failed to open Image 1 and Image 2, is there any other way to see them? Nrahehinak (talk) 12:00, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Which one of them is the closest to the original sign? – ∃ Aditya 7  ¦  17:40, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

I like the sharp pointed lines, but a stylist might ask for the square. I'll leave it up to you (if you don't want to flip an Armenian coin to decide: follow the {{Indian Rupee}}-example might be good). Then, it is to be used in-line too, as a text character (font emulation). Don't you think thinner lines would render it more readable? Or is it just my screen &tc. See e.g. {{currency signs}}, and Armenian dram sign. Do as you think good, an overwrite is OK, I'm at the end of my knowlegde in this :-) -DePiep (talk) 17:52, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

up to me slightly thinner lines are preferable Nrahehinak (talk) 12:00, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Wait, unless you have already proceeded. The Armenian alphabet has a distinctive way of writing, using a sort of calligraphy pen. If the dram sign does not style-copy that (as is now), I suggest you stick with the square variant. (Using sharp pointed bars would break style with the regular alphabet). -DePiep (talk) 18:01, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

a variety of free designs to comform to various font styles are welcome, the sharp pointed bars remind bars, for instance, of euro sign. Calligraphy is not mandatory: there are already a number of font styles with the dram sign since Granshan'2008 competition.Nrahehinak (talk) 12:00, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Alright, I'll try to make the lines a bit thinner. – ∃ Aditya 7  ¦  08:28, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

I suggest we continu this at Talk:Armenian dram sign#Graphic image. -DePiep (talk) 09:50, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Re: Editprotected

I've replied to you on my talk page and at Template talk:IPAsym, however your request is declined. Editprotected is not used for unprotection requests, we need you to provide us with details of the changes you'd like made. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 23:38, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Thank you here, currently I am replying at that talkpage. -DePiep (talk) 23:40, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

(Reply to your most recent comment) Um, I'm sorry if I've offended you in some way, but I am trying to be helpful here. Yes, it is a sockpuppeteer, and yes, we have so far been unable to stop them due to a little inconvenience called proxies. As I'm sure you know as an active editor, Wikipedia is continually being worked on, and we would appreciate your help, especially with complicated templates such as this. As I've explained, I am uncomfortable removing the protection at this time, however you are welcome to set up a sandbox for the template, make your changes there, and let me or another administrator know when they are done. We can then copy the changes over, crediting you with the edit summary. I really am trying to be as cooperative as possible here while maintaining the security of the site, as is my responsibility. I do not appreciate the aggressive tone you're taking, as I don't feel that I've deserved it. I've been civil throughout this entire discussion, and I'd appreciate receiving some civility in turn. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 04:20, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

You are right. My disappointment & not understanding went too far. Thank you for this reply & other actions. -DePiep (talk) 12:58, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

Tables (Length vs readability)

If a table is over 3 or so screens in length it is difficult to follow which column relates to what in the heading of the table having to scroll up and down. And with the numerous additions in the Unicode 6.1 (draft) the scrolling is that much harder.
So I split the table into three parts BMP/SMP/SSP so an user can show/hide he separate parts/planes. I'm having trouble staying connected to the internet & couldn't verify the table's notes were still working ok :( — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mkouklis (talk • contribs) 03:15, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

The Notes are OK. I've readjusted minor stuff, some more needed. -DePiep (talk) 03:19, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Template:Dynamic list

Hi, The change you made to the Dynamic List template this morning appears to have had an undesired effect and is only showing {{{1}}}. I have reverted this edit for now, but would you be able to have a look at it, as I assume the edit was important? Thanks, Glanis^Talk 07:19, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, noticed. reverted {{inc-lit}} too. Weird templates. -DePiep (talk) 07:20, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

todo

note to myself Voiceless palatal lateral fricative -DePiep (talk) 14:38, 14 July 2011 (UTC) - check soundfile name vowel turned omega -DePiep (talk) 15:10, 15 July 2011 (UTC) More on [[

R with tail]].-DePiep (talk) 09:02, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Italics

Italics within italics are usually set in normal type. The names should be left as-is to set them off from the italic text, since they're words as words. —Designate (talk) 22:39, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

They do not show so in the hatnote (using rellink or dablink). -DePiep (talk) 22:41, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Check again, they did until you changed them. Designate (talk) 22:58, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

The name is Name, not Name.

I'll check & revert. -DePiep (talk) 23:00, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Done. While we're at it, should we change "quotes" into these italics, as in {{Philippine name}}? -DePiep (talk) 23:12, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, that would be better. —Designate (talk) 23:36, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Going -DePiep (talk) 23:37, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Gone. -DePiep (talk) 09:30, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Discussing Congo (country) redirect

I posted a comment at Talk:Congo#Many_incoming_links_from_a_country_Congo suggesting a change to the redirect page Congo (country). I can see you had put in some work on this before, I'd like to get your thoughts on my suggestion. Thanks! LarryJeff (talk) 16:36, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Template edit

No, nothing specific; it's simply that I'm not very good with templates, so I wouldn't know if something small had gone wrong. Nyttend (talk) 12:12, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Template:ISO 15924

Throw away banned user. -DePiep (talk) 23:33, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

Change to the template

I made the change to the template, please check the results, as I am not particularly conversant with IPA--SPhilbrickT 11:51, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

It is fine, thank you. -DePiep (talk) 12:09, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

question about capitalization

What is the reason for changing "{{Infobox Writing system" to "{{Infobox writing system" as you did here? —Coroboy (talk) 10:49, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

There is no reason, shouldn't have saved that one. I was in a sweep of cleaning up WLH pages of that template, partly by AWB, preparing for the use of ISO 15924 alpha-4 code. -DePiep (talk) 11:06, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

{{ISO 15924/wp-name}}

Hello. I don't know exactly what you've changed in the template, but it seems to have damaged the userbox's work with some parameters, one demonstrative variant being here. Please, try to fix this soon. I was going to look into the technical details, however I expect you to find the breach faster and don't want to spoil anything else. Thanks. --Microcell (talk) 21:17, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, I'll take a look into it. -DePiep (talk) 21:18, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Looks like this has been solved or you still see anything wrong? --Microcell (talk) 21:49, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Let's say it's OK now (Byzantine it is; I'll dive into it some day). Maybe you'd like to clean that sandbox page, these Categories are working again, too ;-).

No delete request!

I have restored User:DePiep/sandbox9 but look at it man - it is covered with speedy tags. I presume they are being trancluded from another page. Investigate and fix fastish. — [[::User:RHaworth|RHaworth]] (talk · contribs) 11:28, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

To explain

Under the policy of WP:DENY, sockpuppets of banned users have their contributions reverted or deleted on sight, immediately. This is done because when Wikipedia's community bans someone, it bans them properly; to allow them to contribute, directly or indirectly, would completely undermine the entire point of bans in the first place. As such, Wikipedia:CSD#G5 allows for the speedy deletion (note the emphasis) of "Pages created by banned or blocked users in violation of their ban or block, and which have no substantial edits by others". Now, it is certainly true that this allows for exceptions where substantial edits are made, but you have not made such edits to these pages, and furthermore admit that you have no evidence or recollection of making substantial contributions. Your edits, varying from template to template, consist of things like "removing whitespaces" and "moving the template code to another page and including that one instead". These are not "substantial" edits.

To address the points you brought up at DRV, you wrote that you are seeking WP:DRV because you did not find my response constructive. This is not a criteria for DRV; DRV is for when you have real grounds to believe that the deletion was improper, under the deletion criteria, which you admitted you did not have. Your reasoning was that I:

1. did not check for usage of the template,
2. did not act to solve that graciously beforehand,
3. may have wrongly claimed there are "no substantial edits" as per db-g5,
4. the declining editor starts wikilawyering without helping to keep or reproduce good templates at all

In order; on your first and second points, there is absolutely no requirement to check for template usage, nor to "graciously" do so before deletion. Speedy deletion is precisely what it says - speedy; after the article has been tagged, the deleting administrator is not required or expected to consult with anyone else until after the fact if people raise a fuss. Your third point is perfectly valid, although I note that you did not actually bring it up when discussing it with me (and indeed, I never directly "claimed" anything). As for your fourth point... WP:WIKILAWYERING, which is an essay, notes that a Wikilawyer is someone who interprets the letter of the rules in violation of the spirit, and that "Wikipedia policies and procedures should be interpreted with common sense to achieve the purpose of the policy". That is precisely what I did - the purpose of the policy was to deny publicity to banned users, and I denied publicity. Accusing me of wikilawyering smacks of either a failure to understand what the term means, or simply a complete disregard for the principle of WP:AGF, a core pillar of Wikipedia. If it is the former, I would urge you to actually read the essay (particularly the line "In any case an accusation of wikilawyering is never a valid argument per se, unless an explanation is given why particular actions may be described as wikilawyering"). If it is the latter, I would ask that you desist from making statements like "the user is wikilawyering" and putting words in my mouth, and instead extend the common courtesy of starting from the presumption that I had good reasons for my actions. Ironholds (talk) 11:10, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

And another thing

Re this little message? What you just said (1) completely undermines the entire purpose of the deletion and (2) is a violation of copyright law. Ironholds (talk) 11:18, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Template:Infobox IPA/core2

Sorry for my late response. 15em was narrow to me so that playback button for audio file overflowed. 16em is enough. Thanks anyway! --fryed-peach (talk) 17:44, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

I get it. The playback button is a bad beast because it is a browser-thing, not a page-thing. It is like the browser taking over our page, esp when you click it. I tried to cover that overflow somehow, but we can not control all of it from Wikipedia. -DePiep (talk) 17:47, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Response at ANI

FYI, it doesn't look like Dicklyon will be able to respond for at least a week due to a recent unrelated block. Just thought I would let you know in case you were expecting a response. Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 23:40, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Hm. -DePiep (talk) 23:43, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Vowel chart

Since the two vowel charts were a content fork, I merged them, preserving the history of the older, and then moved them to the original name. The new one didn't display properly: the alignment was off. Now some of the transclusions, such as {{IPA navigation}}, are offset, but at least the transclusions in the vowel articles now align properly. — kwami (talk) 03:14, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Not only this. You also deleted existing code, did not sandbox nor start a talk, and have created a mess. Both the move/delete and the style each could have been discussed first. -DePiep (talk) 14:48, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Okay, merged the page history, so that it's all together on that page and more accessible. — kwami (talk) 23:19, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

font-size

Hi DePiep. I noticed you make a lot of work with templates, but there is a problem now with the template:IPA vowel chart. The vowels in the chart appear very small and diacritics are hard to see with that tiny font-size. Would you please enlarge them as they were, previously. I think they were 120% or 125%. --Mahmudmasri (talk) 13:51, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

They still were 120%. I increased to 130%. — kwami (talk) 13:57, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Mahmudmasri, someone really messed it up without talking. Al lot more is spoiled. Thank you for noting the now gone effort, still. -DePiep (talk) 14:18, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Use the old code if you like and can fix it up. The code doesn't matter, the display does. It should have been finished before using it in the template. — kwami (talk) 23:19, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks DePiep and Kwami, now it appears better. --Mahmudmasri (talk) 09:55, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

International recognition of the State of Palestine

Just a courtesy note to inform you that I've removed the {{or}} tag which you recently added to the article. Due to sourcing concerns, I've removed the colours from Israeli non-recognizers here so I believe that your concerns have been addressed. If not, feel free to re-add the tag. TDL (talk) 04:42, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Which would be OK, if it was not reverted already. I think for now the quality is lost. There seems to be a WP:OR/N. -DePiep (talk) 13:07, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

thank you

Thank you for turning my amateur template {{ArticlePair}} into the real thing! — Robert Greer (talk) 23:47, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks very much for your help with {{Millennium Park Map}}! Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 20:59, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Appreciated! -DePiep (talk) 21:00, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Greek diacritics

Hello, I've replied to your comment at Talk:Greek diacritics#Combining character, but thought it worth also posting directly to you. None of those diacritics are in fact "combining characters" (see the Unicode chart here), and if you're not seeing them correctly, I suggest it may be Firefox that is messing them up for you. Can you see if it works OK with a different browser? Vilĉjo (talk) 22:54, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Yes. Replied there, and linked to a Village Pump section. Main frustration was that I cannot trust my own edits. -DePiep (talk) 23:15, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

1RR restriction

Hi, regarding your edit at User talk:Israelite1, all articles in the Israel-Palestine area are subject to arbitration enforcement that includes 1RR. See the notice I put there. Regards. Zero^talk 14:57, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Why you tell me? What you tell me? -DePiep (talk) 00:13, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

You placed a 3RR notice on User talk:Israelite1 and I wanted to inform you that 3RR is replaced by 1RR on those sites. Zero^talk 08:08, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Qazhyghumar Shabdanuly

The reason I declined the speedy deletion on this article is that there never was an AfD on it. There is no obvious link between it and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Qabdesh Jumadilov, which was closed as keep anyway. Also the header inspired by Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Qabdesh_Jumadilov doesn't belong in an article (it is formatted as a section title) and should be removed promptly regardless of the article's status. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 02:47, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

Arguments, at last. -DePiep (talk) 02:56, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

Yat

Please take a look on the last edit of your bot and how I fixed it. Probably the same issue may occur somewhere else. -- 69.111.166.5 (talk) 13:27, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

I see. I edited Dze, and started a Talk at Talk:Cyrillic because it is not too clear for me. -DePiep (talk) 14:19, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

AWB added newlines when adding a navbox

Status	New
Description	AWB added newlines when added a navbox
To duplicate:
Site URL:	http://en.wikipedia.org
Operating system	WinXP
.NET FW Version	dunno
AWB version	5.3.1.0
Workaround	correct manually
Fixed in version

Before/after: [1] I'd expect AWB to make the templates be without whitespace nicely. In my AWB sweep yesterday (adding some 100+ templates to articles) I saw more of such actions, and corrected some. Maybe I have missed a new policy= -DePiep (talk) 23:51, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

How did you add this navbox? Prepend text allows editor to define the number of newlines before the prepended text and/or do sort meta data. -- Magioladitis (talk) 14:42, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I can't recall the AWB settings used. Could be with some manual (in AWB) editing too. Guess we might close it then. Next time I'll take notes. -DePiep (talk) 15:13, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Moved discussion here for simplicity. Most probably you forgot to reduce the number of newlines in the "More..." tab. Please rereport if necessary. -- Magioladitis (talk) 15:32, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

All right. -DePiep (talk) 15:36, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Your VP post

I don't know how to check easily that this is what happened, but here is my guess: Some users (I think especially Mac users) have an easy way of inserting non-breaking spaces that look just like normal spaces, using ctrl-Space -- and regularly do so because they are used to it from non-Wikipedia applications. Some browsers automatically convert such non-breaking spaces into normal spaces.

I don't think it's related to the database lock at all. As far as I know all diffs are produced right when you ask for them. I.e. the diff is the result of actually comparing the two page versions, and the red passages always represent real changes (unless the diff algorithm mixes up paragraphs, as it often does but clearly not here). In any case, nothing to worry about. Hans Adler 17:18, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Comprendo. DePiep (talk) 23:33, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

unichar

I question your adding the HTML parameter to {{unichar}} like this when some of the characters in question have only a numeric character entity reference as opposed to a named one. I don't see what makes a numeric one worth mentioning, especially in an only indirectly related article. HTML & its daughter articles cover how the numeric ones are derived from the codepoint number; I think that treatment is sufficient. --Cybercobra (talk) 23:57, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Agree, questionable it is. As the template works now (I build it to do so), when html= is invoked (the parameter is used), it shows the HTML numerical entrance and the name whenever that exists (as you knew). I have not thought about only mentioning the name if existing, but not the HTML code. That would need an extra switch, somehow.

But there is another thing. By showing the HTML code this way, we also show the decimal value. That way, I thought then and now, we cover both ways without disturbing the inline text too much. So, I hope (!) that when we show the decimal number in HTML, both basic reader (1M) and specialists (you and me) recognise the right thing. Sure it would be correct to note: decimal value, html-decimal usage, html-hex usage, hell how to enter it in Windows. But that would make the line unclear. I also left out the HTML-hex notation, like © (00A9 is already in the ID U+00A9). Actually, today I removed some "decimal value=" notes in this template, in favour of the "html=" note, to simplify the inline text. I am hoping that a reader recognises the decimal value through the HTML. Especially by using a standard.

It is questionable. What does the Reader know & expect? -DePiep (talk) 00:21, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Adding: you seem to think that adding html= is only usefull when a character requires escaping in HTML [2]. But the 250 or so named entities in HTML are not existing to "escape" (¥, ♥?). Maybe this is valid for a handful in XML. So, in regular text, there is no reason to "escape" those 250+ characters in HTML. And any such a requirement could be notes inside or outside the template.

Second. So the entity name is not there to signal that it should be escaped. It is there because it is an alternative and useful id for the character. When specifying a character as we do (for example when using {{unichar}}, apart from the main Unicode id U+00A9 (in hexadecimal), we also add differennt id's: the glyph, name, HTML (thereby showing the decimal value), and the entity name when existing. These are all alternative id's, in the description or specification. So I see no reason to leave out, in general, the HTML= code while leaving in the others. I mean, we could do without the Name too? -DePiep (talk) 11:11, 31 January 2012 (UTC)