User talk:Mirokado

If I have left you a message: please answer on your talk page, as I am watching it.
If you leave me a message: I will answer on my talk page, so please add it to your watchlist.
Please click here to leave me a new message.

Welcome!

Hello Mirokado, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! - Vsmith 03:17, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Archives

1, 2, 3

This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by when more than 8 sections are present.

Always precious

Ten years ago, you were found precious. That's what you are, always. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:54, 28 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Gerda. This year your message has coincided with a very late start to real spring weather, so I have at least two reasons to be smiling. -- Mirokado (talk) 21:06, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Article length bar

Hi, Mirokado. I'm writing to tell you about new template {{Article length bar}} ({{Albar}} ). I found you because of your earlier use of the template {{Article length rating}} (alias {{Alr}}). I had an application which also needed a graphic for article length, but I found Alr opaque in its symbology, and also it tops out at 20kb, which I think of as start-class, or just past stub; that is way too early for my purpose. My use case is more about checking whether an article is getting close to being too big and approaching the threshold for splitting, or already exceeding it, while Alr appears to be better for measuring stubs. Anyway, don't know if you stopped using Alr because you no longer had a need for it, or you gave up on it because it didn't really work for you, either.

The new {{Albar}} is very configurable, you can use it in default mode to get {{Albar|Jean Sibelius}} → 122k, for example. Here's France , Germany , and Italy rendered as sparklines. Lots more configurability, and if you still have a need for a graphic length symbol, I'd love to see your applications for it. It's still new, and I'm still thinking of other enhancements (including a prose-words mode: long-term, and not simple) and if you have any wish-list items for it, please add them to the template talk page. Cheers, Mathglot (talk) 06:46, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

CS1 error on Mysticism

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Mysticism, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

A bare URL error. References show this error when one of the URL-containing parameters cannot be paired with an associated title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 13:01, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In case anyone is interested: this arose because I corrected one error (|work= should have been |journal=) which caused this one. The new problem was missing |title=, which I decided to leave with a {{full}} tag since the original citation was incomplete and I could not find the article's author or title anywhere. The content and reference have since been removed, so this is now moot. -- Mirokado (talk) 19:16, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A-Z comments in reference list

Please do not remove alphabet markers in long reference list. They are used on multiple articles and assist editors in properly placing references. Such comments are not 'blank lines' and there is no valid policy or guideline-based reason for their removal. Skyerise (talk) 16:18, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A comment is replaced by nothing during parsing, so a comment surrounded by two newlines is equivalent to a blank line. Thus the original and current sources violate MOS:LISTBREAK. If you read that section, you will see examples which are careful to avoid this while embedding comments in lists. These show how to embed A-Z comments in the lists if you wish.

The T comment in Mysticism#Published is missing. You need to maintain these carefully and regularly if you want to include them in the article source. -- Mirokado (talk) 21:53, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is nothing at all in MOS:LISTBREAK that addresses comments between lines in a bulleted list. It is very commonly done in articles with many listed references, and of course we are all volunteers here: I didn't add those comments and am not responsible for maintaining them, but I do support keeping them. They make the article better and easier to edit, so per WP:IAR ("ignore all rules"), keeping them is justifiable. You are of course welcome to take it to the article talk pages and try to established a consensus to remove them per WP:BRD. Skyerise (talk) 03:04, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

To be fair, the example I referred to is in a subsection of MOS:LISTBREAK, MOS:PARABR. I think that "this must be done on a single code line" is quite clear:

:::Y In both cases, this must be done on a single code line. However, you can optionally use the trick of wrapping a code line break in an HTML comment (which suppresses it as an output line break), to separate paragraphs better in code view:

:::* This is one item.<!--
:::--><p>This is another paragraph within this item.</p>
:::* This is another item.
:::

I don't particularly mind if you want the A-Z comments. Articles must however conform to the MOS, at least once a problem has been corrected. I will make the correction as in the above example, retaining the comments. -- Mirokado (talk) 03:53, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

But this isn't at all about comments between lines; it's a "trick of wrapping a code line break in an HTML comment", which isn't what is being done in the refs list. In this case, there's no "code line break" in the refs list to wrap. You're trying to make the MoS say something that it doesn't actually say. Show me where it says, "Don't put HTML comments between bulleted lines" - it doesn't, anywhere on the page. It only gives a trick for embedding <p> tags. Skyerise (talk) 04:07, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is turning out to be quite interesting! While preparing yet another answer, I noticed that the citation lists did not have the slight extra line spacing where I would have expected it from the comments. I decided to actually test (!) a small example of a numbered list with an embedded NEWLINE COMMENT NEWLINE sequence, and to my surprise it is displayed as a single list. This is a welcome improvement to the source parsing:

Beverly
Bob
Cecilia (a C comment on the previous source line)
Charles

An attempt to place the example in an indented talk reply generates two lists though, which was catching me out for a while:

Beverly
Bob

Cecilia (a C comment on the previous source line)
Charles

The comments can also be placed in nested lists:

Beverly
1. apples
2. bananas (a comment on the previous line)
Bob

I think this parsing improvement should probably be documented in MOS:LISTBREAK and the examples could be updated to use the simpler embedded comment pattern as "best practice" and at least sometimes numbered lists for clarity. In particular "this must be done on a single code line" is now clearly incorrect.

We can retain the comments as they are. -- Mirokado (talk) 06:00, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Glad you noticed; the comment lines don't add the slightly larger spacing between lines that a blank line would. I did actually look for that. As far as I know, it's been that way for some time. Comments don't break the list unless there is also a blank line or a coded line break. Skyerise (talk) 06:07, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]