Disputatio Usoris:ShakespeareFan00

E Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Salve ShakespeareFan00!
Knowledge of Latin is not required here. We thank you for assisting us. Feel free to use English,
German, French, Italian, or Spanish when communicating with other users.
In transcriptionis paginis mos noster non est nomen dare, sed in disputationis paginis
memento recensionibus tuis cum nomine tuo subscribere, litteris impressis --~~~~.
Quibus insertis, nomen tuum et dies ostendetur.

Omnibus utiles nexus: Paginae desideratae (missing pages)

Omnes libri (transcription projects)Systema naturae (1735) (proofreading project)

Gratum tibi sit tempus apud vicifontes peractum! Vale!

Vicifontium amici

Zyephyrus (disputatio) 20:05, 7 Iulii 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Some minor typographic changes you did (replacing <small> tags enclosing many lines with one per line)...[recensere]

in the contents of the Disquisitiones Arithmeticae have made the page in main namespace incoherent (little vs. big spacing).

I asked you why you did these changes, and what you thought of why I had done it some other way.

You didn't answer. You didn't edit all the pages in the Contents to make them uniform. And you didn't stop editing after my request for explanations.

I know very well I don't own the pages I first edited, but I don't understand how it would be troublesome to explain what was the purpose of your edit... Neither do I understand what can be your interest in doing minor edits making main NS pages incoherent (2 pagina NS pages on 4 over a few days...) while you are doing a lot of other minor edits on other pages?!...

Your changes make the page a little more legible but further from the original typography. Was it your purpose? Was it a question of coding style?

Please either go on with the remaining pages, or tell me you want me to do the same changes with the remaining two pages, or tell me you don't care if I revert.

And please tell me why you made those edits.

post-scriptum: This may seem nitpicking, but it's mostly that if your rationale is pertinent, I'd like to hear it so I can take it in account in my coding/typographic style... Trlit (disputatio) 20:08, 2 Aprilis 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I did this in an attempt to repair a LintErorr, <noiwki>..<noiwki> cannot be applied over a block level item like a list. ShakespeareFan00 (disputatio) 20:11, 2 Aprilis 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Special:LintErrors for a list of uncovered errors... other than that it's a case of looking at the markup. If you have specfic pages with 'structural' errors that you need help with, please get in touch again. I'm less worried about things like mismatched italics and bold formatting. ShakespeareFan00 (disputatio) 20:32, 2 Aprilis 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Well, thank you indeed. And thank you for the transparent solution you just came up with. Is there a place where I can know which other wiki constructs (tags or otherwise) produce this kind of error?