User talk:Izkala

Speedy deletion declined: User:ClueBot III/Detailed Indices/User talk:Alakzi/Archive 1

Hello Alakzi. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of User:ClueBot III/Detailed Indices/User talk:Alakzi/Archive 1, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: This is not your user page. Thank you. Jackmcbarn (talk) 16:20, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

Then use whichever criterion applies. Alakzi (talk) 16:23, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

I don't think any criterion applies. The closest I can think of is G8, but even that would only apply if you deleted your archives (which you are allowed to do since they're C&P rather than move archives). Why do you want them deleted? Jackmcbarn (talk) 16:25, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

G6 applies. I've switched to a different archival bot, so the indices are no longer kept current. Alakzi (talk) 16:26, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

I guess that could apply. Out of curiosity, are they doing any harm by being there? Jackmcbarn (talk) 16:32, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

@Jackmcbarn: Well, no, I don't think so. Since they're indices of my own talk page, I thought it'd be OK if I wanted to delete them for whatever reason. Alakzi (talk) 16:38, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

Makes sense. Gone. Jackmcbarn (talk) 16:48, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. Alakzi (talk) 16:53, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

Template:Infobox speedway rider

Hi. Firstly I am finding it difficult to discuss this issue when every time i come back it has been archived to a page that is not allowed to be edited, and therefore i have to keep starting the topic again. Anyway, in the archived discussion, Bugumba says "it looks there are articles that are dependent on the new changes. Therefore, it would not be sufficient to only revert the template, but rather all the articles that use the new format would need to be identified and converted as well". I don't believe this is true, the articles are not dependent on the changes so reverting the template would be fine. Only the pages that you manually changed to fit the new template would need to be reverted - i think this is about a dozen? Your statement "The infobox might not look right now, but it never was right" is not correct either, there were no infoboxes that had the years and the teams mismatched that i know of before the template change was implemented. I don't think saying people are free to implement the solution you suggested (widening the columns?) is fair. You did create the problem, so i think it is only fair you fix it! If it is a small change to the template then please make it, i don't know the exact details of what the change would be. Finally, I am not going to continue discussing the problem as i'm growing tired of seeing all the pages in a mess so unless a fix is forthcoming i will attempt to revert myself. thanks ... Rcclh (talk) 20:15, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

@Rcclh: It should be fixed now. Sorry about the archiving. Alakzi (talk) 20:22, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

Glancing through a few pages that seems to have resolved the problem. Thank you. Rcclh (talk) 21:21, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

Nail.

Did you ever click on Reformation on my user page? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:18, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

I'm not sure I understand the reference. You might have to spell it out for me. Alakzi (talk) 22:32, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

You follow the link "Reformation" under my lead image (which was used here first, remembered today), and explore --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:40, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

Apology

You recently called me out for referring to a Wikipedia essay by it's title, which I apologize because I now realize how use of that title offended you. My original intent was to ask for a reprieve on your block, and used the shortcut name of said article to argue the merits of an unblock, namely: "If they mean what they say, they'll be fine." In the process, I did not realize that the title itself is negative, and I did not believe the essay necessarily presumed a negative outcome. I apologize for the misunderstanding, and have modified the essay as an initial step towards improving it. No comment is needed on your part. Regards.—Bagumba (talk) 20:56, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, I appreciate that, and I'm sorry if I've offended you with my own reaction. Alakzi (talk) 21:15, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

Color tracking

Whenever you are finished with the current work on adding {{Greater color contrast ratio}} to {{Infobox television season}}, would it be possible to add it to {{Episode list}} as well? My template coding skills are not quite good enough to do it myself. I think the idea of adding the tracking category is wonderful and would love to see it expanded to the Episode list template as that's another common source of WP:COLOR violations. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 21:13, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

Do you mean the table header? That's manually constructed - or at least it was, until recently. I've now added {{Greater color contrast ratio}} and tracking to {{Episode table}}. Alakzi (talk) 21:30, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

Yes, I mean for the color/text in the table header. But I see what you mean that it's manually constructed. Thanks for adding it to the {{episode table}}. Cheers! EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 21:55, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Geology of Pluto

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Geology of Pluto. Legobot (talk) 00:08, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

AWB restored

I'm putting my money where my mouth is and restoring your AWB access. I don't believe that you don't know what was wrong with what you did. And I genuinely have faith that you won't do it again. I hope this is true. Thank you, --ceradon (talk • contribs) 00:38, 27 July 2015 (UTC)