Thank you for sharing your knowledge and experience at Wikipedia talk:Copyrights, and for keeping (mostly) a cool head throughout. I too learned a lot about various international copyright laws and treaties through the hard knocks of Wikipedia subtleties. We all want to have as many free images as possible, but we all want to avoid having to remove works (or, worse, discard derivatives of works) that later turn out to be protected. Nothing hurts free-culture projects like ours as much as the recopyrighting of previously public-domain works. (I grieve for Golan v. Holder.) This is a legitimately difficult conundrum, and I hope we as a community get it right. All the best, – Quadell(talk) 16:50, 2 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Have you ever designed or worked on a template or series of templates that use nested parser functions? They do not have to show up under what links here to be used.
The template was deleted for the sake of getting it deleted despite my objection. I cannot always quit everything else I am doing just to comment on something as trivial as a tfd so I am quite puzzled at the speed of the deletion. What was the hurry?
First step for the re-evaluation of ALL ranks and insignia templates is the discussion phase. I need input from people on how is the best way to represent the ranks. Second phase is the programming/design phase of template. This can go back and forth of course. You can see part of that discussion phase on my talk page and I am waiting for these people to comment.
No, I'm sorry, I did not understand what you are doing with "nested parser functions". I vaguely recall what that is from college computer courses decades ago. I also don't understand how it has not been working since 2005. I would have changed my !vote if I could see some simple explanation. I looked over the link you gave and didn't see an explanation, just people agreeing some other templates were OK. I do agree that the TfD was closed too soon, but I can guess the closing admin didn't see answers as well. Can you add a standard blurb or a link to each of these templates showing they are all part of a bigger project? Can you include a link to where people are disscussing it? In any case, when you have it working, you can recreate the template. Have the closing admin userfy it for you. I am sorry if this has upset you. Richard-of-Earth (talk) 20:08, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I am not upset, just trying to understand whats going on :). I typically stay away from xfd discussions so I am unsure how they function as of late.
mw:Help:Extension:ParserFunctions is a series of commands between nested {{ }} that are difficult to read and write. It complicates coding if it is userified as then you have even more redundant repetitious text. It would also cost me a lot of time to de-userify the template as the code would be shared with some templates currently in use in template space and others would be in my userspace. Why is it necessary to userify it? I would be happy if you could create blurb explaining that the templates are a part of the series and apply it to the templates. I do not know what to write in it to be honest.
To be fair I have not spent too much time on the rank templates until as of late as there really wasn't much of a need. It only covered the NATO countries of the time which was less than what it is today as even NATO expanded. Also the template structure is used to compare non NATO nations on several occasions. The idea to develop a generic template to better structure rank templates came about recently. While I have not edited all of the individual templates I have been discussing this with people recently. The discussion revolves around how to express the templates. Questions such as "Should the ranks be listed vertically or horizontally" need to be answered first before I attempt to code the template. Unfortunately that discussion is developing slowly as I had been busy with real-world affairs since December.
I see, however, to all apperances the template was broken and unused since 2005. Fastily (talk·contribs) deleted it and will gladly usefy it for you. (Create a copy in you user pages.) Here ia a link to the TfD. When you are ready to finish coding it, I'm sure you can just recreate the template with no controversy. Good luck with it. :) Richard-of-Earth (talk) 16:17, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The thing is coding is that much difficult when it is outside of the template namespace. -- A Certain White Catchi? 17:13, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
AfD for Chronology_of_diplomatic_recognitions_and_relations_of_South_Sudan[edit]
You participated in a related discussion before. The current one is here. Japinderum (talk) 11:51, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Back in December you suggested that we replace the cumbersome map/table setup on the NATO article with a hide/show structure. Today, I put up a new table with maps that try to accomplish this. If you have any comments, I've continued the discussion on the talk page. Thanks for the idea!-- Patrick, oѺ∞ 07:02, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
