justincase wrote:As an example:
Before Blue's edits ... states that there are multiple builders on Buildslave Warszawa, and that only one of them, specifically the one which builds ReactOS Trunk in debug mode, gets triggered to build automatically, the rest of the builders on it being unattached to any such system, and thus requiring manual triggering if a build from one of them is desired.
After Blue's edits ... indicates that Buildslave Warszawa, host of multiple builders, is the only buildslave which both builds from Trunk in debug mode and gets triggered to build automatically, and that the other buildslaves are not attached to such a system, and thus require manual triggering if a build from one of them is desired.
Blue wrote:I don't see anyone's point of it being wrong. As above is the same as below.
In case above is to hard to understand.... Meaning the same as the example of mine you offered Before Blue's edits:... -_-
Currently it host multiple builders on Buildslave Warszawa and specifically only one which builds ReactOS Trunk in debug mode, gets triggered to build automatically, in debug mode that is attached to a scheduler and that is triggered automatically by our own Warszawa build system. Our additional multiple builders that are attached to Warszawa, have to be triggered by hand when needed and are not unattached to any such requirements. You can trigger a Trunk build update by manually triggering if a build from one of them is desired...
Actually they have very different meanings, mainly due to changes in scope of various parts of the statement. Also your restated version is better than the version you put in the wiki (by way of correctness), but is very clumsy (grammatically speaking), and would (in my opinion) be better off as it was before you touched it.
Blue wrote:Again don't delete my crap because you don't have a IT degree!!!
I've only undone 2 things that you did, and each time I explained why in the Summary field.
These are due to the previous version having better sentence structure
, and due to a list being unordered and thus not suitable for an "ordered list"
Blue wrote:or do a better job at editing at the wrong parts & fix them other than deleting my whole wiki fixing!!!
I tried that where I thought a change might be good, but yours was not quite right
, it's not my fault Zehnvor (who has more authority in this project that I) apparently
thought it was better before either of our edits.
Blue wrote:Way to be a jerk when you have a full wiki original wiki page viewer & mods saying give me each step of what you've edited to waste my time... and ban me off the wiki pages because you can not express what you mean in written and hope people understand your hidden meanings...
I don't think I'm being a jerk, just trying to help the wiki, and to perhaps help you understand how to edit the wiki without getting banned.
I don't think Zehnvor's meanings were hidden (see your talk page
), if you did not understand them, then you should have asked him what they meant rather than simply continuing to do what he had asked you not to do.
Blue wrote:That's why I don't like little kids being WIKI MODS! HARD words I know.... I now feel that way though... Why help when all they do is come and ruin what you've worked on for hours to fix and than tell you, its wrong but can't explain to you the reasoning why its wrong... or fix the part in it. (I'm just saying they are offensive wiki controllers).
Wow, name calling, that's (not) good internet etiquette
. Actually Zehnvor did tell you what was wrong in several instances, and I tried to "fix the part in it" in another. You were not banned for making all those edits, you were banned (temporarily I might add) for continuing to do what a person of higher authority asked you not to, there is nothing "little kid" like about that.
Blue wrote:Any page that is official should look official and try to limit the missing information & be very detailed, and move away as much as you can from the 60s style wiki pages.
There were no wikis in the '60s, and it is more important to have correct
information than well styled information.
Blue wrote:As Ros is using this page for public domain listing under Welcome area to enter all the following areas for the public to view and learn from! (Even wiki pages can be locked). This is a good example why we need official wiki pages, if we are going to use them for a public domain visit center & should be locked from public editing in entirely. This way would also protect privacy from un-authored external link changes if this truly what is being worried about by the wiki mods.
I had to read that sentence several times to figure out what you meant.
ReactOS' homepage is at ReactOS.org, not ReactOS.org/wiki, that's the wiki, which is referenced as the "Technical wiki". Some pages are
locked, other pages are protected by people who undo bad edits, and try to explain to the people who made such edits why they were undone, and what they should do differently.
Blue wrote:I was told I can not make icons in front of headings - "they make the page look less seriously."
I don't agree as it makes it look more uniformed as it is being used as a public visiting domain.
Whether you agree or not, someone who has more authority within the project in question said not to. So don't.
Blue wrote:I was told I can not make "external links, when others are allowed on the page under nightly builds."
The Wiki page editors can but the end users can not? Is this mod upset another person might do a better job?
Specifically you were told "don't include images from external servers, because this opens some privacy related problems."
"external servers" in this case means any server not owned and/or operated by the ReactOS Foundation and/or other predefined affiliated entities
and the "privacy related problems" are multiple issues, including the both the simple fact that another server outside the project can now see who's accessing a page, and the fact that an image hosted on a compromised server can sometimes be used to put malware onto a users computer without their knowledge.
Blue wrote:I was told look at the wiki rules & how to format on the wiki pages when I was doing a fine job.
We have no rules listing under the navigation side menu.
You obviously were not
"doing a fine job" if a wiki Moderator undid your changes.
The only officially stated rules I can find in a quick search of the site is the "Code of Conduct" thread https://reactos.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=3709
which is stickied to the top of every board on this forum, and while it looks to be mainly meant as rules for the forum many of the rules can also be applied to the wiki
Blue wrote:The wiki is principally used as a repository for technical documentation on NT internals. (Stop using this as a excuse.) why things should not be fixed or edited out for better understanding. ALSO YOUR ONLY CAREING ABOUT Developers and not the end users that need to look up this information.. You think developers are the only people that need to really know this information.. Your wrong sr. Now please make the wiki pages more transparent and correct full sentence and like our ReactOS motto... WIKI is for all users not just Developers (EVERYONE)!!!
It's not an excuse, it's what it is, it's the "Technical wiki", which is "principally used as a repository for technical documentation on NT internals", and is likely to stay that way. That said, there is nothing wrong with using complete and proper sentences, and as far as I can tell people usually try to do so on the wiki, however not everyone is well-versed in English grammar, and some people use lower quality English due to being in a rush or simply not caring about the quality of their work, and these should be fixed if possible, but not made worse. Inversely, just because you or I have difficulty understanding a specific sentence does not mean that it is necessarily wrong, so unless you know
that your 'fix' is correct, don't take it upon yourself to 'fix' it. (there is a reason that every page has a link to a "talk page" available, so we can suggest changes and/or request fixes by people who know more about the specific subject than we do.)
Blue wrote:NOTE: I did not make this page to rant on either but when it comes to unfairness its aggravating.
Again I don't see how what's happening is unfair, you made changes to the wiki and someone with authority over the wiki asked to stop making the kinds of changes you were making, you kept doing it, you got temporarily kicked off of the wiki. (and again I want to mention that it was a temporary ban. This means that it will automatically lift after a specified period of time, and that you will be allowed to edit again, if you will change to do things in a way that is acceptable on this wiki.)
Enjoy your games.
I hope you find some of this post helpful.
And please remember "Code of Conduct" rule #1
[url=https://reactos.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=3709]Code of Conduct[/url] posted by Z98 wrote:
1. Be polite, be courteous, be civil.
Common courtesy seems to be lacking on the internet, but it's something that we will enforce here. This is
not a matter of respect, it's a matter of treating others the way you want to be treated
. Violation of this rule will result either in locked threads, deleted messages, or deleted accounts, depending on the severity, frequency of infractions, and response to warnings. It will be up to the moderators and administrators to determine in their own judgment which punishment is appropriate.
(I underlined what I'm trying to emphasize)