User talk:SomeoneIGuess

Explain xkcd: It's 'cause you're dumb.
Jump to: navigation, search

thy fathre Me[citation needed] 03:38, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

i see you have also been cursed with "oh god i have a user page" Me[citation needed] 03:49, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

i hath not been cursed - it is thy blessing (signing posts is forbidden)

bro why do you have <br />

because when i dont use them i cant figure out how to add line breaks, plus it's cleaner, preferred in almost all cases, and can be used in more scenarios than a normal <br> someone, i guess (talk) 19:31, 20 October 2023 (UTC)
epic Me[citation needed] 20:41, 20 October 2023 (UTC)
Hi, here's some information on all that, in case you're interested.
When replying with indents, a <newline> and the appropriate number of ::s to maintain the indent on the next line is enough to line-break (see this source).
If you're writing unindented items, a single <newline> is treated as just whitespace, such that it just flows on the same (output) line.
If you really want to separate items, you can use two (or more?) <newline>s and it'll respect the new-paragraph feeling.
(The separation in the edit source is obviosuly far more obvious. If you're just the next person making a 'root' comment in a Talk page then this actually is useful to help navigate the fact that you're looking at two different contributions, but if you're writing multiple paragraphs of your own then you wouldn't want it to look so disconnected.)
It's also the case that the first (single) <newline> in a wikitable item is correctly treated as a new-paragraph in the table contents, but any further such newlines are treated as continuation of that second paragraph, unless you make it work as above/below.
You can, of course, use <p>, <p></p>, <br>, <br/>, etc to force a break (even in an actual run-on line the source) or make the 'trivial' and whitespace-only break real (either side of the actual <newline> that is otherwise ignored.
...I rather like adding a <br/> at the end of paragraphs to let me use an editor-friendly layout, as described. Occasionally I'll add it it to the start of the follow-up paragraph (it makes it look a bit like a bulletted list, which might aid future editors), but that's rare.
And, of course, when writing Talk-type replies like this, I don't need to do any of that. I just use the indent-colons and it all works out exactly as it needs to without fuss.
Indents don't (often) apply in actual comic articles themselves, of course. But I suspect that their use at the start of every line in the Transcript (it is usual to have at least the one level of indent in front of every individual line except for actual 'blank lines') is in part to make it look more or less the same in both 'raw edit' and screen-style, given that a Transcript is supposed to have very little actual formatting markup/tagging of any other kind.
Anyway, you can always use Preview to double-check (and tweak with) anything before actually posting, just in case you forget to force a newline (or do one where it isn't technically needed and ends up looking worse than you intended). 21:01, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

"watch out nqh" - history

i'm scared Me[citation needed] 02:13, 21 October 2023 (UTC)

by the way your dark mode doesn't work on the modern skin :godo: Me[citation needed] 02:22, 21 October 2023 (UTC)

Now that it's finally, FINALLY fucking done, i'm considering taking a break from userstyles. If i ever decide to come back, i'll probably focus on other skins. Stay tuned someone, i guess(talk i guess|le edit list) 15:49, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
someone didnt read the warnings someone, i guess (talk) 19:55, 21 October 2023 (UTC)

For your recent FAQ addition (which I'm not able to edit myself), might I suggest that instead of:

For statements that require actual, genuine citations, the template Actual Citation Needed should be used instead. change it to:

For statements that require actual, genuine citations, the template {{Actual citation needed}} should be used instead.

(See edit source for how I wrote that, or even to copypaste the markup direct.)
Also note that the 'real' template is capitalised with a capital 'A' (and no others). The all-lower one aliases to the first-upper one (much as rather more variations on {{Citation needed}} redirect to it). Not really so important, but while {{Citation Needed}} exists (to save time for people who can't simply remember that it is "First capital only"?), there isn't even an {{Actual Citation Needed}} (at time of writing, at least, and I honestly think there's no need to spoil people with something like Template:eVeRy PoSsIbLe CaSe-MiX when the baseline is fairly standard).
So, at least lower the latter two capitals in the link-text to implant the valid (and main) version in people's minds from the moment they possibly learn of such a possibility. Whether or not you {{template}}ify the link and/or 'Inital case' where it points to. ...but just a suggestion. Perhaps more style than substance, but you seem like you might appreciate these pointers. 08:39, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Fixed! someone, i guess(talk i guess|le edit list) 14:02, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
Aye, certainly the part about the visual cue. Which probably matters most. (Could all be considered a minor thing. But I thought it had value to keep the FAQ a bit more accurate, as obviously did you by putting that original addition in.) 14:22, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

you could add the following CSS for better highlighting changes that added or removed a lot of bytes: {color: #5F5 !important;} {color: #F55 !important;} {color: #0F0 !important; font-size: 1.2em;} {color: #F00 !important; font-size: 1.2em;}

(+23) (-2) (+593) (-18,952)

changes that add or remove at least 500 bytes are <strong> instead of <span> Me[citation needed] 17:04, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

I think i might do that, i'll check it someone, i guess(talk i guess|le edit list) 02:03, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

Ahem... *cough* ..."same as last edit" and "ditto"s only make sense in the edit history that shows them (in this case the Recent Changes, at least as long as the fully explained precursor edit isn't then re-edited and the reason gets lost/misplaced/multiply-summarised in time). Better to actually refer to "as per recent edit of <comic number>", although just being explicit each time doesn't hurt (never out of context), and if you're worried about repeating explanations because you hadn't the inagination... well, you repeated "ditto"s, so already jumped that shark! I mean, I'm not the Summary Police, just I could see what you were thinking but I think you might even want to do it differently next time if you put your mind to it. 12:02, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

did you know: common? Me[citation needed] 23:55, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

i made this comment before i knew it didn't work bbhjbdjbhjdbfjhgbhj Me[citation needed] 00:09, 10 November 2023 (UTC)


soup soup[soup] 13:15, 6 November 2023 (soup)

soup soup[soup] 3:34, 6 November 2023 (soup)
Tomato soup.jpg Soup
soup[soup] soup:soup, soup soup soup (soup)

soup soup[soup] soup:soup, soup soup soup (soup)

As you claim ownership

You might want to resolve this issue with this rather strange page. Or forget about it and consign the whole thing to history. 17:24, 20 December 2023 (UTC)