Difference between revisions of "User talk:Lahwaacz"

From ArchWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(Stop: re)
(Stop)
Line 51: Line 51:
  
 
::::::Right: "I will also spell out the difference between "ntpd" and "ntpd -q", even though that could be gotten from man ntpd."
 
::::::Right: "I will also spell out the difference between "ntpd" and "ntpd -q", even though that could be gotten from man ntpd."
::::::We can see who's being subjective here. You won't be happy with any edits.
+
::::::You have not read my comments any more than you've read the edits you're reverting. You won't be happy with any edits.
 
::::::That is not how a Wiki works.
 
::::::That is not how a Wiki works.
 
::::::[[User:Idomeneo1|Idomeneo1]] ([[User talk:Idomeneo1|talk]]) 23:05, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
 
::::::[[User:Idomeneo1|Idomeneo1]] ([[User talk:Idomeneo1|talk]]) 23:05, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
  
 
:::::::That's about just enough, you're reported: [[ArchWiki_talk:Reports#User:Idomeneo1]]. We shall see what the others have to say. -- [[User:Lahwaacz|Lahwaacz]] ([[User talk:Lahwaacz|talk]]) 23:19, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
 
:::::::That's about just enough, you're reported: [[ArchWiki_talk:Reports#User:Idomeneo1]]. We shall see what the others have to say. -- [[User:Lahwaacz|Lahwaacz]] ([[User talk:Lahwaacz|talk]]) 23:19, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Revision as of 00:38, 16 February 2014

Fork Bomb

Fork_Bomb: This new article worries me a bit, as it provides an example of how to do one. Carlduff (talk) 21:04, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

But it also contains some information regarding prevention, so I'm fine with its existence. I can't comment on the factual accuracy though. -- Lahwaacz (talk) 15:46, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Openbox

RE: Revision [1]

A dependency of Thunar is libxfce4ui. A sub-package of libxfce4ui is xfce4-about. For confirmation see: [2]. So I would not describe my work as being "useless" or "inaccurate". There are however many useless and inaccurate articles on this wiki, which seem to be ignored in favour of putting my contributions under a microscope instead.

OK, there has been a slight misunderstanding with the xfce4-about - it is not a (sub)package in Arch terms, I'd say it is a binary/executable that is part of libxfce4ui. I was looking for an Arch package under that name.
First of all, why recommend some application when the user is discouraged from installing it in next sentence? Also, I'd say that an average Arch user knows about the dependency chain, and checks which dependencies are installed if he cares.
You are not under a microscope, it just happened that Openbox is in my watchlist. Believe me that I check all pages from my watchlist equally. True, I don't check all new edits in Special:RecentChanges, that's just beyond my powers...
-- Lahwaacz (talk) 16:43, 7 December 2013 (UTC)
I am trying not to allow personal bias get too much in the way of contributions, which is why I listed a range of FMs without specifically recommending any of them, including those without their own wiki pages. A warning was placed about Thunar as although it is an excellent FM (I personally prefer SpaceFM), the exo and xfce4-about menu entries can irritate users like myself who want a "harmonious"-looking desktop. Experienced users would know this; I'm just trying to be helpful for others like myself who want to learn.
Of course I understand being corrected when I neglect to adhere to the guidelines, but sometimes the amendments do seem a bit over-critical. It has seemed at times as if it is being done of out irritation than anything else (as apparently evidenced by being called "usless"). Personally, I would rather just be told to go away if I am considered as being provocative in some way. Carlduff (talk) 17:01, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Stop

Lahwaacz, you appear to be trolling my edits. Please stop doing that.

Idomeneo1 (talk) 20:51, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

  1. Commands like systemctl enable ntpd do not belong into ArchWiki - see Help:Style#Daemon operations. The original wording was absolutely fine and compliant to the style guidelines.
  2. There is a fundamental difference in how the individual network managers use NTP: NetworkManager runs the daemon which stays running, whereas netctl and wicd synchronize only once.
  3. Why the hell is "Synchronize once per boot" under "Running as daemon"?
Reverting once again, sorry... Please do not edit articles outside your competence.
-- Lahwaacz (talk) 21:09, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
That is the difference between "ntpd" and "ntpd -q". Either can be used with any network manager hook.
I will change "Running as daemon" to "Running under systemd". I will also spell out the difference between "ntpd" and "ntpd -q", even though that could be gotten from man ntpd.
Idomeneo1 (talk) 21:44, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
Is there any common case where "Running as daemon" != "Running under systemd" these days? The ntpd-q command is described in Network_Time_Protocol_daemon#Using_without_daemon, what exactly is missing there? I can only think of the link to the man page :P
See also Help:Style#Hypertext metaphor, even copying from man page might be considered as duplicating external resources.
What exactly is your point here, to leave your trace on every bloody article on ArchWiki?!
-- Lahwaacz (talk) 22:04, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
The problem is that you appear to be muddying the difference between daemon and one-shot, and yes, I did mention man ntpd to you.
My "point" is to edit some of the more unreadable wiki articles, and improve them. As any editor does. I expect to be able to do that in a civil environment, and without being trolled.
Idomeneo1 (talk) 22:22, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
I'm well aware of the one-shot service type, note that the != operator I used is not commutative. It was meant as "...where Running as daemon does not mean Running under systemd" and not the other way round... And you did not mention the man page!
Unreadable is subjective. I find the Beginners' Guide being unreadable to me, even though I admit it contains correct information (until some first-time ArchWiki editor steps in and...). The point is to make ArchWiki readable for most of the readers, which is why I do not involve myself (much) in editing the Beginners' Guide. It is obvious that some compromises are necessary, specifically, ArchWiki assumes that the reader is acquainted with Help:Reading — which you clearly did not read since my last "trolling" — and that the editor is at least willing to gradually improve his knowledge of the Help:Style guidelines. I will not read it for you, but some sections for the start:
The Network Time Protocol daemon page is was perfectly fine before, you did not do anything else than changing a Help:Style-complying article into a non-complying one. I'm afraid I'll have to revert it again...
-- Lahwaacz (talk) 22:50, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
Right: "I will also spell out the difference between "ntpd" and "ntpd -q", even though that could be gotten from man ntpd."
You have not read my comments any more than you've read the edits you're reverting. You won't be happy with any edits.
That is not how a Wiki works.
Idomeneo1 (talk) 23:05, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
That's about just enough, you're reported: ArchWiki_talk:Reports#User:Idomeneo1. We shall see what the others have to say. -- Lahwaacz (talk) 23:19, 15 February 2014 (UTC)