User talk:Teateawhy

From ArchWiki
Latest comment: 23 January 2017 by Lahwaacz in topic New terms in section headings

GRUB redundant menu entries

About [1]: there is already a warning for that: GRUB#Generating main configuration file, [2]; even with a link to the bug report which provides the necessary workarounds. Is the new section necessary? -- Lahwaacz (talk) 22:00, 7 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Inactive Arch based distros

Hi, I just wanted to make you aware of Arch based distributions (inactive), since you recently removed some inactive distros from Arch based distributions (active). I've restored them there this time. -- Kynikos (talk) 17:08, 17 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Removing content

Hi, when you do edits like [3], please make sure the content removed is already available somewhere else, otherwise you should make sure the useful parts are preserved; I've restored them this time: [4], [5]. -- Kynikos (talk) 23:38, 1 April 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I assumed the beginners' guide consists only of information that is already available on the relevant other wiki pages. Apparently that is not always true. Thank you for pointing this out.
Teateawhy (talk) 09:32, 2 April 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Composite managers

About [6]: there is already Xorg#Composite. -- Lahwaacz (talk) 16:58, 1 May 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have replaced the existing list with the one from List of applications, as the new one has a nicer formatting. Then i created a link from the List of applications to the Xorg page. -- Teateawhy (talk) 20:23, 1 May 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Great, thanks! -- Lahwaacz (talk) 05:53, 2 May 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

dm-crypt/drive preparation

[Moved to Talk:Dm-crypt/Drive preparation#Partitioning -- Kynikos (talk) 09:05, 8 May 2014 (UTC)]Reply[reply]

New terms in section headings

So your opinion is that e.g. this section should be named "Technology that allows the monitor to go into standby" or something like that? You see, when the exact definition does not fit into the heading, it's only natural to use the new term in the heading itself. -- Lahwaacz (talk) 22:23, 22 January 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

"Display power management" would be a better headline and it's close to the original definition as well.
-- Teateawhy (talk) 22:31, 22 January 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That still contradicts your argument that new terms should not appear in the section heading. -- Lahwaacz (talk) 22:37, 22 January 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The terms "Display", "Power", and "Management" are common. Such a word built out of common terms is intuitively understandable. -- Teateawhy (talk) 22:40, 22 January 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
OK. There are many better examples: Network_configuration#Promiscuous_mode, Wireless_network_configuration#Setting_RTS_and_fragmentation_thresholds, Internet_sharing#Enable_NAT, Iptables#Chains, Simple_stateful_firewall#Port_knocking, Creating_packages#Creating_a_PKGBUILD, Systemd#Targets, File_systems#FUSE-based_file_systems. Should I go on? -- Lahwaacz (talk) 22:54, 22 January 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You are right. These examples can't be improved. -- Teateawhy (talk) 23:04, 22 January 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
So now that you see my point, could you revert the disputed heading back to using the "typematic" term, which is explained in the section, instead of the fabricated workaround involving undefined or ambiguous terms ("character entry")? -- Lahwaacz (talk) 23:29, 22 January 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you. -- Lahwaacz (talk) 13:01, 23 January 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]