User talk:Hoarier

Jump to: navigation, search
This is the discussion page for Hoarier. Click here to start a new topic.

Discussion pages are for discussing improvements to the article itself, not for discussions about the subject of the article.

old stuff

Lens mounts

Question on edits to Lens mounts page. You made a change to all the dimensions that rendered them unsearchable. I'm not certain what the change was, the diff highlights them and it appears you replaced the 'x' character with an uptypeable character (at least on a normal US style keyboard). Previously I could do a control-F and search for, say a "24 x 36" value and find them but that no longer works. I'm curious what the motivation is as this new character looks the same but thwarts searches?
Steevithak 21:58, 4 January 2012 (PST)

Ah. It hadn't occurred to me that people would search for "24x36" or whatever, especially as the table can be ordered by any column. I changed "x" to "×" ("×") which in the computer/browser I'm using now and in most others I'm used to looks different and a bit better. It's very widely used here in CW; though now I remember that it's not used for categories (presumably to ensure ease of input); thus the Mine Six "is the name of a series of 6×6 folding rangefinder cameras [...]" ("times" sign) but it's in "Category:Japanese 6x6 rangefinder folding" (lowercase "X"). Shall I change them all back? Doing so would be simple. -- Hoarier 22:13, 4 January 2012 (PST) slightly reworded 01:39, 5 January 2012 (PST)
If it's easy to revert, I'd prefer that. Though if it's worth discussing on the mailing list first, I'm okay with seeing what everyone else thinks. My feeling is 99% of users won't know how to use XML entity values to create a multiplication symbol vs an 'x', so we'll end up with a mix of both and complaints from editors about unnecessary complications when we end up with a mix of both on a page. I tracked down a reference in the WP style guide that says the multiply symbol is preferred for math equations but 'x' is okay to mean "by" in dimensional reference such a 6 by 6 or 6x6.
Steevithak 22:23, 4 January 2012 (PST)
There, I've invited people to comment here. I suggest waiting a day or so; if people prefer "x" I'll then happily change back to "x". -- Hoarier 01:18, 5 January 2012 (PST)
I changed back. -- Hoarier 04:45, 8 January 2012 (PST)
We do use the character entities for fractions, and suggest that in our help pages. Is there a search issue with that? I've been known to use the multiplication symbol myself; but it's only with serif fonts that a lowercase x looks noticeably wrong.--Vox 11:55, 9 January 2012 (PST)

Category rethink

On :Category:Root category, you have written Camera-Wiki realizes that there are problems with the category tree, and is planning an improvement. This troubles me because no discussion of such a plan has reached my ears. If you are planning anything, I recommend that you have the discussion first. Major, un-discussed changes by any individual are unhelpful, in what is supposed to be a community, and as the Help pages say, categories can create a lot of work. Secondly, we generally write as ourselves, not as the personification of, don't we? --Dustin McAmera 03:31, 9 January 2012 (PST)

Yes, very good points. Where's the best place to discuss this? Name your preferred place, and I'll be happy to kick off the discussion. (:Category talk:Root category is not a good place, because I think I can persuade you that :Category:Root category is better deleted to make way for two replacements -- I don't want to start a discussion and later to delete it.) -- Hoarier 05:14, 9 January 2012 (PST)
Dustin, this follows up on some email discussions we had. I have always found our category system perplexing, and inconsistently applied. I suggested to Hoarier that his background might make him a good person to look into this. The hope is to repair some of our system's inconsistencies and unclear logic. --Vox 08:07, 9 January 2012 (PST)
Ok! I agree that something needs doing about Categories; I was only concerned that it seemed to be a personal project, so my hackles are now down. Discussions could be held at discussions, or in the Google mail-list, depending how widely you want to consult. Doing it in the wiki would have the advantage that those who come after us can see what we were thinking. I'll hold off any comments on the Cat system itself for now; perhaps someone could set out how far discussion elsewhere has got? Cheers! --Dustin McAmera 10:24, 9 January 2012 (PST)
I'd suggest starting a topic at discussions, with an invitation to comment there mailed to the Google list. This will spare a lot of email traffic for those who don't have much interest or an opinion.--Vox 11:48, 9 January 2012 (PST)

Case Sensitivity

Hello. I have noticed that when searching the "Leica R" part of these articles' title is case insensitive, but the "E" in "Leica RE" is case sensitive so that "Leica Re" does not find it. How can this be fixed? DesmondW 02:01, 28 January 2012 (PST)

Now fixed! Check for yourself: Leica Re. (See here how it's done.) -- Hoarier 04:52, 28 January 2012 (PST)

Thank you, I had of course thought of that. However Leica R4, leica r4, lEICA R4, all seem to redirect without separate pages, or must there be a page for every possible case combination? DesmondW 06:00, 29 January 2012 (PST)

You don't have to worry about the case of the very first letter. This is always taken to mean uppercase. "Leica R4" and "leica R4" will be processed identically, even before anybody adds any redirects.
It seems that MediaWiki here tries capitalizing the first letter of any subsequent word too. Thus although there is no redirect from or anything else at "Mine six", typing "Mine six" in the "find" box will take you to "Mine Six".
I don't think it's a good idea to add lots of redirects with the vague idea that somebody somewhere might benefit from them. For example, the, ah, spelling-challenged might benefit from redirects from "Lieca" and "Leika" to "Leica", but that would be enough: no need for "Leika R3" and the rest. The way the "find" box now presents a list of guesses makes it a lot easier for people with wobbly spelling/memories to find what they want. -- Hoarier 06:19, 29 January 2012 (PST)
Agreed, multiple redirects are a nuisance and that is what I was trying to avoid. However, it seems that the case of the entire first word is ignored, then the case of the first letter of subsequent words. Even something obviously crazy such as "lEiCa r4" works.
The listing of choices in search boxes now so common is incredibly useful for all of us. Best wishes - DesmondW 06:41, 29 January 2012 (PST)

Olympus scandal

In this comment I red-flagged a new section of Olympus which describes their recent financial scandal. The paragraph is very poor—and perhaps libelous, if implying that payments to mobsters is proven fact. I'm not sure if you have access to any better news sources than the global ones; but personally I find the details of the scandal quite confusing. I think that only the parent corporation's management is implicated (not the camera division); and that they disguised old operating losses through bogus acquisitions of small companies (with bloated consulting fees)—which were quickly written off. But I don't quite get why one type of loss was more acceptable than the other. If you have any insight or definitive sources, feel free to replace what is there.--Vox 07:53, 20 February 2012 (PST)

It seems pretty clear that various bad practices have occurred. Quite what did occur -- well, this is coming out, piecemeal. The picture is very complex. Until more is known for sure, I'd direct readers to that Wikipedia article.
Of course I'm never keen on poor paragraphs, but I'd agree with you that extraordinary care is needed when attempting to summarize others' allegations of fraud. If such care is not evident, writing shouldn't wait for improvement; it should instead be deleted. -- Hoarier 17:05, 20 February 2012 (PST)
Ah, I see now that it was speculative "bubble" investment losses that had to be disguised. Well, at least that's one fairly clear point.--Vox 07:55, 21 February 2012 (PST)
The article linked from here goes into some good detail; but the long comment below by Bruno Masset seems to get to the heart of it. --Vox 06:47, 27 February 2012 (PST)


I see it edit out. How to describe electric block system that gakken made?--Tkmedia (talk) 05:43, 3 July 2012 (PDT)

SLR Template

Hello. I have added the template Infobox_35mm_MF_SLR to the Leicaflex article. However, the template is missing a tag for {image caption} and I didn't want to change it myself. Could you fix this? --DesmondW (talk) 13:19, 14 January 2013 (PST)