User talk:Marti

From GreaseSpot Wiki
Revision as of 00:30, 22 July 2009 by Aavindraa (talk | contribs) (@unsafeWindow Examples)
Jump to navigationJump to search

{{FULLPAGENAME}}

This wiki's engine is pretty out of date but it isn't that out of date. See: "User talk:Marti"; I was using it on those pages to get alphabetical sort order under "*" for the category (they were out of order). -- BlindWanderer 00:56, 6 April 2009 (EDT)
P.S. You do good work.

I E 7 P r o

Is "I E 7 P r o" a curse word on this wiki (without spaces of course)? -- BlindWanderer 02:04, 6 April 2009 (EDT)

Summaries

You will be pleased to hear I'm going to write a GM script to keep me from submitting until I've written a summary (interesting... when you post a new section there isn't a summary field) -- BlindWanderer 06:22, 6 April 2009 (EDT)

Summaries test

Yes there is... configure you preferences for this wiki... you should have already done that... I also recommend <===(keyword here) that you set minor edits as your default as well and only use major ones for emphasis. Marti 06:32, 6 April 2009 (EDT)

Category:Code snippets

My idea was, that any article where someone uses Template:Good example will automatically be listed under Category:Code snippets. The only problem was that the template itself got included into the list since the template contains an example of how the template works... But try re-adding the category tag and see how convenient it is to have it there. --Photodeus 11:38, 29 April 2009 (EDT)

Alright we'll give it a shot... I think I know where you are going with it... Thanks for contributing here... it's a neat idea Marti 19:49, 29 April 2009 (EDT)

@unsafeWindow Examples

Specific revert: http://wiki.greasespot.net/index.php?title=UnsafeWindow&curid=1529&diff=3983&oldid=3980

I changed it in the first place because newbies (people who are looking at this page to begin with), may be confused and think their code has to be all on one line or in a string. The edit I made showed quite clearly that this isn't the case.

Plus, the original version makes two unnecessary calls to encodeURI and uneval. What do you think?

--aavindraa 01:30, 22 July 2009 (EDT)