User talk:SanityOrMadness

Black Friday Discussion

Sorry, I clicked the wrong pair of edits for comparison when I was checking who wrote what. Should've guessed GWolfv2 was behind all the unsigned edits; he established a pattern.--Apcog 15:16, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Maintenance edits

When doing a large number of maintenance edits on a long list of articles, please mark the edits as minor. It's not crucial, but it does help cut through some of the recent changes clutter. Thanks.--Rosicrucian^Talk 19:47, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Monaco 2 on Wikia test box.

Change your default Monaco skin to "Beach" and you should be good.--Rosicrucian^Talk 15:31, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

What are you doing?

We're going to automate copying pages from the downloaded cache files. You don't need to do redundant work, it's just going to get overwritten. --Suki Brits 14:42, 18 March 2009 (EDT)

"Again"

Actually, we are ALL cleaning up after Bookworm. For my part, I was just cleaning up after the import script broke all the Wiki formatting, and you don't see me singling out the import-scriptwriter by name. I have already admitted that I can't tell one line of code from another, which is why I ask questions when things seem to go wrong as I attempt to follow the basic instructions on Damage Control. --Thylacine 2000 15:36, 22 March 2009 (EDT)

I meant it light-heartedly - that's why I did the :p. I wasn't trying to slam you (after umpteen hours of this, I'm probably a bit skewish, that said...) - SanityOrMadness 15:40, 22 March 2009 (EDT)

Discussion page recovery

Derik's tool has been updated to deal with indenting of comments. However- it still doesn't deal with LONG pages well, so you'll have to break it up.  :(

This version (3.0i) does only the indenting and headers. Run a big page through this first to clean out most of the junk, then paste chunks into 2.5 to clean them up. (It's not a good solution, but it beats nothing.) -Derik 03:10, 23 March 2009 (EDT)

"Marvel Properties"

Primus, really? Well, I feel like a moron...but then how is G.B. Blackrock used with no problems in the recent reprints? Thanos6 02:26, 3 May 2009 (EDT)

Not entirely sure - up until #73, only Circuit Breaker is claimed by Marvel; but from #74 to the end of the series, they all are. I half-suspect they were sold by Hasbro TO Marvel around that point, and possibly they were allowed to reprint the earlier issues with them as part of the deal (I'm actually not sure why IDW are having such trouble in the first place - Titan reprinted all the issues involving Marvel stuff with no trouble, even the one with Spider-Man). - SanityOrMadness 04:44, 3 May 2009 (EDT)

What amazes me is that for years and years I'd seen it said that Hasbro owns all those characters and not Marvel, but apparently somehow no one noticed the indica saying otherwise until now? --KilMichaelMcC 05:12, 3 May 2009 (EDT)

Click for legible version

I don't understand it myself - especially the fact that from their début (Blackrock in the early issues, the other NKs in #68) until #73, they AREN'T claimed in the indicia for Marvel (except for Circuit Breaker), but, well, click the image for the bigger version. I've submitted this as a question for the Q&A, so try & lean on Walky... - SanityOrMadness 10:01, 3 May 2009 (EDT)

Wait, Marvel claims them as "trademarks". They never used them in such a capacity (as in, publishing a "Circuit Breaker" comic), and their claim of the trademarks should have expired long ago. Do I have this one right?--Nevermore 12:23, 13 September 2009 (EDT)

Sure, and that's why I wanted a Q&A answer on it, since the fact that Marvel felt ABLE to claim them - when, by rights, Hasbro should have owned the characters [except Circuit Breaker] based on what we know, and thus would have objected strongly to any such claim - carries a strong implication, if not a definitive one... but note that Circuit Breaker was only ever claimed using the exact same wording - the only change was to add the other names in the list.

[Further. ould Marvel really have been interested in floating a Neo-Knights comic [as Furman hinted at in the TFUS #80 lettercol] if they had to rent the characters from Hasbro, after Transformers fell to cancellation levels? Remember, #75 was going to be the end, but it was given a temporary reprieve, which included tacking on the epilogue to that issue. You don't tend to plan a spin-off with [expensive] licensed characters unless the parent title is doing pretty damn well. Moreover, there are prior examples of Marvel spinning off characters they own from dead licensed series (Machine Man from 2001: A Space Odyssey, Bug from Micronauts), and I'll have to try and find the indicia from the original issues there. Ultimately, it's the difference between the "Captain Marvel" trademark lapsing, but having to invent your own character to fill it; and being able to pick up the Shazam! CM. If Marvel felt able to claim the "names and distinctive likenesses" then, I doubt Hasbro could have owned them, regardless of how it came to be.] - SanityOrMadness 13:56, 13 September 2009 (EDT)

Have you seen this question Hasbro answered recently? Pretty interesting. They seem to be saying Marvel doesn't own the characters that appeared in TF first. - Starfield 00:33, 26 September 2009 (EDT)

Thanks for pointing that out - their general answer is basically what's always been assumed (not least given the hoops Marvel jumped through with Circuit Breaker & Death's Head to start with). I note that they didn't answer about any specific characters though, and if Hasbro do own the Neo-Knights, I want to know how & why Marvel claimed the others in the last seven issues when they didn't feel able to do so before that (and why Hasbro didn't object if Marvel shouldn't have done so). - SanityOrMadness 12:07, 26 September 2009 (EDT)

"Patronizing Dick"

I had always heard that as "Specialist skills", but whatever. You were right on that.

As for "judgement" - Judgment is the primary and correct spelling, judgement is an incorrect "variant" that is accepted because people still know what you're talking about, even if it's technically a misspelling (you can even see this if you open up the edit screen). As you're the one who reverted the correct spellings for four instances in that edit, I don't see how I was the one being the dick.KrytenKoro 20:37, 17 May 2009 (EDT)

Oi! "Judgement" is the Queen's bleedin' English, my old cocksparrow! Incorrect variant indeed! Bloody foreigners! :-P - Chris McFeely 20:52, 17 May 2009 (EDT)

It is? Never mind then. "Judgment" still wasn't incorrect in the first place, though.

Never mind. I'm going to go ahead now and say you win on this SM, because I honestly couldn't give a crap about a spelling argument.

Yeah, Chris is right about it being the British variant.KrytenKoro 21:04, 17 May 2009 (EDT)

Unsigned Template

Is there a particular reason you edited the unsigned comments on discussion page on the female Starscream Clone the way you did, rather than just using the {{unsigned}} template? If you weren't sure how its formatting works, just check that page now so you can see how I reworked it.--Apcog 12:22, 18 May 2009 (EDT)

I did use the unsigned template - I just subst:ed it to save the fairly pointless transclusion. If the server's falling over on a regular basis, you don't template silly things. SanityOrMadness 12:59, 18 May 2009 (EDT)

Sorry, rather than a familiar template, I saw what appeared to be manually typed code, including a span command for reducing the font size (which I've never seen show up when using the template). And as I'm not familiar with the term "subst:ed", I'm afraid you're talking over my head there. I'm not sure how it saves having a transclusion, pointless or otherwise. Wait...was this meant to be something to maintain the "unsigned" format if the template doesn't come along with the eventual server transfer?--Apcog 20:06, 18 May 2009 (EDT)

If you type {{subst:TEMPLATE}} instead of {{TEMPLATE}}, than instead of grabbing the template at each and every page load, it grabs it once and saves the output of the template code to the page instead. Calling the template incurs a processing overhead on the server, and on stuff like {{unsigned{{#if:||{{{2}}}|}}}}, where long-term formatting changes are unlikely and not particularly important, and is used on talk pages rather than article pages, I generally throw the subst: in unless there's a good reason not to. - SanityOrMadness 20:14, 18 May 2009 (EDT)

Hmm...learn something new every day. For instance, I just now discovered from your response there's such a thing as a "tl" template that calls a link to the template cited after the pipe. Aside from that, I wasn't aware of any processing overhead incurred by template calls; I thought that once it was done, it was "remembered" on that page.--Apcog 16:22, 19 May 2009 (EDT)

Grimlock Main Pic

I admire your enthusiasm. But there isn't a snowball's chance in hell that folks will allow that main pic to be changed. Have a look at the Talk:Springer (G1) page for my attempt at changing a main pic :) Drmick 09:56, 20 June 2009 (EDT)

Dinobot page

What the hell?!? I only edited the tiny bit of the original dinobot toy, i did NOTHING else! I don't even know how i could do something like that by trying! I am sorry that something like that could happen and you had to clean the mess i made.--Sunjumper 10:38, 31 August 2009 (EDT)

Mark Gruenwald

Yeah, I know about the multiple multiverses. I was actually going to say "...in a multiverse Marvel owns," but decided that would be too complicated; I hadn't counted on finding another Gru fan. :) Thanos6 19:50, 20 October 2009 (EDT)

Rewind/Sunder

I agree that the way the bio is written makes it unclear as to who loves dubstep, but given that each of the other Mini-Con two-pack bios has the two guys at odds with each other (never talks/doesn't shut up, solitary/likes to be around others, thinks everyone could get along/just wants to stab people), surely the joke with the Rewind and Sunder is supposed to be that Rewind gets headaches, and then Sunder plays dubstep, which is the last thing you'd want to listen to if you've got a headache? Jalaguy 13:45, 29 December 2012 (EST)

Sky Garry Image

I got the picture from Cliffbee.com. Movie09 20:31, 8 April 2013 (EDT)

I know, I googled it (and it's been deleted now in favour of a better copy of the original file anyway). The point was that you need to identify this IN THE FILE DESCRIPTION with a link to the source (or note where you got it, if you capped/scanned it yourself), along with a image tag and - if you can't find a specific tag like {{TFAcap{{#if:||{{{2}}}|}}}}, {{PrimeBHstock{{#if:||{{{2}}}|}}}}, {{IDWG1interior{{#if:||{{{2}}}|}}}}, etc and have to resort to a generic one like {{hastak{{#if:||{{{2}}}|}}}} or {{fairuse{{#if:||{{{2}}}|}}}} - a relevant category, like [[Category:Return of Convoy toy images]] in the case of the Sky Garry image.

Tl;dr version: Uploading a file with no description whatsover? Big no-no.

Other point: Filenames. Something like "Skygarry.jpg" is bad. You should identify the toyline/issue/episode in the filename (e.g. "G1-ROC-toy Sky Garry.jpg", "Scattered WheeljackInjured.jpg", "ReluctantSpecialist Whirl BoomBoomStick.jpg", etc) - SanityOrMadness 22:28, 8 April 2013 (EDT)

Upright?

What is this "upright=1.4" stuff you're adding to File tags? Just wondering! --abates (talk) 20:43, 18 January 2014 (EST)

Basically, you can set a thumbnail size in your profile for thumbnails that don't specify a size like 250px directly. If the wikicode sets a fixed number for a given thumnail, that overrides your setting entirely. If instead you specify upright=1.4, then that thumbnail will appear 1.4 times the size of your default, rounded to the nearest 10px - for the default thumbnail setting of 180px, that's equivalent to setting 250px directly.

Basically, it gives more flexibility to users, especially if they're using the mobile skin primarily and would prefer smaller thumbnails.

(I did a chart here to remind myself of the various sizes, if it helps. Some 10px increases require jumps smaller than 0.1) - SanityOrMadness (talk) 22:38, 18 January 2014 (EST)

Why is it causing all those pictures to become god-awful huge? I don't think I've set any default thumbnail size and this new feature seems to be causing every image in an article to double in size (if not more). --Khajidha (talk) 12:29, 24 January 2014 (EST)

Maybe I had changed my default thumbnail size, as it was set to 300px. --Khajidha (talk) 13:45, 24 January 2014 (EST)

Titan numbering

Sorry, that was my fault! When I started doing the Titan issues because whoever was doing them stopped, I just continued on the existing numbering system, not realizing that it was being reset each time the magazine changed franchise. :) --abates (talk) 18:58, 3 February 2014 (EST)

Happens :). I didn't catch there at first that the Prime series had a Titan Comics logo on it, rather than Titan Magazines, hence the wrong category that now needs deleted! - SanityOrMadness (talk) 19:22, 3 February 2014 (EST)

What Images?

Seriously, what images have been watermarked? They are just official images (nobody can argue about that). If I uploaded images that were watermarked, why aren't the new ones deleted? Also I did get the message last year when I uploaded the Platinum Edition Ultra Magnus. Movie09 (talk) 19:20, 5 May 2014 (EDT)