User talk:Quantum Immortal

From NetHackWiki
Jump to: navigation, search



Hi, Quantum Immortal! Welcome, and thanks for joining NetHackWiki!

  • The How to help and Style guide pages are excellent starting points.
  • Special:Recentchanges is a great first stop, because you can see what other people are editing right this minute, and where you can help.
  • Questions? Need help? You can ask at the Community Portal, the forum, or on the discussion page associated with each article! Just remember to sign those posts with four tildes: ~~~~. That will expand to create a signature.

You can put {{NAOplayer|NAO player account}} on your user page to link to your NAO player account. Capitalization matters.

We are really happy to have you here, and look forward to working with you!

This is an automated greeting.

-- New user message (talk) 07:32, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Unnecessary information

Your lynx change seems to be unnecessary padding - the article alreaedy has a link to the wikipedia article, which says the same thing. --paxed (talk) 17:49, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

Sokoban pages

It turns out that the reason why trying to edit Sokoban and Sokoban (SLASH'EM) was timing out was because using substitutions like default={{lightgray|$1}} was creating a lot of transclusions of {{lightgray}}, which overloaded the parser. Removing those template calls from the substitutions, and instead setting the default char color using a single {{lightgray}} template around the whole <replacecharsblock>, fixed it.

(This is really a performance problem with the ReplaceCharsBlock extension, and I should look into optimizing it better, but in the mean time, this trick should take care of the issue in practice.) —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 00:15, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

Yet an other ugly hack :P --Quantum Immortal (talk) 09:43, 8 February 2015 (UTC)


I'm pretty sure that techlevel/10+1 means that you divide the tech level by 10, then add 1, and that techlevel/5+1 is similar, since if it were tech level divided by 11 or 6, they would just say that. --Kahran042 (talk) 17:21, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Yeap, you are right B[. I had a look at the patch.--Quantum Immortal (talk) 17:35, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Japanese pronunciation is one of sheer millions of resources that can help you understand why "hoochoo" is completely wrong. That page has in-line hyperlinks that play .au audio files when clicked; of particular interest to you would be "Ohayō gozaimasu," which features three distinct o vowels which, despite being rendered differently, are all pronounced the same - long o.

Frankly, I hope you can understand my annoyance at having to bring you this information. That someone needed to go out of their way to provide you a correction as obvious as this is a strong indication that you don't have any business editing any articles on the subject of Japanese pronunciation.

Moreover, this is not the first time you've "corrected" something language-related that wasn't actually an error:

The phrase "dark-skinned and -haired" line, which you contested, is perfectly fine. That you personally weren't familiar with this "synthax" [sic] should have been an indicator to you that your language skills are impaired, to say nothing of the fact that the majority of your edits have grammatical, spelling, punctuation, and factual errors, both in the article content themselves and in the text of your revision summaries. You attempted to justify your reformatting of the aforementioned line by saying "dark-skinned and dark-haired" was "international" English, which is laughable, as there is no international English standard. The line is appropriate in both North American and Commonwealth (British) English, to name only two standards out of dozens.

Going forward, there is ample evidence that you should refrain from making language-related edits, as it is not a subject on which you've demonstrated competence.-- 07:45, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

Addendum: There was absolutely no reason for this edit, either:

I'm afraid that I could spend weeks combing through your contribs and fixing all the egregious errors.-- 08:02, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

I put in hoochoo, in order to be short, it's not the point in giving long winded explanations on that. Most English speakers on the internet aren't native speakers. It's a matter of courtesy to avoid weird stuff. You are braking wiki etiquette.--Quantum Immortal (talk) 13:30, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
I'm not "braking" [sic] wiki etiquette by explaining to you that you were wrong, that you have a history of making errors, and that your edits are having a negative impact on the quality of articles. It does not matter if you do not speak English natively; even if you didn't speak English at all, the edits you have made are still rife with errors. Based on your response, I have reason to believe that the only way this matter will be resolved is by bringing it to the attention of nethackwiki staff, which is what I'm going to do.-- 09:52, 26 September 2015 (UTC)
Look. I have my ideology, you have your ideology. We'll agree that we disagree. In practice people compromise on a wiki. You need to be polite at all times and always let the other save his face. Otherwise the other is less in a mood to compromise and conflict spirals out of control.--Quantum Immortal (talk) 00:56, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
I am going to try using simple English words to help you understand me: This is not about "ideologies," and I am not new to wikis. The pronunciation you gave for Houchou was wrong. When I told you this, you said there was a "standard romanization rule," but that is not a real thing. You later said that you did not know how Houchou was pronounced, but if you knew that you did not know, why would you correct someone else? You should not make edits about things you do not understand. Also, the two edits I posted above also had errors. You made those errors and many more because you have problems with English. I am asking you to stop making edits like that, because it means someone else has to come fix what you break. The things you changed were not even wrong - your changes to them were wrong. It is a matter of courtesy to not make things wrong. That is what I am trying to tell you.-- 15:40, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
Paxed is more for technical problems and isn't here often. And you are too long. I think this is what you are looking for: NetHackWiki:Administrators. In general admins aren't very active here. I propose you start a thread here Forum:Watercooler. I actually said, that i didn't know what you wanted that the phrase should say. You didn't like "standard" or "most frequent" (or what ever i said exactly). You didn't propose something, you just reverted. This is not like wikipedia, i'm personally really not in the mood for long edit wars over a little coma or daddy admins or impossible bureaucracies, and i doubt any one else here is. Just propose your change, i'm very reasonable.--Quantum Immortal (talk) 21:07, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
You gave a wrong pronunciation - "hoo-choo" is wrong. I was not wrong to remove your mistake. You were wrong again when you restored the mistake, and I was not wrong to remove it again. This is not about compromise, this is not about bureaucracies, this is not about "daddy admins" - you have done something wrong, and when I talk to you about it, I think your attitude is that I should feel bad for fixing an error. I have learned that there is a language barrier that makes it hard for me to communicate my message to you, and you still seem to be confused about why I am upset with your responses. That is why I have tried to talk to other people and see if they can help me make you understand. I do not have to "propose changes" when the thing you wrote is wrong. There is no compromise between right and wrong; what I wrote to fix your mistake was okay, and you reverted it without "compromising." Your ideas about what is acceptable are based on bad English being "okay" enough for you, and I disagree; if nobody cared about good English, the entire wiki would be written in bad English, so I do not believe I should feel bad when I re-write or remove your mistakes. I would like it if you stopped making those mistakes, but you have told me that you do not care. I think it is unreasonable (and very rude) for you to expect other people to continue to clean up your mistakes, when you should not be making them at all.
Right now, I cannot fix your mistakes, because you think I am personally attacking you. That is why I think I need some other people to help fix this problem. I also do not want an edit war.-- 17:17, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
check the last version please.I had moved "hōchō" to the lead, and i don't know what bugs you with "the most frequent romanization rules for Japanese."--Quantum Immortal (talk) 18:49, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
There is no such thing as "most frequent romanization rules." That is not a real thing. That is why I have been removing it. I have said this many times, but still you do not understand.
You have been wrong on other articles too. Here is just one example (there are a lot): . The line "dark-skinned and -haired" was fine. You changed it because you were not familiar with good English - your reason for changing it was """a bit more international english". "International English" is not a real thing. Do you see the problem now? You are making up rules that are not real, and this behavior is because you are a poor English speaker, which you have already admitted. You think you are improving articles, but your bad English skills are actually adding errors. Do you understand now?-- 12:12, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
What are these then?[1] [2]--Quantum Immortal (talk) 19:18, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
In the very first paragraph of the Romanization of Japanese article that you linked: "There are several different romanization systems. The three main ones are Hepburn romanization, Kunrei-shiki Rōmaji (ISO 3602), and Nihon-shiki Rōmaji (ISO 3602 Strict). Variants of the Hepburn system are the most widely used." This subheading explains that different systems are used in different parts of the world, so when I made this edit and said "there are multiple transliteration and pronunciation standards for japanese," I was right. Also, "romanization" deals with transliteration, not pronunciation. This whole time, you have been acting like romanization has something to do with pronunciation, when it does not. That is very embarrassing. That is a big mistake that shows your ignorance of the subject.
Did you even read the articles you linked? International English is not a standard! The article makes that very clear: "International English is the concept of the English language as a global means of communication in numerous dialects, and also the movement towards an international standard for the language." "Sometimes, "international English" and the related terms above refer to a desired standardisation, i.e. Standard English; however, there is no consensus on the path to this goal." An "International standard" of English does not exist. There are many, many, many, many standards for English, in different places all over the world, and the fact that there is not an international standard has caused some problems. This article is one of many articles that talks about this problem more, if you want to learn.
Both articles you linked prove me right. Now, are you going to apologize for being wrong? Will you let me fix what you have broken, and will you stop breaking things?-- 10:13, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
I tried to change the houchou article. For asmodeus see Forum:Edit conflict--Quantum Immortal (talk) 20:01, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
I accept your apology.-- 01:11, 1 October 2015 (UTC)