User talk:Nickps

Wikipedia talk:Special:CreateAccount

I'm sorry, but what's the point of these talk pages? Drmies (talk) 02:34, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

@Drmies: Wikipedia talk:Special:ListDuplicatedFiles was linked from its special page and was a red link before I made it. The rest are honestly probably pointless. I only made them for consistency with the ones that already exist. You can G7take the talk pages to MfD(13:24, 13 May 2024 (UTC)) (minus the one I linked above) if you want, but I think the soft redirects should stay and I'll make the rest of them today, just without the talk pages. Nickps (talk) 10:01, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

Ah OK, that makes sense. Thanks. Drmies (talk) 14:45, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

no 104.159.177.254 (talk) 13:20, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

C++23 Hello World

Why not adding the C++23 hello world program? The source is here: https://www.modernescpp.com/index.php/c23-a-modularized-standard-library-stdprint-and-stdprintln/ Dc coder 84 (talk) 14:49, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

@Dc coder 84: Having the source is not enough. You have to add it to the article. Also, you didn't change the surrounding text to accommodate the new hello world program. After your edit the note above the program still said This code is copied directly from Bjarne Stroustrup's errata page (p. 633). He addresses the use of '\n' rather than std::endl. which was false at that point. And finally, you have to consider that the iostream hello world program is still the main hello world program of C++. It works in every version of the language and will be the one people will keep teaching for a long time. Replacing it with a program that doesn't even work in the latest released version of C++ violates Wikipedia's policy on WP:due weight.

To summarise, if you want the C++23 hello world program in the article you'll have to a) put it alongside the old hello world program instead of replacing it and b) cite a WP:reliable source when you do it. Your source seems to be a WP:blog which isn't really considered reliable most of the time, so consider finding something else. Nickps (talk) 15:13, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

I was working on the surrounding text but you were faster :)

More reliable sources could be the technical reports of the c++ standard committee.

You're are right. If we put the the c++23 version in there it should not replace the old one because compilers like clang still work on module support and that can be confusing to beginners. Dc coder 84 (talk) 15:34, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

@Dc coder 84: Unless the technical report includes a hello world program, using it as a source would be WP:original research, which is also against policy. so I'd advice you against that. I'm honestly not sure what source should be used, actually. Nickps (talk) 15:46, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

Personally I think one could also argue this little peace of code is so trivial it doesn't need source verification but I guess this is Wikipedia. Wikipedia needs a "no source needed for trivial content" policy ;)
At least you now have this idea from me and it's discussed here. Dc coder 84 (talk) 16:33, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

@Dc coder 84: You don't need to cite trivial things on WP. The page WP:BLUE, while just an essay and not a policy makes exactly that point and I agree with it. I don't agree with you however, that writing a hello world program is trivial. On the contrary, I think that a hello world program falls under the likely to be challenged category as seen in WP:BURDEN. In particular, someone who doesn't know how to write C++ could see that code snippet and ask, "who do you know that works?". Nickps (talk) 16:43, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

Well for anyone asking that question you could simply say it compiles and puts "hello world" on screen or not? Dc coder 84 (talk) 17:16, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

@Dc coder 84: Well, how do you know it compiles and puts "hello world" on screen? Saying "you can try it" is WP:OR and therefore an unaceeptable answer. Since that claim is likely to be challenged you need to cite a WP:RS to put it in the article.

Have you considered waiting until C++23 is released and people write tutorials on it? WP:CRYSTAL and WP:WIP come to mind. There's no rush to add it now. I'm not saying I don't want it there, but if the only way to include it is as an unsourced assertion that it exists, we might as well wait.

To be honest, I don't feel too strongly about it. The C++23 article includes the same program without a source, so it's probably fine. If you want to add it to C++, please cite the source you provided earlier though. Also, please get it right first try, your edit also said that The following is Bjarne Stroustrup's version of the Hello world program that uses the C++ Standard Library stream facility to write a message to standard output. That's the main reason I reverted. I really didn't want to have such a glaring mistake stay, and I had no way of knowing whether you'd fix it later. Also, like I said earlier, the original program should stay in the article. Nickps (talk) 17:53, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

Ah, I've not seen that. What do you think about adding this sentence below the old hello world program:

Also see the modern C++23 version of the Hello world program here.

The word "here" then links to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C%2B%2B23#Modern_%22Hello,_world%22_Example Dc coder 84 (talk) 18:16, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

@Dc coder 84: WP:EASTEREGG links like Click here should be avoided. I think adding an extra paragraph that says,

After changes to the language made in C++23, the hello world program can also be written as:

and then the new program is the way to go. Nickps (talk) 18:36, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

Okay, I can do it that way but then we have duplicate code/text. Isn't there an anti duplicate text policy? Dc coder 84 (talk) 18:39, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

(←) @Dc coder 84: I don't think there is such a policy. But there is another problem. I had missed the comment on the page that says:

* BEFORE MAKING CHANGES to the "Hello World" example
* please establish consensus by discussing your proposed changes
* on the Talk page. This is not the place to "Be Bold"; this
* has been discussed before at length.

so don't add anything just yet. Instead, make a post on the talk page Talk:C++ first, so more people see it, otherwise someone else will revert the change even if I don't. Nickps (talk) 18:43, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

: <math> vs. <math display=block>

A formula typeset using : <math></math>:

$\Theta =kT$

Same formula typeset using <math display=block></math>: $$\Theta =kT$$ There's too much space after this paragraph. This extra space is caused by <math display=block></math>.

As you can see, there's a bug in <math display=block></math>, which is why I'm changing it to : <math></math> whenever I see it. — UnladenSwallow (talk) 22:14, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Also note that there's not enough space before the paragraph affected by the bug. — UnladenSwallow (talk) 22:20, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

A trout for you

Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.

You somehow broke hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of infoboxes and assorted templates by nominating Template:Both and Template:If both at TfD. Massive confusion ensued at Talk pages across the project as non-technical folk (like me) wondered why their beloved infoboxes had huge red error messages. Toadspike [Talk] 12:15, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

I knew I'd get one sooner or later. Guess I should have chosen "disabled" from the start lol. Nickps (talk) 12:16, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

Beautiful.

I added the cats to WP:CSD a while ago, so I was nervous that there was a big diff about the cats, but I see you fixed them all, beautiful! jp×g🗯️ 02:13, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Sidebar TemplateStyles

Just want to draw your attention to WP:TemplateStyles#Guidelines, particularly the item about CSS conventions.

Separately, a future improvement: don't move text-align: center from collapsible sidebars, use |centered list titles=y.

That said, while I'm somewhere in the realm of happy-to-see someone doing this, I'm not sure it's the most high-value work to be doing. Izno (talk) 23:13, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

I guess I'll have to fix the ones I've already written to align with the conventions. Thanks for letting me know. Also, yes, I'll agree it's not really worth doing, but it was a decent way to pass the time. Nickps (talk) 23:18, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

If you need something to pass time, MediaWiki talk:Common.css/to do#Infobox is a thing. :) Izno (talk) 01:08, 3 August 2024 (UTC)