User talk:CCeducator

Welcome!

Welcome to Wikipedia, AFA-NCF! Thank you for your contributions. I am StAnselm and have been editing Wikipedia for quite some time, so if you have any questions feel free to leave me a message on my talk page. You can also check out Wikipedia:Questions or type {{helpme}} at the bottom of this page. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that will automatically produce your username and the date. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!

St Anselm (talk) 02:19, 19 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This and that

Yes! There is an easy way to track what is going on with a page. Add it to your "watchlist" by licking at the top of the page, and then click on "My watchlist" to check whether the page has been changed. Oh, and I got the AFA logo from one of the pdf files on the website. St Anselm (talk) 03:30, 22 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the tip. I put in for a user name change last nite. How long does this take. How do they notify me - just change the name? CCeducator 02:39, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Help with page/column formatting

I have been trying to sort out how to move info boxes around on the page and seem unable to find any discussion of how ro do this. Is there some way to position info boxes (right to left) on the page? For example put 3 info boxes in a row.

Similarly for images I know how to do left, center and right, but can you tell the software you want it spaced (+6) blank spaces from the left edge or (-6) blank space from the right edge?

Any advice would be appreciated.

Thanks CCeducator 00:05, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

In a word - no, you can't do it.

We keep all formatting as simple as possible - so that pages look OK on a very wide range of devices - from mobiile phones, through to 40" monitors. So, we don't try to force the formatting - as much as possible, we let the user (and their browser) sort out where to position things.

Putting a picture in a very specific place can cause a lot of problems when viewed on a different screen size. For that reason, we avoid 'sandwiching' text between images, and try to make sure there's just one image on any horizontal portion of the page, most of the time, in articles.

Infoboxes count as 'images' in this respect (because text 'wraps around' them) - so, there shouldn't be an image alongside an infobox either.

It's also for this reason that we should use the default 'thumb' size, for almost all pictures - because, the user can change the default for their own skin (in their user preferences).

Now...there are some tricky ways to 'hack' it. One is, to put images in a table;

{| | [[File:Tst.png|40px]] || [[File:Tst.png|40px]] |}

Another way is to use a 'gallery' - but, those are best avoided too. A third way is, by using HTML DIV tags.

All those are fine for playing around in user space, but not useful for articles. Best advice is, "keep it simple". Chzz ► 02:36, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks CCeducator 16:08, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Removing tags

That's a great question. I think you can remove an old tag whenever you think the issue has been addressed. If it's a newer tag (less than a month) it might be good to wait a week, unless you have clearly addressed any concerns that have been raised. As far has the Christian worldview article goes, the tag was added in 2005, when it was a totally different article. You will have seen that someone has already queried the tag, and that query had not been challenged, which is a sure sign it can be removed. To take an other example, however, I am lot to remove the neutrality tag from the Federal Vision, since the concerns raised were never addressed, and it would be very hard to get a version that everyone is happy with. Anyway, thanks for your editing. St Anselm (talk) 03:31, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

He did give a reason is his edit summary - "Commentary, misspellings, poor spacing, etc." Now, that might not be a good reason, but you did replace "set of worldviews voiced" with "Worldviewcexpressed". The "commentary" bit would be something like a truly Biblical Worldview should be invariant and capable of being separated from other presuppositions (e.g., British 19th Century Imperialist doctrine). That sounds like your own opinion. Anyway, it is better to discuss it on the talk page of the article. I'm going to add back the bit that was well sourced. St Anselm (talk) 03:54, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]