User talk:ClickerClock

Issues with other user
Hi. One user has made accusations against me and reverted all my edits and revoked my user rights. I was not given any warnings prior to any of his reverts.

With regard to his accusations, this is what he said "1. You seem to be a BJP proponent editing BJP-related pages. 2. You've engaged in plagiarism".

He has not said from where the plagiarism is supposed to come, and has not asked me about it. I used an old version of wikipedia for some of the information, but most of it was rewritten or clearly referenced to websites.

His other accusation about BJP (the BJP is the current ruling party in India) is also wrong. I'm not a proponent of the BJP. I'm also not aware that RationalWiki forbids editors on the basis of political affiliation.

On the other hands, due to the work of one editor, all Hinduism articles are extremely biased not only against the BJP, but against all aspects of Hinduism in general (like factual errors about Hindu educational institutions, ...). That user clearly was a SPA with the mission of Hindu-baiting. My edits were trying to make them a bit more factual and balanced.

For example, in the honor killings article I removed the category Hinduism, because it is not supported by any Hindu text or authority or guru, and is not practicised in Hinduism. I'm open to the possibility that it happens also among Hindus (I don't know), but is not part of Hinduism (which category implies).
 * My issue was not that honor killings do or do not occur among Hindus (I simply don't know enough about it), but that it is not part of Hinduism and Hindu doctrine (which I am sure about), which the categorization implies. My issue was solely about the categorization.

In the David Frawley article (about a fairly mainstream Hindu writer on Hinduism and Yoga) I balanced some extreme smears with actual quotes from the author. It is a "Biography of A Living People" article and therefore should be held to some higher standards.

And in an article about a Hindu educational institution, I pointed out that there are factual errors in the claims in the article, which still have not been fixed.

Please can you help? Thanks. --Stargazer (talk)

About that
Some of the stuff on the page was actually going to put in a book of mine, and I've got no where else to put it. The PIE related stuff was meant to be the basis of a translator, but that didn't end well. Darthmaul (talk) 05:40, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
 * COOL! —ClickerClock (talk) 05:46, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

Hi!Sonikkustar (talk) 10:51, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

Thanks
for your work on the transgender glossary article! It's in the mainspace now. 22:26, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. —ClickerClock (talk) 03:50, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

New template for you
tech pledge. —Kazitor, pending 01:46, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
 * k. —ClickerClock (talk) 05:31, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

New User Signature
Testing. It cute. —ClickerClock💾 talk.txt 07:27, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

Semantic HTML not supported
You seem like the person I should discuss this with :)

I'm trying to improve the markup of navsidebar (tables! Yuck!) and sketched it out with a nav, header and sections and... MediaWiki doesn't like that, it just escapes them. Do you know if it's possible to get RW's configuration/MW files changed to support those tags? Or should I try to make do with divs? —Kazitor, pending 03:04, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Oh yeah. I tried to do the same thing a year ago. I can't exactly see how a section tag could lead to an vulnerability. Now we could play with the Mediawiki stuff or make do with ARIA and the role attribute. —ClickerClock💾 talk.txt 03:47, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Yep, the files exposed to github don't include includes/parser/sanitizer.php. So should we email someone with server access, or...? —Kazitor, pending 03:56, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
 * David Gerard is a lazy cat. —ClickerClock💾 talk.txt 04:02, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Of which I am fully aware. We need someone else; I know Trent doesn't hang around much but he probably still checks his email. Or we could say something to a board member. But before that, what should the plan be? Propose changes to that file or suggest a particular extension? —Kazitor, pending 04:06, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Only 3 have been updated since 2016. Extension:Secure HTML requires this ugly hash. I have a feeling that Extension:HTMLets will cause an annoyance in the future. We could use Extension:Widgets but that extension seems to powerful for what we need. —ClickerClock💾 talk.txt 04:32, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
 * All we need is to allow the use of a few tags. —ClickerClock💾 talk.txt 04:34, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm pretty sure that adding some entries to the $htmlpairsStatic array in the sanitisation file would achieve the desired effect. As far as I'm aware, MW files have been altered on this site in the past to fix/change things. I haven't researched MW extensions, but it's possible a simple (custom) extension could override the array as necessary. —Kazitor, pending 04:40, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Go for it. —ClickerClock💾 talk.txt 08:04, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Which, look into writing an extension or try to get the files modified directly? —Kazitor, pending 09:16, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
 * A small extension. —ClickerClock💾 talk.txt 09:24, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Alright, added to my ever-expanding projects.txt —Kazitor, pending 09:33, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Actually I change my mind. We'll leg it with ARIA and role. You're not going to manage to get the extension done in a reasonable amount of time. —ClickerClock💾 talk.txt 10:41, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the vote of confidence... though admittedly part of that plan hinges on somebody with server access. So you're saying stick with divs and add aria- attributes? Because from the links above it seems those attributes might not be allowed either. View source on this span —Kazitor, pending 10:47, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm just going to scream in a pillowcase. —ClickerClock💾 talk.txt 10:57, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Finally managed to find the supported attributes: https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/source/mediawiki/browse/master/includes/parser/Sanitizer.php$1749 The allowed ARIA attributes should be sufficient, they are
 * aria-describedby
 * aria-flowto
 * aria-label
 * aria-labelledby
 * aria-owns
 * role
 * What I mainly wanted to do was fix up the markup (rather than hacky tables) and style them properly. So I'd really appreciate it if, after you do something, you tell me first so I can have a look at it :) —Kazitor, pending 10:58, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks. —ClickerClock💾 talk.txt 12:14, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

And just so you know, here's what I originally wrote (incomplete and indented): Idea being to edit common.css for all the static styles. —Kazitor, pending 00:03, 16 July 2018 (UTC)