corrections to chinese anarchism article
Mar 7 2008
greetings admin,
i've attempted to pm catch, john., and jack about this over the last two months, but other than catch's message in december saying to nudge him if he didn't do it after a few weeks (which i did) i've had no reply. i don't know if this is because my pms don't work or because all three admins have been too busy, but anyway, i thought that rather than pm each admin one by one i'd post this here. it's a list of corrections to the article on chinese anarchism that i posted in december, all formatting mistakes from putting it into the odd coding you have here.
I wrote:
i've gone through the chinese anarchism article and found the mistakes, there are only three and were probably from me trying to put the tags in originally. i hope i've explained them correctly.
in the main text, just after the link to footnote 83, after the sentence that ends with "June." there is a bit which should be footnote 84 (and so move all the other footnotes after it up a number) which begins with "[fn Certain articles" and end with "discovered in Japan."
in what is current footnote 96 (and so after the above change will be footnote 97) there is a bit which should be in the main text after the link to footnote 96 (now 97). it is from the bit in bold to "Wang Ching-wei". the bit just after that in the footnote is a repeat of what footnote 96/97 should read and can be deleted.
once the above bit has been re-inserted in the main text, "Wang Ching-wei" will require a footnote that reads "For a detailed description of the Chin-te Hui, see Chang Hsing yen, “On the Chin-te Hui”, Min-li Pao, February 26, 1912, p. 2, and the special Chin-te Hui section which was subsequently carried in that newspaper. See also Wu Chih-hui’s reply to Shih Fu in Min Sheng, No. 2, August 27, 1913, p.10.
that's all i've found, though i've read it so many times now i might be blind to other mistakes, but i think it will probably do.
Mar 8 2008
#2
sorry dude, mega busy and can't use pc much! you can edit yourself now tho!
Mar 16 2008
#3
ok, i read it and had a look and there was no edit tab on that article (although there is one for my original post so i don't think it 's the browser). what next?
and just to check, did you actually receive the pms? just to know whether they've been working or there's been something wrong with the site (or the computers i've been using which is pretty likely, indian internet is shit most of the time).
Mar 16 2008
#4
Yeh, I've noticed some library stuff has no edit tabs.
Mar 16 2008
#5
hmm, this might be to do with some old articles being in weird formats that non-admins can't use. in the meantime, if you post up links to articles you want to edit but can't i'll try changing the format to something standard and see if that helps, then when the techier admins have the time we'll try and do a proper fix.
Mar 16 2008
#6
GT. I think (hope) I replied to your pms, although I never got to fixing this 
I changed the input format - it was on a non-standard one from trying to fix something else - Drupal stops you editing stuff in input formats you don't have options for to avoid breakage. One advantage is the standard input format now has some automated html correction, so it's looking a little better now.
Mar 16 2008
#7
Oh and JK's right - if you post up (ideally in feedback rather than a pm since so many of us aren't around consistently atm) we can usually just change the input format of an article to something else. And if you can't edit something that's almost certainly the reason.
Mar 21 2008
#8
ok, it has the edit tab now. i don't have the time to do it today, maybe next time i internet. but, erm, it now has a bunch more crazy stuff, like words turned into links to footnotes and bits of html strewn around. i'll see if i can fix it al soon though.
i only got your first reply, telling me to nudge you, not any reply to the one nudging you nor any that i sent to steven. or jack. i just wondered if this was a problem with my pms, as obviously i don't mind if people don't have the time to reply...
Mar 22 2008
#9
sorry gt i got it, just too busy, can't use pc much, and forgot about it. sorry!
Mar 22 2008
#10
oh, no worries, i just thought i'd better check they actually worked as i got no replies from 3 different people i sent pms to.
Mar 22 2008
#11
Aug 13 2008
#12
ok, i just submitted another edit to this with the following log message:
Quote:
i removed "[/i]" from the middle of "synthesis", fixed the images and tried again to fix the footnotes which don't seem to work properly (instead of numbers, some of them have the text in italic from the note as the link), but failed. if someone could have a look at it to figure out why they do that, it would be good. if it's still broken in a month i'll try just removing the tags for italics in the footnotes.
could someone else have a look and tell me why the footnotes go so weird? it happens from footnote 10 onwards.
Hey GT, yeah, we're all quite busy at the moment but if you want you can edit it and we'll approve it (seeing as its you
). Have you seen this: New site feature: edit tab for all users.
Anyway, have a read and tell us if you need any more help..