User talk:Vriskanon

Unmarked links to userspace

Please read the Esolang:Policy. In particular, mainspace (pages with no prefix like User:, Talk: or Esolang:) is meant to be a place where people describe things like esoteric programming languages and esoprogramming concepts. In particular, that means that links to userspace (which is under the control of the respective user, rather than part of the article itself) need to be clearly marked (typically by leaving the User: prefix visible). After all, there may some day end up as separate pages, one where a person writes about themselves, and another where other people write about a person. (Just compare Chris Pressey to User:Chris_Pressey, for example; the first is a mainspace discussion of Chris Pressey and his relation to esolangs, the other is a page that Chris Pressey wrote about himself, and thus inappropriate to link from mainspace.) Unmarked links to userspace are fine on pages like Talk: pages that are already outside mainspace.

You've recently been editing a lot of correctly-formatted links to be incorrect; I had to change them back. Please don't do that in the future (and please remember to leave the User: prefix visible when writing new articles, too).

A more minor problem you've been doing, but one that's a problem based on similar principles, is the difference between talking about the subject of an article, and talking about the article itself. Articles should talk about the language/concept/whatever they're describing. If you want to discuss the article itself, normally you should do that on its Talk: page. If you feel that a note about an article itself is important to readers of the article (such as {{stub}} or similar indicators that the article is unfinished), you should mark the comment with clearly different formatting, normally ":''text''":

This is what a meta-note about an article itself looks like.

Thanks for helping to improve Esolang; most of your changes are useful, it's just a few minor things that are problems. --ais523 08:12, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

jeo

This might be wrong, but I think that the Gibberish code jeo would output 0. IAM (talk) 12:27, 24 April 2016 (UTC)