|
Please look at it: Power Over IP: Testing of the First Experimental Facility[^].
The picture "PoIP.png" is not shown. And it is not the problem with missing file or wrong URL. First, it was shown in preview in first place.
Moreover, it is shown when I try to edit the article.
And, finally, it is shown on the preview its latest version: http://www.codeproject.com/script/Articles/ArticleVersion.aspx?waid=119876&aid=752137[^].
My edition of this version was unrelated to the picture; I just added numbering of the sections.
I really hope to have everything shown by April 1st, as the article was intended to be shown on that date (we really, really need a tradition of April-1st publications, as, say, IETF does (http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3251.txt[^])). But the point is: there is some glitch in the system: I faced something similar when I published one or two of my past articles.
Thank you.
—SASergey A Kryukov
|
|
|
|
|
It's funny, yesterday (30th of March) the article was in the moderation list and I did see the image at the top.
The problem that I didn't know what to do with the article - I thought it's a 1st of April joke, but didn't fir the date... 
I'm not questioning your powers of observation; I'm merely remarking upon the paradox of asking a masked man who he is. (V)
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, this is another evidence that something is wrong here.
Thank you very much,
—SASergey A Kryukov
|
|
|
|
|
Just checked again - it is in the moderation queue and the images are in place...
I'm not questioning your powers of observation; I'm merely remarking upon the paradox of asking a masked man who he is. (V)
|
|
|
|
|
Unfortunately, the date is automatically set. This is a serious problem: if we edit some article, we often really need to keep the date of the original publication, because eventually it could be needed as a proof link of some priority.
You can understand "what to do with it" if you just read the article more thoroughly and apply some thinking, which I really recommend you to do.
—SASergey A Kryukov
|
|
|
|
|
I know what to do - bookmark it, sit back and wait for the responses...It may make me the whole month... 
I'm not questioning your powers of observation; I'm merely remarking upon the paradox of asking a masked man who he is. (V)
|
|
|
|
|
Sorry, from your comment, I, for my sins, thought that you did not get the meaning of the article. Hope I was mistaken.
—SASergey A Kryukov
|
|
|
|
|
Kornfeld Eliyahu Peter wrote: I thought it's a 1st of April joke, but didn't fit the date
And it is...And a very well done 
I'm not questioning your powers of observation; I'm merely remarking upon the paradox of asking a masked man who he is. (V)
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you very much.
By the way, did you have a chance to see my other drawings, which appears on clicks of the links in the body of the article (not in "References", like "enthusiasm", "well-grounded", "sanitation", etc.)?
—SASergey A Kryukov
|
|
|
|
|
Sergey Alexandrovich Kryukov wrote: see my other drawings
Of course - I took your advice seriously...
I'm not questioning your powers of observation; I'm merely remarking upon the paradox of asking a masked man who he is. (V)
|
|
|
|
|
Sergey A Kryukov
|
|
|
|
|
There's always the option of submitting an article directly to an editor. For something like this we will look after it and ensure it's all good.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
I understand it, thank you very much. I'm talking about a particular glitch: the links to uploaded files tends to be broken after some legitimate step. Sorry my report is not 100% accurate, as I did not experiment with submission or tested it. I have an impression that the files were correctly referenced on first submission and get broken on the original page when the second version was created. Interestingly, when second version was approved, adding other versions did not disrupt anything.
Anyway, as of today, my immediate goal is reached: the article integrity is preserved (I don't dare to say it has no more mistakes) and is dated by 1st of April, just as planned.
Thank you,
—SASergey A Kryukov
|
|
|
|
|
The popup to share with Google+ disappears before you can hit the public button and the article does not shows on Google+...
[UPDATE - 01-04-2014]
After a long fight I was able to share it on Google+, but the image CodeProject pushed is one of the images from the article and not the standard CodeProject image...
[END-OF-UPDATE]
I'm not questioning your powers of observation; I'm merely remarking upon the paradox of asking a masked man who he is. (V)
modified 1-Apr-14 12:21pm.
|
|
|
|
|
It has been a while since I voted an article but now I am getting this message. How do I get my email address confirmed? May be this is also the reason why I have not been getting email alerts when someone posts questions in my articles.
|
|
|
|
|
There should be a link in the message that takes you to the "send me a new confirmation email" page.
In any case I've sent a reconfirmation request. Should be in your inbox right now.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for the instant response! I just got the confirmation request you sent and my email address is confirmed now. Hope I will start getting email alerts for article questions.
|
|
|
|
|
Looks like you email is confirmed, so our systems should no longer be scared about sending emails to a non-existent address. Let me know if you get a notification for this message.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, I got an email alert for your reply. Thanks Chris.
|
|
|
|
|
How do I edit my signature line? I found it a long time ago but cannot find it now.
Thank you.
Thanks for your time
If you work with telemetry, please check this bulletin board: http://www.bkelly.ws/irig_106/
|
|
|
|
|
Go to your account settings page (Name in top right > My Settings) and click on the 'Forums' tab.
What do you get when you cross a joke with a rhetorical question?
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks. Nice signature yourself.
Thank you for your time
If you work with telemetry, please check this bulletin board: www.irigbb.com
|
|
|
|
|
No problem. And thanks as well.
What do you get when you cross a joke with a rhetorical question?
|
|
|
|
|
I just posted a comment to a Quick Answers question and was rewarded by near blindness as my comment was rendered with a bright yellow background. May I suggest a more subtle shade of attention? 
Thanks,
/ravi
|
|
|
|
|
There is an algorithm that is used. The brighter your comment, the brighter the color used. Consider it a compliment
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
