User talk:Ed g2s/Archive1

Hmm. You weren't responding to IM, so... Re. the WS crest - are you sure that version of the image is out of copyright. Also, the black-and-white looks far better, IMHO; perhaps we could use that instead? James F. 19:21, 14 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Only yesterday, I was looking at the London Underground and Tube Map articles and thinking that as the Beck style maps are copyright we need a geographical map for the articles. I did a google search and found several sites with maps including http://www.kordy.dircon.co.uk/misc/lul.gif which appears to be the original from which the map you've put up has come from (have you checked the copyright issue, for this map?) and http://www.thoughtsonthings.com/images/tube_massive.gif which was created by someone who used the streetmaps from www.streetmap.co.uk and joined the dots. Because of potential copyright problems none were of complete satisfaction and Iwas considering embarking on creating such a map myself. Mintguy 13:59, 17 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Ahh clever. I did the same for media:London_postcodes.png. You might want to make one of two corrections then, High St. Kensington isn't an interchange, the district and Circle lines come through the same tunnels and platforms. And Aldgate is the same but for the Circle and Bakerloo. Monument and Bank are connected by an escalator should be shown as an interchange. Well done! Mintguy

Did you fix this? I don't want to do it on the image on Wikipedia, it's better if it's done on your original Photoshop file. Mintguy 23:16, 11 Sep 2003 (UTC)

If you go to Taipei 101's homepage, you will see the following: " CTBUH calls Taipei's world's tallest claim 'premature', BBC News (10/22) "The Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat...says that a candidate [world's tallest] building first has to be occupied and in use. So Taiwan will have to wait until next year when tenants move into Taipei 101 before it can claim the crown."" -- Someone else 17:36, 1 Nov 2003 (UTC)

I've been wanting to change that poxy illustration on Football (soccer) for ages, your image is a million times better thananything I could have done. Mintguy

Why did you copy the copyrighted material to the Talk:Sir Edwin Landseer page? RickK 23:38, 15 Dec 2003 (UTC)

You need to click on "What links here" and fix all the double redirects each time you move a page.--Jiang 04:20, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)

But according to Wikipedia:Naming conventions (pluralization), it shouldn't have been moved in the first place.--Jiang 04:25, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Further to your contribution of the text of a United Nations Security Council resolution at Wikisource on the matter of Iraq and Kuwait, I note that you have not shown a date when this resolution was passed. Such resolutions are perfectly acceptable on Wikisource, but in this case I suspect that the title is wrong, and that perhaps it should be Number 687 rather than 987. Could you please look into this and make any necessary corrections. If you "move" the article to the proper title, I can later delete the wrong title. Eclecticology 20:11, 2004 Mar 5 (UTC)

I'm going to move die games back to dice games, as "dice games" is the standard term for these games (ie. it's not two seperate terms "dice" and "games" but rather "dice games"). --Imran 02:25, 14 Mar 2004 (UTC)

There are two reasons that I prefer the simplified version. The first is that as it now is it is messier, and less easy to see the various links. It's not too bad with just the Football League and Conference divisions, but someone else then added (and I'm sure will add again) the division links for the Northern Premier, Southern, and Isthmian Leagues too, and that made it much harder to read. And how can one argue that those links should be excluded if the links for the FL and FC are there? I actually included the FL and FC division links myself previously, but it seems that it has to be either all or nothing, and I prefer nothing. The second reason - and actually to me perhaps the more important one - is that right now those division links, whether FL, FC, NPL, SL, or IL, have no unique information on them at all. All the info on those pages is on the respective league pages, so why point the reader there? Of course, there may come a time when those pages are developed and they become useful destinations with unique information, and in my view that would be the appropriate time to consider adding a link to them from the template. Right now though, I don't think it serves the reader to point them there.

I have to say I've been impressed with your recent contributions, especially concerning templates, and I hope you keep it up. Maybe we'll just have to disagree on this one - have I convinced you to go along with the simplification, at least for now? - Madw 14:40, Jun 4, 2004 (UTC)

What's so vital about the D1,2,3 links as those pages stand now? - Madw 16:04, Jun 4, 2004 (UTC)

I'm not against in principle, there's just nothing there right now to warrant the links IMO. They maybe important divisions (not leagues), but the pages currently lack useful information, don't you agree? - Madw 16:15, Jun 4, 2004 (UTC)

OK, so we'll keep the FL divisions in. I've adjusted the template - are you OK with that? Of course, if the name changes are confirmed then we'll have to make them Championship, etc. - Madw 16:29, Jun 4, 2004 (UTC)

Keep up the good work - but watch the width on those sidebars! On a smaller screen they squeeze almost all the text out, which is why I moved them to a separate 'At a glance' section. Something to ponder... - Madw 16:37, Jun 4, 2004 (UTC)

I just had a look at the Euro 2004 article. I like what you did with the Top Scorers section (putting flags instead of the country's abbreviations). I thought that added a touch of class. JB82 00:09, 23 Jun 2004 (UTC)

This is a great idea, but a comment, I am trying to debug why it is fubaring so much. As I know nothing bout football/soccer, can you tell me if teams have different colours on their amrs as opposed to their bodies? If not, can the body be one png?Burgundavia 09:55, Jun 25, 2004 (UTC)

I really like the template idea, but I disabled it on Portugal as it is not displaying correctly. I would recommend doing these things by hand, to avoid the whole issue. And remember to sign your comments with ~~~~. Burgundavia 11:10, Jun 25, 2004 (UTC)

The error appears apparently at randome and therefor cannot really be debugged easily. I sometimes can get them to display correctly, but sometimes they do not. I believe it is actually a bug todo with Mediawiki and code formating. And please, "It works fine on Mozilla" is not a good attitude, IMHO. Webpages need to work well on all browsers, not just on one particular kind I happen to use Opera, but I have some people have commented that they don't work on Mozilla as well. [[User: Burgundavia|Burgundavia]] 06:45, Jun 26, 2004 (UTC)

• I am not trying to be rude or offensive. I really do like the idea, and I do want to get it to work. Maybe if I can get the numbers off you, the table width can be defined, and thus constrain the colours. Burgundavia 07:25, Jun 26, 2004 (UTC)

Yes, the images are created by myself. I have made a non commercial cricket site. The url is Cricket Introduction. You'll find the images there too. Created the images in January. I'll try and see if I can rename them. Nichalp 19:19, Jun 29, 2004 (UTC)

Go ahead if you wish to clean the image up. I can't clear the grass as I've already saved the image as a template consisting of the pitch and field. PNG's didn't give me a good output while saving the file. I'll do my best to relocate the original file and save it as PNG if you want it in that format. Nichalp 19:39, Jun 29, 2004 (UTC)

I'll try and give you the image. Give me a day. I'll need to see the conditions of the original file (it's a long time since I made it). I'll notify you in a day's time if it's feasible & if I have the original templates still. Should I post the image here if I get it? Nichalp

Ok I'll do that. Nichalp 19:59, Jun 29, 2004 (UTC)

Just mailed you the images. Nichalp 18:32, Jul 1, 2004 (UTC)

Were they useful? Nichalp 20:30, Jul 2, 2004 (UTC)

Hey, I noticed you cleaned up the images! Any chance on the fielding positions image that you or Nichalp can move gully back behind point where it's supposed to be? And deep midwicket should be where the sweeper is (I'd suggest just ditching the sweeper name from the image). --dmmaus 22:38, 1 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Please go ahead with the shifting of the field positions: Gully and Deep-mid-wicket. Keep the Sweeper though. Here's some more field positions that I had previously inadvertently omitted: (for clarity's sake I'm considering the image like an atlas)

• Short Mid Wicket (towards North-West of Mid-Wicket)
• Leg Gully same latitude as the *new* Gully, eastern hemisphere.
• Silly Point Fraction SW of *current* Gully.
• Also move Foward Short Leg a fraction east.
• Short Square Leg west of Square-Leg (same latitude)
• Short Leg just North of Foward-Short-Leg.
• Backward Short Leg (I'm not sure of the exact location but it is north on the same longitude as FSL)

I hope you can include the above 6 additions. Nichalp 19:38, Jul 3, 2004 (UTC)

The word that comes out of my mouth when I look at the new image on cricket fielding positions is WOW!! Good job on both of the new images. Nichalp's images were good too, but the new images are wonderful. But I had a question, what are the blue dots? Image:Cricket_positions.png Are those not fielding positions? --Ankur 03:48, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)

First, good work converting icons to PNG, nice work, second always sign what you put on Images for deletion and never ever list an image that is still being linked to as you did on Scotland national football team which was still using the JPEG version though you lead people to belive you had replaced it like others with the PNG image. --Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 19:41, 2004 Jun 30 (UTC)

It was on my to-do list.

Thank you for cleaning picture of flag of montenegro. I appreciate it very much!

[[User:Avala|Avala|★]] 18:10, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Can I ask what you mean by "sets a bad example"? Mike H 23:38, Jul 15, 2004 (UTC)

Hi, Ed,

Image:Baseball.jpg was originally on Wikipedia as Image:Baseball.gif which had lots of dithering in the background. I merely cleaned it up and saved it as a JPEG.

Rdikeman 17:20, Jul 24, 2004 (UTC)

Well.. I thought long and hard about the whole move thing. I'd stumbled onto clock tower via random pages and was surprised that it referred to Big Ben and not Clock tower's in general. The fact that it only differentiated by the case of a single letter was what finally convinced me to do the move. I will concede that I am not an expert on the Clock Tower. I still think the pedia would be better served by a rename, but I am happy to take it that your judgement is better, being from London and all! :) MDCore 09:12, 28 Jul 2004 (UTC)

this web site is soooooo fucked up how could people do that hsit that is nasty!!!! EAT ME!!!1

Congratulations! After receiving 100% support on RfA, you are now an administrator. You should read the relevant policies and other pages linked to from the administrators' reading list before carrying out tasks like deletion, protection, banning users, and editing protected pages such as the Main Page. Most of what you do is easily reversible by other sysops, apart from page history merges and image deletion, so please be especially careful with those. You might find the new administrators' how-to guide helpful. Good luck. Cecropia | Talk 02:53, 29 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Good stuff on the sysop-hood old chap! Now remember to use your powers for good and not for evil... ;) MDCore 12:49, 30 Jul 2004 (UTC)

*Puts World domination for dummies back on the shelf*, sigh. ed g2s • talk 16:03, 30 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Hi! I believe that the Tokyo Tower picture should be before the "prefectural" infobox in the Tokyo article. If you have reservations against this, please discuss in Talk:Tokyo :) WhisperToMe 17:44, 30 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for the compliments on my Enigma and other diagrams! I considered a Yafray render of the Enigma, but since the goal was to show the structure of the mechanism, I don't think a photorealistic rendering would add much to it; it typically works better to use cartoonish colors and lighting for that purpose. I will probably upload another version of the image without any labels soon. I've also recently added two more: Image:Enigma rotor set.png and Image:Enigma ratchet.png. Out of curiosity, what don't you like about the labels? I would welcome your suggestions for improvement. Thanks again! -- Wapcaplet 20:35, 30 Jul 2004 (UTC)

• The aliasing problem is most likely a side-effect of reducing the image to 256 colors; hard to avoid, without making the file a lot larger. The numbers are big so they'll show up well in the thumbnail version (which is now on Enigma machine); the lines are pointing to specific bits (such as the black dot on the front plate, the spring-lever on the inner cylinder, etc.) which is probably why they look inconsistent. I think having them all on one side would make it pretty cluttered, especially since there's already some empty space available above and below. Anyhow, I will see if I can clean it up a bit :-) -- Wapcaplet 23:11, 30 Jul 2004 (UTC)
• Good call; I've made the lines vertical. Also got the background to be white - I'm not sure what happened before; the GIMP dimmed my white background in 256-color conversion. Reloading the PNG, refilling with white, and re-converting for whatever reason fixed it. As for creating a separate thumbnail image: I don't know if there's an official policy on this but I've noticed a lot of phasing-out of the old approach of using separate thumbnail files, in favor of the extended syntax that generates them automatically. (They especially get listed a lot on Images for deletion.) I like small files as much as the next person, but the size problem with 256-color PNGs could eventually be corrected in the thumbnailing software, in which case we'd end up with redundant thumbnails. Not to mention, an update to the thumbnail(s) is needed every time the main image changes. But I do not really care that much, so feel free to use it if you want to keep it updated. -- Wapcaplet 00:54, 31 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Hi. I wanted to know which lincense your images are, especially the Brandenburg gate images. Thank you. --Andre Riemann 10:29, 3 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Thank you. --Andre Riemann 10:49, 3 Aug 2004 (UTC)

EasyTimeline is back now. Cheers, Erik Zachte 16:44, 6 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Whenever you see "People's Republic of China", "Republic of China" (or for this matter "Republic of Ireland" and "Republic of Macedonia") please link fully (e.g. [[People's Republic of China]] and [[Republic of China]]) as opposed to something like Republic of [[China]]. Cheers, Jiang 19:58, 2 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I replied on my page :-) Fantasy 容 12:31, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I played around a bit and created Template:Oxbridge College Infobox. Sadly, [[Image:{{{crest}}}.png]] returns no-image even though there is one, as the code is... interesting, so if we use it the crests would have to be moved as [[Image:{{PAEGNAME}} crest.png]] works fine.
Thoughts?
James F. (talk) 16:24, 6 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Ed, your changes to the layout of Cricket, make the pages look ridiculous. All the diagrams, which were previously neatly stacked by the side of the relevant text are now bunched together at the top. I'm reverting, until its justified on the talk page. GWO 12:30, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Re: appearance of motor rotating by 90 degrees with each step - I had that exact same thought after uploading the pics. I'm thinking about removing the large green arrow entirely, perhaps to be replaced by a smaller arrow that corresponds to the 3.6° arc indicated on the photos. I think the small green arrows may be confusing the issue as well. Maybe it'd work better to show four small arrows on the electromagnets only, and not on the sprocket? That way, one doesn't get the impression that they're moving. -- Wapcaplet 17:15, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)

• Oh, the fun challenges of illustrating motion with still-images :-) I don't know if showing cumulative rotation is a good idea, since then understanding of one image would depend on having seen all previous ones (instead of just the immediately preceding one). I'd like to find a way to show which electromagnet has just been turned off in each image, but I'm not sure how to do that in a language-independent way--perhaps a small circuit diagram on the currently-active and last-active electromagnets, with one closed-circuit and the other open-circuit? Colored dots? 0 and 1? (I'm starting to think I should've chosen a larger step size, to make the rotations more obvious, but I'd rather not backtrack on that.) Hm, what do you think of using a colored pie-wedge overlaid on the image, instead of a pair of radial lines? That might make the changing magnitude of the angle clearer. I'll see if I can whip something up... Thanks for your ongoing comments, by the way. I'm always looking to improve my illustrations. -- Wapcaplet 02:23, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I noticed in the Michigan you removed, without comment, the second box on the page and created a new section called "State symbols". Is there a reason you did this? Rmhermen 22:53, Sep 7, 2004 (UTC)

I don't see the need for a template - to me the box looked just fine. And It kept more non-sentence material out of the main flow of the article, which I almost always consider a good thing. It is hard to read through an article with breaks of non-sentence text and this material is so easily handled in a box I don't see a reason for changing it. Rmhermen 23:08, Sep 7, 2004 (UTC)

[1] looks much better to me than the current one. I don't see a problem with the symbols in table form. And why did you remove all the section lines from the first box? Rmhermen 23:24, Sep 7, 2004 (UTC)

Hi, why is the state seal of New Jersey public domain? anthony (see warning) 01:15, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I removed your NPOV notice from the article - please state the problems you have with it on the talk page before you add the {{NPOV}} template. [[User:Halibutt|Halibutt]] 06:24, Sep 8, 2004 (UTC)

OK, you convinced me. Boris just makes me laugh, but I guess that's not the point. Happy editing. PeterGrecian 15:43, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)

You didn't give any reason for your "browser compatibility" revert. You didn't anwer my question: "(What doesn't support <caption>? - and if you don't have CSS nothing else is going to be formatted....)". You also seem to be out voted on other things about this page - such as the inclusion of the quote box and the use of {{{PAGENAME}}}.jpg - which is a very bad idea - for example the best image of Galileo Galilei in a PNG, do you suggest I convert this balck and white image to a JPEG just so I can use the infobox template?. ed g2s • talk 16:21, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)

The main compatibility problem isn't with < Caption > - its about the width and right alignment of the table if you don't run style sheets.

The top caption change is because it looks better not being a caption, and caption is used to describe a table (of data), when a table is used for placement, screen reader browsers prefer that it be a < TH >, not a caption.

As for the image (jpg vs png), the Image use policy says that "Drawings, icons, political maps, flags and other such images (basically those with large, simple, and continuous blocks of color) should be in PNG format. Photos and photo-like maps should be in JPEG format." -- Netoholic @ 16:28, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)

P.S. There already is a JPG version for Galileo Image:Galileo.jpg. -- Netoholic @ 16:30, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)

The image naming standard has support and detractors, but overall, the naming convention for the images (both by article name and jpg format) is supported by policy. Suggest you bring this up on the Template talk:Infobox Biography page. -- Netoholic @ 16:47, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Look, I respect that you want to be bold and all, but you have to discuss major changes to multiple page before you implement them. You have one opinion, but the community may have another. No one person is right. -- Netoholic @ 17:03, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)

The variables you are inputting are going to be very confusing. Say someone reads Albert Einstein and wants to duplicate the infobox on another article. They will see your image variable and mistake it for something real. I invited you to the talk page for the template. If you want to suggest any major changes, do it there first. -- Netoholic @ 17:09, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)

If a page doesn't have a {{{PAGENAME}}}.jpg, then none of the related images follows naming standards. This ensures that at least one picture is done correctly. Until then, it's no loss that the template doesn't work. They can use {{subst:Infobox Biography}}, and then edit the table manually on that one page. -- Netoholic @ 17:18, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)