Jump to content

User talk:Poccil/archive5

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< User talk:Poccil

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Frogsprog (talk | contribs) at 17:36, 24 September 2006. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


CKCKCKCK

Yo i see u tryin 2 change shit wit College Point, Queens but u probably dunt kno shit bout it. Come 2 CP at night to see wat i mean. if ur wite u will get shot. i aint lyin datz wat im sayin. im jus sayin i live in CP and i even get scared walkin round by maself at nite. so im sayin stop changin shit bout CP. Im Blood so u bettah watch out. dis summer ma best frend got killed by a Crip so im sayin dat theres many of em in da area so watch out niggggguuuuhhhh!!!!


Please

If you find another article of mine that you think is misplaced, please contact me on my user page before you edit-conflict me. Thanks. :) – ClockworkSoul 05:21, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

re: What's a Tobagonian?

I think that a Tobagonian is someone from Tobago :) But I couldn't be sure! It's certainly a very short list, and I agree that it's a speedy delete. — riana_dzasta • t • c • e • ER • 05:25, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Edit summaries

Please remember to use edit summaries. When I saw that you had removed a stub tag at http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Partido_de_la_speranza_dominicana&diff=72244219&oldid=69813123 , I didn't understand why you had done that. An edit summary would have been helpful. TruthbringerToronto (Talk | contribs) 20:12, 27 August 2006 (UTC) -- Peter O. (Talk) 00:02, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]


OK. -- Peter O. (Talk) 00:03, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

PoccilScript

blocked becuase Template:NowCommons is quite sufficent for that kind of image. CSD is for stuff that has to be delt with now. Images that have been moved to commons can be delt with whenever.Geni 11:16, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Images to commons

I'm happy that you're moving images to the commons, but could we talk about image names. For Gutenberg books, I've always used a naming convention of Subject_of_article_name - POinter_to_Gutenbrg_Source. By removing the Project Gutenberg eText 12345 element of the image, you remove the latter of these. Is there any good reason for this? I appreciate we have not lost the metadata in the image description but I feel more comfirted if the imagename on its own is able to convey source info. As to my own images, I've always encoded the date the image is taken into the image name. Again, is there any good reason to jettison this? thanks --Tagishsimon (talk)

Thank you for the suggestion. Next time I will add the original image's name to the metadata info. Peter O. (Talk) 14:42, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Next time, I'd prefer you to leave the metadata in the title, or explain why removing it is a better thing to do. Your action verges on discourtesy. --Tagishsimon (talk)

Images on commons

As the deletion of the images here is not an urgent matter, please do not put them in Category:Candidates for speedy deletion. That category is currently heavily backlogged and will become even more inefficient if it is used for so many non-urgent deletions (som eurgent deletions may be delayed by days due to the backlog). Thank you, Kusma (討論) 11:41, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I understand. Since this is the only page I can edit now, I might as well propose here a template to mark images ready to be deleted, but are not speedy deletions. They could be placed into a different category, such as:"
This image was moved to Wikimedia Commons and is now redundant and ready to be deleted. This image isn't, however, a candidate for speedy deletion for that reason.
I apologize for my actions. Peter O. (Talk) 13:18, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
There is already {{NowCommons}}. Isn't that sufficient? Kusma (討論) 13:20, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This is for the case when a (non-sysop) user already checked that the image is really used nowhere, that the image really exists, and that the image's metadata is already exported to the Commons page. For what I am doing, a template such as one above is needed at least now. I could change the wording to:
...It has been confirmed that the image is orphaned and its history was exported to Wikipedia Commons.
Thank you. Peter O. (Talk) 13:28, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is with the expected time delay before such images are deleted (in terms of priority deleting stuff shifted to commons if pretty low on the list of backlogs needing to be cleared) they would probably have to be rechecked before they are deleted.Geni 16:47, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You shouldn't be blocked I've cleared the autoblock.Geni 16:41, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok User:PoccilScript has been unblocked.Geni 12:35, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just curious about changing WP image names to Commons image name?

I note that you just changed the name of an image in the two articles Distillation and Fractional distillation from its Wikipedia name to its Commons name. I am curious as to why that was necessary. Is there some benefit to that ... or what? I'll await your response here on your Talk page. Thanks, _ mbeychok 21:36, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The purpose is to prepare for its deletion because the image is redundant in Wikipedia. PoccilScript 21:45, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. - mbeychok 22:45, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Removal of "notability" tag on page As Blood Runs Black

Hello there, I see you removed the notability tag on the above page. Can I ask why? It was placed there because the article lacks sources, content, and may not fall under the guidelines of WP:MUSIC. --Danteferno 00:53, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply] 

-- Peter O. (Talk) 17:50, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Commons Images

Please consider having your script make sure that the images in the commons that are to replace the ones on WikiPedia are actually identical. I uploaded a newer much higher quality of Image:Sullivan-GS.JPG a few days ago, only to find it has just now been replaced with the horrible version copied over to the commons earlier. I meant to update the Commons image at the same time, but while I've been on WikiPedia since 2004, I only just joined the commons and it told me I was too new. --Anivron 04:52, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

File history from EN wiki

I've moved this comment here since it seems that you don't read your Commons talk page

Please only upload the file history from EN wiki if the Commons file was based on (or is exactly) that file. Many times you've uploaded the filehistory from EN wiki for a file which has originated from another language wiki or where the image is based on the original source directly. /Lokal_Profil 21:04, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:PoccilScript

Nice job replacing the flag images; I would be looking forward to more of this in the future :) User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 23:24, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Flag infobox

I see that in the flag infobox you were having trouble applying "colour" instead to "color" to some articles with this infobox. Do you mind if I help apply this change for you? Perhaps it involves creating a new template or replacing existing templates in certain articles. PoccilScript 00:54, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Go right ahead, let me know when you finished and thanks a bunch. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 00:56, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Modular schematics

I just saw your idea for modular schematic diagrams and thought it was something I could help you with. Here's how I would handle it.

First, each of the graphics should be converted to SVG. (As you may know, MediaWiki has SVG support now.) Then, I could make a script that would piece together each SVG graphic into one big one, as well as handle text. I hope you can help me and that I can help you. Respond at my talk page. Peter O. (Talk) 05:05, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I abandoned that idea a long time ago. The script idea is intriguing, though. What did you have in mind? — Omegatron 05:07, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

SVG files are text files. I could make an online script similar to the one you have still online, but that generates SVG instead of HTML. SVG text of each schematic piece is used instead of images. The resulting SVG file could then be uploaded to Wikipedia. Peter O. (Talk) 05:12, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't even think of that. That is a very good idea. It is still limited by being too "blocky", though, and not very flexible.
See Wikipedia:WikiProject_Electronics/Programs for the discussion of what to do about electronics diagrams on Wikipedia, which includes an extension that can be built into Mediawiki, but requires horrendous code and creates pretty bad graphs, some programs that can output SVG, but not very great looking.
See also Commons:Category:Electrical_symbols, which already has lots of SVG symbols, but they're all drawn by different people, so some are great-looking; some are ugly. Even the ones that are good-looking are inconsistent with each other. Like this, for instance:
PNP P-channel
NPN N-channel
BJT JFET
They are obviously drawn differently, though both styles look decent by themselves.
I started to draw my own renditions of all the different symbols, in a style that is consistent with each other, but never finished it. I'll upload what I did so far for comparison:
There are a few that have been uploaded that are especially nice-looking, in my opinion, like these:
We could try to emulate their style maybe. — Omegatron 05:31, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm getting some SVG, but it's not working seamlessly. I'm going to try to figure it out by myself (I'm not too familiar with the SVG code), but it would be faster if we could talk by email or IM. — Omegatron 23:51, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

New Boolean Logic pic ?

Hi, I see you replaced my pic with a new one, which is functionally identical. Since you didn't add a comment when you made the change, let me ask, what was wrong with my pic ? I thought mine had a better usage of colors to show sets, for example. StuRat 05:39, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, but couldn't you convert my pic instead of creating a new pic ? StuRat 06:29, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yǔn

Thank you for confirming that for me by moving it. I was having a dilemna when I started that one because Yǔn has several meanings and I did not want to create a disambiguation page. This is the same problem with many Chinese characters. The sounds are not as important as the meanings they convey, and I could not think of another way to start an arrticle about the right Yǔn unless I clarified it with the character intended. Do you think this might be worthwhile opening a policy discussion over?Kaz 16:33, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Hope Evangelical Lutheran Church

You had prodded this article. I prod2'ed it. An IP editor deproded without doing anything else. I leave it to you to evaluate AFD nomination; I'm going to stick the relevant cleanup tags on it. GRBerry 03:11, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Orlík (disambiguation)

[1]: have you see Wikipedia:Village_pump_(miscellaneous)#Onomastic_pages_created_by_Sheynhertz-Unbayg? Do you think it is fun to clean up such mess? Pavel Vozenilek 23:32, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

concerning the Mercator-proj image

This image at english Wikipedia is better than the image at commons. English Wikipedia image is in the current optimal format for this type of image. The English Wikipedia image is 33 times smaller in filesize while still higher in quality. Please do not replace Mercator-proj.png with Mercator-proj.jpg, but instead replace Mercator-proj.jpg with Mercator-proj.png. Thank you. --Jecowa 19:04, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have restored links to the image and uploaded a copy to the Wikimedia Commons. PoccilScript 20:00, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It's very good that you uploaded the better image to Commons but please don't use the PoccilScript output on the image description page. Currently licenses, categories etc are just down as nowikied tags. Please rewrite the information using the commons:template:information tag. Also if you upload a better version please link to it from the jpg version./Lokal Profil 11:21, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep PoccilScript off user talk pages

Could you keep PoccilScript from modifying user talk pages? I just a "You have a new message", just to see your script had changed a picture in a signature of an old message. --Apoc2400 13:43, 19 September 2006 (UTC) "[reply]

Yes, I could do that for you. Peter O. (Talk) 16:34, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

thanks

...for your great work on moving images to commons. This benefits WP a lot. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 19:11, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

[untitled]

Your edit to Cordillera del Paine created a completely irrelevant, and rather unpleasant, image. Was this a clerical error or malicious vandalism? Viewfinder 19:50, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It was definitely not vandalism. When the image was replaced to Paine.jpg, it was thought to have been pointed to the same image as on Wikimedia Commons, and not to a different one. Peter O. (Talk) 23:06, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, it was an accident and my vandalism accusation was premature. But the replacement of correct images with the sort of image that appeared on Cordillera del Paine, with a professional looking commemt to ward off vandal watchers, is not unusual sneaky vandal behaviour. Viewfinder 23:37, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit to Florida

Your recent edit to Florida (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // AntiVandalBot 04:45, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, I thought I was reverting vandalism as well... Peter O. (Talk) 04:47, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:PoccilScript

It would be nice if you request and get Bot status for this user as he keeps flooding my watchlist without. --Denniss 02:54, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Applies to the Commons as well. --Denniss 02:58, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Poccil, I also came to ask you to do the same thing. Did you intend an "empty" reply above? —Quarl (talk) 2006-09-21 06:09Z

No, it was a mistake. Peter O. (Talk) 06:49, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well, any status on getting a bot flag? :) —Quarl (talk) 2006-09-22 06:24Z
I would actually request that PoccilScript doesn't get a bot flag on Commons since the edit comments say explicitly "revert if wrong". If the edits pop up with a bot flag many such necessary revertings will go missing.
A botflag on EN wiki I have nothing against /Lokal Profil 22:57, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

template

i didn't create it, someone suggested it on a talk page so I decided to paste it into a template :-) --Frogsprog 17:36, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Poccil/archive5&oldid=77563801"