User talk:Kelvinsong

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Leave me a message!
I have only one rule—use a real dash (—) ! No double hyphens please ;)
Project editor retention.svg
Editor of the week.svg
Animal cell cycle-en.svg
SVG Diagram of the animal cell cycle
uploaded on Dec 2, 2012 by Kelvinsong
Editor of the Week
for the week beginning January 13, 2013
This editor registered on April 6, 2012. At the time of this award Kevinsong had 515 edits. An active contributer of complex svg renderings and illustrations with high quality, encyclopedic use! His contributions can be seen on Endoplasmic reticulum, Centrosome cycle and Nucleotide.
Recognized for
Feature status SVG Illustration
Notable work(s)
Cscr-featured.svgFile:Chloroplast (standalone version)-en.svg
Nomination page

Chloroplasts and friends[edit]

Hello there. So, what issues with Template:Infobox cell biology are you seeing that I'm missing. :/ —Sowlos  14:37, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

As far as your comment in your edit summary at Chloroplast, I chose numbered diagrams for two reasons. One, they're commonly used over in-picture labels. Two, text in the pictures are unreadable unless blown up to sizes which should be avoided. Even then such text is still not big enough when considering accessibility for the disabled or users on mobile devices. ...making the usage of such image sizes of limited benefit anyway. —Sowlos  14:52, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

edit conflict
Glad you asked! I appreaciate the effort, I really do, and I'm definitely not saying it's "useless" because I think making templates for these things is a good idea. That being said, you're going around and fixing what ain't broke. I don't watch every single cell biology article, but the ones you've added the template to seem to be ones that already had a working diagram there (like at Chloroplast or Centrosome). The main benefit I see in these templates is that they bold the name of the organelle part that the article is about (very useful actually because a lot of them have a forest of labels for a reader to search through to find the right one). So I think {{Infobox cell biology}} is more suited for the organelle subarticles like Crista or Chloroplast membrane where I haven't drawn a more specific diagram (unlike at Centriole).
Aside from that, two concrete problems with the templates are
1 They use the numbered diagrams, which are very hard to read. I made those for other language wikis for which there's no translation. In reply to your second comment Again, number labels are confusing and difficult to read/understand. Regarding mobile devices, I use one, and the text is actually clearer on one than on a desktop. Regarding disabled users, maybe some of my solution ideas below can help.
2 The chloroplast numbered diagram is out of date and scientifically inaccurate. I've since uploaded a redrawn version that can be found at File:Chloroplast structure.svg or File:Chloroplast II.svg. There's also a minimalist style I have going on at Chloroplast that the template doesn't really mesh with.
So complaining done, here are some solutions I'd be happy with
1 I can typeset new versions of my diagrams which have labels like 1 Thylakoid—, 1.1 Lumen—, 2 Stroma—, etc. Then you can list them under the diagram like you're already doing.
2 Use linked labels, like in {{Calvin cycle}}. I really like this idea because it keeps the text in the diagram and is good for accessibility reasons, but it's hard to implement and we can't have underlines under the links without causing problems on old IE.
—Love, Kelvinsong talk 15:04, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
... you're going around and fixing what ain't broke.
Well, if things can be made better, something is being fixed. :p As far is nothing being broken, that's iffy. While lead images can be larger than most others, sidebars and thumbs stay around 220px wide for a reason (MOS:IMAGES#Forced_image_size).
I can typeset new versions of my diagrams which have labels like 1 Thylakoid—, 1.1 Lumen—, 2 Stroma—, etc. Then you can list them under the diagram like you're already doing.
As long as the number are readable at 220px wide, that sounds like a really cool idea.
Use linked labels, like in {{Calvin cycle}}.
That looks very cool. If we do it that way, then the trailing list of links should be removed, right?
The main benefit I see in these templates is that they bold the name of the organelle part that the article is about (very useful actually because a lot of them have a forest of labels for a reader to search through to find the right one).
Yes, this is the main reason I decided to make the template. The other big benefit is constancy.
Thanks for the changes you made. I was planning on adding more dynamic behaviour based on what diagrams are shown.
Cheers —Sowlos  15:40, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
Chloroplast ultrastructure (interactive diagram) Chloroplasts have at least three distinct membrane systems, and a variety of things can be found in their stroma.
I made {{Chloroplast structure}} which makes an interactive linked diagram. (Which I managed to make work sort of with IE6!) I don't think it would be hard to distinguish the label that represents the page its transcluded in.—Love, Kelvinsong talk 18:21, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
Wow, you did a lot of work in my absence! *bows*
That template looks great. I won't have time to duplicate your work into other *structure templates until later today or tomorrow, but once we have replacements for all the images, they can be swapped out. The data cells should be able to take the same kind of borderless styling you applied to the images.
Sure, I don't see why the label for the host page of a transclusion shouldn't be noticeable. They can always be styled to stand out with parser-functions/magic-words. —Sowlos  21:38, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
Thanks! Actually, come to think about it, highlighting the labels is going to be pretty hard. It's only easy on a diagram like {{Chloroplast structure}} where the text labels have already been positioned over the graphic ones. It's not scalable either. Anyway, are we going to be adding other data cells like Sedimentation coefficient, average size, etc?—Love, Kelvinsong talk 00:42, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────I would think adding {{#ifeq: link-target|{{PAGENAME}}|rgba([somethig-get-the-text-red],0);|rgba(6, 69, 173, 0);}} to the color value for each of the links. I'm confused, though, because the color value you're using should be an ugly blue, links with no colours look like fuzzy doubles (even though their is no second set of text underneath), and unformatted text outside of the divs display white. My knowledge of HTML and WikiMedia's crazy syntax is clashing. Can you help shed any light on this?
Anyway, are we going to be adding other data cells like Sedimentation coefficient, average size, etc?
I'm completely open to this, but still sceptical. How much should we add; what's related *and* too important to leave out? Lots of infoboxes and navboxes end up awash in *related* information or are built to a certain size because they're expected to contain some minimum amount of information (Roman Empire is a great example of the latter). This is where the nickname "disinfobox" comes from. While I'm fine with big, I looked towards the infoboxes for the chemacle elements and planets as a model for {{Infobox cell biology}}, I'm still debating how to adapt there example here. As always, the more input, the merrier. —Sowlos  07:36, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Chloroplast template.svg
How the linked image works is it has four layers. The first layer is the SVG rendered text labels layer. It's an image. The layer on top of that is a conditionally opaque white shield. It has the style "background: white; background: rgba(255,255,255,0);" Because of that, if a user's browser supports rgba alpha, it will render the shield transparent and reveal the SVG text below. Otherwise it covers it up. The third layer is the green chloroplast itself, positioned so the white box under it doesn't cover it up. The fourth layer is the HTML links. They're styled with "color: rgba([wikilink blue], 0)" That way, if the user's browser doesn't support rgba alpha, it will display the HTML links opaque (as well as cover up the SVG prerendered text.) If the user's browser supports alpha, the HTML links are transparent and only show the underlines.—Love, Kelvinsong talk 19:17, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
Did you really make visualization just for this post? xD
Eh, I should've realized the text layer was still there. I thought you just removed it. Honestly, I'm surprised WikiMedia's rasterizing of SVGs allows such creative solutions. Why not just remove the text and make the floating wikilinks visible? Is that related to the support issue you referred to? —Sowlos  23:19, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
The wikilinks are hidden for typographical reasons. The SVG text looks much nicer and doesn't fluctuate cross-browser or cross-OS.—Love, Kelvinsong talk 00:25, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

CaF arb break[edit]

<144 div style="position:relative; float: right; width: 500px; height: 350px; ">
Mitochondrion ultrastructure (interactive diagram) A mitochondrion has a double membrane; the inner one contains its chemiosmotic apparatus and has deep grooves which increase its surface area. While commonly depicted as an "orange sausage with a blob inside of it" (like it is here), mitochondria can take many shapes[1] and their intermembrane space is quite thin.

I hope I didn't maim your work too badly. Oh, and there are no blue underlines for the links. Unfortunately, I've literally just run out of time. Only Outer mitochondrial membrane, Porin, Intermembrane space, Inner mitochondrial membrane are working at the moment.

Ok, for the mitochondrion you might want to wait for me to rework it like the chloroplast one as the article version is a bit messy right now. And why are you using image map—the whole point of the text labels is the underlines and people being able to highlight the diagram and see the text (useful for accessibility reasons). & as it seems youre using File:Mitochondrion mini.svg instead of the article version, I would uggest you design at 300px because this solution isnt scalable.—Love, Kelvinsong talk 03:18, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
Yes, I used File:Mitochondrion mini.svg. I simply modified the mitochondrion image currently in the template. I've added a visualization of the template in the /doc with all parameters set, so it should be easier to determine what the state of diagrams and links are.
I tried out an image map because I thought you didn't like the blue I figured throwing them out was preferable to keeping them unstyled, since theirs no visual indication that the titles are links anyway. Also, I was planning on suggesting using parser functions to place the "you are here" labels you came up with next to the relevant links. That would indicate the diagrams are dynamic and might prompt users to move the mouse over them (then noticing the cursor changing to a pointer over links).
Hmmm, it hadn't occurred to me that someone might try highlighting an image. Good point.
I'm not married to either solution, so if you think absolute positioned links are the better way to go, I'm okay with that.
If the mitochondrion image isn't ready, what about Golgi, nucleus, and centrosome? And what should we do about the other images? They're not all great, but look okay for the moment. (I was annoyed I couldn't find a good diagram of the ribosome, though.) I could try to redraw them in the same style as your images, but (as I'm sure you know) it takes a bit of effort to properly imitate someone else's style. —Sowlos  10:56, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── I copied the chloroplast template over to the mitochondrion one—you just need to position the labels now. When you're done, just use a text editor to replace all occurences of color: rgba(6, 69, 173, 1); with color: rgba(6, 69, 173, 0);. I'll try to fix the golgi and centrosome pictures soon, I didn't make the nucleus picture but I can still typeset it. I don't think its possible to find a ribosome picture cause they're so simple (And here come the angry ribosome-scientists). Unless we're going to label every protein/rRNA loop in the things. & Then we'd have to decide whether we're drawing a bacterial, archæan, chloroplast, mitochondrial, eukaryotic, etc. ribosome.

BTW, I'm a minimalist (flat-design to be specific) so most of my pictures and templates (and my user/talk pages) reflect that. I used to declare that on my user page but ironically it got swept out because I'm a minimalist. ;) —Love, Kelvinsong talk 17:15, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

All the links are positioned, with alpha set to 0. I created some redirects so all labels could be linked.
I will wait eagerly for the Golgi and centrosome pictures. Oh and talking about pictures you didn't upload. The tweaked mitochondria pictures I uploaded are at File:Mitochondrion structure.svg and File:Mitochondrion structure no text.svg. So if you find yourself wanting to do anything with pictures given those names, feel free to upload over them. Also if you do, feel free to remove the "modified by Sowlos" part. Or if you prefer, let me know and I will.
Ribosomes may be small, but big things come in small packages! A ribosomal diagram would have at least two subunites to label, anyway. ;) If we were to label the rRNA and proteins, obviously we'd use eukaryotic ribosome. We humans eukaryote chauvinists after all. Joking aside, they seem too important to every cell and some organelles to overlook. Perhaps a diagram would simply highlight the subunits and two ...squigles, labelling them as rRNA and Ribosomal protein? —Sowlos  11:09, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
Looks great! I've added it to Mitochondrion. For the ribosomes, wouldn't it be better just to modify something like the File:Chloroplast and bacterial ribosome comparison.png that I used at Chloroplast?—Love, Kelvinsong talk 13:57, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

parabola diagram[edit]

Thanks very much for producing the diagram about areas of parabolic segments. I was actually contemplating asking you to do such a diagram, but I was still hunting in Commons in the hope of finding one. Yours is excellent. Thanks again. DOwenWilliams (talk) 04:46, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

You're welcome!—Love, Kelvinsong talk 12:21, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

Note glitch[edit]

Hi K:

I added a footnote to the parabola article. It turned out that, on my screen, the "[d]" (or whatever) on which the reader hovers or clicks to see the note was at the extreme right-hand end of a line, and it somehow overlapped into the space of your new diagram. As a result, the note couldn't be read. I've fixed this in this case by adding a couple of words to the main text, so the thing gets scrolled to the next line. However, I guess on screens of different sizes, the problem could still occur.

Maybe this happens because your diagram doesn't have a frame. This might cause confusion as to the area it occupies.

What do you think?

DOwenWilliams (talk) 16:11, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Fixed by encapsulating the text in a div with some CSS that lifts it above the diagram.—Love, Kelvinsong talk 16:49, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
I'm not sure that I understand, but if it works, that's all that matters. Thanks. Hugs. DOwenWilliams (talk) 19:23, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 28[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Botany, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Life cycles, Runoff and Mutualistic (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:59, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Article Feedback Tool update[edit]

Hey Kelvinsong. I'm contacting you because you're involved in the Article Feedback Tool in some way, either as a previous newsletter recipient or as an active user of the system. As you might have heard, a user recently anonymously disabled the feedback tool on 2,000 pages. We were unable to track or prevent this due to the lack of logging feature in AFT5. We're deeply sorry for this, as we know that quite a few users found the software very useful, and were using it on their articles.

We've now re-released the software, with the addition of a logging feature and restrictions on the ability to disable. Obviously, we're not going to automatically re-enable it on each article—we don't want to create a situation where it was enabled by users who have now moved on, and feedback would sit there unattended—but if you're interested in enabling it for your articles, it's pretty simple to do. Just go to the article you want to enable it on, click the "request feedback" link in the toolbox in the sidebar, and AFT5 will be enabled for that article.

Again, we're very sorry about this issue; hopefully it'll be smooth sailing after this :). If you have any questions, just drop them at the talkpage. Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) 21:39, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Botany, FA candidate[edit]

As a major contributor to the development of the Botany article, we would be very grateful for your opinion of it and for your support of its FA candidacy if you feel that is merited. Plantsurfer (talk) 19:50, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 14[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Chloroplast, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Nucleus and Precursor (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:44, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Chloroplast[edit]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Chloroplast you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. Time2wait.svg This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Chiswick Chap -- Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:10, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi Kelvinsong, I've left a first-pass stream of comments on the GA review page. The basic drift is that the article is much too long and complex to occupy the kind of top-level position of a topic like Chloroplast that a schoolkid might search for: it will not become a GA without splitting off several sub-articles as I've indicated. This has been nothing like any review I have ever attempted - usually we have flaky references and patchy coverage. Here, the task is to simplify and summarize. I don't think any of the material will just be cut - it will all have a home somewhere, just in sub-articles in most cases, though the overlap with Photosynthesis will likely demand some simple pruning. I do hope this is all right with you, and I appreciate the extraordinary work you've put in on the graphics. Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:56, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Chloroplast[edit]

The article Chloroplast you nominated as a good article has failed Symbol unsupport vote.svg; see Talk:Chloroplast for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Chiswick Chap -- Chiswick Chap (talk) 03:52, 19 October 2013 (UTC)


Design Barnstar.png The Graphic Designer's Barnstar
Reading chloroplast I was wondering who had made those beautiful graphics - to which I click through to your userpage to find you have contributed loads! They are incredibly detailed, informative, visually appealing and add so much encyclopedic values to articles. Just as a little thank-you for brightening up my day and for your service to Wikipedia, and ultimately humanity, I, Acather96 (talk · contribs), hereby award you this barnstar! Display it with pride :) Acather96 (click here to contact me) 20:02, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
Thank you!!!!!—Love, Kelvinsong talk 00:13, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Original Barnstar Hires.png The Original Barnstar
Absolutely amazing artwork! cslarsen (talk) 18:30, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks sm!!!—Love, Kelvinsong talk 19:01, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Request for comment[edit]

There is a discussion at Talk:List of United States congressional districts related to style of new district-level maps for the post-2013 United States congressional districts. Your input would be appreciated. Thank you. --7partparadigm talk 02:44, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the WV barnstar graphic[edit]

What the subject line says. I checked out your userpage on the way here, and you've got a gorgeous set of illustrations there! The combination of willingness, artistic talent, and hard work makes you a real asset to the project. Ammodramus (talk) 02:28, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks sm!!!!¡—Love, Kelvinsong talk 20:58, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

Pocohontas Coalfield map[edit]

Hi there, thanks for creating the above at the map workshop. Just to let you know, the colour conventions normally used with this type of map are shown in this guide, which might be useful in the future. Best, ► Philg88 ◄ Star.pngtalk 04:51, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

You're welcome! I didn't use those map colors bc I figured those were only for map-maps, not simple maps designed to just show one thing (like territorial distribution, etc). && I find the color choices there to be rather ugly too (sorry manilla just doesn't work for me).—Love, Kelvinsong talk 20:58, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
I'm not too keen on the manilla either but for consistency it fits in with thousands of other location maps. Best, ► Philg88 ◄ Star.pngtalk 15:08, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the Sevastopol map[edit]

Thank you for the Sevastopol map you made for us! I left some feedback at Wikipedia:Graphics Lab/Map workshop#Sevastopol within the Crimean peninsula as the city is very dependent of maritime trade so showing/coloring the sea is important for this map.

I also made a new request for a similar matter. We need a location map now for the city showing its administrative divisions. You can check the request at Wikipedia:Graphics Lab/Map workshop#Location map for Sevastopol.

Once again, thank you for your time and effort, it's highly appreciated.

Ahnoneemoos (talk) 04:55, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Nppp!!! Sorry I saw this on my phone & forgot to reply later.. But it looks like someone else already did the city location mapp—Love, Kelvinsong talk 21:08, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Barnstar of Humour Hires.png The Barnstar of Good Humor
For this edit. Pine 05:13, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
😏💁—Love, Kelvinsong talk 21:09, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Diagram of Jupiter[edit]

Jupiter diagram.svg
An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status
Your image, File:Jupiter diagram.svg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! Armbrust The Homunculus 06:03, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Thank you! A gift from fellow Wikipedians.[edit]

You have been selected to receive a merchandise giveaway. We last contacted you on April 3, 2014. Please send us a message if you would like to claim your shirt. --JMatthews (WMF) (talk) 07:30, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Done! Thank you!!!—Love, Kelvinsong talk 20:51, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Regarding the Supercell diagram[edit]

Hey once again Kelvinsong! Regarding the supercell diagram, you've uploaded a newer version of the vector graphic of it. It should have been uploaded as a different file as it is a FP locally here at Commons, so by guidelines uploading it seperately would be ideal. Best and regards, ///EuroCarGT 02:31, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Supercell Diagram[edit]

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status
Your image, File:Supercell.svg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! Armbrust The Homunculus 06:32, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
Hello, Kelvinsong. Please check your email – you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{YGM}} template.


Hello Kelvinsong!

I saw your amazing work on the diagrams of the structures of planets! congratulations! I would like to ask you if you could translate the Neptune diagram in Portuguese, because I'm working on this article there and it would be of great importance to have an illustration with such great quality.

Another Neptune diagram.svg

here are the translations

  • Netuno
  • todos os components desenhados em escala
  • distância .... raios planetários
  • campo de visão
  • deslocamento em x
  • deslocamento em y
  • magnetic pole = polo magnético
  • rotational pole = polo de rotação
  • upper cloud layer = camada de nuvens superior
  • water-ammonia sea = camada de água e ammonia
  • rocky core = núcleo rochoso
  • Great dark spot = Grande Mancha Escura
  • methane cirrus cloud = nuvem cirro de metano
  • xxxxx ring = anel de xxxxx
  • xxxxx's orbit = órbita de xxxxx
  • Triton=Tritão
  • feature no longer exists= característica não mais existente

Thanks! WOtP (talk) 13:54, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done—but please be more complete in your translations next time! If I didn’t speak some Spanish and French, I would not have been able to use these translations—Love, Kelvinsong talk 22:03, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 12[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Taylor Swift, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Frozen (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:15, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

Regarding 1989 (album)[edit]

Wikipedia conventions seem to be that a song is considered a single only if it is actually announced by the artist or label as an official single.

For example, Venus (Lady Gaga song) was originally scheduled to be the second official single from ARTPOP, with Do What U Want being released before Venus as a promotional single. However, there was a change of plans and the two songs switched places. Therefore, Venus has a promo single infobox and DWUW has a normal single infobox; the album entry only lists Applause, DWUW, and G.U.Y. as singles.

And just because something is listed separately as a single doesn't mean it's a standard single by Wikipedia conventions, and just because something didn't get a single release on iTunes doesn't mean it's not a single. Love Me Harder and One Last Time (Ariana Grande song) are both singles, even though they did not get their own iTunes releases. Hooky-i-vanisher (talk) 21:19, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Well I was going to argue with you, but on closer inspection it turns out Taylor never actually called it a “single”, so ig I stand corrected on that one. :) Which is wierd bc all anyone was talking about on Tuesday was the “Wonderland Single”… —Kelvinsong talk 23:16, 20 February 2015 (UTC)


A gummi bear holding a sign that says "Thank you"
Thank you for using VisualEditor and sharing your ideas with the developers.

Hello, Kelvinsong,

The Editing team is asking for your help with VisualEditor. I am contacting you because you posted to a feedback page for VisualEditor. Please tell them what they need to change to make VisualEditor work well for you. The team has a list of top-priority problems, but they also want to hear about small problems. These problems may make editing less fun, take too much of your time, or be as annoying as a paper cut. The Editing team wants to hear about and try to fix these small things, too. 

You can share your thoughts by clicking this link. You may respond to this quick, simple, anonymous survey in your own language. If you take the survey, then you agree your responses may be used in accordance with these terms. This survey is powered by Qualtrics and their use of your information is governed by their privacy policy.

More information (including a translateable list of the questions) is posted on wiki at mw:VisualEditor/Survey 2015. If you have questions, or prefer to respond on-wiki, then please leave a message on the survey's talk page.

Unsubscribe from this list Sign up for VisualEditor's multilingual newsletterTranslate the user guide

Thank you, Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 15:56, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Cloud and Earth's atmosphere[edit]

I see it's been awhile since we last chatted about a couple of articles we've both worked on. I hope you don't mind me being a bit of a busybody again! I see someone has modified the cloud classification diagram you added to the applicable article to show stratocumulus as a precipitationg cloud. This is not altogether incorrect as Sc does sometimes have the suplementary feature 'praecipitatio', but this feature is also sometimes seen with altostratus and cumulus. All 3 types can therefore be associated with precipitation, but generally only of very light intensity. Nimbostratus and cumulonimbus are the only 2 types on the chart that normally produce precip over a wide area or of more than very light intensity, so these are generally the only 2 that are emphasized as significant precipitating clouds, as reflected by their nimbiform names. I would like to suggest that if Sc is to be depicted on the chart as producing precipitation, the hatching should be more widely spaced to show a lighter intensity, and the As and Cu should be similarly depicted for the sake of consistency. The alternative could be to remove the hatchings from the Sc and leave the As and Cu as they are.

In the case of 'Earth's atmosphere', I've noticed the Aurora seems to be placed mostly in the mesosphere, even when I take into account the 3-dimentional nature of the diagram you added to the article a couple of years ago (a characteristic of the diagram that caused me some confusion at first, as you may recall). According to the article, the auroras occur mostly in the thermosphere, so I'm wondering if you could shift them higher up in the diagram, maybe to just below the internatioinal space station which orbits in that layer. Many thanks! User:ChrisCarss Former24.108.99.31(talk) 11:17, 11 April 2015 UTC

Yes check.svg Done I git rid of the strato raindrops, though as far as I can tell, it has always had the rain, so there must’ve been a good reason for it. && I raised the auroras though I could have sworn I read somewhere that they live just above the meso or else I wouldn’t’ve put them there—Kelvinsong talk 03:21, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

Illustration request please![edit]

I am hoping I can get your assistance with creating an illustration for the article: Thirty Meter Telescope. What is needed is something that illustrates the size difference between the two most recent proposed telescopes; the TMT and the European-Extremely Large Telescope ( and possibly a couple of the existing mirrors like the Keck etc.) to scale with a person or figure for comparison. This was the illustration on the article: File:Comparison optical telescope primary mirrors.svg, but in thumb it is far too complicated for quick understanding. I have a reliable source for all the information for comparisons [1]]. This is a secondary, reliable source. I know you are excellent with these sort of complicated science based illustrations so I feel you are the perfect editor to ask. What do you think? Possible?--Mark Miller (talk) 21:56, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Yes it’s probably possible! Do you want just a mirror comparison or illustrations of the entire telescope? Bc for the latter I’d need schematics of the thing or a .blend 3d model… && somewhat related—well, tbh, I oppose the TMT and signed petitions to stop it && illustrating the structure does feel a bit like endorsing it…—Kelvinsong talk 22:32, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
I honestly believe that the free flow of information and the education of everyone of the facts will help people understand the situation to better understand and that no one will think that you endorse the location, just because you support science. The protest isn't against the science anyway so you should not be feel bad in any way.
What the article needs is something to show how big this mirror and structure will be (18 stories) compared to the existing Keck telescope that is already there and to the E-ELT being built in Chile and the telescope that is just under the size of the Keck. I will leave it entirely to you if you wish to illustrate the mirrors using the existing illustration for scale or something more intricate. I will look to see what schematics are available.--Mark Miller (talk) 11:32, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
I don't know if any of this will help but..[2]--Mark Miller (talk) 11:36, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
And these are all line drawings...[3]].--Mark Miller (talk) 11:40, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
Here's one...[4]].--Mark Miller (talk) 11:44, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
The most helpful of those is probably [6] & [7], which I could use to reconstruct a 3D model assuming the telescope thing is really a circle and not an oval or something. But those images are clearly from existing 3D models the lab coats have in their posession and no sense duplicating work if the model file already exists. Also might need to think about copyright considerations with this—Kelvinsong talk 14:30, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
PS does the giant pupil thing move or something? cause it’s in like a different position in every picture I see—Kelvinsong talk 14:31, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
@Mark Miller: I’m trying to recreate the 3D model but it appears that the TMT website is down at the moment…—Kelvinsong talk 01:05, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
Cool. I believe the CG images of the TMT are pretty much CC3.0attribution. they allow any use, including commercial with proper credit to TMT.ORG, but you have to check whatever images are being used as they state if it has a copyright or name attached to the photo, that is the copyright of the artist of organization. The dome does move sideways and up and down to allow positioning. To close, the opening moves into the enclose to one side. Not sure if that moves separately. I do know the manufacturing company if that helps.--Mark Miller (talk) 01:14, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
@Mark Miller:I wonder if they would be kind enough to offer the original 3D model so I can render my own angle from that? Plus I’m almost certain to get something wrong if I try to duplicate it from a blurry screenshot—Kelvinsong talk 01:26, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
OK, no...they probably wouldn't go for that....but...if you feel a 3D model would be helpful, I know there is a Google Sketch up model out there somewhere. I will endeavor to look harder to find it for you.--Mark Miller (talk) 02:01, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Cell (biology) Images[edit]

Hi, The Cell (biology) page looks as though it's about to go through a bit of an overhaul (discussion). Your organelle images proved very useful to their pages, so some dedicated animal+plant+prokaryote images for this page could be great. Currently the article uses user:LadyofHats images, but these updated versions would still be useful. T.Shafee(Evo﹠Evo)talk 23:33, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

Pluto suggestion[edit]

Current Pluto article cutaway

Another image request from me - There currently exists a cutaway diagram of Pluto (File:Internal_Structure_of_Pluto.jpg) but it could do with updating to bring in line with your other excellent contributions to this diagram type. T.Shafee(Evo﹠Evo)talk 00:25, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

I actually tried to make a pluto image a good while back but nobody knows enough about the planet to make a picture of it. You generally need to have more of the blanks filled in to make a picture than to write an article.—Kelvinsong talk 03:07, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:54, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

  1. ^ "Mitochondrion - much more than an energy converter". British Society for Cell Biology. Retrieved 19 August 2013.