Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Graphic design

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Graphic design (Rated Project-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This page is within the scope of WikiProject Graphic design, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of graphic design-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 Project  This page does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This page has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Speedbird up for deletion[edit]

The Speedbird, created for Imperial Airways, later BOAC and British Airways, was one of the iconic designs of the 1930s. The article is now up for deletion. Please visit Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Speedbird and say what you think. If you can improve the article too, that would be great. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 06:29, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

For those with some knowledge of phylogenetics, and clade presentations[edit]

Could you have a look at this effort, here, to use clade diagrams to summarize pharma business acquisitions. My take at present is that the images created are devoid of standard quantitative meaning that cladograms offer—nothing in this novel application is captured by vertical and horizontal line lengths, as far as I can tell—and so they are a misapplication of this maths/graphic presentation method.

Moreover, I argue that they are misleading (presenting a time axis, but not making spacing of events proportionate to the historical time differences), much harder to maintain (consider adding entries to a std Table versus this graphic), more likely to diminish article quality (in their ambiguity of content, again, over a std Table with clear headings), and therefore practically amenable to decay as a result. I would add to this, in this esteemed graphic design context, that this would make those who trained many of us, and purists in methodology and meaning (and Edward Tufte more generally), turn in their graves/beds. After having a look at the User page and at a couple of pages linked on that sandbox page, leave your opinion here, regarding the overall effort? Thanks for your opinion.

Please, also—re-post in places where the concern is for the stability of information entered into WP? I do not know where best to post it, with regard to the "harder to maintain" aspects of my argument. Cheers. Le Prof Leprof 7272 (talk) 01:37, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

Sorry about the inappropriate posting above. I have opened a discussion in the appropriate forum, here: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Companies#Diagrams, for anyone who is interested Jytdog (talk) 03:27, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
Jytdog moved the question to a new forum, the one where it is least likely to be viewed with rigour/relevant experience, see last comment and link. I reply there. I stand by the fact that a Tufte- or related type of knowledge base is an appropriate venue to call for experts, and so that it was appropriate to call out to you you at this location, to ask your input. All coming from this area, I would appreciate if you state for the record your experiential bases in quantitative graphic representation, or other areas, germane to the question, for sake of transparency, please. Le Prof Leprof 7272 (talk) 15:45, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

RfC[edit]

Discussion at Wikipedia talk: Non-free content#RfC for NFCC#8 exemptions for currency and USPS stamps[edit]

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk: Non-free content#RfC for NFCC#8 exemptions for currency and USPS stamps. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 06:29, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

2016 Community Wishlist Survey Proposal to Revive Popular Pages[edit]

Magic Wand Icon 229981 Color Flipped.svg

Greetings WikiProject Graphic design Members!

This is a one-time-only message to inform you about a technical proposal to revive your Popular Pages list in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey that I think you may be interested in reviewing and perhaps even voting for:

If the above proposal gets in the Top 10 based on the votes, there is a high likelihood of this bot being restored so your project will again see monthly updates of popular pages.

Further, there are over 260 proposals in all to review and vote for, across many aspects of wikis.

Thank you for your consideration. Please note that voting for proposals continues through December 12, 2016.

Best regards, SteviethemanDelivered: 18:00, 7 December 2016 (UTC)