User talk:Fabartus/Archive02

Dates/posts prior to 07:08, 11 July 2006, see User talk:Fabartus/Archive01

Templates and Wikipedia

1. From 11:46, 22 December 2024 (UTC) Navigate to: user talk:fabartus/Templates and Wikipedia
2. Think pushing 'WikiProject until Mid-August will be unwise with Real life demands.
3. Would like to see continuing discussion...
   1. esp. template names,
   2. reports on some trial attempts by others to use the template system, ...
   3. especially someone that can try in another language and test my assertions of cross wiki scope
   4. really esp. template names from some more multilingual individuals!!!
   5. Anyone want to take a stab at formulating so have positional ability per Duesntrieb's comments, that would be a very good thing.

Best regards to all. // FrankB 18:07, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Re: Template:TIME

I can see how you're confused, but {{TIME}} is a speedy delete tag because on en.wp it's a fair use tag. See en:Template:TIME. This is to stop people blindly copying fair use images to Commons. Similarly template:fair use, template:promotional. pfctdayelise (translate?) 01:43, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Main thread: Pfctdayelise:Is talk at cross purposes, (my bad!) // FrankB 14:03, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Re:What to do about

I don't know how many more times I can say this, or how I can make it clearer, but please stop importing stuff wholesale from the English Wikipedia. You are creating needless duplication and confusion.

I don't know why you created Category:United States Navy images because we already have Category:PD US Navy. Did you really think Commons didn't have a single US Navy image yet??

--pfctdayelise (translate?) 05:28, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

• Don't be insulting... There's no reason these shouldn't be classed under something via the US Navy... In this case a reposatory of the same or similar images which need ported onto the commons. That can only be helped if the cat on those is the same.

• I'd think you'd be delighted I found so many images that need brought over. Multiple categories cross indexing of images is the commons stock in trade or you've been wasting your time. Something which cannot be found is useless. For cripes sake, every image photographed in a given year has it's own category if nothing else has been uploaded yet from that year. If this is wrong, kindly point me to the guideline saying it's so. I seem to have missed that. // FrankB 21:18, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

• • If you're using a tool that can only transfer images where the categories have the exact same name, then frankly that tool's not good enough. Go back to the drawing board. It cannot seriously be very hard to have different source and destination categories.
  • Redlinked categories are useless too. Creating categories that are synonyms of existing categories is also a bad idea - files relating to one subject should be able to be found in one category. As I said in email, transfer time is important for a HUMAN to examine the license carefully and make sure it applies. Categorising images by year taken is not really encouraged. Despite several concerns that I have repeatedly raised, you continue to gloss over them. So how should I react when you continue regardless? --pfctdayelise (translate?) 02:42, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

I agree with Pfctdayelise: create new categories only as needed (i.e. if the broader category is too full, or if there is really nothing that matches). Do not import the structure from the english wikipedia: commons has different needs with regards to naming and to granularity. Please help cross-linking categories and pages in a simple, compact and consistent manner for all projects. Please do not try to turn commons into the back yard of the english wikipedia.

You said That can only be helped if the cat on those is the same - this would mean it would be impossible to move images from any non-engish project. It's also completely wrong: cross linking the categories on commons and wikipedia is quite sufficient to establish the connection, for use by humans and scripts.

Please also note the comments I left at User talk:Fabartus/Templates and Wikipedia#More thoughts on this -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 09:51, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Document maps template

Xpost to David Kernow

Dave:
   That is great work! Don't know if the commons has Barnstars, but you certainly earned one on thinking that through!

See {{Nasdbc}} which expands to link Template:Nasdbc, whilst you finish finagling the beast! That's really some table!

Re: Just poking around

ICS is still an experimental system as far as I'm aware. Please don't start implementing it on a widespread scale! pfctdayelise (translate?) 14:43, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Please link images

I saw you've uploaded three pictures, two of them aren't linked everywhere... Yuval Y • Chat • 09:50, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Re: Image renaming

This is not possible. The image must be reuploaded with the correct name, and the old one marked {{badname|correct name}}. This is also a FAQ. pfctdayelise (说什么?) 00:17, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Ans on Pfctdayelise

How could I suggest what to read when I don't know what you're interested in? If I was you I would keep {{Welcome}} up, though. --pfctdayelise (说什么?) 00:36, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Point--LOL. Has it changed? I can access in archive01, but that of course was subst'd. I do need to spend some housekeeping time and refresh my knowledge of what is where, what has changed, etc. (such as the new ability to see what links on en.wp--Yeah!) I'll have to stomp on Jimbo's toes again about the image handling. Be well. // FrankB 01:00, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Template:PD-Old-70

Image deletion warning

Template:PD-Old-70 has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this image, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. If the file is up for deletion because it has been superseded by a superior derivative of your work, consider the notion that although the file may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new file. In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

GeorgHH 18:53, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

NPOV templates

Many of the templates you have made are not NPOV, they are English Wikipedia POV. Some examples of the POV are:

• interwiki links to English Wikipedia get boxes on category pages while other languages only have ordinary interlanguage links
• main articles are always on English Wikipedia, never on other Wikipedias
• interwiki-tmp templates only link to English sisterprojects

I suggest you stop using those templates. If you need to link to English Wikipedia you can use ordinary interlanguge links ([[en:Category:xxx]] or [[:en:page]]) when linking to en.wp. /81.229.40.207 18:44, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

---

Answer (xpost on 81.229.40.207

Actually, the normal interlanguage links will become rather fundamental to the system proposed that these templates serve as trigger for auto-linking. Specifically:

1. English is used because all sister project types and all sister wiki's use it for linking information,
   1. just as all items here on the commons are required to have annotations in English
   2. and the categories and articles are in English
   3. and ... the interwiki language links are tied to English in the categories here
   4. and ... the interwiki language links are tied to English in the categories on en.wikipedia, which catches some ommisions on one or the other, and overlaps on those with differing category names,
   5. AS ARE the interwiki language links from all languages are tied to English on Wikipedia ON ARTICLES.

Now image you are a program given access to an auxillary data base with all those interwiki links and the datum that the users prefered language is Swedish. Given the template you are complaining about, do you imagine it would be difficult or hard to have that computer take those common links supervised by careful hand editing to point to the correct key links, for the users language of choice. In short, the template will in effect, allow an auto-translation AND LINK to the appropriate page that has been identified as being that language's equivalent to the English Key Word. In computer terms, the English term becomes a pointer to the correct language.

Since the servers processor does thousands of such substitutions in the course of parsing each and every page far faster than we can blink an eye, I don't think it would be hard at all... given the proposed system software changes. If you want to use something difficult and unweildy, try applying this. Hint, it's several pieces, see the similar names in Category:Interwiki utility templates. See some of the few places it's been used, like Category:CommonsRoot or Category:Music on either English sister project.

Now do you really want to complain about the narrow scope of a project which will make those links automatically for anyone viewing the page in their chosen language of the day? Not so narrow is it. Nor so POV, which doesn't translate well in such matters as this. Look up biased, Anglo-centric , and prejudiced as alternatives.

Oh, and the -tmp templates are similarly designed. They need interwiki translations and installation and adaptation to other languages, but the software should work without alteration. As the English projects are in my language, I really had no interest in doing more than providing for that equivilent functionality. I presume any language group which wants to use them understands they can copy them and adapt them to their own language. Someone has to write the first one of anything, and the {{interwikitmp-grp}} tagging has no relation to anything but tools port and adapted to be used on a given language or project. I'm perfectly willing to admit I'm incompetent and should avoid working on every language but English, and some would argue my competence there. If I started porting things to Fr or De or whatever, that would be a real disaster.

Be well. Keep the blood pressure down. // FrankB 18:57, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, that's no answer!

re: Harumph!. I did ask a question in response to your summary. Is there a reason to alter (some would say vandalize) a corporate record over a issue which you raised in the first place? Best regards // FrankB 07:48, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your messages. There is no problems and I agree with you it's why I did not make an answer. Best regards. --Patricia.fidi 09:13, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Okay, can't argue with 'effectively convincing you' against your own summary! Otoh, would be nice to know why you made the summary in the first place. If only so I can figure out what happened, or be on guard and alerted to 'a body of thought', which I've seen some indications may exist out there.

Just as one illustration on how such can take 'imaginative flight', beyond a comment, once someone expressed an concern on a community forum that templates using logic (Parserfunctions-- see Category:Templates using ParserFunctions) 'might' cause undue server loading... which techies in the know more or less dismissed as a concern. Template:I5However, that chance comment led to untold manhours where others began tagging all such templates with a special category... just in case the bogey man came to visit the server loads... which was not really a 'real big' concern of the programmers. Sigh. I would place worries about the new fashionable 'Svg' files in a similar 'fashion' category—why just yesterday (or so it was announced) that 'Jpgs' were the ultimate and replace all the old graphics like Bmp, Gif, etcera (yawn). <g>

Such 'questionable' tagging still goes on, and is effectively tradition, though in that specific case there is an offsetting 'god' effect in that it collects esoteric templates together, and sometimes leads to better (simpler and/or more robust) versions being developed.

Hence, I was concerned that such a rumor may have been at the root here. Which was my focus. I'm sure you can see that sort of thing wastes volunteers time, if some such 'fashion' is in vouge, which is why I was wondering why you made the comment. Thanks for the quick answer now. // FrankB 19:37, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

"Old maps of the history of" categories, etc.

Hi Frank, Thanks for spotting the below and the Wikipedia note:

re: These redlinks from Naming scheme, right or wrong?

• Image:Austrasie752.jpg will need same identical categories top to bottom, which should finish cleaning out States of Germany.
• Which brings up the point of how does your municipal research tie into this category name, which has far more utility on en.wikipedia vice here... or so it seems.

I'd say "Old maps showing the history of X" categories (maybe "Old maps of the history of"...?) can exist, but recognize they could be confused for "Old maps of X". So, I'm not sure whether making the distinction might be more trouble than it's worth... (Is that what you're suggesting in your third point re utility...?)

I also recognize I need to set up something of a sabbatical from Wikipedia, i.e. engineer stepping back from various (mostly template-related) work there, in order to return here and at least note the rationale that was developed for the map categories. User:Astrokey44, for example, appears to've been devoting some time to the maps here – which is great – but I think s/he may've been seduced by that ambiguous word "historical". If so, there's an instance of where some folks' previous experience (i.e. ours) distilled on a page may've been useful. If I haven't started something here after a few days, please prod me again (without fear!).

Thanks also for your pointer re User:Mac (on Wikipedia). As I think you'd agree, I reckon it's probably best if s/he try contacting me, if/when s/he wishes; s/he hasn't done so yet.

All the best, David (talk) 05:26, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Acknowledged by email

with follow on query. //FrankB 16:56, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Don't know how I missed that one

Hi Frank. You write to me: "Is this what you were trying here? The name, being an abbreviation, needs adjusted. They all do.

The 'a' on the commonscat#Ra versions is the same as 'M' on WikiPcat1M and WikiPcatM... both mean Main Article link. I'm still waiting to here from the programmers whether they will adapt the system with an interwiki translation on the fly, so to speak, and have been off in Real Life, so evolution has lagged. If you have any questions, feel free to ask. // FrankB 12:13, 20 January 2007 (UTC)"

Thanks for the help me and your information. Bye Stepa 17:48, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Re ...I see you did Neustrie752

Hi Frank,

I see you did Neustrie752...

Yes; at least I think so, hope so... I didn't create the redlink categories as I'm still not sure about this "Old maps of" vs. "Old maps of the history of" business... although, having just typed these names again, perhaps the distinction should be made. Maintaining the distinction, however, as/when folk add or move maps...

Re the rest, I too finally seem to be tiring, so will also try the pillow again and catch up sometime tomorrow. I agree that Category talk:Maps seems the appropriate place for "washing the linen". Thanks, David (talk) 06:25, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Since I get email notifications here, just keep the answers in the thread. Easier on both of us... and clearer. And don't have to worry about two emails. Well, there is tomarrow, and tomarrow and the day after to thrash the details out. You got started on a write up, so now to go forth and slay the beast... then the fun can begin! Best! (I'm about to close my interleaved answers on my talk to your last queries there!) // FrankB 06:36, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Re ...Personally

Hi Frank – good morning!
In case you're wondering, yes, I'm not ignoring your recent messages but restarting the category scheme as part of my response. By following the pattern of the others, I hope it'll be less wordy (i.e. quicker/easier to use).

...I thimk you should make this with the same foreground color as the background...

At present the whole table is background:transparent, but your comment makes me wonder if different (light) background colors for the breakdown on the left and notes on the right might be a good idea...?  Yours, David (talk) 12:48, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Re ...Can't believe this

Hi Frank,
Am trying to work through your various posts:

Hey, see this category...

Now awaiting rename to Old maps of New York City.

Most of the Category:New York Central Railroad sub-cat is NOT maps material, whereas the other IS mostly maps. So need to park that elsewhere...

Have just finished some sorting etc within that category. One or two subcategories now awaiting rename to reflect their contents (e.g. adding "Maps of" to a name, etc).

so I raise this question: What's a url to google-search the commons site for both category and say railways, rail transport, or railroads (The later being common only in the USA's English.)

   [I suck at searching, and everything I try using 'site:' seems to find pre-cached photo's on google, not commons pages.]]Template:I5this bookmark finds WP:AN/I archives.Template:I5this fails in intent. I don't try anything this fancy with Google, although if wanted/needed to do something along these lines, I guess I'd try to find that "use Google to search [Wikipedia/Commons/etc]" page that's displayed whenever Wikipedia/Commons/etc's own search facility is offline. Yours, David (talk) 19:06, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Scheme proposal now at Category talk:Maps, Template:Cat see also

Hi again Frank,
Trying as ever to keep in touch with the various threads:

1. The maps scheme proposal is now here and I've mentioned it to User:Electionworld.
2. Above you said something that made me think you weren't taking the power of {{cat see also}} into account...
   This looks intriguing and hopefully very useful; my second thought was to consider how its output might be made less dense, e.g. for that sizeable example you provided on my talkpage. Maybe if the categories were · spaced · apart · a little · like · this – or perhaps tabulated in some (simple) way...?

Yours, David (talk) 22:05, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Re ...Looking over your shoulder II

Hi Frank,

...I really need you to weigh in on VfD's: for W2 and W2C (here). They're great time savers cause I can search and replace... Just go to WP TFd, I said it already there. Also laid down a link to the one here for W2C...

Have responded here (on your Wikipedia talkpage); meanwhile, I don't see {{W2c}} being challenged here (i.e. the Commons version)...?

If I saved it, (!) that is, I made some comments in the maps talk. // FrankB 14:47, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

I don't think so, unfortunately – unless my cache needs purging or the like...  Hope all well, David (talk) 18:19, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

clarifications

Some of this cross posting may be adding to confusion. Answered something on my talk on this, and pinged you. I'm just going to ping you here on the below.

No--still back in a unbacked through browser window. (Maybe), the subsequent post should be there after your now moved table. I'm very overloaded. Innaugerating a quick and dirty W:Wikipedia:WikiProject template sharing today, and have other priority discussions to get through and company coming for the Superbowl! Yikes... I'm supposed to mop some floors starting five minutes back! Another broken promise to wifee! // FrankB 21:05, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Long category lists?

I saw that you added many links to sub- and supercategories to Category:Regions of Africa [1]. You are probably trying to make navigation easier between the categories. But I think that the long lists are more confusing than helpful for that. If you want to help navigation, you need to be more selective about the links. If someone searches for Wikipedia articles, he can follow one of the language links to a Wikipedia and navigate the category tree there. And on Commons it is possible to navigate the category structure by using the existing links to the parent and child categories. In some cases extra navigation links can be useful, but if you include to many links it will be hard to read the category page (especially when similar links are added for other Wikipedias). /81.229.40.45 17:55, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Category:17th century

Dear sir, It is my impresion that something went wrong during your last edit of the page Category:17th century, [2]. I presume you didn't do this on purpose. For the present time I lack the ability to correct your error. Perhaps you can restore the original page, please? Thanking you in advance, Sincerely, S.Kroeze 01:08, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks! Good catch... the problem was not in that page, but in that I'd changed a template Template:Cms (Edit Discussion links Page history) per prior planning a couple of days ago, and hadn't cleared all uses of it by replacing it with it's replacement (cms ---> CMS). That caused some unbalanced parenthesis in the code... and a ripple effect breaking other things on the page you spotted. Only happened one other page, to a much more minor extent, but I'm glad you spotted that! // FrankB 06:50, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Russian maps - Novogrod and Nizhny Novgorod

Sorry I'm replying a bit late - been busy here and in Meatspace. My Russian geography is not as good as it used to be. I think another user who knows the area more could help you more than I could - sorry. Thanks for the compliments on my maps! Hoshie 13:35, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Not to worry ... I've been semi-inactive myself the past three weeks, so what little time I had didn't have this on my radar! Appreciate the answer. If you can tell me where you get blanks, I'd appreciate it. I've got some graphics capable packages, and am getting an itch to do something to show rivers in geo-political regions. Thanks // FrankB 20:38, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Edit summaries

If I make a tiny change where making an edit summary would take as long or longer than the actual edit did then it seems ludicrous to me to include an edit summary. Besides, you would've checked those edits anyway even if you had seen the diffs because then you would've known straight away that you disagree. I removed categories from templates because: 1. There's no point in having templates in uncreated categories. 2. Many many times people copy over templates from en and forget to remove the en categories.

If you wanna create the categories you're more than welcome but do so when you add them to the template so people don't view the template and see a red category - if you don't people can't find the template anyway. I dunno exactly what your project encompasses but I'm not really interested in it enough to go around different projects editing templates. It'd also be helpful if you could provide diffs so I know what exactly you're talking about... Yonatan ^talk 19:36, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

You can translate anything I say in any way you want but that doesn't make it true. I want to contribute as much as I possibly can and if an edit summary hinders the contributions - I won't use it. True, I maybe could've used -cat (and I usually do) except I didn't see the need to *in this particular case* since it seemed fairly obvious to me that the category was accidentally copied over and needed to be removed. The Wikimedia Commons *is NOT* the English Wikipedia, nor is it an English project - it is a multilingual project. Copying over more and more templates and categories that aren't necessarily needed on commons bureaucrifies commons and is simply not needed. If the English Wikipedia has x templates, they need y categories and if we have u templates, we don't need that same "b" amount of categories. I am more than happy to discuss the changes I make with you however if you had simply created the category when you copied the template over I never would've removed it from the template. Also, please note that you would've viewed my changes either way so lack of an edit summary is not an issue in this case - it's something separate that you're pissed off about but it isn't relevant here. Yonatan ^talk 20:11, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

How do you misconstrue me as being pissed? I made a simple request. Have attempted to point out that what you did is disrespectful of others time, and think frankly, we've both spent enough time on this. We obviously disagree and will have to let it go at that. I hope you'll forgive me for thinking it an immature and irresponsible attitude, no matter how you self-rationalize it. I'm rather consistent on how people affect other people's time, no matter which of the eleven sister's I happen to be working on at the moment.

As to the cats and languages, I only patrol English, but you need to take into account that nearly every foundation wiki irregardless of language ties into the English projects, and TSP is a meta project, not just wikipedia. The category is one for collecting sub-templates used within others which is a good division... those writing new templates can perhaps reuse something already in place, and those looking for a template don't have to wade through sub-template names which won't act as a standalone tool. The folks at wikipedia just happen to have the largest tool template library which means that now and again one is copied to other sisters, and how they categorize things impacts other projects at times. Be well. // FrankB 20:32, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

As said previously, I usually use edit summaries when I deem it useful. In this case, the whole problem would never have been created if you had simply created the category before hand... I am glad that I misconstrued you because that means you aren't pissed but saying I'm discourteous and immature didn't really make me think that you aren't pissed (I hope you can understand why). Yonatan ^talk 20:42, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

• Now --again, and still-- you are rationalizing like one of my teens, trying to turn the point off topic. The blame game is very immature. Of course, if I'd had the time to initialize it back then and when, it's patently obvious that you wouldn't have been offended by a redlink. So why state the obvious? I didn't gripe about the edits, but the edit summary's as I had the same problem with other edits you made on pages with similar lack of comments, so made the suggestion that such is not behavior one expects on a wiki, any wiki. If you pulled that on WP you'd have ten people joining my request that you make edit summaries in short order. It's that simple--it's unprofessionally unacceptable behavior to expect others to look unecessarily at your edits, as there are hundreds editing a page, and dozens of admins at any given moment looking at recent page changes who would be all over you, in far less polite ways. And don't be disingenous either... Cutting out the category with a control-X and pasting it following a minus sign as the edit summary is hardly a big time sink, and lets all concerned know exactly what you changed. "-cat" is frankly not enough either, and your summaries need be couched to convey more information.

In any event. Drop it... but don't edit on en.wp, or be prepared to catch a lot of grief. Cheers! // FrankB 21:00, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm actually a frequent editor on en and have used -cat and +cat frequently and have had no problems (not even a friendly suggestion to use more descriptive edit summaries). We're obviously not going to agree on this, you're right but I just wanted to remind you to create the category... Yonatan ^talk 00:25, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Unfortunately we don't but I might try creating a new modified version that should be used for the other namespaces (or if you wanna port something over from en and commonize it). Yonatan ^talk 00:58, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

• I think it a good idea, but really don't have a good enough handle on the local politics here to push for it, and am really really really not interested in plumbing those depths right now. I know enough that it ought to be a VP item if there isn't already a patrol in place on such a category page. From what I can see, even the deletion discussions here of non-images take forever and a day... not enough of a work force I suspect. If you or another admin were to do that, I'd be glad to support it. Thanks // FrankB 01:11, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Interwiki's edit

What generated the motivation for this series of interwiki spacing changes? Some sister's display the interwiki's underneath, and they clump up in an ugly way, so the added spacing helps those display better, so if there's a reason to not follow that practice, I need to know since I try as a rule to make text identical between sisters. This will make for differences in Meta, Wikiversity and wikispecies, iirc. Thanks // FrankB 03:41, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

I added the en interwiki and didn't see why that code was there so I removed it as it's obviously not needed on commons. I also don't see the need for them to be completely identical across projects (and they obviously won't be since commons will have the en interwiki and the others won't). Yonatan ^talk 07:46, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

You're assuming excess equates to bad. There is no harm to having an en interwiki on any of the English sites-- it merely restates the obvious--which brings up the question as to why you added it at all, but <chuckle> I really don't need to know that! <g> I'd sure as hell never see it, looking at that bar is not something I'm likely to do.

However, the whole concept of the template sharing project is to uniformatize things and eliminate the need for changes, including by making any links portable so one can cut an paste the whole page site to site if a change is needed. And, at the same time, provide common tools so we can all be productive in off-home wiki editing, part of that toolkit is good documentation and consistent categorization so people can locate what they need. Some templates are the same but have a different name, so {{Interwikitmp-grp}} was designed to handle those, as well as bypass one's deleted, or name collisions with another template of the same name, etc. The English interwiki in light of that functionality is rather narrow in scope. // FrankB 08:24, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

IE6 and SVG

Hi there, Frank! I´d like just to observe that not always IE6 has problems with SVG extension, and in many cases the file may be corrected in order to be well viewable by IE6 users. It is a matter to firstly test the file in different browser and make the needed adjustments. Cheers. --Tonyjeff 17:36, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks, but that's irrelevant to the time cost of the moment, not to mention the reliability worries when coming across a problem as an article editor. It's hard enough to get text straight and position HTML elements properly so as to minimize whitespace useage without taking a distractive side trip to fix up an image with a problem. That circumstance simply means I found an image or resized one that that cost me extra time when I have little enough to volunteer as is; so such jarred my elbow whilst I'm likely editing in three or four related articles, and does little to ease the peace of mind as to what the customers may see.
  
  I keep my browsers free of extensions and scripts and such and use the default skin specifically so I can see what the customers see as a rendered page, and this is worrisome to me with my eye on the big picture. An isolated occurrence is NBD, but the half-dozen or more I've seen raise sincere concerns that we need to make progress more deliberately more slowly.
  
  My harsh rehetoric was purposeful to make that issue clear! However your assurance does suggest there ought to be a tag for such problems so some body of people who do have an interest in editing images can address such fixups. Maybe I should propose THAT here and on WP:VPT!) Cheers and thanks! // FrankB 18:35, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

For sure! Here we are all friends, working together to build a kind of utopia. If you need help regarding a SVG with problems, please tell me. I always spend a plenty of time testing the SVGs I create for flags and COAs. Anyway, the important is to discuss and expose our opinions. Best regards! --Tonyjeff 21:50, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Please see my talkpage. Yug (talk) 19:40, 7 May 2007 (UTC) (Summary :no such project existing + Maps lab no yet open => impossible to help you)

First thing, please use calm and standard english. Sadly, when english user become more "friendly" with me, then start to talk faster (english "slang", with letter disappearing, etc.) and I start have difficulties to understand.

Second better thing, What you look for is probably the french fr:Wikipédia:Atelier graphique/Cartes (Graphic Lab/Maps), the only general one working by a full team.

An other is the Indian mapping project, lead by Planemad on wiki-en, really good, but only on India.

I know no one about european history.

Yug (talk) 20:26, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

This may also help your project :

• Cartes historiques de tout le Template:XIXe
• Carte d'Europe en 1815
• Carte d'Europe en 1839
• Carte d'Europe en 1871
• Carte de l'unité italienne
• Carte du monde en 1914 : l'apogée de l'Europe

(found on wikipedia, of course)Yug (talk) 15:14, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

• Many Thanks! // FrankB 15:28, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Frank, about the request you made, I'm sorry for the late answer, and much more for could not be able to get what is going on with the SVG picture. It seems that SVG files get a wee bit tricky when used in tables and thumbs. Anyway, I found a solution to, at least, make the picture viewable, as you may see here. Surely, we are obligated to adjust some layouts to SVG extension, what does not invalidate its use. See ye. --Tonyjeff 17:31, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Please pay attention to …

… Commons:Deletion_requests/2007/01#Template:Wikipedia. I’m going to delete these templates. --Polarlys 16:10, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Map of the Thüringer Wald

I´ll try to do it like that, but it won´t be easy ;)

Hi Fabartus! You´ve asked me because of the map. I´ll do it! :) (Sorry, I'm not often here at the Wikimedia Commons.)
--Omnidom 999 ⁿسالكانⁿ 14:50, 12 September 2007

• Thanks... I've been 'off for the summer' myself, so NBD on the delay. Thanks for Image:Harz_map.png, that's a really good start (and will be a big help!)

• My interest in the drainage basin is focused more northerly and east however and is also renewed by the way. (The Hartz map will help with 1632 series which has two new novels to write up properly and the region is integral to the series geopolitics, so this map is great for some of that. Also can be used in articles about all the related pricedoms, duchys, et al which I also work on here and there. So I'm very happy with it! I've put it right into Harz Mountains)
  
  However, the 'drainage basin map' request was somewhat differently focused in a large sense... the Elbe has a tributary which drains the northfaces of the thuringerwald, but the drainage basin map I seek in general should be of great use explaining how the place name Saxony (See that maps dark green territories) has moved upriver over the years from the northwest corner of Old Saxony to the eventual Kingdom of Saxony/Duchy of Saxony and todays derivations such as Lower saxony / Saxony-Anhalt / State of Saxony, which is, iirc, the reason I asked for it, and can use it immediately. In short, I'm hoping explaining some of that history will be easier with a good map as helper. (My mention of relief features and the Harz was perhaps, unfortunate!)
  
  In brief: what was called "Saxony" has migrated over a thousand years, both eastward and southwards, so illustrating that by mapping the Elbe drainage should be useful in making historic relations like that clearer to some degree at least. Sorry my initial request was so unclear. Still interested? With the high usage of 'Saxony' (and derivations like 'Saxe') this can be used in a lot of articles, I would guess. After the basin map is 'put up' in sufficiently high resolution, it can be overlaid or excerpted to focus on the historical region of interest in the given time period. // FrankB 14:17, 4 October 2007 (UTC) (xpost versions synched: // FrankB 04:50, 5 October 2007 (UTC))

Replied. Thanks for noticing..--OsamaK 06:50, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Template:Wikipediacat

Image deletion warning

Template:Wikipediacat has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this image, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Richard001 08:34, 29 April 2008 (UTC)