Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 19:38, 23 March 2014

Archives

01Template:·w02Template:·w03Template:·w04Template:·w05Template:·w06Template:·w07Template:·w08Template:·w09Template:·w10Template:·w11Template:·w12Template:·w13Template:·w14Template:·w15Template:·w16Template:·w17Template:·w18Template:·w19Template:·w20Template:·w21Template:·w22Template:·w23Template:·w24Template:·w25Template:·w26Template:·w27Template:·w28Template:·w29Template:·w30Template:·w31Template:·w32Template:·w33Template:·w34Template:·w35Template:·w36Template:·w37Template:·w38Template:·w39Template:·w40Template:·w41Template:·w42Template:·w43Template:·w44Template:·w45Template:·w46Template:·w47Template:·w48Template:·w49Template:·w50

This page has archives. Sections older than 4 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present.

For me.

Welcome

Welcome to Misplaced Pages, the greatest encyclopedia on Earth! You seem to be off to a good start. Hopefully you will soon join the vast army of Wikipediholics! / You may wish to review the welcome page, tutorial, and stylebook, as well as the avoiding common mistakes and Misplaced Pages is not pages.

Here are some helpful links:

• Misplaced Pages:Merge, for information about merging, renaming and moving pages.
• Misplaced Pages directory is also quite useful.
• Meet other new users You may want to add yourself to the Misplaced Pages new user log.
• Assign edits to your username from before you registered.
• Be Bold!
• Don't let grumpy users scare you off.
• Play nice with others
• Contribute, Contribute, Contribute!
• Tell us about you
• How to upload files and image copyright tags.

By the way, an important tip: To sign comments on talk pages, simply type four tildes, like this: ~~~~. This will automatically add your name and the time after your comments.

∞Who?¿? 08:40, 29 July 2005 (UTC)

DYK for Big Fish, Little Fish (play)

On 19 March 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Big Fish, Little Fish (play), which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that Hugh Wheeler's Big Fish, Little Fish (1961) was one of the first Broadway plays to explore the theme of homosexuality in a sensitive and honest way? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Big Fish, Little Fish (play). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 08:02, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Featured picture candidates/Coronation of the Virgin (Velázquez)

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Diego Velázquez 012.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Misplaced Pages:Featured picture candidates. Armbrust 08:14, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

It would seem you lack Google fu

3000x4000 > 1200x1600. Your move ;) Adam Cuerden 09:46, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

• Dating to (note the "was at the time")? This is a very detailed scan... shame I suck at straightening lines like that. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:53, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
  • You know I show my restorations to my mother, right? Oh, god... ;) Adam Cuerden 12:21, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
    • I generally post my new FPs / FAs on Facebook. Since I'm a teacher IRL (among other things), I have avoided posting anything like this. (Perhaps this needs an encrypted ZIP folder?) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:25, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
      • Heh. We laughed about the Kipling butts. I suspect this might be a bit much, though. Heh. Maybe it's time to break Shoemaker's Holiday back out for a one-off return. Adam Cuerden 12:30, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
      • There's a reason this is at WP:POTD/Unused, I must say. I mean, the nude autochrome got some protests... this would certainly raise eyebrows. Shoemaker's Holiday? Like, a 425-year-old stage play? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:39, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

Crisco

Crisco, tell me, what does this means: **As a general rule, images should not be set to a larger fixed size than the 220px default (users can adjust this in their preferences). If an exception to the general rule is warranted, forcing an image size to be either larger or smaller than the 220px default is done by placing a parameter in the image coding.**. I want that exception. I want images that are an exception to the general rule, I wan't them big. I wan't them to show up like 280px and I want that it should work for everybody - well if it is possible. I experience preference and image chaos, se talk page Tadao Ando. Also if this is possible, will you make a comentary on talk page, please. Bless, Hafspajen (talk) 11:09, 19 March 2014 (UTC).

• You already know how to make the exception... and it forces the size for everyone. Now, getting people to accept this is a different story altogether, and you can't really force acceptance. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:07, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

.No, I really don't undrstan what's happening. At a time I belived that using upright will be good for everyone. I do not understand this.

• First, there is the 280px. This looks like it is not alowing those preferences whatever that is. ( I guess people go in to their so called preferences in their OWN computer and make their OWN images look differen from the ones the standard image would be, but this is something I don't know about, and I guess quite a lot of editord don't - but I am only guessing)

• Second, I thought if I do the upprighr=1.35 that will make those people whith the mystical preferces happy, and will show up like big on standard.
• Third - there is this wide range of screens nowadays, on top of everything.

All these are only my guessings, because I used the same kind of computer since like 2000. I tried to discuss these thing here and there but I still don't get it . Hafspajen (talk) 13:52, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

• Have you ever tried accessing Misplaced Pages on a mobile phone? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:54, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

• No. I don't have any ... I digged down my last into a flowerbed. Well, accidentally. So, I said better without. While I do things I do, I wan't to feel free. Like in old times. Hafspajen (talk) 14:10, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

• Ah. Give it a shot. Or try adjusting the size of your window. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:19, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

DYK

Hi Crisco, I think I may be about to add to your woes - so apologies in advance! Hafspajen needs to have the DYK check tool added so he can use it for reviews; the link you gave on my talk page looks as if it has some added bells and whistles that perhaps he might not need? Would you be able to give him easy instructions (while he's here on your page anyway) to install the very basic DYK checker - or would you rather I drag him kicking and screaming back to my page? SagaciousPhil - Chat 14:12, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

• What bells and whistles would he not need? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:19, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

Whoops - sorry, after I'd pressed "save" I managed to work out that the link was showing the whole coding rather than the simple quick installation script. Do you want to guide him through which of his pages to add it to? SagaciousPhil - Chat 14:26, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

Okay. Hafs, you need to copy the line importScript('User:Shubinator/DYKcheck.js'); to User:Hafspajen/vector.js, then save. Purge the page, and it's installed. It will show up in the bar at the left-hand side. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:28, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

• OK, Haffy (talk) 14:10, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

I am an artist, forChristsake, not a programer- what have I done NOW wrong? https://en.wikipedia.org/User:Hafspajen/vector.js Hafspajen (talk) 14:37, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

• You had to copy the whole line, not just the bit in the parentheses. I've fixed it. Try purging your cache (CTRL + F5 in Firefox). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:39, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

Did that. Hafspajen (talk) 14:55, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

• Do you see the tool? It should show up as "DYK check" in the sidebar. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:59, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

You mean in between the What links here; related changes, Logs, ... or above between Wikilove, sandbox, twinkle and so on? Hafspajen (talk) 15:06, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

• After "What links here", in the "Tools" section. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:08, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

Yes it is here, but why is all the rest here? talk pages and stuff? like User talk:Angusmclellan , I am not even watching his page. Don't even remember talking to him. https://en.wikipedia.org/Special:WhatLinksHere/User_talk:Hafspajen Hafspajen (talk) 15:11, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

• Huh, what? No, the tool is not through the "What links here" link. The link is called "DYK check" and should be immediately after "Cite this page" in your sidebar. ("What links here" shows pages that link to the page where you clicked on the link, so this is picking up all the times you've signed your name). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:14, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

• Re: Angus: It's picking up your comment "You may wish to expand wally dogs or 'Wally dugs' or Staffordshire dog figurines. New article. Hafspajen (talk) 6:23 pm, 31 May 2013, Friday (9 months, 19 days ago) (UTC+7)" — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:14, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

Did that, but am I going to be linked toghether with him forewer? And if so, where are the pages I use most like Phils, Drmies and yours , for example? WHY IS those pages linked? How did I managed to get linked to them. I don't wan't to be linked to those pages. Hafspajen (talk) 15:20, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

• It is just showing that there is a wikilink from that page to your user page. The list is organized alphabetically (A, B, C, D, E and so on) so Drmies and myself are much further down the list. It's not really something to be worried about; I've probably got tens of thousands of backlinks. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:25, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

Who linked those. It was not me. Wan't to delink. Hafspajen (talk) 15:27, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

• It's linked automatically every time you sign. The only way to delink would be to go through those... hundreds... of pages... manually, to remove your signature. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:28, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

Back to images

OH; no. that I don't care. Crisco, can you tell me how is possible to make a page layout that satisfying everyone+ WHAT IFsome pics are really no good at thumb. Obviously gives some guys the creeps, if they are 280px. Looks like the same for upright =1.35. For me it sounds like a labyrint all this preferences and sizes. there is the 280px. This looks like it is not alowing those preferences whatever that is. ( I guess people go in to their so called preferences in their OWN computer and make their OWN images look differen from the ones the standard image would be, but this is something I don't know about, and I guess quite a lot of editord don't - but I am only guessing) , as I said.

• Second, I thought if I do the upprighr=1.35 that will make those people whith the mystical preferces happy, and will show up like big on standard.
• Third - there is this wide range of screens nowadays, on top of everything.

SOLUTION=Nobody is happy. Hafspajen (talk) 15:35, 19 March 2014 (UTC) Hafspajen (talk) 15:33, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

• • The problem is there is no way to make everyone happy. If you force all images to be bigger (say, upright=1.35) then people on smaller displays will have issues. If you keep images the default size, then people on larger displays will have issues. If you force them smaller, then everyone except cell phone users will have issues. If you remove images, everyone will have issues. To see why forcing images to be larger is an issue, try adjusting the size of your browser window; see how the images don't resize, and take up an increasing amount of room? Anyways, I am off to bed (gotta go to campus somewhat early tomorrow). Sorry I can't help more with this. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:38, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

• Looks like somebody (programer) made a bad job here. Hafspajen (talk) 15:50, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

• Sorry, just butting in here, but I don't think it's a programming issue. It's a layout issue. One way to tackle it could be to resize the images 'on the fly' using Javascript or something but this wouldn't necessarily work well either. The bottom line is, Misplaced Pages is (potentially) viewed on so many different types of displays with so many different aspect ratios that it will never really be completely solved. I think 250-300px wide is a good size for most desktop (non-mobile) displays, personally, but I'm quite image-centric. Others seem to think less than 200px is ideal. Pff to them. :-) Ðiliff «» (Talk) 16:17, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

Quite so, I think also a 250-300px wide is a good size, personally, because I'm quite image-centric too. Question is to use 300px or to use the new upright= 1.35. Does it make several or more people happy using upright= 1.35? I met a lot of people just go and stripp all the layout and replace everyting with plain upright - and everything looks just weird, really. And if I put back what it was before they tell me I am forcing them to experience ... something that gives them the creeps. So I thought, maybe upright 0.1 or upright= 1.35 makes them happier? But I cant't check. Hafspajen (talk) 17:12, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

• I personally don't mind larger images, but (as Diliff mentions above) there are so many people reading, using so many different kinds of displays, that there are bound to be people who disagree with an image's size. You can't please everybody, especially on Misplaced Pages. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:07, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

• The person arguing against bigger size said: but don't you think we should try to choose the option that inconveniences the least number of readers? And do you think forcing everyone to view one particular editor's preferred size rather than leaving it up to individual preference really is the option that inconveniences the least number of people? My question is = do we know that standard screen are in minority? Hafspajen (talk) 11:36, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

• Right now the safest bet would be to try to discuss at MOS:IMAGES and put forth your arguments regarding why higher resolution images should be used. Unilaterally changing the MOS will not work; it needs to be based in consensus. That will take a long time, and may not even be successful, but it's essentially the only way to avoid arguing at every article where you change the image size. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:10, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

• Image use policy say: Sometimes a picture may benefit from a size other than the default; see the Manual of Style for guidance.

• Manual of style: **As a general rule, images should not be set to a larger fixed size than the 220px default (users can adjust this in their preferences). 'If an exception to the general rule is warranted', forcing an image size to be either larger or smaller than the 220px default is done by placing a parameter in the image coding.

• The exception from the general rule is most art and art related articles that they do fall into this cathegory, and they are this exception to the general rule .

• See here art and art related articles, and architecture articles. These articles do use images larger than thumb. Michelangelo, Ancient Greek architecture, Anglo-Saxon art, La maja desnuda, Stained glass, Sandro Botticelli, Yixian glazed pottery luohans, Wells Cathedral, Romanticism, History painting, Romanesque architecture, Ambrosius Benson, Portrait of Francesco d'Este, Andrea Mantegna, Crucifix (Cimabue, Santa Croce), Danaë (Titian series), Cambrai Madonna, The Werl Triptych, Portrait of a Young Girl (Christus, Berlin), Léal Souvenir, Braque Triptych, Death of the Virgin (van der Goes), Miraflores Altarpiece, Madonna of the Dry Tree

• See here also featured articles - art and art related articles, and architecture articles do use images larger than thumb; as exception to the general rule : Early Netherlandish painting, Holy Thorn Reliquary, The Magdalen Reading, Royal Gold Cup, Madonna in the Church, Stanford Memorial Church, Portrait Diptych of Dürer's Parents, The Entombment (Bouts), Crucifixion and Last Judgement diptych, Las Meninas, Dresden Triptych, The Garden of Earthly Delights, The Magdalen Reading Funerary art

None of these articles was my work, by the way, Hafspajen (talk) 11:06, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

• I know that it is a recommendation, but you are not going to convince some editors that it's allowed. I tried to put Streatham portrait through FAC with a 300px infobox image, and it ended up killing a lot of bytes which needed not have died.  — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:11, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

Ä* Well, I don't know. Here are some guys convincing someone, succesfuly, about galleries. See what other editors working with art articles were discussing , here at Talk:Charles Marion Russell. with Montanawb. Sometimes I think people read the Manual of style like in 2008, and since then they don't realize that things the changes. I still meet people who tell me galleries are dicouraged, like the teddy bear article - issue. They are not, not any more. Hafspajen (talk) 11:06, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Featured picture candidates/Aularches miliaris

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, File:Aularches miliaris at Mangunan Orchard, Dlingo, Bantul, Yogyakarta 07.jpg, was nominated on Misplaced Pages:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Misplaced Pages:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! Armbrust 08:57, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Featured picture candidates/delist/Strelitzia 2

I've renominated, as the last one didn't get the requisite number. This is probably a violation of some rule, but the fact this wasn't delisted feels like a violation of common sense to me, so there you go. I'd appreciate it if you'd drop by again. J Milburn (talk) 11:43, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

• Done. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:29, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Voting Rights Act of 1965

Crisco, can you please take a look to determine whether this is indeed eligible for DYK, and if so, put an "again" icon on it so reviewers know it needs to be checked? Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:22, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

• Done. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:00, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

• Thank you! BlueMoonset (talk) 03:32, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

Dipodium punctatum

It looks like someone expanded Dipodium punctatum last month. It might not be enough to get the picture off of the hold list, but figured I'd let you know anyways. Sven Manguard Wha? 06:31, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

• Armbrust, did you get any news on this? Enough to run, sure. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:22, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Joehana

On 21 March 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Joehana, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Akhmad Bassah was best known by his adopted daughter's name? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Joehana. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 09:43, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

Nom: Ike Altgens

Please accept my apologies if I'm spamming. This nom has been active for 38 days. The initial concerns with Ike Altgens have long since been addressed, and a great deal of additional work has been done, including a recheck of its sources and the addition of a free image courtesy the subject's nephew. I believe this article is ready for promotion and would greatly appreciate any attention you're willing to give its nom. Thanks in advance. :) —ATinySliver/ 18:54, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

r

tks. Ceoil (talk) 03:11, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

• Yw. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:53, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

• ) Ceoil (talk) 04:11, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

D'Oliveira affair

Another favour to ask! I've got this article at PR here; it is technically another cricket article, but this one is a bit different. Any comments appreciated. Sarastro1 (talk) 11:19, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

• I'll see what I can do. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:32, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Triumph International

Hi Crisco. Over two weeks ago I submitted a draft article on the Talk page of Triumph International, where I have a COI and advertised my request at COIN, where it was archived without response. John Broughton reviewed the article and said he supported moving it into article-space, but I'm still waiting for someone to actually fulfill the Request Edit by moving it into article-space per WP:COI.

I was wondering if you had time to take a look. The Talk page discussion is here and the draft is located at User:CorporateM/Triumph. CorporateM (Talk) 19:02, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

• I'll try and have a look later today. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:40, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 19 March 2014

• Forum: Wikimedia Commons mission: free media for the world or only Wikimedia projects?

• WikiProject report: We have history

• Interview: Nate Ott: the writer behind 71 articles in the largest-ever good topic

• Featured content: Spot the bulldozer

• News and notes: Foundation-supported Wikipedian in residence faces scrutiny

• Traffic report: Into thin air

• Technology report: Wikimedia engineering report

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:15, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Fulvous Whistling Duck

I've got this to the stage where all the text is in place, although I haven't even begun copyediting or checking. Since you were involved with the image discussion, I wonder if you had any views on the current selection and placement—note that I've moved the FP to lead image. This is quite short for a bird article, do you think the lead is long enough? Thanks Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:35, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

• Certainly long enough for GA. I'll take a looksy tomorrow, hopefully (it's getting on midnight here). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:56, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Nom still open

Hi Crisco, I see there must be a bot issue, but in this edit you closed an FLC nom for List of awards and nominations received by Bruno Mars, but it's still showing as open, and has no delegate comments either, the nominator still believes the candidate to be open, despite it being closed over a month ago. Suggest that something is done, even manually, even if it's just to leave a closing note, so this doesn't happen again. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:38, 23 March 2014 (UTC)