User talk:Thadius856/Archive/January 2008

Olympic pictogram images

Hello, I saw that you have created some SVG versions of the wonderful pictogram images that User:Parutakupiu created for the Wikipedia:WikiProject Olympics work. First, I notice that you have only converted the winter sports so far. Do you intend to convert all the summer sports too? It would be extremely useful to have the same conversion process applied to all of these. Some other editors have worked on a handful of the summer sports (e.g. Image:Olympic pictogram Cricket.svg and Image:Olympic pictogram Rugby union.svg), but there are problems. The whitespace around each image was altered, so that when you render different pictograms on the same page, they are all scaled differently. If you could update all the rest the same way you updated those you've already done, that would ensure consistency.

The second point is that you changed the image name to remove the leading capital letter of the sport. For example, your version of Image:Alpine skiing pictogram.svg is Image:Olympic pictogram alpine skiing.svg. It would be very helpful if you would rename your versions to match the original naming style. The leading upper case on the sport name is intentional. As per a previous discussion in the Olympics wikiproject, we plan to create some templates for formatting results articles, and the proposed template design would use the same string (e.g. "Alpine skiing") to generate both the pictogram and the article link (e.g. Alpine skiing at the 2006 Winter Olympics) in section headers, where we want the first letter capitalized.

Thanks for your help. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 22:33, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Update: Actually, I didn't convert anything.

It looked to me like the original author(s) has grabbed a PNG version of the blank world map, thx used a paint bucket fill on it. I simply went back and tracked down the original SVGs that the PNGs were rendered from, and applied some fill colors to it. As far as the naming scheme goes, I apologize. I hadn't realized there was any naming scheme. I encourage you to request their renaming over at commons.

And yes, I do plan to eventually do some of the summer Olympics maps. A few use PNGs for which I haven't been able to track down the SVG originals, or may be derivatives of other PNGs. Hence why I haven't done the older winter Olympics maps - before the breakup of the Soviet Union, SVG maps aren't easily available. thadius856_{talk|airports|neutrality} 22:47, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure we're discussing the same images. I'm referring to the icons like this: File:Olympic pictogram alpine skiing.svg. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 22:49, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose we weren't. I thought you were referring to my series of SVG maps for the Paralympic Games, such as this one (countries which participated in 1998):

The short answer is yes, I plan to convert more - some time tomorrow with any luck. I'd love to do them as we speak, but preserving the transparency requires that I manually edit the Vector Magic files with Illustrator, which I don't have on this laptop. I'll preserve the original naming scheme, as you requested, when I upload them. thadius856_{talk|airports|neutrality} 22:59, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks. After further thought, however, I'm not sure that the word "Olympic" needs to be in the image name. That was Parutakupiu's original motivation, but their usage has expanded beyond Olympic pages, and also beyond Olympic sports. I see that Parutakupiu also created Image:Karate pictogram.png and Image:Squash pictogram.png, and that naming style ought to work for both of us. I can use those names in templates, and the image name won't have improper capitalization of words that aren't proper nouns. Thanks again, — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 23:05, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've gone ahead and tagged the images for renaming to the method you suggested. However, there's an extremely large backlog of images to be renamed. I'll try contacting a few Commons admins, but the rename could take a substantial amount of time. thadius856_{talk|airports|neutrality} 23:36, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've converted Olympic pictogram Ice hockey.png some days before, but made some changes at the stick: File:Olympic pictogram Ice hockey.svg, because at the PNG-pictogram it was a stick from field hockey. I think it isn't necessary to have two different SVG-versions... --Hedavid (talk) 00:52, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agree, only one version of every pictogram is wholly sufficient. My only concerns are that a consistent naming scheme is used (as discussed), and the conversion process is consistent for all pictograms, so that they all have the same scaling, etc. The current problem is that a handful of pictograms have been independently converted to svg by different editors, with awkward results. For example, the cricket image is much larger when placed by the others side-by-side because the whitespace around the image content was removed. The rugby image is smaller for a similar reason. I came to Thadius856 for help since he has converted the majority of these pictograms so far, so if he uses the same process every time, then consistency in the end results is assured. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 00:59, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree for setting one standard size for svg, so I used 300x300 for the last images, how the most of Thadius856's images are made. --Hedavid (talk) 01:16, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well that's not the point. SVG images are "Scalable", so the image size is irrelevant. What I'm trying to say may be best shown by the images instead of described in words:


File:Olympic pictogram alpine skiing.svg	File:Olympic pictogram Rugby union.svg	File:Olympic pictogram Cricket.svg

The images on the first row are User:Parutakupiu's originals. The "bodies" are all similar (e.g. the circles for the heads are all the same size). On the second row, the alpine skiing pictogram was converted such that the svg version looks identical to the png original. The rugby union and cricket pictograms were converted imperfectly, such that when they are rendered at the same size (60px), they are scaled differently. This is very noticable on pages that use multiple different pictograms. That is why it is so important that they are all consistently converted. I hope this makes sense now. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 04:46, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly correct, Andrwsc. However, that wasn't the only problem with the ice hockey image: transparency was not preserved. Does this matter against a white background? No. Does it matter against gray or any color? Yes!

However, I think it would be more correct to say that we want to preserve the proportions of image to negative space, as well as the image's aspect ratio. Nominal SVG size is unimportant - this is simply determined by the scaling when the image was created or traced.

I talked with an admin over at Commons. They recommended that I re-upload my works under the new name, replace all their uses, and then speedy the first ones at redundant. But I'd have to do it all, otherwise the history must be preserved and we'd have to wait through the backlog. thadius856_{talk|airports|neutrality} 06:18, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've gone ahead and re-uploaded all the images. I started replacing many of the image links on en.wiki with by bot, Thadius856AWB. However, ALL wikis must be done before I can CSD them. Can you help me? thadius856_{talk|airports|neutrality} 08:59, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely! Thanks for all your work. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 17:28, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Did a few bot runs and removed them all from en.wiki. Also from other languages manually (aargh!). Already converted most of the summer Olympic and discontinued sports ones - just need to manually edit them for transparency and upload once I get home tonight after work. Toodles! thadius856_{talk|airports|neutrality} 21:42, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Great!! I've been spending some time updating other wikis from the .png directly to the new .svg names for the winter sports. Many of the winter .png images can be nominated for deletion soon. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 21:47, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've just noticed the endeavoring PNG-to-SVG conversion of my pictograms that you've been undergoing, Thadius856. I want to thank you for performing this task and wish you keep up the good work! — Parutakupiu (talk) 23:00, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I know, that SVGs are "scaleable" - so the name of the format stands for. But of corse the size is important when using image:...svg-tag without a given size. But all of this is for me a secondary problem. My problem are the svg-images File:Olympic pictogram Ice hockey.svg by me and the newer

by you. Your pictogram is nearly the original, but I changed in my pictogram the stick because the original stick isn't an ice hockey stick. --Hedavid (talk) 23:13, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would suggest you upload your version (with the improved stick) on Commons as a new version of Image:Ice hockey pictogram.svg. That change will ripple through to all wikis. I am assuming that everything else about your version is the same as Thadius856' SVG conversion (whitespace, scaling, transparency, etc.). Thanks! — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 23:22, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

About whitespace, scaling, transparency etc.: I think too. Okay, I'll do so. --Hedavid (talk) 00:37, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have no qualms with you overwriting my version. The only difference I can see now is very slight - the skates have a little different shape to them, but not too much. thadius856_{talk|airports|neutrality} 07:31, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I've done it. --Hedavid (talk) 20:40, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pictograms, partie deux

I've gone ahead and converted all of the pictograms for both summer and discontinued sports - exactly 50 in all. Took a long time, with lots of hard work, but they're complete. My bot is running through en.wiki screaming, replacing the .PNGs at lightning speed. Cheers! thadius856_{talk|airports|neutrality} 11:46, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Great work! That will keep me busy for a while... (I sure wish AWB worked on all language wikis....) Can you also convert a couple of other pictograms? User:Parutakupiu had also created Image:Karate pictogram.png and Image:Squash pictogram.png for some non-Olympic Games (Pan-Am Games I think), and I see that User:Hedavid also created Image:Olympic pictogram futsal.svg, which perhaps ought to be renamed. Thanks!! — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 17:31, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Another question: we had pictograms for a few multi-discipline sports that don't seem to have been converted. They are:

As it turns out, each of these was a duplicate of one of the sub-disciplines (road, flatwater, artistic, and indoor, respectively) but given a shorter name for convenience. How is this best handled? Should there be an intentional redirect on Commons (e.g. Image:Gymnastics pictogram.svg redirects to Image:Gymnastics (artistic) pictogram.svg? Or is there a better way? — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 19:35, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Found a couple more: Image:Olympic pictogram Bowling.png and Image:Olympic pictogram Water skiing.png. Both have "different" SVG versions created by commons:User:Gorivero in the last day or so. I am also bothered by the license summary on those, as Parutakupiu is not given any credit for the png originals. Thanks!! — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 19:55, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And Image:Olympic pictogram Roller hockey.png. I think this just needs a name change, as Hedavid already did the SVG conversion. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 20:46, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Renaming is backlogged for a very long time. I simply made my own conversion and uploaded it under the new name. All of the ones you mentioned here are done.

Image:Bowling pictogram.svg

Image:Canoeing pictogram.svg

Image:Cycling pictogram.svg

Image:Gymnastics pictogram.svg

Image:Karate pictogram.svg

Image:Roller hockey pictogram.svg

Image:Squash pictogram.svg

Image:Volleyball pictogram.svg

Image:Water skiing pictogram.svg

I'll set my bot on them shortly. :) thadius856_{talk|airports|neutrality} 21:25, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've reuploaded my version of Image:Roller hockey pictogram.svg because of circles. (Rolls etc.), since yesterday there's also the non-olympic Image:Inline hockey pictogram.svg. --Hedavid (talk) 22:08, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, good eye. Thanks! thadius856_{talk|airports|neutrality} 06:33, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On Our Merry Way

Could you please explain why you went to the trouble of adding an asterisk (which shows as a box in the article) in front of the external link when there is only one link? Aren't these necessary only if there are more than one because they're used to separate them? Thank you. MovieMadness (talk) 14:17, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Response: Actually, I'm not sure that's true. Wikipedia's External Link Style Guideline makes no bulleting exception that I can see for a single link in the section.

“

If an article has external links, the standard format is to place them in a bulleted list under a primary heading at the end of the article. External links should identify the link and briefly summarize the website's contents and why the website is relevant to the article. The heading should be "External links" (plural) even if there is only a single link listed.

”

thadius856_{talk|airports|neutrality} 17:10, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I guess it depends on how you interpret "If an article has external links, the standard format is to place them in a bulleted list under a primary heading at the end of the article." To me, this means if there are more than one, then the bullet is used. I would think if it was to be used at all times it would have read "If an article has one or more external links . . ." but that's just my opinion. Thanks for responding. MovieMadness (talk) 19:46, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Response: I could see it going either way, now that you mention it. I don't really think it's that large of an issue, but you could always discuss it the style guideline's talk page. I'm sure they'd be more than happy to clear up any ambiguities. thadius856_{talk|airports|neutrality} 21:45, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]