User:Goran tek-en/discussions/2021
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Discussions 2021
problems at the project
I just went through the history of our discussion of our SVG project. There are words there that I did not write. I uploaded this book along with sevaral other field guides for wikimedia and never (this project) for gutenberg. Why 1) would I lie? and 2) would anyone do that to me?
That you don't remember that you didn't believe in the licensing here is somewhat a problem but that my words were changed to a complete untruth is completely wrong.
How many "people" use your commons acct? It should be just one of me who tries to never lie nor claim credit for works that I did not do.
And can you confirm that you have finished 3 images? I wonder if there are fake Rabos and Gorans grabbing the SVG before they get to me.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 21:00, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
- RaboKarbakian We have had so many discussions I can't remember everything but I haven't reacted on something being strange. I haven't noticed anything strange with my account either, here you can see what I have uploaded for this project so far. --Goran tek-en (talk) 10:51, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
- I am going to have to stop using "preview" there. Today, I had forgotten the closing sup tag and after a preview, typing became worse. The other publication, from 2007 and 1914 is a different edition (second) and the scan is not available at the archive. This wikiname I use was carefully chosen (but thoughtlessly misspelled) because of people I have worked with before. Having my words changed is completely unacceptable. I have enough wrongs I accomplished on my own to account for. That's all for my post-shock rant. Thank-you for "back to business".--RaboKarbakian (talk) 13:42, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
- I am going to have to stop using "preview" there. Today, I had forgotten the closing sup tag and after a preview, typing became worse. The other publication, from 2007 and 1914 is a different edition (second) and the scan is not available at the archive. This wikiname I use was carefully chosen (but thoughtlessly misspelled) because of people I have worked with before. Having my words changed is completely unacceptable. I have enough wrongs I accomplished on my own to account for. That's all for my post-shock rant. Thank-you for "back to business".--RaboKarbakian (talk) 13:42, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
Done --Goran tek-en (talk) 11:39, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
hello
can you edit your map about christmas observence (File:Map of Countries that do not recognize Christmas as Public Holiday.svg) turkey now recognizes christmas and easter holidays for its christian citizens check these but use translator since the links are turkish here and here — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 46.196.85.168 (talk) 10:57, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
- I'm not the author of that map, I have made some requested edits on it. You haven't signed this request so I will not perform it until you sign it here, this is my policy. --Goran tek-en (talk) 12:02, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
Done --Goran tek-en (talk) 11:39, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
File:GoodHardware straightened.png
 |
File:GoodHardware straightened.png has been marked for speedy deletion. A reason for the tagging has not been detected or none was placed.
Why not upload a picture of a plant, animal, or anything else which fits into our scope. You can contribute any media type you want, including but not limited to images, videos, music, and 3D models. Start uploading now! If you don't have anything to upload at the moment, why not take a look at our best images or best videos, sounds and 3D models. If you have any doubts/questions don't hesitate to visit our help desk. |
User who nominated the file for deletion (Nominator) : JimPercy.
I'm a computer program; please don't ask me questions but ask the user who nominated your file(s) for deletion or at our Help Desk. //Deletion Notification Bot (talk) 00:43, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
Thanks Syed Aashir (talk) 13:35, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
It should be light green because only claimed by Pakistan not under its control. Syed Aashir (talk) 07:55, 3 July 2021 (UTC)
Canonical territories of autocephalous and autonomous Eastern Orthodox jurisdictions
Thanks a lot for your excellent map on the Orthodox Church organization. I was wondering though whether or not North Korea should have the same colour as South Korea, and Taiwan the same colour as Mainland China. The reason is that South Korea doesn’t recognize North Korea as a state and so usually jurisdiction formally applies to the entire Korean peninsula, though of course for North Korea it’s purely theoretical. For the Catholic Church, for example, Korea is formally still seen as united (see Catholic Church in Korea).
For the Chinese Orthodox Church, the article states that the Russion Orthodox Church granted autonomy in 1957. If so, I would assume this would also cover Taiwan, no? I don’t know how that Orthodox mission in Taiwan sees itself.
I was just wondering about this, I didn’t look into any sources et cetera. Perhaps there isn’t a clear answer in the first place since this is all mostly an academic question (except perhaps for Taiwan). De wafelenbak (talk) 11:52, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
- @De wafelenbak: hello, I am the one who gave the information and instructions for this map, so I am responsible to answer your questions.
- there are churches in South Korea which belong to the EP. Apparently, since December 2018, some ROC churches have opened in SK in response to actions of the EP. Still, I believe there is a wide consensus among the mainstream churches to say that SK is to be under the jurisdiction of the EP. Since there is no church in North Korea, there is no debate or consensus over under which jurisdiction this territory is.
- I do not know if Taiwan is considered by the Chinese Orthodox Church to be under its jurisdiction.
- One problem doing of this map is that one has to rely mostly on clues to try and find what are the de facto accepted or claimed boundaries of each church. It is the only thing we can do, since the only churches with clear boundaries are the churches created since the 19th-century. The other churches have had their territories expanded and reduced as their countries and missionary expeditions expanded or were reduced. There is no official maps or agreement among the mainstream Eastern Orthodox churches as to what their territories are. You can see the process of creating this map here. Veverve (talk) 13:49, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
- Many thanks for your answer! De wafelenbak (talk) 19:14, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
- Many thanks for your answer! De wafelenbak (talk) 19:14, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
Done --Goran tek-en (talk) 11:38, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
Request for a slight adjustment
Hello. Could you change this image? The "Upper Seas or" and "Water above Firmament" should be arced, higher, and on the same line, roughly like this. Could you also make the sun, the moon, and the stars 20% smaller? The person who made it for me said he/she did not have much free time, and was not able to arc the phrases, hence why I am asking you. Veverve (talk) 11:13, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
- Veverve When arcing texts they have to be converted to paths due to rendering problems. The chosen font in this illustration is not accepted by wikimedia but I didn't change it, (it is replaced). Done --Goran tek-en (talk) 12:58, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
Main schisms from the Russian Orthodox Church (2021)
| Extended content |
|---|
|
Could you also adjust File:Main schisms from the Russian Orthodox Church (2021).svg? Could you change the layout of the notes so that it is this way, and change the "[2]" after "Tikhonites" into a [1], as well as the [1] after "in exile" into a "[2]"? Veverve (talk) 22:35, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
I have updated the image myself once more. Could you add in this symbol in the legend, at the top of the list, with "Merge" next to it? Veverve (talk) 02:12, 18 February 2021 (UTC) I would need you to add two more lines for two more churches. I will add the sources in the summary later. I put the sources here so that I know where to find them later.
Veverve Please always ping me, everywhere.
It seems there is a problem with the "Ukrainian Concilian-Episcopal Church" line. It is either in conflict with the previous text (1,860 × 979 pixels) or too far from the previous text (1,280 × 674 pixels). When opened in the Wikipedia media viewer, it has the same problem as the 1,860 × 979 pixels version, which is a big problem. I know nothing about graphic design, so I do not know if it can be fixed. Veverve (talk) 20:06, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
@Goran tek-en: the line of the Living Church should go to 1946 and not 1926, like this. Veverve (talk) 01:00, 24 February 2021 (UTC)
|
@Goran tek-en: I would like you to add one more church line: in 2015, the ROCOR (V-F) of Filaret (Semovskikh), https://imgur.com/a/unJQK5K Veverve (talk) 20:20, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
@Goran tek-en: I add:
"True Orthodox Church of Moldavia" should be "True Orthodox Church of Moldova" & the colours of some lines should be changed; everything is here: https://imgur.com/a/C6s86cF Veverve (talk) 12:31, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
- Veverve As always, I had to move other stuff so check everything, draft-12. --Goran tek-en (talk) 15:44, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
- here: "Unification council of theEastern Orthodox churches of Ukraine" -> "Unification council of the Eastern Orthodox churches of Ukraine" (adding a space between the "the" and "Eastern")
- Change the colour of a line at one place, here this way
- here: add a parenthesis before "Filaret (Semovskikh)" so that it reads "(Filaret (Semovskikh) (ROCOR V-F))"
- https://imgur.com/a/pfVdi0Q: replace "(Anthony (Orlov))" with "(Anthony (Orlov)" Veverve (talk) 16:39, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
- Veverve
Question I didn't do #4, then you would have 2 left and 1 right parenthesis, is that what you want? Draft-13. --Goran tek-en (talk) 18:41, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
- @Goran tek-en: I will illustrate for #4: https://imgur.com/a/ufEO4Q1. Once it is done, you can upload the new version. Veverve (talk) 18:48, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
- Veverve I understood but it still seems wrong to me. You also have different ways with parenthesis when writing eg. (ROCOR V-F)) or (ROCOR (V-A)) and others but I guess it's supposed to be that way.
- Done --Goran tek-en (talk) 19:58, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
- @Goran tek-en: thanks; I try to used the abreviations I find online. You forgot to make #2, i.e. change the colour of a line at one place, here this way. Veverve (talk) 20:14, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
- @Veverve: New version uploaded.
- After you have approved a draft I have to do a bit of work before I can upload, and that is there I make mistakes sometimes. Maybe I will have to show you one "upload" draft also to avoid it.
- I'm not talking about the content, the abbreviations. I mean how you use the parentheses, sometimes there is a separate set of them around the last characters, sometimes not, (ROCOR (V-A)) (ROCOR V-F)). To me parentheses should always be two, one left and one right but in this (Anthony (Orlov) and this (ROCOR V-F)) (maybe more) you have unequal numbers of left and right. --Goran tek-en (talk) 12:46, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
- @Veverve: New version uploaded.
- @Goran tek-en: thanks; I try to used the abreviations I find online. You forgot to make #2, i.e. change the colour of a line at one place, here this way. Veverve (talk) 20:14, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
- Veverve I understood but it still seems wrong to me. You also have different ways with parenthesis when writing eg. (ROCOR V-F)) or (ROCOR (V-A)) and others but I guess it's supposed to be that way.
- @Goran tek-en: I will illustrate for #4: https://imgur.com/a/ufEO4Q1. Once it is done, you can upload the new version. Veverve (talk) 18:48, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
- Veverve
@Goran tek-en: I checked the new version. I do not think showhing me a upload draft is necesary. The way parenthesis and abreviations are used depends on how people write them, so as you pointed out it is incoherent.
Could you change the colour of the beginning of the RusOC line like this? Veverve (talk) 13:02, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
- @Veverve: New version uploaded. --Goran tek-en (talk) 14:37, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
@Goran tek-en: Can 1) you add "/Russian True Orthodox Church - Moscow Metropolia" next to "(Vyacheslav)", like this, 2) add the "Cat." symbol next to "Free Russian Orthodox Church" like this? Veverve (talk) 20:09, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
Done --Goran tek-en (talk) 11:38, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
Greek Old Calendarists timeline
Hello. Could you make a map of https://imgur.com/a/XwOqZbC and reuse the same colours as File:Main schisms from the Russian Orthodox Church (2021).svg for the legends which are the same? Veverve (talk) 09:24, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
I made a mistake: it should be "Angelos (Anastasiou) of Avlona and Beotias" instead of "Angelos (Anastasiou) Beotias". Veverve (talk) 18:50, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
| Extended content |
|---|
Veverve Please always ping me, thanks. Draft-2. Lines and texts. --Goran tek-en (talk) 13:53, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
Veverve (talk) 17:11, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
Veverve (talk) 11:35, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
All those churches are called "True Orthodox Church (of Greece)" or "Greek True Orthodox Church", either officially or colloquially, wether they practise True Orthodoxy or not. True Orthodox: churches which either consider themselves True Orthodox (the ideology), or which considers New Calendarists/churches practising ecumenism as graceless, or both. Old Calendarists: those who only refuse the new calendar. All True Orthodox are Old Calendarists, but not all Old Calendarists are True Orthodox. Not included:
Veverve Now you can find it here file:Timeline of the main Old Calendarists and True Orthodox Greek Orthodox Churches(2021).svg.
|
- https://imgur.com/a/Ys0rvWN: can you remove "(GOC-Kallinikos)". Veverve (talk) 23:08, 24 February 2021 (UTC)
- Veverve Done --Goran tek-en (talk) 10:38, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
- Veverve
- https://imgur.com/a/Ys0rvWN: can you remove "(GOC-Kallinikos)". Veverve (talk) 23:08, 24 February 2021 (UTC)
I will ping you back in about two weeks. 1) https://imgur.com/a/36Ti8eC: I ask for one more line for a new church starting in 1983, and a new date above the fusion symbol (January 1985). 2) https://imgur.com/a/fElGsKX: I ask that you add "(Kioussis)" next to "Chrysostomos II" Veverve (talk) 10:11, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
Veverve This will also have to wait for two weeks. --Goran tek-en (talk) 11:33, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
Done --Goran tek-en (talk) 11:37, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
Two changes
Yes, let's change the lattice to be face-centered like in the animation. We can leave the H+ ions as they are, because they look good with the arrows. Technically, we should add two H+ ions for every O2- ion you add to the lattice, but we also don't want to make it too crowded. I'll defer to your opinion as to whether we should add more. -Rob Hurt (talk) 21:21, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
- Superionic ice conducting, Superionic ice rest
- Rob Hurt I moved this to here, I will get back to you. --Goran tek-en (talk) 14:31, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
- Rob Hurt Two drafts with the correct number of H.
- Draft 1.
- Draft 1-60 in which the bindings are in 60% . --Goran tek-en (talk) 15:42, 24 February 2021 (UTC)
- Rob Hurt Two drafts with the correct number of H.
- Goran tek-en this looks great, and I like the one at 60%. -Rob Hurt (talk) 20:19, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
- Rob Hurt Draft-1 rest. I haven't any crashes in this or the one I just uploaded. If you want that just tell me. --Goran tek-en (talk) 14:57, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
- Goran tek-en I think that looks great too. -Rob Hurt (talk) 21:41, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
- Goran tek-en I think that looks great too. -Rob Hurt (talk) 21:41, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
- Rob Hurt Draft-1 rest. I haven't any crashes in this or the one I just uploaded. If you want that just tell me. --Goran tek-en (talk) 14:57, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
- Goran tek-en this looks great, and I like the one at 60%. -Rob Hurt (talk) 20:19, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
Done --Goran tek-en (talk) 14:28, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
no ping since Feb 19
Honestly, I thought you took the weekend off and maybe some travel or something else nice. The last edit to the project that I can see is https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons%3AGraphic_Lab%2FIllustration_workshop&type=revision&diff=534219441&oldid=534212393
I can (usually) see in my watch list when you change the pngs to point to the new svg when you upload, but I get only half to 2/3s of the notifications (pings).
Was going to ask about Pisces and Saggitarius but ....--RaboKarbakian (talk) 16:22, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
- RaboKarbakian It would have been lovely to travel or do something with people but this pandemic is just blocking everything. I have other stuff going on here att commons but I will try to finish yours this week, I hope. --Goran tek-en (talk) 16:32, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
Done --Goran tek-en (talk) 11:36, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
File:Stemma del marchesato del Monferrato.svg
Hello. Could you change the firesteels of File:Stemma del marchesato del Monferrato.svg to "B"? The model is File:Testone Guglielmo II Paleologo.jpg, but the lower right parts uses "B" on the model, whereas the SVG version has firesteels. See comparison. Could you change this part to make it more faithful to the model? Veverve (talk) 15:22, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
- Veverve Get back to me in two weeks, thanks. --Goran tek-en (talk) 11:12, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
Done --Goran tek-en (talk) 11:37, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
Logo request
Could so draw me the historical logos of the german VARTA company? Three rather simple iamges...--Antemister (talk) 22:49, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
- Antemister I'm not sure this is yours because it's not signed. There are no links or anything to work with either. Anyway you will have to get back to me in two weeks, thanks. --Goran tek-en (talk) 11:35, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
Done --Goran tek-en (talk) 11:37, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
- Signature added, have sent you an email with the images. When you have time, just ping me (is not an urgent issue, really).--Antemister (talk) 20:54, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
- Antemister I'm not comfortable working with company/organisation logos and creating svg from a bitmapp which never will be correct and if it's allowed by copyright and other rules. So I will say no to this, I'm sure you can get help at Graphic lab. Thanks for your understanding.
- Done --Goran tek-en (talk) 10:43, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
- OK, will try (images are historic ones, from the early 20th century, so copyright problems would not apply)--Antemister (talk) 09:24, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
- Signature added, have sent you an email with the images. When you have time, just ping me (is not an urgent issue, really).--Antemister (talk) 20:54, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
Done --Goran tek-en (talk) 13:00, 7 March 2021 (UTC)
a link to guidelines
Goran tek-en I have been making references to something I read years ago and now cannot find! Maybe you can help? Is there a page that describes a good bitmap to SVG conversion? Some place where the color blind palette is given and a description of the kinds of bitmaps that are better as SVG?
I am having difficulties sharing my years old instincts....--RaboKarbakian (talk) 14:36, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
- RaboKarbakian I don't understand if you mean within wikimedia or generally all over so I give you both of what I know/find.
- Wikimedia
- svg help, svg help/converting.
- Here are different links to show what type of images that would work well as svg; 1, 2, 3. Maps of relief type can be converted to svg but often they become quite heavy. 3,66 Mb, 3,99 Mb, 11,55 Mb. Generally you can say that none photographic images (not continuous tones (like shading)) works best.
- Generally all over
- I don't think you can describe a "good bitmap to SVG conversion" just like that, it all depends on the bitmap content. Converting can more or less be done in the three different ways that are described there. Each has it + and - and depends on the content of the original bitmap. So the only general thing I can say is: Be thru to what the original bitmap is conveying. You have to understand what the bitmap wants the viewer to experience, then you have to translate that into svg. This doesn't mean you should follow it absolutely as they are two different ways of visualization. Then every person experience/visualize an image in there own personel way so really there is not one thru way.
- I think the right way to talk about "color blind" is "color vision deficiency" (CVD). Palettes. There is no way make it work for absolutely everyone without using shades of grey with patterns, there are so many different deficiencies. The three most common are; deuteranopia, protanopia and tritanopia so it's mainly them you can work with.
- You are referring to your age both here and before, what do you mean, that you think you are "old" or what. I'm 67 and I can notice it on my skin and body but the brain and mind is the same as ever. What ever I lost I make up with experience even more. --Goran tek-en (talk) 12:10, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
Done --Goran tek-en (talk) 12:10, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
- Thank you for the links, but they are not going to help with my task. Age here has two ways of measuring. How long you have been involved with wikimedia projects and also actual years old age. I think that born on age is only relevant when requiring wisdom that is beyond the birth date or endurance that the birth date has surpassed. My wikiage started in 2007 and this is the "old" I was talking about.
- The bitmap people back then determined that png was the best format for non-photographic images and I could paste a link to an explanation of this. It was a mindset for me that it became instinctive, but I had that page so I could share this "instinct" of mine. Thae use of png has been refined by me in the many years since, and is irrelevant to this request.
- Good SVG was being defined then also, I saw it either in discussions or in a page describing it -- it has been a decade or so ago. I saw evidence of it also, beautiful maps and insect diagrams and etc.
- The rules have links. I have been talking of guidelines that apparently don't exist. You just "instictively" through a shared education and experience knew to make good SVG here. By good, I mean with the palette and the multi-lingual and all the other things that I don't know but can see in your artwork. It isn't going to help with my claims of following guidelines.
- I have lost. Good instincts have lost to pasteable rules.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 13:18, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
- RaboKarbakian I'm sorry I couldn't help you. But honestly I could not imaging a guide for a good svg in an aspect of content. A good svg is is for me a svg file which is processed in a way it works well, the image doesn't renders badly, has a code that is "clean" and follows W3C, all the technical side of it. Regarding the content it's not possible. The only other aspect is the differences between them, 1, 2, 3.
- Done --Goran tek-en (talk) 13:59, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
- I have lost. Good instincts have lost to pasteable rules.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 13:18, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
Three requests
@Goran tek-en:
1) File:Main schisms from the Russian Orthodox Church (2021).svg
- add "/Russian True Orthodox Church - Moscow Metropolia" next to "(Vyacheslav)", like this
- add the "Cat." symbol next to "Free Russian Orthodox Church" like this
- https://imgur.com/a/36Ti8eC: I ask for one more line for a new church starting in 1983, and a new date above the fusion symbol (January 1985).
- https://imgur.com/a/fElGsKX: I ask that you add "(Kioussis)" next to "Chrysostomos II"
3) File:Stemma del marchesato del Monferrato.svg
- The model of File:Stemma del marchesato del Monferrato.svg is File:Testone Guglielmo II Paleologo.jpg. The current version of File:Stemma del marchesato del Monferrato.svg has firesteels on the lower right parts, whereas the the model uses four "B". See comparison. Could you change the lower rigt part of the SVG to make it more faithful to the model, i.e. replace the firesteels with four "B"?
Veverve (talk) 18:38, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
@Goran tek-en: addition for 1): could you change the 1942 donut for a merge symbol, like this? Veverve (talk) 11:16, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- @Veverve:
- Map_of_schisms-14.
- We didn't have "January 1985" so I added it. Timeline-8.
- 4B-1. --Goran tek-en (talk) 18:18, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
- @Goran tek-en:
- 1) Could you make this part the way I made it (with the arrow before the merge symbol)?
- 2) That is good, you can upload it.
- 3) That is good, you can upload it. Veverve (talk) 18:31, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
- @Veverve:
- 1) Map_of_schisms-15.
- 2) Done
- 3) Done --Goran tek-en (talk) 11:45, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
- @Goran tek-en: 1) That is good, you can upload it. Veverve (talk) 11:49, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
- @Veverve: 1) Done --Goran tek-en (talk) 10:01, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
- @Veverve: 1)
- @Goran tek-en: 1) That is good, you can upload it. Veverve (talk) 11:49, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
New timeline request
@Goran tek-en: Hello. Could you make an SVG version of this timeline like you did here and here?
I have used the same colour code as with File:Main schisms from the Russian Orthodox Church (2021).svg and File:Timeline of the main Old Calendarists and True Orthodox Greek Eastern Orthodox Churches (2021).svg; however I had to add a new colour (grey) and a new symbol. The legend for this new colour and this new symbol are at the bottom left of the image. If you accept, I give you no deadline so take as much time as you need. Veverve (talk) 14:09, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
- @Goran tek-en: If you accept, please use the latest version of the map I have put, as I have had to do some important changes numerous time since I posted my request. Veverve (talk) 20:11, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
- Veverve I will do it, if you do any more changes please let me know, thanks. --Goran tek-en (talk) 14:29, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
| Extended content |
|---|
@Goran tek-en: so, how is it going? Veverve (talk) 12:30, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
@Goran tek-en: Here are the corrections. I have done numerous things to try to show you what I wanted. I have put a circle in violet where there was a problem, and violet lines to show you where I wanted a line to be at the same height as another line. I have also written direct corrections next to mistakes, those start with "->". Moreover, I have sometimes taken part of the version you have given, then drew an arrow to show you what the correct version should look like. I have sometimes put correction notes.
@Goran tek-en:
B) in the legend:
Veverve (talk) 20:11, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
@Goran tek-en: Well, the E. Orthodox Churches are, like everything including Buddhist monks or accountant firms, influenced by politics. The E. Orthodox are more open about it than Roman Catholics, althought the EO still claim they are a mystical, otherwordly body created by god.
Veverve (talk) 20:08, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
@Veverve: the timeline is finally done! you have done an excellent job as always!
@Goran tek-en: Can you change "Council of Ephesus, 431" to "Council of Chalcedon, 451"? Veverve (talk) 15:22, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
@Goran tek-en: https://imgur.com/a/kAbd2xY: could you put "UOC-KP" in bold? Veverve (talk) 22:19, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
|
- https://imgur.com/a/gkaOosV and https://imgur.com/a/u4a6wNT: those three sentences are in bold in the PNG version, but should not be. They are at the 1448, 1453, and 1484 dates.
- https://imgur.com/a/PIAPJvF: could you replace the "-" of "1394 - ~1416" with a "–"? Veverve (talk) 11:36, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
- Veverve Done --Goran tek-en (talk) 13:12, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
@Goran tek-en: Could you change the "(seat in Preslav)" text? Could you change it to "(seat in Preslav until the 970s, seat in Ohrid since then)"? Here is the model. Veverve (talk) 20:41, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
- Veverve Done --Goran tek-en (talk) 15:18, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
Request for a slight change
Request for a change at: File:Timeline of the main Old Calendarists and True Orthodox Greek Eastern Orthodox Churches (2021).svg.
The beginning ot the line of the Old Calendar Orthodox Church of Greece - Holy Synod in Resistance currently looks like like this; could you change it so that it looks like this? Veverve (talk) 23:33, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
- Veverve I did think of that part when doing the previous edit. I prefer to do like this her, OK? --Goran tek-en (talk) 14:46, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
- @Goran tek-en: ok, that version is good, you can upload it. Veverve (talk) 14:50, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
- Veverve Done --Goran tek-en (talk) 16:05, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
- Veverve
- @Goran tek-en: ok, that version is good, you can upload it. Veverve (talk) 14:50, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
Legend changes for two timelines
Hello. Could you change the following things in the legends of those two files?
1) File:Main schisms from the Russian Orthodox Church (2021).svg
- Liberal/reformist movement -> Autocephalous unrecognised liberal/reformist church
- True Orthodox -> Autocephalous True Orthodox church
- Autocephalous unrecognized church (not True Orthodox) -> Autocephalous unrecognised E. Orthodox church (not True Orthodox)
- Catholic -> Roman Catholic
- Recognised, mainstream E. Orthodox Church -> Recognised, mainstream autocephalous E. Orthodox Church
- Old Calendarists -> Autocephalous Old Calendarist church
- True Orthodox -> Autocephalous True Orthodox church
- Recognised, mainstream E. Orthodox Church -> Recognised, mainstream autocephalous E. Orthodox Church
Veverve (talk) 12:31, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
- Veverve Done --Goran tek-en (talk) 16:46, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
@Goran tek-en: While I am at it, here is a remark. There is no background it seems on the preview for File:Timeline of the main Old Calendarists and True Orthodox Greek Eastern Orthodox Churches (2021).svg. See the comparison on WCommons here, and how it is displayed on Discord chat.
Veverve (talk) 22:17, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
- Veverve Sorry, forgot to switch on one layer. --Goran tek-en (talk) 09:39, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
@Goran tek-en: at File:Main schisms from the Russian Orthodox Church (2021).svg: https://imgur.com/a/Jya0CgI: the "20 June" is in bold in the PNG version, but should not be. Veverve (talk) 11:45, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
@Goran tek-en: pinging you in case you forgot; if not, sorry for being rude.
Also, how would you feel about adding the Georgian Orthodox Church at File:Main schisms from the Russian Orthodox Church (2021).svg (it would look like this)? I completely forgot to add it back when we were working on this timeline, sorry. I think it would require making the image bigger in order to fit it. Veverve (talk) 22:20, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
- Veverve I haven't seen that one, maybe ping didn't work.
- As always please give me the texts for new church here. --Goran tek-en (talk) 17:50, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
@Goran tek-en: Thanks for accepting.
1) To fix: https://imgur.com/a/Jya0CgI: the "20 June" is in bold in the PNG version, but should not be.
2) To add:
- Model: https://imgur.com/a/nWV11h0 it's a new model with the two lines of the Church put below
- Church:
- "Georgian Orthodox Church" (it is written twice at two different places)
- Events:
- "31 October 1943"
- "Autocephaly recognised by the Russian Orthodox Church"
- "25 January 1990"
- "Autocephaly recognised by the Ecumenical Patriarchate"
- Dates:
- "1811"
- Legend:
- Event
- Forced annexation of the Church
The two lines for the Georgian Orthodox Church must be totaly parallel. Veverve (talk) 18:25, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
- Veverve Draft-16. --Goran tek-en (talk) 18:09, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
- @Goran tek-en: That is good, you can upload. Veverve (talk) 19:53, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
- Veverve Draft-16. --Goran tek-en (talk) 18:09, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
Veverve Done --Goran tek-en (talk) 14:49, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
- @Goran tek-en: Thanks a lot!
- https://imgur.com/a/yuslpZy: there is an overlap in the PNG version; "Georgian Orthodox Church" should be more on the left. Veverve (talk) 15:10, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
- Veverve I don't know why it does this and I redid the text but the issue remains. I don't know what to do. Also if you look at this png size 1,280 × 715 pixels no text is bold. So There is something strange with the png rendering that I don't understand or control. --Goran tek-en (talk) 16:31, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Graphic Designer's Barnstar |
I wanted to award you a graphic design barnstar sometime ago for your contributions to Vietnamese heraldry sometime ago but I forgot. But often I have seen your work on Wikipedia and didn't even know it, I am pretty sure thousands of readers enjoy your work without knowing who makes it and that deserves recognition. Also, I have seen your images countless of times on websites discussing Vietnamese history (unfortunately without attribution), so you're an artist that definitely deserves more recognition.  . Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 05:23, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
|
Serbian timeline request
Hello. I would like to request you to make another timeline. Do not worry, this one is way shorter than the other threes! Here is how it looks. I have the texts and can copy-paste them to you. This timeline reuses the same colours as the other threes. Veverve (talk) 15:31, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
- Veverve I can't right now so get back to me in 10 days or so, thanks. --always ping me--Goran tek-en (talk) 17:35, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
- @Goran tek-en: here am I. Veverve (talk) 10:13, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
- Veverve Give me the texts here. --always ping me--Goran tek-en (talk) 17:22, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
- 1879
- Metropolitanate of Belgrade
- Autocephaly of the Metropolitanate of Belgrade recognised by its Mother Church, the Ecumenical Patriarchate
-
- 1942
- Croatian Orthodox Church
- 1945
-
- 1967
- Macedonian Orthodox Church – Ohrid Archbishopric
-
- 1993
- Montenegrin Orthodox Church
-
- 1996
- Serbian True Orthodox Church
-
- 1984
- Free Serbian Orthodox Church
- 1991
-
- 2018
- Montenegrin Orthodox Church
- (2018)
-
- 2010
- Macedonian True Orthodox Church
---
Legend:
- Recognised, mainstream autocephalous E. Orthodox Church
- Autocephalous unrecognised E. Orthodox church (not True Orthodox)
- Left its church for disciplinary (pastoral) reasons or for perceived heresy
- Merge
Veverve (talk) 17:29, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
- Veverve You didn't give me all of the texts and I didn't know which was which for legend, This draft is a PNG version of the original SVG file I'm working in and will upload to commons. Serbian-1. --always ping me--Goran tek-en (talk) 18:02, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- @Goran tek-en: Sorry, I forgot to add the text for the part I copy-pasted from File:Timeline of the History of the main autocephalous Eastern Orthodox Churches, E. Orthodox point of view (2021).svg
- The merge symbol has trensparency in 1920 and 1991, however it should not have any transparency.
- The lines of the 1920 merge should be like this, the way they are here.
- "Autocephaly of the Metropolitanate of Belgrade recognised by its Mother Church, the Ecumenical" should be right below the 1879 arrow, like this
- Is it me or do the lines lack the thin black line which outlined them which can be seen in the other timelines we made?
- In the legend:
- Yellow line: "Left its church for disciplinary (pastoral) reasons or for perceived heresy"
- Orange line: "Autocephalous True Orthodox church"
- Grey line: "De facto autocephalous E. Orthodox Churchwith unclear recognition status"
- Veverve (talk) 19:39, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- Veverve I'm sorry I should have explained more for that draft. To save me some work the lines, symbols and other stuff is not as it will be finally. I save me some extra work by waiting to do that stuff until all the lines are set and approved by you.
- In this draft you can see two different variations to fix the merge in 1920. I guess none is optimal but we have to work with the other information, lines etc. --always ping me--Goran tek-en (talk) 17:08, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
- @Goran tek-en: The left version is better. Veverve (talk) 17:36, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
- Veverve This is a full draft-3.
- If this is fine I will need the following;
- Name of the file
- Description (/language)
- Captions/s (/language)
- Category/ies at commons
- to be able to upload it at commons. If you don'y know about Captions read here. --always ping me--Goran tek-en (talk) 17:49, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
- Veverve This is a full draft-3.
- Veverve I'm sorry I should have explained more for that draft. To save me some work the lines, symbols and other stuff is not as it will be finally. I save me some extra work by waiting to do that stuff until all the lines are set and approved by you.
@Goran tek-en: https://imgur.com/a/iGJyXiv: there should be a space between "Church" and "with". Once it is fixed, you can upload the SVG.
- Name of the file: Timeline of the main schisms from the Serbian Orthodox Church (second quarter of the 19th century to 2021)
- Description (/language): Timeline of the main schisms from the Serbian Orthodox Church (second quarter of the 19th century to 2021).
Information from :
- Croatian Orthodox Church: w:Croatian Orthodox Church
- Free Serbian Orthodox Church: https://orthodoxwiki.org/Serbian_Orthodox_Metropolitanate_of_Australia_and_New_Zealand#Free_Serbian_Diocese , w:sr:Новограчаничка митрополија
- Montenegrin Orthodox Church: w:Montenegrin Orthodox Church
- Serbian True Orthodox Church: w:Serbian True Orthodox Church
- Montenegrin Orthodox Church (2018): w:sr:Црногорска православна црква (2018)
- Macedonian Orthodox Church – Ohrid Archbishopric: w:Macedonian Orthodox Church – Ohrid Archbishopric
- Macedonian True Orthodox Church: w:sr:Македонска истинска православна црква
- Captions/s (/language): Timeline of the main schisms from the Serbian Orthodox Church (second quarter of the 19th century to 2021)
- Category/ies at commons: Serbian Orthodox Church, Macedonian Orthodox Church – Ohrid Archbishopric
Veverve (talk) 18:25, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
- Veverve Now you can find it here file:Timeline of the main schisms from the Serbian Orthodox Church (second quarter of the 19th century to 2021).svg.
- Done --always ping me--Goran tek-en (talk) 10:55, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
@Goran tek-en: Could you change it so that the lines for the Croatian Orthodox Church and the Montenegrin Orthodox Church are not aligned? Also the yellow line for the 2018 Montenegrin Orthodox Church should be shortened, and the red line for this church moved a little bit to the left. Here is what I am asking. I did not notice this problem earlier, sorry. Veverve (talk) 11:53, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
- Veverve Draft-4. I didn't understand the last part about red line. --always ping me--Goran tek-en (talk) 12:20, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
- @Goran tek-en: Nevermind what I said about the red line, it fixed itself with your change. The line of the Montenegrin Orthodox Church should be lowered like here. Veverve (talk) 12:38, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
- Veverve Draft-5. --always ping me--Goran tek-en (talk) 14:32, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
- @Goran tek-en: It is good. You can upload it. Veverve (talk) 14:39, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
- Veverve Draft-5. --always ping me--Goran tek-en (talk) 14:32, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
- @Goran tek-en: Nevermind what I said about the red line, it fixed itself with your change. The line of the Montenegrin Orthodox Church should be lowered like here. Veverve (talk) 12:38, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
Veverve Done --always ping me--Goran tek-en (talk) 15:17, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
Copyright status: File:Ambox warning pn-large.svg
Copyright status: File:Ambox warning pn-large.svg
|
| This media may be deleted. |
Thanks for uploading File:Ambox warning pn-large.svg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.
If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.) If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there. Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you. |
And also:
This action was performed automatically by AntiCompositeBot (talk) (FAQ) 20:06, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
Done --always ping me--Goran tek-en (talk) 13:29, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
Red and Green
|
The strawberry fruit (which is not actually a berry) is widely appreciated for its characteristic aroma, bright red color, juicy texture, and sweetness.
Thank you for taking the time and effort in creating SVG version of the Moor banner! --Flaspec (talk) 18:35, 8 May 2021 (UTC) |
A barnstar for you!
|
Timeline barnstar |
| A barnstar for all the hard work you have put into the timelines I asked you to do! Veverve (talk) 15:27, 15 May 2021 (UTC) |
Copyright status: File:345-409 Ambox warning centered.svg
Copyright status: File:345-409 Ambox warning centered.svg
|
|
| This media may be deleted. |
Thanks for uploading File:345-409 Ambox warning centered.svg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.
If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.) If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there. Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you. |
This action was performed automatically by AntiCompositeBot (talk) (FAQ) 14:05, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
DoneGoran tek-en (talk) 15:06, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
UK General Election Results in England Maps (1997, 2001 and 2005)
Hello there
First of all I apologise that I haven’t got back to you straight away. I took heed of what you said to me on the requests page, for the Holkham map I can’t give you any additional data as I haven’t got any to give however for the general election results maps for England in the years 1997, 2001 and 2005 I can give you the necessary data what you will need as all you need to do is look at the maps which I will now upload to you
-
The 1997 U.K. general Election Result -
The 2001 U.K. general Election Result -
The 2005 U.K. general Election Result
All you need to do is remove the results from Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland and then we would have a set of England only results for the years 1997, 2001 and 2005. I do hope that this will help in some way. (MOTORAL1987 (talk) 16:12, 8 June 2021 (UTC))
- MOTORAL1987 I didn't say I would take your request, I just informed you that we (graphic workers) have to get all the necessary information from the requester, we don't do research or investigate for information. It's your favorite (probably) subject and we have never heard of it, you have to understand that. So if you want any help with your request post this information at the request and please always think like that. Graphic workers have probably zero knowledge and need all the information from the requester's.
- Done --always ping me-- Goran tek-en (talk) 17:53, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
- Thank you and I do understand what you was trying to say to me I do apologise, would you like to me to add this information to the request at all? (MOTORAL1987 (talk) 20:12, 8 June 2021 (UTC))
- MOTORAL1987 It's your request (you have two) and you have to decide what a graphic worker needs to know to be able to complete it. The better information and a clear an understandable request feels always easier for me help out with. --always ping me-- Goran tek-en (talk) 17:49, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
- Thank you and I do understand what you was trying to say to me I do apologise, would you like to me to add this information to the request at all? (MOTORAL1987 (talk) 20:12, 8 June 2021 (UTC))
File:Qənizadə Sultanməcid.jpg
|
File:Qənizadə Sultanməcid.jpg 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 file, 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. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
Dr.Wiki54 (talk) 19:30, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
File:Sadiqcan.jpg
|
|
File:Sadiqcan.jpg 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 file, 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. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. |
Dr.Wiki54 (talk) 19:55, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
hello
Can you please tell me how did you creates or edits these type of maps File:Pakistan (orthographic projection).svg and File:Punjab in Pakistan (claims hatched).svg. Syed Aashir (talk) 02:00, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
- Syed Aashir I haven't created either of those two but I have edited File:Pakistan (orthographic projection).svg. There are many ways to describe how to work with svg maps like those. I use Inkscape Help:Inkscape as tool and here Help:SVG you can read about svg in general here at commons. It is very good to keep the code as valid W3C validator and it's also very useful to check the rendering here at commons before uploading, SVG checker. To make maps look the same (more or less) although they are created/edited by different people we try to stick to Map conventions and also us this template Template map. There is so much more. Look at maps people have created, which sources they have used, ask questions and there is so much more to read. On my user page I have collected some links which I think is useful. --always ping me-- Goran tek-en (talk) 13:22, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
Can you please edit File:Pakistan (orthographic projection).svg and add the Former Junagadh Princely State File:Junaghad state.jpg in it according to the new Political Map unveiled by the Government of Pakistan[1]-- Syed Aashir (talk) 02:00, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
- Syed Aashir If you want to request work please start a new section by using "Add topic" or use the same at the top of this page. It's very hard for me to keep track of stuff otherwise. --always ping me-- Goran tek-en (talk) 10:10, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Red Fort drawing.svg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:22, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
Cổ Phong
I am really into Cổ Phong groups on the Facebook and often come across designs you made for Wikimedia Commons there, for example here:
This group features one of the Vietnamese dragons you designed. You have no idea how much of an impact your work as a Wikigraphist has on so many online communities. I often came across your work and didn't know who made it, after learning about you and going over some of your galleries I started noticing your contributions everywhere off-wiki (likely unattributed because most people on the internet don't know how copyright © works). Just want to tell you how much of a positive force your talent is on the world, likely in ways you will never see yourself. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 21:48, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
- Donald Trung Thanks for that. I know that many don't respect, or have the knowledge, about the free copyright licenses they just think it's free without any obligations. I really think knowledge should be free and open for everyone, that's why I work here, just as you do. --always ping me-- Goran tek-en (talk) 10:05, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
Official Map of Pakistan
Can you please edit File:Pakistan (orthographic projection).svg and add the Former Junagadh Princely State File:Junaghad state.jpg in it according to the new Political Map unveiled by the Government of Pakistan[2]-- Syed Aashir (talk) 02:00, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
- Syed Aashir Should it be dark or light green as there are two colors in that map? Also I get a felling that this is something which one could have different thoughts about. If so then it should be light green. If there is no consensus around this someone will probably change this back so tell me honestly what goes here. --always ping me-- Goran tek-en (talk) 18:41, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
- Goran tek-en It should be light green because only claimed by Pakistan not under its control. Syed Aashir (talk) 07:55, 3 July 2021 (UTC)
- Syed Aashir New version uploaded. Done --always ping me-- Goran tek-en (talk) 14:47, 3 July 2021 (UTC)
- Syed Aashir New version uploaded.
- Goran tek-en It should be light green because only claimed by Pakistan not under its control. Syed Aashir (talk) 07:55, 3 July 2021 (UTC)
@Goran tek-en: the zone you have added has a yellow part in the northern area. Is it voluntary? What does it represent? Veverve (talk) 19:27, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
- Veverve There is no yellow, might be the light green and white that look yellow. --always ping me-- Goran tek-en (talk) 20:10, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
- This is misleading, the claim is not new at all this has been an unenforced claim which is on and off only in the Survey of Pakistan maps. Nowhere else is it claimed or branded about (not even by the PK govt), even where disputed territories are marked. The "new" maps aren't that at all they are basically reprints of older ones (see the wp articles for further). There is a reason this claim wasn't included in the projection maps of PK since years simply because it isn't a claim per se. I have reverted this, a consensus is needed for such a strong change either here or at enwiki, especially when nothing new has happened. Gotitbro (talk) 05:03, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
- @Gotitbro: I'm a graphic worker and people ask me to edit/make new stuff but I have zero knowledge of the topics and we, graphic workers, can not and should not make research in that field, it would be impossible. We always have to trust our requester but sometimes it can be obvious that something is an area of different points of view. If so I try to ask for a source but it's still hard for me to value it.
- So you are free to revert to what you think is correct and someone else might revert to another version, we are free to do so here.
- @Gotitbro: I'm a graphic worker and people ask me to edit/make new stuff but I have zero knowledge of the topics and we, graphic workers, can not and should not make research in that field, it would be impossible. We always have to trust our requester but sometimes it can be obvious that something is an area of different points of view. If so I try to ask for a source but it's still hard for me to value it.
- This is misleading, the claim is not new at all this has been an unenforced claim which is on and off only in the Survey of Pakistan maps. Nowhere else is it claimed or branded about (not even by the PK govt), even where disputed territories are marked. The "new" maps aren't that at all they are basically reprints of older ones (see the wp articles for further). There is a reason this claim wasn't included in the projection maps of PK since years simply because it isn't a claim per se. I have reverted this, a consensus is needed for such a strong change either here or at enwiki, especially when nothing new has happened. Gotitbro (talk) 05:03, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
But we can also have different maps of the same area showing different points of view. Commons is not an encyclopedia, it's a place for media, all sorts and points of views. even what many think is wrong.
Neutral point of view is important
Disputed territories --please ping me-- Goran tek-en (talk) 09:11, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
Request: minor change in Serbian OC timeline
Hello @Goran tek-en: ! At File:Timeline of the main schisms from the Serbian Orthodox Church (second quarter of the 19th century to 2021).svg, could you move the 1945 slightly more to the right, like this? Veverve (talk) 13:40, 3 July 2021 (UTC)
- Veverve New version uploaded. Done --always ping me-- Goran tek-en (talk) 14:52, 3 July 2021 (UTC)
Request: remake/update the Russian OC timeline
Hello @Goran tek-en: ! I have a request for some changes to be made at the File:Timeline of the main schisms from the Russian Orthodox Church (1589 to 2021).svg image. Is it possible?
| Extended content |
|---|
Veverve (talk) 13:54, 3 July 2021 (UTC)
Google ChromeHjälpforum (Pashkovsky), ROCOR-A"
Veverve Draft-20. --always ping me-- Goran tek-en (talk) 16:57, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
@Goran tek-en: Ok. However, I am pretty sure the merge symbol and its line are too much on the right by design, and not because of any coding issue. "GOC" means the first "Georgian Orthodox Church" line.
information
suggestion/decision
@Goran tek-en: Well, I do not really get how you did it or why it worked, but it seems it fixed most of the problems. Thank you and good job! Do you think the other timelines need the same treatement?
Veverve (talk) 21:07, 9 July 2021 (UTC) Veverve New version uploaded, File:Timeline of the main schisms from the Russian Orthodox Church (1589 to 2021).svg,
@Goran tek-en: Alright, hopefully it will improve them in some way.
|
- @Goran tek-en: Ok, I understand. I have had a good look at the image to try to fix everything in one fell swoop. There is still four changes needed, one of which I do not know how to do.
- "1990 25 January" along with its symbol and description should be moved a bit to the left, so that the "1990" above and the "1990" below are in the same place on the X axis. I have intentionally left a black space in the green line in the model draft to show my move.
- There should be another 1925 here, it should look like this.
- "(a.k.a. Tikhonites [3]" -> "(a.k.a. Tikhonites [3]," (adding a ",")
- Here, I would like to show that the recreation of the UAOC and the merge of the Lubnyan schism into it both took place in 1942. However, I do not know how to show that. Do you have any suggestion?
- Veverve (talk) 14:46, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
- Veverve
- For "1990 25 January" against "1990" above. "1990" is set to the left where the vertical line begins. (I'm actually bit confused about this as the donut to my understanding should be the year, not the vertical beginning but as I understand it you see it the other way around, and for this your opinion has priority.)
- "1990 25 January" is on the other hand a centered thing above the symbol so in one way they can't really be at the same point, but I will line them up on the left.
- I'm not sure I understood the 1942 thing. Considering my thoughts above I have some suggestions.
- I have made a minor change to 1990, to me it's a new way to start a line when you have a donut at the same location, to me it feels fine.
- I have also a suggestion for 1942, it's not perfect but a start. I have changed the ratio of the merge symbol and then applied the same logic as above. If we will use this we will have to change this symbol everywhere we used it.
- Draft-02. --always ping me-- Goran tek-en (talk) 18:31, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
- Model.
- The 1941 beginning of the line should also be harmonised with the new style by removing the arrow. I think this new style of beginning is better.
- The UAOC and its abreviations should be put where I put them in the model, or else those would be on the same line as "Unification council of the Eastern Orthodox churches of Ukraine"
- The "1942" should be put where I put it in the model.
- The 1942 merge symbol should be less squashed. I think the new squashed version should be next to the normal version in the legend.
- Veverve (talk) 19:10, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
- Veverve
- My intention with this new style was to be used ONLY when we have a donut or other symbol just after a vertical start line. We still have the right arrow ending in a vertical line or the other way around. So if you mean 1941 should be the same then also 1589 should be changed and other documents, and I don't think we should!
- I think having two versions of merge symbol is bad so I went back to the original one.
- Draft-03. --always ping me-- Goran tek-en (talk) 17:34, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
- Veverve
- Model.
- For "1990 25 January" against "1990" above. "1990" is set to the left where the vertical line begins. (I'm actually bit confused about this as the donut to my understanding should be the year, not the vertical beginning but as I understand it you see it the other way around, and for this your opinion has priority.)
- Veverve
- @Goran tek-en: Ok, I understand. I have had a good look at the image to try to fix everything in one fell swoop. There is still four changes needed, one of which I do not know how to do.
@Goran tek-en: Ok, it is good, you can upload it. Hopefully, we will not have to touch this timeline anymore from now on. Veverve (talk) 17:40, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
- Veverve New version uploaded, I'm not so sure as you are that we wont edit this again. Done I will remake the others also, please remind me if I take to long. --always ping me-- Goran tek-en (talk) 20:21, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
Request: change a ribbon
Hello again @Goran tek-en: !
I have a request for a change for File:Coat of Arms of the Ecumenical Patriarchate Constantinople (St. George's Cathedral, Istanbul).svg. The ribbon, I feel, is not faithful to the model, and thus should be changed.
Here is an image. The first version is the current version of the SVG, the second is from File:Church of St. George, Istanbul (August 2010).jpg, and the third version is a rough draft of what the corrected version should look like. Veverve (talk) 00:41, 4 July 2021 (UTC)
- Veverve As I recall we had discussions similar to this at the time. The SVG file is a 2 dimensional interpretation of a very poor photo (when zoomed in) of a 3 dimensional sculpture. That sculpture was created from some material we know nothing of, it's a 3 dimensional interpretation of that material. Now we are trying to go back to a 2 dimensional interpretation but we don't have the material they started of with.
- That photo (second) is taken from a very low angel and doesn't show what it looks like strait forward and then the low quality on top of that.
- Every time something is created from some other material and dimensional form (2<->3) changes are made to fit in with that new circumstance and purpose. So if I try to look at that photo I would say the ribbon is standing out from the wall so the broad area is "perpendicular" to the wall. That means if I was to really follow that in the 2 dimensional SVG file there would only be a thin line visible of the ribbon below the knot, the thickness of the fabric.
- If there is no better photo (with or without copyright) straight on the sculpture, I don't really see the point in making these changes as we will not get any closer to the original, what ever the original is as this is all we have. --always ping me-- Goran tek-en (talk) 17:52, 4 July 2021 (UTC)
- @Goran tek-en: I do not really remember us having a conversation on this subject, so sorry if I have forgotten. While I agree that the images we have are not very helpful, and that it is unfortunate that we do not have the origina 2d model, I can clearly see both in here and here that
- there is no frill or ornament at the end of the ribbon
- the ribbon has high curves, and not simply small waves
- I think that those two details should be changed. Of course, the source material is not great, but I feel one can clearly se that those two details are very different from the current SVG version. I have once again searched on the internet, and could not find any high resolution picture of this sculpture, sorry. Veverve (talk) 18:48, 4 July 2021 (UTC)
- Veverve
- here, to me this image is to bad when zoomed in to see any details like that on the end of ribbons.
- here, this image is cut so you don't see the end of the ribbons and also bad quality.
- This image is what we used to shape the ribbons like it's stated in the sources of that SVG.
- If this is important to you I can remove the frills and reshape the ribbon but it will mainly be as a guess from my side as I don't really have anything else but the CoA above to go on. --always ping me-- Goran tek-en (talk) 17:23, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
- @Goran tek-en: The thing is, this is also very likely a guesswork, and its user stopped responding shortly after he/she posted it; he/she did not even give credits for the parts he/she used, so this ribbon may be from another image. Sometimes, because of this attribution problem, I think about asking for the image to be deleted.
- Therefore, I would prefer you to change the ribbon based on the images and the the draft I gave you. Veverve (talk) 17:40, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
- Veverve Ribbon-1. --always ping me-- Goran tek-en (talk) 17:44, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
- @Goran tek-en: It is good! Thank you. You can upload it. Veverve (talk) 17:54, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
- Veverve Ribbon-1. --always ping me-- Goran tek-en (talk) 17:44, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
- Veverve
- @Goran tek-en: I do not really remember us having a conversation on this subject, so sorry if I have forgotten. While I agree that the images we have are not very helpful, and that it is unfortunate that we do not have the origina 2d model, I can clearly see both in here and here that
Veverve New version uploaded Done --always ping me-- Goran tek-en (talk) 18:07, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Spanish knot.svg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:16, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
Copyright status: File:Ion paths in a strong magnetic field.svg
Copyright status: File:Ion paths in a strong magnetic field.svg
|
|
| This media may be deleted. |
Thanks for uploading File:Ion paths in a strong magnetic field.svg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.
If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.) If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there. Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you. |
This action was performed automatically by AntiCompositeBot (talk) (FAQ) 13:05, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Nemška pomladna ofenziva 1918.svg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:30, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
Valued Image Promoted
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Floor plan of the Red Fort in Delhi before 1857..
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
--VICBot2 (talk) 00:22, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
A Request for the George Cross
-
The George Cross Medal.png Detailed Version
Hi, I have a request for the George Cross on the flag of Malta. The current cross on the flag which is widely used on Wikipedia has fewer details than the one on the official construction sheet and some elements are not accurate like the cross at the bottom instead of the flower. I have searched the web for the correct version but the only one I found is a PNG(above). I have asked the user Great Brightstar and they made a request on the Illustration workshop. But since then I've made some edits to the request which might have made things unclear. I just need a SVG format of the PNG image and I will update the flag and the coat of arms. If it's possible for you, can you do it? If so I would be really grateful. Here are theOfficial graphical specifications for the color and size ratio of the Red Perimeter. So please let me know if you are going to do this. Best Regards. Kamran.nef (talk) 19:59, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
- Kamran.nef I will do it, I will take the request and work there. Done --always ping me-- Goran tek-en (talk) 09:07, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
- Thank you so much! Kamran.nef (talk) 09:11, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
- Kamran.nef Thanks for "The Graphic Designer's Barnstar". I have been thinking, do you think there is a need for a version without the the red outline? --always ping me-- Goran tek-en (talk) 14:05, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
- I don't know, there could be. Most places associate the cross with Malta. But other versions might be useful too. Kamran.nef (talk) 15:24, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
Maksimir park
Kaštel Stari It seems as your request was archived and I can't find any user page for you so I hope this ping will find you.
Here is now two drafts for today's park.
Tell me what texts you want in there, which texts to change and check everything. --always ping me-- Goran tek-en (talk) 17:28, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
- Goran tek-en Well, all the texts that are in open street map, and just change the title in Park-šuma Maksimir. 95.168.120.17 17:55, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
- Kaštel Stari You are not logged and I don't act on anonymous postings so please log in. There are a lot of texts at OSM so you have to be more specific and as before I need the texts written here so I can copy, thanks. --always ping me-- Goran tek-en (talk) 18:02, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
- :Goran tek-en Ok can you put link to OSM, then i’ll tell you what to put in. Kaštel Stari (talk) 18:07, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
- Kaštel Stari OSM --always ping me-- Goran tek-en (talk) 18:19, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
- Goran tek-en Tnx, I’ll send you what texts to keep but no sooner then 17. August. Kaštel Stari (talk) 18:27, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
- Goran tek-en Here It is. Link Kaštel Stari (talk) 13:20, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
- Kaštel Stari The link doesn't work for me, access denied. Remember that I need the texts also as texts here so I can copy them, thanks. --always ping me-- Goran tek-en (talk) 13:37, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
- Goran tek-en Sorry, my bad. Now It should work. [3] Kaštel Stari (talk) 13:50, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
- But I still need the texts so I can copy them here, to many special letters. --always ping me-- Goran tek-en (talk) 14:16, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
- Goran tek-en Ok here are the texts: Peto Maksimirsko jezero, Četvrto Maksimirsko jezero, Treće Maksimirsko jezero, Drugo Maksimirsko jezero, Prvo Maksimirsko jezero Kaštel Stari (talk) 14:26, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
- Goran tek-en Here It is. Link Kaštel Stari (talk) 13:20, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
- Goran tek-en Tnx, I’ll send you what texts to keep but no sooner then 17. August. Kaštel Stari (talk) 18:27, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
- Kaštel Stari OSM --always ping me-- Goran tek-en (talk) 18:19, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
- :Goran tek-en Ok can you put link to OSM, then i’ll tell you what to put in. Kaštel Stari (talk) 18:07, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
Kaštel Stari I changed the name in the title. Draft-2.
If this draft is fine I will need the following;
- Name of the file
- Description (/language)
- Captions/s (/language)
- Category/ies at commons
to be able to upload it at commons. If you don'y know about Captions read here. --always ping me-- Goran tek-en (talk) 18:02, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
- Name of the file Map of Maksimir Park
- Description (/language) Današnji izgled Park-šume Maksimir (Croatian)
- Captions/s (/language) Situation plan, Park, Maksimir (English)
- Category/ies at commons
Ponds in Croatia, Maksimir Park
Kaštel Stari (talk) 18:12, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
- Kaštel Stari I added 2021 so names and info are more informative, hope it's fine with you.
- file:Map of Maksimir Park 2021.svg
- Done --always ping me-- Goran tek-en (talk) 18:57, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
|
The Graphic Designer's Barnstar |
| I want to thank you for your amazing work on File:George_Cross_of_Malta_737x737.svg and File:George_Cross_of_Malta_170x170.svg Kamran.nef (talk) 23:14, 18 August 2021 (UTC) |
Map Jaguari
Hey man, use the traductor for portuguese please :) Como é uma cidade pequena, não há muito material disponível na verdade. Aquele link que eu mandei ele é uma base mas não está muito aproximado, por isso eu mesmo comecei a fazer os mapas no google earth, baseado nas leis. Existem correntes de água na cidade também. Eu gostaria que você ajudasse fazendo um mapa em imagem para a Wikipedia. Entre em contato :)
NaCl_polyhedra_bonds
Michael D. Turnbull, DePiep I hope both of you will have the time and interest in helping out for us to be able to create a more accurate image than File:NaCl_polyhedra.svg.
- Info from DePiep:
Nice to note: their reply does not concern the crystallography, but the chemical bonding representation. Some honour is saved ;-) That is: size of balls, and the drawing of sticks between them (here in colors green-white) is the problem. So, given (=accepting from MDT) that the bonding is different, image File:Sodium-chloride-3D-ionic.png says something different. Now how to turn this image into a correct one, per MDT? Obviously, remove the between-atomic-balls sticks (no such bonding). Also, change ball size (keeping anion/cation relative sizes) to make them touching & give stable ball stacking. However, then both illustrative en:octahedrons would become invisible? These are the main assests of currewnt image!
As for the two "cubic-like" items: this is a visualisation, not physically present. It illustrates the surrounding (positioning) of a grey atom by six Na-atoms, on a en:triangular bipyramid (six corners = atoms); en:octahedron. It is described here: "It is obvious from the diagram that each chloride ion is surrounded by six sodium ions which are disposed towards the corners of a regular octahedron". Correct PyMOL colors, from source PyMOL: :::Na#aa5cf2([0-1] scale: 0.670588235, 0.360784314, 0.949019608), sodium Na :::Cl#1ef01e([0-1] scale: 0.121568627, 0.941176471, 0.121568627), chlorine Cl
- Info from Michael D. Turnbull:
I think I can express the issue in another way that may help. There are two general bond types in chemistry, ionic and covalent. When we think of a compound "AB" we can write A+B- as a good way of expressing the ionic option. Or we could write A–B to show the covalent option. Some compounds have both type of bond (e.g. A–B–C+D-). What is the key difference in behaviour? Well, for one thing, ionic compounds completely lose their integrity on dissolving them in water or melting them. That means that if we recrystallise them or re-freeze them, the individual ions don't revert to the positions they previously held: they randomize. Whereas, when a covalent compound like acetic acid = CH3COOH dissolves in water the methyl group never becomes detached from the carbonyl group: when re-isolated they are still covalently bonded, although other molecules of the acid do freeze independently. And sodium acetate displays both behaviours: the methyl group stays attached to the carbonyl group BUT the sodium atom is promiscuous: it moves around in solution independently. Hence the "best" simple drawing is CH3COO–Na+. Incidentally, the atoms in covalently-bonded compounds frequently end up closer together than the sum of their ionic radii. They share molecular orbitals in a way that ionic compounds (of which sodium chloride is a classic example) can't. So the challenge for Goran tek-en in trying to create a really superior image is to use some cunning transparency in the lattice made up of filled atoms to add the polyhedron whose role is to illustrate the closest neighbours of a given single atom (a chloride in the current drawing on the right and a sodium on the left). I have no objections to using lines within these polyhedra, to represent their edges, not bonds. The result will some sort of combination of the polyhedra with a drawing like File:NaCl.png.
- Space-filling_model, Ball-and-stick_model. Electrostatic interactions Non-covalent_interaction, electrostatic_interaction, illustration-of-electrostatic-interactions, File:Schematic of the electrostatic interaction between two dipolar molecules.png
| Extended content |
|---|
|
1) For me to be able to start I would need the ratio in size between Na and Cl.
Michael D. Turnbull, DePiep Now I have uploaded the image NaCl bonds and in this I have reduced the visibility of the bonds to 60% of what it was in this Draft. To me it's better but you guys has to say which you want or maybe softer/stronger. --always ping me-- Goran tek-en (talk) 14:11, 29 August 2021 (UTC)
Michael D. Turnbull, DePiep Can any of you describe in words I understand what it is that the two polyhedrons are actually showing. I understand it shows the relationships between the seven atoms but is there not more to it? --always ping me-- Goran tek-en (talk) 15:13, 29 August 2021 (UTC)
Michael D. Turnbull Now I have a draft with both polyhedral.
Michael D. Turnbull Here are different drafts.
|
Now you can find them here file:NaCl octahedra in crystal.svg, file:NaCl octahedra and part of crystal.svg, file:NaCl octahedra.svg. Done
- Which one would you pick as I want to promote it as Featured pictures? --please ping me-- Goran tek-en (talk) 18:47, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
- Sorry for the delay, Goran tek-en. I've now incorporated each image at least once in relevant articles (see their file pages). Any of them could be a featured image but if pushed I'd choose file:NaCl octahedra.svg, now at en:Sodium_chloride#Solid_sodium_chloride. Michael D. Turnbull (talk) 13:58, 29 September 2021 (UTC)
Valued Image Promoted
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Plan du cimetière de Plainpalais, Genève (Map of the Plainpalais Cemetery, Geneva)
InfoThe description of the numbers can be found here Liste des tombes du cimetière des Rois, Genève.If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
--VICBot2 (talk) 00:22, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
surge_tank
Glrx Thanks for helping out here. I have copied the last part from Commons:Graphic_Lab/Illustration_workshop/Archive/2021#schematic_sketch_surge_tank_=_Wasserschloss to here.
Here are now twelve illustrations of a full cycle. I have added arrows to show which way the valve is moving. I have also added some informativ text but you have to say if you want it, also when I do the animation it will be time depending so you can read them if we keep them. The numbering now is not related to your sketches any longer. ::::::*1 ::::::*2 ::::::*3 ::::::*4 ::::::*5 ::::::*6 ::::::*7 ::::::*8 ::::::*9 ::::::*10 ::::::*11 ::::::*12 ::::::: Depicting the full cycle is a great idea. ::::::: Also good: the arrows to show which way the valve is moving. ::::::: I have also added some informativ text but you have to say if you want it. I like it. ::::::: The numbering now is not related to your sketches any longer. That is fine. ::::::: Answer to Glrx ideas: ::::::: 4 Valve open flow. Flow in tunnel is slow compared to penstock (pipe feeding turbine). I'd use short arrows in tunnel. One possibility, but Goran_tek's pale and dark arrows are also ok. ::::::: 5 Valve shut. (Real world shuts valve gradually.) The gradually closing valve is a good idea. And it's nice depicted in 2-3-4.png ::::::: I have a few remarks about 1-11.png but will write tomorrow. He wanted illustrations and an animation is possible.
- So what I would like to know is if the twelve different illustrations are good or something should be edited.
- If they are good the should be uploaded and then I need this info for each file;
- Name of the file
- Description (/language)
- Captions/s (/language)
- Category/ies at commons
- Finally the animation should be created and checked. --always ping me-- Goran tek-en (talk) 15:12, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
- Glrx You agreed to help out on this, could you please do so, look above, thanks. --please ping me-- Goran tek-en (talk) 16:33, 3 September 2021 (UTC)
- @Goran tek-en:
- Free free to ignore these comments.
- 1. The darker wisps in the reservoir suggest water movement. I'd remove them. The flow at the tunnel entrance will be as fast as the tunnel, but the flow drops off rapidly. The area at the entrance is πr2. One tunnel diameter (D = 2r) away, the area contributing to the flow is one-half of a sphere of radius D. That area is ½×4πD2 = 8×πr2. So the flow velocity at 1 tunnel diameter away from the mouth is 1/8 the tunnel velocity. The arrows in the tunnel should be the same length because the flow velocity in the tunnel is uniform. The penstock looks to be ½ the tunnel diameter, so its flow is 4 times as fast as the tunnel velocity. Its arrows would be 4 times longer. You've drawn the turbine as a side-shot waterwheel: efficient turbines try to remove almost all the stream velocity. The exhaust comes out the bottom rather than the opposite side. See Hydroelectric Power: How it Works at USGS. The water should be dumping into the lower body of water rather than stopping in mid air.
- 2. When the valve closes, the flow in the left side of the tunnel will not change quickly, so its arrows should stay the same length. The tunnel flow after the surge tank will be smaller due to the valve, so its arrow length should be slightly shorter. The difference in flow is directed into the surge tank. So the arrow going into the surge tank should be small (diameters are the same, so the length of the left side arrows = length of surge entrance arrow + length of right side arrow. That's conservation of mass. The diameter of the surge tank is about twice that of the surge entrance, so the length of the arrows inside the tank should be about ¼ the length of the entrance arrow.
- 3. Cavitation needs to start after the valve. When the water flowing through the valve is less than the water flowing down the penstock, then a vacuum is formed after the valve. You show that cavitation, but the contrast between the gray and the light blue is small.
- 4. Flow in surge tank is ¼ the right-to-left flow in the tunnel.
- 5. "Valve closed" is good but should be first line. Add "surge tank is above reservoir level". Third line "so tunnel flow reversed".
- 6. Use shorter arrows in body of surge tank. Its flow is still ¼ of reverse tunnel flow.
- 7. Reverse line order. First line is "valve closed". Second line "surge tank at same same level as reservoir". Third line "no flow".
- 8. Causality: put the line about the valve opening above the line about gradually increasing the flow.
- 9. Reverse lines. "Valve gradually opens". "Surge tank supplies water quickly". "Water in tunnel starts to move".
- 10. Line 1: "valve open". Line 2: "tunnel supplies water for turbine and to refill surge tank".
- 11. At this point, the net flow into the surge tank = net flow out of the surge tank. There should not be any arrows in the surge tank.
- 12. Same comments as 11.
- Glrx (talk) 17:09, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
- Glrx Thanks for your input and knowledge, I will check and use it. --please ping me-- Goran tek-en (talk) 14:16, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! VIIC uboat shaded.svg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:26, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
Вікі любить пам'ятки 2021 в Україні / Wiki Loves Monuments 2021 in Ukraine
Привіт!
З 1 по 30 вересня вже традиційно пройде українська частина міжнародного фотоконкурсу «Вікі любить пам'ятки»! В Україні цей конкурс пройде вже вдесяте. На конкурс можна подавати власні фото пам'яток історико-культурної спадщини України — і змагатися за призи. Більше можна прочитати за посиланням.
Радимо ознайомитися із детальними правилами, а також із відповідями на часті питання. Як і того року — у номінації «За найбільшу кількість сфотографованих пам’яток» можна отримати 21 бал за фотографії об'єктів, якщо світлин цієї пам'ятки раніше не було завантажено.
Нагадаємо, що всі фотографії автоматично беруть участь у номінації «За найбільшу кількість сфотографованих пам’яток»; однак для того, щоб фото позмагалося у номінації «Найкраще фото», потрібно підтвердити це при завантаженні.
Цього року вперше будуть окремо виділені фото з повітря (дронами, квадрокоптерами тощо) — у спеціальній номінації «Аерофото». Для того, щоб робота потрапила на спецномінацію потрібно вибрати її у Завантажувачі.
Також вперше проводиться спеціальна номінація «Пам'ятки Подесення», знову пройдуть спецномінації «Відео», «Єврейська спадщина», «Млини», «Пам'ятки національно-визвольної боротьби» та «Via Regia Ukraine». Для участі світлин у цих спецномінаціях не потрібно обирати нічого у Завантажувачі — світлини зараховуватимуться автоматично з відповідних списків.
Усі номінації та спецномінації конкурсу описані тут.
Приєднуйтеся!
Зі списками пам'яток можна ознайомитися тут. Більше інформації про конкурс дивіться за посиланням. Щоб отримувати інформацію про новинки у конкурсі — підпишіться на наші блог та сторінку у фейсбук.
Важливо! Цього року відбулася адміністративно-територіальна реформа. Однак, ми проводимо конкурс ще за попереднім адміністративно-територіальним устроєм. Ми почали роботу над створенням списків з новим поділом, але вона ще не є завершена. Ви можете користуватися тими новими списками, що вже є, якщо потрібно відшукати пам'ятку за новим поділом (деякі ОДА вже почали присилати у такому форматі), але пам'ятайте, що нові списки ще не є повними.
Якщо у Вас є запитання, можете звертатися wlm
wikimedia.org.ua чи у фейсбук – З повагою, Оргкомітет «Вікі любить пам'ятки».17:33, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
Ви отримали це повідомлення, оскільки Ви брали участь в одному із фотоконкурсів «Вікімедіа Україна» чи допомагали (наприклад, редагували файли з цих конкурсів).
If you do not speak Ukrainian, but you are interested in a contest, you can check out our page in English here.
Flag of RVNMF during Diem's era
I made two images for the flag of RVNMF in Ngo Dinh Diem's era (cf. File:Flag of the RVNMF (1955–1965).svg), as I saw some sources shown that the flag kept similarity to that of the Vietnamese National Army. It would be nice if you can made further improvement based on better sources. Regards. -- Great Brightstar (talk) 17:28, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
- Great Brightstar
- First I think it's wrong to put the attribution in my name. You have made those derivative works based on a file I created (which you stated) but I haven't created those two so please put the attribution in your name.
- I don't understand which parts you think I should improve and what sources you are thinking of, please explain more, thanks. --please ping me-- Goran tek-en (talk) 18:53, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
- OK. All sources I have seen were already listed in their file description pages. Including two images archived at the Internet Arvhive, and a YouTube video from Diem's era, all of them shown that the flag of the RVNMF was still keep the yellow field with three red stripes as that of the Vietnamese National Army in his presidency. However I can read some of French contents but I can't read Vietnamese text, and I can't promise I made right reproduction for the inspections and wreath laurels. So I just hope anyone could give a hand. If you could help to improve, I will send you barnstar. Regards. -- Great Brightstar (talk) 17:00, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
- Donald Trung Could you check (please read above) the sources of this file Flag of the RVNMF (1955–1965) by Great Brightstar if what he has done is correct and/or if you know of better sources. You do have knowledge of this if I'm not wrong. --please ping me-- Goran tek-en (talk) 18:17, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
- I will research it (more) later, I don't think that the current version is incorrect at all based on the resources available to me. I just think that the Great Brightstar wants to have the most factually correct version and saw that you made "the other flag" so (s)he just asked you. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 18:55, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
- Donald Trung Could you check (please read above) the sources of this file Flag of the RVNMF (1955–1965) by Great Brightstar if what he has done is correct and/or if you know of better sources. You do have knowledge of this if I'm not wrong. --please ping me-- Goran tek-en (talk) 18:17, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
- OK. All sources I have seen were already listed in their file description pages. Including two images archived at the Internet Arvhive, and a YouTube video from Diem's era, all of them shown that the flag of the RVNMF was still keep the yellow field with three red stripes as that of the Vietnamese National Army in his presidency. However I can read some of French contents but I can't read Vietnamese text, and I can't promise I made right reproduction for the inspections and wreath laurels. So I just hope anyone could give a hand. If you could help to improve, I will send you barnstar. Regards. -- Great Brightstar (talk) 17:00, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
Request: small tweak in a timeline
@Goran tek-en: At File:Timeline of the History of the main autocephalous Eastern Orthodox Churches, E. Orthodox point of view (2021).svg, could you move the "1990" of the UAOC (red line) so that it is at the same place on the x axis as the "1990" above it? Like this. Veverve Veverve (talk) 20:29, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
- Veverve The thing is that as I see it it's centered. The center of the grey five corner lines up with the line below which is the point where 1990 starts. This is how I have drawn every where, if we change here I will have to change every where and that is a lot of work which (to me) doesn't bring any improvement. --please ping me-- Goran tek-en (talk) 14:24, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
- @Goran tek-en: Is it not possible to move only this date, and not the others? If you think it will be too asymmetrical, then nevermind. Veverve (talk) 15:03, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
- Veverve It's possible but I don't like it. I'm that type of person that likes that the timelines we have made should all have the same construction, rules etc. But in reality you always comes to a point like this. Have you got comments on it or does it feels wrong to you? --please ping me-- Goran tek-en (talk) 15:11, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
- @Goran tek-en: It simply felt wrong to me. I know our aesthetic feelings sometimes clash, but I feel all in all we - especially you - made a good job on the requests I made. Nevermind, then. The timeline is already very good the way it is!
- Oh, by the way I have some requests at the Graphic lab, one of which is not under DR, so if you want to give a hand feel free ;). Veverve (talk) 15:22, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
- Veverve
- This is a variation I'm fine with, does it help you?
- I don't understand what you mean by "not under DR", please explain.
- Please put the links for your requests here and I will check. --please ping me-- Goran tek-en (talk) 12:56, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
- @Goran tek-en:
- No, but as I said it is not a problem to keep the timeline the way it is, do not worry.
- Some images I asked to be changed in the Graphic Lab are under deletion request (DR). While they should normally be kept, I understand a graphic designer would not want to work in images which could possibly be deleted soon.
- Here is the request I made in the lab which does not concern images under (DR): Commons:Graphic_Lab/Illustration_workshop#SVG_version_of_Nuvola_images. Veverve (talk) 16:10, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
- Veverve
- I have seen that one and are those images not copyrighted in some way when used in a "program", that's why I haven't accepted it.
- What I can see on other images there is a named designer so it's strange to me.
- If you want to use them that small (your two links) why do you want a svg version?
- What is Nuvola images really. --please ping me-- Goran tek-en (talk) 17:08, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
- Veverve
- Veverve It's possible but I don't like it. I'm that type of person that likes that the timelines we have made should all have the same construction, rules etc. But in reality you always comes to a point like this. Have you got comments on it or does it feels wrong to you? --please ping me-- Goran tek-en (talk) 15:11, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
- @Goran tek-en: Is it not possible to move only this date, and not the others? If you think it will be too asymmetrical, then nevermind. Veverve (talk) 15:03, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
- The images are under GNU 2.1+, so they are not copyrighted.
- The GNU license does not prevent people from adding the author's name.
- I feel it is always better to have SVG rather than bitmap images.
- w:Nuvola states: "Nuvola is a free software icon set under the GNU LGPL 2.1 license, created by David Vignoni."
Veverve (talk) 17:28, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
- Veverve Sorry to be a bit persistent on this. That license is for software to my understanding and I really don't feel comfortable recreating them like that and it's a bit of work just to have them as svg if... I can never be true to the original so I'm sorry but I will leave this open for someone else. I hope that's fine with you. Done --please ping me-- Goran tek-en (talk) 18:28, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion
.svg) |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Plan of the Jama mosque based on Pascal Coste's drawing(en).svg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:24, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
Valued Image Promoted
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Illustration of Sutton Helmet design-2 known and reconstructed parts.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
--VICBot2 (talk) 00:22, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
Вікі любить пам'ятки 2021 в Україні триває до 30 вересня / Wiki Loves Monuments 2021 in Ukraine is on till September 30
Привіт!
Нагадуємо, що до 30 вересня включно можна вантажити світлини та відео культурної спадщини України до національного етапу міжнародного фотоконкурсу «Вікі любить пам'ятки»!
Зараз Україна посідає 3-є місце за кількістю завантажених світлин, поступаючись Російській Федерації та Німеччині. За першу половину місяця було завантажено світлини пам'яток із усіх регіонів України, але частина із них є дуже погано представлена. Севастополь зараз представлений тільки однією пам'яткою і одним фото, Крим — 12 пам'яток і 51 фото. Детальніше — у таблиці:
| Регіон | К-ть пам'яток | К-ть фото |
|---|---|---|
| Севастополь | 1 | 1 |
| АР Крим | 12 | 51 |
| Закарпаття | 26 | 96 |
| Миколаївщина | 29 | 81 |
| Рівненщина | 36 | 186 |
| Херсонщина | 36 | 83 |
| Житомирщина | 55 | 324 |
| Донеччина | 57 | 153 |
| Тернопільщина | 62 | 234 |
| Буковина | 75 | 220 |
| Луганщина | 82 | 90 |
| Львівщина | 82 | 351 |
| Кіровоградщина | 88 | 181 |
| Волинь | 98 | 270 |
| Одещина | 115 | 383 |
| Сумщина | 129 | 414 |
| Дніпропетровщина | 139 | 278 |
| Київ | 159 | 248 |
| Хмельниччина | 166 | 538 |
| Полтавщина | 171 | 594 |
| Харківщина | 175 | 625 |
| Київщина | 181 | 651 |
| Черкащина | 186 | 455 |
| Прикарпаття | 240 | 305 |
| Вінничина | 242 | 775 |
| Запоріжжя | 253 | 317 |
| Чернігівщина | 305 | 519 |
Зі списками пам'яток можна ознайомитися тут. Усі номінації та спецномінації конкурсу описані тут.
Цього року у конкурсі є вісім спеціальних номінацій:
- «Аерофото» — для фото з повітря (зроблені дронами, квадрокоптерами тощо). Для того, щоб робота потрапила на спецномінацію потрібно вибрати її у Завантажувачі;
- «Відео» — для відеосюжетів з пам'ятками;
- «Єврейська спадщина» — для об'єктів із охоронним статусом, і без нього;
- «Млини» — для об'єктів із охоронним статусом, і без нього;
- «Пам'ятки національно-визвольної боротьби» — для об'єктів із охоронним статусом, і без нього;
- «Пам'ятки Подесення» — для об'єктів із охоронним статусом, і без нього;
- «Via Regia Ukraine» — для об'єктів із охоронним статусом 15 населених пунктів, що за цим маршрутом є.
Більше інформації про конкурс дивіться за посиланням. Щоб отримувати інформацію про новинки у конкурсі — підпишіться на наші блог та сторінку у фейсбук.
Приєднуйтеся!
Якщо у Вас є запитання, можете звертатися wlmwikimedia.org.ua чи у фейсбук – З повагою, Оргкомітет «Вікі любить пам'ятки». 19:08, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
Ви отримали це повідомлення, оскільки Ви брали участь в одному із фотоконкурсів «Вікімедіа Україна» чи допомагали (наприклад, редагували файли з цих конкурсів).
If you do not speak Ukrainian, but you are interested in a contest, you can check out our page in English here.
Quality Image Promotion
|
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Sutton Hoo helmet design 2-reconstructed-known.svg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:20, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Sutton Hoo helmet fig1 - reconstructed-known.svg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:38, 25 September 2021 (UTC)
Valued Image Promoted
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Illustration of Sutton Helmet design-1 known and reconstructed parts..
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
--VICBot2 (talk) 00:20, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! NaCl octahedra.svg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! NaCl octahedra and part of crystal.svg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! NaCl octahedra in crystal.svg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! NaCl bonds.svg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:37, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Minsk Protocol.svg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:33, 1 October 2021 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Reverse-Air.svg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Mechanical-Shaker.svg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Reverse-Jet.svg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:30, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
Valued Image Promoted
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Site plan of the Jāmeh Mosque of Isfahān from 1840..
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Particles in a plasma orbit around the magnetic field lines with a radius that varies with the strength of the field..
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
--VICBot2 (talk) 00:20, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! South Sudan topographic map.svg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
_1846.svg) |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Situacijski plan Parka Jurjaves (Maksimir) 1846.svg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Map of Maksimir Park 2021.svg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:25, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
Spelling mistake in File:Time zones of the world-UTC.svg
Great work with the time zone map! I love the colors. There is one spelling mistake though: It should be "Arctic Ocean", not "Artic Ocean". --Morn (talk) 10:23, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
- @Morn: Done Thanks, corrected. The colors are picked to work for many people with some kind of color deficiency. --please ping me-- Goran tek-en (talk) 11:21, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
- @Goran tek-en: Thanks for the update! I am not color blind, but I still appreciate bold-yet-tasteful color combinations in mapping and graphs. Other time zone maps are either garish and ugly or too subtle and hard to read. Your colors are a much better middle ground. --Morn (talk) 14:11, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
File:Timeline of the main schisms from the Serbian Orthodox Church (second quarter of the 19th century to 2021).svg edit request
Hello! Sorry to bother you again with one of those timelines. At File:Timeline of the main schisms from the Serbian Orthodox Church (second quarter of the 19th century to 2021).svg, could you simply remove the whole line which starts in 2018? The result should look like this. Veverve (talk) 23:51, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
- @Veverve: , Done --please ping me-- Goran tek-en (talk) 15:53, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! VIIC vector.svg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Archaeological geography of Vale Royal Abbey, Cheshire.svg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
--QICbot (talk) 05:23, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
Valued Image Promoted
.svg){kind=small}
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
SVG illustration of: "Banner of the Moors" in 1212. Almohad dynasty lost in battle of Las Navas de Tolosa.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
--VICBot2 (talk) 00:22, 31 October 2021 (UTC)
Valued Image Promoted
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Territories in western Mediterranean held by Numidia, Carthage and Roman Republic in 150 BC, during the Third Punic War.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.
--VICBot2 (talk) 00:20, 3 November 2021 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion
|
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Banner of the Moors (1212).svg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
--QICbot (talk) 07:07, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
Changes request for the Greek Old Calendarist timeline
Hello. I have made some research on the subject of the timeline, so I request some minor tweaks. Here is what it should look like.
- below "1936": add "or" and "1937". If you know a better way to add the 1937 date, feel free to do so.
- in the legend: remove the "Autocephalous True Orthodox church" and the orange line
- the 1936 "Genuine Orthodox Church of Greece" line: put the beginning in yellow and the rest of the line in the blue used by the Autocephalous Old Calendarist church.
Veverve (talk) 14:38, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
- @Veverve Please remind me in three weeks, thanks. --please ping me-- Goran tek-en (talk) 10:24, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
- Could you pleas link to that timeline, I have made a "few" requests here so it would help me and saving time for me, thanks. --please ping me-- Goran tek-en (talk) 18:12, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
- @Veverve I got some time over draft changes. --please ping me-- Goran tek-en (talk) 17:47, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
- Could you pleas link to that timeline, I have made a "few" requests here so it would help me and saving time for me, thanks. --please ping me-- Goran tek-en (talk) 18:12, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
@Goran tek-en: The last two lines should look like this. Veverve (talk) 19:46, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
- @Veverve Sorry, didn't see that, draft-2 --please ping me-- Goran tek-en (talk) 20:07, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
- @Goran tek-en: It is good. You can upload it at File:Timeline of the main Old Calendarists and True Orthodox Greek Eastern Orthodox Churches (2021).svg. Veverve (talk) 20:12, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
- @Veverve Done --please ping me-- Goran tek-en (talk) 11:31, 15 November 2021 (UTC)
- @Veverve
- @Goran tek-en: It is good. You can upload it at File:Timeline of the main Old Calendarists and True Orthodox Greek Eastern Orthodox Churches (2021).svg. Veverve (talk) 20:12, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
In appreciation
|
The Graphic Designer's Barnstar | |
| By the authority vested in me by myself it gives me great pleasure to present you with this barnstar in recognition of your creation of File:Map of the route of Edward III's chevauchée of 1346.svg. This currently features in six featured articles in the English Wikipedia and in seven other wikipedias. A startlingly useful piece of work. It is appreciated. Gog the Mild (talk) 20:11, 8 November 2021 (UTC) |
Map of the route of Edward III's chevauchée of 1346
Newm30, Gog the Mild I have now updated this map with; some templates of my own, Object location, Caption, Wikidata (search wikidata) and also Structured data, please check it.
Within the map I added a location map, if you don't want it just tell me.
This should look better as thumbnails especially the fonts and then the information overall is updated to what I do now and your sources.
I have no idea if this will affect the thumbnail were you are using it in wikipedia, please check. If something is strange there (it should not) please tell me as it's good for me to know. --please ping me-- Goran tek-en (talk) 13:26, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
- I think that under "Description" you should add Battle of Crecy.
- I am not seeing an in-map location map.
- Otherwise, it looks good. Gog the Mild (talk) 13:33, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
- Newm30, Gog the Mild Thanks, you have to either force an update, purge the cache or just click on the image and the right version is shown. It's an preview update thing, takes some time sometimes. I added the battle but it seems strange just like that, could you please change it so it is more understandable, File:Map of the route of Edward III's chevauchée of 1346.svg. Done --please ping me-- Goran tek-en (talk) 14:16, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
- Newm30, Gog the Mild Thanks, you have to either force an update, purge the cache or just click on the image and the right version is shown. It's an preview update thing, takes some time sometimes. I added the battle but it seems strange just like that, could you please change it so it is more understandable, File:Map of the route of Edward III's chevauchée of 1346.svg.
Four files
Gog the Mild do you know if Newm30 still active since he hasn't responded to things?
I have now updated four files that was requested by Newm30 but it seems as you were involved also. So if you have the time could you please just check them.
Should you be added to them or any like in the first one?
- File:Map of the route of Edward III's chevauchée of 1346.svg this one you have checked
- File:Map of Gascon campaign of 1345.svg
- File:Map of route of Lancaster's chevauchée of 1346.svg
- File:Map of route of Black Prince chevauchée of 1355.svg In this there is a pdf link which is not allowed any more, do you know if I can insert this instead, or any other you know? --please ping me-- Goran tek-en (talk) 20:06, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
- Goran tek-en, Newm30 hasn't posted since 31 August. They tend to have lengthy breaks, but this is unusually long. The second, yes, I liaised regarding the sourcing for this. The third similarly, except that the sourcing doesn't seem to have been added; would you like me to insert it? The fourth I wasn't involved with. (I have made a minor change to a page number.) Re the PDF, I think the easiest thing would be for me to replace it with essentially the same map from Sumption, an impeccable source and a dead tree source. Gog the Mild (talk) 20:37, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
- Gog the Mild Thanks, can you please add what you know and your self where it fits. Yes replace the map, thanks.
1796 Italian campaign maps
Hi @Qbli2mHd:
In 2019 I worked on your request 1796 Italian campaign maps but then I lost contact with you so it was never finished.
Both you and I invested a lot of time and energy in that and I would really like it to be completed. I think it's almost finished and to me it holds a lot of information and can be very useful.
Is there any way we can do so?
If you don't want to, could you recommend some one else who you think would be interested in competing them. I would really appreciate it, thanks. --please ping me-- Goran tek-en (talk) 18:45, 11 November 2021 (UTC)
Done in other place. --please ping me-- Goran tek-en (talk) 12:54, 21 November 2021 (UTC)
an amuse bouche?
Hi! You made SVG of constellations for me last year and invited me to ask about other projects and here I am with a small project (comparatively). Perhaps you might be interested?
It is 8 fleurons for a book I am working on. They appear with the title of each chapter. The pixelmaps I made look fine when scaled down, but I was just thinking that they would look more than fine if they were svg. Also, I had thought I would have my own inkscape running by now, but it is not on this borrowed computer.
Here are the files (I am somewhat embarrassed to show them) Category:Through a Glass Lightly (1897, Greg)/Fleurons. The book is about wine. English wine, actually (port, sherry, etc). Published in 1897. The author compiled essays he had written for a British magazine and caused the book to be published; making it as nice as he could for a memorial to his father. He hired an artist to draw the title page (and maybe these fleurons also) a published but as yet not widely known artist, Arthur Rackham. Gold lettering on a yellow silk cover. All very nice (except for the choice of yellow and gold, but that is my opinion).
I have just started the book (the cover is my design, based on a description and looks not very much like the original) it is at s:en:Through a Glass Lightly. Where the book can be seen page by page (and the progress I am making is here: s:en:Index:Through a Glass Lightly (1897, Greg).djvu. From that last link, each of the pages with a fleuron has been created and can be found marked yellow in between grays.
I just thought they would look lovely as SVG, and no feelings will be hurt if you decline the project.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 22:39, 11 November 2021 (UTC)
| Extended content |
|---|
RaboKarbakian the drafts I show you are all PNG versions of the original SVG files I'm working in and will upload to commons. Then we can go with a "softer" color. I just give you one size here at this stage. We can of course use any color you like. To me a grey or soft color (like in the constellations) looks so much nicer and more pleasant to view. This is a today version of that old book and if they could (technically, financially) I think they would have used colors. --please ping me-- Goran tek-en (talk) 16:47, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
@RaboKarbakian I'm not really happy with those drafts as it's so hard to transfer a grey scale print into a all black 100% one. Everything gets so much harder and it's difficult to deceide what is black or not. The drafts image height is 50 px and the illustration height is 48 px and the width varies.
@RaboKarbakian I'm sorry but the information on your last posts are confusing me, I think we have to back down a bit.
---drafts
{{Book
Goran tek-en I am very sorry that you do not believe me when I say that the use of the book template is the result of negotiations with a commons bot author. Please read: User_talk:Schlurcher/Archive_3#Inception_date_vs_publication_date It is not my "feeling" about the situation that caused me to ask that the book template be used. Also, I do not see anything from this project in your uploads.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 12:53, 21 November 2021 (UTC)
The Book template is my politics. It is an evolution in the relationship between the Commons and Wikisource. At source, it might be that I am "dismissed" as a Commoner and here, you are reading the template notes to me in a dismissive way because I am from Wikisource and don't understand the commons ways. For me, I was having problems with one of the wikidata bots here and the Book template was the solution which is what made it my politics. In the political arena, I think that honestly (the kind of honest where you don't invent other reasons so that you get your way) you don't want to change your template. I am not going to include your work with mine because of any invented reasons. If you were serious about not using the template due to the templates purpose 1) you would not have used the "Institution" template wrongly and 2) you could have asked had one of the authors of the book template confirm. But you didn't. Had you simply stated that you really need to use your own template from the beginning or even at the start of this template chat, the discussion would be over and the images would be used or not used, we will never know. From me, honestly, I have too much "invention of 'for the greater good reasons'" reasons which are actually for selfish purposes (like being enamoured with your own template) in my life for me spend any more time with this one. The only thing wrong with selfish purposes, in general, is that they get hidden into policy. That is what you are doing and I cannot abide that.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 14:36, 22 November 2021 (UTC)
|
@RaboKarbakian
Please, read this without any of our previous discussions in your mind.
I do think we complement each other and by so producing better material for wikimedia together.
- Information
- It's documentation states: "This template is used to provide formatting to the basic information for files (description, source, author, etc.), and it is automatically inserted by the upload tools.". This is the template I use.
- The excluded usage of this template is stated: "and Book if the image is a part of a complete set of page scans of a book (or in the case of DjVu and PDF, one file may comprise all the pages)."
- Good_file_descriptions describes which template to use for what.
- Book
- It's documentation states: "This template is used to format basic information about books and should be used in place of Information for scanned book pages, whether the file contains a single page (e.g. JPG) or the entire book (e.g. a multi-page DjVu or PDF)."
- If you just read the above apart from all our discussions, which template, which template do you mean should be used for free standing illustrations uploaded to commons?
--please ping me-- Goran tek-en (talk) 15:43, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
- One last time. See this: User_talk:Schlurcher/Archive_3#Inception_date_vs_publication_date This is a step in the process where the commons is being wikidatified. The bots need to know the difference between images and images from a book. That is all I am going to say about this, and it is something that I have said again and again. If you do not agree with the outcome of those negotiations and can find anywhere here in which there has been a problem with the way the book template is being used by me after this chat with the bot, do let me know. Other than that, if you will not use the book template, then you should be happy with your decision and leave things as they are.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 22:37, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
- @RaboKarbakian
- I'm all for development and new stuff.
- I will go by what is said in the in consensus accepted documentation regarding which templates to be used on a uploaded media.
- The discussion you are linking to is between two users (what I can see) and as such is not a in consensus accepted documentation.
- I see the illustrations as stand alone illustrations, you see them as a part of the original book. They can't be locked to specific book but they can be used in a book. --please ping me-- Goran tek-en (talk) 10:36, 24 November 2021 (UTC)
- One last time. See this: User_talk:Schlurcher/Archive_3#Inception_date_vs_publication_date This is a step in the process where the commons is being wikidatified. The bots need to know the difference between images and images from a book. That is all I am going to say about this, and it is something that I have said again and again. If you do not agree with the outcome of those negotiations and can find anywhere here in which there has been a problem with the way the book template is being used by me after this chat with the bot, do let me know. Other than that, if you will not use the book template, then you should be happy with your decision and leave things as they are.--RaboKarbakian (talk) 22:37, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
Translations of your works
Ingen orsak... Kartan är bra ! ThomasPusch (talk) 19:06, 20 November 2021 (UTC)
- @ThomasPusch How many languages do you know, but Swedish is not in your Babel info. --please ping me-- Goran tek-en (talk) 19:11, 20 November 2021 (UTC)
- I'm not fluent in Swedish, but attended a course when I was 17... Esperanto-speakers tend to collect languages...
ThomasPusch (talk) 19:21, 20 November 2021 (UTC)
- I'm not fluent in Swedish, but attended a course when I was 17... Esperanto-speakers tend to collect languages...
.svg){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
Request: Western Front Map
@Goran tek-en: Hyello! I saw your work on an Eastern Front Map recently, and although it is from over 5 years ago, I was wondering if you could make one for the West. Specifically, a basemap similar to: File:MapOfWWIEasternFrontArea.svg I'd prefer it is was one of these maps, but it's your choice! File:Western front 1915-16.jpg & File:Stabilization of Western Front WWI.PNG (I'm a bit new to Wikipedia and all so sorry if I did something wrong.)
| Extended content |
|---|
Those drafts are PNG versions of the original SVG file I'm working in and will upload to commons.
|
.jpg){kind=link}
![[4]](https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/892927746370584639/920095134752854108/unknown.png){kind=link}
![[5]](http://members.kos.net/sdgagnon/mil03.jpg){kind=link}
TheStrandedDemon Now you can find it here file:MapOfWWIWesternFrontArea.svg.
- Please check all the information, also links for wikipedia, wikidata and structured data.
- Done --please ping me-- Goran tek-en (talk) 13:54, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
- @Goran tek-en It looks great! One last question: What do you use to map? TheStrandedDemon (talk) 14:56, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
- @TheStrandedDemon I use Inkscape so I do my work manually, not from datasets. Therefore I'm depending on free sources that I can work from and draw a new map with the content I (rather the requester) needs. --please ping me-- Goran tek-en (talk) 16:38, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
Quality Image Promotion
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Vietnamese Dragon green.svg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Sutton Hoo helmet design 2-full.svg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|
 |
Your image has been reviewed and promoted
Congratulations! Amhara topographic map.svg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images.
|