User talk:Slaunger/Archives/2008/3

VIC test

I tried adding one. The page layout of Commons:Valued images candidates looks a little odd now. Not sure why. --MichaelMaggs 19:31, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you Michael. So creating the image page was not a problem using the adding procedure in oitself? If yes, that is at least good news. I think the problem with the rendering of the thumbnails is due to some problems in {{VIC-candidate-images}}. This template is also causing some extra linefeeds, which I cannot figure out how to get rid of. -- Slaunger 19:37, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Not ideal, but {{VISC}} at least works at the moment. Adam Cuerden 01:23, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, better now. I tried it here and it looks fine. Now it remains to modify the thumb template as it is rendered very bad on COM:VIC. Maybe the gallery tags should be absorbed in the tamplate such that different viewing sizes can be used when looking at the review page and the thumbnail representation (using the widths and heights gallery parameters)? -- Slaunger 01:39, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

I think I have it working with galleries, though in a slightly more difficult way than I'd prefer, and it does not presently accept captions for reasond I don't understand. Oh, well, the main {{VIC}} template still has some bugs in it, so it's not like VISC will hold it up much... Adam Cuerden 01:48, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

I think the problem is with Template:VIC-candidate-images - all the carriage returns at the start of those #ifs are getting put into the last section, thus creating the empty space, if I had to guess. Not sure how to fix it. Adam Cuerden 03:07, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I know. I tried to remove them at some stage, but then the functionality of the template was broken. What are the bugs in {{VIC}} you are mentioning? -- Slaunger 07:42, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

May I please ask for your help again?

Hi, Slaunger,
I created a new nomination Commons:Valued images candidates/Iceberg B15-D, people and helicopter.jpg and put it to the end of the list, but for some reason it shows above three nominations, which were there before. Then I wanted to write the review for your icebergs images, but I could not find the right place to put my review to. Could you please tell me, if I'm missing something? Thank you for your time.--Mbz1 03:59, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome! Again, you have done just right. Actually your iceberg image is the last one in a row of four, but the three first are rendered such that they appear to be floating under it. It is due to a flaw in a template, {{VIC-candidate-images}}, I have created. It inserts a lot of extra paragraphs within a single table cell, and I cannot figure out how to get rid of it. That is, I know to get rid of them, but then the functionality of the template breaks. I have not relly worked with templates before doing this VIC work, so I have an awfull lot to learn. Considering the image sets, it is again a flaw in the templates. The image sets are still in their infancy (consider it a sandbox), and functionality for proper redirect to the review page has not yet been implemented. A direct lint to the iceberg image review page is this: Commons:Valued images candidates/Iceberg deterioation. The layout of the image page is likely to be changed, but if you want to review it, just do it there and I will make sure your review comments are not destroyed during the restructuring. -- Slaunger 08:06, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

I am currently working on changing the set review page into something like User:Slaunger/Sandbox/Iceberg deterioation. -- Slaunger 08:18, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi, Slaunger. Thank you for responding my message.--Mbz1 15:59, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Since the rules say that images will be reviewed at eg 480x360 pixels, I think the template for reviewing sets ought to show them at that size, even though it takes a lot of space. --MichaelMaggs 18:28, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

I agree, that is exactly what I am working on in the sandbox link above. I was aiming at a solution which also supports showing the Valued Image Set Candidates as a normal gallery in the candidates list (full review size is a no-go here for concerns of bandwidth), but I have great problems. I had hoped I could acheive this by doing something like this

...
! Images
| <gallery widths="480px" heights="360px">
{{{ingallery}}}
</gallery>
...

in {{VISC}} and then use the same parameter for thumbnail display in a {{VISC-thumb}} template, which is transcluded into the candidates list with something like

...
<gallery>
{{{ingallery}}}
</gallery>
...

The problem is that the template will not expand the {{{ingallery}}} parameter when it is inside gallery tags, and it is driving me nuts! Is there a way out?

The first thing I would try is to work without the widths heights attribute. I wonder if it is being asked to make too many decisions.... -- carol 23:33, 2 March 2008 (UTC) oops! carol 09:15, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Solved, in principle in User:Slaunger/Sandbox/TestTag using the weird {{#tag:gallery|Image:foo.jpg{{!}}Foo caption}} notation:

{{User:Slaunger/Sandbox/TestTag
  |widthspx=480
  |heightspx=360
  |image1=Image:Iceberg near sanderson hope 2007-07-24 1.jpg
  |caption1=Iceberg near Sanderson hope
  |image2=Image:Iceberg with hole near sanderson hope 2007-07-28 1.jpg
  |caption2=...with a hole in it.}}

gives

Now it just needs to be tidied up and implemented in the real templates... -- Slaunger 16:44, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Captioning

Captioning works on VISCs after all - I was over-thinking it.

I think I can do this =)

Yes, it does ;-). Concerning large gallery photos for the review page and a small gallery page for the candidates list page, I got a hint from Dshwen about how that might be done (have not tried yet). Basically, I would like to leave out the gallery tag from the user parameter and use the widths and heights parameters to adjust the size in {{VISC}} and a TBD {{VISC-thumb}}. -- Slaunger 06:33, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

VISC

I'm not sure the way you've set it up is a good idea, for the simple reason that, well... the images are so big that a reasonably large featured set would be absolutely huge and take up more space than the entire group of single image candidates. Adam Cuerden 16:57, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Kind of, but I'm not quite clear how we're going to switch between small view and large view without forcing them to set up two pages. Adam Cuerden 17:08, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Hard to explain. Just wait and see, I'll do it. It will work out fine. Promise. -- Slaunger 20:22, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

One more question

Dear Slaunger,
I'm afraid ever since I came back I create only troubles for you. Sorry about this. May I please ask you, if it is possible to change my version of B15 iceberg nomination with an edit, which was done by Carol File:Iceberg B15-D, people and helicopter-1.jpg. If it is a hard thing to do and it will take lots of your time, please do not do it. Thank you. --Mbz1 15:21, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Dear Slaunger, do you think that is necessary? -- carol 16:13, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

No problem. You are testing the system and that is great! For now, the templates do not support that you change the image name of a VIC in a subpage. The subpage name and the image name has to be identical for the links to work right on the candidates list page. This could probably be changed by doing some further work on the templates. However, I feel a discussion about how to handle edits in the middle of a nomination should be handled in general. However, in your case no reviews have been posted on your original review, so I suggest the following simple scheme right now:

1. Change the status field in your original nomination to status=withdrawn
2. Create a new nomination using the guideline and the new image name.

Cheers, -- Slaunger 21:06, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

• Thank you very much. It is amazing how you thought about all the situations.Great work!--Mbz1 22:17, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Valued image

here are some sketches, i was on vacations and that is why i couldnt answer before. let me know wichone you like so i make more sketches in that direction. -LadyofHats 16:39, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Very nice! I have initiated a thread calling for comments here. I have made some initial comments to all your draft proposals. -- Slaunger 20:15, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Aker Brygge pano

Nice image, I recognice the spot. Hope you had a nice time in Oslo :) /Daniel78 19:50, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

I certainly did have a nice time in Oslo. Restuarant Manna mmmmmm.... -- Slaunger 20:02, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

More VI testing

Hi, Slaunger,
as you could see from here I withdrawn the nomination some time ago, yet it is still present in the list directing voters to review page, May I please ask you, if it is my own responsobility to take it off the list?
I've also tested something else today. I created this nomination and may I please ask you to take a look how it is shown in the list. Thank you for your time and please feel free to tell me, if you'd rather me stop doing any more testing :-)--Mbz1 15:36, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

No, you should not stop testing! I will reply in more depth this evening (Europe time). -- ~~

OK, so here goes:

1. In case you withdraw an image another time the thumbnail template is now changed such that the link is striked out with a parenthetic remark that it is withdrawn. that should make it clearer for reviewers, that the page is closed for voting
2. You have done just right by leaving there. Ideally a bot would change the status on withdrawn nominations to decline and eliminate it from the list of pending valued image candidates. However, we do not have a bot yet, so it has to be done manually. In this case I have done it as there were quite some other candidates on which a clear concensus had been reached, so I have declined/promoted those
3. A little up the page you will now see two new links to declined and promoted VICs. When the status is changed to declined or promoted the VIC is now automatically added to one of the two templates alphabetized by the name of the image.
4. Concerning your new nomination, you has a superfluous "Image:" prefix in the subpage name. I have created a new subpage with the correct name, so now it works. Yes, I know it is a little bit confusing that you have to do it differently concerning the subpagename as compared to FPC. However, for some technical template resons, this is what works best for VICs.

Goodnight. -- Slaunger 23:50, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

• Thank you very much!--Mbz1 01:44, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Erigeron compositus a dupe

Hi Slaunger!

There are 3 files:

• Erigeron compositus ilulissat 2007-08-21 1.JPG 2.999.558 Bytes
• Erigeron compositus ilulissat 2007-08-21 1.jpg 2.999.558 Bytes
• Erigeron compositus ilulissat 2007-08-21 1 edited.jpg 1.818.785 Bytes

The last one is the bright and enhanced version you mentioned. But the first and the second ones are dupes with same file size. So I think the first one (with "JPG" in capitals) should be marked as a dupe, because the other file has a better description (coordinates and Other versions gallery).

-- Common Good 21:39, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

OK, no problem. Good night! -- Common Good 22:07, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for taking your time to help me in that newcomer's issue. Some of us are skilled in photographing bugs (with the help of a good DSLR...), others in dealing with people's problems in a mild and constructive way. In this case, and after your detailed and patient explanation, I hope there will be a happy ending.

By the way, you have done a very nice job with the VI project. When is the opening cerimony? I'm impatient to participate with my critters! Cheers, Alvesgaspar 23:55, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi Alves. No problem, but thanks for passing by and also for your appraisal of VI. Well, the more involvement from other users to address remaining issues, the faster the launch date. As I see it there are still some unresolved issued about the procedures and guidelines which needs to be stabilized. For some time I have sought consensus on some of these issues on the Commons talk:Valued images candidates, but it is hard to reach consensus as a single user, not much activity from other users recently, I could need a hand! It is vital to get things organized well from the beginning. It is so much harder to make dramatic changes once the project is going. I would also really like to get the logo question settled. It is important for identifying the project.

By all means, do test nominate some of your critters at COM:VIC. Although it is a test nomination right now, I find it plausible that we will decide at some time that the test nominations will be the first VIs. -- Slaunger 00:22, 29 March 2008 (UTC)