User talk:IsadoraofIbiza/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

TalkBack

I don't know how to do a "TB" tag, but...
I responded to your question on the Helpdesk: Feedback from my watched pages not working

"[Firefox Nightly 20] Moves to AURORA on November 19, 2012 ..." Releases - MozillaWiki ~E:74.60.29.141 (talk) 23:32, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Electoral Vote Graph

Just wanted to compliment your work. It's beautiful! 67.248.177.238 (talk) 04:28, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

Thank you!—Kelvinsong (talk) 13:20, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

Animal cell illustration

Hello, I would like to give you a suggestion regarding this illustration of yours. According to my knowledge (and this article, perhaps), the endoplasmic reticulum should be a continuation of perinuclear space, so the nucleus shouldn't be separated from ER by the cytosol as shown in the image. What I was talking about in an image. Thanks for consideration… --Nefronus (talk) 23:34, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

You are right, I'm fully aware that the outer nuclear membrane(and the inner one to boot) are continuous with the ER. It's an error inherited from the SVG that image was based off of.

Old version of cell

I'll put that on my todo list, thanks! By the way, you can wikilink to file pages by putting a colon in front of the "File:" prefix—"File:Animal_Cell.svg"—Kelvinsong (talk) 00:01, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Cell illustrations

Hello, thanks a lot for making pretty versions of the organelle chart and the centrosome cycle! MichaK (talk) 09:18, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

You're welcome!—Kelvinsong (talk) 11:59, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Graphic Designer's Barnstar
	This is for your brilliant pictures uploaded. They are by far the best graphics I have seen describing anything. You deserve it. Wow. Simply wow. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 10:07, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Please keep up the brilliant quality work on pictures and graphics. Wikipedia most certainly needs them.

And may I also say that I would prefer that the biology pictures you have added have as less text as possible. I prefer that the description on almost all places there be halved. Thats a lot more coherent TheOriginalSoni (talk) 10:12, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! And yeah, I guess the text walls are a problem, though I include them because I like keeping the text with the pictures instead of relying on numbers and a key in an article.—Kelvinsong (talk) 15:12, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Actually what I had in mind was more like reducing the information in the text boxes to give only the basic info. That way, the picture is still informative and looks awesome to look at too TheOriginalSoni (talk) 15:37, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

This was what I could try to collapse the info on Centrosome Cycle, just to give you an idea of what I had in mind-

The mother and daughter centrioles sever links, still loosely connected. Both centrioles duplicate themselves while the cell duplicates(S-Phase) The new centrioles reach full length and sever links with the original centrioles. -Remains as is- -Remove "of mitosis"- -Remove "of mitosis"- -Remains as is-

I agree with the "of mitosis" and condensing the parts where the corresponding cell cycle stages are mentioned. I'll put that on my toDo list, for the rest of them, I would rather keep them in (never thought I would say this) complete sentences. Also I have a personal policy of "No pronouns" and "No acronyms"*, because those invite confusion. There's redundancy there to make it absolutely clear the difference between a centrosome and a centriole, and the differences between the mother, daughter, and new centrioles.

Oh and by the way, the centrioles don't sever the tight link, a protease called separase does that, but I think adding that would cause the label to grow even more :P

*Not to say I never use them, I just avoid using pronouns for the sake of length, and I do use common acronyms like "DNA".

—Kelvinsong (talk) 16:15, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Alright. As you see fit. Just had to suggest collapsing text on some of the pictures; which would look even better otherwise.

Question - Are you a new editor? TheOriginalSoni (talk) 16:27, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Depends on how you define "new". Editor since April, active in the last few months—Kelvinsong (talk) 16:40, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Which would imply you are pretty new. Same here.

What software do you use to make your pictures? TheOriginalSoni (talk) 16:54, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

I use Blender (software) to make 3 dimensional references (for stuff like those DNA helices, which are nearly impossible to draw freehand, as well as any scale drawing that requires a projection into 2D like the sun crosssection). I use Inkscape to draw the vector SVGs. —Kelvinsong (talk) 19:21, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Alright. I was hoping that maybe I could also create some decent graphics but my hopes seem to have been dashed! :P I just hope that you keep creating such images (If I were given a choice I would have you do it full time. We have other editors who can do the normal jobs; but certainly not enough graphics experts.) Which reminds me, have you been to the Graphics Lab? You might find it interesting. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 19:47, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

The basics aren't too hard, and there's a lot of tutorials out there. All the software I use except the font is free and open source. Start with simple stuff like maps and geometry, math-related articles are a good place for that, and many social studies articles are in dire need of non-jpeg maps. I started with line art (cartoons)—helps you learn béziers—the basic unit of vector art. Then filled shapes and blurs(shadows)—helps you learn layers and booleans, and finally gradients and shadow masks—the final set of skills.

A 3D background helps with stuff like bokeh, focus blur, and ambient occlusion*, but is not necessary. Good luck!

*The ambient occlusion article needs some work, basically, it's the effect of how corners appear darker that flat surfaces—look around your room, you should be able to easily see it.

Oh, and yes, I have been to the Graphics lab—Illustration workshop seems a bit dusty, and to be honest, many tasks regard simple flowcharts or company logos.

—Kelvinsong (talk) 20:15, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

*Phew* Everything just buzzed over my head. I have absolutel no idea what you are talking about. Maybe sometime later I shall get the time and courage to learn everything. Otherwise I am happy with just editing

What about Map workshop? It had some real requests which could use some experience. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 21:36, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Maybe I'll try that, thanks!—Kelvinsong (talk) 23:26, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Please join Wikipedia:WikiProject Images and Media/Illustration taskforce We could REALLY use your help. I have fallen off more than a little over time as I have been so wrapped up in other issues and subjects.--Amadscientist (talk) 07:20, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Editor of the Week

		Editor of the Week
		Your ongoing efforts to improve the encyclopedia have not gone unnoticed: You have been selected as Editor of the Week, for your creation of graphics. Thank you for the great contributions! (courtesy of the Wikipedia Editor Retention Project)

User:TheOriginalSoni submitted the following nomination for Editor of the Week:

"I nominate Kelvinsong to be the among the first recipients of this award. He is quite new, and has been creating some spectacularly high quality graphics (many of them FP status)."

You can copy the following text to your user page to display a user box proclaiming your selection as Editor of the Week:

{{subst:Wikipedia:WikiProject Editor Retention/Editor of the Week/Recipient user box}}

Thanks again for your efforts! Go Phightins! 21:35, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Wow, I'm honored! Thanks!!! :D—Kelvinsong (talk) 22:24, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

You are the first to ever receive the award. Congratulations. Go Phightins! 23:06, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for all your hard work! Gtwfan52 (talk) 06:27, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for the fantastic artwork!--Amadscientist (talk) 07:06, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Congrats!!! ```Buster Seven Talk 13:14, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Welcome!—Kelvinsong (talk) 23:14, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Sorry I'm late, but here are my congrats as well. AutomaticStrikeout (T • C) 22:39, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

		Project Editor Retention This editor was willing to lend a helping hand!
		I love your illustrations. Amadscientist (talk) 10:18, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks!—Kelvinsong (talk) 23:14, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for editing on Wikipedia!

As we come to the close of our first week of Editor Retention Editor of the week, I wanted to take a minute to say how much I personally appreciate the work you do. I am of no particular importance to our encyclopedia and am just another editor like yourself...but that is the very key to Wikipedia. Regular people.......real people that are interested in expanding the free flow of information to the world. In this day and age we have so many limitations and face more and more everyday with those that do not want information to be free and accessable to everyone. Your work is exceptional and I hope you get as much satisfaction with/from your contributions as our readers do from your work. If you ever need anything, please feel free to ask. I am always available to help in any way I can.

Sincerely,

Mark--Amadscientist (talk) 07:13, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks!—Kelvinsong (talk) 14:41, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

WP:RFPP

I've placed the request for page protection for mitosis. The requests go to WP:RFPP, not the article talk page. If you were seeking consensus, I concur There is a backlog at present.Novangelis (talk) 02:33, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Autoblock

Please follow the instructions at Template:Autoblock to get this fixed, if it's still in place. I've amended the schoolblock to allow logged in users to edit.  An optimist on the run! 20:02, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks!—Kelvinsong (talk) 21:07, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Plant "centrosome"

Hi, in the recent scientific literature, the MTOCs of plants are *not* called centrosomes. See, for example: "The early finding that higher plants do not contain centrosomes established a long-standing mystery of how plant cells nucleate and organize microtubules independent of centrosomes." (source), "How do Plants Organize Microtubules Without a Centrosome?" source. Could you please revert your reversion of my reversion? MichaK (talk) 16:44, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Reverted.—Kelvinsong (talk) 20:33, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks

Saving me with your graphic on gene cloning. Thanks. Modkarma (talk) 20:53, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

parabola graphic

Hi K:

Someone has suggested that I should ask you for help with a Wikipedia diagram.

Take a look at:

Parabola#Conic section and quadratic form

I wrote the text of this section, which concerns a theorem about parabolas, and searched through Commons to find a diagram to illustrate it. However, I couldn't find a really good one. The diagram that I did find and that is there now is unsatisfactory in several ways. I would like to improve it, in ways that are obvious if you read the text, and maybe also add a second diagram showing a cross-section in the plane of symmetry, showing the construction that finds the focus.

The trouble is, I have absolutely zero knowledge or skill concerning doing graphics.

Help!

David Williams

DOwenWilliams (talk) 03:40, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Yikes! Most of that section flew over my head on the first read, and it took me some time to figure out what you were trying to say. I would consider linking (or better, explaining) much of the jargon, and explaining the thought process in the math steps. It is not obvious that x² = 4ry⋅sin θ is simply EM⋅DM = BM⋅CM substituted with the values above. Alternatively, you could replace "∴" with "therefore" or "so"—I'm guessing most people don't know what the three dots mean. Remove "Clearly", as it makes the reader feel stupid.

Anyway, conic sections has been on my long todolist (idea list) for a diagram for a while, the only reason I never did it is that I didn't know how to render 3D scenes into SVG. I'm proficient in both 3D modeling and 2D SVG drawing, though don't know how to convert from the former to the latter well. The tool(s) I currently use can only export polygons (as opposed to curves/surfaces) into SVG, and they must be done one or two at a time. The 3D program (Blender) also only works with solid polyhedra, though a rough approximation could be achieved by taking a boolean intersection of a very thin rectangular prism and a many-sided pyramid.

Will definitely look into this—Kelvinsong (talk) 21:02, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

The three dots are the generally-used mathematical symbol for "therefore". When I was a kid, starting to learn algebra, I was taught that this symbol must be used to link the lines in, for example, the solution of an equation:

$3x+5=17$

$\therefore 3x=12$

$\therefore x=4$

Take a look at the source text I've just typed to see how the symbol is done.

The other way up $\because$ three dots mean "because".

It's true that the whole Parabola article is written in fairly "difficult" language and symbolism. It was like that before I did any editing of it. Since the article was clearly aimed at people who have studied math for a while (and therefore know some calculus, for example), I continued in the same tone.

Don't worry. If you're not comfortable with it, I'll find some other way to improve the diagram.

Thanks, anyway.

DOwenWilliams (talk) 16:20, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

BC and PK are diameters of circular horizontal conic sections. PK has a midpoint V, forming radius VK, or r. DE is a chord of the lower circle, with its midpoint M. P is the vertex of the parabola, and F is its focus. y is the length of PM, and x is the length of DM or EM. θ represents the inclination of the parabola away from being vertical.

I did my best, though keep in mind that it's a tracing of a polygon approximation—

I don't think they teach the "∴" anymore—we never use it in school, in fact I can only remember one instance in which the teacher even mentioned it.—Kelvinsong (talk) 22:22, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure they still teach it in England, which is where I was raised. And I'm very sure it is still taught here in Canada, where I was a high-school math teacher for a while. One advantage of this kind of symbol is that it is understood internationally, no matter what language is generally spoken.

The image you created looks excellent. I see you've already put it into the article. I think we may be asked to ut it into Wikimedia Commons, too.

I think we can give ourselves pats on the back. This Parabola article is a lot better than others that are around, even in textbooks.

Thanks again.

DOwenWilliams (talk) 03:20, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

I already added it to to the Commons parabolæ category. Also, being a lazy writer, I have no problem with the dots—however, I don't write the US textbooks, in which I have never seen those symbols before. —Kelvinsong (talk) 03:46, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Hi again K:

This may seem picky, but I'm wondering if you could do something to correct the alignment of the graphic you did for the Parabola article a few days ago. The axis of the cone is supposed to be vertical, and the two circular cross-sections horizontal, but in the diagram they're rotated a bit anticlockwise. Is there some reason for this, or would it be fixable?

Thanks.

DOwenWilliams (talk) 03:57, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

The "tilt" is a vestige of the three-dimensional model used as a tracing template for the SVG. It comes from the position of the camera in three-dimensional space to render the cone into 2D. In 3D space, the cone's axis is nice and vertical.—Kelvinsong (talk) 20:40, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

I've already added a sentence suggesting that readers should imagine the cone rotated slightly to make its axis upright. Unless people complain, this should be enough, don't you think? DOwenWilliams (talk) 01:40, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Circunferencia

You made a typo in the diagram currently on your user page. DOwenWilliams (talk) 02:58, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Fixed — Kelvinsong (talk) 03:30, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Good!

I'm not familiar with the word "nappe". The double-"p" looks odd. I looked it up in a dictionary, and it wasn't there. The nearest I could find was "naque", which means a pair of strolling musicians. Maybe it can also be a pair of cones.

Since you're fluent in Spanish, try reading the "parabola" article in Spanish Wikipedia. It's quite good, but not, I think, as good as the English one.

DOwenWilliams (talk) 15:33, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

I looked around, and as far as I know, there is no word in Spanish for half a doublecone, so I just used the English word there. Looking at the parábola article, it does not seem to match up with the English one very well. For example, I think we're missing a section on bisecting tangents that can be found on the Spanish article. Also, the English wikipedia appears to be missing a Generatrix article—a rare case where the Es-Wikipedia has something the En-Wikipedia doesn't.—Kelvinsong (talk) 16:00, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

The "bisecting tangents" property is shown in the diagram accompanying the "Proof of the reflective property" section in the English article. One extra sentence could make it explicit. However, in the English-speaking world, this doesn't seem to be thought at all important.

Yes. Maybe a short section about the Generatrix would be a good idea. Maybe I'll get around to writing it.

I looked a bit further for the word "nappe" in Spanish. Apart from proper names, the only place I found it was in the es.wp article about the Matterhorn, a cone-shaped mountain in the Alps. However, I couldn't figure out exactly what it meant.

DOwenWilliams (talk) 21:02, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Thre's an article called Conical surface which discusses the Generatrix. DOwenWilliams (talk) 21:13, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

I've added a couple of lines about bisecting tangents. There's a link to Conical surface in the introductory paragraph. DOwenWilliams (talk) 21:28, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

I think it's talking about geological nappes, more specifically the Austroalpine nappes. —Kelvinsong (talk) 22:11, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

I think you're right. Nothing much to do with cones, then.

Maybe you should invent a Spanish phrase, medio cono, maybe, to indicate one of the halves of a cone.

DOwenWilliams (talk) 03:28, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

EotW could use your help

I wonder if you might have the time to create a new banner/barnstar and/or templte for the Editor of the Week Award. If so, please go to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Editor Retention/Editor of the Week/Archive 2#Barnstar used in recipient notification and discuss it with Users:Isaacl and TheOriginalSoni. We would be honored to incorporate your skill into an Award that will acknowledge our most important commodity...the working editor. Thanks in advance, ```Buster Seven Talk 17:08, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Please feel free to be as creative as you feel best. Your work is of a quality and caliber that would surely help to promote EOTW in ways we can only begin to imagine. I suggest taking a look at what they have done at the Teahouse with their graphics and look at some of the other more informal projects. If you have any questions or need anything, let me know.--Amadscientist (talk) 02:00, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

In the words of my 5 year old grandaughter, "OMG!". ```Buster Seven Talk 03:27, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

I love it.--Amadscientist (talk) 03:29, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

• Hello,

Thanks for creating the wonderful barnstar, banner and the infobox. We are already using the first two, but I'll need some help with the third. The third box that you made ought to be replacing this template - Wikipedia:WikiProject Editor Retention/Editor of the Week/Infobox. But I am not very sure how to enact that, as I dont want to mess up the style or the actual stuff there. So could you help with making the required changes on the page? Also, there were a few suggestions at the EotW talk page to slightly change the infobox. Could you also help implement that?

Thanks and cheers,

TheOriginalSoni (talk) 08:07, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

You do wonderful work and even though I have left the project I want you to know that I support you doing whatever you wish. I know it will be great kelvin. Happy editing.--Amadscientist (talk) 08:27, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Gliese 3

The article Gliese 3 has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Doesn't seem to meet any criteria of WP:NASTRO. I do notice that this was a requested article, but it doesn't seem to be notable.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. StringTheory11 (t • c) 01:49, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

A small but powerful favor

Hello- I very much am impressed by your graphics work. Do you think you could create a West Virginia Barnstar???? Specifically, A barnstar with the great seal of WV or the WV flag on it???? I suck at graphics design and you do not. Please let e know if this is doable. Many thanksCoal town guy (talk) 03:12, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Footnote: Coal town guy is another recepient of the EotW award. What a wonderful cycle of collaboration. ```Buster Seven Talk 03:32, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

How's this?—

—Kelvinsong (talk) 15:12, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

EGAD, thats FANDAMTASTIC...........jaw dropping and beautiful.......I have gone to the Wikiproject WV talk and opage and asked folks what they think. It really speaks to the heart and spirit of the great state. Hands down, worthy of Webster. I for one, say Thank you!Coal town guy (talk) 15:56, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Welcome! —Kelvinsong (talk) 16:56, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

You are too cool for school Kelvin. Consider me a fan....and I am not a fan of almost anything! Woohoo!--Amadscientist (talk) 04:17, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5