User talk:Mdd4696/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Autotagger

Hi, I just discovered a fault with the autotagger you are developing. I was using the tab at the top and didn't notice till I had done about 50 images that the current date stuff doesn't expand and will alsways say today. Maybe it would be better if the script inserted {{subst:nsd}} or {{subst:nld}} which automatically expands out fully. I had lots of fun manually fixing them all, oh well that will teach me for using developmental software. ;-) --Martyman-(talk) 06:48, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Don't worry too much about getting the date right on no-source or no-license tags: OrphanBot's quite good at fixing up that sort of thing, and now that I've finished with the marathon first run through the "uploader unsure" category, I'll be doing a run through the "no source" and "no license" categories every other day. --Carnildo 07:49, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

I really appreciate your help Martyman. The bug is fixed now, so you shouldn't have that specific problem anymore. If the tool is still useful in its current buggy state, by all means continue using it, but I could also give you a heads up once I feel the tool is more stable, if you like. ~MDD4696 17:27, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Cool, thanks for fixing that. I will try it out again and see if I can pick up anything else that needs fixing. Thanks for the work. --Martyman-(talk) 20:46, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Re: Please read Wikipedia:WikiProject

I've noticed that you've been creating a lot of pages in the Wikipedia namespace. Of course I assume you have the best intentions, but you may be creating a lot of pages that do not get used. For example, you created Wikipedia:Helping Hand Group only last month, and already you've marked it as inactive! I would recommend holding off on creating new projects until you see a need for one (i.e., you would be creating a page for something many people are already doing), and you are absolutely sure that it is not redundant.

Also, some of the pages you've created are rather non-standard. The Wikipedia:Wikihalo administration page is largely unnecessary--we generally don't appoint different positions for projects because there's not really a need for them. We want projects to be open and to be able to change and evolve over time, and Wikipedia is led by consensus of the group. (See WP:OWN).

Of course, being bold is always encouraged, however I think you would do well to discuss things like this at the Village Pump first just to get a few others' opinions. ~MDD4696 00:04, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

I am aware that 2 of the projects are inactive, and this is probably because not many people know about them. I have no idea how to tell people about it without spamming. On another note, there is only administration for the Wikihalo project so that it does not go off on a tangent and that there are always people to break up any edit wars etc. The Neokid - Wikihalo Guiding Director talk 18:01, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

SHA Hashing calculator

Hello, I am the maintainer of the link you removed. http://www.johnmaguire.us/tools/hashcalc. I believe I have corrected the issue. Would you please help me to verifiy that the problem has been resolved.

Thanks, -John

Hi John, thanks for contacting me. As far as I know, these are some correct SHA-1 hashes:

' = bb589d0621e5472f470fa3425a234c74b1e202e8
" = 2ace62c1befa19e3ea37dd52be9f6d508c5163e6
# = d08f88df745fa7950b104e4a707a31cfce7b5841
\ = 08534f33c201a45017b502e90a800f1b708ebcb3
& = 7c4d33785daa5c2370201ffa236b427aa37c9996
? = 5bab61eb53176449e25c2c82f172b82cb13ffb9d
'"#\&? = 699b7d43c2ceb01791d98817222b96c35714d1f6

I tested them on several different hashing calculators, and they all returned the same value. Your calculator does not properly handle the pound sign (#) or the ampersand (&). I'm currently getting:

# = da39a3ee5e6b4b0d3255bfef95601890afd80709
& = da39a3ee5e6b4b0d3255bfef95601890afd80709

Until that issue has been resolved, I think it would be wise to remove your calculator from the External links. Also, I will be cleaning up the links sections on (at least) the SHA hash functions article, so if you fix the bug and add your link again, it may still be removed. Please see Wikipedia:External links for more information on Wikipedia's linking policy. Pages that provide source code and free licensing, without advertising, are more likely to be linked to than others.

Would you consider creating an account on Wikipedia? It's free, does not require any personal information from you, and would make it easier for me to communicate with you, since IP addresses can be shared by multiple users. Feel free to leave another message on my talk page. ~MDD4696 03:43, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

I have created an account. thanks for your help today.

I think it is fixed.. # now hashes to d08f88df745fa7950b104e4a707a31cfce7b584 which is consistant with your test vectors..

Also, please make sure you are actually pressing the "calculate" button each time..

The problem was that I was not urlencoding values before.. I appreciate your help to ensure that this tool provides accurate hashes.

Thanks,

-John

Great! I think there was a caching issue on my end... things look good now. If you decide to stay around a while, please sign your posts on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~). And in any case, good luck! ~MDD4696 04:02, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Gay Head Cliffs

Thanks for fixing my picture. I never realized that the slope was off, but then again I never looked that closely! It looks better now. I'll try to keep the camera steady next time I take a picture! —Jared 20:47, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Image autotagger

Hello, I was testing the autotagger you made, looks like it might be good! Anyway, tags like {{albumcover}} don't have the brackets around them, so they don't actually insert the template, just the word albumcover. Is this because it's some intermediate phase? Just wondering. I looked at the code and I guess I could just add the brackets around every tag, but if you are going to programmatically add brackets for all tags in one line somehow that is beyond what i can do in js ;) - cohesion★talk 20:53, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

I've fixed the bug, thanks for pointing that out. ~MDD4696 22:55, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Now the frequently used tags don't work because they already have the brackets and are getting them double. I like the list w/o brackets though :D Sorry to be so annoying, I might start really using this though :D - cohesion★talk 00:11, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Oh, it's not a problem at all. The only frustrating thing is that I won't have any time to work on the script until tomorrow night, so I can't make all of the changes I have lined up. If you have any more issues however, I'm all ears. Thanks! ~MDD4696 03:22, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

I'm in no hurry either, I actually did find something else though. A lot of times there is an image in the list of things to be tagged that is actually already tagged, but it stays on the list of the autotagger b/c it knows it hasn't tagged it yet, it would be cool to be able to delete them from the list, or mark them complete somehow. - cohesion★talk 03:32, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Hi again further to the discussion above, the tag tab at the top of the page now adds tags with 4 brackets around it instead of 2. I have been using that part of the script quite a bit and find it very useful. I haven't gotten around to giving the main part of it a proper test yet.

Some further feedback/suggestions. The way I normally work these untagged images is to pick one image, tag it and then do every other image the editor has uplaoded. Then I notify the editor about all of them with advice on how to fix it. If the script could somehow accept a user's image uploads as the input it would be great. Also I noticed before if you are going through the image list and find an image that needs a subtle change like a tag closed correctly if you press edit in the image browser window the script automatically saves the description before you can do anything (and if I remember right it blacks it too). I am not sure if there is any way to work around that problem though. PS. Thanks for the vote at RfA. --Martyman-(talk) 06:53, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestions. I plan on implementing a bunch of new features over the course of this week, so don't be surprised if the tool breaks occasionally. I will try to keep the fast tagger tab operational, but the main autotagger box will probably be messed with a lot. The tool is stable right now, so if you don't want to be affected by the upcoming changes, it might be a good idea to copy the code to your monobook.js instead of including it. ~MDD4696 04:06, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

If you could you make a page in your user space for a stable version that people can link to it would be great (maybe User:Mdd4696/Autotagger). It would give everyone a central place to include the javascript from. That way you could update it with new features from your cutting edge version at will. --Martyman-(talk) 04:39, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Oh, fine. You forced me into it ;). Stop making good suggestions and being so helpful and nice and everything already! Admins are supposed to be mean and nasty! Heh, anyways... I had been trying to put that off until I was more organized, but who knows when that would be. Documentation has been posted at User:Mdd4696/Image Autotagger. ~MDD4696 05:21, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Cool, that seems to work great for me. Thanks for all the work you have been putting in to it. The only trouble now is you won't get instant "you broke that again" type feeedback when you are working on it (which could be intrpreted as a god thing). --Martyman-(talk) 05:38, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Well, it's both good and bad. When I know people are using the tool, live, it forces me (somewhat) to fix the bugs right away. But then again, not having it live lets me experiment and play around a lot more. Anyways, I've got some cool things coming up. I'm incorporating code from Wikipedia:Tools/Navigation popups so that an image thumb appears in the main tagger box instead of another window, and you'll be able to move that main tagger box around. It's bedtime for me now though... goodnight! ~MDD4696 05:45, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Small problem I discovered with the autotagger (in particular the quick tag tab). I tried to nsd Image:Княз Борис(1997).jpg and it doesn't seem to support unicode or something but I ended up creating a new description page called Image:%u041A%u043D%u044F%u0437 %u0411%u043E%u0440%u0438%u0441(1997).jpg. Not a huge problem but you might know an easy fix, so I thought I would let you know. --Martyman-(talk) 09:06, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Ah, that is certainly a problem. It is something that will take a little longer to fix, so if you come across more images with non-alphanumeric characters, it'd probably be best to do those by hand. Thanks! ~MDD4696 22:52, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Wolftone

I'd really like to hear the cello wolftone but the .ogg file is a very rare animal and I don't think many people would find the codec for it. How about a .wav file or .rmx or mp3 or something that will run on something common? Ex nihil 06:43, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Media#Audio. All audio files on Wikipedia are in the Ogg Vorbis format. It takes no more than a few minutes to add Ogg Vorbis support to a system that does not already have it. Also, Ogg Vorbis is a free and open codec, keeping with the spirit of Wikipedia. WAV files are too large, and MP3 is patented. This issue has been brought up several times in the past, but it is highly unlikely that any format change would be made. ~MDD4696 22:42, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Re: Wow

Hi 3dnatureguy. I just stumbled across your user page, and I am amazed at all of the discussion about 3d images that's gone on--I had no idea there was anything like this going on. You seem really enthusiastic about Wikipedia and about adding 3D images to it... I'm curious as to what your motivation has been? Thank you for your contributions, and I hope to see you around for some time to come! ~MDD4696 04:35, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Hi, I am one of a group of photographers, whose history goes back to about 1843, just a few years after the invention of photography. Our specialty is called stereoscopic photography. Mathew Brady, for example shot much of his civil war coverage in 3D. We have both international and U.S. national organizations,and similar groups exist in the U.K. and Australia. There is serious interest in France, Germany, Russia, Japan on a national basis. Digital cameras and processing have given 3D photography a real shot in the arm. Where even 5 years ago, full color anaglyph images were considered near impossible, that is being acheived now in a routine manner. 20 cent paper glasses can open the world to truly poor people to see things in the museums of the first world cities. Several colleges are providing on line 3D images for classes. The US government with the USGS and NASA are posting a growing number of images. I am a regular workshop presenter, year after year at the NSA conventions, and also at current education related conferences. I have been a youth museum director, a historical documentary film, and television news producer/director. My museum photography in 3D is quite well know. I am developing an educational pictorial site: www.worldheritagemuseum.org, which will provide up to 3000 images from the great art history, ethnographic, and archeological museum collections. All images will be properly documented so that it can serve as both a pictorial and text based resource. Science uses 3D all the time. Electron microscope images of viruses and the like make far more sense in 3D. The same is true of optical microscopes. Did you know that 95 of all optical microscopes are binocular? That has been true for almost 60 years. Small object are far more understandable when magnified and displayed in 3D. A forensic expert, for example would be at a great disadvantage if blind in one eye. Most people simply take stereo powers of observation for granted. Editors interested in sculpture who may not like 3d pictures that they haven't seen in 3d, would not want to go to the Louvre sculpture galleries with one of their eyes patched over. Editors on Wikipedia need to see the effect in 3D before trashing the idea. The policy that has been under development provides for a 2d version of the picture to be the thumbnail, and only a linked image from the tiny icon below the flat thumb. I didn't like the idea at first, but now see the value.

the downside is that most of my existing images are only 3D, and so can't be posted anymore. I can convert a tiny portion of these to good 2d but that takes about 20 minutes to do. In any case, Jimmy Wales thought the world would be better with Wiki sites, I think the visual experience of the web and HDTV is improved in many cases with the new technology. About 95% of the artifacts that would normally screw up a 3D image are eliminated with the new technique. I'd be delighted to send any editor interested in evaluating the technique a pair of glasses. The first dozen to ask will get plastic and paper, the later ones will have to settle for paper. But I will post glasses to the first 100 that ask. My e-mail is sharper3d@yahoo.com. I am in California. Thanks for your taking notice...Drop me an address for you and other interested or "concerned" editors.68.125.21.140 05:56, 15 February 2006 (UTC)3dnatureguy 06:01, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

WP:RFA/Quarl, scripts

Hi Mdd4696, thanks for your support in my RFA, which succeeded. If I can ever improve or help in any way, please let me know :) By the way, I am starting a project on Wikipedia power tools, if you'd like to join. —Quarl ^(talk) 2006-02-16 12:06Z

Wikipedia:Featured_picture_candidates/Water_drop_animation

You may wish to reconsider your vote after seeing the new version of this animation. Feel free to remove this note once you've seen it. --Gmaxwell 23:37, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

My RfA

Thanks for your vote My request for adminship passed with a final result of 78/2/0. Hopefully I will live up to everyone's expectations. Please ask if I can ever help out with anything in the future. Martyman - 09:19, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Re: Hunted (Ben 10 episode)

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Hunted (Ben 10 episode), but we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. Perhaps you would like to rewrite the article in your own words. For more information, take a look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Happy editing! ~MDD4696 01:23, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

I actually wrote the ones on TV.com, and they were put there after they were added here, but rewriting them won't be difficult. - Someguy0830 (Talk | contribs)

Oh, really? Is there any way you can show that? Then you wouldn't have to bother rewriting it... although, I think a more concise plot summary would be more beneficial to Wikipedia's readers. Thanks! ~MDD4696 02:47, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I don't think there's a way to show it directly without having access to TV.com's specific logs. The best I could show is that I've submitted recaps to the specific episode. It doesn't really matter, though. I can alter the wording to the point that it's different from the original. - Someguy0830 (Talk | contribs) 05:34, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for helping to keep the poll results of the Main Page redesign on the Community Bulletin Board up to date. My access to the Internet will be sporadic today, so if you could keep an eye on them again, I'd sure appreciate it. --Go for it! 14:27, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

My RFA

Thank you for your recent vote on my RFA. While the nomination failed, I was rather expecting it due to the big lapse between registration and recent edits. I appreciate the comments you left when you voted, and I will definitely keep them in mind. If you have any other suggestions as to how I could improve as a Wikipedian, so as to hopefully succeed next time, please let me know! Thanks! —akghetto ^talk 07:55, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Lesser enemies in Naruto

Hi JadziaLover. Do you know what 70.46.70.11 keeps changing the names on Lesser enemies in Naruto to? For example, he changed "Midare, ミダレ" to "Midari, 初夏雨嵐". Since I can't read the kanji, I was wondering what the difference between the two was. ~MDD4696 22:21, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I do... 初夏雨嵐 (Shoka ame arashi) is a rather odd way of saying "early summer rainstorm". He also changed Baiu's name to 雨期 (Uki) meaning "rainy season" and Shigure's name to 霧雨 (Shigure), meaning "drizzle". It seems he took the meanings of the characters' names and put them through Babelfish or something. The only kanji he got right were Shigure's. It's highly annoying and he's been doing this with jutsu names as well ><

～卍 JadziaLover ^{会話~投稿} 卐～ 22:27, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Neat signature, by the way. How long before someone who doesn't know any better complains about it? ;) ~MDD4696 22:30, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Actually, I'm a bit surprised no-one has complained yet ^^ Oh well, if someone complains, I'll just have to teach them about the older and more positive meaning of the swastika ^^

By the way, it appears 70.46.70.11 cleared his entire talk page.

～卍 JadziaLover ^{会話~投稿} 卐～ 23:01, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Thermal management etc

I really can't see your reasons for wanting to delete this page. Can you explain please? Also, can you indicate where you would include such issues if the page were to be deleted?--Light current 01:23, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

As it stands, I don't think the article covers enough material to be seperate from the Electronics page. Also, everything in the article is already described in detail on numerous other pages. So it seems to me that the topics it covers would be better served by a concise paragraph in the Electronics article, with inline links to the different types of cooling. If Thermal management of electronic devices and systems could be significantly expanded, then you should make that point on the article's AfD.

My reasoning was outlined on the article's AfD. If you are unfamiliar with AfD, there's a lot of information at WP:AFD and Wikipedia:Deletion policy that describes the process. I've copied your comment from the article's talk page to the actual AfD. Please consider expanding your comment so that others who are unfamiliar with the subject can make more informed votes. You could also change it to a Keep or Rewrite. ~MDD4696 01:44, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Well of course the article could be expanded. THis is just the start. A whole book could be written on the subject. Electronics page is overcrowded as it is and would not benefit from futher swelling. --Light current 01:53, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Article v talk edits

Just a bit of friendly advice :-) You are doing too many article edits without discussing them first.--Light current 01:34, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Which edits are you referring to? ~MDD4696 01:45, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Your latest ones —This unsigned comment was added by Light current (talk • contribs) 01:49, 23 March 2006.

I'm still not sure which ones you are referring to. Are you talking about the articles I nominated for deletion, my work to orphan the {{backlink}} template, or my vandalism reverts? If you are talking about the backlink orphaning, the issue had already been discussed on its TfD. ~MDD4696 02:01, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

You are a little hasty on the backling deletions methinks and on nominating my article for deletion! —This unsigned comment was added by Light current (talk • contribs) 02:17, 23 March 2006.

I believe that the {{backlink}} removals were justified given the outcome of its TfD, and Zzyzx11's comment at Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log. I'm reconsidering the AfD now, but I may leave it up there just to generate some opinions or activity on that article (I'm still not convinced that it really needs its own article, although now I see how it might). I noticed the m:Immediatism link on your user page, so I'm sure you understand what viewpoint I took when I nominated it. ~MDD4696 02:44, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Yeah but Im not as immediatist as I was! —This unsigned comment was added by Light current (talk • contribs) 02:45, 23 March 2006.

Sorry. Didnt mean to edit your talk! Force of habit on article talk!--Light current 02:54, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Computer still life

How's the rendering comin along? We all wait for your HUGE version... ;-) Greetings, --Janke | Talk 06:36, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Quite well :). So far it's been 146:42:15, and 1069 lines (out of 2400) have been rendered. That's 494 seconds per line, so there's 12 days remaining. I guess I severely underestimated how long it would take. I posted the partial render at http://bubka.rh.rit.edu/rendering.png if you'd like to take a look. It opens fine in Firefox, but if you use IE you might have to use an image editor to view it (since it's an incomplete file). ~MDD4696 22:37, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Great! Looks really nice (I'm a Firefox Mac-man...), and you're already more than 44% done... ;-) One question though: What gamma did you use - 3.0? Your version looks a bit darker than the original upload, but that can of course be corrected after rendering. Nice work! --Janke | Talk 06:29, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for rendering the large version! It looks gorgeous at this size and much less grainy than the smaller ones. Note that I did also underestimated the time as the upper part renders faster than the top (the time killers are the glass+focal blur zones and the bottom part is full of them). On the other hand, the last lines will go much faster.--Gilles Tran 12:14, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

I used a gamma setting of 3.2. It is darker, but I'm not sure if that's a good or bad thing yet. I'm hesitant to adjust the gamma after the rendering, because it's not as accurate, but I suppose we'll see when it's done. ~MDD4696 16:59, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Re: {{-}} and __TOC__

Hi Someguy0830. I'd like to kindly ask you to stop using the {{-}} template everywhere. It was intended only to be used in the unusual case where the formatting of an article is severely screwed up because of floated images. For pages like Hunted (Ben 10 episode), the template is totally unnecessary. All it does it force the main text of the article below the infobox, which is against the established article style.

I'd also recommend that you limit your use of __TOC__. Again, it really is only meant for unique situations. There is a reason the Mediawiki defaults to no TOC for short pages: a TOC is only useful on articles with many sections! Otherwise it just takes up space and forces the user to scroll more than necessary.

In any case, keep up the good work! ~MDD4696 23:20, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Ok. No problem. - Someguy0830 (Talk | contribs) 02:12, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks (belatedly) for the note

I never said "thank you" for your mentioning that Template:Daughter was going up on TFD. I appreciated the notice though--thank you. Matt Yeager ♫ (Talk?) 22:41, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Re: Template Assistance requested

Hi Boothy443. What are you looking for in particular? I'm pretty good with Wikipedia's templates and web programming. ~MDD4696 02:46, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Well thanks for the responce. Here is the thing, i developed this template {{Infobox Irish Place}}, and it actucally works fairly well for what it designed to do with the execption of one thing. Instead of using individual maps for places, we use a map with a dot overlay to represent the location. It that overlay that is the problem. The first part was that the dot overlay was rendering in different locations in different skins. Well i fugured that one out, thats a css issue with template coding, the different css skins do not all interperte the "em" measurements the same, so i switched to (and my perfered) "px" measurment. Solved that problem, but it exasaperated a problem i was already aware of. Between IE and mozilla, i ues firefox, the dot does not render in the corret spot, usually of by 3px both north and south, and to fix under one would be to breal under the other, this was pointed out to me specificaly on the Derry article. Well ifigured it was a world wide problem, untill another template that i have used the pin cord system on, that is basicaly the same as the template in question {{Infobox U.S. City}}, but in that one it works fine in both mozilla and IE, no problems, York, Pennsylvania would be a perfect example. So their has to be some issue that i am not seeing somewhere. I just did a check between the two templates, and in the rendering i can see what the problem is, so i think i have an idea of what needs to be fixed, but being that i baes the tow off of each other they use the same coding do i dont know. This all kinda related to a bigger css "standartazation" issue, for example they have not implemented the so called ie border padding fix, as well as a militude fo other problems, so i like to keep wikipeda css coding influences to the bare mininum. I dont know how mich of this you understand on either a technical level or my way of describing it, but feel free to take a look and let me know what you think. FYO i am running to tester templates, User:Boothy443/Sandbox/useless (the coding for the IE citybox), User:Boothy443/Sandbox/ie city (display page for corsiponding); User:Boothy443/citybox test (for the us box coding), User:Boothy443/Sandbox (tester page), feel free to snag the code. --Boothy443 | trácht ar 05:30, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

I will take a look at it as soon as I get a chance. ~MDD4696 05:35, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Well just one thing, the probel that i found is where it is rendering the overlay. In the US version, the so called correct one, it renderes the overlay within the confines of the background image. In the ie box, it renderes it within the confies of the cell, which from IE to ff, can vary due to how it renders the table. The coding for the pin cord is similar to {{tl|Superimpose]], but i wanted to use a striped down version that was directly in the template. --Boothy443 | trácht ar 05:43, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

I've found a number of coding errors in both {{Infobox Irish Place}} and {{Infobox U.S. City}}. I might be able to hack a fix in there, but I'd rather recode the templates just to make them cleaner and easier to understand. I don't mind doing that, but I'm busy tonight so it may take a few days. In the mean time, you could read about CSS positioning and the box model if you'd like to learn more about working with CSS. ~MDD4696 02:02, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Numerous, humm, makes me wonder how bad the some of the other templates that i have developed are. As for recoding, fell free to give it shot, i just ask if i could look over it before you have it go live and that the form and the function of the current version are replicated in and recoded version. As do it when you get a chance, i am in no hurry. I came across a fix that kind works for the problem, i framed the image in a "box", that is dependent on the size of the image, so the float can, in theory, only be contained inside the box and thus only on the image. It seems to work, though their is an issue with the Derry article with it being of by 2px on a north/south, though their seems not to be an issue with Dublin or Cork in which it works fine. I am wondering it it could be the image it's self. Either way, if you find anything let me know. Oh and i just scanned threw the website, and look to be informative, look like it explains it easier that what i have came across so far. --Boothy443 | trácht ar 07:55, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

You can see how it's coming along at User:Mdd4696/Sandbox and User:Mdd4696/Playground. ~MDD4696 03:45, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

The template is finished; take a look at User:Mdd4696/Playground and User:Mdd4696/Sandbox. The reason the marker was off was because of a stupid IE bug--the size of the DIV depended on the size of its font-size attribute! I'll put the new code up with your OK. ~MDD4696 00:11, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Well i have some issues. First of it's to wide, i rather have it at the 235 or what ever it is at now, as it will the transition from one box to the other easier. I dont likr the idea of the stats info being in a seperatlry coded box, causes a problem with the background colour. The spacer line between the stats and website is missing. The pouplation box does not work correctly, when their is no pouplation stat it is removed completely, this should not be the case, espically with the other two pouplation fields in use, its a strange way that the CSO does pouplation. And i am not a fan of the use of conditionals as a replacement for hiddenstructure. Reason is that it used html coding for frams structures, whcih when combined with other wiki elemenst leads to numerious quirks, like null spaces that look out of place. I am aware of the accesibilty issue, though i am not convinces that this soultion is the best for addressing issue, due to the other issues that presents. Other rhen that i thank you for you assistance. --Boothy443 | trácht ar 09:01, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

I've addressed some of your concerns: the width is fixed, I added the website spacer line, and the population now functions correctly (if any one of the three population variables is present, it will be displayed). However, I'm not sure what you mean by "problems with the background color" for the statistics table. Right now it looks exactly the same as the old infobox, and there shouldn't be any issues if we wanted to change the background colors.

Also, I chose to use the conditional templates because they are easier to read and it will be easier to replace them when the native MediaWiki code is added. I don't see any problems using them... if the template needs to be changed and they act quirky, just let me know and we can find a solution. Hiddenstructure is a horrible, horrible hack--because of the way it works, we have no idea if it will work in browsers that we haven't tested. ~MDD4696 19:03, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Looks like Tim Starling has written some parsing code that will replace {{qif}}, so we can soon get rid of that clunky template from the infobox. ~MDD4696 16:38, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

looks intresting, but i like to see it in action. --Boothy443 | trácht ar 07:31, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Image:Platform Sandal wood Buffalo brown.jpg

I noticed that you tagged the page Image:Platform Sandal wood Buffalo brown.jpg for speedy deletion with the reason "Image is on Commons, and the description here duplicates its information there". However, "Image is on Commons, and the description here duplicates its information there" is not currently one of our criteria for speedy deletion, so I have removed the speedy deletion tag. You can use one of our other deletion processes, proposed deletion or articles for deletion if you still want the article to be deleted. Thanks! See also {{NowCommons}}. Stifle 20:36, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice, but I do believe it can be speedily deleted (I will bring up adding a specific line item on the CSD talk page to cover this type of deletion). The image has not actually been uploaded to Wikipedia; only its description page has been edited here. Since there is nothing in the description page to warrant a seperate page on Wikipedia (i.e. categories), it can be deleted. I should've phrased my reasoning a bit better I think. Please do not delete the image now though, I will use it as an example for the proposal. ~MDD4696 22:30, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Re: "End Notes" style of links...

Hi Merecat. Please try and keep discussions, such as "End Notes" style of links reduces readability, in one place. Copying your comment to multiple places is redundant and fragments the discussion. Thanks. ~MDD4696 01:45, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Not being sure where best to post it, I thought it sensible to try a couple of places. Merecat 02:09, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

When you are unsure, you can always ask someone on their talk page or post something at the Village pump. Or, you can just post it somewhere logical and people will refer you to the right place if it's not the right one. Just try to avoid spamming. ~MDD4696 02:38, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Well, I don't think that the respective article talk pages are "spam" and the other three locations were admin specific. I am mindful of what you say, but I felt I was ok. Even so, thanks for the feedback. Merecat 02:41, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

No problems :). ~MDD4696 02:42, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Re: Comment on my contributions?

Hi NSLE. I am preparing to nominate myself for adminship in the coming week, and I noticed your vote on Benon's RfA. I was wondering if you would care to comment on my edit history or my responses to the nomination questions. I would value any feedback you care to send my way... thanks! ~MDD4696 04:04, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

They look well-rounded enough for me to support you. Good luck. NSLE _(T+C) at 05:04 UTC (2006-03-29)

Either the Autotagger doesn't work in SeaMonkey, or I don't know how to use it

It works just fine if I just use the tab, but if I want to tag with the "Image Autotagger" link in the toolbox, how do I actually make the change to the image page? When I click "tag image", a new window opens up viewing the source of the Main Page. And what's the "Load" button for? Sorry for all the questions. —User:ACupOfCoffee@ 08:53, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Never mind, I figured it out. It would be nice if the page for it had directions on how to use it. Also, could you add {{orfud}} to it? And is there any way to make it not blank the image description page before adding the tag to it? I'm finding that I have to partially revert myself after almost every tag I add with it. Other than that, I find it quite handy. —User:ACupOfCoffee@ 17:10, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback. I have a new version of the tagger than I'm working on, but it's slow going. I will look into the blanking issue that you mentioned; is the problem restricted to SeaMonkey, or does it occur in Firefox as well? As far as I know, the tool worked properly the last time I used it. ~MDD4696 22:24, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Re: WP:SELF

Hi Lindosland. I've noticed that in some of your edits you've added things like "Please continue moving appropriate links from below and put the backlink template on them (see Root page)". Please have a look at Wikipedia:Avoid self-references; addressing the reader/editor is inappropriate usage for Wikipedia articles. ~MDD4696 00:00, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

You are right, and I realised I was breaking the rules a bit, but expected it to be very short term until it got sorted out. I only experimented on a few topics, mostly Electronics, and noise Noise which have now been put into revised form. The Wikipedia:Root page concept has met with many objections, and it the light of these I have now revised it so that the branch page listing and rootpage template, and 'backlink' are abandoned and should be removed (I have removed most of them). Instead a special form of navigational template is being used which incorporates the 'root' and 'hub' pages and by its presence is sufficient to signify use of the Root page concept (many people did not like the extra words added into the page. Since navigational templates are already in widespread use, I feel that their use cannot really be objected to. Regards --Lindosland 11:34, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

I see that you get involved in the software. Could you perhaps suggest how the Wikipedia:Root page concept could be automated as described. What is needed is a bit like the automatic creation of the index that already exists, except that it requires reference to other pages. One way would seem to be to store a parametric template for each navigational template, and then to scan every page as it is saved after editing to look for any template reference, and update the template if necessary. Another way might be to trawl round the database with a software bot, though this might be slower. --Lindosland 11:40, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

This Root page concept might work as a sort of "standardized" navigational template. From what you said here, it seems like you want to create a navigational list that is structured in a very specific way. I'm not entirely sure what gains are made by automating the process though; what exactly is automated? ~MDD4696 22:31, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Your RfA

I have added two questions. If you have a minute, I'd appreciate you answering them. Thanks. JoshuaZ 03:44, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Autotagging

Hello Mdd4696, It was really great that you care about individual's vote. My vote goes for support now as I am fully convinced with your reply. Will you help me about autotaaging process, because i am unable to understand it. Right now, I am associated with untagged images project. Thank you in anticipation, Regards, Shyam ^(T/C) 20:08, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

I've added some usage instructions to User:Mdd4696/Image Autotagger. With the next version, I hope to make the interface more intuitive. Are you currently using any tools to make image tagging easier? It seems that you have a very efficient method of tagging, whatever it is. Thanks for the vote of confidence by the way! ~MDD4696 20:51, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

POV-Ray still life

Just writing to let you know how much I am looking forward to the finished image. How long has it been rendering so far? Meniscus 03:09, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

It's just finished line 1501 out of 2400, after rendering for 359:55:03... that's about 15 days! I never thought it would take this long. I hope that it turns out OK, the gamma might be a little off. I've been periodically posting the most recent image at http://bubka.rh.rit.edu/rendering.png if you'd like to take a look (Firefox displays the partial image fine, IE doesn't). ~MDD4696 20:25, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Insanity

I'm surprised you promoted Image:Angelo Bronzino 003.jpg as a featured picture. I count only 11 support votes, or about 69% in favor. I don't believe consensus was reached, especially given the disagreement about it's relevance to the Insanity article. How did you make your decision to promote? ~MDD4696 00:44, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Yep, you are completely right. After reviewing the nomination further, I screwed up. I've been going on autopilot on closing these things. I got lazy and tried to do the math in my head, but I was off by quite a bit. 4 more support votes would have been needed to hit just 75% (and even then, that percentage is probably debatable to reach a consensus. Thanks for catching this error and I will double check every nomination from now on. By the way, if you ever want to give a hand in closing these nominations, go for it. --PS2pcGAMER (talk) 00:55, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

No problem, I just happened to notice it on a whim. Thanks. ~MDD4696 01:03, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Image:Nematocyst-threads.jpg

I've updated the source information for this image, I found it on a foreign wikipedia, I think Hungarian[1]. Given this probably is less well maintained on image copyright, and I don't read Hungarian, is there a way to get someone to translate? |→ Spaully°τ 22:53, 5 April 2006 (GMT)

Unfortunately, if you cannot find the licensing information for this image, it will have to be deleted. Try making a translation request over at Wikipedia:Translation into English, or maybe you could post something at the Ukranian Wikipedia with the hope that someone there can speak English? ~MDD4696 00:15, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Oops, Ukrainian it is. I'll ask the uploader on the Ukrainian WP, he's responded on his talk page in English previously. |→ Spaully°τ 00:36, 6 April 2006 (GMT)