User talk:Noclip
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Infobox Film and the trailer field
Please feel free to contribute to the discussion about it at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Films. There's a discussion topic about the subject at the bottom of that page, and that page usually gets more replies than the template's talk page. - Bobet 23:39, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] your skin
so it looks like your wonderful skin isn't going to be used at wikinews, any chance of a general public release? --MateoP 02:33, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
- Skin file, I will post the CSS if I can dig it up. Noclip 00:56, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
- I would also appreciate it if you could find the css. It looks very intreasting. Bawolff 19:50, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
- +1 Vildricianus 16:06, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
- +2 -- Zanimum 20:02, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
- +3 -- [anonymous fan of your theme!] 25 February 2007 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.40.204.157 (talk) 05:28, 25 February 2007 (UTC).
- I would also appreciate it if you could find the css. It looks very intreasting. Bawolff 19:50, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] FPC
Keep trying at FPC, you'll get one eventually. I am 2/4 so far. -Ravedave
[edit] Featured picture promotion
 |
|
~ Veledan • Talk 23:09, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Resolution Chart
NoClip, Are you the original author of this resolution chart? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Resolution_chart.svg
I have some questions about this chart, and the description... "It does not accuratly reflect the screen shape (aspect ratio) of these formats, which is always stretched or squeezed to 4:3 or 16:9. The table assumes an average vertical detail loss of .75x due to interlace. The actual loss is variable due to content, motion, opinion on acceptable levels of flicker, and possible success of deinterlacing. 1920x1080i is not included because all common use of 1080i is filtered to 1440 or less."
I don't understand why interlace artifacts are discussed or factored in to this chart. It would seem to be better to reference this as a separate discussion. The resolution of HDTV is identical for interlaced or progressive scan formats for the same signal type (1920x1080 or 1280x720).
I don't understand the justification for the statement "all common use of 1080i is filtered to 1440 or less". 1080i is defined by SMPTE 274M, and is broadcast in the US using ATSC. Neither of these specifications filter the horizontal resolution to 1440. Only HDV uses anamorphic pixels to record 1440x1080 as 1920x1080. Most of the broadcast 1080i material is shot and edited with full 1920x1080 resolution equipment.
This chart has been placed on many different wikipedia pages, and I am interested in working with the author(s) to improve it.
Thank you!
Tom Vaughan Tvaughan1 19:46, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
- That particular chart is not mine. I tried to replace it but someone else re-replaced it with the current one. Noclip 20:52, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
Thanks... the origin remains a mystery! Tvaughan1 18:03, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
Update - User:Algr claims to be the author. We're discussing this image on Image_talk:Resolution_chart.svg.
Thanks for helping with the new, improved image. Please see the discussion page... Image_talk:Resolution_chart_(Combined).svg
[edit] Image tagging for Image:Downtown Washington (Aerial view).jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Downtown Washington (Aerial view).jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 06:05, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Your bot
Your bot identified Image:Downtown Washington (Aerial view).jpg as having no copyright information despite the image having a US Government public domain tag. - Noclip 16:56, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
- Actually, the bot correctly identified it as having no source, which is not the same thing. --Carnildo 21:31, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] SoaP
In my sandbox I reworked the article, moving most of the trivia section into a "parodies and references in popular culture section", leaving only three points in trivia. I moved the snake information up under the cast, and somewhat reworked the intro. I also removed the viral videos as well. Look this over and see if there are any other improvements that need to be made, and once that's done, I'll transfer it over to here. --Nehrams2020 00:54, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
- Looking over the reworked version, the main issues have been resolved. While it would pass in this form, my personal recommendation is to get rid of the first two trivia facts completely and to work the third one into the History section. Noclip 02:48, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
- I transfered it over to the article if you would like to take another look. --Nehrams2020 19:02, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] The Blues Brothers (film)
Thanks for assisting in the SoaP page and passing it. Can you also take a look at The Blues Brothers? I can work on it further today if there are any necessary improvements. Over at WP:Films, we're trying to improve the quality of articles we produce, and it would be beneficial to broadcast as many GA films as we can for our newsletter within the next week. If you can't, no worries, thanks for helping.--Nehrams2020 19:59, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] FP Promotion
 |
|
Note it was Edit 1 which got promoted --Fir0002 07:14, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
Hi Noclip,
Just to let you know that the Featured Picture Image:Mexican Wolf 2 yfb-edit 1.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on April 8, 2007. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2007-04-08. howcheng {chat} 07:19, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] My secret
While I'd like to suggest it is all magic and raw talent, I have to give plenty of credit to the fact that I'm shooting with a 13 megapixel camera and high quality lenses, and quite often stitching 5-20 images together which (with up to 50% overlap to ensure that no part of the scene is missed) often resulting in images which are equivalent to about 50-100 megapixels. I usually downsample them by halving the dimensions and the image still typically results in an extremely high resolution image that is far sharper than an image would look straight out of a camera. That said, it all requires quite a lot of time and patience - more than a lot of people would be willing to give! Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 14:20, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Image tagging for Image:BackupHDDVD GUI Screenshot.png
Thanks for uploading Image:BackupHDDVD GUI Screenshot.png. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 15:06, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Hamburg vote
Noclip: I notice you voted "support" for the Hamburg picture. Don't you think you should move your “Support” to the beginning of your paragraph though (and move it hierarchically to the far left), or create a separate "support" vote? Thanks for your two cents to help call those "effete corps of impudent snobs" for what they are: "nattering nabobs of negativism". I loved the "Bah!" part. Like a fine wine, it provided a delicate finish with hints of aloof and dismissive. Greg L 23:43, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] re'dup!
I was mostly kidding, but could the 3 guys in black right in front of the front corner of the monument be duplicates? --frothT 23:47, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Commons POTY
I assert that I am User:Noclip on Commons. Noclip 00:40, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] POTY 2006 voting
Please check your vote, diff is not according to rules - Alvesgaspar 14:35, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Featured Picture
 |
|
Congratulations! I especially like your very modest nominations statement ("somewhat high detail"). Raven4x4x 06:42, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Possibly unfree Image:BackupHDDVD_GUI_Screenshot.png
[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:Driver.png)
Thanks for uploading Image:Driver.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Paul Cyr 01:04, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Please upload freely licenced images to the Commons
Images such as Image:Air Force Memorial at Night.jpg can be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons instead of the English Wikipedia so that all Wikimedia Foundation projects can use it. --Pmsyyz 01:02, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] License tagging for Image:White House Rear View 4K.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:White House Rear View 4K.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 05:10, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] White House image
Hi Noclip. thanks for writing me about the White House north portico image. I may have mispoke. The problem is more focus and clarity. the present picutre is in much better focus and shows more architectural detail. While I liked the appropriate spring time look to your pic it was very milky and did not show much detail. CApitol3 15:40, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
- Hi Noclip. On my monitor, the image I placed there last night shows much more detail. I can see the dentils in the pediment, and more detail around the wiondows. CApitol3 20:37, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
- Hi (again) Noclip. At that size it looks wonderful! But what do you think when it is in hte size on hte article page? There it seemed less detailed to me. CApitol3 22
-
- 24, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
