User talk:Planetneutral

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archives Archive 1: Jan. '07 - 30 days ago

[edit] D'oh!

Gosh, I would have sworn that I'd gone through and changed all four rotating sections footers to match. Must have just previewed and forgot to save. I do that WAY too often. Thanks for cleaning up my messes. Planetneutral 14:53, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm certain that you did! I changed a bit of the code and decided to match the sections. :) Again, I love what you've done with this portal - a few more tweaks and some more rotating content and it'll be featured... no doubt. The quotation section - well, I'm not fond of yet another box within all the boxes and the small type. Not a big deal, but I'm playing with some ideas here, User:Sparkit/sandbox/templates. Not what I'm after yet but maybe more play on it later.

Keep this up and you'll get hit with some barnstars! --sparkit^TALK 15:16, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Oh, OK, I guess I'm not quite as crazy as I'd thought. Good to know. I'm definitely open to different displays for the selected quotation, so I'll keep an eye on your sandbox page. Nice to have someone with an artistic eye involved! Planetneutral 15:21, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, this templating stuff is certainly crazy-making! I boldly went ahead an implemented my quote layout idea, and added a Duchamp quote. Thanks! --sparkit^TALK 16:30, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Strangely, running IE7 on Vista, the More selected quotations link is white and therefore invisible on the main portal page. Doesn't happen on Firefox. Wonder why that would be? Can't really dig into it now, but I'll look tonight. Planetneutral 18:01, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

I may have fixed that by adding style="background-color:transparent;". The text had a white background on Firefox/Mac, but the text itself was blue/purple, but now it's the same as the background. --sparkit^TALK 18:24, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Display problem

Something about the changes made today has resulted in a break of the portal's display in IE6, such that the right column is pushed down below the end of the left column. It was working as of the end of last night. Too much was done today beyond my limited understanding to have any hope of fixing it, so I'm hoping you can. Cheers, Planetneutral 02:24, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Ugh. I'll roll 'em back and let you know the specific problems in firefox/mac. the code will be more familiar to you that way. I don't have Windoze to look at the probs. --sparkit^TALK 02:40, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I tried some 'rolling back' in an isolated fashion, but it may be that all three sections now share some attribute that's flummoxing the whole deal. I check IE every once in a while for exactly this reason. Hope it solves the issue.

I'm working on some of the other suggested tweaks. While I hesitate to sacrifice originality and style for the sake of consistency (and really recoil at the use of quote in place of quotation), I'm pretty sure we'll lose those fights at the FPC level anyway. And really, the goal is to draw attention to visual arts on Wikipedia, so I want that FP status badly. Major increase in the number of eyes on the portal. Planetneutral 02:47, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

I rolled them back to last night. It'll be easier that way I think. As far as the FPC thing goes, how's about submitting it the way you, or we, like it, and if a case can't be made for the originality, then change it? --sparkit^TALK 02:55, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

I got it!!!!!!!! Something about moving the Did you know section into the right column (or moving the things you can do to the bottom) broke it. Switch 'em back and presto. Kind of a bummer as I liked it better the other way, but I'd rather have it working. Planetneutral 04:41, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Wow! that's really weird, but I've seen bugs like this before. I'm suspicious of the div tags and floating... seems I recall reading that IE doesn't handle them the same as mozilla.

I've been thinking about visual art content... I just don't remember coming across very many articles that are "GA" status. And I glanced at the bureaucracy surrounding that today. Ugh! --sparkit^TALK 04:54, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Yup, having the same problem. Many of the GA articles are unimpressive. Bios are no problem.

I added a suggestion area for each of the rotating sections. I'm working on DYK right now. Of course, I should be heading off to bed... Planetneutral 04:58, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Is there a way that you can introduce a line of white space between the bottom of the {{{text}}} and the footer material in the rotating sections? I can't figure it out and my brain is fading fast~ Thanks for the help. Planetneutral 05:16, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

break tags are the easiest. I did it for the Portal:Visual arts/Selected article/Layout. See if that's what you're after. And get some rest! :)

I'd like to see a little more white space at the above the items, like right about the first line, but I won't fiddle with that now. --sparkit^TALK 05:28, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

That might be too far in the opposite direction ('cause I'm not at all picky). Maybe a single break tag is enough? Planetneutral 05:31, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

OK. Let's try one. :) I made the change. --sparkit^TALK 05:41, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

It's true that a number of them aren't addressing it. Here's some that seem to: Portal:Dogs, Portal:Electronics and Portal:Literature. I'm not seeing any difference on the basis of that line height attribute in Firefox or IE.

I'm OK with moving the picture, although it does make it pretty rigid and boxy on the left. Seems to work on the whole. Planetneutral 14:15, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

The dog portal is using a common box footer template, placed on the portal main page. I tried it with visual arts just now and it messed up he page layout. Didn't save it. --sparkit^TALK 14:46, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Are you sure? That's not what I'm seeing for the random components (which is where the issue is, right?). It looks like they are using the layout that I started with.

{| class="noprint" width="100%"  border="0" style="padding: 0; 
margin: 0; background-color:transparent"
|-
|<div style="text-align:left;">'''[[Portal:Dogs/Selected article|...Archive/Nominations]]'''</div>||
 <div style="text-align:right;margin-right:10px;margin-bottom:4px;">
'''[[{{{link}}}|Read more...]]'''
 </div >
|}

Is there a compelling reason not to just use that? Planetneutral 15:06, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Yep, that's what it looks like now that I look closer that box-footer is included in the rotating template. The most compelling reason not to use that is that "...archive" and "...read more" links using the div tags will overlap tall images on the archive pages. --sparkit^TALK 15:14, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Also, the {{tl:Random portal component}} uses {{tl:Portal:box-footer}} which is not adjustable by us unless we want to change all the wikiportals that use it. Which explains why we see a difference in the components we're using that don't use the random thing (DYK). Dunno where to go on this from here. --sparkit^TALK 15:41, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

I had to do some pretty drastic things, but I have everything working, including eliminating the white quotations link in IE7. Did not like having to 'undo' so much tweaking, but things are about as they should be now across browsers. In an ideal world, getting rid of the white space under the footer links would be desirable, but I really don't want to play and have to do this all again, as it's been a real energy drain/distraction from focusing on the content of the page. So I recommend we be pretty cautious (not dormant, just careful) from here as far as box format tweaking is concerned. Planetneutral 18:51, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for doing that. The problem with the "more" links overlapping some of the images in the article and bio archives has returned. If you're not seeing it in firefox/win, it must be a firefox/mac-specific problem.

The whole exercise has been a drain/distraction to me as well, but I must say that I know alot more now about the arcane bits of portal code. --sparkit^TALK 19:29, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Selected quote

Not always! - you got me just at the right time. However looking at what links here, there are a number of other pages with quotion instead of quote. However, I think you should be able to move these yourself with the move button (you have got one, I think) - not cut and paste though, but you may know that. If you need any more assistance, let me know. Keep up the good work! Tyrenius 00:20, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

The quote selection is a new one on me. I'm wondering why they aren't all on one page for easy access? Also, if you don't do it already, I'd recommend Wikiquote. They seem a bit deficient on (contemporary) visual art there. I added Tracey Emin for example. Then there's a special box on Wikiquote to link to the Wikipedia article and vice versa. It would be good to promote this on the portal. Tyrenius 00:28, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

I got a bit muddled there - I was meaning the Visual Arts project! However, I see the portal has links to other projects, so the Artists category on Wikiquote might be valid. Tyrenius 00:33, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

OK, thanks for info. Just doing a bit on wikiquote right now (same user name). Tyrenius 00:45, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Cookies and barnstars, oh my!

Oooooooo! Thanks for the cookie! Yum.

But you! I think you need a barnstar for driving the whole project!

		The Barnstar of High Culture
		For Planetneutral for driving the Visual arts portal to featuredom, whilst maintaining humor and sanity! --sparkitTALK

I'm sorry to see that label/title/header style go. Something to think about later, perhaps. --sparkit^TALK 01:26, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks for fixing up my cookie!

Cookie looks much happier now! --sparkit^TALK 05:58, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Portal

Hello, thanks for the oppertity to review the portal. Everything looks great, I have added my support for featured. Keep up the good work.Cheers — WilsBadKarma ^(Talk) 19:25, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

• Portal:Library and information science looks really cool. Couldn't there be a way to move that right-hand column up into the empty space though? Smee 04:22, 13 March 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Thank you

Many thanks for the little touches (recatting, spelling corrections) on mat (picture framing) and fillet (picture framing). Both helped, though I'm particularly grateful for the spelling corrections, which were somewhat embarrassing. ^^;; Runa27 15:24, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Carducci

Have a google search for "Bartolomeo Carducci" and you'll have plenty of sources. I think, English sources are not so much reliable for Italian old matters, as they simply copy each other. "Bartolommeo" is in fact a typical old-fashioned typo from English sources, as both in Italian and in Latin the name as a single "m" (Bartolomeo and Bartolomeus). Bye and good work. --Attilios 19:35, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

If I may butt in, and ignoring A's usual tendency to blame everything on the English, I think he is right on this one: Bartolomé Carducho gets 442 English lang ghits (including accentless e's), & the Italian 27,200. Scholar 44 to 131. I notice the Spanish WP use the Italian, & the Germans the Spanish - go figure! I think it's the first time I've had an issue with the Getty Index. I noticed on Jusepe de Ribera that the US tended, like the Spanish, tended to use José, whereas he & everybody else uses Jusepe. Johnbod 19:49, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thought you might be interested...

...to know that an editor reversed your page move of Constantin_Brâncuşi without providing a counter-logic for doing so. Planetneutral ^talk 19:19, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

I saw it when it happened and chose not to fight that battle. :) The edit summary of the move, to the spelling that no one will search for, said "not a policy". As it turns out the page I though was policy was a proposed-but-failed policy and no one had marked it as such (it's now marked). However, it confuses me in light of all the other naming convention pages which prescribe "use English." I guess all the libraries and museums in the English speaking world have been spelling it wrong for decades. It's confusing other folks, too. See the bottom of Talk: Constantin_Brâncuşi. --sparkit^TALK 00:02, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] DYK

On 23 March 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Indiana Department of Natural Resources, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Carabinieri 20:14, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Question on @Road entry

Planetneutral -

I noticed you were a fellow Illini alum, so I thought I would ask you for some advice on Wikipedia.

I tried to get a link under GPS Tracking to our company, GPS Insight. It was summarily deleted as spam, although it was roughly similar to several other company references. I see that you recently edited the @Road entry.

I am curious, if I want people to be able to see some of the things we're doing with GPS Tracking, and want a reference under the Wikipedia, what is my best approach?

I am curious why you maintain the @Road page, as well -- do you work there by chance?

I appreciate your help -- thanks in advance.

Incidentally, this was the reference which I attempted to add:

• [GPS Insight]

Rdonat 04:21, 29 March 2007 (UTC) Rob Donat

[edit] March WP:FILMS Newsletter

The March 2007 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This is an automated notice by Cbrown1023 talk 00:38, 30 March 2007 (UTC)