User talk:Luokou

Welcome!

Hello, Luokou, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Katr67 (talk) 01:29, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Interstate shields

The file descriptions say that it is "750 mm by 600 mm (30 in by 24 in)", but the sign specs only include 12x15 and 18x22.5. Which one did you use? It doesn't look like you did it correctly, since both of them specify that the numbers should be half the height of the shield, but they are slightly taller (for instance on File:I-405 (Oregon).svg I count 34/64 pixels in the 0). You also used series C rather than D; would this have been necessary if the height was corrected? --NE2 09:13, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Since i do have an I-205 shield that is 30"x24", i was mainly going off of a physical representation. However, you are correct that i stretched out the numerals to be a little taller than need be (maybe i prefer how that looks, incorrect as it may be). Though, pretty much every 3-digit interstate shield i saw in Oregon save for I-105 shields uses FHWA-C (growing up there, one tends to notice these things). The footnote on the specifications sheet does say that C may be used in lieu of D due to space restrictions. This is especially evident for the I-205 signs, where Type D wouldn't fit with the "half sign height" numerals even when kerned as close as possible. Technically after height correction one would use type D, but most of the time the DOT and local contractors used type C anyway. Hell, i wasn't expecting anyone to be so scrutinizing about a few pixels taller, especially for non-official work. Might as well go and make the necessary changes. Luokou (talk)

I actually noticed the changes and thought they "looked wrong", but I don't live in Oregon. Maybe the main issue is with kerning - the example on [1] is C but has more space between the numbers. Looking through the overhead signs on that page, they do seem pretty close to your SVGs. I'll change the templates such as template:infobox road/OR/shield Interstate to use the new filenames. --NE2 03:19, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

State-based Interstate signs?

So now Interstate route signs differ based on the state? - Denimadept (talk) 13:54, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's definitely been the standard when the state includes the state name, and I believe a few other states do use different-styled non-state-name shields. This should be asked on WT:USRD. --NE2 08:25, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your interstate shields

Hello. I've seen the shields you have made for Oregon and they look very similar, if not the same, to how shields are made for Utah. I got this assumption from seeing the I-84 shield, which is the only interstate Oregon and Utah share in common. I was wondering if you could make an I-15 or I-80 shield with the Oregon specs just to see if they would work. Thanks for your time. C L — 16:54, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

County Lemonade will like you to neutralize the version of Image:I-215 (UT).svg. He ask you if you can overwrite that iamge with neutral shields like .--Freewayguy ^{T C} 03:31, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind, the shields were made by another user. Thanks anyway - C L — 16:48, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]