Jump to content

User talk:Vadac

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

[edit]
Some cookies to welcome you!

Welcome to Wikipedia, Vadac! I am Marek69 and have been editing Wikipedia for quite some time. I just wanted to say hi and welcome you to Wikipedia! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page or by typing {{helpme}} at the bottom of this page. I love to help new users, so don't be afraid to leave a message! 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! Oh yeah, I almost forgot, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome!

Marek.69 talk 09:03, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Questions

[edit]

{{helpme}}

Thank you for leaving me positive feedback, it really makes a difference as a new user. It encouraged me to begin my user page which is in its beginnings.
I actually do have a question: How can I find the right codes to use to make small coloured boxes to describe maps I choose on the Commons for various pages? In other words, the little boxes beside the times areas gained independence from the Spanish Empire based on the map above it which is on the Spanish Empire page?
Okay, but how do I know which code goes to which colour? If I want a dark green, a light green, a medium blue and a grey for example.
Another question I have is: If an image only in use in a talk-page archive and not in active use on an article itself can it be nominated for deletion and actually get deleted?
Does getting Wiki-cookies boost your capability on Wikipedia? I have seen others get them and I instantly noticed you gave me some in your welcoming message. If yes, what is now new? Vadac (talk) 14:43, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

But are the CAPS AND 3 EXCLAMATION POINTS REALLY NECESSARY?

Otherwise, no problem at all. SamEV (talk) 04:16, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for agreeing! I thought it made sense when I noticed the deletion request. As for the caps, I think I must have hit the caps lock button by accident. It happens quite a lot for me for some reason. There were a few other pages I did the same thing to and I just didn't want people to think it was vandalism because some Wikipedians have strange ideas of what vandalism is, as to the exclamation marks.
All right. Carry on. SamEV (talk) 16:40, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Portuguese maps

[edit]

Hello Vadac! Please do not delete the map on German articles without any discussions and beware what you are doing! The map in the article de:Portugiesische Kolonialgeschichte has the same colours in use (mentioned in text), like the other maps in the article and shows further territories missing in "your" map. If there are mistakes in current map, please tell me. And it is an absolute "No No" in German Wikipedia to change sth in pages of users (Benutzer). ;-) Greetings, --J. Patrick Fischer (talk) 13:12, 10 April 2010 (UTC) (fastest contact: de:Benutzer Diskussion:J. Patrick Fischer)[reply]

Maps

[edit]

Thanks for your note. First off — the reason that I talk about this not being Commons is that you cited a Commons deletion discussion, and since we're not Commons, it's not relevant. I declined the speedies simply because the rationale you cited is a valid reason for deletion at FFD, but not a valid reason for speedy deletion. You're free to open a FFD nomination for all of these images. Nyttend (talk) 02:09, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I just noticed that your question was far longer than my response. Did I explain myself well enough, or have I left you confused? Nyttend (talk) 02:10, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I just got your note — I'm travelling and don't have reliable Internet access. I'm actually not sure that these images need to be deleted, so I don't think it a good idea for me to start a deletion discussion. Could you write up a rationale to present for their deletion (or separate rationales, if there are different reasons to delete different images) and put the rationale(s) on a separate section of your talk page, and then ask someone else to do it? To ask someone else, just place the code {{helpme}} on your talk page and then write a simple explanation saying that you'd like them to nominate the files for deletion with the rationale that you've posted. Nyttend (talk) 03:40, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mass deletion request

[edit]

{{helpme}}

I believe all of the following shuld be deleted and need someone to post them fr deletion for me as every time I try to do it the whole thing screws up and one or more admins are annoyed at me about it: [snip]

list available here

Please post them for deletion with this reason:

These are all nonsense duplicates of inaccuracy regarding the Spanish and British colonial empires and have been demised as a result. All pages requiring a map of this nature should use: File:Spanish Empire Anachronous 0.PNG & File:The British Empire.png. Vadac (talk) 21:36, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I have listed this in Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2010 May 19#File:British_Empire Anachronous 2.PNG, I have added the notice on all the file pages, and I have notified the original uploader of each file on their respective talk pages. Hopefully I have done it all correctly. Give me a shout if there are any problems. Best,  Chzz  ►  22:48, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

 Done

A file deletion dispute

[edit]

Your point about the slight differences is the exact reason that I declined them: the applicable criterion requires them to be identical, and the differences you highlight are the reasons that they're not identical. Feel free to take this image to WP:FFD, and please let me know if/when you do, for I'll be happy to support its deletion; the only reason that I declined it is that it doesn't meet the criteria for speedy. Nyttend (talk) 21:37, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion critera

[edit]

{{helpme}}

I have found situations where there are duplicates of images which naturally should be removed via speedy deletion but not all have the same file format and I can't find a deletion criteria for when the file format is different but they are stil the same image. I know that SVGs are treated separately from other imae formats and have been respecting that but PNG, JPEG, BITMAP and others like them i fact are all the same and do not have a difference n their construction like SVGs. So, what I am getting at here is what speedy deletion criteria can I use to get rid of duplicates which happen to be a variety of non-SVG fies?

You're probably best off not relying on CSD and going for regular files for deletion. Sometimes, it's useful to keep a non-svg version around. /ƒETCHCOMMS/ 00:50, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Another answer, to elaborate a bit
The short answer: probably, don't bother, but you could suggest deletion as 'redundant' if you really wanted to. Reasons;
  • Although PNG and BMP are indeed both ways of storing exact image date, a jpeg can never be identical to a PNG. It is a lossy format, so when you convert from BMP/PNG to JPEG you change the file. It is not identical; you could not convert back (except in really trivial cases) without differences.
  • BMP and PNG can also, technically, differ. As they are lossless, the actual image content might be identical, but Metadata and aspects such as transparency could differ. I'll admit this is mostly technical and irrelevant in most cases.
  • Perhaps the primary reason for not bothering: when a file is deleted, it is not removed from the disk. The deleted version remains available, but only people with special permissions (mostly, SysOp) can view them. Therefore, there is absolutely no 'saving' in disk space, database size, etc. In fact, it makes the databases larger, with all the logging of the deletion.
For these reasons, an admin might reject F1 for images with different extensions. Then again, they might choose to exercise common sense - for example, in the case of a trivial image file which is never, realistically, going to be of much use.
My own opinion is, don't waste time on this; there are better ways to improve Wikipedia. In terms of image 'fixing', for example, have a look at the list in User:Chzz/pic - ignoring the red links - which shows lots of files that need a more descriptive name (or deleting). User:Chzz/dsc is similar.
Hope that helps,  Chzz  ►  01:15, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tagging talk pages

[edit]

Hello If you want to tag an article, you can go to its talk page and add that banner at the top of the text. To add something to WikiProject Austria, add {{WikiProject Austria}}. Similarly, to add the Germany WikiProject, add {{WikiProject Germany}}. (Most WikiProjects have a banner of that sort: {{WikiProject NAME}}) If you want a directory of projects, so that you can find the most appropriate one, see here: Wikipedia:WikiProject.

As far as rating goes, virtually every one of these templates has the parameters importance= and quality= so that you can insert the tag: {{WikiProject Austria |importance=low |quality=C}} and generate the relevant categories and text on the talk page. Some banners have their own special fields.

If you want to collaborate on how to improve that article in particular, you can post to WT:AUSTRIA and ask other users who are interested in Austrian topics.

Please post on my talk if you would like more help. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:37, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

List of largest empires

[edit]

Hi there. We're having a content dispute at the article above - the list of empires has a large 216 entries, and currently the article sees fit to repeat this list 6 times! Clearly a waste of storage and bandwidth. A better solution (saving at least 30% and making it much easier to read and use) would be a table with a column for each attribute, sortable, as used in many other articles (see the discussion). However, a silent editor keeps reverting attempts to clean up the article, without explanation. Please see the discussion (currently nobody disagrees). Your comments would be welcome. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.141.18.207 (talk) 21:19, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In case you missed it: I've replied to your contribution at Talk:List of largest empires#The idea of this article being changed to a table format. The uncommunicative edit-warring IP is/was 190.134.255.212/190.134.219.101/190.134.130.7/190.134.148.205/190.134.136.70/190.134.208.134/190.134.193.217/190.134.235.131/190.134.146.153.  --Lambiam 08:21, 11 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How to deal with warring IP Address users on an article

[edit]

{{helpme}}

My question dirives from the issue above. What am I and/or the Wikimedia community to do when someone starts undoing others work constantly even after heavy discussions support the changes and the undoing IP does not involve themself in the discussions but merely undoes our work over and over? The big trouble is, as can be seen above, is that this individual is doing this from several IP addresses so they have multiple power and can be more effectivly abusive.

If this individual continues to do this is it right to actually block one or more of the IP Addresses they are using, maybe even all of them? (The ones listed above only, not the whole 190.134.xxx.xxx range). Vadac (talk) 22:53, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You can report them at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. /ƒETCHCOMMS/ 01:58, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Great Turkish War, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Principality of Transylvania (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:53, 14 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

British and French empires 1920

[edit]

Thank you for the nice file:British and French empires 1920.png map. Some territories are still missing, at least in China, like (the visible) Guangzhouwan (1898-1946, with 3 last years japanese occupation), part of the shandong and hongkong for england, parts of wuhan, guangzhou and shanghai, beijing for both.82.225.234.108 (talk) 23:12, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Vadac&oldid=1167469349"