Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Euro

Euro

It shows how math and art combine to create a commonly recognized symbol. The image appears in Euro and Euro sign. User:Agateller released it to the PD in the Wikimedia Commons.

Nominate and support. - Hyad 04:24, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Question but what's the angle ACD? Would seem to matter since it occurs five times. - Samsara _contrib ^talk 04:36, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Looks like it's a right angle between A, C, and the dotted line on the right, that's 90 degrees + 100 degrees between A, D, and the line = 130 degrees. -Hyad 04:50, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm looking for the angle between A and D, centered on C. It looks like it is in the region of 30° but I don't think you can work out what it is from the image. However, it is possibly the most important angle in the design. - Samsara _contrib ^talk 15:35, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Weak oppose. Great diagram, very informative. But... not a FP in my book, sorry. --Janke | Talk 09:13, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Information. I tried to put more information on the derivation of the image in the summary but it doesn't display. Anyway, the original copyrighted image from the Euro Commission is a very coarse image supplied only as WMF (!) or TIFF and doesn't display or print very well. It also has the pesky problem of being copyrighted. This image is public domain and it follows the graphic guidelines set forth in the official diagram, but it does not illustrate them in exactly the same way and is not a copy of the official diagram. The angle ACD is the angle formed by a line from the center of the symbol to the base of the symbol directly below, and then another line going up from that point to the point where it intersects the symbol again on the upper right inside. I know this is extremely awkward, but that's the only official parameter provided, and if I described it in any other way (by specifying the exact angle ACD, for example) it would stray from the official model and theoretically might not produce the same symbol. Agateller 11:22, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

By trigonometry, I get the angle to be 22.57°. - Samsara _contrib ^talk 15:57, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

|AD| = 5, |AB| = 6

<DAB = 90 + 40 = 130 (note: not divisible by three)

|BD| = sqrt(25 + 36 - 60cos130)

|ACD| = arcsin(5sin130/|BD|) ~ 22.572593°, which is why it is not specified. ed g2s • talk 18:02, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

omgz hilarious, if this isn't exemplary of the unbelievable level of regulatory bureaucracy of the EU what is?--Deglr6328 21:37, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not really, no. National and corporate symbols and logos almost always have extremely precise geometric definitions. This isn't specific to the EU, nor is it in any way exaggerated regulatory bureaucracy. Nice "try", though. Phils 23:46, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh good heavens, it slipped my mind there for a moment that we shan't make any humorous observations about any international organizations for fear of offending. oops! back to my doublethink lesson! sigh.--Deglr6328 06:16, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You didn't offend me. I actually think the EU is quite the bureaucratic mess indeed, but that diagram certainly isn't a symptom of that, IMO :D. Although I am far from being a blind supporter, I am generally annoyed at the amount of baseless criticism the EU receives from overseas. I'm sorry if I sounded too abrasive; this is not the place for political debates. Phils 15:35, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support, however (and call me fickle if you want) I'd prefer to see a more colourful version. 86.135.200.146 01:18, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support really cool and crisp. gren グレン 02:32, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support, extremely informative, I like it. Dylan 20:35, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support Attractive, clean diagram and an indispensible contribution to the part of Euro sign where the tension between the European Commission's specification for the symbol and the interests of type designers is discussed ~ Veledan • Talk 22:39, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support, although it should probably not ever be a Picture of the Day.--ragesoss 02:36, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, does the job well, but not particularly stunning. ed g2s • talk 02:54, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. No color? Neutrality^talk 22:19, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support Incredibly informative. --Lewk_of_Serthic _contrib ^talk 01:57, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Information I've uploaded a color version of this diagram[1]. It looks much prettier but it is actually harder to read than clear black and white. The black-and-white version still serves the purpose of the article better, IMO. Agateller 04:39, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, the black and white one is far better. --Lewk_of_Serthic _contrib ^talk 03:06, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support Very good and certainly a lot of Wikipedians will likeit =D --Lord Snoeckx 17:33, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Informative, easy to understand, and relevant. --Dante Alighieri | Talk 21:53, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Suppprt, color schmolor. Broken Segue 04:45, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Suppport great illustration. chowells 01:16, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment since this was created in Illustrator, can't a SVG be exported instead? --ChrisRuvolo (t) 14:50, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Illustrator 8.x doesn't export to SVG. I can't find a free program to convert from EPS to SVG, either. Additionally, I've never seen any mention of SVG outside of Wikipedia, and so I wonder exactly what purpose it serves (it seems to be like JPEG2, a solution looking for a problem). Major browsers don't appear to support it. While I can see the advantages of a vector-based version of the image, in the absence of a universally supported standard for them, it seems like PNG is the safest bet (and even that is risky, since some browsers won't display PNG, either). Agateller 07:42, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - I have access to Illustrator 10.0 if that helps anything. --Dante Alighieri | Talk 00:30, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    - I've had some success converting EPS to SVG using pstoedit. See Image:EEA agency logo.svg for example. SVG is supported by browsers such as Firefox and Opera. It will often produce a more space-efficient image than PNG. And when the articles eventually go to press, SVG will produce the most accurate images for printing, just like EPS would. Also, there is the benefit of many people being able to edit the SVG after you have uploaded it, to correct for problems or create a derivative work. I have recently done that with commons:Image:Flag of New Jersey.svg. There are many benefits to SVG. If you could send the Illustrator file to someone with SVG export, it would be appreciated. --ChrisRuvolo (t) 15:06, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    - BTW, Wikimedia will render SVG to PNG for browsers that don't support SVG. --ChrisRuvolo (t) 15:12, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support. In my opinion, it achieves the effect it wants to. I also find it ironic that Neutrality voted against it for lack of color. But I think that the content of the inage makes up for that: a feeling of complexity without even loking at it in depth. Gracenotes ^T § 17:26, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support A nice picture thats interesting to look at, I believe. 216.37.227.202 16:14, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted Image:EuroConstLarge.png Raven4x4x 06:59, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]