Wikipedia talk:Graphics Lab/Illustration workshop/Archive 4

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

How to know if it's OK to make a derivate

This request The_Hughleys has been there for a while and I can do it but I don't know if it's OK. It feels as if it would be some kind of copyright on it, how do I check that? -Goran tek-en (talk) 21:17, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

This is just my personal opinion, but I tend to shy away from making derivatives of copyrighted and trademarked illustrations in general. Take for example the American Dad logo which also has recently been submitted for vectorisation. I wouldn't touch this at all. That's clearly copyrighted and there's absolutely no reason to vectorise it as it should only be displayed as a low-resolution image anyway per Wikipedia's own policy. However, "The Hughleys" is claimed to be simple enough to be copyright free. I'm by no means an expert in American copyright law, so before I would touch this one I would have to be absolutely positive that the public-domain claim is legitimate and correct. I, personally, am not positive. Is the "H" stylistic? Is the font customised? Is there enough artistic expression there to flip this into "copyrighted" status? Probably not, but I honestly do not know for certain. Niamh (talk) 06:14, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Goran tek-en, here are Threshold of originality and commons:COM:TOO for your benefit. --George Ho (talk) 06:19, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

George Ho, that is very helpful and informative. Thank you! By my reading of these, I would say that "The Hughleys" logo should be fine to vectorise. Niamh (talk) 06:28, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the input and now I also think this would be free as it's just text. But as mentioned why need a svg for that and there is no article to connect it to. Could it be someone who just wants a job done without having to pay or am I out of line then? --Goran tek-en (talk) 19:34, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

SVG is now in use, replacing GIF. SVG does better resolution than GIF, but modifications are still needed to resemble the actual logo. George Ho (talk) 19:45, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Not AGAIN!

Much like the last time, when someone tried to trace-SVGify the logo of AUstrialia, we have this: Image:Computer_Workstation_Variables_cleanup.png. Far from a cleanup, it looks identical to the original and is approximately twenty times the size of the original. 76.117.247.55 (talk) 20:12, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

SVG to PNG error

When I tried converting an SVG image from Inkscape, to a PNG on fileformat.info, it wouldn't convert. I don't know if it tells me if the SVG file itself is not fully vectored. Blurred Lines 19:25, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

You would have to provide us with the original file you try to convert to be able to say anything. --Goran tek-en (talk) 20:07, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

I don't know why conversion using the site you mention doesn't work, but did you know there's actually a tool within Inkscape to export SVG files to PNG (in the menu bar, File → Export Bitmap)? SiBr₄ (talk) 20:18, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Also, if the SVG is on a Wikimedia site, you can just download a PNG by clicking the appropriate link below the image on the SVG file page. The Haz _talk 01:59, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Text rendering of Adobe Illustrator SVGs on Wikipedia

(Moved from project page) I have never understood how Illustrator SVG interact with the Wikimedia SVG rendering engine, but I do know that setting font as Liberation Sans (one of the SVG fonts supposingly available) never works out the way I'd like it to. The various interactions between thumbnail / full / various versions is also never clear to me. To make life less mystifying, I've just created a page for testing SVGs here. I'm not sure what is the take-home message here except that text-rendering doesn't play well (at all)... tons of artifacts (e.g., compare the kerning between the regular font left,right,center aligns) If any of you have suggestions to expanding/revising the conditions of the test, I will be happy to oblige. Jon C (talk) 04:09, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

What your test page (or rather your test SVG) proves to me is that Illustrator has possibly the worst SVG export that I've ever seen:

• It starts with the left/center/right-aligned boxes which are not aligned at all. It's simply absolutely positioned text. Instead of correctly specifying the alignment as an XML attribute or a CSS style, Illustrator writes fixed coordinates into the SVG which are shifted a little by Wikipedia's SVG renderer libRSVG because of font hinting. Therefore they look misaligned.
• Next thing I realize are the wrongly specified font families: Illustrator writes font-family="'LiberationSans-Italic'" into the SVG. Correct would be something like font-family="Liberation Sans" font-weight="bold".
• Third thing that scares me are that superscripts/subscripts are not specified as such, but are realized by Illustrator by using absolutely positioned, scaled down text. Smallcaps are even worse: There is no specification in the SVG at all, that would tell a renderer that it is supposed to use Capitals.

In conclusion all "render errors" are in fact export errors made by Illustrator. It's a shame, that a commercial product like that does not care at all to support the SVG standard and only offers such a bad export functionality. I don't know if this can be fixed on the Illustrator side (and I don't own it myself to test), but at this point I can only blame Adobe. --Patrick87 (talk) 20:39, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

First, there is a Commons tool to check SVG files before uploading. Second, not all render errors are export errors. The SVG rendering engine (RSVG) isn't perfect, leaving some of my perfectly coded SVGs (with or without text) still not showing up correctly. We just need to be careful about that. Using something like Notepad++ to clean up SVGs is worthwhile. Of note, Inkscape adds lots of tags that AI doesn't, which is why I stopped using it. However, there are a few things to keep in mind:

1. Illustrator does not format the names of font families correctly. AI removes all whitespace in names and hyphenates the style rather than putting it in font-style. It also leaves no place to enter a generic font.
   1. Check the font-family to see that the text matches what is listed at SVG fonts.
   2. Be sure that the font-style also matches what is available. For example, you can use "Bitstream Vera Serif" but not the italic version of the font as it's not available, so the font will not be rendered correctly (as in it most likely won't even bother with the font-family you chose).
2. "Output fewer <tspan> elements" should be checked before exporting. This will use fewer text elements and should keep words and phrases together.
3. Use <textpath> if you actually have text on a path. Otherwise each glyph will usually get it's own tag.
4. Avoid the use of sub-/superscript whenever possible. If you need to, go with a separate element for this (which AI mistakenly does automatically). The RSVG rendering engine used here doesn't do well with embedded tags so it's usually not possible to embed the sub-/superscript tag.
5. Illustrator's built in SVG export script uses absolute positioning via the transformation matrix, which is common (though not necessarily the best), and is actually handled well by the Wiki server. In turn, you get exact placement of the text, exactly where you put it in Illustrator. If you get the font correct in AI and then change the font to be the same outside of AI (fixing the font-family), it's usually exactly where you placed it because it uses absolute positioning. If the font-family is off, you can usually kiss this positioning goodbye as I've done many times without thinking about it. Also, you can still use alignment with some tweaks outside of AI.
   1. The matrix is the a b c d e f format which translates to scale_x skew_y skew_x scale_y translate_x translate_y
   2. If you do want alignment, just set the anchor using text-anchor="start" , text-anchor="middle" , or text-anchor="end"
6. For an example of all this, check out this code. You can save it as an SVG, and open it in a browser. You can also use the Commons SVG checker as link to above.

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE svg PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD SVG 1.1//EN" "http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/1.1/DTD/svg11.dtd">
<svg version="1.1" id="Layer_1" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" 
x="0px" y="0px" width="200px" height="200px" viewBox="0 0 200 200">
<line stroke="#231F20" fill="none" x1="100" y1="0" x2="100" y2="200"/>
<text text-anchor="start" transform="matrix(1 0 0 1 100 50)" font-family="Courier, serif" 
font-style="Regular" font-size="30">Test</text>
<text text-anchor="middle" transform="matrix(1 0 0 1 100 100)" font-family="Courier, serif" 
font-style="Regular" font-size="30">Test</text>
<text text-anchor="end" transform="matrix(1 0 0 1 100 150)" font-family="Courier, serif" 
font-style="Regular" font-size="30">Test</text>
</svg>

The Haz _talk 00:43, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Don't know how to upload new (vectorized) versions

Hi,

There is a while without uploading new vectorized versions of files. I tried to upload the new file but it doesn't allow me since "it is already a file with that name". If, instead, I try to "upload" a new version of the old file it will not work since the extension of the file is not the same. Any advice??

Thanks, Nicoguaro (talk) 04:59, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

If you try to upload a new version file with a SVG that is a PNG it will not work, as it is a different format. – You may upload a whole new file - Disregard the warning notice, and continue with the upload, as this will NOT over write the a PNG file with the same name - FOX 52 (talk) 05:43, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Don't use the Upload Wizard if you're uploading to Commons. Choose one of the older upload forms (link toward the top of the page) as they allow you disregard the notice as FOX 52 wrote. The Haz _talk 06:34, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

A little bit of background: This glitch was introduced by a patch to prevent the upload of multiple files with names only differing in the case of the extension like image.jpg, image.JPG or even image.JpG/image.jPg. Sadly this was "fixed" by simply ingoring the file extension completely when checking if the file name already exists. Therefore image.jpg, image.png and image.svg are considered to be the "same name" now. Will be hopefully fixed some day (there is also a Bugzilla entry for this, but I don't know the bug number right now). --Patrick87 (talk) 14:25, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Ok, I think I have done it. Thank you for your help. If you want to take a look: File:NAFTA_logo.svg — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nicoguaro (talk • contribs) 02:48, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

list of taken requests (assumed to be in progress)

dear reader, end of January I placed a request for redrawing Aceh emblem on the Wikipedia Graphics Lab/Illustration workshop page. The status changed to "request taken" on 1st February. For quite some time I donot see this request any longer on the mentioned page. A few other requests that I sent with status "stale" I can see in the Archives 2014 page, but I wonder where the Aceh emblem has gone. I cannot find it - is there a page for requests with status "request taken" assumed to be in progress? I am rather new on this workshop-page and have no earlier experience on this matter. Can you please elucidate me ? sorry for bothering you. thank you and best regards / JanJC (talk) 14:28, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

@JanJC: Apparently, FOX 52 removed your stale request as archived on 27 March but didn't put it in an archive. The taker Pbroks13 hasn't edited WP since (s)he took the request on 1 February. SiBr₄ (talk) 15:27, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks SiBr4 I thought I got that one, well now it's archived - FOX 52 (talk) 17:36, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

Useful Firefox Add-On – Nicer Media Pages

Hi Everybody,

I just wanted to inform you about a great Firefox add-on of mine called "Nicer Media Pages" which could come in real handy for all Wikigraphists.

Besides polishing the overall look of media pages (image/video files shown in the browser) the probably most valuable feature is the ability to show transparency in images – live in your browser:

• By default a pure white background is used for all images (in contrast to the ugly grainy grayish background used in recent Firefox versions).
• As soon as you hover over the image, the background is however replaced by a nice checkerboard style pattern (similar to the one we're used to from Wikipedia file description pages) allowing you to see and inspect transparency in images.

The best part is that this does not only work for PNG/GIF files but also for SVG files! The result for an SVG file is shown in the image to the right.

Since I'm the developer of the add-on (using an alias) you can direct all comments, bug reports, feature requests, etc. directly to me. All feedback is highly welcome (I hope you appreciate the add-on as I do )!

Regards, --Patrick87 (talk) 22:25, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

PNG to SVG logo conversions

There are a couple of requests up for converting .png logos to .svg (one for the Damascus University, the others for Right-wing political parties in India). Somebody asked what the point is of making these conversions. One of the politcal logos is tagged on Commons with a tag saying that svg is "more efficient" than png. Can anyone expand on what this means and if it is worth our time to make these conversions? Gaff (talk) 19:44, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

I believe it is because a typical .svg file can be quite a bit smaller than a decent-sized .png. The extension '.svg' stands for Scalable Vector Graphics. Vector graphics are graphics in which the information is encoded on the basis of shapes and lines with properties, such as color, thickness and transparency. For instance, the following is the entirety of the code for the file File:colours_of_Dublin.svg:

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
<svg xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" width="100" height="67" version="1.0">
    <g>
        <rect fill="#88B8FD" width="100" height="67"/>
        <rect fill="#000080" width="50" height="67" x="50"/>
    </g>
</svg>

It is 250 bytes in size, and can be rendered at any resolution with no loss of image quality.

On the other hand, ".png" stands for Portable Network Graphics, and it is a Raster graphics image, meaning it is defined by storing the color of each individual pixel. The code for that looks like the following:

89 50 4e 47 0d 0a 1a 0a 20 20 20 0d 49 48 44 52 20 20 20 64 20 20 20 43 08 06 20 20 20 6a 4b a0 da 20 20 20 04 73 42 49 54 08 08 08 08 7c 08 64 88 20 20 20 09 70 48 59 73 20 20 0d d7 20 20 0d d7 01 42 28 9b 78 20 20 20 19 74 45 58 74 53 6f 66 74 77 61 72 65 20 77 77 77 2e 69 6e 6b 73 63 61 70 65 2e 6f 72 67 9b ee 3c 1a 20 20 20 c3 49 44 41 54 78 9c ed d1 b1 0d 40 50 20 20 51 4c 67 24 bd c6 48 96 13 6a bd e4 5f e4 bd 09 2e b9 f9 38 af 7b fa 81 6d dd 47 27 7c 62 19 1d c0 9b 21 31 86 c4 18 12 63 48 8c 21 31 86 c4 18 12 63 48 8c 21 31 86 c4 18 12 63 48 8c 21 31 86 c4 18 12 63 48 8c 21 31 86 c4 18 12 63 48 8c 21 31 86 c4 18 12 63 48 8c 21 31 86 c4 18 12 63 48 8c 21 31 86 c4 18 12 63 48 8c 21 31 86 c4 18 12 63 48 8c 21 31 86 c4 18 12 63 48 8c 21 31 86 c4 18 12 63 48 8c 21 31 86 c4 18 12 63 48 8c 21 31 86 c4 18 12 63 48 8c 21 31 86 c4 18 12 63 48 8c 21 31 86 c4 18 12 63 48 8c 21 31 86 c4 18 12 63 48 8c 21 31 0f d2 73 05 05 67 8a f1 26 20 20 20 20 49 45 4e 44 ae 42 60 82

At the size shown on the page (100 x 67), a .png file would be 326 Bytes. That's not much of a difference, but when scaled up to the maximum size on the page (1280 x 858), the .png file reaches 6394 Bytes, while the same .svg rendered at that size is still 250 Bytes.

There's also the issue of editability. Since a .svg file is a vector graphic type, it would be really simple to edit a single element -such as some text- without modifying the rest. This might not be an issue when the original author of a file still has an .xcf or .psd version of the file, with the different elements on different layers, but the .png file doesn't support layers. So if someone had a logo of a gold star with "Gold Star Industries" in front of it in white text, and the company in question changed their name to "Yellow Star Industries", I could edit a .svg file simply by opening it and changing the text. For a .png file, I'd need to open it, erase the text, re-create the star behind the missing text, then add new text. It can take a lot of work to do that, especially when there are elements like reflections and drop shadows involved. In addition, as you can see above, the .svg file can be edited in a text editor by anyone with a working knowledge of XML and a .svg reference, whereas one would need a hex editor and more patience than I posses to edit the .png file manually. MjolnirPants Tell me all about it. 21:19, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Follow-up Ayers Rock (band)

I would like to know whether my request re Ayers Rock (band) (12 Jan 2015) is technically feasible? If it isn't, I will need to pursue other avenues. Also, have I included all the information which a graphist will require to complete the job? CaesarsPalaceDude (talk) 10:44, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

There could be issues with the licensing, because that would be duplicate of a non-free image, not used to illustrate the subject (but rather to illustrate one feature of one component of the subject). I think that's why nobody's helped. I can easily make a .gif animation for you, but I think there are some copyright questions that need answers before anyone does so. MjolnirPants Tell me all about it. 14:17, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

This is a significant issue which was the subject of an FfD discussion which you can see here. You will notice that late in the discussion other editors suggest the .gif. Is it possible to have only one source file, and code the .gif to rotate it to the right, and then rotate it back again? You are quite right; the copyright questions are the key issue. CaesarsPalaceDude (talk) 19:26, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Okay. I read through that discussion. Before I go into that, let me answer your question.

• More or less. An animated gif is composed of multiple layers, each of which constitutes a different frame of the animation. Technically, each of those is a different image. However, the way the images are stored (in general, only those pixels which change from one frame to the next are maintained in each frame, so each image is less than the whole, except for the first) means that it's not actually a collection of individual images that a reasonable person would recognize as such, but rather an aggregate of pixels which can be combined in a certain way to form an animation. Since they are all stored in one file, for display as a unified whole and with no express intention to separate them, I don't think there's any merit to the argument that an animated .gif comprises multiple images. A Flash animation may be done the way you have suggested, but for technical reasons, that's unfeasible. (I could do it, but WP doesn't support it, and Flash is going away anyways.)

Now to the issue of copyright. I do see that another editor proposed an animated .gif file. I don't see that any consensus was achieved for such a thing there, however. That being said, IMHO The animation should technically be considered a distinct (if obviously derivative) work from the original file. However, not everyone will agree that this is the case with respect to copyright law. I'll upload the .gif to the original request on the main page, but I predict another FfD discussion in the future. MjolnirPants Tell me all about it. 14:09, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

WMF grant request for a "Kids Visual Dictionary"

Hello all, I co-designed a Wikimedia outreach project to get a group of Indian kids to learn computer graphic while creating a real Wikipedia picture dictionary for basic English which they could be proud of ! The whole team will be under the management of a professional graphic designer lady who previously worked at Yahoo Inc India. The IEG proposal is detailed there on meta. We are competing with other great projects as well. Also, please take a look, your support for this Kid Visual Dictionary is also much welcome (here). Note: This project wish to have a close collaboration with the wikigraphist, who could reviews the kids' svg and give back design tricks. We even consider to take the kids team to design right here, on the graphic lab since it's the right place to do Opensource design and learn around it. :)

Cheers, please come and support! Yug (talk) 18:45, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

Cool idea! I would suggest that the clear borders be removed from the SVGs though. (If I get the chance I will.) The Haz _talk 02:38, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

I think that the "egg" graphic could be unclear to children who are literalists at a young age. If they are from a culture, or even a household, where fried eggs are non-existent, then the graphic looks like a depiction of the sun. (I also have my doubts about "axe" and "brush". They don't seem universalist to me. Thank you, Wordreader (talk) 19:42, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

USA state and county template question.

Where do I find the unlabeled templates? I've looked around a bit with no luck. Thanks, Wordreader (talk) 00:34, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

These are the kind of templates in which I'm interested: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newburgh_%28city%29,_New_York#/media/File:Orange_County_New_York_incorporated_and_unincorporated_areas_Newburgh_%28city%29_highlighted.svg Thanks again, Wordreader (talk) 00:37, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

No templates are available? Wordreader (talk) 19:45, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Not sure what you mean by templates. I think you are trying to say maps. Maps such as theses ones require a source map, in this case it may be anyone located here. Source map could be found by going through the categories located at the bottom of the file page at Wikimedia Commons. ///EuroCarGT 23:28, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

"Indefinite" requests

I marked the Android version history request "resolved" several days ago but this seems to have been removed by the requester (@Dsimic:) as they wish for the file to be continuously updated. I appreciate that keeping the file up to date is important, but I'm not entirely sure why it would require being left on the list of requests. In my opinion, a new request should be filed if and when there is new data, as then there is a specific request which can be tackled. Leaving images on the list when there is nothing to do on them seems counter-productive, and might give the impression that the page is stagnating. Indeed, if there were more than one of these requests (which, if we set a precedent, is not an unreasonable suggestion) it would almost certainly appear that the page is rarely updated, which tends to dissuade new requesters, at least in my experience.

If I'm alone on this then that's fine, but I thought it would be worth discussing. NikNaks _{talk - gallery} 12:08, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

Hello! In the past we had slow responses to certain requests, and as a result it was rather tough to have that chart updated; it has been even left without updates for a few months. I had to go around and ask a few people on their own talk pages, and thankfully Goran tek-en‎ turned out to be willing to update the chart and do a few other requests as well (Goran tek-en‎, thank you so much once again!). At the same time, recreating basically the same request for this particular chart again and again might just clog up the page and its history... Though, I'm more than willing to do that once each month if that's what everybody sees as a solution; perhaps we should hear from Goran tek-en‎ as well. — Dsimic (talk | contribs) 12:23, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

@NikNaks:@Dsimic: I can see both sides but I tend to agree with NikNaks that it's not good to keep it as a permanent request. For now and ahead (don't know for how long) I'm willing to update this file if you Dsimic add a topic on my talk page at commons and ping me as a reminder each time with a link for the new data.

I do also think that you will get better updating if you actually can find a person who is willing to do this for some time.

Otherwise there is also the solution that you or someone else that work with this learn how to update this chart. I would be happy to instruct you if you want. That's how I think about this, thanks. --Goran tek-en (talk) 14:02, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

I think the best option is to either contact Goran directly, as he says, or take him up on the offer of learning how to update it yourself. In the event that several months pass without the file being updated with no sign of a response, then perhaps it's worth making a new request here to see if someone else will tackle it, but that seems unlikely at the moment! I'll mark it resolved again as there seems to be agreement. NikNaks _{talk - gallery} 16:41, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. Although I'm by no means a lazy person, ;) I'd prefer that someone else does the actual updating of the chart. At the same time, I'm more than willing to ping you, Goran tek-en‎, once per month on your Commons talk page when new stats data becomes available; thank you for being willing to update the chart, and of course for updating it with the May 2015 data. — Dsimic (talk | contribs) 03:52, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

Need help converting JPEGs to SVGs

Is someone with expertise in converting JPEG images to the SVG format available to help? I have 15 team logos that need to be converted, e.g., File:Gators men's tennis logo.jpeg. If you have the time and skills to assist, please ping me. Thanks. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 02:03, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

Help removing SVG request banner

Hi, I recently created an SVG version of this image: File:Illustration to Euclid's proof of the Pythagorean theorem3.PNG which can be found here: File:Illustration to Euclid's proof of the Pythagorean theorem3.svg. However, I'm having trouble removing the SVG request banner from the PNG file page. It seems to be working on wikimedia commons, but the wikipedia file page won't change. Does anyone know what to do? CheCheDaWaff (talk) 12:11, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

OK, now I'm pretty sure I'm doing something wrong. I'm getting the same/similar problems with the following pages: File:Trig Functions.PNG, File:Trig Functions 2.PNG CheCheDaWaff (talk) 15:18, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Never mind, I asked over at the Tea House (the question seemed more appropriate there). Sorry if I wasted anyone's time. CheCheDaWaff (talk) 11:15, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Help, with a Graphics Lab process problem

Hi. I came to this page to ask for some help on getting a single image bacground whitened.

I clicked on New request. In reading the prose, it sounded like I should do one of the "Top four" requests you were talking about. So that led to this edit: diff, where I added my request immediately below the hidden comment: <!-- ADD SUGGESTIONS BELOW -->, which seemed the right thing to do.

After that, when I looked at the page history, I found out that that page had not been edited in over a year. This leads me to conclude that I have gone horribly wrong in transmitting my simple request to you all. And now I don't know how to proceed except to tell you all about it.

It seems that possibly some of the older/former??? procedures used in the past might not be active, but perhaps the instructions were never cleaned up? I'm not sure. N2e (talk) 21:16, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

@N2e: the top 4 section was never a good way to work with another editor to get a image improved. It didn't allow for any place to discuss the request and didn't even have enough space to include a detailed request or source/reference material, because of this it was removed from the page. If you want to make a request, click on the "—New request—" link on the Illustration workshop page and fill in your request details. I thought all the instructions regarding the top 4 were removed from the main pages, where did you find the instructions to fill out the top 4? I've now updated the advice page, sorry about that. Offnfopt^(talk) 22:01, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @N2e: the Top Four template had been suffering from lack of attention for a while, which I guess is why it was recently removed from the GL/I page. (It was originally intended for comparatively routine tasks that wouldn’t require any discussion, and populated by GL maintainers rather than requesters, hence the instructions to ask on the Talk page that misled you.) Anyway, since the original file is a raster image, from a technical POV removing the background is more of a photo-retouching job than illustration per se, even though it’s not actually a photo; please move your request to the bottom of WP:GL/P. Sorry about the confusion.—Odysseus1479 22:15, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Well, thanks for thanks for the quick responses! I'm pleased it helped you get your problem sorted out on the project.

I will place my request as mentioned. N2e (talk)

Access timelines

I would like to use, in a book I am writing, the three timelines included at:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_human_evolution

How do I access them? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.200.252.198 (talk) 21:10, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

Those timelines are not images, they are actually MediaWiki markup. If you were to reuse them in print, the best way would probably be to have someone draw them for you. -- AntiCompositeNumber (Leave a message) 23:15, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

Another possibility would be convert the HTML produced by the templates into PDFs (with Adobe Acrobat, for example), then import the PDFs into the book layout—either directly or after using a drawing program to edit them.—Odysseus1479 02:46, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

Wikicontest Ilustra o Día das Letras

miniatura

(Sorry for my english) Hello to all, I wanted to announce that at the Galipedia we are organising the gl:Wikipedia:Wikiconcurso Ilustra o Día das Letras to achieve a portrait of the greater possible quality of the writer honoured at the Galician Literature Day 2018, María Victoria Moreno. We want to inspire you to participate creating an illustration on this author and to participate in the contest. If you know to other people, wikipedians or no, that can be interested, we would appreciate you that you spread this activity. Greetings, --Elisardojm (talk) 16:06, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

Archival broken?

The archival bot is archiving requests to September 2018 instead of October 2018 -- 65.94.42.168 (talk) 08:19, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

Animated image

I'd like to improve the article on the Mars cycler, and it could really benefit from an animated image like this one. Is there anyone able to construct one for me? Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:40, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

SVG Translating tool

Hello the graphic team, I just got words that SVGtranslate have been revamped and is in beta before public release announcement. This tool's ancestor was actually created in 2008 following WP:GL's wikigraphists' requests. Feel free to use this new version of it to translate your SVG graphics and maps, and spread the word about it. Feed backs appreciated (here ?) ! Yug (talk) 15:49, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

Discussion on the use of "cartoonish" graphics for medical content

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Social distancing#Cartoonishness of graphics. Sdkb (talk) 05:15, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

It seems discussion is moving in the direction of openness to new graphics you might be able to help us create. As a plug, these images are used at Coronavirus disease 2019 and 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic, so assuming pageview trends continue, any new ones you create will likely be seen by tens of millions of readers in the coming weeks. Sdkb (talk) 19:28, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

Archive bot is far too fast

Hi there, the current archival system via bot seems to archive satisfied request taggued {{done}} the very next day. This is bad for community learning. Give it some time, showcasting our work is rewarding, encouraging for us, a role model for new graphists. I'am pretty sure we would gain from having about 6 to 12 {done} work still display on the page. If needed, let's go back to a dual bot + hand-done archival model. Mutual learning by examples is at the core of the Graphic Labs, fast archival plays against it. Could we have some support or help to move back this such practice. Yug (talk) 18:41, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

After some digging it seems to be due to Snow Lion Fenian adding {resolved} and ClueBotIII reacting to it shortly after. Then, It's just best practice issue. @Snow Lion Fenian, thanks you for the fast archiving, such efforts is encouraging. Yet per above rational, it may be more interesting for the community to slow down ;) Yug (talk) 18:50, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

@Snow Lion Fenian: Hi there, any idea what balance we can find to increase learning without overloading too much the page ? --Yug (talk) 19:55, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

Mississippi flag opportunity

@Snow Lion Fenian: you did not notify me about this removal, did you? EllenCT (talk) 06:05, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

"Illustration workshop" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Illustration workshop. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 January 24#Illustration workshop until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 10:57, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Stupid question, but where's the thread?

I just got a message that Goren had moved my image request to the Commons, but only had time to look at it now. The message points to this page, but it appears that discussion has been moved/archived. This page is auto-archived, but the link for 2021 at the top contains nothing. Where has the thread gone? Maury Markowitz (talk) 13:11, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

@Maury Markowitz: I've restored the thread. — Pbrks (talk) 14:14, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

Ok, but in the future, is there a particular place to look? It seems these would be on the archive page, but they don't seem to go there. Maury Markowitz (talk) 14:20, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

The archive is at the top of the page, as you saw. It was under 2021, then June. The bot has been placing archives in the previous month for some time now; I tried to get it fixed a year or so ago, but I got no response from the bot's owner. — Pbrks (talk) 14:26, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

@Maury Markowitz: I've moved this conversation to the talk page. — Pbrks (talk) 14:31, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

Template link replacing Resolved template

I've noticed that in the January 2022 and December 2021 archives, {{Resolved}} has been replaced by {{tl}}. I've restored {{Resolved}} for these two archives, but I have not investigated the cause for the templates being changed. If this is legit, I would recommend adding hidden text to avoid future confusion. — CJDOS, Sheridan, OR (talk) 10:57, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

Images already in svg

Wikipedia:Graphics Lab/Illustration workshop contain a section with a lot of images, raster and svg. The question of the user who opened the section, is for conversion request. A lot of those images are in svg and there is not conversion needed. I have attempted to remove images that do not need conversion but my edit is always reverted. Why? It is wrong? --151.71.42.64 (talk) 18:54, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

Commons backlogged

Hello all. Would appreciate if someone can help to clear the requests on commons. Thanks :) --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 09:08, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

NPP flowchart.svg is just a raster in SVG format.

I was looking at NPP flowchart.svg and noticed that when I zoomed in it was pixelated like a raster image. Should I add the Template:Should be SVG template?

I am interested in trying to convert it to a proper vector SVG but I might need some help. CoderThomasB (talk) 07:57, 24 October 2022 (UTC)

I have added the necessary maintenance template. Also this request should probably be put on the project page instead of the talk page. HapHaxion _{(talk / contribs)} 13:54, 24 October 2022 (UTC)

labels not showing in preview

Fixed

Hi,

Wondering if there's anything wrong with File:Kaktovik digit table.svg, or if it's just me. (I've checked on two browsers.) The SVG has labels for all 20 digits, but the previews only show the labels for 0 to 9, with 10 to 19 being blank.

— kwami (talk) 19:54, 10 June 2022 (UTC)

 Done @Kwamikagami: Seems to be an rsvg bug in which text with multiple x values are ignored. I've kept only the first value, and also moved the last line down for more whitespace. Please mark as resolved if it's fine now. Cheers, cmɢʟee⎆τaʟκ 07:04, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

Perfect. Thanks! — kwami (talk) 08:06, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

Resolved

Outline drawing wanted for article - how do I request it?

I think the Wikipedia page on plastic bullets would be improved by a line illustration showing the shape and dimensions of plastic bullets used by Israeli riot control forces, illustrated in figure one of this academic paper and described on page 381 (The plastic bullet (Fig. 1) is a 5.62 mm missile, 1.5 cm long):

https://www.jtcvs.org/article/S0022-5223(19)35042-1/pdf

I can't do the job myself. Assuming that such a drawing can be prepared based on that source without falling foul of any restrictions, where and how should I ask for someone's assistance?

Thank you. Michael F 1967 (talk) 11:22, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

@Michael F 1967: Go directly to Wikipedia:Graphics Lab/Illustration workshop and click on "New Request". Best wishes. —RCraig09 (talk) 16:08, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply. I've clicked on "New Request" and unfortunately I need to ask for more help.

I don't understand how to fill in the request. I'd appreciate some advice on the following (apologies for the formatting - this is the best I could do by way of displaying the wikipedia markup):

{{subst:void|↑↑↑ !!! Don't forget to add a headline to your request !!! ↑↑↑}}

{{GLNF|Non-free image.ext|Description of the image}}

1) The advice: "Don't forget to add a headline to your request" - what is meant by "a headline"? And where do I enter it? In the Subject box?

2) What am I supposed to put in this bit: GLNF|Non-free image.ext|Description of the image

- I don't have a link to the original image file, only a link to the PDF containing the original image.

Thank you. Michael F 1967 (talk) 18:39, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

@Michael F 1967: I copied your request to the workshop page itself. It may be several days before someone takes an interest. —RCraig09 (talk) 21:45, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

Thanks

@Snubcube: Re: Wikipedia:Graphics Lab/Illustration workshop/Archive/Jul 2016#Interference theory - yes, those are exactly right! I added them to Decay theory. Many thanks, and apologies for the long delay in checking on that request. -- Beland (talk) 23:11, 17 March 2023 (UTC)