User talk:Briantist

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Welcome! 1.1 Additional tips 1.2 Be Bold!! 2 Channel 4 logo 3 Ceefax clarification 4 Semi-automated template substitution 5 Windows Vista french image 6 License tagging for Image:Windows vista arabic.png 7 Googolplex typo 8 Additions to Hitchhiker's related articles 9 BBC radio after switchover 10 Multiplex names are not changing 11 Orphaned fair use image (Image:Ridiculous Records 010.jpg)

[edit] Welcome!

Joe I 01:46, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Channel 4 logo

From the Channel 4 style guidelines: The Channel 4 identity should always be surrounded by a minimum area of space. The area of isolation ensures that headlines, text or other visual elements do not encroach on the logo. The area is defined by using a third of the height of the logo which is referred to as x. A margin of clear space equivalent to 0.3x is drawn around the logo to create the invisible boundary of the area of isolation.

It is important that the appearance of the logo remains consistent. The logo should not be misinterpreted, modified or added to. The logo must never be redrawn, adjusted or modified in any way. It should only be reproduced from the artwork provided. To illustrate this point some of the more likely mistakes are shown.

...

• Do not place the logo in a box.
• Do not place the logo in a frame.

If you revert the logo again, then this will be seen as vandalism, and you may be blocked.

-- 9cds^(talk) 12:37, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

If there is a problem with your browser, then you should use a better browser, or consider fixing the problem with the transparency (which is a known IE bug), and NOT changing the logo itself. Please stop deliberately introducing incorrect information into articles. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. -- 9cds^(talk) 12:47, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages by deliberately introducing incorrect information, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. -- 9cds^(talk) 12:53, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

This is your last warning. The next time you deliberately introduce incorrect information into a page, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. -- 9cds^(talk) 12:56, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

Please stop removing content from Wikipedia; it is considered vandalism. If you want to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. -- 9cds^(talk) 13:16, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

Oh well, I've had nearly 20 years working with TV corporate identities... The version that has been locked on to the page is wrong.

I'm just following the guidelines, mate. It has a white background if it's on something that's white. More importantly, it cannot be placed in a box. that's why I'm saying it's wrong. If it breaks in IE, then maybe you should create a version that is not in a box, but also which doesn't break in IE? -- 9cds^(talk) 13:32, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

But the version you have installed is of poor resolution, and you are looking at the guidelines for printing on paper. It also breaks the rules as it is so large that gets a border from the box on the page ("Do not place the logo in a frame").

Well, as I said on the channel 4 talk page, feel free to create a higher resolution image that is transparent. Only reason I didn't do it myself is because I'm on a machine without suitable software. -- 9cds^(talk) 13:59, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

If you actually look at what is being used by Channel 4: into and out of ad-breaks and all other on-screen versions the logo is cut out of white. This is not possible on paper. This doesn't mean there has to be an additional background colour.-- 9cds^(talk) 13:59, 20 January 2006 (UTC) The best way to do this would be to have to whole box background white, but you are going against what is shown on the website.

Surely the purpose of wikipedia is to reflect what is actually shown to the viewer?

We have to follow guidelines -- 9cds^(talk) 13:59, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

I'm quite happy to ring Channel 4 to get their guidance, if that is what is required.

As said earlier, I have the C4 guidelines, of which I have pasted the excerpt about the logo above.-- 9cds^(talk) 13:59, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

I've got new logos direct from the Channel 4 press office. Can I be alowed to upload these?

I'm not an admin, so I cannot unprotect the page. If they've got the transparent background, which will solve the issue with the "white box", and works in IE (which is buggy), then go ahead and upload once it's been unprotected. -- 9cds^(talk) 14:32, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ceefax clarification

Hi,

Can you please clarify the following sentence you added to the Ceefax article?-

There is still a limited Ceefax service broadcast alongside BBC World that covers British news on.

Is this related to 'Pages from Ceefax' (the section it was placed in), or does it just mean an ordinary (but limited) Ceefax service?

I didn't want to remove this, as it looks like worthwhile information.

Thanks.

Fourohfour 23:01, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Semi-automated template substitution

• This page was modified to semi-automatically substitute templates using Pathoschild's template list. // Tawker 20:22, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Windows Vista french image

Hello, thanks for uploading the image with a demonstration of the French version of Windows Vista. Would it be possible for you to re-submit this image without any third-party tools or logos present? It's a violation of Wikipedia's fair use policy to display things like the Google logo if we aren't talking about Google. The image will have to be removed entirely if this isn't done. Thanks... sorry for the inconvenience! -/- Warren 21:10, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

I'll fix it ASAP

[edit] License tagging for Image:Windows vista arabic.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Windows vista arabic.png. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 00:09, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Googolplex typo

Be that as it may, Google didn't exist until the mid-1990s. So any use of the word with that spelling prior to their organization was unintentional, and cannot possibly be a reference to the company. --JohnDBuell 23:16, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

So Adams's publishers made a typo. Google's founders DID deliberately misspell Googol so that it could be trademarked. Coincidence. --JohnDBuell 23:26, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

This was NOT a typo! It was Douglas' playful use of words... The spelling is THE SAME and the meaning is THE SAME too, as it is refering to one of the greatest computers of all time. Briantist 23:33, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

--I think this is fair--

• The name of Google's corporate HQ was (unwittingly) taken from the first book (1979, Chapter 25, page 127) when Lunkwill and Fook are shocked at Deep Thought's self-depreciation: "And are you not," said Fook leaning anxiously forward, "a greater analyst than the Googleplex Star Thinker in the Seventh Galaxy of Light and Ingenuity which can calculate the trajectory of every single dust particle throughout a five-week Dangrabad Beta sand blizzard?" (Note the spelling is the same as Google, not the number googol). Briantist 23:36, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

It's still just a coincidence. I think the folks at Google would just laugh. --JohnDBuell 23:56, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Additions to Hitchhiker's related articles

While I appreciate your enthusiasm, you can't simply make the statements that you have been making in the articles you have been editing without serious proof. Any statements, especially those made in featured articles, require verifiable proof, which is why that statement appears under every edit window before an edit is saved. Please consider this in future. --JohnDBuell 23:56, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

You're getting close to violating WP:3RR and you're certainly violating Wikipedia:Verifiability. Please reconsider. --JohnDBuell 00:01, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

As regards Greece, yes Adams traveled around Greece, as well as Turkey and other countries. And as regards naming, his choices of some names are also well documented - Hotblack Desiato being perhaps one of the most famous. The inspiration behind the "Zansellquasure Flamarion Bridge Club" is NOT documented, or at least not in a way that I've been able to verify. If you have a verifiable source, please share it. --JohnDBuell 00:07, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

OK. I do have the source, but it's not with me at the moment. I'll repost when I have the references. Briantist 00:29, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] BBC radio after switchover

I have written to the BBC to confirm that they will not be removing any radio services after switchover. I will re-edit when they re-confirm. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Briantist (talk • contribs) 20:40, 7 November 2006 (UTC).

I don't quite understand. I wasn't aware, and have never suggested that, the BBC are going to remove any radio services from digital terrestrial television after the digital switchover. What I do know is that BBC Radio 1, BBC Radio 2, BBC Radio 3 and BBC Radio 4 are currently broadcast on Multiplex A and there are no plans for them to move. As Multiplex A is due to become a one of the 'commercial' multiplexes after the switchover, these radio stations will not be on the PSB multiplexes and therefore will not be available on all the relay transmitters like the channels on Multiplexes 1, 2 and B (including Five and S4C, which are moving). - Green Tentacle 21:12, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

I have written to the BBC for clarification on this point, but as far as I understand it BBC radio via Freeview is very popular and the BBC will have the space to carry these four 'original' stations on Multiplex 1 when it switches to 64QAM mode. The space on multiplex B is being 'gifted' to five, S4C and S4C2. I have written confirmation from both the BBC and S4C on this point.

From: Jackie Burdon, BBC Date: Nov 29 2005 - 6:26pm Five will move to one of the BBC muxes at switchover, as will S4C and S4C2 in Wales. This is to ensure that, as public service broadcasters, they have near-universal coverage in the digital world. The move will be possible without displacing any BBC services, because at switchover the BBC will return from 16QAM to 64QAM mode but maintain equivalent coverage and robustness of signal thanks to the high power transmissions which will be possible post switchover. The mode change will create capacity equivalent to two standard channels on each of the BBC's multiplexes - enough for five, S4C and S4C2. S4C isn't a whole multiplex in this instance - are you thinking of SDN, the multiplex operator that was founded in part by S4C? You are right that the three commercial multiplexes will not have the same level of universal coverage after switchover as the three psb muxes you describe - though I'm not sure we can assume they won't roll out at all. It is the case that they are not obliged to reach the same level of coverage as the psb muxes - and indeed will not be able to achieve it for technical reasons. But they may make a commercial decision to extend their coverage substantially.

So where's your evidence that the BBC radio stations are moving to a PSB multiplex? - Green Tentacle 18:40, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Multiplex names are not changing

I have provided evidence from primary web sources AND backed it up with the email listed above, the other user has NOT provided any evidence to support the repeated editing of suposition. I provided references to the relevant web pages, PDF documents and explained where the misunderstanding have arisen from.

The other user repeatedly DELETED the references I had supplied to verify the information that I provided. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Briantist (talk • contribs).

That's all fine (apart from using an email as a defence), but an edit war is not the way to do this. Use that article's discussion page, and share what evidence you have with the other user. Try and talk it through properly (and don't forget to sign your comments there - four tildes "~~~~" ). RobWill80 04:01, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:Ridiculous Records 010.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Ridiculous Records 010.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image is unlicensed for use on Wikipedia and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Fritz Saalfeld (Talk) 12:14, 26 November 2006 (UTC)