User talk:GearedBull

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Welcome to Wikipedia! 2 Vermont project and the colored state seal 3 Large cones 4 Vermont, and "Organized territory" 5 VT education 6 Category:Vermont culture 7 Infobox at Bodoni 8 Misunderstanding da Bodoni 9 Category:Vermont culture / Category:Culture of Vermont 10 Rhubarb pie 11 Manhattans 12 Concerning signators of the petition for a statewide referendum on same-sex marriage 13 Hugenberger 14 External links 15 Excellent Bodoni sample 16 Overwriting images 17 Akzidenz Grotesk specimens 18 Image:FrutigerSpec.svg 19 Benton Sans 20 Font samples 21 Charcoal (typeface), Skia 22 font article infoboxes 23 Rick Santorum hatnote 24 Hoefler & Frere-Jones pages 25 Typeface samples 26 Re:Vandalism by 199.185.88.90 27 Jesse Ragan 28 Font sample template 29 White House 30 Blair House image deletions 31 Romney Podium 32 Image:RomneysNewSeal.jpg 33 Mishonda Baldwin 34 Template:Infobox font 35 New font Infobox design 36 Archer 37 civil union category in VT town pages 38 Morris Fuller Benton and Cheltenham (typeface) 39 Old South Church 40 Orphaned fair use image (Image:AIBwordmark.svg) 41 Orphaned fair use image (Image:AIBmonologo.svg) 42 typeface categorization 43 License tagging for Image:BellCentInk.svg 44 Way off on the Romney pictures 45 Old samples 46 Coat of Arms of Vermont 47 Looking for members to join Project Boston 48 Font Infoboxes 49 Wikilogos 50 Image:DINsp1451.jpg

[edit] Welcome to Wikipedia!

I saw that your main contributions have been to Vermont related pages (many thanks for them). I'd like to draw your attention to Wikipedia:WikiProject_Vermont if you haven't seen it already. Project Vermont is a project to create and improve Wikipedia articles about the U.S. state of Vermont. It intends to organize, format, expand, and exemplify Vermont related articles on Wikipedia. Take a look at the project page for more information. Best regards, and welcome! - Mickmaguire 20:29, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vermont project and the colored state seal

Hi Jim, Thanks for the note on the seal. It seems to have come from an official page (if you look at its source in commons), are you 100% sure there is no official colored version? I'm inclined to keep it as the seal does exist and the coat of arms is something different. I dont think that we should use the coat of arms on the infoboxes as we already have the state flag on the left, it would look like a duplication / possible screw up. Additionaly many of the other state projects incorporate the state's seal in exactly the same place so there is some consistency (a rarity in wikipedia ;0)).

My suggestion is to keep things how they are but perhaps we should consider making the image grey-scale, assuming its a correct rendition of the actual seal in all but color (is it?). Hmmm raised more questions that anything else there! Let me know what you think :O) Mickmaguire 16:22, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

I found a black and white copy and replaced it. Unfortunately as the original image is in wikipedia commons I was not able to replace it directly but had to create a new image and change the things that linked to the original to the new. Mickmaguire 15:31, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Large cones

Hi Jim - thanks for the e-mail! There are several species with cones that can be that large; it could be Sugar Pine (Calif/Oregon), Mexican White Pine (Mexico), Coulter Pine (Calif), and (rarely; usually shorter) Western White Pine (western N America) and Blue Pine (Himalaya). Do you know where they came from? - MPF 16:29, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vermont, and "Organized territory"

Hi Jim-

I'm quite aware that Vermont was for a time an independent country. I think you misunderstand the point of the list that you removed Vermont from. The list is not a list of "unorganized territories" that became states; it's a list of states that were "never organized territories," as the article says. The phrase "organized territory" has a technical meaning in this context: a piece of territory under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Congress, but not part of any state, and given an organized government through an Organic Act. See the Organized territory article for more details. Most states of the union were organized territories before they were states. Vermont, like Texas, was never an organized territory in that sense; it went right from being an independent republic (albeit one whose independence was not recognized by the US) to being a state. If you look at the other states on the list, you'll see that Texas, another independent country that became a state just like Vermont, is also on it. --Jfruh (talk) 22:32, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] VT education

Nice work on the education add!--Jonashart 00:58, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Category:Vermont culture

Would like your views here. Category talk:Vermont culture GameKeeper 06:44, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Infobox at Bodoni

Hi, I noticed you removed the infobox of Bodoni. Was there a reason for doing so or did it get removed by accident? atanamir 00:31, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for the prompt reply. It seems from [1] that diff that you replaced the infobox with the new specimen (which, by the way, seems to be a broken image! i tried to action=purge it but it still seems to be broken... i'm going to try it out on a different computer tomorrow). Did you purposely remove the infobox and replace it with the specimen? I can't really tell from your response if you purposely removed it or not "I restored its removal by James Arboghast earlier today". Either way, I was just curious. I'll look at the broken image issue again tomorrow! Best regards, atanamir 10:25, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Misunderstanding da Bodoni

Hi Jim. :-) Thanks for the explanation. Everything is just fine. Here and there, the close timing of two editors can make one editor's actions seem harsher or more reactionary than they really are. I happen to be looking at the articles for Bodoni, Caslon and Baskerville at present, as I'm about to expand the section on 17th & 18th centuries for the History of typography. Sorry Nicole; most of my edits are bold and in good faith. I considered yours to be in good faith too. I'm happy to build up the Bodoni article with you.

My apologies for my vague edit summary regarding the image being "deleted"—that was my error.

I hope we can get your samples working soon. Looking forward to seeing them.

Best regards, j a m e s   t a l k 15:14, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Hi Jim. I've looked at the Bodoni page on both Macs and PCs at work and at home and the image is not showing up. Is it working at your end?

Bulmer is a lovely organic de-geometrified Bodoni. Airy and elegant, with a woody antique ambience and a hand-engraved feel to it. I've used it on a few covers for novels and histories set in the 19th century. Its great too for covers of biographies of literary figures, old film stars, anyone from the pre-WW2 era. Walbaum is a classic. There's a blurb by Frantisek Storm that accompanies his version, might be of interest.

The Greeks of 5th century BC were purists in their use of the orders, reserving the Corinthian for inner rooms like the naos and opisthodomos of temples, and never using it for outer peripteral columns. The Corinthian's decorative saliency represented decadence and excess—the antithesis of the Greek ideal of Sophrosyne—moderation. They were not naturally modest people and strove to express their ideal in art. All the major Greek temples used Doric columns on the outside—the purest order. Ionian was used sparingly for peripteral and facade columns for the small tetrastyle temple of Athena Nike and the Erectheum, and a few other isolated small altars in sanctuary grounds.

The Romans loved the florid exuberance of Corinthian and used it almost everywhere, especially on the outer columns of narrow elegantly-proportioned temples on high podiums, expressing their desire for grandeur, pomp, power and glory. Rome's temples and public buildings were also monuments to the patrician class that built them. The Corinthian order on Roman buildings has also been taken as a symbol of the decandence, the corruption and excess of the empire, the corrupt army resulting from Sulla's reform, the political bloodletting arising from dictatorship and autocracy.

By way of conjecture—I haven't read much about Jefferson or his architecture, or American neo-classicism—but I wonder. The possibilty is there, that he opted for Ionic captials in favour of Corinthian to draw alongside Greek democracy and avoid parallels with the Roman empire.

j a m e s   t a l k 12:38, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Category:Vermont culture / Category:Culture of Vermont

Every other state uses category of style Category:Vermont culture not Category:Culture of Vermont. Can you leave the articles in Category:Vermont culture. See Category:American_culture_by_state to see other states use standard <Statename> culture

Also would like your views here again. Category talk:Vermont culture GameKeeper 11:13, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

added comment Category talk:Vermont culture GameKeeper 12:42, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Rhubarb pie

Hi, thanks for the sources -- but could you give at least 1 page reference from one of them, then I will put in a footnote reference.

[edit] Manhattans

Thanks for the kind words. I'll look for the cherries at Trader Joes the next time I'm there. I actually have a big bottle of Makers Mark, dunno where it came from, and made a Manhattan with it a couple of months ago. It was very good, but I think I prefer Crown Royal. But taste, of course, is so individual.... Hayford Peirce 03:33, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Concerning signators of the petition for a statewide referendum on same-sex marriage

It is rare, near to never, that the majority of citizens have been allowed to vote on the rights of a majority in the United States. Support for the current referendum under consideration in Massachusetts, that would allow the majority to vote on the civil liberties of the states homosexual minority is pertinent to articles related to institutions or individuals supporting this. While the motto Let the people vote! sounds reasonable enough, it is interesting to consider what sort of nation the U.S. would currently be had the people voted in referenda on woman's suffrage, integration of the armed forces, interracial marriage, public accomodations, etc. To refuse to separate civil marriage from religous mariage is to ask for state endorsement of a particular religous belief. Selective interpretation of Scripture is at work here most often, affirming Leviticus or I Corinthians 6:9 but conveniently ignoring the bible's support in places for female rape, human slavery, or nonsensical casting into the fires of hell those who eat shell fish, wear a cloak made up of two kinds of fiber, or plant their fields with multiple kinds of seeds. If you signed the petition and you or an institution you administer have an article here on wikipedia, a citation with a link is pertinent. CApitol3 13:55, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hugenberger

Please see User_talk:Flex#Editing_Dr._Hugenberger_article. --Flex 14:21, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] External links

Hi. According to Wikipedia:External links, the external link that was added to Rick Santorum should not be there; I don't think it adds significantly to the article, a general rule of thumb for the addition of external links. In addition, the primary content of the site is an interview with a non-notable columnist pertaining to the election and the candidates; this does not qualify the site for addition. We need to be aggressive in removing non-pertinent links from articles, and I don't feel that this one qualifies as a proper external links. Thanks for your understanding! Flcelloguy (A note?) 22:25, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

P.S. I would also appreciate it if you could assume good faith here; I don't appreciate you calling my reverting the addition of the external link as "POV oriented deletion", as this cannot be further to the truth. Thanks! Flcelloguy (A note?) 22:27, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. Yes, judgement on all external links and most policies is ultimately subjective, but what let me clarify what I had meant: the columnist is not significant on the national or state level, and I haven't seen anything that would distinguish his interview being included rather than the multitudes of other interviews, opinion pages, and editorials that exist. I had, however, not reverted the addition of the link with any thought of POV; instead, I remain committed to removing external links when they are not appropriate, and I believed this one to be one. I will be happy to continue the discussion on the talk page of the article. Thanks again! Flcelloguy (A note?) 22:46, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

• Hi. Flcelloguy asked me to drop by and take a look at the issue. I'd have removed the link myself. We don't link to blogs, in general; were this an article about Dan Savage, the link might be appropriate, but a link to a blog to demonstrate a third party's already well-known opinion of the subject of the article is a pretty far reach. PS: I loathe every aspect of Rick Santorum's politics and most aspects of his personality, and have been working hard to keep this article NPOV and a good Wikipedia article (which generally involves removing crude anti-Santorum sentiments), so don't even bother accusing me of bias. --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 00:00, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

• • Hi again. Sorry for the long time in replying; I've been busy. I would love to continue our discussion on the talk page until we reach a consensus, and I look forward to working with you to reach an agreement. I think the issue we last discussed was whether or not the site is a blog, which the site itself clearly states it is. As I've said before, blogs should not be placed under external links generally, according to external links policy. Thanks! Flcelloguy (A note?) 00:16, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Excellent Bodoni sample

Jim, the new specimen looks great! Just the kind of contemporary artistic quality WP needs. A couple of points:

• the blue glossed letters (bluebrication? ;-) work seemlessly for "HORATII", but the lower case a, g, k, p, s, x stand out. Advise either making the lower case all-black, or make just a and 0 (zero) blue. This approach is akin to the art of type design itself. Ideally no single glyph should stand out (integration).

• I like the background colors and the duotone effect—nice, classy, refined. I've been more conservative with background colors in my type samples to fit in with the conservatism of other editors working on type articles, but I think it's time now to loosen up. The more artful font samples you and I make the more influential the precedent will be, until one day all WP font samples be beautiful.

"Curious too, to pick up the thread of our last conversation."

The symbolism of Jefferson's Virginia capitol building columns versus Greek columns versus Roman colums?
Best, Arbo talk 18:00, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks James. My use of color was intended to focus attention on characters that seem to exhibit something distinctive about Bodoni (to me). I agree its important to be judicious here. The sheer small scale of the specimen might recommend avoiding visual noise and keeping the alphabet monochromatic. Please take a look. I could go without color entirely, but thought a little was attractive. I once saw use of a Prussian Blue in a Bodoni book and that is where the color idea comes from. Best, Jim CApitol3 22:21, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

P.S. the posted sample is very nice. Thanks. Do not know that face. Is it Goudy? Or much more recent? CApitol3 22:22, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Your revised Bodoni sample couldn't be more satisfying. Iz bella bella magnifico. Consider it final. Personal views of subject matter count as a form of original research and breach of NPOV, so yes, we have to be careful to avoid it. That's why I based the Vita Nuova Bodoni sample on official material issued by Bodoni's heirs.

Re: updating samples. It's best to update the existing image by overwriting it with the new version to minimize the number of superfluous image files on the servers. On the existing image's page hit "Upload a new version of this file", and when prompted hit the "overwrite" button.

BTW, I had to rewrite Roman type because it was full of factual errors. So I added your Bembo sample. Keep 'em coming.

Iowan Old Style is by the much-respected contemporary sign painter John Downer. It looks kind of Goudy-ish going by the italics and capitals. The conception and finish are much neater than the abberations Goudy put into his fonts to make them personal works of art with intentional faults, yet Downer's production is every bit as meticulous and artistic. Complete family shown here.

Arbo talk 01:30, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Overwriting images

There's a tutorial here Wikipedia:Uploading images but the distinction between uploading a new image v.s overwriting an existing image is vague Let's say you want to update the color Bembo sample.

1. On the image's page [[Image:BemboTypeSpec.svg]], under File history, click the link Upload a new version of this file
2. This takes you to the Special:Upload page: the server automatically fills in Destination filename with "BemboTypeSpec.svg"
3. For Source fileneme hit the Browse button and select the new file on your computer
4. Leave the Summary and Licensing fields blank as they will inherent their details from the existing image file page [[Image:BemboTypeSpec.svg]].
5. Hit the Upload file button
6. When the image has uploaded you'll see the Upload warning page; hit the Save file button. On the previous screen Special:Upload checking Ignore any warnings will skip the Upload warning page
7. That's it. The overwrite process replaces the old file with the new version, so there's no need to delete the old one as the new one is uploading.
   

Arbo talk 08:12, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Akzidenz Grotesk specimens

Why have you replaced your beautiful SVG specimen with a blurry JPEG? The new version makes it much harder to see the letterforms. JPEG really isn't a great format for designs that are based on sharp edges and flat colours. — Haeleth Talk 15:24, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Much better - thanks. These specimens are great work: it's nice to see some real thought going into design and aesthetics. — Haeleth Talk 16:17, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image:FrutigerSpec.svg

I just wanted to tell you that I updated your image Image:FrutigerSpec.svg. You accidently left the character set as Univers after you made the other one for Image:UniversAIB.svg (I suppose). I changed the text to Frutiger so it matches up now.

By the way I realy liked your design for these two specs, it's realy nice and clean. Great job.

-Alex 06:21, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

P.S.-- I just used your wonderful design for Gotham (typeface). I hope that you won't mind!

[edit] Benton Sans

Oh that is one of my favorites also. Martha Stewart Living has had such beautiful typography over the years (Have you seen their custom font Archer? I would do anything to get a copy of it!). And I believe they used Perpetua and Joanna for of their early work. Alex 16:40, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Font samples

I have to say, the designs of your sample illustrations are absolutely gorgeous, and I hope you can do one for every font/typeface article on Wikipedia. That said, I'm going to steal the idea and see if I can rework a Johnston sample (I've got the commercially available version on my computer at home) using this design. --Calton | Talk 01:28, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Please feel free to borrow the design. I love Johnston, great face. Is it the same face as that used on the London Underground?

That's the one. The version I have came from P22, so I'm assuming it's identical to the LU version.

Will look for your newly formatted Johnston.

I'll do my best, but I can't make any promises as to its quality, given my rudimentary graphic-arts skills, but I DO have a great template to work off of. --Calton | Talk 01:44, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the museum tip. I'm embarrassed to report that I didn't even know about it -- though the odds are good that I've walked past it -- and I'll be dropping by when I get the chance. --Calton | Talk 06:57, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Charcoal (typeface), Skia

Please explain why this needs to be cluttering up Category:Typefaces when it already exists in Category:Apple typefaces and Category:Sans-serif typefaces? The point of having subcategories is to split out large, unwieldy lists. Generally speaking (i.e. unless it's the main article of a category) you don't put articles in a category and it's parent category. Thousands of typefaces exist; subdividing them makes sense here. — ChristTrekker 18:13, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

No worries, everybody's new once. Unfortunately MediaWiki doesn't make it very easy to get an aggregate view of articles in subcategories. Often it would be nice to see everything, even those things in a subcategory - but it just doesn't work that way. As it is unlikely that there are any typefaces that don't fit established categories, Category:Typefaces could be mostly a collection of subcategories, though typeface and similar articles about typefaces in general would also fit directly. Note that it is perfectly acceptable for one article to fit in multiple subcategories, depending on how many ways you want to look at it: Skia is sans-serif, Apple, and 20th century. — ChristTrekker 15:44, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] font article infoboxes

Hi GeardBull,

When you re-write the articles, please stop removing the infoboxes on the right hand side. They provide a quick summary of the important information of the font for those who do not want to read the text. This is a common practice on wikipedia and infoboxes can be found on a variety of subjects.

However, I agree with you about the previous samples being aesthetically lacking; to rectify this i've begun work on a new font infobox that integrates the samples you've been creating. The in-progress prototype is at User:Atanamir/TypeBox. You can make changes too if you see anything wrong with it.

Also, I've noticed you've been uploading samples in both JPG [cheltenham], and SVG [bodoni, etc]. Is there a reason for not choosing one format?

Thank you. atanamir 08:56, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

• PS - great job on all the articles!

Hi, It seems we are viewing the matter in two different perspectives: from what I undersatnd, you view the infobox + specimen as one item, when i view the infobox as one item, and the specimen as another item. I have seen you receive much praise about the new design of the specimen itself, but not about the omission of the infobox. While it is true that the information can still be found in the caption, it is arguably harder for the reader to find. If you look at Adobe Illustrator, the infobox there contains information that is easily formatted for quick viewing of the essential facts. If all done in the caption, like User:Atanamir/Adobe Illustrator, the information is not as easy to find. If you would like, we can omit the sample from the infobox and put it UNDERNEATH it if you want, but i feel that an infobox is rather important for reader-friendliness.

That said, in summary: the specimen is one element of the article, while the infobox is another element. I think you're viewing the infobox + specimen as a single element and viewing the new specimen as a replacement for both, which is what I don't seem to agree with.

Thanks! atanamir 17:25, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Hi, I think that looks great! Instead of implementing it all in the image where it wuld be hard to edit, i've wikified the bottom half here: User:Atanamir/TypeBox. What do you think? Thanks for considering the idea! atanamir 22:35, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

• PS the fields in the box don't have to be typeface / designer / date / foundry. Those were there in the infobox previously before i re-designed it, i just copied them onto the new infobox. If you can think of a better overall set of essential facts, then by all means we can put that in instead of the date / foundry / etc.

Hi! I will make the infobox a template that's easily customisable and easy to implement, so we won't have to wory about re-typing all the syntax every time.

Hm, that's odd (regradiung the SVG question). I've never seemed to have that problem before. However, you can try using Inkscape. That's what most people in wikipedia use (it's like a free version of illustrator). They have a mac version, too. You can grab it at [2]. It has betetr support for SVG than illustrator does. I hope it helps!@ atanamir 18:09, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Rick Santorum hatnote

Hi, GearedBull. I'm curious why you removed the hatnote I restored to the Rick Santorum article (diff). Powers ^T 19:24, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Well, your edit summary said "(rv redirect)"; did you perhaps think that the {{redirect}} template was redirecting "Rick Santorum" to "Santorum"? Powers ^T 23:46, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hoefler & Frere-Jones pages

Hi GearedBull, thanks very much for taking the time to build out the Wikipedia pages about both me and Tobias Frere-Jones, and also for what I see are your continuing typographic contributions to Wikipedia! And also for creating a page about Requiem, to which I'd be delighted to contribute as soon as I can find a moment. (By the way, the correct name of the font is Requiem, rather than Requiem Text; I'm somewhat new to Wikipedia, and wasn't sure how to make that edit. so could I ask your help?)

In response to your question about the design of Gotham, Jesse Ragan was the first of many people to contribute to the project, but Tobias Frere-Jones is the font's designer. There have also been contributions by Andy Clymer, Kevin Dresser, and even me, but for purposes of copyright and authorship, Tobias is its creator.

Drop me a line sometime -- I'm at hoefler@typography.com. Regards, Jonathan

[edit] Typeface samples

Hi GearedBull,
Do you think it would be possible to put Image:ReqText.svg, Image:Requiem.svg, etc. on Commons? This would allow Wikipedias in other languages and other Wikimedia projects to use them. --moyogo 21:33, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re:Vandalism by 199.185.88.90

Thanks for letting me know. When you see vandalism despite an IP's final warning, report it at Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. (I'm doing that for this IP right now, so you don't have to this time.) I'm not an administrator, in case you mistook me for one, so I can't block people. --Gray Porpoise^{Phocoenidae, not Delphinidae} 20:03, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Jesse Ragan

This page you created has been nominated for deletion. The reason given was that it is a vanity page, which you may be able to shed some light on for the discussion. -Jcbarr 15:19, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Nope, not me. I just noticed the AfD and the "vanity" label being tossed around and thought you might want to defend yourself. Sounds like they're on non-notable now, so perhaps not an issue (other than your perspective on why to keep). -Jcbarr 22:24, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Font sample template

Hello Jim. Please email me the new template. Thanks. ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 16:08, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi GearedBull, thanks for your message. Yes, I suggested that the page be deleted, but by "vanity page" I didn't mean to imply that you were the subject. I've posted a response in the thread on the page. Thanks.

[edit] White House

In your edit summary, you wrote that you were "Reverting vandalism by Sprocket". What vandalism? I made a mistake, and I reverted it to the way it was before I screwed up, without changing anything. Sprocket 02:26, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for the message, no problem. Sprocket 21:22, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Blair House image deletions

Hi Ben, I am curious why you deleted the new pictures on the Blair House article. The use of bold in captions is allowed in wiki MOS. CApitol3 13:28, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

I didn't delete them - I just moved them into their own category on Wikimedia Commons for space purposes. Check it out: Commons:Category:Blair House. As for boldface in captions, could you point out for me where this is permitted? I looked at Wikipedia:Manual of Style, Wikipedia:Images, and also Wikipedia:Captions, and found nothing that explicitly permitted bold text in image captions. SchuminWeb (Talk) 10:32, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia style does not prohibit bold or italics in captions. The article had only a single image yesterday. CApitol3 12:42, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

But it also does not explicitly permit boldface in captions, so I am not running afoul by removing it. As for images, correct - it only carried a single image, but there was a link to a Wikimedia Commons category, where the remaining images resided. SchuminWeb (Talk) 19:56, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Ben, we take a different interpretation to the Wiki style manual. And, editing an article so that three captioned images that previously loaded and displayed no longer do so, seems akin to deleting them. No, you did not delete them from the entire system, you moved them to a related resource which I have no problem with at all. But making them no longer visisble on the article seems like you removed 'em. The constitution does not implicitly articualte my right to eat winter squash, drink root beer, or water ski, but that does not mean it's forbidden. Could you 'please flex a bit here? 20:03, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

My problem with the images' all displaying on the page is that it makes the article too long. When two images are displaying entirely below the text, as seen here in this revision before I touched anything, it means that there are too many images displaying in the article. Therefore, leaving one of the images and linking to the rest on Commons is a prudent move. Per the MOS: "Use {{Commons}} to link to more images on Commons, wherever possible." Basically, we want to make the article visually attractive from a layout point of view as well, and too many pictures makes the article appear crowded or awkward. SchuminWeb (Talk) 20:25, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Matin St. Louis lives outside Burlington in the off season, with his wife (a Vermont native) This is stated in the Tampa Bay Lightening media guide.

[edit] Romney Podium

I thought somebody was just joking about Romney's podium, but you are right. It is very similar to teh President's. Thanks for pointing that out!--Waverider5 13:31, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image:RomneysNewSeal.jpg

You claim to have created this image yourself. Image:RomneysNewSeal.jpg. Is that correct? It is a very odd photo as the seal is barely visible. Can you describe how the circumstances of its creation, and can you upload a different version that actually shows the seal and podium? Thanks, -Will Beback 22:46, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Also, can you please give the source for Image:BlueGoosePodium.jpg? Thanks, -Will Beback 22:47, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

If you actually tok the photograph then that's fine. It had looked to me as if it was the cropped version of a news photo. I'm happy to be wrong. Has Romney declared himself a candidate for U.S. President? If not we shouldn't assume he is a candidate. -Will Beback 23:10, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Oversized images crowd out the page and make it harder to follow the text. Anyone can click on the images to see them full sized. -Will Beback 23:14, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Image use policy recommends not adding a fixed size to thumbs. Users can set their preferred thumb size in their "Preferences". An exploratory committee is adequate to determine interest in a candidacy, however let's not engage in speculation or original research about his intent regarding the design of the seal or the podium. -Will Beback 23:33, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mishonda Baldwin

I prodded the above article because she lost the election and nothing else about here would seem to meet the WP:BIO guidelines. However, then I saw you had edited the article recently and thought this might indicate you thought it should stay. Any thoughts? JChap2007 05:21, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Template:Infobox font

Please don't remove the infoboxes from the typeface pages. I understand that you wish to place your samples into the pages, but you should instead find out about adjusting the infobox to suit your ideas for samples rather than undoing other editors work to suit your own. While your samples of the typefaces look great, your method of removing the infobox and arranging the info as a caption is shortsighted; the captions make the information more difficult to locate on the page as it will no longer be in a reliable spot, and the typeface information doesn't particularly suit the sentence format of captions anyhow. You've omitted details on several articles in this process.

Can you explain your rationale for removing the infoboxes entirely from the page just to place in your type samples? They do look nice, but turning the font info into a caption hinders readability more than it helps. —Down10 ^TACO 02:33, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi Down10. "...the captions make the information more difficult to locate on the page as it will no longer be in a reliable spot...turning the font info into a caption hinders readability more than it helps." Only if you focus on the infobox and its format exclusively. The name of each font is clear and readable enough from each article title, and is repeated in bold in the first line of text, and repeated again on the top row of Jim's samples. It couldn't be clearer. Advise not focussing on the infobox but looking at the whole (article) picture.

"...removing the infoboxes entirely from the page just to place in your type samples?"

That reads like an assumption of bad faith. It's not that simple: Jim's actions are not selfish. I assure you he is acting in good faith and a compromise solution is in hand.

"...and the typeface information doesn't particularly suit the sentence format of captions anyhow."

True, but a new font infobox template is in the works and due to be implemented soon. Please refer to User talk:Atanamir#Font infoboxes etc.

Best regards, Arbo talk 20:23, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi Down10, Arbo, and atanamir. Looks like the typeface infobox is very close. I wonder if you could please take a look at Template:TypeBox and see a comparison between the box, and a secondary illustration I've added from the Georgia page. Any chance of reducing the horizontal spacing between rule and type (is this what is called "padding") a hair to match what happens with wiki images and captions? Also, might we lighten the vertical and horizontal rules to match the light gray used around images? it will still define and contain, just liberate the text a bit. Thanks for looking and your thoughts. Jim CApitol3 15:10, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm not clear on what you're referring to regarding "horizontal spacing between rule and type". The {{TypeBox}} template is based on the infobox style specified within Common.css, and the image "thumb" style is (unfortunately) styled differently from the infobox class.

Regardless of styling, any extra diagrams or images for a specific article would not be placed in the infobox; they would be arranged separately on the page. I'm not aware of how to add padding to the Image frames — you may want to read WP:PIC and WP:MOS for information on how to format the images on the individual articles you want to update. —Down10 ^TACO 22:50, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi. I mean the distance between the vertical rule (line) and type. I am guessing that this is called padding. My desrire was to reduce it a little so that its distances looked like what wiki does when it puts a box arounfd a caption (why I added the other image). I am not suhggesting putting any image in the the box, that was just as an illustration of spacing. Sounds like a lot of this is not customizable, in which case, let's not worry about it. I thought it would be nice if it were coinsistent with the light gray wiki uses around images, that's all. Best, CApitol3 22:57, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] New font Infobox design

Cheers Jim—thanks for the compliments. I've added some more ideas to User talk:Atanamir#Font infoboxes etc.

I uploaded a pic of the Trajan inscription -- Image:Trajan inscription duotone.jpg -- It's in History of western typography. If you have time please add it to Trajan's column and Roman square capitals. If you're too busy that's cool.
Bset, Arbo talk 09:08, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Archer

thanks for the heads up. Where did you find out Archer will be avalible for retail sale? Alex 23:34, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] civil union category in VT town pages

Hi, I like the fact that civil unions are added to the marriage stats in the VT town pages, but I was wondering if you knew if the couples stats according to the 2000 census really does include people who asserted themselves as same-sex couples? I don't know the specific about how the questionnaire worked, does the marriage stat include same sex couples as well? Since the law was enacted in 2000 (or the decision made, etc), could the people in same sex partnerships before then be considered in civil unions technically? It's just a sematic question mostly, but I was wondering what you could tell me about it. Thanks. Jessamyn (talk) 00:28, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi Jessamyn. I live in Boston, but had dinner with a Vermont town clerk on Saturday. She says that civil unions are categorized with marriages in vital statistics, and that in the first two years after enactment many Vermont towns reported greater numbers of civil unons than marriages. I asked her if they report civil unions as marriages in federal census and she said that it is done by the state which includes it. Knowing almost a dozen couples with civil unions I thought it made sense to chage this. I am surely open to additional opinions. I started first in towns and incorporated villages where I knew gay or lesbian couples. It seems a shame to describe their homes as non-family households. CApitol3 14:16, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for the response. I think it's a great idea to address civil unions in all Vermont Wikipedia data going forward, I was just wondering if by stating that the 2000 census "couples" indicators included civil unions, we might be being inaccurate. Do you know? Since Wikipedia specifically uses census data, and civil unions only became law after the 2000 census was complete, the people in civil unions might be counted among the non-married for the 2000 census, but I don't know for sure and was hoping someone else maybe did. Jessamyn (talk) 15:27, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Morris Fuller Benton and Cheltenham (typeface)

Actually, I think I deleted a link to Cheltenham (England). I followed the link from the Morris Fuller Benton page and found myself reading about a spa town in Gloucestershire.

I wasn't aware of a page about Cheltenham (typeface) -- but I've found it now and I'm definitely a doofus if I inadvertantly removed a link to it. My bad.

Best, 63.238.213.114 16:58, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Old South Church

Ack! I don't know where I got 1865 as the year of construction for Old South Church. In the architecture year categories, buildings are listed by year of completion, so I'll change it to 1875, if that's ok? Christopher Busta-Peck | Talk 19:43, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:AIBwordmark.svg)

Thanks for uploading Image:AIBwordmark.svg. 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. BigDT 23:51, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:AIBmonologo.svg)

Thanks for uploading Image:AIBmonologo.svg. 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. BigDT 23:57, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] typeface categorization

As I mentioned previously, one needn't put articles in a category and it's parent category. There are good reasons to subcategorize. Place articles in the most specific categor(y|ies) that apply.

Allow me to illustrate with a different example: Category:dogs. Dogs are canines, so you add Category:canines to all the dog breed (and individual dog) articles. Canines are carnivores, so you add Category:carnivores to these pages as well. And carnivores are mammals, so you add Category:mammals to all the dog articles, too. And all mammals are vertebrates, and vertebrates are animals. Now your Category:animals page (potentially) has about 875,000 entries in it. (OK, I made that number up.) Do you see the problem? A category listing that long is not useful, and is not helping you find what you are looking for.

The size of the category may not be a big concern now, with only ~100 entries, but could be later—and it would be a much bigger job to clean up then. Many many of WP's bigger categories have notices asking that they be kept maintained. This is the reason for subcategorization.

Categories exist to correctly describe the article, so that it is placed properly in its taxonom(y|ies). Saying Arial is a typeface as well as a sans-serif typeface is redundant. Also, categories can never be comprehensive by their very nature—they can only help you find existing articles. If you want a comprehensive index of something, that's what a list article is for—they can point to articles that do not yet exist. So if what you really want is a list of all fonts, a list article is better than a category.

There are some good-sounding reasons for duplication, which you have hit on before, but the main one boils down to "not making the user drill down to subcats is easier" (which is true only insofar as the category is small enough to visually scan). I think of the user benefit rule here: does one catch-all listing of every typeface help users? Personally, I don't see significant benefit. A list of arbitrary names means essentially nothing. I think typically, if a user is using categories as an aid, they have some idea of what kind (category) of typeface they are looking for. A unified (category) listing wouldn't be helpful except possibly when all the user knows is the beginning part of the name and thus wants to scan an alphabetical list, and a list article could do that as well. When the category is large, drilling down to get a manageable number of entries per category is actually easier, as long as the subcats are logical.

Putting all faces in a single category also has the effect of undistinguishing which articles are typefaces (e.g. Arial, Cooper Black) from those that are about typefaces in general (e.g. metrics, serifs). ⇔ ChristTrekker 19:29, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

I am not sure what you meant by "If I were to arrive at the typefaces category page and find purely a list classifications i think I would be more comfortable with it." - please explain?

Also wanted to mention that I appreciate your contributions to the face pages. They look very nice. I wish I had a modicum of talent for that sort of thing. ⇔ ChristTrekker 20:13, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] License tagging for Image:BellCentInk.svg

Thanks for uploading Image:BellCentInk.svg. 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. 00:06, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Way off on the Romney pictures

These pictures are here correctly under fair use. They are offical public photos relesed by Romney's office for the public to use. In fact these pictures might even have the copyrights released for public consumption since they have been posted on a public site. I bet if somebody were to write to Romney's office they would reply with a response stating that they were public domain and this would mean that they have no copyright

In any event, I can't prove this. I can prove that they are "fair use" as they are distrubted to media outlets. Given this reality, they do not qualify for "speedy deletion", rather a discuss on an alternative if one is desired.--Cliffhanger7 02:46, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Old samples

Hi atanamir and CApitol3.

I would like to make some request.... since CApitol3 is replacing the old samples of the fonts, could you please put the old SVG with link to

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samples_of_Serif_typefaces http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samples_of_Monospaced_typefaces http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samples_of_Sans_Serif_typefaces http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samples_of_Script_typefaces

and complete these tables according to

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_typeface

What happens is that the old SVGs created by Atanamir are now orphan. Since there is no page that links to them, in some weeks a bot will appear and will erase them. Therefore, before it occurs, it would be better to update those tables.

Now, I dont have too much time to do this, since in two months I have to submit mi dissertation.

Maybe Anatamir could write a small script to do that, given that he is a programming expert.

Diego Torquemada 20:23, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Coat of Arms of Vermont

Hi, I presume your request is related to my assessment of the article for the heraldry and vexillology wikiproject. My reasoning was basically that it was too long to be a stub, and didn't have GA status, which meant it had to be either Start or B class; since it was on the short side I went for Start. Having read it once again I can't immediately think of any content which could be added. This is a problem I have with all coat of arms articles; once you've said what it looks like, when it was first used, who designed it and any possible symbolism, there's really not much else you can say unless the arms are old enough that you can trace the historical development. Having said that, it would possibly be interesting to know why the state has both a seal and a coat of arms.

I would however take issue with your statement Vermont is the only U.S. state to have authentic armorial bearings described in a blazon. First, what do you mean by an authentic coat of arms? Are there states which use fake coats of arms? Also given that the arms are an example of landscape heraldry you might find people arguing whether they are actually 'authentic' arms. Secondly, a blazon is just a written description of a coat of arms; given a picture of a coat of arms someone sufficiently experienced in heraldry can produce a blazon, so there's nothing particularly unique about a coat of arms having a blazon. (In the European tradition it is in fact the blazon that defines the arms rather than the visual representation). Thirdly, if you want to get picky, blazon usually refers to the anglo-french jargon used to describe coats of arms, whereas the blazon of the CoA of Vermont is more like a layman's description, although it does throw in a few heraldic terms (I note that the external link you provide refers to the blazon as 'quasi-heraldic terminology'). Finally Vermont is not the only state which has a blazon enshrined in statute, see Coat of arms of North Dakota for example.

Regarding possible improvements, I would be inclined to add subheadings, e.g. history, blazon,Vermonter's badge. Also, now that you've added a couple of other sources it would probably be good to add citations to indicate which facts come from which source. The external link says that the arms were not defined by statute until 1862, but the article says differently; is the external site wrong? Quoting the statute numbers could possibly be useful. A couple more images could also be good, e.g. of the arms being used today, or historical versions showing the 'considerable liberties taken'. Dr pda 01:45, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Looking for members to join Project Boston

I noticed you work on Boston related articles. I am looking for good people to join Project Boston in order to clean up and expand wikipedia articles directly related to Boston. If you feel like helping out please join up. Markco1 16:58, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

I fear I have not heard of The Young Snakes or Relentless Cookout - I will do a little research and see if I can find info on them, do you recall the style of music? As far as contributing to Boston articles - Do so at your leasure, I am just trying to get some focus and as a group with various histories and viewpoints we can add a wealth of information to sparse or non existant articles. Markco1 20:16, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Found references to both bands playing at the Channel so I added them - The Young Snakes were an Aimee Mann band I think I did know that somewhere in the back of my brain.

[edit] Font Infoboxes

I've made some edits to the font infoboxes. Let me know if you think these changes are improvements and whether further improvements can be made. I can respect your expertise as a professor of typography, but information design (i assume) is something different and while putting information in infoboxes might make the information less readable, it does make it more accessible to the casual reader of the article. pablohoney 16:06, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

So, thank you, very much, for addressing this. Here is my wish list:
1) can we place the text box to set nbelow the specimen but without making a box around the specimen?This would be ideal, in that the right side of the page would be smoother, quieter, and no discord between the specimen size, and the image immediately below, as now exists on the Bell Centennial article
2) If not, can the spacing between the specimen illustration and the rules (lines) be made at least half as big as they presently are? A visit to the Bell Centennial page shows what I mean, it would be great if the info box spacing were like what wiki does around an illustration
3) Text: could date created be made Design date; and then add a separate Release date (keeping second words of entries lowercase) for faces with both.

I personally feel that 2) is the best option. I'll see what i can do to fix this, but it may take some time for me to figure out. Please be patient as I try to figure this out. Adding fields as suggested in 3) is simple. I'll be adding more myself when I get a chance. Hopefully working together we can come up with a solution that works for everyone. I do feel that your illustrations are an improvement over the generic illustrations as you can find in the Helvetica article. Thank you for spending time to make illustrations that are visually pleasing, I'd like to rework the spec for images for font infoboxes as well, bringing the standard more in line with what you have been doing in this way.pablohoney 19:00, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

The blue color is used to denote a link. I guess you could link the page to itself, but I think that's a bit silly. Also Classifications are currently being used for sub-classifications, see Baskerville. If you have suggestions on terms that would clear up this confusion, i'd be glad to hear them. Also, can we move this discussion to the talk page for Template_talk:Infobox font? Thnx for your help. Let's continue working together to make these user boxes truly useful. pablohoney 23:41, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikilogos

I've noticed you are a graphic designer, you might be interested in my proposal for Wikipedia use logo variations created by members of the wiki community to mark national and international awareness days, Remembrance Days, notable anniversaries, and observance days. Please comment on Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)#Logo Variations and on my talk page. Thanks! FrummerThanThou 05:50, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image:DINsp1451.jpg

Hi GearedBull,
Image:DINsp1451.jpg has some wrong glyphs. The Aa on the 2nd line are not from DIN 1451, they look a bit like Highway. Other than that, it's probably better to make a PNG file instead of a JPG, since the number of colours is not large, PNG will be much better quality. Cheers. --moyogo 16:09, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for catching my error in the specimen for DIN 1451. CApitol3 16:25, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi Moyogo, that wrong face was DIN-Neuzeit Grotesk Light, I think a part of 1451 but not one of the two more recognized weights.CApitol3 16:39, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Neuzeit Grotesk became a DIN standard in 1970 [3] under the name DIN 30640. Whereas EngSchrift and MittelSchrift became DIN 1451 in 1936. [4]--moyogo 21:34, 15 December 2006 (UTC)