User talk:GRAHAMUK/Archive 3

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 image deletion 2 Many worthwhile edits 3 Flutterbox? 4 Roads and Pavements 5 ABBA 6 help on beziers 7 BABBA 8 WikiProject Macintosh

[edit] image deletion

Hi - I really like your suggestion about dealing with the unsourced images user-by-user rather than as an unsorted clump of images. I've posted something about this to Jimbo's talk page and am following up in various places to try to get the wholesale image slaughter to stop until we can find out how urgently the problem has to be addressed (from Jimbo). In the meantime, can you please add the appropriate source tag to your remaining images? In case you don't know, you should be able to find all the (remaining) images you uploaded from the upload log, e.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=upload&user=GRAHAMUK&page=&limit=250&offset=0. If you don't have personal copies of images that were deleted we can almost certainly track them down from a wikipedia mirror. Like I said elsewhere, please don't leave over this. Jimbo may be overreacting, but may not. Copyright violations are serious and there could well be some legal urgency involved which if not satisfied could lead to wikipedia being shut down (I don't have any idea whether this is actually the case). In any event, I think this could have been handled much better. Thanks very much for bringing it up. -- Rick Block (talk) 04:13, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

Thanks Rick, nice to feel that I'm not completely alone on this. Now that link there is the first really useful and practical thing that someone has come up with in this whole discussion - which is what we need, practical deeds, not more argy-bargy. So thanks a lot - I'll go through and at least tag everything of my own. I can't believe how some people behave the minute they have been given some perceived "power" - it explains a lot about human nature, it really does! Graham 04:20, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

Sorry for placing this here, but like others I'm a bit unsure of where to comment on all the recent changes and thought I'd follow on this discussion. Well, I'll be the first to put my hand up and say I've just deleted loads of images in the past few days as it seems it's the only way to get rid of a lot of unsourced stuff. I agree, it seems to have been decreed more than anything, but I've asked a few times on the admin board for help in sorting though images in the unsourced categories and no-one seemed interested (I guess I just don't know enough helpful people to be able to post a request on their talk page instead!?) When I first started working though the unsourced images at the start of the year, I think I got through all the images on 'X', 'Y' & 'Z', put them on WP:PUI, but within a few weeks they were full again and I was doing it all on my own :-( Anyway, I guess my point is, that unless others are willing to join in and put images through WP:IFD or WP:PUI every so often, then does the new change not seem the only way to deal with it? Craigy (talk) 01:59, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

IMO there are really two issues. One is the backlog of images that already exist without clear copyright status. The other is the ongoing problem of people adding such images. I think we can approach the first problem the same way we approach other huge issues, i.e. by making and posting lists and enlisting numerous people to help clear the backlog. I think Beland's orphaned categories lists are a comparable example (perhaps an order of magnitude smaller). Whatever we do about the backlog, we also have to find a way to reduce the rate at which people add such images. I'd prefer if we can find a way by education or other means to discourage people from doing the initial upload, rather than allowing such uploads to continue and deleting the images after the fact. Jimbo's solution basically increases the rate at which the images will be deleted, discouraging more such uploading only indirectly. This might work, but I think it's at the expense of annoying a large population of users - which I think is a bad thing. There are a lot of smart people around here. I'm certain we can craft a better solution than CSD. -- Rick Block (talk) 03:13, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

In regards to the specific images that were lost, I found vx_vivahb.jpg here: http://vauxhall-viva.wikiverse.org/media/c/c0/vx_vivahb.jpg and I'm pretty sure I can find the others as well. It would probably be clearest if you upload them(although, if you are too pissed off(you have reason to be ;-)), I would be happy to do so, assuming you are still OK with Wikipedia using them). Hope this is some help. JesseW, the juggling janitor 08:43, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Many worthwhile edits

I came across the image delete controversy, and I saw that you were considering leaving Wikipedia, and felt that perhaps your edits were not appreciated. I took a few minutes to look at just a random smattering of your most recent & earliest contributions, and I can say that in my opinion based on what I saw it looks like you've made a lot of good, high-quality contributions. In particular, I discovered that the Iko Iko article, which I happen to have had occasion to look up recently, was one that you had originally created!

I can easily understand your frustration with the image delete issue. After participating in a few contentious votes for deletion, I can even say I empathize. But I feel sure it will ultimately be resolved, and once it is, you may feel different. In any case, I think it would be a real loss to Wikipedia if you were to leave.

Therefore, in consideration of your many worthy edits, by the complete lack of any power vested in me, as a token of my esteem I award you this blue morpho butterfly. Thank you! --DavidConrad 10:40, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

David, thankyou for taking the trouble to write, it is nice to be appreciated actually! The image delete controversy is not really about this, in my view, but simply about reducing the encyclopedia's quality and value for no very good reason (that I can see). Copyright is a badly broken concept these days - the original idea is simply to strike a balance between giving a creative person or entity due credit, and allowing reasonable use of that work. Today we seem to have lost sight of that, and I feel the way forward would be to take a stand - law exists to serve us all, not just a few. Anyway, I think now a few days has passed it doesn't seem that the issue is really worth getting quite so angry about, though I still despair of certain users who act first and think later, if they ever do. On the other hand that's human nature all over. Coming back to the contributions, I do what I can, but I don't believe it's false modesty to say that compared to the sum total of what is here it is just a drop in the ocean. But it is nice to be appreciated for even that, so thankyou very much. Graham 11:01, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

Support much appreciated - Zscout seems to have no concept of sensible compromise. How he can decide that personal images are a breech of copyright, I don't know. A bureaucrat "just following orders", with no intention of changing his ways. Thanks again, Jim

Zscout's latest comment on his talk page is probably as near as we will get to an admission that his implementation of the Great Leader's dictats was over the top - as you say, he's just too eager to please his master. I've declared a truce on my behalf, since he at least seems to have taken some note of the stream of criticism, and life's too short... jimfbleak 05:28, 27 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Flutterbox?

In the article on ABBA: The Movie, you mentioned the first use of a "flutterbox". Do you have any more information on what that is? The word is internally linked there but there's no article, and when I search for it on the web I only come up with ten different sites with the same sentence, word-for-word, about how ABBA used it first and then Star Wars and other movies used it subsequently.

I actually originally questioned it because Star Wars was filmed in 1976; if ABBA: The Movie was based on footage from their 1977 tour, I don't see how it's possible that their use of the flutterbox - whatever it may be - predates Star Wars.

Any ideas about this? What am I missing? Thanks - Kafziel 19:21, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

I'd like to know more about what exactly this is as well! On the one hand my recollection is reliable, I did read somewhere that a device called the flutterbox was used first in Abba - The Movie, and in particular I think it's used in the 'Eagle' elevator sequence where there is a lighting effect that creates the appearance of moving up through a series of levels. It is this lighting effect which I believe the flutterbox is responsible for. Less reliable is the source of this information. I only have one or two books on Abba now and they don't appear to have been my source. It is possible I read it in one of the 70s Abba fanzines that existed at that time, which would make it a very old recollection, but nevertheless one that stuck in my mind very firmly. The reference to Star Wars is much less definite - it's possible that part is not correct. As you say googling for it is not very useful, and it's possibly because it was a technology that just came and went quite quickly, and may not be used these days - so it won't be mentioned on a movie technology site, or warrant much of a mention on a movie history site. Maybe it only ever got used for The Movie. I guess somebody needs to ask Lasse Hallstrom, and get it from the horse's mouth. Any idea what his email addy is? ;-) Graham 23:26, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Roads and Pavements

Thanks for bird-dogging these pages. Trucks really, really do beat these up badly, and Wbfl had no good reason to remove these references. I added a bit on the design methodology to the Pavement (material) article, and intend to add similar to structural road design.

I have never heard the term road "metalling" in American roadbuilding Do you know its origin or use? We refer to these as macadam, or technically as "stabilized road surfaces." (Standard Handbook of Civil Engineers, 3rd. ed., p. 16-38.)

I couldn't agree more that anonymous edits should be speedily deleted. When I suggested that on a talk page though, I got a gentle "That's not Wiki." response from another soul. Eternal vigilance is the price of wiki. And what the hell is a "legal sock puppet?" I think that one should put yourself out there. Anonymity breeds poor manners, I think. MARussellPESE 15:02, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

Just a second note of support for the Road issue. It seems to have died down, and the referencing is very good. I added a google print reference that also mentioned the road test to it's article. Thanks for everything you do for the 'pedia! JesseW, the juggling janitor 07:58, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] ABBA

Dear GRAHAMUK, I can't help being bad at English, but imho my last night addition to ABBA was not as POV as you seem to think. Just turn on your radio and listen to a few hit parade songs. When you listen closely it is just impossible not to notice ABBA's influence in one of them. Their traces are to be heard everywhere: in instrumentation, in melodies and in harmonic sequences (which where rarely heard in any hit parade music before ABBA; if anywhere in popular music, the chiefly appeared in prog rock). And that is not just my particular observation: a lot of scolars and pop journalists approve this. If you wisj I will bother, of course, to prove my position, but anyway I think a statement like "their influence on later music is vast" does not bear any point of view. Regards, Caesarion 10:27, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

I would personally agree that Abba were probably influential, but beyond that there is no documentary evidence to what, if any, degree. It's possible that there were other developments in pop music that Abba were influenced by which also influenced the other groups, so it might have happened with or without them. Abba did jump on a lot of bandwagons in their run - glam rock, disco to name but two - they were not as innovative as fans like to believe in some cases. You can't say one way or the other about their influence, it's just not possible to know. Therefore to assume the cause as Abba is POV, as it's unprovable. Any statement to this effect really doesn't add much to a factual article, it's just your opinion. It certainly doesn't belong in the introductory paragraph. Also, the quality of the writing matters, though others will clean up entries that have worth. Sorry, but that's the way it is. Graham 23:57, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

Personally I am not at all a fan, and of course they were heavy influenced by many dominant styles of those days. Yet I think their particular blend of styles, their presentation and the features of their music that were quite innovative for mainstream popular music did influence popular music heavily. But of course simply claiming this would conduct to endless "tis-taint-discussions". The case is, I am a musicology student, and if I can find the time I will consult some literature on this subject. I for one think there are some reliable sources that support my statement (but indeed it is unprovable; NOTHING except logics and mathematics is provable!). Caesarion 09:00, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

If you can find a reliable and credible source, then it's fair to say something like "...according to Joe Bloggs in his biography of the group, ... blah blah blah...", but simply stating it without attribution sounds like fandom, whether or not you actually are! There would probably be some argument about where such a statement belongs - often introductory paragraphs grow too long because everyone and his dog adds their favourite factoids. The integrity and quality of the article as a whole needs to be considered. Graham 23:32, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] help on beziers

I used the source code in the bezier article and when i plot out the points it gives me the curve never starts on P0 (the start point) nor ends on P3 (the end point) and from what I gathered in the article this would be what I should expect? If you are a c++ programmer could I send you the project I built and you tell me where I screwed up? I'm trying to integrate beziers into a freeware audio generation tool i'm building. Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Scott Lloyd scuttle@scuttle.us

I have mailed you separately about this. But for anyone else trying to use the code, note - it's untested. (Though if bugs are found they should be fixed). Note that the case where t=0 is a very good test case for debugging, because the main polynomial collapses to a very simple assignment statement where the output point is simply assigned the value of P0. If that isn't happening then the reason should be easy to find - the mathematical part of the code is NOT where the problem lies, as all of those values are multiplied by zero. I'd start there! Graham 23:57, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] BABBA

Yeah, I'd never heard of BABBA either and was tempted to get rid of it, so I'm glad you felt the same way too and deleted the ref. They do seem to exist - http://www.babba.com.au/ - but I hardly think they're big enough for a mention here. Well, I must go now and insert a couple of Madonna references into the ABBA article intro... ;) CLW

[edit] WikiProject Macintosh

Thanks for joining! We're currently focusing on the Apple Computer article. Our old focus, Apple Macintosh, is currently a FA candidate and you can vote here. We’re all honored that you want to join our WikiProject. --HereToHelp (talk) 21:43, 13 December 2005 (UTC)