User talk:Greg Williams

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] A Warm WikiWorld Welcome

Greetings! Starting on Monday, December 11, 2006, the WikiWorld comic found a home in The Wikipedia Signpost. You can check out the Signpost's introductory article here. And, if you come across any articles that might be well suited to a cartoon-style interpretation, please be sure to let me know. --Greg Williams 13:13, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wow is the word for WW!!

Hi Greg, WikiWorld was great - I'm planning to use some of the strips to motivate students to contribute to Wikipedia. I understand that you would like to explore Wikipedia on your own for comic strip ideas but you may also want to look at WP:PINQ and its archives as they comprise several interesting and obscure facts about India as well as around the world. Having 1 or 2 WikiWorld comic strips on Indian topics would also make my job of motivating students in India easier. I may also talk to a couple of publications to see if they will carry it out in their issues. Most importantly, I wanted to say that I am impressed by your resolve in ensuring that this initiative took off despite being new to Wikipedia. And a small award, to say thank you for that... --Gurubrahma 07:18, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

		The Exceptional Newcomer Award
		Greg richly deserves this award for displaying creativity and resolve in bringing forth "WikiWorld", which, I hope would attract newer audiences to benefit from and contribute to Wikipedia. --Gurubrahma 07:18, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

P.S. I am not sure if you have received this message before, but to make sure, I am leaving the standard welcome message and some useful links along with it!

Welcome!

Hello, Greg Williams, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Enjoy your stay on Wikipedia!! --Gurubrahma 07:18, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks very much, Gurubrahma. I'll definitely take a look at the articles about India that you've mentioned. If you talk with any publications that would like to reprint the WikiWorld comic, please let me know - since these Web-based versions of the comic might cause problems for a print publication. I'd be happy to provide another version that would be better-suited to their needs. --Greg Williams 14:04, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] suggestion for a future comic

Greg, one of my favorite articles is Apples and oranges. It seems like it would make a good WikiWorld comic someday.--ragesoss 21:34, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Comic

Hi there! I just spotted your comic in the signpost. Nice work, it looks great there! (Radiant) 15:16, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

I really liked it too... I know its probably okay under the license, but wanted to clear it with you first, can I go ahead and throw the Redshirt comic up on my user page?? Thanks.. EnsRedShirt 20:46, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Sure, feel free to add it to your user page. Can you use it full-size (650 pixels wide), to make it as readable as possible? If not, it would be great if you could make it as close to that width as possible. Thanks for checking in. --Greg Williams 20:53, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Biographical

WikiWorld cartoonist Greg Williams is shown below in a portrait by son Jeremy, 11. --Greg Williams 03:22, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Neat! Put it on Wikipedia Facebook if you want. :) W3stfa11 06:11, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Redshirt comic

Loved the redshirt comic! Your caricature of Kirk made me laugh out loud. Keep em coming! :) Kaldari 08:01, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

I love your cartoons - my favorites are the pet skunk and red shirt. You might also have some fun with Kitsune (which is currently a featured article candidate). Raul654 04:35, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Great cartoons. I love the Pet Skunk and Facial Hair. Good work! W3stfa11 06:11, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Just saw the Redshirt comic, care of the Signpost. Needless to say, I look forward to seeing more. Excellent work, and informative. An excellent benefit to Wikipedia. Kaiser matias 05:39, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia signpost

Have you talked to the guys who do the Wikipedia community paper? The signpost? You could probably do a weekly update for them, it's pretty cool, and might get others to contribute too. - hahnch e n 02:12, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Several people have made the same suggestion. I've sent an e-mail to the Signpost editors, but we haven't talked. Thanks.--Greg Williams 04:05, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Congratulations on the Signpost thing; it will bring some well-deserved recognition to your work. It will be a real addition to the Signpost too. Anyhow, keep up the good work.--ragesoss 04:45, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

		The Graphic Designer's Barnstar
		This barnstar is presented in recognition of the sheer awesomeness of WikiWorld. ragesoss 04:45, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, Ragesoss! I'm not sure when the comics will start showing up in Signpost, but I appreciate the support WikiWorld has received. Up until now, only active editors could have known about the comics - along with a few random readers who called up the articles I've illustrated, I suppose. Signpost is geared toward "insiders" but should provide a stable home for the comics. That will make it easier to tell people how to find them, at any rate. I'm not sure whether the Signpost editors are planning to archive the comics or just to display the most recent posting. But Wikipedia is a fluid medium, so I'm hoping for the best. --Greg Williams 11:55, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Older discussions

I am removing your cartoon/comic drawings from Wikipedia. Your posting them into the relevant articles is unfortunately a major breach of WP:COI, and you've apparently given no notice or claim that your infringement of the Wikipedia logo trademark in your own logo is actually approved by the Wikimedia Foundation. They are cute cartoons, but entirely inappropriate for Wikipedia article main space. -- JossBuckle Swami 02:55, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. My cartoons were posted - and the WikiWorld logo was developed and used - with the knowledge and assistance of folks at Wikimedia, although this would not be apparent to other editors. --Greg Williams 23:27, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Ecch. I for one am thankful for the images, although using them full-sized in their respective articles is counterproductive, as they're large enough to make reading difficult. I'm surprised and disappointed to see that no centralized location to talk the matter through has apparently been created. Without one, we get an awful lot of mess for few results. I'd quite like to found and oversee one myself but, alas, I'd also like to pass at least one of my upcoming exams. I'll see if there's something I can do. --Kizor 23:17, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, Kizor. Good points. I think it's perfectly reasonable to keep the cartoons outside of the articles themselves - because of the size they'd need to run, and because of concerns that they don't add encyclopedic value. For me, the cartoons would work best as an illustrative promotional feature, to shine a light on some of the fascinating but little-seen articles in Wikipedia. Unfortunately, that only works if a casual user of Wikipedia could actually stumble across them. (Displaying them inside the little-seen articles themselves becomes a COMPLETELY nonsensical exercise, if promotion is the primary goal.) Another editor suggested posting them on a Project Page. But is there any chance that a casual user would ever encounter them there? --Greg Williams 13:12, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

I saw them too. While I'm not sure that they suit articles, I wonder if the folks at the The Wikipedia Signpost, a kind of newspaper for Wikipedia, would be interested in them? They'd brighten up the pages and encourage people to work on these undervisited articles. La ï ka 19:31, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

I'll keep an eye on The Wikipedia Signpost. Maybe that would be a good option. Thanks for the link. --Greg Williams 17:17, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

I created the {{Illustrated Wikipedia}} template at the behest of Danny Wool as a ground-breaking exercise for what will hopefully become WikiProject Illustrated Wikipedia (analogous to WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia). It is somewhat regrettable that a user of all of 10 days standing should take it upon themselves to be quite so bold without consulting the person who created the template as to intention. It does provide somewhat of a incentive to get on with creating the WikiProject, but the lack of manners doesn't exactly improve the atmosphere. It should be noted that the template does not display the actual cartoon, merely provides a link to it…as the slightest effort on the part of the remover would have revealed. Greg: please don't take this as any kind of sign that your cartoons are unwelcome here. HTH HAND —Phil | Talk 08:45, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the note, Phil. I appreciate it! I'll be adding a new comic strip to my Wikimedia gallery and User Page today; Should I try to add the Illustrated Wikipedia template to the pertinent article(s) myself, or would I need some additional information before proceeding? --Greg Williams 12:09, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

I'd say "be descreet"... {{Illustrated Wikipedia| }} is the format for the template. Just paste that into the external links section of an article, replace the spaces with the image file name, and just save the page. -- Zanimum 21:32, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

While the "template deletion" discussion continues, I think I'll steer clear of the editing process. Others can add the Illustrated Wikipedia templates for now, if they like. --Greg Williams 04:07, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Project now started

You are cordially invited to participate in WikiProject Illustrated Wikipedia. Now it's on a more official footing, maybe people will start using those manners their mothers no doubt attempted to teach them. HTH HAND —Phil | Talk 14:48, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Wow! Thanks. This should be interesting. What do I need to do, apart from producing and uploading the comics? (I've already received a few suggestions of topics for future strips; That will be a great help - although I also enjoy doing my own explorations.) Phil, if you have specific thoughts about how to link to the comics, how to archive them, etc., please let me know here, or in an e-mail. --Greg Williams 15:19, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

The best place for discussion of these topics is at the project itself. Recruiting some of your buddies to join in would be fun also

: it would be interesting to have different styles of cartoon, and we might spark some fruitful discussion over whether certain types of article suit certain types of cartoon…or not

. HTH HAND —Phil | Talk 21:29, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Greg, I am much more comfortable, now that your project has been formalized, involves the participation of more cartoonists than just yourself, and doesn't hijack the articles themselves (which, you have to remember, are being viewed by many people on things like 56K modems and cell phones with slow connections). I hope that people like Phil who seem to be on a high horse about manners also see that my concerns were based more on the trademark use of the Wikipedia logo, the obvious violation of WP:COI, and the fact that the cartoons do not "add" to Wikipedia's mission (at least in the traditional sense). I honestly wish you all the best of success and happiness -- I just wanted it in the proper format, with proper licensing/permission, in the proper forum. I wish the leaders at the Wikimedia Foundation had done this properly (by executing through "beta testing" with the community, and asking for community input), rather than running it like the "boys club" that it too often appears to be. I still don't get how WMF can get so upset about the use of merely the Wikipedia NAME in something like a press release, whilst unofficially endorsing the complete theft (albeit for creative purposes) of the Wikipedia logo by a private artist. You can see, that by their failure to communicate this project to the community, it led to a lot of needless energy wasted by the slave-volunteers. --JossBuckle Swami 04:17, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree, it has been a bumpy ride so far, as the Wikipedia community attempts to sort out how (or whether) these comics fit into the site's current landscape. Obviously, this project doesn't fit neatly within the previously established parameters for submitting content. Hopefully, things will sort themselves out - especially now that it's a little clearer that the concept (and logo) weren't developed in a vacuum. Honestly, it doesn't bother me a bit if the comics aren't posted or linked within the articles themselves. I've always envisioned this project as a way to entice casual readers to check out some of the fascinating but little-known articles in Wikipedia - not merely to entertain the handful of readers who might somehow stumble across "Facial hair" or "Pet skunk" on their own. (Although the promotional usage I've described might not please absolutely everyone, I suspect it wouldn't raise quite the same concern about protecting the encyclopedic integrity of the articles themselves.) --Greg Williams 16:14, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hosting

If it ends up you cannot do your comic project here, then I can set up a MediaWiki server outside of the wikimedia foundation, but with the same copyright policies dedicated to the project. It is a great idea, and I am a real believer in creating free content for the masses, while respecting the artists right to be attributed. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 22:33, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

As I understand the licensing arrangement, others are free to reprint or adapt the comics regardless of how they are used within Wikipedia. I'll continue to make the images freely available on Wikimedia Commons - as requested - but if you'd like to use them as part of an outside project, go right ahead. If you need anything, let me know. Thanks. --Greg Williams 04:03, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Suggestion for strip

Hi Greg, I really enjoyed your Redshirt comic which appeared in the Signpost; I immediately went and looked at the others. It struck me, as a mathematician (and a visually inclined one), that an article like Möbius strip would be great fun for your strip. --Chan-Ho (Talk) 16:45, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

I'll have to give that idea some thought. I've always been fascinated by Möbius strips - and would love to be able to study a sculpture of M.C. Escher's Möbius Strip II, if such a thing could actually be produced. (Could it? I can't quite wrap my head around the spatial requirements of converting Escher's drawing into a 3-dimensional object.) Thanks. --Greg Williams 13:33, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

I mainly came to this page to say I'd noticed and enjoyed your illustrations, loved the overweight skunk... Saw this post about the Möbius strip and thought I'd throw in Klein bottle. After I discovered the Möbius strip in my youth I read a lot about topology and then discovered the Klein bottle which I found interesting & bizarre. (and also pretty hard to draw from memory...) anyways good luck here on the wiki and take care. SeanMack 14:09, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] A Smile on My Face

Hi Greg, I just dropped by to say thanks for your work on the WikiWorld cartoon strips, great stuff and long may it continue. I look forward to regular postings in the Signpost to add some colour, humour and a welcome smile to the site. I enjoyed the strips you've done so far very much indeed, (the veangeful pet skunk image is my personal highlight so far). It's a wonderful idea for Wikipedia' keep up the good work. Best wishes. --Cactus.man ✍ 13:04, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, Cactus.man. Since I've built up a small stockpile of comics (as you've seen), I'm planning to present a mix of new and existing comics in the Signpost for the first few weeks, just to get things rolling. I'm glad to hear that you're enjoying the project. --Greg Williams 13:22, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WoW [And not the pagemove vandal]!

Nice work! (Especially the licence!) 68.39.174.238 13:21, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Greetings

I haven't been editing long but your page inspired something close to epiphany in me. The say be bold round here, but suspect you may have set a new benchmark. I'm off to WikiProject: Illustrated Wikipedia as you suggested. Check out Hunt Emersons pages from the fortean times magazine. Regards Fred.e 14:31, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Aloha...

I know you get tons of suggestions, but I just came across Beefalo, a cattle-buffalo hybrid. Something about the name just had me kind of chuckling on the inside. Also, if you weren't aware, Wikipedia:Unusual articles would be good fodder perhaps. Mahalo. --Ali'i 21:58, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. So many good ideas! --Greg Williams 12:18, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Awwww.... you missed the Boston molasses disaster... :P >Radiant< 15:26, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

I tried to work it in, but limited space - and the fact that a bunch of people were killed - made it a difficult combo. (Maybe someone else, with a more serious cartooning/illustration style than mine, could give it a try.) --Greg Williams 13:42, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Great Stuff

...but you need to do a survey of our screen settings. your boxes on the right hand of your page are chopped off and require some scrolling. Just thought I'd let you know. best. frummer 12:15, 1 January 2007 (UTC)]]

How much of a cut-off are you talking about? It would be easy enough to resize, if the current width of 650 pixels isn't workable for everyone. (That width was suggested by a Web designer not connected to Wikipedia; I'll do some independent research.) Thanks. --Greg Williams 13:52, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Project box

Dear Greg, Fantastic comics, I really think you're doing us a great service by creating them - I hope "real world" publishers decide to take them up too! I am writing to request that you (or someone who knows how) create a little info box to place on the talk-page of the articles that you've drawn - rther than placing a little mention in the article itself. It should look something like the "Did you know" or the "featured article of the day" boxes which appear at the top of talk-pages - like this:

An entry from Thagomizer appeared in Wikipedia's Signpost in the Illlustrated Wikipedia on January 3, 2007.

What do you think? I definately believe that the fact that you've drawn the article should be brought to the attention of readers - but not in the article itself, that's meta-info and belongs on the talk page. Let me know your opinion. Witty lama 19:51, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. There has been a lot of discussion about whether it is appropriate to post the comics in story space, but linking to the comics with a WikiProject box seemed to address those concerns. That's where the current box came from. Ideally, the WikiWorld comics should function as promotional elements - to help send readers to the articles themselves, not the other way around. Running the comics in Signpost is a great step forward in that direction.--Greg Williams 00:55, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

I think you misunderstand me. I am not talking about posting the cartoons in the project namespace or anywhere else - I am talking about the little infobox you placed in the articles you have drawn. I Do agree that there should be mention of the fact that the articles have been "cartoonised" but I do not believe that the mention should be in the article itself. It is WP standard practice that only information relevant to an encyclopaedic entry on a subject should be mentioned in the article itself, not things that link to the "wikiproject" namespace. For example, if you look at today's "Featured Article of the day John Brooke-Little you will see no such meta-information in the actual article but when you go to the talk page here you see several project boxes that refer to things that have happened to the article on WP (peer reviews, Featured candidacy, mentions on the main page...). I believe that the "illustrated wikipedia" infobox should go alongside these types of things in the talk page.Do you agree? Do you think you could get someone to create a pretty little template to place on the talkpages of the articles that you've drawn? Cheers, Witty lama 14:06, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

I do understand your point, Witty lama. The current box is the result of several weeks of back-and-forth editing and discussion by quite a few others. Maybe I've missed something, but it was my understanding that the current box was the direct result of those discussions. That's the only reason I've been adding it to articles. If more discussions are warranted, I'd prefer to stay uninvolved. As I said earlier, the comics are intended to direct readers to the articles - not vice versa. Take care, --Greg Williams 04:04, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Witty lama appears to be correct -- the box looks like it breaks WP:ASR -- but I can understand exactly where you're coming from. For the present, I don't think there's any pressing need for you to stop adding that box to articles, since it's not really going to upset anyone (unless it makes their computer burst into flames, or something). However, a better solution should be developed if possible; maybe we should try to find a few other alternatives, and see what looks best? :) Daveydweeb (^chat/_review!) 12:30, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ligne claire

Hi, I really like your work on WikiWorld! Would you be up to providing a free image to illustrate Ligne claire to replace the fair-use image that's currently there? —An gr 12:40, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Actually, if you don't mind, I'd like to try my hand at this first. -- Zanimum 19:22, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm unfamiliar with the term, so it would take a bit of research for me to feel comfortable that I've captured the proper look. If Zanimum is willing to give it a shot instead, that would be terrific. Can't wait to see it. --Greg Williams 20:20, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] April Fool

Hey Greg, we've been trying to come up with a picture to use on the Main Page on April Fool's day...in the "Featured Picture" section at the bottom. We want something funny - and completely unexpected for Wikipedia.

I think (and most people I ask agree) that a WikiWorld comic would be the perfect thing - but there is a problem. A picture - no matter how good it is - can only become the 'featured picture of the day' if it's used in an actual Wikipedia article - which I don't think any of your cartoons are. We could almost justify adding a WikiWorld cartoon into Comic or Web comic - but Wikipedia disallows 'self reference' - gratuitously mentioning Wikipedia inside an article isn't allowed.

So the idea that comes to my mind is to write a new article specifically so we can weasel one of your cartoons onto it. The one way I could think to do this 'within the rules' would be to write a biographical article about you, personally. The problem here is whether you meet the Wikipedia 'notability for a living person' standards. You evidently have lots of published works (in the newspaper you draw for presumably) - that's a huge plus point. Are there books of your cartoons? Have you ever won any kind of an award for your work? Have any 'critics' discussed it?

Another alternative - would be to beg and plead for you to draw us something that's NOT about Wikipedia (ie not a WikiWorld comic page) - but which could serve to illustrate an article like Comic but without being a 'self reference' but which would look very, very strange indeed on the Wikipedia front page. I have no clue what that might be - and it would have to be good enough to make it through the 'featured picture' process.

SteveBaker 17:17, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Steve, I like your idea of doing something unique for April Fool's Day. Like you, though, I'm stumped about what it could be. It's hard to do something unexpected without breaking the rules in some way, you know?

I seriously doubt that I would meet the "notability" standards - but thanks.

Here's a thought: I remember that Norman Rockwell did a series of April Fool's Day cover paintings for The Saturday Evening Post magazine. Each one was filled with tons of "mistakes" and unusual combinations of imagery. As far as I know, those covers haven't been very visible in recent years (except possibly as jigsaw puzzles or as memorabilia from the Norman Rockwell Museum in Stockbridge, Mass.). Anyway, do you think there might be a way to include information about those covers in an existing article, or to create a new article about them? You can see a low-res version of one of the covers here. (It's hard to pick up on the details at that size, I know, but the trickery in the images is pretty intricate.)

It wouldn't be a WikiWorld comic, but it certainly would be unique to see one of those covers online, at a large enough size to allow easy viewing. I'm not sure what sort of contortions would be required to make it happen, though. Perhaps a small version of one of the covers could be inserted into an article about Rockwell or The Saturday Evening Post, which then could become a Featured Picture. To see the image at a much larger size, however, it might be necessary to link to an external source, with proper permissions. Seems like it might be a complex process - but, hey, what else is new?

Personally, I'd love to see Wikipedia forge a relationship with the Rockwell estate or the publishing company that controls the rights to his work (here) that would allow this sort of thing to happen - especially since Rockwell did a whole series of April Fool's Day covers. It could become a yearly tradition for the site. (If you like the idea, maybe Brad Patrick could tell us whether he's aware of any sort of arrangement that could make this possible, without violating copyrights.) --Greg Williams 13:32, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

I love the Rockwell cover! The problem is that we can't put 'fair use' images onto the front page - that cover must still be in copyright - right? It's hard to read on that small image but it looks like the date says 1948. Remember - it's not enough for the Rockwell estate to grant us permission to use it - the images would have to be free for anyone to use and I doubt the Rockwell folks would give up the images on that basis. Oh well - back to the drawing board. SteveBaker 13:47, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm sure you're probably right about the copyright. I think the publication date for that cover may have been 1943, but it seems unlikely that anyone would let a Rockwell copyright lapse.

Trying to find a talented painter who would be willing to attempt the intricacies of Rockwell's style - and then make it freely available for anyone to use - would be close to impossible, I'm guessing. Then again, that's basically what I'm doing, on a simpler scale.

Definitely worth thinking about, regardless. Maybe the Rockwell example will spur us on to think of a workable WikiWorld concept. --Greg Williams 17:29, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

If the picture would be tantamount to an April Fool joke, maybe the requirement that it needs to appear in an article could be excepted / subverted / defied in an April-Fool manner (!) / etc...? Regards, David Kernow (talk) 18:31, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Haha

Kudos on writing possibly the only story ever to begin with the words "Dear God! I'm bleeding from the ears! Make it stop!!!" Ral315 (talk) 01:43, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Good work and suggestion

Hi Greg,

You have done good work for the Illustrated Wikipedia Project. I have a suggestion for you, which I think would help you in the long run. While uploading images, instead of writing same repetitive image description, prefer to use templates. This way you can update all the images that are under the purview of the project in one edit. I have created a sample template in my sandbox, and you are free to improve upon it. Regards, — Ambuj Saxena (☎) 15:03, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. I'm not quite sure I understand the benefit of the template, if the wording doesn't change from one comic to the next, though. Maybe I'm missing something - but I'll give it a try next time. --Greg Williams 12:01, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Let me explain. Using the template has the following distinct advantages.

Ease of use. Instead of writing "I created this cartoon illustration in cooperation with the Wikimedia Foundation. It has been uploaded as part of the Illustrated Wikipedia WikiProject, which is currently under development...", you can just write {{WikiWorldImage}}, and the complete text that you intend to write there will come all on its own. Even if the text changes for every image, using templates provides standardization across all uses.
Ease of maintenance. If after some time, say the WikiProject came out of development phase, and you intend to update this information, all you need to do is to change it at the base template itself, and it will be reflected everywhere it is used.
Ease of search. By using the "What links here" functionality, you can find out all the images that have been labeled as part of "WikiWorld". You would no longer need to keep all those links on your user page to keep track of the images under WikiWorld.
Ease of identification. Once the template becomes well-known, by just looking at the template, one would recall everything that it said. Things written completely in text require a detailed read to understand.
Prevention against vandalism. Using templates ensures (to certain extent) that none of the image are mis-represented. By just checking for vandalism on the base template itself, one can ensure prevention against vandalism.
Visual appeal. Since templates also use features other than text (like images), they are usually appealing to the eyes.

Hope this was helpful. Contact me if you need additional help. — Ambuj Saxena (☎) 14:17, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

I have implemented the template. From now on, when you upload an image to commons, instead of the long text, just write {{WikiWorldImage}} in the image summary. This will include both the template message, as well as the two categories ("Greg Williams" and "WikiWorld Images by Greg Williams"). This should reduce the word you have had to do. But don't forget to put the cc-by-2.5 license. Regards, — Ambuj Saxena (☎) 16:07, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks again; I appreciate your help! --Greg Williams 03:26, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WikiWorldImage

Hi Greg,

As explained before, I have created and implemented the template feature for the comics. I have tested another feature, and if you wish, that can also be implemented in all the comics. What I have done is that I have allowed the template to have an optional parameter, which will provide a link to the English Wikipedia article the cartoon is used to illustrate. For example, you can see the Hyperthymesia cartoon which uses the parameter. The original image page shows how it renders. The actual text can be changed at any point of time. Also note that the images that don't use the parameter (like this one) still display the Template without any awkward formatting. It is up to you if you want to use it in the future or not. If yes, just remember to summarize the images as {{WikiWorldImage|Article name}}. Regards, — Ambuj Saxena (☎) 14:20, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

That seems like a worthwhile addition to the template; Thanks! --Greg Williams 17:39, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject overhaul

Moved WikiProject to Wikipedia:WikiProject WikiWorld, and merged the templates (some of which were being abused) into {{WikiWorld}}. WikiProject (formerly WikiProject Illustrated Wikipedia) appears to be moribund, however. It is tagged with {{Inactive}} (which anyone can remove at any time if they're doing something with the project). There are some potentially interesting ideas in the talk page at the project, too. — SMcCandlish [talk] [contrib] ツ 00:14, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion of this change

Since you're listed as the major participant, please join us in this discussion. HTH HAND —Phil | Talk 15:09, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikiworld: Pet skunk

The vengeful frame me laugh, thanks and keep up the good work. -Ravedave ^{(Adopt a State)} 17:12, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Syndicating Wikiworld...

Hi!

If the current week's wikiworld could ALSO always be in a file named current_wikiworld.png or similar, it would be much easier to contemplate syndicating it to my web site... (Assuming you would be friendly to that idea?) --BenBurch 19:14, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestion, Ben. Once I sort out some formatting questions, I'll be happy to create a file that can be updated easily, as each new comic is published in the Signpost.

All of my previous uploads have been JPGs; What are the advantages of using the PNG format instead?

I'm glad the WikiWorld comics have found a home in the Signpost. It seems unlikely that many casual users would find them there, however. Since the comics are published under a free-content license, this "online syndication" idea should help increase readership AND serve the original intent of promoting Wikipedia's content. One request: When you add WikiWorld to your Web site, could you include a brief attribution credit that also links to the Signpost's intro/archive here ? In case you're interested, I've also started a blog/archive at www.myspace.com/wikiworld --Greg Williams 14:53, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

All of my previous uploads have been JPGs; What are the advantages of using the PNG format instead?

Well, the PNG format is "lossless" - the image you end up with is precisely what you painted in whatever art program you used. With JPG, the image that's stored is only a convenient approximation of what you painted - some of the colours will be very slightly screwed up - and, perhaps more importantly, the sharpmess of your lines and text will be somewhat blurred. The benefit of JPEG is that it makes for a much smaller file than PNG - precisely because it is able to throw away information from your original image that were not deemed critical for people looking at it. The JPEG algorithm knows things about human perception and (in theory) cunningly tosses out information that our eyes don't much care about. Note also that JPEG has a 'quality' setting - high quality JPG's are nearly as big as PNG and nearly as qood quality. Low quality JPG's are noticably nasty - and take much, much less space than PNG files. Beware though - there is no point in converting a JPG file into a PNG - the damage has already been done and it can never be recovered. Increasing the quality setting of an existing JPEG image is similarly bad. So if you are planning to switch to PNG (and I'd say the benefits were debatable) then you must save your newly drawn pictures directly into PNG. Personally, I don't think your cartoons suffer from being in JPG - and the reduction in space will be appreciated by readers with only a dialup connection. The JPG quality setting lets you experiment with saving the same image in a bunch of different quality settings and see what your artistic sentements will tolerate! I would recommend that you keep 'archived' versions of your original art in PNG though - I'd also draw them at much higher resolution and down-size them when you convert them to JPG for "publication". Cartoon-art scholars of the future might appreciate being able to see your historic portfolio in it's original pristine condition! SteveBaker 16:50, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

This is a big help, Steve. I've been saving the JPGs at the highest possible quality setting, to cut down on file size without introducing the visual nasties that you sometimes see in compressed files. For the purposes of an online display at the current size (600 pixels wide), it seems to be working fine. Just in case better-quality versions are ever needed for print publications, I've also saved larger TIF files at 300 dpi.

It sounds like you are on top of the problem then. SteveBaker 03:06, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Unless someone makes a persuasive case to switch to PNG, it sounds like I should stick with the current JPG approach for "Signpost" and online syndication. (Sound reasonable, Ben?) --Greg Williams 22:27, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WikiWorld

Hi Greg, just want to say I love your cartoons :-) However, can I make a suggestion that you include a link to the permanent revision of the article you are quoting? It would be helpful, especially as this is what we suggest to those who cite our work. - Ta bu shi da yu 03:15, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. I'm not sure I understand your request, though. The Signpost page for each comic includes a credit line that links to the article(s) quoted. This should bring up the most recent revision, in case the content of the article has changed since the comic was produced. (Or are you suggesting a link to the earlier version of the article?) --Greg Williams 18:32, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Dumpster Diving

Dumpster diving is a weird article. You should do it. Lazy Laces 13:08, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Squirrel fishing also might have some potential. :-) Steve Dufour 00:47, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../g/r/e/User_talk%7EGreg_Williams_11db.html"