User talk:Grendelkhan

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archives
1 (up to July 17 2006)

[edit] About time for you to be nominated for adminship!

Hi, thanks for accepting the nom - just wanted to point out that you have another question on your RFA page. Cheers! bd2412 T 13:48, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] You're a sysop!

Hey there. I'm pleased to let you know that, consensus being reached, you are now an administrator! You've volunteered to do housekeeping duties that normal users sadly cannot participate in. Sysops can't do a lot of stuff: They can't delete pages just like that (except patent nonsense like "aojt9085yu8;3ou"), and they can't protect pages in an edit war they are involved in. But they can delete random junk, ban anonymous vandals, delete pages listed on Votes for deletion (provided there's a consensus) for more than one week, protect pages when asked to, and keep the few protected pages that exist on Wikipedia up to date.

Almost anything you can do can be undone, but please take a look at The Administrators' how-to guide and the Administrators' reading list before you get started (although you should have read that during your candidacy ;). Take a look before experimenting with your powers. Also, please add Administrators' noticeboard to your watchlist, as there are always discussions/requests for admins there. If you have any questions drop me a message at My talk page. Have fun! =Nichalp «Talk»=

Please also add your name to WP:LA =Nichalp «Talk»= 14:35, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Welcome to the club, member #11 :). From member #9, NoSeptember 15:25, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

• Congratulations on your determination of mop-worthiness... I had (and have) no doubts. Cheers! bd2412 T 15:38, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Thank you, thank you all. I've added myself to the list, and look forward to helping out. grendel|khan 16:17, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Feedback on Soft focus

I saw your request for comment for soft focus, so I added a bit of feedback on the feedback page. Hope it helps! NigelQuinine ^{Blather• Toil} 03:56, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Kiritimati FP delist nomination

Hi, I have nominated Image:Kiritimati-EO.jpg to be delisted from Wikipedia:Featured pictures. The discussion is at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Image:Kiritimati-EO.jpg delist. --KFP (talk | contribs) 22:32, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image tagging for Image:Elfen_Lied_ep4_Nyuu.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Elfen_Lied_ep4_Nyuu.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

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. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 07:24, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

The source was stated ("Elfen Lied episode 4") both in the title and image description. The U.S. distributor is listed at Elfen Lied, but it's now also listed in the image description. grendel|khan 21:17, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Released MP3s.

There really isn't any way to prevent loss, which is sad.

If you have only the mp3s to work with, then the best option is to use a good encoder, at high bitrates. But even then, the quality hit is unavoidable. But the regret is relative; the vast majority of users should not be able to tell the difference.

The current Hydrogenaudio recommended encoder is aoTuVr1 (Aoyumi's Tuned Vorbis release 1), a quality-tuned fork of xiph.org's version of Vorbis, widely agreed to significantly increase quality at low-to-medium bitrates, and achieve transparency for most at quality 5. If your KDE screenshot means anything, http://www.geocities.jp/aoyoume/aotuv/source_code/libvorbis-aotuv_r1.tar.bz2 is what you want.

Compile that; decode the mp3s (xmms can decode to file last I remembered), and encode using -q 5 or higher, and see if the filesize is ok. Remember that you can use fractional quality values safely (-q 5.99, -q 6.25) to finely manipulate the size. And above -q 7 is definitely overkill, even for transcoding.

-- Znode ^(talk) 20:19, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:T. S. Monk.ColumbiaUniversity.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:T. S. Monk.ColumbiaUniversity.jpg. The image description page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. 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 lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 20:16, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Rationale added to the image description page. grendel|khan 20:38, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Library of Congress classifications

Should pages now at titles like Library of Congress Classification:Class P, subclass PB -- Modern languages and Celtic languages and Library of Congress Classification:Class P, subclass PA -- Greek language and literature, which you created long ago, be combined into a single page? —Centrx→talk • 19:25, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Some of them (like PT are pretty long; the sum total would be very long. However, I didn't write the original articles; I just followed an existing format that someone had written before me. (And this is how standards are born...) Would you still want to concatenate them, even though they're very long? I'd argue for letting inertia work its will here. grendel|khan 23:25, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

The problem is they're not encyclopedia articles and they're horribly named. I would tend to think they should be deleted if not merged. —Centrx→talk • 03:20, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

I think the idea was to be able to browse Wikipedia along the LCC categorization lines. See List of Dewey Decimal Classes for a similar project. I do agree that they're badly named; what do you think about "Library of Congress Classification class P, subclass PT"? Or just "Library of Congress Classification subclass PT"? I think that's unique and well-defined. (We can't do "Library of Congress Classification P", because there's both the outer class P and the subclass P, for instance.) grendel|khan 16:41, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Ah, it was Wikipedia:Contents. Scroll down to see the LCC listed as a way of browsing Wikipedia. grendel|khan 16:50, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Ah, this is horrible. There's also List of people by name. We need an Index namespace or something. —Centrx→talk • 22:23, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Faber @ Maryland

he coached both, as was the custom then since most football players played lacrosse in spring to stay in shape. jim brown of syracuse is a famous example. WillC 23:05, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Okay, cool, so [1] is a source of information. Excellent. grendel|khan 03:57, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] thanks!

Thanks for making the photo of the flutist available under the GFDL! I've used it in a book at http://www.lightandmatter.com/html_books/3vw/ch04/ch04.html#Section4.4 . The book is GFDL licensed, and you're credited in the photo credits section.--75.83.140.254 00:50, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Knight underpromotion example.png listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Knight underpromotion example.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. — MECU≈talk 15:57, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Rook underpromotion avoiding stalemate.png listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Rook underpromotion avoiding stalemate.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. — MECU≈talk 16:01, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image:BDSM collar back.jpg

Howdy! As a courtesy, I thought I'd notify you that the Featured Picture status of Image:BDSM collar back.jpg, which you created, is currently being reconsidered. Feel free to weigh in at the discussion here, or correct any faults listed therein. GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 21:49, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Maths rating

Thanks for adding {{maths rating}} to so many pages yesterday. However, it would have been even more useful if you had actually evaluated the articles. Anyone can rate articles - see details on the {{maths rating}} page. Also, it is helpful to add the article to the relevant sub-page at Wikipedia:WikiProject Mathematics/Wikipedia 1.0. Tompw (talk) 12:42, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Will do; I'll get right on that. Thanks! grendel|khan 14:29, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Snow Curve

Yeh sorry about taking so long i dont use that account anymore its correct thanks for making it an svg i have alot more stuff on snow making if u want it —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 124.189.98.101 (talk)

Sure! I'd especially be interested in where you got the source data for that graph. grendel|khan 14:30, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] ISFDB live

Hi, just wanted to let you know that the ISFDB is finally live on user editing. I didn't know if you'd visited it in the last two or three weeks, so just a heads up in case you have time to get involved over there. Ciao -- Mike Christie (talk) 01:11, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Ah, thanks for the heads-up. This should be interesting. grendel|khan 03:27, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] PGP GUI images

Thanks for the {{Windows-software-screenshot}} tags for Image:PGPgui1.png et al. I did not know the appropriate copyright tag to use. — Loadmaster 21:48, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

No problem. I've done sillier things. grendel|khan 22:19, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ayaan Hirsi Ali

Friendly discussion point - I checked out your user page, and can't help but feel friendly toward a fellow Heinlein fan (I have all of his stuff, and he definitely shaped me growing up, especially Starship Troopers and The Moon is a Harsh Mistress). (Also, Vinge is awesome - and I hope you've checked out John Ringo's stuff.) I was wondering - would you classify Heinlein-style libertarianism as "right-wing"? I sometimes wonder about the POV regarding this on Wikipedia - it seems that often libertarians get unjustly classified as 'conservatives' just because of their perceived alliance with the right wing on the issues of small government/lower taxes. (Just as someone who is anti-Islam also gets lumped in with 'conservatives', regardless of their other views, because the current administration is also perceived as anti-Islam.) RJASE1 02:36, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

I think self-described libertarians get lumped in with conservatives because of this narrative: Glenn Reynolds, Eugene Volokh and so forth have hitched their wagons to Bush, for good or ill, despite running in the opposite direction of their small-government ideal, and despite expansions of state power that would have made Clinton blush. The defining issue of our time is supporting or not supporting the administration; if you support them, you're conservative. Despite the administration having pulled the same snow job on small-government libertarians that they pulled on David Kuo, they're still sniffing his cod. This is the reason given; I'm not saying whether or not I agree with it. Not to even open the whole anti-Islam can of worms... grendel|khan 02:56, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

You're probably right (and you can include Neal Boortz with Volokh and Instapundit) - I think U.S. libertarians who are politically active have mostly found an ideological home with these guys, as the Libertarian Party is pretty much a joke. Europeans seem to have had a little more luck (parties like the VVD come to mind).

Maybe now that the Democratic Party controls Congress, some of the libertarians will drift here. Probably depends whether the Democrats make any effort to woo them - the Republicans at least talk the talk, even if they rarely walk the walk unless their backs are to the wall.

Have a good one - oh, and I'll have to check out Kings of the High Frontier, looks intriguing. RJASE1 14:24, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Kings_of_the_High_Frontier.bookcover.jpg

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Kings_of_the_High_Frontier.bookcover.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. When you use a generic fair use tag such as {{fair use}} or {{fair use in|article name}}, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. 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 lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ↔NMajdan•talk•EditorReview 20:07, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Fixed. Odd that we have to essentially duplicate what {{bookcover}} already says. grendel|khan 20:22, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

My apologies for duplicating the "Missing Fair Use Rationale" tag on your image. It must have been an oversight on my part. Unfortunately, the basic fair use tag (such as {{bookcover}}) is not enough in establishing fair use rationale. Thank you for fixing the issue.↔NMajdan•talk•EditorReview 20:38, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Updating a JTable with new information (Java)

Yes, that makes perfect sense. It only took a few changes in the code, but I did manage to get it working. Perhaps not in the most efficient way (using a setDataVector each time the redraw is called), but it does work. My theory for doing it that way is because eventually I'll need to delete individual entries, but I say as long as it works, that is fine by me. I'd like to thank you immensely for your assistance; I'd still be lost if I hadn't known about the DefaultTableModel class. I do hope you have a most wonderful day, and happy editing! Kyra_~(talk) 07:17, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm glad it worked out for you. I still remember my own frustrating introduction to Swing and the model-view separation, which seemed really elegant once it "popped" for me, and I was enlightened. grendel|khan 07:27, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Getting {{navbox generic}} to hide by default

Hi. I noticed at Template talk:MediaCompression#Redone with {{navbox generic}} that you wanted to know how to hide stuff by default. What you need to do is add |state=collapsed to your {{navbox generic}} call. Cheers. —davidh.oz.au 04:40, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] About "Image:1453 conquest.jpg""

This is the second time somebody asks about this picture. This picture contains a "concept" rather than a creation. Mehmed II is entering the last fortress of the Roman world, victorious, and carrying the green flag of Islam (while his Akıncıs -Turcoman soldiers- are carrying the red, actually crimson, flag of Turkish people). This concept is used by many artists (with slight differences such as the death body of Constantine XI) in different times and in different styles. Here you can see a different version of the art [2] and here is the version I uploaded [3]. Also, this is another version of the one I uploaded [4]. I'm searching for an artist name... Deliogul 18:52, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Wow, two new versions are founded in a minute! Please look at this link [5]. This is an internet market so maybe they would remove it in couple of days so it is better you look at the link immediately. See you, Deliogul 18:56, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

I don't speak Turkish, but that link appears to imply that it was published in the 1970s, which would mean it's not public domain, and with no other information available, it's not licensed in any way that would allow us to use it here. It looks like a classical painting, but without knowing who painted it (or at least when it was painted), we can't presume permission to post it here. Is that what the page says? grendel|khan 20:10, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

You got it wrong. I just tried to show you the different versions of the painting. It is like a Hollywood cliché. Many artists used the same setting and structure, therefore it is transformed into some type of a pattern. People don't take permission from the producers of the older films about, for example, car chase scenes because it is a pattern which is used by the every sector of the American film industry. Is it clear now? I'm still searching for an artist name but it is hard to find who thought this "Mehmed II at the gates of Constantinople" thing first. Deliogul 20:22, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Ah, I see now that the painting you linked to isn't the same as the painting that's currently uploaded. But the problem isn't that the uploaded image is a painting of Mehmed II at the gates of Constantinople; the problem is that it's a specific painting of Mehmed II at Constantinople. If you can find out who painted the currently-uploaded painting, or at least when it was painted, that's what we need. If there's a painting of the subject made before 1923, we can use that; if not, we can't--at least not without permission, which painters tend not to give. Where did you get the uploaded image from? Did you take a photo at a museum, or scan a book? Either source would tell you when the painting was made, and by who. grendel|khan 20:47, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

You are great! Thanks for searching. Deliogul 19:54, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image sort order

Hello,

Have a question for you, I have been working on the Commons classification of 19th century european painting, as you are well aware image naming is very much ultimately left to the uploader. Which is good, we want as many good images, and naming is not crutial.

Now, how can I make categories to show in a sensible way? Ideally I want the images to show sorted by year they were painted (assuming of curse tha approxmiate date is known). That helps to see the evolution of an artist. Also, assume yo go to commons ans you see the :commons:Category:1959 paintings or any for that mater, all the painting s get sorted by their image name wchich can cause differente images of the same painting to show up in completely different locations (even pages, if more than 200 images are int the category),

I found that the best scheme for all of this to work best is to upload images with name: <year they were painted> <Artist name as seen in creator template> - <Painting name> That really works great, but of course it is bejond reasonable effort to rename all existing images. My solution has been to use SORTORDER, and then the images sort very well.

A similar issue of getting the critical information from a paiting is with nav pop ups. so I have been ading a single line at the to, so that yo can see the critical infomration of the painting when you use navigational popups.

At the end this permits the category to look a lot more like the gallery. In particular it lets find missing images in the gallery at-a-glance.

You know of any better way to archive all this automatic sorting and consisntent pre-view in navigation pop ups? You mind if I keep using SORTORDER and using the single summary line at the top? maybe there is a better tool than nav popups that I am not aware of.

Thanks. --JuanPDP 02:39, 30 March 2007 (UTC)