User talk:Black and White

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

User Page · Talk · About Me · Contact Me · My Blog
Black and White (TALKCONTRIBS)
Hello, welcome to my talk page!

If you want to leave a message, please do it at the bottom as a new section, for better formatting. You can do that by simply pressing the plus sign (+) or "new section" on the top of this page. And don't forget to sign your messages with four tildes, like this: ~~~~

Attention: We, Wikipedians, dislike fragmented discussions. If you leave a comment for me here, I will most likely respond to it on this same page–my talk page–as an effort to keep the entire conversation in one place. By the same token, if I leave a comment on your talk page, please respond to it there. Remember, we can use our watchlist to keep track of when responses are made. At the same time, feel free to send an alert to me on this page about a comment you have left elsewhere.

Thank you!

Contents


[edit] Signature

Main article: Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages

Hey, Numerator. Greetings from Passaic, NJ. Do remove the picture from your signature per WP:SIG. It puts an unnecessary strain on our servers, delays page loading, and is generally annoying. Thanks. - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 20:57, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I'll take one of the two images off. Black and WhiteBlack and WhiteUSERTALKCONTRIBSBlack and White 21:38, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
I've changed it to this: —Black and White (TALKCONTRIBS) 00:07, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image Perspective

Main article: :Image:Rsv2k2ann 2.jpg

Hi Alvin,

I've seen on Wikipedia how you've edited images (usually pictures of Bibles) to adjust the perspective, for example the image of the Revised Standard Version.

I've uploaded four or five Bible book pictures, and they look like they need their perspective adjusted too. Which program do you use to do it?

Thanks,
Michael

To answer your question, I use Jasc Paint Shop Pro 8 to adjust the perspective. About, the images you uploaded, would you please list them here. Thank you. —Black and WhiteUSERTALKCONTRIBSBlack and White 01:00, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
Sorry, I'm not too familiar with all of the Wikipedia markup, but the images are:
Michael
Thanks. I will adjust their perspectives as soon as possible. Here is what I think about all four of the images:
—Black and WhiteUSERTALKCONTRIBSBlack and White 19:40, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
Okay, here are the new images:
Hope you like them. If you want me to edit more photos you take, just leave a comment here on my talk page. —Black and WhiteUSERTALKCONTRIBSBlack and White 22:22, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
Wow, thanks, they look more professional now. I especially like Image:The Message- The Bible in Contemporary Language (2002).jpg. By the way, is there a reason why you converted Image:Strongs.JPG into a PNG file with transparency? I assume there is a technical benefit (that I'm not aware of), but I noticed that it's now increased the file size by a factor of eight.
Secondly, is there a reason why some Bible pages (not just on the pages we've worked on but others) have very large image thumbnails but others are smaller? Do you know if anyone has ever talked about making a standard template for Bible pages?
Thanks,
Michael2 09:43, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
You're welcome. About Image:Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible (1998).png, I think it turned out to be a bad idea. I will rework it and file Image:Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible (1998).png for deletion.
I'm pretty sure there is a template for articles on Bible. See Template:Bible translation infobox. This template has parameter. It's not that complicated. See the template's talk page for information about how it works.
You may also want to join WikiProject Bible (WP:BIBLE) to discuss your thoughts on Biblical articles. I might join. You can express your ideas and draw this issue under light in a larger WikiProject, WikiProject Christianity.
Take this into consideration. —Black and WhiteUSERTALKCONTRIBSBlack and White 02:11, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] TeX vs HTML

Hi. Just a note. Per the math style manual, HTML formulas are acceptable, and even may be preferrable if LaTEX formulas end up as PNG images inline. So while it is good that you TEXified slope, it may not be a good idea to spend a lot of time of converting existing math articles to LaTeX, not until MathML is adopted anyway. Just thought I would let you know. :) You can reply here if you have comments. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 22:07, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for the comment. I replaced the formula with TEX because it would have then looked uniform. I thought that some TEX here and some HTML there would look disorganized; so, I made them all into TEX as organized and best as possible. —Black and WhiteUSERTALKCONTRIBSBlack and White 22:21, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
So you are fine with a black/white duality, but not with a TEX/HTML duality. :) Thank you for your explanation. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 23:59, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
In essence, yes. Thanks for checking. —Black and White (TALKCONTRIBS) 02:56, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] United States or United States of America

Main article: United States

Please look at MSN Encarta and Britannica before using the word "encyclopedic" so carelessly. Both of them call their article "United States," because they follow the same policy as Wikipedia—they use the most common name of something for the article name. Also, please read the official text of the U.S. Constitution [1]; it uses United States about 50 times to refer to the United States of America. --Coolcaesar 03:42, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Actually, looking back to the policy, I was going to consider to change my vote. However, next time, please leave this comment on the page the vote takes place, so that it may benefit other voters. —Black and White (TALKCONTRIBS) 01:39, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image Tagging for Image:JPEG artifacts in Image-Dubrovnik edit.jpg.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:JPEG_artifacts_in_Image-Dubrovnik_edit.jpg.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:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 03:17, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

This is the reason that I dislike bots. Actually, the source can be found in its description page as deriving from another image from Wikipedia, which has a public domain license. It was used to point out the JPEG artifacts in a proposed featured picture candidate. —Black and White (TALKCONTRIBS) 14:27, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Problems with Image:Times New Roman versus Georgia.svg

Thanks for fixing up the SVG trouble I had, which I posted on the Village Pump. But, now I have another one: Image:Times New Roman versus Georgia.svg. The basic idea is to have a Times New Roman alphabet over a Georgia alphabet. (See Image:TNR-Georgia.png.) This time, the Georgia alphabet won't appear and the Times New Roman is covered in black as last time. Maybe, I'm saving the file wrong. Do you save it in "Inkscape SVG" or "Plain SVG"? Thank you. —Black and White (TALKCONTRIBS) 21:01, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

I have had a long play with this and come up with something that works. You might want to adjust the final size of the Georgia font to get the two fonts to line up exactly.
I am not entirely happy with my solution, because I do not know why the new version is working and the old wasn't. The original did have a rectangle object in the XML which seemed to cover all the text. I removed this in the XML editor but it still didn't work. I also noted that the Georgia text was actually two parts (the letter "a" and the rest of the text); changing this made no difference. In the end I removed all your original text and put new text in. This seemed to fix it. The only thing I can see is that the Inkscape said the original text was "linked flowed text" whilst the new text is just "text". I do not know what the difference is.
There are a couple of other things I discovered:
  • Whilst inkscape displayed the original correctly neither Wikipeida (which seems to convert it to PNG), Internet Explorer (opening the file directly from my local disk) or GIMP (which converts it to a bitmap) seemed to be able to display it correctly. Suggesting Inkscape might be the culprit (or at least doing something fancy not supported elsewhere).
  • The new version looks about right in Wikipedia (with both fonts being the same length). However, in Inkscape the line of Georgia text is distinctly longer. This time the problem looks to be Wikipedia as opening the file directly in IE or GLIPS Graffiti Editor both produce exactly what Inkscape shows.
As Wikipedia seems to be rendering the images to PNG I will try and see if the render engine is available to download. This will at least avoid the need to keep uploading the files to Wikipedia to see if they work.
Finally it doesn't seem to matter whether you use Inkscape SVG or Plain SVG --MarkS (talk) 19:55, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
Have had a quick look round and text in SVG does seem to be a problem. Batik seems to offer a fairly full SVG implementation and refuses to open the original SVG images because of the flow element. I can't find what Wikipedia is using to convert the images but Batik is mentioned as a possible method to convert from SVG to PNG (which is what Wikipdia seems to do). Looking a W3C there is version 1.1 of SVG which doesn't mention Flowing text. Version 1.2 (which is still draft) does have flowing text. My best guess is that Inkscape has implemented the draft version 1.2 but most other packages haven't. The trick seems to be to draw text in Inkscape either by just clicking where you want the tick (rather than streching out a text box) or drawing the text and selecting Text-Unflow from the menus. Then test it in Batik. --MarkS (talk) 20:34, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
Thank you very much. I should start to check the XML before I upload it. —Black and White (TALKCONTRIBS) 20:10, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs
Miscellaneous Bible translations
The Abbey Road Sessions
Christian Connection
United-SF
John Alexander Reina Newlands
Russ Taff
Allene
John Hicks Eynon
View Askew Productions
Federal Triangle (Washington Metro)
Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport (Washington Metro)
S. Dillon Ripley Center
Enthalpy change of solution
List of Korean ceramic artists and sculptors
Lincoln Boyhood National Memorial
Renwick Gallery
James Renwick, Jr.
L'Enfant Plaza (Washington Metro)
Archives-Navy Mem'l-Penn Quarter (Washington Metro)
Cleanup
They Hunger
List of United States history articles
Individualized Education Program
Merge
Born-Haber cycle
Christian socialism
Velocity of detonation
Add Sources
Standard molar entropy
Bedbug
Chemical makeup of the human body
Wikify
WQDR-FM
Pierre Coupey
Name at birth
Expand
Endergonic reaction
Hassium
History of United States continental expansion

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 04:58, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject CCM

I have a suggestion for the WikiProject, and I am coming to you because I do not understand the format of the suggestion mechanism. Please paste the following paragraphs in the appropriate location:

I would like to propose creating a list of related articles like we have at WikiProject Wisconsin and WikiProject NASCAR. I prefer the NASCAR way because it is easier to navigate to the correct talk pages.

I have experience in helping setup Wikipedia:WikiProject IROC, and I would be happy to help out this new WikiProject in the same capacity. I have am authorized to use an AWB, which has proven effective on mundane tasks, especially double redirects. -Royalbroil 20:04, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Inspirational Music Wiki

Hey Black and White! I saw that you're a member of WikiProject CCM, so I thought that you might be interesting in joining
the Inspirational Music Wiki. It's really small, so we need all the editors we can get. -- P.B. Pilhet / Talk 19:54, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Hello, P.B. Pilhet! I will gladly join IMW. I know a bit about CCM. Please reply and tell me what I can do. —Black and White (TALKCONTRIBS) 01:30, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] From Dan!

Whoa, Alvin, is that you, man? It's Dan from RWB (If you haven't forgotten heat3000). How ya' been? -Heat3000

Hey, Dan. Wattup! I kinda moved in a hurry so... How's high school? Give me your AIM sn. Also, say hi to Philip Gaylan for me.
Alvin  ;-)
—Black and White (TALKCONTRIBS) 01:23, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject CCM

I've done a lot of work on updating the Wikipedia:WikiProject Contemporary Christian music page, making it more user friendly as well as adding whole sections to the page so that we can better collaborate on improving articles under the scope of the project. Please swing on by and take a look! -- Pepsi2786 09:00, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WP:CCM Collaboration

Hi, quick message from WikiProject: Contemporary Christian music!

We are currently in the nomination and voting stage for our first project-wide collaboration. Please stop by and nominate which article you believe we should focus on for the period of February 12-25, 2007. We look forward to your involvement! -- Pepsi2786 00:44, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Welcome to Wikipedia!

Hello Black and White! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. If you decide that you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Below are some pages to facilitate your involvement. Happy Editing! —Meteoroid » 13:54, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
Getting Started
Writing and editing
Getting more Wikipedia rules
Getting Help
Getting along
Getting technical
Okay, I've been Wikipedia for about an year already, but it's appreciated. Thanks! —Black and White (TALKCONTRIBS) 01:47, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
Thanks! —Meteoroid » 22:39, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] License tagging for Image:Matthew West.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Matthew West.jpg. 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:

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. 22:11, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I already placed a tag on it! —Black and White (TALKCONTRIBS) 21:24, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] IPC headings

Hello,

I've noticed that you have reverted most of my heading edits for the India Pentecostal Church of God article. Under the level 1 heading, "Expansion internationally", there is a level 2 heading called North America. What doesn't make sense is why isn't the level 2 heading "IPC North American Family Conference" under "North America"? Also, the level 3 heading "United States" should be under "North America" and not "IPC North American Family Conference". Lastly, because the Eastern and Midwest Region is in the United States, it would only make sense that the level 2 headings "Eastern Region" and "Midwest Region" should be under "United States".

I have temporarily reverted your edit. If you disagree, please reply below or more conveniently at the end of my talk page. —Black and White (TALKCONTRIBS) 21:21, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Hi Black and White,
You are right. I do agree with your logic.
What I tried to do was only to correct a few mistakes that were made (for example: ===Eastern Region==; several heading where like that), not knowing whether you meant those headings as level 1, 2 or 3. If you compare the versions, you will know exactly what I mean.
Now it flows better. It does make sense. Appreciate what you do.
By the way:
THE FOLLOWING IN PARAGRAPH 2 OF IPC ARTICLE ARE NOT VERIFIABLE OR FACT BASED, JUST SOMEONE'S OPINION...NEED TO BE REMOVED.
(However, the percentage of Christians in its mother state, Kerala has declined from 25% to 18% of total population making it the third largest religion in Kerala. The Pentecostal movement largely converted most of its members from Catholicism, Mar Thoma, Jacobitism and Eastern Orthodox. Due to the large rate of conversion in Kerala and throughout India, many opposing parties blame the organization for disrupting the local cultures of villages and tampering with ages-old customs, such as marriage traditions.) 74.103.8.33 13:14, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
Thank you, 74.103.8.33. I did see my errors in the headings (added an extra equal sign a few times). About the paragraph, I will try to look into it. Also, this article needs citations, although it's kind of hard to get websites; however, I know there are books on it. —Black and White (TALKCONTRIBS) 19:20, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Aaron Shust image

I unfortunately had to remove the image that you added to his article. The flickr contributor has the photograph tagged as Non-commercial, which is not allowed in Wikipedia. The flickr contributor also has the photograph tagged No derivatives, which is also not allowed in Wikipedia. I don't make the rules. I tagged the image for speedy deletion. Creative Commons images can be marked only as ShareAlike and/or Attribution. You can find out the allowed tags here: Wikipedia:Image_copyright_tags/Free_licenses. Royalbroil 04:44, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Commercial use of Image:Aaron Shust.jpg

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Image:Aaron Shust.jpg, by Royalbroil (talk · contribs), another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Image:Aaron Shust.jpg is an image licensed as "for non-commercial use only" or "used with permission for use on Wikipedia only" which was either uploaded on or after 2005-05-19 or is not used in any articles (CSD I3).

If you created this media file and want to use it on Wikipedia, you may re-upload it (or amend the image description if it has not yet been deleted) and use the license {{GFDL-self}} to license it under the GFDL, or {{cc-by-sa-2.5}} to license it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license, or use {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain.

If you did not create this media file but want to use it on Wikipedia, there are two ways to proceed. First, you may choose one of the fair use tags from this list if you believe one of those fair use rationales applies to this file. Second, you may want to contact the copyright holder and request that they make the media available under a free license.

If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. This bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate Image:Aaron Shust.jpg itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. If you have any questions about what to do next or why your image was nominated for speedy deletion please ask at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thanks. --Android Mouse Bot 2 04:50, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Welcome to VandalProof!

Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, Black and White! You have now been added to the list of authorized users, so if you haven't already, simply download and install VandalProof from our main page. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or any other moderator, or you can post a message on the discussion page. Daniel→♦ 05:34, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. Black and White 00:37, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Possibly unfree Image:Rsv2k2ann 2.jpg

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Rsv2k2ann 2.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. —Angr 16:52, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

The original image was listed as public-domain, so I simply edited and released it to public domain. Black and White (talk) 19:25, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
The reason that your image is listed is because the cover of the book is copyrighted like every other part of the book, so it is a type of copyfraud (not to be read as a deliberate attempt at copyfraud on anyone's part). It is not listed because of your licensing. In other words, the image never should have been uploaded because you can't upload images of the cover of a copyrighted book. Royalbroil 04:20, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
Look at the licensing on the other image in the article (Image:Title Page to RSV.jpg. It has a fair use license. You should change the licensing on your image to that license. Both images need to have a fair use rationale added to them or they should be listed for deletion. Please add the rationale for both so they don't have to be deleted. Royalbroil 04:25, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
A user just asked me to edit those photos, and when it came to upload the edited photos, I simply copied the former image's license. Black and White 01:07, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Contemporary Christian Music

I noticed your edits on articles in the WikiProject. I started a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Contemporary Christian music#WAY-FM Network to discuss whether the network meets criteria #11 of Wikipedia:Notability (music). Feel free to bring up other notable networks. Royalbroil 04:04, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm the guy that actually started it, but I haven't done much on Wikipedia for months. I am glad that the project is getting bigger and I think that is largely in part of your participation in the project. For that, I want to thank you. Concerning the issue, I do have one important network in the New York/New Jersey area: Star 99.1 (www.star991fm). You can get their station log to www.yes.com/#WAWZ . Black and White (talk) 23:08, 16 December 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Invitation

I'd like to invite you to join the Christian Music WikiProject. We are currently looking for new members. With your help we can make it one of the best WikiProjects. Remember cooperative works can do amazing things. Regards Royalbroil 01:12, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

After discussion, all of the Christian music WikiProjects have been rolled into a single WikiProject with taskforces. WikiProject CCM has become a task force. I didn't place the blue infobox, but I subst'ed it because of an error. Royalbroil 01:12, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

It's nice to see the various Christian music projects merging. I'm not as dedicated as I previously was with working on Wikipedia, but I'll gladly help whenever I'm on. Black and White (talk) 21:08, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Possibly unfree Image:The Message- The Bible in Contemporary Language (2002).jpg

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:The Message- The Bible in Contemporary Language (2002).jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Samuell Lift me up or put me down 20:51, 23 March 2008 (UTC) --Samuell Lift me up or put me down 20:51, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

As I mentioned in a previous topic, a user just asked me to edit those photos, and when it came to upload the edited photos, I simply copied the former image's license. If it must be deleted, then let it be. Black and White 01:07, 4 December 2007 (UTC)