User talk:Tuvalkin

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search

Optimizing SVG file[edit]

Hi,

I came across your file File:23Flag(Quarterly)YW.svg and I noticed it could be opitmize.

Instead of :

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE svg PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD SVG 1.1//EN"
        "http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/1.1/DTD/svg11.dtd">
<svg xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg"
        width="324" height="216">
<!--
http://www.crwflags.com/fotw/flags/vex-f-ic.html
http://www.crwflags.com/fotw/flags/fotwcols.html
-->
<g stroke="none" fill="#FF0">
        <path d="M 0,0 V 216 H 324 V -216 z" />
        <path fill="#FFF"
                d="M 324,0 V 108 H 0 V 216 H 162 V 0 z" />
        </g>
</svg>

you could more simply write :

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE svg PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD SVG 1.1//EN"
        "http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/1.1/DTD/svg11.dtd">
<svg xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" width="15" height="10">
<!--
http://www.crwflags.com/fotw/flags/vex-f-ic.html
http://www.crwflags.com/fotw/flags/fotwcols.html
-->
<g stroke="none">
        <path fill="#FF0" d="M0,0 V10 H15 V0"/>
        <path fill="#FFF" d="M15,0 V5 H0 V10 H7.5 V0"/>
</g>
</svg>

There is no need to use 324*216 when 15*10 is enough. Since there is no strokes, the « z » is not needed. The V -216 is probably a mistake between absolute and relative paths (it should be v-216 or more simply V0). The spaces after the command letters are not needed too. Put the fill is the group is ok but it seems more clear to me to put it in the path since it's not shared by multiple paths.

I don't what to do the the two links in the comment. Is is really useful?

What do you think?

Cdlt, VIGNERON (talk) 09:21, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello Vigneron, and thanks for taking time to analize this file (see them all in Category:Flags of municipalities of Portugal/generic patterns). Some replies:
  • 324×216 was chosen because these were originally developed for FotW. No need to change as these are vectorial. While 15×10 is surely “enough” (as even 3×2 would be), it would look too small on the file page.
  • The SVG code has some inconsistencies and redundancy because it was done by hand back when I knew almost nothing about SVG and were generated by from a single MSExcel formula fed with arguments for all combinations.
  • The XML comments emmbedded in the files are also due to their original use; those links should also be on the file pages.
-- Tuválkin 17:06, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

Code issues in User:Tuvalkin/monobook.css[edit]

Hi Tuvalkin, I am a bored bot (this is kind of a computer program) that is watching the recent changes and tapping buttons like I did now.

Curious about the reason? Possibly not but I will tell you anyway:

  1. You edited User:Tuvalkin/monobook.css. Glad to see you coding in css! Have you ever considered becoming a MediaWiki hacker?
  2. Though, that change appears to introduce 2 new prettyCss issues -- the page's status is now having warnings. Note that invalid or ambiguous code often has unwanted side effects like breaking other tools for you. If you cannot find out how to fix it, I suggest blanking the page for now.
  3. To help you understanding where the issues are, I have aggregated a report here and now. If you have questions, don't hesitate to ask users experienced in css writing for help. But do not ask the bot's operators (chronically overwrought) unless you suspect an error of mine. If you prefer not getting spammed by me, you can opt-out reports by adding {{ValidationOptOut|type=all}} to your user page. Good luck at Wikimedia Commons and happy hacking!
  1. WARNING: unknown-property:speak: line 3 char number 4 - Evidence: speak
  2. WARNING: suggest-relative-unit:px: line 14 char number 12 - Evidence: 1px
  3. WARNING: suggest-relative-unit:px: line 18 char number 12 - Evidence: 1px

Your CommonsMaintenanceBot (talk) at 21:15, 30 July 2015 (UTC).

File:Uniformes de Gala PDMU.jpg[edit]

May I ask why you added Category:Gay marriage (presumably intending Category:Same-sex marriage) to File:Uniformes de Gala PDMU.jpg? I would simply fix the category name, but the category seems absolutely wrong. Did you have some basis for it that I'm missing? - Jmabel ! talk 00:57, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

You may ask, and I ask myself the same. I indeed did it but on hindsight I have no idea why. Looks like the kind of problematic joke I’d never indulge on. This is not good. I’ll go dig through my other edits around that timestamp to make sure whatever caused this (evil twin, pranked while afk, momentary lapse) didn’t make other similar damage. -- Tuválkin 02:14, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
Thanks. I'll just delete that category on that page then. And, yes, you might want to look into your other edits around that time, because it did have the look of a prank. - Jmabel ! talk 16:23, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion of Deprecated compass arrow BSicons[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Useddenim (talk) 01:16, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Ferrostal railbus category[edit]

Regarding this edit and your comment in the edit summary: No, I did not "assume everybody else is dumb". I assumed that either (1) it was an unintended, accidental category addition or (2) the person who added the category had failed to indicate what relationship existed between the two subjects. You have shown it is the latter. I did not state that it was an error; I wrote that it "appears" to have been an error, because I did not know – but I wanted you to clarify the situation by adding information, which have now done. So, my edit improved the situation for Wikimedia users. However, having Ferrostal trucks does not make a tram a "Ferrostal railbus", so I believe the category is still not relevant here. Maybe a new Ferrostal category is needed, but I do not have enough interest in this to work on that. – Steve Morgan (talk) 03:35, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

Steve Morgan, certainly a Ferrostal category is needed, to reflect their apport to the “remodelado” project — just like Vossloh Kiepe, Škoda, and Knorr (just added the latter). Not sure about how that needs to expressed in the text of the category page, though. What’s there now could be attacked for lacking sources, etc. Common’s categorization, when seen from a Wikipedia perspective, amounts to “original research” and at every step it must be ultimately confronted with what’s in the several wikipedias’ articles about their subject, not what’s in it's page text. -- Tuválkin 11:54, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them.
Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!


Afrikaans | العربية | বাংলা | Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Català | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Eesti | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Íslenska | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk nynorsk | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Português do Brasil | Română | Русский | Slovenčina | Slovenščina | Српски / srpski | Svenska | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Affected:


Yours sincerely, JCP (a.k.a. John Carlo Pagcaliwagan) 22:39, 24 August 2015 (UTC)