User talk:Timneu22/Archive 2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

(Archive on June 12, 2007)

Contents

[edit] Bot request

I responded on the bot request page and went ahead and made a request for approval for the bot. I wasn't sure if I was supposed to write the bot first before adding the request though. --Android Mouse 18:35, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Turns out the bot must be written before approval. I'll let you know when I get it finished, which it probably will be sometime this weekend when I get some more time. --Android Mouse 03:08, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
It's now finished. The request for approval can be found here. --Android Mouse 04:54, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
I have a link to the source posted on the bot's userpage. Use at your own risk, I wouldn't exactly call it quality code at this point and most of it isn't commented. But it has worked fine in the limited tests I've done. Before running you will have to set the 'username' and 'password' definitions and also change the 'connect' macro to point to your work's wiki. If you have questions about the source feel free to ask. --Android Mouse 00:50, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Just letting you know the bot finally got approved. I've also updated the source to fix a multitude of issues, if you have previously downloaded it, I strongly advise updating. I ran it a bit tonight and knocked out about 100 articles without any problems and will start it up again sometime tomorrow, so I think it is relativly stable at this point. --Android Mouse 06:37, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Finished --Android Mouse 23:21, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Reverted

Looks like all the work has been reverted, and my bot is now blocked. See my talk page for more info. --Android Mouse 02:57, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Template:Infoboxrequested

Please don't remove the {{tfd}} notice from the template.

You might also want to read the talk page again and the deletion debate. Imho, if you insist on the template going onto articles you're more likely to see it get deleted. Being on articles will also cause difficulties for those of who write tools that tag talk pages and convert infoboxneeded calls to wikiproject template parameters. --kingboyk 16:50, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

You don't need to keep messaging me on my talk page. I have the template watchlisted and will reply on the talk page if need be.

The important issue, hence my rollback, is that you keep removing the deletion template. Persist in that and you will be blocked. --kingboyk 16:56, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Willett image in "Daylight saving time"

The recent edit to Daylight saving time that moved the William Willett image messed up the layout with my Firefox browser (Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.8.1.3) Gecko/2007031001 Iceweasel/2.0.0.3 (Debian-2.0.0.3-1)). Among other things it caused the Franklin image to obscure text. I reverted it for now, but I'd like to fix the display glitch you must have observed with the old version. What problem was fixed by moving the Willett image? Perhaps there's a better way to fix it that doesn't mess up Firefox. All other things being equal, I'd rather have Willett's image near the text that talks about Willett. Eubulides 23:31, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

While we're on the subject, what display glitch was fixed by adding the "clear" template at the end of Daylight saving time#Health? Eubulides 23:31, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

When images are placed in-text, there's always an alignment problem. Generally, it is best to put two images next to each other so one will be first and the next right below it, while all the article text flows smoothly. As for the "clear" template, I used this for a similar reason — without it, the section header appears with a large space before the first sentence of the section appears. This seems like a Firefox issue, not a wikipedia issue. ;-) Timneu22 00:35, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
I can't find the strategy of putting two images next to each other mentioned in Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Images or in Wikipedia:Picture tutorial. Unless I'm misunderstanding things, the latter seems to advise the opposite of what you're suggesting. First, Avoiding image "stackups" gives advice about how to avoid putting two images next to each other. Second, Forcing a break says that something like the "clear" template should be used only "where absolutely necessary" because it can "produce rather unattractive gaps", and goes on to warn "don't force page design just so that it looks pretty on your machine." With the "clear" template in there, I can see an unattractive gap before Complexity when I make my Firefox window wider than about 900 pixels. In contrast, with the older version without the "clear" template I don't see a gap, nor do I see the phenomenon that you describe where "the section header" (presumably "Complexity"?) "appears with a large space before the first sentence of the section appears". What browser are you using? Eubulides 04:52, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
Image stackups occur all the time. I had not read the "image stacking" section before, and I'm not sure it states to not use them... the article has suggestions on how to stack propertly, which is what you should consider for the article. I've never had a problem viewing these types of pages, which are everywhere. I just clicked "random page" to find a few:
  • Tim Curry - image below infobox (same effect)
  • Atlanta
  • Aakrosh - here's a page where the infobox and image weren't stacked, and you can see the poor result.
In any case, I think that you should consider the methods discussed in the avoiding image "stackups" section. As for my use of "clear", I still stand by that one. Without it, there is that large gap that I mentioned. With it, the gap is still there, but it is before the header, so at least the section flows properly. I'm using IE6 and IE7. Timneu22 10:13, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
By "stack properly" do you mean that you don't like an image stackup where images are of different widths? If so, Avoiding image "stackups" advises against having "two adjacent images of different sizes", which is what was done in the reverted version. If not, I still don't understand what the goal was in that part of the change. Eubulides 19:21, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
As for "clear", thanks for pointing out the problem with Internet Explorer. I don't have easy access to IE but when I do I'll take a look at the glitch you observed there. It doesn't happen with Firefox. Perhaps the problem can be fixed in a different way, by moving the image to another section. Eubulides 19:21, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

The width of the image doesn't matter. I guess you didn't look at those articles I told you about? I cannot believe you haven't experienced this issue. In short, if you did this:

[image 1]
[image 2]
some lines of text

You'll get this:

some lines of text     image 1
some lines of text     |     |
some lines of text     |     |
some lines of text     |     |
some lines of text     =======
some lines of text     image 2
(new paragraph)        |     |
some lines of text     |     |
some lines of text     =======

If you do this:

[image 1]
some lines of text
some lines of text
some lines of text
[image 2]
some lines of text
some lines of text

You'll get this:

some lines of text     image 1
some lines of text     |     |
some lines of text     |     |
some lines of text     |     |
some lines of text     =======
some lines of text
                       
(new paragraph)        image 2
some lines of text     |     |
some lines of text     |     |
some lines of text     =======

Therefore, you get a gap in the article because you put the images within the text, rather than both images at the top of the section. Timneu22 22:41, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

I looked at the pages you mentioned. They look fine with my Firefox version; I do not observe the effect you described. I just now got access to IE6 and used it to view Daylight saving time and did observe the glitches. However, I observe similar glitches when visiting other high-quality Wikipedia pages, for example, Jupiter (today's Featured Article). If the problem is that pervasive, it should be fixed within the Wikipedia server software; we can't expect every Wikipedia editor to hack their articles to work around these display glitches. The glitches are relatively minor (the content is still easily readable) and evidently most IE users just live with the glitches, so I'm inclined to omit the "clear" and leave the Willett image placement alone. No matter what we do, we'll get glitches with some combination of browser type and browser window width, so we might as well keep the layout simple and keep the images near the corresponding text. Eubulides 07:04, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] More about images

Are you telling me there's no difference between the following two examples? It is important as the wiki I set up at my work (which is an external documentation wiki) uses "clear" alot, as well as the image stacking technique. I want to make sure firefox users don't see anything stupid.

What I see:

  • Example 1 - "B" section header is followed by a large gap; the first paragraph in B doesn't start until the third image. The "lorem ipsum" sections in B don't flow from one to the next; the first pgh in section b starts next to image 3, and the second pgh starts next to image 4. There is a large gap between these paragraphs.
  • Example 2 - "B" section is preceeded by "clear", so that the first paragraph in section B is right next to the image 3. There is still a large gap between the paragrpahs in B because I didn't put both images next to each other at the top of the section.

Bottom line: On my browser, the Example 2, section A is the best because Example 2's section B starts after the images in section A. There's no overflow from one to the next.

Do you see something different? Thanks again Timneu22 09:58, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I see something different. In example 1, there is no unusual gap anywhere in the text. The images stack nicely to the right, and the text flows in the left column without any unusual gap. In Example 2, the images stack almost as nicely, except there's a small gap between the 2nd and 3rd image to make room for the "B" header and its "[edit]" directive. There is a large gap between the end of section A and the header of section B, because the header of section B lines up with the small "[edit]" gap I mentioned. Neither layout looks worse than the other, to my eye. Since you're a Microsoft Windows user, I presume that you can simply download Firefox for that platform and see for yourself what it does. Eubulides 17:08, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Example 1

[edit] A
First jupiter image.
First jupiter image.
Second jupiter image.
Second jupiter image.

first pgh Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.

second pgh Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.


[edit] B
Third jupiter image.
Third jupiter image.

first pgh Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.


Fourth jupiter image.
Fourth jupiter image.

second pgh Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.


[edit] Example 2

[edit] A
First jupiter image.
First jupiter image.
Second jupiter image.
Second jupiter image.

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.


[edit] B
Third jupiter image.
Third jupiter image.

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.


Fourth jupiter image.
Fourth jupiter image.

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.