User talk:Dr Zak

Good call on the Thayer image.

Amazing color. Sylvanus Thayer deserves a first class image. The article looks 100% better with this single change. BusterD 04:34, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Need help in discussing a list

Greetings; if you would visit the call for discussion at this page, I'd be grateful for your input. Thanks! Talk:List_of_German-language_philosophers Best, Universitytruth 13:15, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You have a real problem with reading

I won't be the least bit generous with you on this. The article is quite clearly spiked with pro-MSG material. I've made note of it in the discussion page Talk:Monosodium_glutamate#Revert_on_July_13.2C2006. I did not revert without researching, cause or thinking. I'm not going to get into a revert war with you Wikipedia:Reverting#Revert_wars_considered_harmful_.28the_three_revert_rule.29. I'll give you 24 hours to decide, if you want to research this article and give a real response. If not, I'll go straight to arbitration.

--meatclerk 06:29, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You screwed up the references, you see that you fix it. Dr Zak 11:44, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Parrot Award

Hah it looks great, thanks :) Dionyseus 00:29, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What a honour!! Thanks very much, I squwak with pride! Bwithh 02:10, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, Raising the Stakes on You

This is to advise you. I intend to make a complaint in the near future of your methods. My complaints are as such.

Not acting in good faith.
failure to read "discussion page".
failure to read "summary" information.

I'm more than willing to admit and fix any gray areas. I believe I have. I know I will in the future.

But Image:MPCivicCenter2006_500px.jpg is by no means scanned. This points to your presumptuous nature and unwillingness to act in good faith.

I'm not saying anything else. My suggestion is we stay clear of each other for the next 5 days to let things cool down.

--meatclerk 06:34, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest you get familiar with fair use. You are using a picture of a copyrighted map as a map; it's beyond what fair use would permit. And please don't use phat words on this page. Dr Zak 16:05, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

5 days. --meatclerk 05:23, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dr Zak to be fair to you and get the images reinstated without issue, I have updated the reference page for Image:MPCivicCenter2006_500px.jpg. You'll note the image is NOT scanned, but in fact a sign posted on the Civic Center Grounds. Note the original is oversized (2080x1368px) and large 574K. As such, there should be no copyright issue.

On the other image Image:RWC-NaturalFeatures-Pg.21_519px.jpg, I'll update the reference later.

--meatclerk 18:01, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Images

Thanks for replacing the images on my user page! Paul 10:11, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Economic totalitarianism

This is pointless. You cannot just "speedy close" my nomination here. The outcome of the deletion review can never lead to deletion since the article has been changed in the meanwhile. Therefore the 3rd nomination for deletion based on a criteria different than the one used in the two earlier nominations. Intangible 14:36, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Patience! Dr Zak 14:38, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This "patience" results in unneccessary "name calling" in the deletion review and on the talk page of the article. If one is to relist this article for nomination on the basis of WP:OR it will -fail- any deletion attempt. I will seek a fourth nomination. Intangible 14:54, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you must... I see three "overturn and delete", seven "relist" and two "keeps". Dr Zak 15:05, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

MSG Cleanup, Archive and Revert

I think I'm, thanking you for doing some of the above. However, I'm left confused. Please confirm your intent and actions. A note on the MSG discussion page would be best.

Thanks --meatclerk 05:05, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

To keep the talk page within reasonable size discussions are copied to an archive page. That makes the old material easily accessible (it's now all at Talk:Monosodium glutamate/archive1). If the material were deleted one would have to go through the page history to find a particular discussion, a tedious task, especially on dialup internet. Dr Zak 05:13, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. To keep things clear. It's clear now. Thanks. --meatclerk 08:52, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

PNG vs JPG

Can you walk me through the logic here. I noticed you switched the Martin Luther timeline to a PNG. So what is the advantage of a screen capture being saved as a PNG over JPG? Thanks David D. (Talk) 20:58, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

JPG employs a lossy compression algorithm built around wavelets - essentially the Fourier Transform is involved. When sharp transitions between dark and light occur one must employ many Fourier terms and still ends up with series termination errors. (What this means is: compression is inefficient, and there are noticeable compression artefacts. Just look at the JPEG image with, say Microsift Paint and zoom in, you'll see!) PNG, on the contrary is lossless and better suited to line art. Dr Zak 21:02, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, i see the difference. I'll redo the png version from scratch, but leave the one i just upload for now, since it is the correct version despite being a png saved from a jpg (obviously artafcts will still be present). David D. (Talk) 21:11, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What I did was to save a screen capture of Template:Timeline Martin Luther as PNG image. The compression artifacts are gone, but Windows XP obviously does anti-aliasing when rendering the picture... didn't notice that! Dr Zak 21:29, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That makes sense. I'll check my screen capture from a MAC. Although, i suspect the anti aliasing may be worse. Regardless i learned some good stuff. Another option is to clean up the screen capture in photoshop. or even just recreate it in illustrator and save as an SVG. I'll think about it. David D. (Talk) 21:37, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dorsey Brothers stamp

Image:Dorsey stamp.jpg What is wrong with having an image of a U.S. postage stamp? Is it not fair use to use postage stamp images? Talk to Dr. M 21:48, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, since 1978 US postage stamps are copyrighted by the USPS. We can use pictures of stamps only to illustrate the stamp itself, but not to discuss the subject of the stamp. An article where stamp images are used correctly would be the article on the Transportation coils, which talks at length about that series of stamps. On the other hand, one can't use Image:Transportation coil, Canoe, plate 2.jpg to give an illustration of a canoe. Perhaps a better example is at Brontosaurus, which mentions that the Post Office should have known better than issuing a stamp with a dinosaur that never existed. The stamp image is not used to illustrate what the Brontosaurus looks like, instead it appears in the context of discussing the "Dinosaur" series of stamps. Please read Fair use and Wikipedia:Fair use for the fuill story. Dr Zak 22:05, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]