This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Seems the " Template:Ceres Quads - By Name" at " Ceres (dwarf planet)#Map of quadrangles" may be *entirely* ok - however - your view may be helpful - just to be sure - iac - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan ( talk) 11:33, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Drbogdan, while I'm a *little* concerned about the copyright status of the image, since it was modified by Emily Lakdawalla, we'll leave it be for now. Please take a look at my edit to the template...I've adjusted the tags to avoid covering up the names, and to center them a little better. I'm assuming what I'm seeing on my screen is what you'll see. Otherwise, we will need someone more fluent in imagemap-fu to figure out the discrepancy. A better solution may be to use the image without embedded names, and to apply the names in labels as with the Mars quad template. Let me know your thoughts. — Huntster ( t @ c) 13:14, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Huntster - Thank you for your comments - and for adjusting the quad template - on my crt atm (WinXP/ChromeBrowser), there seems to be two major overlap areas: 1) "North Polar Area" label overtop the top of the "Asari" name; 2) "Ac-H-15" label overtop the top of the "Zelus" name - yes - adding names in labels may be a good idea - iac - hope this helps - Thanks again - and Enjoy! :) Drbogdan ( talk) 13:45, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Drbogdan, hmm, so the browsers display labels differently. That is a major problem. Let me make a graphic without the quad names and see what can be done differently. — Huntster ( t @ c) 14:49, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Drbogdan, check it now and let me know what you think. — Huntster ( t @ c) 16:18, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Huntster - Thank you for your comments - and efforts with this - Yes - Excellent job all around - the image/graph/quad boundaries are great - the labels are all aligned perfectly - no overlaps whatsoever - at least on my pc system atm - future updates to the template may include better image(s) & more official IAU names - we'll have to wait and see what develops - iac - Thanks again for you efforts - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan ( talk) 18:42, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

I'm just irritated that the display in Chrome differs so dramatically from Firefox. It really looks ugly in Chrome, but there's nothing that can be done for it. — Huntster ( t @ c) 19:22, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Huntster - FWIW - Template looks *Great* on my present pc system - and *Exactly-The-Same* on *All* my browser programs - including recent versions of Chrome + Firefox + Explorer + Opera + Safari (HP Pavilion dv8000 laptop/Windows XP Professional) - I can see no difference at all in the new template between any of these browser programs - Excellent job - Thanks again - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan ( talk) 19:45, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Drbogdan, I'm glad it's all displaying properly for you. I just wish I could explain why I'm seeing such discrepancies, both on my own computer and at work, even between the same versions of browsers. Infuriating.

Oh, last second thought: http://i.imgur.com/r8A4c6h.png is what I'm seeing and what I designed for in Firefox. http://i.imgur.com/cDx3f9i.png is what I'm seeing in Chrome. Which one are you seeing? — Huntster ( t @ c) 12:29, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Huntster - for me, on my present pc system (HP laptop/WinXP/Chrome v43.0.2357.130 m, "up to date"), there seems to be *no* significant difference in the displays of the images (labels in the "r8A4c6h" image *may* be a *very* little bit brighter than in the "cDx3f9i" image?) - or - with the display of the image at " Template:Ceres Quads - By Name" - ALSO - in Firefox v39.0, "up to date" => the same results: no significant difference in the displays of your noted images with each other - ALSO - displays of images in Chrome seem exactly the same as the displays of the same images in Firefox - could be the OS you're using? - mine is MS Windows XP (MediaCenterEdition/v2002/SP3) - iac - hope this helps in some way - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan ( talk) 15:46, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi friend. I wish to bring to your information that I have added the International Cooperation section in the article. Now, I have added a few valid citations there. As you said, most of info is present in the article itself. But I thought that adding a separate section would facilitate the readers. Regarding the addition of UAE mission, I just added the info given in the sources. I wish to know your opinion on the issue. Mao Martin ( talk) 16:39, 25 June 2015 (UTC)Mao

Hey Huntster. Here: [1] from SpaceX. Looks like we now know the name of the new, second, east-coast ASDS. As usual, I'll leave the photo work to your special competence. Cheers. N2e ( talk) 00:23, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Update: I just saw that Appable has already uploaded that photo. Take a look at it when you get a chance. N2e ( talk) 01:49, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

N2e, thanks for the heads up. Sorry I didn't get to this earlier but I'm under the weather. Nice to see the new barge. — Huntster ( t @ c) 06:43, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Sorry to hear your ill. Hope then that this photo, also just released by SpaceX, cheers you up: Merlin 1D engine nozzle being spin formed. Cheers. N2e ( talk) 12:23, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

N2e, ooooooh pretty. I only wish they'd pick one place to release images! Dunno if stuff released on Instagram is also CC-zero licensed. — Huntster ( t @ c) 12:33, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, me too. ANd I should have said something else I (sort of knew) about that. Yesterday, the new OCISLY photo came out on Instagram, apparently first, and in a smaller/cropped form relative to the one they put up on Flickr later. So, just a guess: with SpaceX recent commitment to open sourcing their photo images, I would expect they'll all get to Flickr too. N2e ( talk) 12:46, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

... and here is another pic, better perspective for Wikipedia maybe? OCISLY on Instagram from Elon Musk And once again, I'm guessing it will be released on Flickr too. N2e ( talk) 15:50, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

That's a long-banned / sock user who likes to add one often irrelevant change after another. Most recently Special:Contributions/108.73.113.2 See User:Arthur Rubin/IP list. Per wp:deny, the IP's edits are rolled back. No problem with someone else adding the change (or undoing my revert). Cheers Ping me with {{ u|Jim1138}} and sign "~~~~" or message me on my talk page. 09:26, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Jim. — Huntster ( t @ c) 10:34, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

A discussion re the " Earth" article is currently considering banner images of Earth - one of the images presented may (or may not) be ok for Wikipedia => http://eoimages.gsfc.nasa.gov/images/imagerecords/54000/54388/BlueMarble.jpg ( described at => http://visibleearth.nasa.gov/view.php?id=54388 ) - if interested, please see the discussion at the following => Talk:Earth#Earth Banner Image - Nominate, Comment, and Vote! - iac - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan ( talk) 15:59, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

So I've heard you're the most involved editor in Evanescence's projects. Do you think any of the albums are ready for GA? If not, what needs done? I kinda feel awkward having all these songs certified GA, and not a single album certified and a band page that's been stripped of its status. By the way, what stripped the band page's GA status anyway?

And one more thing, how'd you make that template (or whatever you'd call it) that warns about talk back templates? I'd love to have myself one of those. DannyMusicEditor ( talk) 13:19, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

DannyMusicEditor, I've been keeping an eye on the Evanescence articles for a long time, but I'm by no means knowledgeable about the GA/FA whatever certifications. The Evanescence article itself was delisted from GA after discussion here, which, personally, I don't feel was appropriate. As for the talkback warning template, it is located at User talk:Huntster/Editnotice. You can create one for yourself by going to User talk:DannyMusicEditor/Editnotice, and I have no problem if you want to adapt mine for your own page. — Huntster ( t @ c) 10:32, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

I was just asking because it looks to me as if the self-titled album might be ready, and I might nominate it after I get results on my first nomination ( Metallica's Black Album). I'll wait and see if the self-titled needs improvements afterward. DannyMusicEditor ( talk) 17:34, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

DannyMusicEditor, if you do decide to nominate it, I'll keep an eye on the discussion and try to assist with any issues. — Huntster ( t @ c) 02:27, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

We hope The Wikipedia Library has been a useful resource for your work. TWL is expanding rapidly and we need your help!

With only a couple hours per week, you can make a big difference for sharing knowledge. Please sign up and help us in one of these ways:

• Account coordinators: help distribute free research access
• Partner coordinators: seek new donations from partners
• Communications coordinators: share updates in blogs, social media, newsletters and notices
• Technical coordinators: advise on building tools to support the library's work
• Outreach coordinators: connect to university libraries, archives, and other GLAMs
• Research coordinators: run reference services

Send on behalf of The Wikipedia Library using MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 04:31, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

There is now a concrete proposal on Talk:Autonomous spaceport drone ship re article scope. It is in line with the sentiments of several editors in the (rather confusing) discussion earlier on that same Talk page, but the earlier discussion had both a different proposed change as well as comments that led well beyond discussion of just the scope of this single article.

Would appreciate it if you might consider weighing in, since the first operational use of the new ASDS is in just a few days, on 28 June. Cheers. N2e ( talk) 15:59, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your comment over there. I've made a comment to follow on the proposal. Re articles on the individual barges, I definitely agree with you that that can be done, if it is even warranted, later on. I don't think there is sufficient material for a split at this time, so I'm going to just let that ride for now.

Of course, well both see what others think over time, as and if the ASDS article gets too large. N2e ( talk) 11:09, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

N2e, agreed. I have a bit of a love for ship infoboxes, which is a reason I favour separate articles, but of course there's no need for such separate articles until data is available. I think Marmac 300 might have enough for a separate one, especially since we know a bit about its history, but the overall article certainly needs to come first, then we'll see what we're left with. Regarding infoboxes though, I'm not exactly sure what would be appropriate for the type article, if any. — Huntster ( t @ c) 11:39, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

FWIW, with a lot of water under the bridge, and no test flight on that last failed mission, the ASDS article still yet needs attention to it's ship infoboxes. I had made a comment on the Talk page that I would leave that for others; and I really have no good idea about what ought to be done with the ship infoboxes on that multiple-ship article now. Cheeers. N2e ( talk) 16:27, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

N2e, I'd just get rid of the infobox for now. Along with the Marmac 300 background, it can be retrieved from history if a separate article is developed. I may work on it myself at some point, but I'm finding less and less time to spend on Wiki these days. — Huntster ( t @ c) 06:47, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Cool. Thanks for the input! N2e ( talk) 10:14, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Following Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2015_April_18#Category:Articles_using_Template:Infobox_spacecraft, please use

• Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Infobox spacecraft and
• Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Infobox space telescope

to track the remaining pages using these templates, which you were intending to replace. At the top of those pages, you can click "Hide links" to avoid mixing in links with the transclusions. – Fayenatic L ondon 14:45, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi I've created Disappearance of Joanne Ratcliffe and Kirste Gordon and I'd like help in fleshing it out/keeping it as for South Australians, the Ratcliffe-Gordon disappearance is second only to the Beaumont children disappearance in such things. Paul Austin ( talk) 15:53, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Paul Benjamin Austin, I'm not Australian and have zero knowledge of this event, so I'm not sure what value I can add? — Huntster ( t @ c) 17:18, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for reverting the category removal on the CAP page. The editor has been removing categories from CAP-related pages (and others) left and right and while I see his point on the IACE page, the others were definitely (IMO) incorrectly removed. I'm glad someone else noticed one of these as I don't want to be the only person objecting to his category changes and deletions on CAP-related pages.  Etamni |  ✉  09:09, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for correcting my edit on the International Space Station. Sloppy of me... kencf0618 ( talk) 22:27, 2 August 2015‎ (UTC)

I'm thinking that this article should be deleted for notability and other reasons, but would like someone a little more experienced with these to look at it first. If you have time to review it, that would be appreciated. (Note: the article was just created within the past 24 hours.) I've left a note on the article's talk page asking an open question about notability.  Etamni |  ✉  01:21, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

Etamni, I honestly am terrible at reviewing for notability, etc. It definitely has issues with content and sourcing, so if you think it should go, feel free to nominate for deletion. — Huntster ( t @ c) 02:04, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

I'm going to contact the editor who wrote it and express my concerns regarding its notability and other issues. He just posted it and may be planning to improve it, so I don't want to come off like I'm biting the newcomer (even though he has a history going back a few years, his total edit count is pretty low and he may feel like a bitten newcomer if I just nominate it for deletion).  Etamni |  ✉  05:26, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

My edit summary never referred to you. By IP, I was referring to an edit made by an IP, starting with 216. -- Rsrikanth05 ( talk) 18:58, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

I thought about reverting that award thing too, but couldn't find it directly addressed in MOS:LEAD or MOS:BLPLEAD, so I decided to leave it to someone with more experience. I know many long time editors and sysops follow this article. Thanks for fixing it. —     Bill W.    ( Talk)  ( Contrib)  (User:Wtwilson3)  — 03:17, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

Seems there may have been an unintentional duplication of image files that may need attention? - images include => " File:PIA19889-Ceres-DwarfPlanet-Region5-BrightSpots-HAMO-20150909.jpg" AND " File:Occator PIA19889.jpg" - Thanks for your help in any regards - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan ( talk) 18:41, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

Drbogdan, thanks. The local copy on en.wiki has been deleted. — Huntster ( t @ c) 23:18, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

@ Huntster: - Thank you *very much* for your help with this - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan ( talk) 02:36, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

Hi.

It's been requested by one of our German editors on Talk:Princess Johanna of Hesse and by Rhine be moved to Johanna, Princess of Hesse and by Rhine to conform with German conventions. Johanna's father is at Georg Donatus, Hereditary Grand Duke of Hesse, after all. Having been abused in recent days by wiki monarchists, I am asking you to intervene. Paul Benjamin Austin ( talk) 07:38, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Paul Benjamin Austin, again, I have no working knowledge in this area, so I'm unsure why you notified me. I also do not see where such a request took place...if they want it moved, they should open a move request on the article's talk page. — Huntster ( t @ c) 17:30, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Huntster I'm remiss in not thanking you fro adding categories to my photos in the Jonesborough Historic District. I've only recently started doing that to my photos, and I'm going back to my photos to update them. I gather you pay special attention to Jonesborough, so I thought I'd ask a question regarding the Greeneville Historic District, which I created. I used the categories from the bottom of the page "Category:Buildings and structures in Greene County, Tennessee" and "Category:Historic districts in Tennessee", which work fine from that page. However, when I paste these categories into my photographs "Category:Buildings and structures in Greene County, Tennessee" shows up in red. I was wondering if you could help figure out what is wrong with the link, or advise as to what I'm doing wrong. Steven C. Price 20:26, 18 September 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Steven C. Price ( talk • contribs)

Steven C. Price, hello! I was confused at first as to what you meant, but finally caught on. So, articles on Wikipedia and images on Commons do *not* share categories, so copying categories from Greeneville Historic District to the image description pages does not work. Remember, they are technically two different websites. It was a fluke at all that " Commons:Category:Historic districts in Tennessee" even worked for the images...that category happened to already exist on Commons.

I've gone ahead and created " Commons:Category:Buildings and structures in Greene County, Tennessee", as well as " Commons:Category:Greeneville, Tennessee" on Commons. I'm also going to create " Commons:Category:Jonesborough Historic District" and " Commons:Category:Greeneville Historic District", so that the photographs can be better sorted. Please let me know if you have any more questions regarding categorisation on Commons. — Huntster ( t @ c) 03:27, 20 September 2015 (UTC)