User talk:Tcrow777/July 2007

En-6 Template
I'm not sure where this could be further discussed. My two top suggestions might be somewhere on the village pump or maybe on Wikipedia talk:Babel. I'm sorry I don't have any better suggestions. RyanGerbil10 (One, two, Charlotte's comin' for you) 03:07, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Re: Userbox re-design
I am trying to re-design this userbox to not use fair-use images, could you help me? Tcrow777 talk  22:09, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Sure. I have removed the fair use image and replaced it with some text instead for now. If you would like to use an image of some variety, I suggest you search the images at Wikimedia Commons, all of which can be used here on the English Wikipedia. When you find a file you like, just include it in the same way you would with an image uploaded here. You could also use any image here that has a free licence. You may also find Userboxes of use if you want to change some other things. Hope that helps and let me know if you have any more questions, mattbr 07:38, 6 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Is there not a free image of Pooh somewhere? I need a free image that in on Commons. Tcrow777  talk  22:23, 6 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Category:Winnie The Pooh is the category on Commons, would one of those be OK? Or there is Image:Pooh.jpg which is used on Winnie-the-Pooh and licenced under the GFDL? Otherwise you could try Mayflower to search the rest of Commons, but I don't think you'll find anything else. mattbr 08:55, 8 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Thank you! Tcrow777  talk  00:58, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

SVG Logo
Thank you for making an SVG version of the logo. You have correctly pointed out some inconsistencies with the large logo vs the small one. I think we would like to use the version in the large logo, without the tonos and breve. Additionally, we would like to replace the Hindi characters and Japanese characters with ones that are more harmonious with normal texts written using those writing systems.

There are a couple issues with the SVG version of the logo. Obviously you have created it using some auto-tracing software. While the results are generally pleasing, there are a couple problems with this. First is that the characters in the logo have a soft, blurry outline at their edges rather than being a crisp single-color path. Second, the gradient across the sphere is implemented as a series of overlapping strips of slightly different shades of gray. Both of these issues compromise the appearance of the logo when it is enlarged. The fuzzy edges around the characters make it very difficult to change those characters to something else, because then we'd need to redraw a matching fuzzy edge around the new characters, and the gradient on the sphere I think ought to be implemented as a circular gradient fill in a single path so it will appear smooth at any size. Of course, while your SVG is certainly an improvement over the current bitmapped logo, I think we will have to fix these issues before we can adopt a new SVG logo as the canonical Wikipedia logo.

Nohat 04:01, 11 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Autotracing of multicolored images is not good. You might want to simplify the image before doing that. Please have a look at Image:Wikipedia-logo BW-hires.svg and Image:Wikipedia-logo-simple.svg. Thank you. --Kjoonlee 11:38, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

My signature
I like your signature: (Talk) …but the red font may cause some Wikipedians to believe that your talk page does not exist, please change it. Thank you! Tcrow777 talk  02:56, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
 * How would they think that my talk page doesn't hexist? What does that have to do with red font?    (Talk)  03:51, 13 July 2007 (UTC)


 * In Wikipedia red colored links mean that the link does not exist. Tcrow777  talk  07:00, 13 July 2007 (UTC)


 * But it is a different color red, isn't it? I will change it willingly, I just do not know how my talk would be confused with that.    (Talk)  14:16, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Here is an example: lalala does not exist, your (Talk)  page does exist. They are different colors. Tcrow777 talk  18:59, 13 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Okay, I have now changed it to this. Իօնաս  ( forgive · disarm ·unite) 21:40, 13 July 2007 (UTC)


 * What does "Իօնաս" mean? What does "forgive·disarm·unite" mean? Tcrow777  talk  04:24, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

"Իօնաս" is my name in Armenian. forive·disarm·unite is my philosophy about the world. Instead of warring, we should move on to forgiveness, disarmment, and unity. Իօնաս ( forgive · disarm ·unite) 04:30, 14 July 2007 (UTC)


 * "Forgive·disarm·unite" might be too controversial to use in your signature. Tcrow777  talk  05:38, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
 * How would it be controversial? Իօնաս  ( forgive · disarm ·unite) 07:05, 14 July 2007 (UTC)


 * It would be too controversial because not all users believe in that. Tcrow777  talk  07:50, 14 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I have now changed it to this. j. rand|talk|contribs|email 21:41, 14 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Did you have your username changed? I do not ask that you change your signature any more (except for any link in your signature pointing to redirects), but I do discourge you from having the link in your signature that points to User:Ionas68224 or User:Bibliotheque being named j. rand, the link should be named Ionas68224. Tcrow777  talk  02:18, 15 July 2007 (UTC)


 * That's silly. If I blank my talk page it will show up Red, but that doesn't mean anything like "oh no I can't click there and add anything". Wikidan829 17:27, 15 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Bibliotheque, just ignore this person. You can put your username back to what it was. You're getting signature advice from someone who's talk page link doesn't even work in their sig. I don't know who he/she is pointing the finger at. Wikidan829 17:30, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

re:template
Sure, it'd be good on user pages. Crystallina 01:28, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Re: My signature

 * ''My reply to Wikidan829:

I do not know what you are talking about. I tested my talk page link in my signature and it works. I never even hinted to Bibliotheque that he/she should change his/her user name to Ionas68224. Tcrow777 talk  21:09, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I want you to click on "Talk", right here on your talk page, just above this message, and tell me it goes to your talk page. Also I was referring to the first message where you told the user their signature was confusing. There was absolutely nothing wrong with it other than your own opinion. If a talk page doesn't exist, then it will be red so you can create it. Nobody is going to think that the link is no good. Wikidan829 01:15, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
 * What are you talking about? My signature doesn't have a talk page link. Wikidan829 02:43, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, I think you are a confused individual. I also think you should spend more time actually contributing to Wikipedia than making a big deal about someone's signature. There was nothing wrong with it to begin with, and things like "that might be controversial" are completed un-based as well. I'm only bringing this up because I've seen that it's not the first time you did this. Just leave the other people alone, especially since you've only been here a month or two. Edit articles, that's what we're here for. Wikidan829 02:56, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I highly doubt it, until I made this account in February, I've been here as an anonymous editor for years. But you can believe that if you like. However, since you think you do know more, I'd like the see the policy or guideline that said that you couldn't use Red for your talk page link in your signature, because I'm certainly unfamiliar with it. Wikidan829 03:51, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
 * WikiLawyering? Do you even know what that means? All I'm saying is don't harass users about their signatures when there is nothing wrong with them. Don't you have better things to do like.. edit articles? Wikidan829 11:34, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Comments on my "talk" page
You recanted what you wrote earlier? What, were you drunk? high? or is it because "they" might be listening in? In any case, I kind of liked your original comment. In light of which I offer you this site, if you don't already know about it. Worth visiting. (Be aware, if you don't already know, that it's on the "blacklist" around here.) Toodeloo. +ILike2BeAnonymous 08:10, 18 July 2007 (UTC)


 * They Wikipedia is so wonderful are always listening. The trick is to learn to ignore them. +ILike2BeAnonymous 08:26, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Your comment on Jimbo's page
I responded, but it kind of got lost in the other mess--Cronholm144 09:22, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

My RfA
Thank you for participating in My RfA which closed successfully. I am honored and truly more than a little humbled by the support of so many members of the community. It's more than a bit of a lift to see comments on my behalf by so many people that I respect. I'll do my best to not disappoint you or the community.

- Philippe &#124; Talk 07:22, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Secret page
I've already told one user. If you look through my archives, you'll find it. hmwith talk  13:58, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

24.20.69.240
Quit being a troll. There is no policy or guideline preventing the use of userboxes and/or the funny symbols on userpages. See User talk:Ryulong, for example. Continue reverting that page and you'll break 3RR. Go edit some articles instead of harassing IP editors. — Someguy0830 (T | C) 02:16, 28 July 2007 (UTC)


 * User talk:Ryulong does not have userboxes on his/her user talk page, userboxes clutter up talk pages. Tcrow777  talk  06:56, 28 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Ryulong has four separate symbols at the top of his talk page, which you're also trolling this IP about. It's not your problem if someone decides to decorate their talk page. You're only harassing this one IP because your recent failure to gain consensus for your IP banning proposal. Go find something of merit to do, because you're just wasting time trying to enforce some non-existent idea that talk pages shouldn't have userboxes. Oh, and quite a few users do it, too. I can bet you wouldn't be so eager if I pointed them out for you. — Someguy0830 (T | C) 07:05, 28 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Point them out! Tcrow777  talk  03:22, 30 July 20l7e07 (UTC)

I'm going to briefly intercede (considering that Someguy cannot at the moment) to point out WP:UP. There is nothing there stating that you cannot have userboxes or other information on your talk page. Honestly, why do you care? Is this damaging you in any fashion other than your own annoyance? If so, than your annoyance is not a reason to vandalize his talk page. I would agree with Someguy's assessment that this is merely a result of your failed proposal for forced IP registration. Stop, or I'll inform an administrator of your actions. Sephiroth BCR ( Converse ) 03:45, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
 * If having userboxes and tiny little icons on your talk page clutters up things then having your talk page be bright orange and having giant icons on the top is also cluttering. I am an administrator, there is nothing stating that userboxes cannot be on talk pages, and removing them from anyone's page, including an IP for the sake of harassing them into getting an account is considered vandalism /and or a personal attack.  Not just vandal only accounts and IPs can be blocked for vandalizing, please stop bullying. Instead, why not find an article that needs fixed up and work on that?  Darth  Griz98  04:08, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

My RfA
Hi, Tcrow777, and thanks for your participation in my RfA. I've withdrawn it, and will be writing up an "analysis" of it, which will soon be available at User:Giggy/RfA/Giggy when it's done. Please come around when you get the chance, and give me feedback on how I can improve. Thanks again, Giggy  UCP 04:21, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Not so IE7 specific anymore?
I believe it's time you should remove the "best viewed under IE7" box now that your code is fixed (I think)? --antilivedT 06:32, 31 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Why did you change the &lt;div&gt; styles into &lt;span&gt; styles in your menu and have 3 copies of redundant styles that can all be inherited from the parent element, &lt;div&gt;? Read up CSS in your spare time if you want to know how it does that. --antilivedT 11:05, 31 July 2007 (UTC)