Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Autostereogram/archive1

Autostereogram
I haven't been involved with the article, just clicked through to it from the reference desk, but it blew me away. Thorough, informative, well illustrated. I actually understand how Magic Eye pictures work now, something I'd wondered for a long time but assumed would be too complicated. A fantastic job that deserves recognition. Skittle 15:52, 23 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I agree, excellent work. I'll give it a thorough proofreading. —Keenan Pepper 16:24, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Keenan, I see that Skittle restored a sentence you removed during proofreading. I agree that it sounds nonsensical.  The problem is that I did not find a consensus on how variations of RDS should be called at the time. I will again remove that sentence, and instead write another paragraph to explain the current lack of agreement on nomenclature, in the next few days.  I've asked members of the 3D Stereograms forum to donate their images to wikimedia, so I can refer to them in this new paragraph. See nomenclature Fred Hsu 04:47, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I just re-wrote a few sentences to clarify the concept. Fred Hsu 02:23, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I just added a new discussion section where people can discuss how to best classify various types of autostereograms.


 * Comment:
 * The lead section needs at least 2 more paragraphs, and should adequately summarize the entire article. Think of the lead section as being a separate mini-article, something the size of an average Britannica article.
 * I expanded the lead section with more information. I'll go back to edit it carefully tomorrow. Fred Hsu 04:30, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
 * There are no inline citations. While the references are listed at the end, they are not connected in any way to the content in the article. --  BRIAN  0918 18:08, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I think I've added enough inline citations by now. Fred Hsu 02:23, 16 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Weak Object as of now for the following reasons: (arrange from major to minor)
 * I am working on this today. Hopefully the revision will be complete by the end of today. Fred Hsu 15:09, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I split the former Reference section into a new (footnote) Reference section and a new "Influential work" section. Fred Hsu 20:40, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at WP:LEAD. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.
 * I expanded the lead section with more information. I'll go back to edit it carefully tomorrow. Fred Hsu 04:30, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I think the lead section is OK now. What do you think? Fred Hsu 02:23, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Per WP:CONTEXT and WP:MOSDATE, years, decades, and centuries without full dates generally should not be linked. For example, January 2006  should not be linked, instead change it to January 2006. Also, please note WP:BTW and WP:CONTEXT, which state that years with full dates should be linked. For example, February 28, 2006,  should be come February 28, 2006. 
 * This issue is fixed. Thank you, Bobblewik. Fred Hsu 01:53, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Per WP:MOS, headings generally should not repeat the title of the article. For example, if the article was Ferdinand Magellan, instead of using the heading  ==Magellan's journey== , use  ==Journey== .
 * I fixed the headings (removed the word 'autostereogram' from headings). Fred Hsu 03:39, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Please alphabetize the categories and interlanguage links.
 * Seriously? There are only three categories and no interlanguage links that I can see. Skittle 09:39, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Mhm... I didn't realize categories need to be alphabetized. Anyway, it's done.  There is only one interlanauge link.  Perhaps we should find autostereogram pages in other languages and add links to them. Fred Hsu 02:09, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is not a "how-to". I would suggest renaming the headings that say "How to...".
 * Done, as well as I could. Skittle 09:39, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks, AndyZ t 22:15, 23 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I'll be working on the intro and cites. As I said, I haven't really been involved with this article so if anyone else wants to have a go, please do. You probably know more about this stuff than me. Skittle 09:41, 26 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I didn't notice the nomination until today. I am quite happy to work with Skittle to further enhance this article.  I'll also ask members of 3D Stereograms forum to help out. Fred Hsu 21:10, 27 May 2006 (UTC)


 * In response to AndyZ's bullet point about date links. This can be done easily using a 'dates' tab in edit mode. Simply copy the entire contents of User:Bobblewik/monobook.js to your own monobook. Make sure you follow the instructions in you monobook to clear the cache. You will also get a 'units' tab. Hope that helps. bobblewik 00:38, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Thank you, Bobblewik. I copied your .js script to my own page, and I now have 'dates' and 'unites' tabs indeed.  I will use the 'dates' tab tomorrow to edit dates. Fred Hsu 04:59, 31 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I haven't looked at the article thoroughly yet, but the referencing still needs to be improved. As of now, only the "History" section and "3D perception" have WP:FOOTNOTEs. Many editors on WP:FAC nowadays request for at least one footnote per paragraph, though I think that there should be at least 1 footnote per section. Remember that web references can be used . Please shift up the image in the lead all the way to the top. Also, "Influential work" should probably be renamed "Further reading" or "Bibliography" (see WP:GTL). Thanks, Andy t 22:03, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Lead Image and Bibliography: fixed
 * Most of the information on this article come from Pinker's book and Magic Eye books from my own collection, and various websites I found during my research. These are corroborated by my own software which I wrote and used in order to create images shown in this article. But I did not want to keep referring to the same footnotes over and over, nor was I sure web references were not frowned upon. I created the original Reference section by carefully reading my books and sources to see what they had to say about "who did what" as described in "which book/paper".  I also listed the top few papers cited by every source.
 * I can probably place footnotes at every paragraph with fairly high accuracy. But I do not feel comfortable attributing a paragraph to a book/paper, unless I have read it with my own eyes (or I know with 100% confidence that author X has writen Y).  To that end, I have just bought 5 books online, all of them out-of-print (including the $175 classic, "Foundations of cyclopean perception").
 * I don't know how long an article can remain in the candidate list. But I think I can have the reference situation corrected in a week.
 * OK, boys, I've received the Foundations of Cyclopean Perception and am working on better inline references. Fred Hsu 01:17, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I am slowly fixing (previously missed) incorrect statements in the article, adding links to other wiki articles and inline references wherever appropriate. Please check out the History page.  This is not yet done.  I need a few more days. Fred Hsu 04:29, 10 June 2006 (UTC)


 * I know this nomination has been archived. But, I've just received two more books (Kinsman and Cadence Books). These two have tons of information. So, I will continue to add citations. Fred Hsu 23:57, 15 June 2006 (UTC)


 * As is done in WP:FOOTNOTE, for footnotes, the footnote should be located right after the punctuation mark, such that there is no space inbetween. For example, change blah blah [2]. to blah blah.[2]
 * This was done a few weeks ago. Fred Hsu 02:25, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Could you provide a bit more information for the web reference (date of publication, date of access, authors, etc.)?
 * Done as well. Fred Hsu 02:25, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
 * You might want to give the article a light copyedit, for example, In 1959, Dr. Bela Julesz, a vision scientist, psychologist, and MacArthur Fellow, discovered the random dot stereogram Who is the psychologist? A few more commas can be added before the word "which", as in The brain does not rely on intelligible icons which represent objects or concepts.
 * I am not sure I agree with the first point. See the first sentence in Steven Pinker. Fred Hsu 02:36, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I find it kind of odd that you define "Autostereogram" in the "Terminology" section. Hopefully the reader will know what it means by the time he/she looks at the terminology section...
 * Good point. I folded the autostereogram item into SIS. Fred Hsu 02:32, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Otherwise, great job! Thanks, Andy t 15:13, 16 June 2006 (UTC)


 * That's cool. Thanks for reviewing again. I just wanted to make sure your previous suggestions were addressed.  As Bunchofgrapes suggested in my talk page, I'll get it peer-reviewed again. Fred Hsu 14:25, 17 June 2006 (UTC)