Wikipedia talk:Graphics Lab/Archive 2

Incarceration rates, totals, etc.

I would like some GIF image charts for use on articles such as Incarceration, etc.. I know people would use the GIF charts both on wikipedia and on websites outside wikipedia.

PNG images don't scale well on wikipedia or on other websites unless one wants to spend an inordinate amount of time tweaking every scaled PNG image. GIF images, on the other hand, scale well instantly with the simplest image editors. Such as IrfanView. See related discussion here.--Timeshifter 05:30, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

I had a look at the discussion, but I don't see what you mean when you say that pngs don't scale as well as gifs. SVG scales pretty nicely, though. --Slashme 16:22, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

I can make some HTML charts about incarceration rates by using wikicode. See

• User:Timeshifter/Sandbox
• User:Timeshifter/Sandbox5

I used http://www.uni-bonn.de/~manfear/html2wiki-tables.php to convert HTML charts I found on the web. I further tweaked them.

I guess I could take screen shots of the sandbox pages, or from my offline HTML pages, and crop some gif images from them.

But is there a more direct route with freeware to create GIF charts without first having to create HTML charts with wikicode or a web page editor? Please see also:

• http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Incarceration_rates_worldwide.gif
• http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:US_correctional_population_timeline.gif
• http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:USA._Prisoners_1995_to_2005.gif

There are related charts here:

• http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Criminal_justice_diagrams --Timeshifter 05:30, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Comment: Make svg charts, using gnuplot, inkscape or some such. They scale perfectly. GIF is a tool of santa. --Slashme 15:36, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

I see your point here and on the other talk page about using SVG and other intermediate formats as working tools to create highly customizable images. Which tools would you recommend for creating 2-dimensional graphs, bar charts, and tables? I can always convert the resulting SVG images, etc. into PNG or GIF images depending on my needs.

Which tools are best, and which are easiest to use? Which tools have the best balance between ease of use, and functionality, in the specific area I am interested in using them for? I am only interested in free software. --Timeshifter 23:50, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

I agree, just look at the example below:-

File:Papua New Guinea coa.gif	GIF, okay so it is 11.49 KB compared to 95.42 KB of the SVG...
File:Papua New Guinea coa.svg	But is it worth losing such quality? The reason they are such lower filesizes, is because the GIF scaled look horrible (no offence). > Rugby471 talk ⚔ 16:25, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

I would also disagree with the statement "PNG images don't scale well on Wikipedia", because A) I think that's rubbish, and B) because PNG scales MUCH better if there are transparent or semi-transparent parts of the image. (GIF transparency is 1-bit,PNG is 8-bit.). --Dave the Rave (DTR)talk 17:29, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

(unindent)The reason the above GIF image looks so bad is because it was scaled UP from a smaller image. The scaled GIF image farther down looks a lot better because it was scaled DOWN from a larger image.

PNG images are full-color images. GIF are only 8-bit color. So if the GIF image is less than 256 colors, then it scales down better on wikipedia. Because it ends up being a lot less kilobytes than the same scaled PNG image.

SVG images are not shown on wikipedia pages. They are converted to PNG images by the wiki software, and then shown on wikipedia pages. That is because some browsers can't view SVG images.

I saved the original 560-pixel-wide SVG image as a PNG and a GIF image, and then uploaded both to the commons. I put them both below scaled down to 300 pixels wide. I indicated the kilobytes of the scaled image. The images look the same at full size too. Click the images to see the full size.

File:Papua New Guinea coa2.gif	GIF image. 22.63 KB.
File:Papua New Guinea coa2.png	PNG image. 61.82 KB

GIF images are fine. The PNG image uses 1648 colors. The GIF image is using 248 colors. I used IrfanView to convert the PNG image to a GIF image. It automatically changed the PNG image to the 248-color palette. For most graphics additional colors beyond the maximum 256 colors allowed by the GIF format are not that important in how the image looks. If it is important, then use the PNG image format.

Transparency works in GIF images, too. I am not familiar with the intricacies though. Many graphics do not need transparency. Especially when used on wikipedia pages.

I noticed that GIF images using transparency have to be done correctly if the images are to be scaled. Otherwise one gets the jaggy, laddered edges. There are ways to make the transparency work correctly with GIF images according to this:

http://www.handson.nu/HTML/transparency.shtml --Timeshifter 19:22, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

I discovered the following while searching for some easy graph creation tools:

Create A Graph. Free online graph creation tool at the website for the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) (located within the U.S. Department of Education and the Institute of Education Sciences). Bar charts, line charts, area charts, pie charts, and XY graphs. Choice of PDF, PNG, JPG, EMF, EPS, and SVG output. --Timeshifter 03:52, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

I did one of the graphs. I will do two more images from the Incarceration page. But I will not do "USA._Prisoners_1995_to_2005.gif". XcepticZP 09:30, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Great! Thanks. If you upload them to the commons, then other wikipedia sites worldwide will be able to use the images, too. --Timeshifter 16:27, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Another way to do charts/graphs, use OpenOffice.org Draw, since 2.3, the whole graph program has gone through a revamp and they no longer look like something you could have spent 2 minutes on Paint doing :-). Just creat the chart and choose to export to SVG. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rugby471 (talk • contribs) 17:17, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I will check it out. It is great to be getting all this advice, and all these tools. I found another online charting tool: BARCHART Tool. Free online bar chart generator. The tool is based on the free software JFreeChart. --Timeshifter 18:16, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Is there a Wikiproject for charts and graphs? Or are there subsections of Wikipedia:WikiProject Illustration or Wikipedia:Graphic Lab that deal only with charts and graphs? I would like to compile a list of all these tools and methods, and to consolidate discussion threads in one place and archive. --Timeshifter 18:16, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

I found another online charting and graphing tool. Zoho DB and Reports [1] is the name of the online database and reporting application in the Zoho Office Suite. It can also "create charts, pivots, summary and other wide-range of reports through powerful drag & drop interface". Here are some samples of reports, graphs, charts, and tables.--Timeshifter 18:34, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Category:Images for cleanup

Someone above suggested looking for images needing cleanup rather than waiting for requests. There are about a hundred images already listed at Category:Images for cleanup. -- Beland (talk) 00:43, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Would this be welcome?

I've scanned in some HUGE prints of Hogarth engravings, but they're in two pieces each (The side was too massive even for a massive scanner. Could I request they be uploaded and combined? The copyrights are all PD-100/PD-art. 68.39.174.238 (talk) 22:34, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Sure, but you might get more attention by directing it the Image Improvement Page. > Rugby471 ^talk ⚔ 18:26, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

OK, I just wanted to make sure before I did so. 68.39.174.238 (talk) 22:52, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Graphic Lab's page : Clean up to continue

The page Wikipedia:Graphic Lab really need a clean up :

• the link toward WP:GL/Images to improve is hide in a full text ;
• the first area is not more need, or should be merge in the presentation.

If someone have the time to make a clean up, that will be really helpful. Yug 17:43, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

---

I finally made a quick clean up myself in the top section and in the introduction. Some points are to notice

1. my english in not perfect, I have probably write "strange" sentences, your corrections are welcome !
2. I have delete about 5 links towards examples of creation, skitching, etc. Links are confusing the new visitors. If you want display a new example of what the graphist can do, please simply complete the gallery of example (currently 4 examples, in WP:GL)
3. write in basic English, and the shortest/clearest possible. Each sentence for fun is not need. Each unclear sentence is to delete.
4. this in a page to introduce the Graphic lab to visitors, the most important informations only are welcome.
5. translate le fr:Wikipedia:Atelier graphique/Logiciels into Wikipedia:Graphic Lab/Softs may really help newbies interesting to contribute ;]

I go back to my true life, bye and good luck to all the graphists here ^0^y Yug 05:15, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Please, find where it may b need to place this link : "GL/Softs" Yug 05:28, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

I did the Software Page (Soft), and placed in link to it on the mian page in the advice part. How is it ? > Rugby471 ^talk ⚔ 13:02, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Great ! thanks for the new download links ;] Yug 20:48, 28 November 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Yug (talk • contribs)

Meta project

[2] Take a look everyone, money for what we do for free already. Cheers —Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 16:24, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Yup, sorry Yug told me about it and I forgot to post it here :-) > Rugby471 ^talk ⚔ 17:29, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

...Or maybe you just wanted all of the money for yourself... ;)—Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 17:51, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Ha ha yeah probably... > Rugby471 ^talk ⚔ 19:35, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

What happened to...

...the entry on the Hogarth scans? The 1st one got done, but that was only one of 6. 68.39.174.238 (talk) 06:16, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

It got archived, it was marked as done. It is here now. > Rugby471 ^talk ⚔ 16:07, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

autoarchiving?

Isn't the page supposed to automatically archive checked images? Or must this be done manually? How often is it supposed to take place? Chris (talk) 02:24, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Wow, it's been a long minute since this was archived. Again, is this something we're supposed to do, or...? Chris (クリス) (talk) 03:37, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Keep in mind

Hello, can you keep in mind this page : fr:Wikipédia:Atelier graphique/English presentation of the Graphic Lab. This page will need both to be updated and expanded for the Wikimania 2008 in Alexandria, Egypt.

Please request to the Wikimania 2008 organisators to plan to print some posters about the Graphic Labs before or in April 2008. Anon 10:51, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

What is an English discussion of an English project doing on a French WP page? --Seans Potato Business 03:04, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

The Graphics Lab was originally a French only Project. Thats why. > Rugby471 ^talk ⚔ 13:18, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Image:svg.svg

• 

You people are the greatest thing ever. 68.39.174.238 (talk) 09:18, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Old unsatisfied requests should be archived

After 2 months, unsatisfied should be archived, if need in a /Archive/Unsatisfied request .

Other think : please don't create images for "Not picture available for this [boat/Speacies of Dog/etc.], if you can provide one, please clic on this image". The standard image "Not picture available, if you can provide one, please clic on this image" already do EXACTLY the same job. Moreover, the Graphic Lab cannot create one such image for each category of object, vehicules, animals, women/men, on wikipedia. Yug 18:12, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Help

Could someone please do some images. I have had an image on the page for 3 months (London Midand PDF) and it has yet to be done! Meanwhile, loads of others have been done. Dewarw (talk) 18:34, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

You could also post them at http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Graphic_Lab/Images_to_improve Chris (クリス) (talk) 03:31, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

You may have better success at Wikipedia:WikiProject Maps, which is geared toward your type of request. Chris (クリス) (talk) 04:37, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

So...

Can I just add this to my userpage, or does some kind of hazing await me? ;) Fvasconcellos (t·c) 23:41, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes, to both. ;) Yes to the first part, no to the second. Chris (クリス) (talk) 01:50, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Consider yourself hazed. Now get to work!  ; )

And welcome to the nicest place in all Wikidom. Sagredo^{⊙☿♀♁♂♃♄} 07:44, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

One of these days when I've not got tons of work to do I'm gonna (actually do stuff here again and)make a list of quotes people have said about the graphic lab. I like the one above :) --Dave the Rave (DTR)talk 16:08, 10 January 2008 (UTC).

Main page getting cluttered up

(moved from main page == Done World Association of Girl Guides and Girl Scouts==)

Part of me says keep posting images to clean up, part of me says wait until old ones are archived, this page is filling up too much. Chris (クリス) (talk) 08:50, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

I think you should put a bunch of them up. Perhaps the "timer" on the automatic archiver should be changed. Sagredo^{⊙☿♀♁♂♃♄} 17:39, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

done putting a bunch of them up, shall we mark done some of the neglected oldies? Chris (クリス) (talk) 20:48, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

A number of projects have stalled out. Some probably never were feasible, some may just be people taking a Wikibreak. It doesn't seem appropriate that they be marked as done. But perhaps, after some period of inactivity, they should be moved to an archive. If it's done by a bot, then a bot message to those who have signed somewhere in the section would be appropriate. Others have been on this page a lot longer than I have probably been dealing with this in the past and probably have some thoughts. Sagredo^{⊙☿♀♁♂♃♄} 21:56, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Both the Texan Navy and the Coastguard requests are done and can be filed. .by KG(D)B is already marked as done, the papal coat of arms one could probably be removed since someone seems to be saying that we already have a free-SVG of the image in question. 68.39.174.238 (talk) 19:03, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

What about moving:

1. 2 Placeholder Images

• 2.1 Placeholder suggestion for CD
• 2.2 Placeholder suggestion for Battleships

1. 3 Map service icons
2. 9 "Ref" button on edit toolbar

To a new page, something like [[Wikipedia:Graphic Lab/ Inhouse Images to improve. I'm sure someone will come up with a better name. It would take these slow moving projects from the top of the page, and keep the "retail store" tidy. Sagredo^{⊙☿♀♁♂♃♄} 19:42, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Joke

What I look like...

...and what I look for.

-___-"

But I think the first point may be expanded to all of us. -__- Yug 11:50, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Opinion needed from a graphic person

View the following please:

• Exhibit A
  Exhibit A
• 
  Exhibit B

I'm currently in a small dispute over the preceding desaturated images (note, the original color image can be found at [3], but I cannot post it or even wikilink to it because it has been overwritten by the editor with whom I am in the dispute. but that's another story). I believe the Exhibit B has noticeable JPEG artifacts. It's like there is a halo of artifacts around the fetus. I also believe Exhibit B is way too contrasty. The user with whom I am in dispute thinks Exhibit A is too light, and less "sharp" than Exhibit B (please note that Exhibit A is darker than a raw, desaturated image of the original color image).

So there are two issues: 1) JPEG artifacts. Are they there and are they problematic? and 2) Contrast. How dark and contrasty should the image be? Hopefully it is not out of line to solicit the opinions of the graphics lab, and perhaps a 3rd image may need to be created to address both of our concerns (a darker, less artifacted image). I, however, am not requesting graphic work at this time, so that is why I have posted on the talk page. I figure that you folk know a thing or two about contrast and artifacts, and should have your monitors properly calibrated to identify those things. You may even want to open the original color image in photoshop/gimp and desaturate it yourself, playing around with various settings. Thanks for your time and your opinions.-Andrew c ^[talk] 04:12, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

We're always glad when images come in. I'm not sure what the halo of squares is, but they could be erased in about two minutes. I put the original into Photoshop, used the autocontrast feature which looks much like Exhibit B. Saving the image as a jpeg, and reopening did not reproduce the halo. However, there is another problem besides the appearance of the image. Please reread the page with the image generator. [4] It plainly states that "You are allowed to resize the image, but you are not allowed to apply other changes to the image." Desaturation or contrast adjustment are clearly not allowed in using this image. If you able to reach a concensus on using the image in its original form, I would suggest enlarging it a bit at the bottom and adding the text link so that we conform to the terms of usage. After spending some time on some of the global warming pages, I know how frustrating edit wars can be. And I expect this article touches areas where emotions are far stronger. You are certainly welcome to post a request for a new image on the graphics lab page. I suggest post a message on the article's talk page that the image is a copyright vio, and marking the image as a copyright violation. You may also post this to the project page, where the activity is and ask for a second opinion. Sagredo^{⊙☿♀♁♂♃♄} 07:04, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

The other user has been in contact with the company and they have approved of the black and white image. I guess we'd need an OTRS to verify that. So you don't think that the B image is too dark/contrasty? I could live with an image that was a bit darker than A, but B just seems over the top. Thanks for your response and imput!-Andrew c ^[talk] 12:55, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi Sagredo. The darker image shown above is one of a set of four images. See here. Would you please eliminate the halo of squares in each of the four images? If you will click on Exhibit B above, you will see that the creators of the image have given copyright approval. Thanks.Ferrylodge (talk) 17:41, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Nevermind. If you click on the link I just gave (i.e. here), it seems that this matter has been resolved. Also, please disregard the "Exhibit A" and "Exhibit B" images above, which have been updated since they were originally shown here at this talk page.Ferrylodge (talk) 03:25, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

meta:Philip Greenspun illustration project/Requests

More requests are desired at meta:Philip Greenspun illustration project/Requests.

Please see the discussion here:

• meta:Talk:Philip_Greenspun_illustration_project#Project_momentum

Could someone also please put a notice at the top of Wikipedia:Graphic Lab and Wikipedia:Graphic Lab/Images to improve pointing out the meta:Philip Greenspun illustration project as another place to request diagrams, especially complex ones?

Please get the word out in other places, too.

We could use some banner and print ads for the project, too. See:

• meta:Talk:Philip_Greenspun_illustration_project#Rewards --Timeshifter (talk) 12:54, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Graphists with time on their hands are always welcome here. English speaking graphists should be aware of this Wikipedia:Graphic Lab/Research and Development, an effort to co-ordinate with the French and German wikis. Sagredo^{⊙☿♀♁♂♃♄} 15:56, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use image warning for images that are going to be improved upon the graphic lab

Do you think we need to have a template that warns administrators that a fair use image is going to be worked on? Miranda 22:48, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

{{hangon}} or {{notorphan}} ? 68.39.174.238 (talk) 02:51, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Alternately you can see if this fools anyone for the requisite length of time. 68.39.174.238 (talk) 15:49, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Modification of fair-use images is generally not permitted. Jackaranga (talk) 01:07, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

It happens often enough for overzealous copyright-bots to be problems. 68.39.174.238 (talk) 18:00, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

I guess leave a big text note? I did this with my latest request. miranda 09:14, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Plea for advice on Ukrainian SSR graphic

Graphics lab editors, I'd like to humbly request your advice regarding the doability of my request to clean up the Ukrainian SSR map graphic. No one has commented so far, so I'm wondering: is it too difficult? Too time-consuming? Or is it just that no one is interested in working on it?

Thank you all in advance for your assistance. Bry9000 (talk) 20:31, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing this in. I suspect that at least one or two others have tried and also felt as I do that we don't really have an answer for this problem. Please the next time you find an image you feel should be improved. Sagredo^{⊙☿♀♁♂♃♄} 23:10, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Some images, unfortunately, just cannot be easily worked with. I learned that the hard way when I requested some images be combined, but neglected to scan an overlap. 68.39.174.238 (talk) 20:21, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

HERE'S the trouble

According to User:Shadowbot3, the bot is currently "blocked for malfunctions"! This explains why we aren't getting any backups. Should we contract out to a new bot in the interim? The page looks like it's getting excessively long. 68.39.174.238 (talk) 14:14, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

It seems like User:MiszaBot II is the only running Wikipedia: namespace archiver bot. I suggest we use it in the interim untill our usuall archiverbot is running again. 68.39.174.238 (talk) 18:57, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes, Shadowbot3 hasn't had a contrib since the 13th. The page was growing large. Unfortunately, I'm not familiar with how that archiver works. Does is not archive unless done=true in the template in the section header? So, rather than changing the bot, which I'll leave to others, I manually archived the completed requests. This should only be a temporary solution.↔NMajdan•talk 15:12, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm not entirely sure that transcluding the <!--werdnabot-archive--> tag works, but don't quote me on that. But if Shadowbot3 isn't running it wouldn't work anyway. Time3000 (talk) 16:30, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

The reason it is not automatically archiving is becuase a while ago, we decided that because you cannot transclude <!--werdnabot-archive-->, we would have to sacrifice the auto-archiving for the new request template. It should have happened that when you set done=true, <!--werdnabot-archive--> will be transcluded, but unfortunately the archiving did not work. > Rugby471 ^talk ⚔ 16:42, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Not to mention that Shadowbot3 has been turned off. So, should a manual archival strategy be implemented?↔NMajdan•talk 20:26, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

I suggest so, just to prevent trouble. Also, if the heading template is no longer needed, can we ditch it? It makes it impossible to use the TOC. Anyway, someone may wish to write up the standard of archiving (Page names, etc. It should be very short). 68.39.174.238 (talk) 15:42, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Proposal for manual archival

In light of the archival bots being down for some time now, we need to implement a manual archival strategy for GL. Any ideas are welcome. My recommendation is as follows:

1. Drop the {{Request Title}} template from the section header to allow editors to use th TOC.
2. When a request is completed, add {{Resolved}} directly beneath the section header, above the gallery. Either sign the template ({{resolved|1=~~~~}}) or leave a note saying it is completed.
3. After 24 hours have passed since either the completion of the request or the last comment, archive it to the appropriate archive.

Thoughts?↔NMajdan•talk 14:22, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

I would suggest that the person who asked the request (Or if they disappear, someone willing to take up the use of the new image) reply at the end saying that the request has been finished to their satisfaction and adds the resolved template with a timestamp and if noone adds anything within a day, archive it. This way if there's a really logical extention (EG. The SVG request on the Azrew CoA) someone can add it rather then having to start a new section all over again. However, that's a minor detail and the above design looks like it would work perfectly. 68.39.174.238 (talk) 16:26, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Need to Wait one week after the request is resolved. Why ? Because new users and graphists as well need to see what have been done here, what the level, etc. Archive too quickly will not help us to be understand. 210.203.61.15

For non-resolved, archive them after one month : keep too difficult requests is both useless and discouraging. (talk) 15:02, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

That might've worked back when we got a request every other day or so, but at the rate we're going now, a week would give you something even LONGER than my talk page. Maybe two days at the most. 68.39.174.238 (talk) 15:37, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

On the 5 last days we have about 2 requests/days. If you archive after 2 days, that means that the page will just have about 10 sections (4 satisfied but not yet archived, 4 unsatisfied, 2 new requests). Add 5 days will make add 10 sections. After what, it's a choice to make : do we think we need to display what we do ? or do we think that the more important is to work efficiently ? I gave my opinion, now, feel free to choice. 210.203.61.15 (talk) 15:51, 19 January 2008 (UTC) action is more efficient that endless talks.

Perhaps "Placeholder Images, Map Service Icons, and "ref button on edit toolbar" could be moved to a special page for images for the WP organization as opposed to images for individual editors. They take up a lot of room, and because they've taken so long, they tend to suggest that things take a long time to be done here. Sagredo^{⊙☿♀♁♂♃♄} 02:55, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm afraid that throwing things on a special page will make them take even LONGER to get done. Unfortunately some things tend to just stall. Like the Villahermosa coatofarms request I filed: It's sitting there about 7/8ths done. I suggest finalizing the standard for archiving obviously completed requests and then start work on the unsatisfied ones, since they (the finished ones) are the more urgent. In any case, I'm going to remove the instruction to use the template in the heading. 68.39.174.238 (talk) 03:22, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

I'd been wondering about the Villahermosa coatofarms request. Is XcepticZP coming back, or should I give it a try when I get a chance? I have been making an effort to do some of the older stuff. Sagredo^{⊙☿♀♁♂♃♄} 04:05, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

I wont complain. I think we should also have a standard, or just a mutual understanding, that if a person starts on a task and abandons it, anyone else can take it up, in order to prevent exactly that: A 1/2 finished request sitting there for MONTHS. 68.39.174.238 (talk) 15:35, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Also, the reference button: I'm not sure if there is anything we can do, unless someone gets a real brainstorm as to a better icon for it. It may just be that that is the best icon for it. Certainly none of the others look more intuitive then "<ref>". 68.39.174.238 (talk) 15:40, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

I agree about the reference button. Mark it done. There's only so much one can do with 22 pixels. If someone gets an idea, it should be possible to re-start it. I'll get the Villahermosa coatofarms. Maybe placeholder images could be reduced to a summary here with a link to a work page. If it were up to me, I'd do a camera icon with a red circle and slash for everything. Sagredo^{⊙☿♀♁♂♃♄} 01:07, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

What exactly is left to be done with the placeholder images? I think its possible the original requesters just forgot, as I did with my request for the "No battleship image". Maybe we should ask? 68.39.174.238 (talk) 18:02, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

I haven't followed them, as they were long sections when I first arrived. The first people to get a nudge should be the graphists, it's there responsibility to keep things moving. Sagredo^{⊙☿♀♁♂♃♄} 20:16, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

I like the idea of using the {{stale}} template. If nobody is watching this page for results, why should we care? I propose we make a system where after a week or so with no comments, we mark them stale, and after a few more days - make it the same amount of time as when they're resolved - they're archived. A week is plenty of time for somebody to check the page and leave comments/ask for attention. Anyway, it's not like we're deleting the request forever. We're preserving it forever in an archive. We need to keep the page clean.

Has anybody requested the bot task yet? -- I. Pankonin Review me! 09:08, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

I just realized that a lot of requests might end up being ignored and then marked stale and archived, so I also propose we make a template similar to {{BAGAssistanceNeeded}} (or use a generic one if it exists) that they can use to flag us down. This would help them realize that it's a normal part of life for some requests to be ignored and that they might need to be assertive to get what they want. Otherwise, there's a feeling of being screwed by the system, which, by the way, is kind of what's happening now when it just stays on the page forever. -- I. Pankonin Review me! 09:19, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

How do you request a bot task? By the look of it, that is the last thing that needs to be done and we can mark this resolved. 68.39.174.238 (talk) 17:53, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Bot requests#Automatic archival for WP:GL/IMPROVE -- I. Pankonin Review me! 01:08, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure about archiving stale requests: It might be useful to keep them here, to ensure that they either get worked on or are thrown out (If totally impossible or useless). 68.39.174.238 (talk) 04:09, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Leaving them on the page forever doesn't seem to be working. Maybe a time constraint will help move things along. -- I. Pankonin Review me! 04:17, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

I am far from certain, but we will see as its too late now... 68.39.174.238 (talk) 00:31, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Changing headers

I'm about to do a massive change to all the headers on the page and change to the new format with {{Resolved}}, and then I'm going to start marking some as {{stale}}. Suggest we archive them a few days after they're marked stale if nobody changes them. -- I. Pankonin Review me! 07:28, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Good. Looking at MiszaBot, it is apparently being rewritten to recognize the resolved template and archive those (see here). Now, we need it to also recognize the stale template.↔NMajdan•talk 17:32, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Nice idea for "Stale", only I would recommend that it be used to flag a section as needing extra attention, and it shouldn't be taken to mean "Everyone ignore this because it'll never go anywhere". 68.39.174.238 (talk) 19:51, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

That is my worry as well.↔NMajdan•talk 20:27, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

SVG help

Moved to Wikipedia:Graphic_Lab/Images_to_improve#SVG_help. --Slashme (talk) 09:57, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Mass VI push

Trouble on Commons: The long simmering disputation over how legitimate the "Vector-images" are is apparently coming to a head: commons:Commons:Deletion requests/Template talk:Vector-Images.com (Yes that looks erroneous: It's actually the most current (Ongoing) debate on it) shows that it's possible they're being deleted. Since this will probably create a massive disruption on, to say the least, "Politics of" templates, I wanted to ask, could we hold, or organize, a massive "Vectorization party" (Come up with your own name for it) to create our own (Legitimate and free) vector versions of these coats and allow us to minimize the disruption if they are deleted, lessen the seriousness of this dispute (IE. Instead of it being "deleting 1000s of massively used images", it could be "some relatively minor images" (EG. Town or county coats, rather then national and territorial ones)), and reduce the ambiguity of massive numbers of images (From "They might be free" to "We know they're free, we made them ourselves")? Thanx, 68.39.174.238 (talk) 04:45, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

I think planning a phase out is a good idea, if for no other reason than the low resolution of the preview gifs. But we should do at our convenience; I bet VI.com does not hold valid copyrights or licenses on more that a small percentage of these. Have they ever requested that any be taken down? (I suspect not, as they would know where they stand.) At a minimum we should try to co-ordinate with the other labs so there is no duplication of effort in replacing these. Which are to be replaced first. And while we're at get standards set, such as document size, line thickness, use of particular colors on the British Commonwealth, etc. So we don't have hundreds of variations in style. Sagredo^{⊙☿♀♁♂♃♄} 00:44, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Turns out that alot of the VI-images are just tagged as "supersededSVG" but not deleted. I've proposed migrating and deleting for all of the VI-rasters that have free SVGs available. That'll reduce the apparently overwhelming # of images to start with. 68.39.174.238 (talk) 16:03, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Problem with info box

I am trying to create an info box for the article Kali (demon) and for some reason the info box formula is stretching out the pic (see here). The pic is not nearly that size. How can I fix this? --Ghostexorcist (talk) 04:34, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Bad infobox design. I added an image size parameter.↔NMajdan•talk 14:48, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Thankyou. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 20:42, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Copyvio trolls Ignoramuses

I've started a page here with some simple referenced information about copyrights and trademarks. Please feel free to use its imformation in the battle against copyvio trolls. And please add to it, but keep it brief easy to use, and referenced, so it will be effective. It is not meant to be a talk (dicussion) page. Dicussion can go here. It is meant to be a place where one can grab a quick, referenced fact to shove in the face of a troll educate the ignorant. Perhaps it should be moved to one of the graphics lab pages. Sagredo^{⊙☿♀♁♂♃♄} 08:54, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

I suspect (hope?) many of these "trolls" may be well intentioned, so I would be careful how forcefully it gets "shoved" at anyone. I do like the idea of having a page we can refer to to ensure we're on safe ground (I say this, despite not being a graphics dude ;) ). Thanx, 68.39.174.238 (talk) 16:27, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, your right about AGF. I wrote I wrote that late at night while being frustrated by the latest stupid question about a PD object. There tends to be a policy of "when in doubt mark it for deletion," which is totally wrong when the doubt is caused by the deletionist's ignorance.

So everyone is free to work on that page. We need to get it all referenced as much as we can educate the ignorant. Sagredo^{⊙☿♀♁♂♃♄} 18:49, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Marking requests as stale

It is a necessary thing to do, and surely the most thankless job here. So we do owe thanks to I. Pankonin for getting it done. But for graphics lab newbies, it probably should include a apology, a thank-you for bringing the image in, along with some possible reasons. why it didn't get done. The reason generally boils down to how much improvement vs time involved kind of thing. We should write a nice generic thing to make the job easier. This really isn't a criticism, I Pankonin, had I been stuck with the chore, with so many to do, this being the first done manually, I would have done it similarly. I am particularly pleased to see someone take steps toward getting the very stale projects removed from the top of the page. They're bad advertising.

Related question, should there be a greeting, a "we're looking at it" put on every request as they come in. Sagredo^{⊙☿♀♁♂♃♄} 23:11, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

A lot of the stale ones are probably complete. Some are waiting for requester feedback. There needs to be some way for the graphists to close these requests for archiving, and marking them complete seems dishonest to me. It seems like that should be up to the requester. -- I. Pankonin Review me! 09:37, 24 January 2008 (UTC) Agreed. Graphist should leave a message on the talk page of the requestor. If no response, after some period it gets marked done. Sagredo^{⊙☿♀♁♂♃♄} 19:30, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Also, if somebody replies to a request that's marked stale, they should remove the template. -- I. Pankonin Review me! 09:38, 24 January 2008 (UTC)AgreedSagredo^{⊙☿♀♁♂♃♄} 19:30, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Maybe we should have a local version of {{Stale}} that links to a subpage explaining what it means, how it happens, and what they can do? That or a default collapsed box that could be expanded to say the same thing. 68.39.174.238 (talk) 20:25, 25 January 2008 (UTC)AgreedSagredo^{⊙☿♀♁♂♃♄} 19:30, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

I don't suggest a template "we're on it", if a person is working on it, don't they usually say "I'm taking this/working on this... will have an image in a few [minutes/hours/days]"? That should be enough, both to mark it as being taken up and to prevent duplicate work. 68.39.174.238 (talk) 20:25, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Agree, it's essentially a welcome bot. -- I. Pankonin Review me! 04:24, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Also, if you do archive a stale request and there is a solution but the requester never "signed off", check the article to see if the newly created image should be used and make your own judgment call.↔NMajdan•talk 18:05, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

I've found in some cases, the original requester just forgot about the request. Usually asking them on their talk page to look at the final result will get a favorable response ("Yes, that's perfect!", or similar) and we can archive it as done. 68.39.174.238 (talk) 16:06, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Just an FYI, next time I do a manual archival, I'll be archiving all the stale requests that have been marked for 2+ weeks. I'll probably do this as early as tomorrow or maybe sometime next week unless somebody beats me to it.↔NMajdan•talk 20:28, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Could you archive the stale ones to Wikipedia:Graphic Lab/Images to improve/Archive instead of the month pages? That way people can more easily find the stale ones and see if they could be worked on. EG. the Icelandic keyboard one. The really hopeless ones (Ref button?) maybe should just be dropped. (IMAO) 68.39.174.238 (talk) 20:45, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Well, that depends. What is everyone's opinion on archiving stale requests to a separate archive? I did think of this also, but I figured that I didn't want to start this exemption if a bot would not be able to continue it. So, either, we get a bot that can archive requests tagged with stale to a different archive, we have the future bot not archive stale requests and we do it manually, or we just archive all requests to the same place. Thoughts?↔NMajdan•talk 22:45, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

I suggest having the bot archive the completed ones to a date-archive, and manually archiving stale ones when someone is certain that it's stale (EG. Requester is completely unresponsive, request is impossible, or impossible without more information, etc.). On a side note, see the new section at the bottom. 68.39.174.238 (talk) 22:01, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Specific instructions for resolving requests?

I notice that alot of requests seem to "time out" (In the sense of pings, not kindergardeners) and go "Stale" because the original requesters don't know about the new {{resolved}} templates, or in some cases don't come back and check on their requests. Does anyone else think this is the case, and/or how it could be remedied? The earlier suggestion of a "welcome bot" was essentially rejected, and I'm not sure about having people cut and paste a standardized block of text for each request either. Could we do something like P:CE has for adding new news stories? That would require us to change from our current "+" tab though. 68.39.174.238 (talk) 22:04, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

I've been marking requests as resolved when it was obvious that the requester was satisfied. -- I. Pankonin (t·c) 03:57, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Holy Backlog!

Anybody noticed the long line of requests that haven't been touched yet? -- I. Pankonin (t·c) 12:07, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Because everyone's making different versions of the Indonesian CoA? Anyway, some of them are just impossible (The Oklahoman quarter comes to mind), and people may all be busy on a Tuesday (I will be in about ½ an hour). 68.39.174.238 (talk) 22:52, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

I don't think I've ever seen the lab page this full :D Anywho, I'm back from long holiday, so I'll be another helping hand! XcepticZP (talk) 13:09, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

I knocked off 3 or so. I'll see what else I can do.-Andrew c ^[talk] 17:47, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Ahh, so that's what happened. I hope you don't mind someone else finished the flag of Villahermosa/Tabasco. 68.39.174.238 (talk) 02:31, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

ImageBlacklogBot

What do people think about this? 68.39.174.238 (talk) 00:11, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Can you be more specific? Is that an existing bot? If so, I couldn't find it.↔NMajdan•talk 14:52, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Err, I meant Backlog. Anyway, it's the one that goes around and replaces all the images with an SVG that says "This is copyrighted!". 68.39.174.238 (talk) 22:38, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Suggestion for archival of stale requests

I am personally against creating a separate archive location for stale requests. I think having multiple archives could become confusing. So, here is my suggestion. This is all based on the possible future implementation of a bot that recognizes the {{resolved}} template but can be done manually in the meantime. I think for the monthly archive pages that we currently have, we can simply implement a level 1 heading (= Stale =) for stales requests and resolved requests. It is my assumption that the bot will add newly archived requests to the bottom so the stale section would be at the top. I think we would need the bot to ignore stale requests and human editors should address those on a case-by-case basis. Thankfully, stale requests are not common so it shouldn't take much work to watch over these manually (we've been doing well archiving the whole thing ourselves so I think we can handle it). Again, this should be simple enough for us to begin immediately and then implement when a new bot goes online. Thoughts?

Another question, how do we currently date our archivals? Say, a request is made in January and either resolved or marked stale in February. Should this be in the Jan or Feb archive? Or if its created in Jan, marked stale in Feb and finally archived in Mar, which archive should it go in?↔NMajdan•talk 21:09, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

I don't mind the idea, so long as the bot is implemented correctly. As to the last one, that's why I gave up manual archiving, the date-system was either nonexistent or too confusing to figure out. 68.39.174.238 (talk) 01:49, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Out of date page

Wikipedia:Graphic Lab/Wikigraphist abilities is notoriously out of date: Some of the best current users aren't even listed here and a flood of the people who are listed I've never or rarely seen around here. Is the page even used at all? 68.39.174.238 (talk) 04:17, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Marking requests stale

I have made a request to have a bot that can mark requests as stale. You can see my requests here.↔NMajdan•talk 20:11, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

animated gif

Does anyone know how to slow down or speed up an animated gif? Chris (クリス • フィッチ) (talk) 20:04, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Copyright on Wikipedia:Graphic Lab/Images to improve

We need to pay more attention to copyright on this page !

If an image has a fair-use template on it, if it says something like This is a XXXXXXXXXXX, and is protected by copyright and/or trademark, then it goes against policy, and law, to either modify it in any way, or make any derivative works from it. For example a fair-use .png images can not be converted to .svg.

If a user licenses a file as GFDL or Creative Commons and you want to reuse parts of his work, you must give attribution to the original user, and use the same license both GFDL and CC require that you redistribute any full or partial copies under the same license as the original. GFDL is not the same as Public Domain, if you use part of a GFDL image to create a second image, this second image can't be PD-Self.

Images found on internet with no copyright information, are copyrighted by their owner, and can not be used on wikipedia, unless either: you prove the image is released under a free license, or they are licensed as fair-use.

Finally you are not allowed to use fair-use images outside of the article namespace, the graphics lab is in the project (Wikipedia:) namespace, so you are not allowed to post any non-free images on it directly, you must instead simply use a link. This can be achieved by adding a semi-colon after the first pair of square brackets. Jackaranga (talk) 23:57, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Martin Amis

Hi everyone: Could someone help me with an accurate crop of a photograph? I added a portrait of Martin Amis to the Martin Amis article, but it has a lot of extra stuff around his head. Nice stuff but it takes away the focus on his facial features. Could someone help me in any way?-Dwindle dwindle (talk) 03:29, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

You should add your image to the main page (WP:GL/IMPROVE) so people will see it and can see if it can be improved as you suggest. 68.39.174.238 (talk) 03:40, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. I have added the photograph to said list.-Dwindle dwindle (talk) 03:56, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Is this just me?

It seems like we're in the second generation of users and editors here, with almost NO overlap from the first. I'm suspecting this because of things like this (Wikipedia:Graphic Lab/Project map) which I've never seen or seen referenced, and the fact that there exists a template (mentioned there), {{glhangon}}, which exists to prevent image deletions of fair use images while being linked only from here (Something that was discussed earlier)!

If this is the case, I suggest we check out our unknown inheritance, see if it's usefull for us, keep what is and trim the rest. 68.39.174.238 (talk) 03:14, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Some of us have been around since the beginning. I thought this was a great idea when it was created. Granted, my activity level comes and goes. I'll definitely take a look through that cat to see if there is anything useful.↔NMajdan•talk 19:48, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Hello, talking about "old surpises", I added explanaition on Wikipedia:Graphic_Lab/Maps. Note that I don't encourage creation of a sub-Lab/Maps if the current graphic Lab is not over booked. In fact, in our current case, it seems that a [Graphic_Lab/Logo_&_COAT] would be more welcome that a Map Lab. Yug 07:09, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

I was unaware you were here previously. Obviously, I don't intent to short anyone who has been here for that long; my point was solely about the large amount of stuff that's categorized as being ours but is never used. 68.39.174.238 (talk) 16:42, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

No, no I didn't take it as being shorted. I agree with your point.↔NMajdan•talk 19:42, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Have We Gone Too Far?

Everything seems to have solidified lately. Have we flooded the place with too many requests? Or too hard ones? Or...?

Help? This is the coolest thing ever, I (personally) don't want to see the place shrivel up and die...

Thanx, 68.39.174.238 (talk) 19:17, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

It would look a lot less intimidating if we have a bot doing the archiving on a semi-daily basis. Right now, human editors have to archive and that gets done maybe once a week. There doesn't appear to be too many more unresolved requests than usual. Of course, those CoA's are skewing it a bit. We should limit each contributor to two active requests at a time.↔NMajdan•talk 19:44, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure about a hard limit though. Thus far that's been the first major flood I've seen, so maybe we can deal with it just be telling the requester that "That's too many @ once for us to do" ? Anyway, I'll stop adding new requests untill it's a little less stuffed. 68.39.174.238 (talk) 03:03, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

I made a quick overview, I think we need to give an hand to archive satisfied sections (if you read this lines, please contribute by archiving 2 satisfied sections...).

After what, I think we have work to do, but we can manage it on the week. 210.203.61.15 (talk) 17:16, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

All resolved and stale requests have been archived. I went through and added the stale tag to more requests as well.↔NMajdan•talk 17:29, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

It doesn't seem to be working. The page is definitely over flowing. It would be much easier if we split the request up into different pages. XcepticZP (talk) 20:02, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

What are you referring to? What doesn't seem to be working. I performed a manual archival. And what do you mean split the requests into different pages? We don't need to make this page more difficult.↔NMajdan•talk 20:33, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

You seem to be worried about novices needed to figure out how to post requests and all that, fine. In that case a long protracted project, like the map one at the beginning or the route picture generator I requested can be moved to some sort of page dedicated to such protracted requests? I mean we should do every little thing to keep this page to some decent size. My connection isn't the best, but it is far better than dial up. And it takes mine 4mins to load all the images. Think about the dial up users too, lest they be totally discouraged to post requests and follow up on them. Sorry if this comment seems rude, it's not meant to be :) XcepticZP (talk) 19:45, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

I just worry that moving any requests to another page will cause them to be overlooked. I wish there was a way to only load the text of a page. This Thursday marks the second week since I tagged several requests as stale. So I will move those to the stale archive for March at the time.↔NMajdan•talk 13:25, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Also, I still think it would be for the good of the GL project to limit the number of active requests a user can have. Surely an editor would have no issues only making 2 or 3 requests at a time. There are a lot more people making requests than fulfilling them.↔NMajdan•talk 15:45, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

I would definitely support something to prevent "Request dumping"; I just don't want templates on the order of DMV notices/vandalism warnings: "You have submitted requests such that there are more than your allowed total maximum active at any one time; your latest has been delisted. If you continue this in spite of warnings you will be banned and/or reported for vandalism". A bit lurid and obviously overdone I know, but the less bureaucracy here I think the better, since we seem to survive pretty well without it. 68.39.174.238 (talk) 03:34, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

I finally got a reply to my request for an archival bot for the main request page. Hopefully, the bot owner will cook us up something nice. View/comment on the request here.↔NMajdan•talk 20:46, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Automated archival and marking of stale requests on WP:GL/IMPROVE

As per this bot request I have set up automated archiving and marking of stale requests. Requests will be marked stale after 14 days, and archived 7 days after that. Resolved requests will be archived after 3 days; the original request was for after 2 days but it says on the header at the top of the page 3 to 4 days so I went with that. If you want any of this changed I can do so rather easily; I'll be monitoring this page for the next few days. After that put a note on my talk page. A few notes: The bot will archive once a day in the middle of the night. The bot archives stale sections based upon the most recent time stamp, not the date the stale tag was placed there. Thus if someone puts a stale tag on a section without adding a time stamp the section will be archived the next time it runs, so don't do that. Lastly, the bot will never edit or archive the last section on the page due to a shortcoming of my regex that I don't feel like fixing right now. The page seems busy enough that the last section will never need to be marked stale or archived anyway, but just so you know. I just ran the bot and it seems to be functioning as expected, if any errors arise please notify me at once.--Dycedarg ж 06:34, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Sweet, it's good this is done after being talked about for ages. Also, who'se "middle of this night" is this (IE. What timezone)? 68.39.174.238 (talk) 15:50, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

CST. At the moment, I have it set to run at about 08:10 UTC. It's running after the bot finishes with a different task, so the exact time will vary.--Dycedarg ж 17:13, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Hello, can your bot have a more simple signature. This signature will be permanently seen about 10 times on the page, a simple signature such as "Dycebot (talk) 07:34, 25 March 2008 (UTC)" would be great. 220.135.4.212 (talk) 07:34, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

OK, I defancified the bot's signature. On another note, I didn't put any automated archival notice on the page, because I didn't know whether or not you all wanted one or where you would want it if you did. So taking care of that is up to you.--Dycedarg ж 23:34, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm a lil confused. What if we want the bot to remove a stale tag? Do we simply add a comment in the request? Or do we have to do something more elaborate? XcepticZP (talk) 11:15, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

I think we just remove the "stale" notice ourselves. 68.39.174.238 (talk) 12:19, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Correct. If you start up work on a stale request, just remove the stale tag and the bot will treat the section as if it never had one. Everything it does is based upon the most recent time stamp and the presence of a resolved or stale tag; getting it to remove stale tags when a new comment is added would be annoyingly difficult.--Dycedarg ж 16:11, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick reply :) And thanks for doing us an archive bot, from all of us here! XcepticZP (talk) 18:58, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

You are quite welcome.--Dycedarg ж 23:44, 26 March 2008 (UTC)