User:Merbabu/Archive15

---

Picture of the Week

A picture that you uploaded entitled IstanaMaimum WEB-1.jpg has been selected as Picture of the Week on the Portal Indonesia for the Week 50, 2007. Thank you for your contribution to promote images of Indonesia.

— Indon (reply) — 09:52, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations!

Congratulations! Your image Image:Kerbau Jawa.jpg was the random picture of the day for November 5, 2007. It looked like this: . Again, Congratulations! - Presidentman (talk) Random Picture of the Day 21:11, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

For the heads up on Jackp. --Stephen 03:49, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you very much for the barnstar! Love, Neranei (talk) 12:59, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

photos

Hi,

please respond to the discussion in the Angkor Wat article before deleting. See External photos in the angkor discussion site. Thanks, Best. Georg —Preceding unsigned comment added by GeorgASD (talk • contribs) 12:09, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Leonardo da Vinci

Please leave the images alone! They have been carefully sized to satisfy a number of criteria. They are artworks discussed in the text. Artworks, in general need to be displayed larger rather than smalller in order to see the content clearly. Those that are to the left have been selected for that placement. Having pics of landscape and vertical format below each other doesn't look good.

Amandajm 12:38, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Please learn to be polite and stop shouting. Please see WP:MOS#Images. I see no special criteria for art works. The idea is to click on them to see the bigger. Notions of "looking good" are very subjective. --Merbabu 12:43, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

I was under the opinion that using capitals was equivalent to SHOUTING, and that saying please was considered courteous.

I too have read the instructions abbout the use of images. When the images are not merely illustrattive, but are the subject under discussion, which is the case in an article that deals with an artist's work, then having to enlarge continually makes the process of looking and reading difficullt, and comparison between pictures almost impossible.

The method for using left-hand pics without detaching the heading from its subject matter is discussed in the wiki-article about how to use pics and I follow it.

The effect of what you have done, by taking a universal approach, is that pics of great significance, "the Baptism of Christ" for example, are now of seemingly lesser significance thann those which are really not as important to the article, Donatello's David, for example.

One of the things which I consider when sizing pics is how much info is going in the caption. If there is quite a lot of info and the box is narrow, it then takes up many lines, and makes the box very much longer than if the bbox was somewhat wider. My pics are often sized to their caption content as well as their relative importance and how they relate to what else is around them.

Amandajm 12:58, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

What you describe is very vague and of subjective value - and it seems simply along the lines that tickle your own personal taste (and the effect of which is probably lost on other screens). You size pics based on there significance? huh? This is not an art book or magazine, but an encyclopaedia. I see no pressing need here to deviate from WP:MOS#Images. Which wiki-article is it that you say mentions all this? --Merbabu 13:08, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Leonardo's "Last Supper" is, with Michelangelo's "Creation of Adam", the most famous religious painting in the world. The "Mona Lisa" is beyond any doubt the world's most famous portrait. If two works can afford enlagement and if any image in the entire wiki collection is worthy of central placement (a facilty provided) it is the Last Supper. Please return it to its size and central placement.

(Another art article that I have worked on which also has large images of paintings has recently receive FA status. Restoration of the Sistine Chapel frescoes.) It wasn't seen as a problem.

Amandajm 13:35, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

I have just read what you wrote above. It seems rather rude, to me.

• As a matter of fact, I am aware that layouts look different on different screens, so I vary the proportions of the space on my own screen to see what effect making it wider or narrower will have.
• WP:MOS#Images. I checked it out.
• I am aware that this is an encyclopedia. Fortunately, being online, it facilitates the reproduction of images.
• As for my approach being is "very vague and of subjective value", everything that is written here is subjective in nature. It all depends on the knowledge, the viewpoint, the prejudices and the choices of those who write. But when it comes to deciding which of the pictures in this article should be larger and which should be smaller, then I am probably the best person to make the decision. Why? because I wrote it, giving weight (subjective if you like, but led by many experts) to certain pantings considered his most significant works. (Until I started on the article, it didn't discuss Leonardo for the thing that he was reowned for for 400 years: Painting)
• I can think of few subject where the size and clarity of the imagge discussed on the page is of more significance than an art article. Your argument that this is an encyclopedia and not a book or magazine is fatuous to say the least.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Amandajm (talk • contribs)

Howard's Asian remarks

Hi Merbabu. Can you check the edit you just made to the John Howard article regarding Asian remarks. There may be a grammatical error in the sentence just added. Bye, Lester 05:04, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Ah, well-spotted. I've now fixed it, I think. --Merbabu 05:08, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Animal & Portal

How are you, mate? I see you got interested on other subject. I'd be good if somebody improves Indonesian animal articles. I still don't know what interested me again in Wikipedia after Borobudur. The project seems not to go further. Collab is practically dead. Maybe I'll take some long editing rest, only to revert here and there. Oh, btw the portal needs bio article now. Speaking about portal, are there people reading it? Somehow it's a bit useless to maintain it. — Indon (reply) — 05:11, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Bintang Beer

Hi there. I happened to be drinking a bottle of the stuff when I caught sight of your article and couldn't resist taking a photo... It looks (and tastes) rather flat, so next time I'm by a pool, I'll try and take a better pic. Regards Davidelit 14:22, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Ha ha - well, given that Bintang costs about $80/case where I am, waiting for your Jakarta pool photos is a far more attractive photographic proposition. --Merbabu 14:33, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks and a request...

Hi Cla68, thanks for providing "references" to articles, but I'm worried that such an addition is misleading. Don't get me wrong, it's good to have the information put in there (assuming they are indeed reliable sources), but I fell it's important we are careful not to give people the impression they were used to actually write the article. They are kind of link additional material that may contain some of the info in the article, but not all, and may contain additional.

Please continue to add the sources, but, please put them either as a (general) "Further Reading" section, or if you can link them to specific info, it's even better if you can add them as in-line cites.

I'd be happy to hear your thoughts on this. thanks --Merbabu 09:21, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

I understand what you're saying. Books that aren't actually used for the article should be in a "further reading" section. The thing is, a lot of those articles are so undeveloped that by putting the book in the "references" section, I'm indirectly advocating that whoever decides to improve that article should really consider using that book. If I'm the one who ever decides to improve the article, usually with FA as the goal, then I'll probably use that book as one of the references. Of course, that doesn't mean that the book can't be listed at first in the "further reading" section and then moved to the references section at a later time. Cla68 22:25, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

History of the Netherlands

Hi Merbabu,

Why did you revert the info that i put into this article about the present state of the Dutch immigration debate? I was the one who put Fortuyn and Van Gogh into the article, because i thought it was a major issue two years ago. Now the immigration discussion has waned a bit, so the article needs to be updated.Daanschr 07:58, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Because you provided no reliable source to verify that it is a "major issue". --Merbabu 08:46, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

I can only provide Dutch sources. Is that a problem?Daanschr 13:42, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

U2 early days

Yes, I would absolutely love that, however, I agree with you that it wouldn't be exactly notable. I was actually thinking of a whole U2 history article; that way, the quotes could be included (that interview website is great, by the way). Thanks for cleaning up the quotes, I've added some that are relevant to album articles and single articles, I don't think it's too long/clunky. Thanks for the congratulations! Regards, Neranei (talk) 23:45, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Changing the subject entirely...

I was very intrigued to read on your user page that you contribute "using a typewriter, and send all contributions via Mail". Since you seem to be very up-to-date with affairs, Wikipedian and not, I guess the post must be bloody quick in your neck of the (Australian?) woods!

Any details of your effective system that would not infringe your privacy I would be delighted to know...

And don't let some bores grind you down (look what I have to contend with) (wry grimace). Alice.S 06:09, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

You may be interested in the viewpoint of Corticopia as being expressed here at Talk:Oceania Alice^✉ 14:21, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

You may also wish to add your felicitations. Alice^✉ 00:17, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

QUOTES

I have no problem whatsoever with the quotes you introduced on the page. The problem is that you erased the table about East Timor and Indonesia, and wrote a text in a way to make stressed that Timor was more Asian than an Oceanic nation. You are making the quotes, but at the same time, transforming it on a biased article...your edition surely points out to an Asian-driven orientation, and even you recongnized in the discussion page that Timor has a double status...so, you need to leave it equal, consider both sides. Emerson —Preceding unsigned comment added by Domaleixo (talk • contribs) 09:13, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Remember...

To denounce my case to the Australian police too! Emerson —Preceding unsigned comment added by Domaleixo (talk • contribs) 09:19, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Palazzo Pitti

Hello Merbabu, I have reverted your changes at the above page, with an explanatory summary. The problem is that your edits altered the layout and disorientated the text and created areas of white space. The MOS does not declare that image sizes cannot be specified when necessary. Your edits also altered the integrity of the page - images of comparatively minor personages towered over the postage stamp sized images of major personalities. I'm sure you will appreciate that every page and image is different and according to the MOS can be treated so. Regards. Giano 10:06, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

I did not have those problems with the layout - in fact mine looked better with the MOS changes. The MOS image section is written to cater in the best manner for the most setups. However, I will not insist on some of the changes i made where there might be a problem (ie, the two adjacent landscape pix), but only make them where there is clearly no difference to layout. Thanks. --Merbabu 10:11, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

As for using image sizes to rank people and items of importance, well that's just a headache - what about the two "postage stamp" size pics at the top? Is that for page layout integrity or importance ranking? --Merbabu 10:15, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

I repeat you are altering the integrity of the page. The manual of style does not demand this. Please do not revert again. Giano 10:18, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

You haven't explained how it alters the page integrity. I've left the two smaller images. Please don't revert again until you explain clearer. Pretend I'm really stupid. ;-) --Merbabu 10:20, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Re: List of countries spanning more than one continent

None of the tables are referenced correctly and from looking at that website they seem to have been manually put together, so I'd remove all of them. From a quick skim of the website, the 'Area in continent X' does not appear to have been sourced from the national entries and I can't see where else it would have come from so it seems to be some kind of OR. --Nick Dowling 10:40, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Using talk pages

Hi Merbabu. I always used the talk pages. Most of the discussions in the John Howard article have been started by me, trying to coax the non-talkers to the page. Cheers, --Lester 11:17, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi Merbabu. You asked a couple of times "what's the latest" on the same-sex Commonwealth superannuation issue. The election promise in 2004 was to end discrimination in superannuation for same-sex couples, but after the 2004 election, discrimination remained for Commonwealth super schemes, which it controlled (state governments had previously stopped discrimination against same-sex couples in state super schemes). In the past week or so, Malcolm Turnbull has promised (again) that if elected, the Liberal government will end discrimination in Commonwealth super schemes. I don't think there will be any developments on this, as it is an election promise, so no legislation will actually change until after the election. Cheers, Lester 19:53, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Sumatran Rhino

Hi Merbabu, thanks for the kind note of encouragement. I started working on Javan Rhinoceros (currently a featured article candidate) a couple of months ago, and I learned so much about Sumatran Rhinos in the research that I thought I'd try polishing it up too! If you see me making lots of typos, or if you have any suggestions, please let me know. Cheers! --JayHenry 07:14, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

I agree

I agree with you 100% and thank you for your kind words.--Lucky Mitch (talk) 04:15, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanyou

Thanks for your congratulations! I don't usually write "off wiki". But since it was a new article, and my spelling is not good, and I keep getting double letters despite adjusting the speed and so on, to avoid them, I thought that I'd write in Word, so as to have the benefit of the spell check. Most of the articles I have worked on have been major rewrites of existent art or architecture articles. Amandajm (talk) 22:18, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

RacialVariancesAnalyser

I'm not sure if he's a sock of the person you'd suggested - wasn't close to the action on that puppet case, so I don't know the kind of person we're talking about - but methinks he's got more experience than the age of his account suggests. I've currently blocked him for his persistent willingness to insult me after I suggested he tone it down a bit, but I'm not expecting miracles out of it. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 12:09, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for your continued action. DrKiernan (talk) 08:28, 28 November 2007 (UTC)