@
Amschouten: Is this what you were proposing? I can switch to horizontal stripes if needed, or if you have a raster version that would be helpful, too.
A diagram like
this one, from
this page, please. This is a standard illustration of basic physics, and a diagram somewhat like this one is in most oceanography textboks, and has been for over a century, so I am not asking for a copyright violation. Ideally freezing temperature (as well as maximum density) would be plotted as a cross-cutting line/area, with lines distinguished by dashes or weight so the diagram is usable by the
colour-blind.
HLHJ (
talk)
16:04, 25 January 2016 (UTC)reply
Related request; an illustration of fresh-water cabbeling, analogous to the one illustrating salt-water
cabbeling (as above, but no maximum-density or freezing lines, just a cabbeling line joining two same-density endpoints, with endpoints and midpoint labelled A, B, and C, respectively).
The needed equation is called the "UNESCO equation of state for seawater"; it gives density as a property of temperature and salinity and exists as a package or
FOSS function in many and programming/plotting languages/programs.
Following
this we are going to create a "WikiProject India noticeboard" barnstar. Please design a barnstar keeping the them (India, noticeboard) in mind. Thanks. --
Tito Dutta (
talk)
17:56, 19 February 2016 (UTC)reply
@
Nagualdesign: I updated the background color to #EEEEEA (was #D3D7CF ) and simplified the SVG markup since it was quite messy (Inkscape does not make the most efficient SVG).
Looks much better. I notice that you also straightened the arrows, made the arrowheads opaque and corrected one of the font sizes. I appreciate you doing such a thorough job. nagualdesign18:01, 9 March 2016 (UTC)reply
@
Nagualdesign: I included a hidden layer with text using transforms to facilitate further translation, since the Wikimedia SVG rendering engine does not handle angled and transformed text gracefully (and text on a path not at all). The file can be edited in Inkscape with new text, then that text can be copied to the visible layer as a path. I note the file appears to be providing similar information to
File:Orbit1.svg, if that's of any help.
There are some vectors available at
[1]. The link says that the download is for jpgs, but the download also includes some pdfs that appear to be vectors. I don't have time to extract and upload this at the moment, but hopefully someone else can handle it.
Sn1per (
talk)
04:37, 23 February 2016 (UTC)reply
After seeing the first illustration above, I've always wanted to see what's really in Wikipedia, so I sampled 1002 random articles (see data above) Can you make the real contents look as nice as the joke illustration? --
Smallbones(
smalltalk)21:03, 5 January 2016 (UTC)reply
Unfortunately @
Pbroks13: seems to have disappeared since the opinion immediately above. I sent an e-mail last week, but there's been no response. If anybody else wants to work on it, please leave me a message here or on my talk page. I do have some updated material and what might be viewed as a self-made "good try" graphic, though it certainly is not of the quality I'm looking for.
@
Smallbones: I took a rough cut at it. The shelves are redrawn to have exactly 100 "volumes" (representing 100 articles) in a single 100-pixel wide bookcase: 20 volumes per shelf, 5 shelves per case. I put up two versions for your review.
The "subdivided" version may be a little hard to distinguish between the various shades of a single color. The files are actually identical, as I added the subdivisions as an overlay transparency layer, and made it visible for the "subdivided" version. I realize that layers aren't officially supported in Wikimedia, but this was the most efficient way to handle those.
Wow, thank you very much! I've done some updating (recategorized maybe 15 articles), see
User:Smallbones/1000 random results but I should check that everything is updated there. My 1st impression is that this is about 80% of what I want, and that 10% can be easily changed (I hope), and that you might think the last 10% is pretty picky. The "easy 10%" - I really like the proportions of the joke illustration
File: Size of English Wikipedia broken down.png, i.e. the shelves should be taller. I know that's an unrealistic size for shelves, except in old libraries - but it just grabs me. The "picky 10%"
Perhaps the colors in the related categories (e.g. bios) could be made more distinguishable by modifying the intensity or transparency (is that the right word?)
Perhaps the lettering for the sub-cats could be put on top of the "books" in letters that are lighter or darker than the books themselves, so that you can read them if you want, but won't interfere with the white lettering for the big categories.
Maybe just use regular black letters and arrows for the sub-cats (like the "actually useful stuff" in the joke illustration) or a combination
I really like the 16% in sports finding - I had no previous idea of this. Perhaps a cross-hatching for the sports bios and the SOC (sports) category. It would be especially nice if these were placed together.
I'll send you an email Sunday night after triple checking all the numbers in the table at 1000 random results and show you how I make a mess of this with a spreadsheet graphic (it'll at least show some of my ideas - but I can't do lettering at all).
@
Smallbones: I've updated the "NoSub" version (broad categories only) with 8-shelf bookcases, which is what the "joke" illustration shows. Thanks! It does look much better, but I'm using the old numbers for now until I get them tweaked. Biography and Society are next to each other so it should be easy to "carve out" the sports sections.
I'd love to get an extraction of figure 1a for
this document, please. In addition, I'd love to have it reflected, so that 0 years B.P. is located in the lower right corner, not the lower left one, and I think the break in the time axis is not necessary (it would be just as accurate to just connect two points closest to it with a straight line--
R8R (
talk)
10:16, 13 February 2016 (UTC)reply
Great work, thank you! One last thing, though: could you please mirror the graph horizontally, so that the time axis stretches not from 0 to 5000 years before present and beyond, but rather from 5000 years before present to 0 (I think the break can stay.)--
R8R (
talk)
03:51, 17 February 2016 (UTC)reply