Wikipedia:Graphics Lab/Illustration workshop
< Wikipedia:Graphics Lab
Illustration workshop
New request
Photography workshop
Map workshop
Skip to:
Table of contentsTagged requestsFirst discussionEnd of page▶ New request ◀
 To top of page
Graphics Lab/Illustration workshop
The Graphics Lab is a project to improve the graphical content of the Wikimedia projects. Requests for image improvements can be added to the workshop pages: Illustrations, Photographs and Maps. For questions or suggestions one can use the talk pages: Talk:Graphics Lab, Talk:Illustrations, Talk:Photographs and Talk:Maps.
This specific page is the requests page for the illustration workshop. Anyone can make a request for an illustration to be improved or created for a Wikipedia article. Clicking the "New Request" button will bring you to a standard template for submitting requests, as well as general advice that should be followed.
Illustration workshop requests archives
Requests from recent years: 2006200720082009201020112012201320142015201620172018201920202021
This page is automatically archived by ClueBot III.

For graphists:
Page header:
If you have completed work and not received a reply you may use the {{GL Illustration reply}} template to inform the requester.
Graphists and other visitors to the Graphic Lab may be interested in the RSS feed of changes to this page. You may find it here.
Commons Illustration workshopSVG help boardImage candidates:
Image requests by subjectSVG help documentationQuality
SVG maintenance categoryCreating charts and graphsValued
SVG conversion requests Featured

Good article and featured article topicon redesign
Yes, this one is a big one.
Background: The current symbols for good articles and featured content have been used since those systems were introduced way back in Wikipedia's early days. They have significant problems. The featured article icon is too skeuomorphic, giving it an outdated look, and its excessive detail causes it to render poorly at small scale. The good article icon, meanwhile, has been adopted throughout the rest of Wikimedia (and in some places on Wikipedia) as the "support vote" icon, leading to conflicting usage. Far worse than the issues with them individually, however, is the fact that there is no shared visual language between them (the GA icon uses the norro style, and the FA icon does not use any style). When compounded by their overall lack of prominence (a separate issue that we're trying to address), this has led to the unfortunate situation where many (perhaps most) non-editing readers could not tell you whether a star or a green badge is a higher distinction. Given how much effort we put into the GA/FA systems, there's more than a bit of tragic irony to that.
Process: This is the first stage in the process of redesigning the icons (after informal discussions in various places). Ideally, several proposals will be put forth that can be compared against the status quo in a more formal and widely-advertised round of !voting (similar to the process for the MediaWiki logo redesign), with the winner adopted.
Design details: The redesigned icons could end up being anything from checkmarks (a la the Twitter verification badge) to a silver star for GAs to a multi-star system that begins with one star for stubs and increases thereafter; feel free to get creative.
Also, since the whole idea here is to unify the symbology, the redesign will need to include the associated symbols in addition to the main icons. You don't have to design them all now, but candidates with at least an articulated vision of what they should look like may be more likely to win support once we reach the formal !voting stage. Here are the current icons still in use that I could find (there may be a few more fringe ones):
Related icons
  • Former good article icon
  • Good article reassessment icon
  • Good article candidate icon
  • Former featured article icon
  • Former featured article candidate icon
  • Featured article candidate icon
  • Article for improvement icon
  • Good topic icon
  • Good topic candidate icon
  • Featured topic icon
  • Featured topic candidate icon
  • Former featured topic icon
  • Former featured topic candidate icon
In truth, the potential scope of this project could be a lot bigger, trying to unify all of the icons used anywhere on Wikipedia. However, recent attempts to do so have failed, and their utility is questionable, given that most icons do not appear in reader-facing areas and thus have a vastly more limited reach. Redesigning these two icons is a more feasible task with clear and significant benefits for readers across tens of thousands of pages.
Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}}talk 05:08, 7 October 2020 (UTC)
Resolved discussion about mandate for change
Has there actually been any discussion about changing these icons somewhere? Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 23:37, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
David Fuchs, the direct impetus for this request was a tangential discussion at the Village Pump. I think there have been a few other "we ought to change this" offhand musings over the years that are mostly buried in archives at this point. But largely, as I lay out above, this is the ground floor. If you have thoughts about how to organize the process to ensure visibility/boost participation/etc., those are welcome. {{u|Sdkb}}talk 22:09, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
You may want to start with an RfC (or, I guess, two parallel questions) on changing the icons in general to get a mandate for the change, as well as soliciting opinions on what changes people would like to see so any designers have a firmer grasp of what might be acceptable. Not like the original icons were chosen with a ton of deliberation (from what I can see at the WT:GA archives one editor unilaterally came up with the GA icon) but at this point I think you're going to have to get buy-in. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 00:16, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
David Fuchs, hmm, I'm not quite sure what form that RfC would take. Should it be a yes/no "should these be changed?" question at WP:VPR, or an open-ended "What changes would you want to see?" brainstorming at WP:VPI, or something in between? I don't want to hand over too much of designers' work to general editors, since I trust designers to know best when it comes to designing. {{u|Sdkb}}talk 00:48, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
I'd suggest the former, with an area for further discussion of the latter. First step of making changes is getting people to agree to a change. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 15:21, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
David Fuchs, sounds good. I'm going to put the proposal forward there, and mark this as on hold for now. {{u|Sdkb}}talk 19:51, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
This is my passing opinion. There is a ooui icon called "articleCheck" () and this is what I think a "GA" icon should look similar to. Basically a sheet (representing a page) with a check on it. And in a green color instead of black. For the FA icon, a simple star/medal design on a sheet with an appropriate color would make sense to keep the two icons inline with each other. SInce I believe that most users could understand a star is more important than a check icon. Basic icons such as these are the only way to keep them readable when used as topicons. Terasail[✉] 17:00, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
Update: Mandate acquired
The formal Village Pump proposal has been archived, and per here, it successfully acquired a mandate for the icons to be redesigned, so I am removing the "on hold" box around this section. I'll leave it up to others to decide how precisely to proceed from here; I hope that someone steps up to take the lead on shepherding the process from here forward, since I'm not sure I can do it myself. This thread can be archived once (and only once) we've moved to the next stage. {{u|Sdkb}}talk 22:09, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
Proposal 1
Proposal was unsuccessful. {{u|Sdkb}}talk 03:02, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Main page: Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals) § Redesigning the featured, good, and article assessment icons
  • Proposal
  • Prop with assessments
@Sdkb: I've went ahead and made some icon ideas and where I think they would be appropriate. Let me know your thoughts. Pbrks (talk) 14:44, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
Pbrks, there are some nice icons in that set; thanks for putting it together! I think the next step would be arranging a large-scale discussion for those and any other proposals. {{u|Sdkb}}talk 16:53, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Ambox warning pn.svg
The shadow of this image is cut off on the right, which becomes easily noticeable at larger sizes. Some of the other images this one is based off may have this issue too. See Commons:File:Ambox_warning_pn.svg#Summary​. Can someone fix this? Thanks, DesertPipeline (talk) 11:55, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
I've noticed this before; would definitely be nice to resolve! (Of course, eventually someday we'll want to standardize all our symbols, and no guarantee this will be among the chosen.) {{u|Sdkb}}talk 07:08, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
DesertPipeline, Sdkb I have looked at this file a bit. The original is 380*330 px and if one wants to be really sure nothing is clipped the document size has to be increased to 437,47*384,42 px. The triangel will still has the same size as now.
Here is a PNG draft to show you the size and the yellow is just to more clearly see the shadow. It doesn't look like the shadow reaches that far out but this is what the program tells me it does. So making it any smaller might be visible sometimes as a clip.
I have now idea if changing the document size will have any impact or what kind of impact on all the places this and the others are used, this has to be looked in to before changing it. Also there is a local version kept here at Wikimedia which also makes a change more complicated and is nothing I have any knowledge of.
Another option is to keep the document size but change the shadow to one without blur. The shadow can be darker or lighter. Draft without blur. Yellow just to compare with other draft.
If you want to anything more from me please always ping me, thanks. --Goran tek-en (talk) 17:25, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
User:Goran tek-en: Thank you for your reply. Unfortunately, I cannot view any of the images, as they're hosted on Google Drive. Google Drive requires proprietary Javascript, and I don't like to visit Google websites or services anyway due to privacy issues. I don't know of any service where these images could be hosted which is reasonably ethical. However, I don't think it's a good idea to increase the size of the image, because this would likely cause issues with all its uses where it was expected to be a specific size. I think a better idea would be to just redraw the shadow and make it smaller so it fits within the image's borders at its current size. Are you able to do this? Thanks, DesertPipeline (talk) 02:20, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
DesertPipeline Can you contact me by email from my user page and then I can send them to you. --Goran tek-en (talk) 12:38, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
User:Goran tek-en: Sorry, I can't do that. Is it not possible for you to just redraw the shadow though? DesertPipeline (talk) 12:42, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
DesertPipeline This is way to important to change without you seeing anything. As this is used in so many places is there some kind of consent to this Sdkb?
Any suggestions on how you can view them as none of the regular ways work for you?
Here. --always ping me--Goran tek-en (talk) 13:26, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
I'm not sure about a wider discussion, but for just fixing a shadow, I'd say we're safe just being bold. One thing I'd suggest keeping in mind is that there may be some uses in which it's desirable for the icon to be centered. {{u|Sdkb}}talk 19:32, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
Sdkb If you want the triangel+shadow to be centered the size of the triangel has to be reduced. It's hard when you add a shadow if that should or should not be included in the "centering" part, it's more about a feeling than any rules behind this.
So would you prefer the the top or the bottom here. Top-new image size, bottom-keep image size. And the yellow is just to better see the shadows. --always ping me--Goran tek-en (talk) 15:54, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
@Goran tek-en: I like the soft shadow. {{u|Sdkb}}talk 17:22, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Sdkb But then the overall image size has to be increased. DesertPipeline What do you say? --always ping me--Goran tek-en (talk) 18:24, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
User:Goran tek-en: I appreciate your help, but I'm not sure I understand what's going on exactly. Please can you explain why it's required to make the image larger? I feel like that's not a good idea, because again, there are uses on Wikipedia where a certain image size is expected. Is it impossible to not have the shadow cut off at the edge without resizing the image? As I said before, I think the best solution is to simply make the shadow smaller so it doesn't get cut off. If that's not possible, please can you explain why? I just need more context here. Thanks, DesertPipeline (talk) 02:00, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
DesertPipeline In a vector program which is used to create a SVG file you can create " soft shadows" by the use of blur or gradient. They work differently but basically they thin out a color (grey for shadow mostly) to 0%, then it is fully transparent and this is furthest away from the object itself. In the present image that length is to short that is why it's clipped.
  1. So if we want to keep the image size and have a soft shadow we would have to decrease the warning triangel to make the shadow fit within the image size.
  2. Bottom image here is another solution.
  3. The last option is to remove the shadow all together. In most cases where this is used, does the shadow enhance the visual understanding or experience? Can you please link to some different ways of using it. --always ping me--Goran tek-en (talk) 12:47, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
User:Goran tek-en: Examples of the use of this image can be found at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3AWhatLinksHere&target=File%3AAmbox+warning+pn.svg&namespace=10
Can you upload on Wikipedia a version with increased image size to fit the shadow and a version without the shadow so it can be tested with some template examples? That would probably be the best idea. Thanks, DesertPipeline (talk) 10:02, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
DesertPipeline Now you can find them here Commons:file:Ambox warning pn-large.svg, Commons:file:Ambox warning pn-no-shadow-centered.svg​. --always ping me--Goran tek-en (talk) 18:58, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
User:Gorak tek-en: You need to tag them as public domain images in the same way the original is, or they'll be deleted after a week. I'm going to try to test the images now. Thanks, DesertPipeline (talk) 02:39, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
User:Goran tek-en: Pinging again because I spelled your name wrong last time. DesertPipeline (talk) 02:40, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
See my template sandbox for examples: User:DesertPipeline/templates/sandbox​. Thanks, DesertPipeline (talk) 02:50, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
talk:DesertPipeline|talk]]) 10:02, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
DesertPipeline Yes I noticed that miss with license and categories, fixed. On your sandbox page I think you linked to the wrong image in "no shadow". Get back to me with your decision.
Do you have knowledge on templates and how to create a variant on an existing? --always ping me--Goran tek-en (talk) 12:44, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
User:Goran tek-en: I notice that File:Ambox warning pn-large.svg has an image size a lot larger than how far the shadow extends. Can you try replacing that file with one that is just large enough to accommodate the shadow, but no larger? I think that might work. Thanks, DesertPipeline (talk) 04:25, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
DesertPipeline At the beginning of this request in the Discussion part I explained it:
Here is a PNG draft to show you the size and the yellow is just to more clearly see the shadow. It doesn't look like the shadow reaches that far out but this is what the program tells me it does. So making it any smaller might be visible sometimes as a clip. --always ping me--Goran tek-en (talk) 09:34, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
User:Goran tek-en: We can check by making it as small as the visible shadow and then increasing it if necessary. Also, you can revert to previous versions of files on Commons, so if we need to return to the original we can do it that way. Regards, DesertPipeline (talk) 03:58, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
User:Goran tek-en: Can you try decreasing the size of File:Ambox warning pn-large.svg to 388x332 from the centre? Thanks, DesertPipeline (talk) 12:25, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
DesertPipeline Then I would have to decrease the warning triangel with shadow, is that what you want? --always ping me--Goran tek-en (talk) 15:44, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
User:Goran tek-en: I checked in GIMP and the entire image including the shadow should be visible at that size. Why do you say you would need to decrease the size of the image to do this? DesertPipeline (talk) 02:35, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
DesertPipeline This file Commons:file:Ambox warning pn-large.svg is 416×356 px in image size and you want me to change it to 388x332 px, to me that means decreasing the image to 388x332 px? If you don't mean that you have to explain in some other way. --always ping me--Goran tek-en (talk) 16:29, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
User:Goran tek-en: What I meant to say is that I'd like you to decrease the size of the image's borders so that the image size (not the size of the imagery in the image) becomes 388x332, from the centre so the imagery is still centred inside it. Does that make more sense? If not, I'll upload an example for you. Regards, DesertPipeline (talk) 05:16, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
DesertPipeline This image is a png version of the svg and is 388*332 px in image size, is this what you want? --always ping me--Goran tek-en (talk) 14:27, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
User:Goran tek-en: Unfortunately I can't view it as it's on a Google service. Can you upload it to Commons temporarily so I can view it, or do you want me to upload the example image I made there? DesertPipeline (talk) 02:41, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
DesertPipeline I forgot, 388*332 px --always ping me--Goran tek-en (talk) 17:20, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
User:Goran tek-en: I wasn't able to view that one either; sorry. I've uploaded an example to Wikipedia for you. It turns out that the size I suggested wasn't sufficient, so I increased it. You can see the size on the file's page: File:Ambox_warning_pn-large_example.png​. Once you've made the change, let me know. Thanks, DesertPipeline (talk) 04:03, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
DesertPipeline I really can't understand that you could not view that, there is nothing strange at all, really.
Now we have three test versions Commons:file:398-338 Ambox warning pn.svg​Commons:file:Ambox warning pn-large.svg, Commons:file:Ambox warning pn-no-shadow-centered.svg​. The ones which will not be used should be deleted. --always ping me--Goran tek-en (talk) 16:47, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
User:Goran tek-en It seems that with File:398-338 Ambox warning pn.svg, I can make it pretty much the same size as the original by adding two to whatever size the original is at. See here: User:DesertPipeline/templates/sandbox#Side-by-side_comparisons​. Do you think it's possible to both ensure the shadow isn't cut off while not changing its size compared to the original? I suppose that's not logically possible. Let me know what you think of the comparisons anyway. Regards, DesertPipeline (talk) 03:45, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
DesertPipeline To me it looks cut at the bottom and with this image size it might look cut sometimes.
I still think the best would be to remove the shadow, keep size of triangel, center it, keep the image size. The shadow doesn't add any value to me when used like this. It would solve the issue for real. --always ping me--Goran tek-en (talk) 17:16, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
User:Goran tek-en: Other ambox icons have shadows too, so if it's removed from this one it would be inconsistent. Also, what do you mean by "It looks cut at the bottom"? DesertPipeline (talk) 05:56, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
DesertPipeline You asked me above Let me know what you think of the comparisons anyway. for this link User:DesertPipeline/templates/sandbox#Side-by-side_comparisons and to me "new 102px" looks cut in the bottom. --always ping me--Goran tek-en (talk) 17:54, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
User:Goran tek-en: It seems that the original SVG is sized in such a way to have the bottom shadow not "end" if you look at the picture at the top of this thread. Do you mean that it would look better if the new one was resized vertically so the same is the case for it? DesertPipeline (talk) 02:39, 14 May 2021 (UTC)
DesertPipeline To me there are only two options. 1: remove shadow on all but keep the outer image size. 2: or use Commons:file:Ambox warning pn-large.svg which has a larger outer image size. --always ping me--Goran tek-en (talk) 11:33, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
User:Goran tek-en: Can you try reducing the vertical size of the image so the bottom shadow of the triangle is touching the bottom of the image? [[User:DesertPipeline|DesertP​Commons:File:ipeline (talk) 12:49, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
DesertPipeline If I do that then we are back to the same problem with a clipped shadow all the time so I can't see any meaning with that. --always ping me--Goran tek-en (talk) 14:35, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
User:Goran tek-en: I thought you said it looks better if the bottom shadow is touching the bottom of the image? DesertPipeline (talk) 05:57, 16 May 2021 (UTC)
DesertPipeline Either I wrote something wrong or you misunderstood me and I don't know where because that has never been my intention.
What I tried to say is that here User:DesertPipeline/templates/sandbox#Side-by-side_comparisons "new 102px" looks cut at the bottom to me, not showing the full shadow. --always ping me--Goran tek-en (talk) 14:23, 16 May 2021 (UTC)
User:Goran tek-en: To be honest I think the 398-338 image looks fine. I don't see any cut-off myself. It may be positioned slightly differently compared to the old one but I don't think that's something which can be avoided. Also, are you looking at the one on the left or the one on the right in my template sandbox? The one on the right is the new one.
I think we should ask for a wider opinion to see if people are okay with the change here, but I'm not sure where to go to do that. Do you know? DesertPipeline (talk) 03:54, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
DesertPipeline This is your project/request I just do graphic work and manly on commons so I'm sorry but I have no idea. --always ping me--Goran tek-en (talk) 17:06, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
User:Goran tek-en: I downloaded Inkscape to attempt to edit it too. What do you think of this: File:Ambox_warning_pn-border_edit_2_test.svg​? DesertPipeline (talk) 04:41, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
And a comparison in my template sandbox: User:DesertPipeline/templates/sandbox#Original_and_test_edit_by_DesertPipeline_(both_100px) DesertPipeline (talk) 05:05, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
DesertPipeline I don't understand, was not your idea to not have a cut shadow? --always ping me--Goran tek-en (talk) 15:09, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
User:Goran tek-en: Do you mean that it's cut off at the right in my image, at the bottom, or both? Because if you mean the bottom only, I don't think that actually looks wrong – but maybe I'm just used to it. DesertPipeline (talk) 04:19, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
DesertPipeline [1] here the left image is cut bottom and right. Right image is cut bottom and a little to the right. Both look bad to me.
Read at the top under Request what you asked for. Fixing this issue, so I don't understand what you are doing now, sorry. --always ping me--Goran tek-en (talk) 15:31, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
User:Goran tek-en: I think I understand what you mean by it being cut off at the bottom (because the shadow isn't fully in the image), but I'm not sure if it looks right to have the full bottom shadow visible. At least in my opinion the bottom looks fine. I don't know if it's actually cut off on the right still in my version; are you sure about that? I can't see it myself. DesertPipeline (talk) 07:32, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
DesertPipeline We all see the same things a little different depending on a lot of things, so I can only say what I see. --always ping me--Goran tek-en (talk) 17:31, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
User:Goran tek-en: I'm not exactly sure how to do it myself, so can you try centring your version of the one with the shadow so that the exclamation icon itself is centred, but not the shadow? As in, having the same amount of space on the left as on the right, as if there's an imaginary shadow of the exact same size on that side too. Also doing the same with the top – having the canvas be exactly as far away from the exclamation icon itself at the top as at the bottom. Also, it should be as close as possible to the top and right shadows as possible to reduce size differences between the current one and the new one. DesertPipeline (talk) 01:59, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
DesertPipeline I'm sorry but to me this request has derailed. You are now asking for adjustments that will newer be seen or perceived by any one in the content that it will be used and it doesn't enhance the function of it either. There is no meaning to put in work for this kind of adjustment.
If you want everything in the triangel to be centered within the image, then again I say, remove the shadow, center triangel and everything is fine. --always ping me--Goran tek-en (talk) 15:14, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
User:Goran tek-en: What I mean is to increase the canvas size on the left and top so it's the same distance from the triangle itself as on the right and bottom. Centring the triangle might make the image look better. I've tried doing it myself but I can't seem to get it precisely right, so can you try and upload it as a new file for me to see how it looks? DesertPipeline (talk) 03:27, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
DesertPipeline You will have to clean up/delete among all those versions later on. 345-409 Ambox warning centered --always ping me--Goran tek-en (talk) 13:09, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
User:Goran tek-en: Unfortunately that one is a lot smaller. What do you think we should do now? Do you want to try editing the one I made (​File:Ambox_warning_pn-border_edit_2_test.svg​) so that it looks correct in your view, then upload it as a new version of that file so that we don't add even more new files? DesertPipeline (talk) 11:30, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Addendum: Also, I don't know why, but the source code of my edit is apparently invalid.
Regarding what changes you should make, I would recommend increasing the canvas size just enough for nothing to be cut off, or making the bottom shadow smaller. Whatever looks better. I think it's important that the general size of the image is preserved as much as possible here, so that all templates that use the image don't have to have their size adjusted (although I suppose that wouldn't be too much of a problem). However, excessive whitespace may still cause it to look wrong. I think this is quite tricky, frankly, and I'm sorry that this has been so complicated and unorganised. DesertPipeline (talk) 12:22, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
DesertPipeline This is your request, I'm just a graphic worker and besides what I have said before (no shadow) I have nothing to add.
User:Goran tek-en: So would you say there's no way to fix it properly without removing the shadow? Like I said earlier, I don't think we can do that as other Wikipedia icons have a shadow, so it would be inconsistent. Also, I have no idea how my version is so much smaller than the original. Do you know why it says the source code of my edit is invalid though? DesertPipeline (talk) 03:17, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
DesertPipeline As this is your request I don't really now what your aim was with this. To my understanding it was the problem with the clipped shadow.
User:Goran tek-en: Thank you for fixing the image. Also, I think I know what the problem is: The bottom shadow looks weird on the left side. It just kind of stops. This is present in the original too. If that was changed, do you think it would look okay? DesertPipeline (talk) 09:41, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
DesertPipeline I don't think it looks strange to the left, it's to the right and below is for me the whole discussion here.Goran tek-en (talk) 19:04, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
User:Goran tek-en: Sorry, I meant the bottom left. The area where the shadow just stops. Below on the right and the right itself looks fine to me, but on the bottom left the way the shadow stops looks weird to me. Do you see what I mean? DesertPipeline (talk) 04:45, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
DesertPipeline On which image, we have so many versions.Goran tek-en (talk) 15:12, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
User:Goran tek-en: The one that I uploaded, File:Ambox_warning_pn-border_edit_2_test.svg​. DesertPipeline (talk) 05:57, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
DesertPipeline All the bottom.Goran tek-en (talk) 13:06, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
User:Goran tek-en: You consider the bottom shadow in its entirety of that image to have a problem? DesertPipeline (talk) 13:08, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
DesertPipeline Problem has to be defined first then. The bottom part with the shadow is clipped and doesn't look good to me.Goran tek-en (talk) 13:24, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
User:Goran tek-en: Would you say it looks worse or better than the original one, File:Ambox warning pn.svg? Or the same? The issue I have is that if the canvas is expanded at the bottom to accommodate the entire bottom shadow, the image will be too large. Is there anything that can be done about that? DesertPipeline (talk) 13:28, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
DesertPipeline They have different sizes already so I don't understand. The only way to get rid of this problem within keeping image size is to remove shadow (on all variations also) all together or add a hard shadow, no soft edges. There is not space enough for anything else and keeping the triangel as big as possible is much more important. --''always ping me''-- Goran_tek-en (talk) 17:10, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
User:Goran tek-en: I'm not sure why the edit I made shows as smaller on its file page, but with the comparisons I did it seems to not be noticeably smaller than the original. Can you try increasing the canvas size only at the bottom for it then, just enough that the shadow isn't cut off, so we can see how that looks? DesertPipeline (talk) 03:41, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
DesertPipeline But we have done that before, you are just going round in circles, it doesn't get you any closer to a solution. --''always ping me''-- Goran_tek-en (talk) 18:27, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
User:Goran tek-en: Oh. Can you link me the file that matches that description then please? DesertPipeline (talk) 04:52, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
DesertPipeline What I also mean is that everything is tried and there is no new answer than what you already have. Really it's up to you to keep track of the versions, it's your request. Commons:File:Ambox warning pn-large.svg --''always ping me''-- Goran_tek-en (talk) 15:26, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
User:Goran tek-en: I think that if the canvas size for that version was reduced so that it stops as soon as the shadows (on the right and bottom) end, with the same space on the other two sides as on the shadow sides, it might work. Did you already try that? I can't remember; I'm sorry. DesertPipeline (talk) 13:13, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
DesertPipeline I can't do that because there is no exact point where the shadow ends to the right or downwards. That will depend on so many things which is out of my control that I can't achieve that. It depends on browsers, different libraries, resolution of the screen, the quality of the screen and a lot more which I have no knowledge of. The only thing I can be sure of with the shadow is the version were there is a lot of space which is set by the software telling me where the shadow ends. --''always ping me''-- Goran_tek-en (talk) 17:39, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
User:Goran tek-en: I'm confused by this – how can it be that different browsers (etc.) will display the image differently? Isn't the data in an svg file an exact description of how something should appear? DesertPipeline (talk) 05:35, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
DesertPipeline Yes and no. If you stay within a svg program (eg Inkscape), YES. When you print from a svg file today I would say it works very well. Viewing a svg file in a browser on a screen is another thing totally, so NO. This help page for svg gives you an idea of the problems that exist. A svg file has to be rendered to a raster version, often png, to be able to be viewed in a browser. Do read the section "librsvg" because that is very important but the whole page gives you an idea of what we are dealing with. A screen is made up of pixels as a raster image, a svg is a text (xml, and more) based file so it has to be converted, rendered. The quality of the screen and what it can show or not affects this also. Texts is an extra problem within a svg file so this is by no mean an straight forward thing. --always ping me-- Goran tek-en (talk) 17:48, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
User:Goran tek-en: So with File:Ambox warning pn-large.svg, did you make the canvas as small as possible to accomodate the shadow as the source code of the image tells you where it stops? DesertPipeline (talk) 02:43, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
DesertPipeline No this is smaller and what I visually would say is "safe" regarding no cut of the shadow. --always ping me-- Goran tek-en (talk) 18:31, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
Image of the classical diffusion process
Description of the image
classical diffusion
As noted on the article talk page, classical diffusion is somewhat complex to explain, but trivially easy to understand with a single diagram. Unfortunately, I cannot find one in a free format, so I'm wondering if someone with some 3D skills might make an SVG - or four similar ones actually.
Here is an example of the image: classical diffusion from JET. Its really two images in one. There is a problem with this version; it shows a single particle orbiting a single straight line in the upper left, but for some reason shows the lines as curved in the lower right. While real reactors are typically curved, that's not a requirement, and having one straight and the other curved may confuse the reader for no reason. They should all be straight.
I say four images, but two of them are just slight modifications of the two seen here. Each should have a second version where the helical orbit is "tighter" around the magnetic line. In the second image showing the collision, it would miss instead. This illustrates how having a higher magnetic field reduces the diffusion rate: with a higher field the orbits get smaller and their chance of collision goes down. It's basically the area of the circle in the helix, so if the radius is half, diffusion is 1/4. If you can illustrate one "circle" to show the relative areas, more power to you!
Maury Markowitz (talk) 14:10, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Maury Markowitz It would have been great if you used the "▶ New request ◀" link above as it provides us with necessary info and code.
 Request taken by Goran tek-en (talk) 17:42, 21 May 2021 (UTC).
I think I can help you but I will need your assistance as you have the knowledge. Can you please link to other similar images that you think is more correct, they don't need to be free, I just want to have a look to better understand what you want. --always ping me--Goran tek-en (talk) 17:42, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
Maury Markowitz I haven't heard from you but I need your help now. I think the black and white illustrations are hard to understand so this draft is a bit different. This is the first part just so we can agree on it. This draft is a PNG version of the original SVG file I'm working in and will upload to commons. Draft-1. --always ping me--Goran tek-en (talk) 18:02, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
@Goran tek-en:, sorry was at lake house. Well, not sorry really :-)
Yes, that diagram you made is exactly it! The blue arrow should be labelled B, which is the symbol for the magnetic field. Maybe label at the lower left end? There should also be a dimension arrow running from the center of the blue arrow to the red path labelled r, for radius. I would also thin out the blue arrow, so the shaft isn't as wide (radius). Here's a version I clipped from a book, but it uses weird units.
Now make a second version with the blue arrow exactly as it is in this image, with the shaft of the original width, indicating a stronger field. In this version, the red helix is smaller, tighter to the blue arrow. This is because in a stronger field, the particle orbits more tightly. The reason for having two similar diagrams will become clear in a bit.
That's it for the first two diagrams, those two will end up in dozens of articles (and likely some books!). Maury Markowitz (talk)
Maury Markowitz Lake house sounds nice, I have added the code which using "▶ New request ◀" link above is giving us when properly used.
Is it not possible to keep the width of the blue arrow as it is in this first draft and then make it wider in the next? It would save me quite a lot of work if I didn't have to make this first thinner. --always ping me--Goran tek-en (talk) 16:40, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
Maury Markowitz I would need your feedback on my question above.Goran tek-en (talk) 15:11, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
@Goran tek-en: Sure, feel free to keep the arrow larger in the first one! Maury Markowitz (talk) 15:27, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
Maury Markowitz Here are the two first versions as drafts. In 2 I made the B arrow more distinct, darker in color. Does that work to indicate a stronger magnetic field, if not I will do something else.
Goran tek-en (talk) 19:03, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
Maury Markowitz I would need your feedback on the post above, thanks. --''always ping me''-- Goran_tek-en (talk) 15:30, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
@Goran tek-en: Hello again - sorry for my tardy replies. Yes, I think the two versions you have now work fine. So, next modification (sorry, two more to go!). Do you see the "r" vector? Imagine it was pointing at the particle as it went through one rotation. It would trace out a spiral, like a short fusilli. The basic idea behind diffusion is that if that path ever intersects with the one from a neighbouring particle on a parallel path, they can collide. So you can see how when r is smaller, like the second version of the images, they undergo r^2 less collisions. So would it be possible to make a "lightly shaded" spiral of that sort in those two images? Maury Markowitz (talk) 16:01, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
Maury Markowitz So there should not be any collisions but adding a spiral to them? --always ping me-- Goran tek-en (talk) 19:44, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
@Goran tek-en: For now yes, the collisions will be the last step! I hope I didn't misrepresent this task at the start, I see you do lots of images for other people and I don't want to take too much time that might be better spent elsewhere. Maury Markowitz (talk) 20:08, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
Maury Markowitz You don't take up my time, it was I who wanted to do this request. I do like doing illustrations for "scientific" stuff. Every request takes the time it needs so there is no problem here.
I'm not sure I really understood but here is a draft-1-2 so you can check if I understood. --always ping me-- Goran tek-en (talk) 18:30, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
Cherub with Chariot (Fabergé egg)
Description of the image
Cherub with Chariot (Fabergé egg)
Would it be possible to make a drawing of the lost Fabergé egg? For some examples, see here. Thank you.
Details of your request go here… -- (talk) 14:31, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
2021 Japanese general election graphs
2021 Japanese general election and Opinion polling for the next Japanese general election
Both of these graphs need updating with the latest opinion polling information given in the tables on Opinion polling for the next Japanese general election. Helper201 (talk) 21:53, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
Pinging BSMIsEditing, in case they still have the appropriate files and are willing. Pbrks (talk) 03:44, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
@Pbrks: It is on Plotly, but I will start updating them again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ‎BSMIsEditing (talkcontribs)
National Labor Relations Board Logo
Political appointments by Donald Trump and Political appointments by Joe Biden
Hi, could you make this National Labor Relations Board logo in svg format. The current image is in low resolution. Stalin990 (talk) 16:14, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
 Done @Stalin990: --Sodacan (talk) 01:40, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Republic of China (Taiwan) passport emblem
Blue Sky with a White Sun
Hi, there is a new variant of the Republic of China (Taiwan) national emblem on the Taiwanese passport issued from 2021 onwards. The new passport reduces the prominence of the words "Republic of China" (the country's official name) by depicting it in a border surrounding the emblem. The Taiwanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs cannot completely remove the name from its passports as doing so is considered an act of separatism by the People's Republic of China (PRC) on the mainland and threatens to invade Taiwan if it changes its official name or its national symbols (though this new design doesn't seem to annoy the PRC as the variant depicts the official name and is only used on passports). The Taiwanese passport (both before and after 2021) depicts the emblem in green and yellow when normally, the emblem is blue and white. When comparing the passport emblem to the standard emblem, it seems that the words and borders are in white and the background is in blue. Can someone kindly please make an SVG version of the passport variant of the emblem? Thanks in advance. -- (talk) 14:21, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
 Done - see above. Cheers, Mliu92 (talk) 00:46, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
Signature of Libuše Šafránková
Libuše Šafránková
Please vectorize this signature that came to my attention after the recent death of this actress. -- Pakeha (talk) 19:36, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
Resize logo request
Wikipedia in the Tachelhit Language
Is there someone that can kindly resize logo to 135 × 155? Many thanks in advance!!! -- 2001:B07:6442:8903:594:8303:2E25:E570 (talk) 13:45, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
 DonePbrks (talk) 15:16, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
Last edited on 16 June 2021, at 15:50
Content is available under CC BY-SA 3.0 unless otherwise noted.
Privacy policy
Terms of Use
HomeRandomNearbyLog inSettingsDonateAbout WikipediaDisclaimers