Jump to content

User talk:Bronger

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Bronger (talk | contribs) at 20:28, 8 May 2003. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Hello there, welcome to the 'pedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you need pointers on how we title pages visit Wikipedia:Naming conventions or how to format them visit our manual of style. If you have any other questions about the project then check out Wikipedia:Help or add a question to the Village pump. Cheers! --maveric149

I'm a h2g2 veteran and I'm afraid that that will remain my primary site. (By the way, today h2g2 has published a new entry about Wikipedia on its home page!)

I want to contribute to Wikipedia nevertheless: I want to draw the maps for the celestial constellations. However, in contrast to h2g2, Wikipedia contains a lot more information, and it seems to be more accurate, too. So as a reader, I look forward to using Wikipedia.

I've already looked around a bit and think that I've understood the system by and large. But thank you for your welcome message!

You are welcome! I like the images you have created. But the placement in the articles is causing trouble for people with lower resolution screens. Specifically the image and the table overlap. Would 250 or 300 pixel wide images be too small? If not then the images could even be placed in the tables (see sainfoin, lithium, United States and Pluto (planet) for examples). --mav

Actually I was playing around with Sagittarius with the current image and it really doesn't seem to be that bad at lower res. --mav

Well it wasn't the greatest image downsizing I've done but I reduced the width of the Sagittarius image to 300 px. See the Wikipedia:Image use policy for why it is a good idea not to have images too wide. --mav

Although I was aware of this problem before I began with the charts, it is indeed a serious one. I had read Wikipedia's image policy very carefully and I thought that 400px are an upper limit but okay. By and large the problem is either Wikipedia's HTML or the browser, because the two elements mustn't overlap, but a horizontal scrollbar should be used. -- Torsten Bronger 16:23 Feb 22, 2003 (UTC)
Horizontal scroll bars are evil and should be avoided like the plague. Many studies have shown that web surfers hate to horizontally scroll and textbooks on web design state that you should hardly ever force a user to use their horizontal scroll bar. So that is not a solution. Resizing the images to a width of 300px and putting them in the table will make everything work for everybody. --mav 00:30 Feb 23, 2003 (UTC)
A horizontal scollbar is surely not optimal. But I would be forced to reduce information density if I scaled them down. At least for some of them, you cannot just make them smaller. By the way, I was not responsible for the positioning of the graphics next to the table. I think it would be better to accept a less nice layout instead of less detail. -- Torsten Bronger 10:15 Feb 23, 2003 (UTC)
I agree with Bronger. Unlike the images of the flowers or animals, a map needs details. So I think resizing the maps is not the best option. A simple solution is to reposition the maps.
My opinion is based on the scaled down version of Sagittarius by mav, which doesn't look too good because the map is resized "physically". How about you upload a new generated and scaled down map of Sagittarius and see if it would be better, Bronger? --Lorenzarius 11:31 Feb 23, 2003 (UTC)
[Please call me Torsten :] I can produce a map that is smaller but with labels of the same size. But this would mean that I have to delete some nebulae, and it is already *very tight* with the grey constellation labels. This is not critical on all but some of the maps. I will make new maps smaller whenever possible. Most upcoming constellations are small anyway.

Hi Bronger, have you one of these very nice constellation map for Crux? -- looxix 21:09 Apr 2, 2003 (UTC)

If a new constellation is finished according to the project template, please add it to the list at Wikipedia:WikiProject Constellations because we all watch this page. Then I upload a map as soon as I can. --Torsten Bronger
Thanks, looxix 19:58 Apr 8, 2003 (UTC)

Nice Maps!

The colours you've chosen are obvious and clear. I especially like the grey constellation names and the yellow border, which are sorta transparent and hence doesn't interfere with the stars. And on a white background? I must say I was amazed at first, and it fits with the white WP background so well. Do you enter all the star coordination manually? How long does it take to make one map? Or do you make several simultaneously? (Because I see other constellations cut-off.) --Menchi 18:55 May 8, 2003 (UTC)

Thank you for the encouragement! All sky coordinates come from free Internet databases. One map takes 10--30 minutes. They are not created simultaneously, however the program lets me use a global style that I thus don't have to re-create every single time (colours etc). What does 'cut-off' mean? -- Torsten Bronger 20:28 May 8, 2003 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Bronger&oldid=902013"