User talk:Vanderesch
Dear experienced Wikepedians. I have now added my article and after much moving around by other wikepedians it has finally landed where it should be and the dependence on Mahogany has been broken. Thanks Vicky Rosenzweig!! My problem now is that I would like Google to find the article when one searches for Neem. How is that done? Thanks to anyone who can help me out on that one.
Have a look at http://www.google.com/addurl.html --JeLuF
Hello there, welcome to the 'pedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you need any questions answered about the project then check out Wikipedia:Help or drop me a line. Cheers! --maveric149
Hi maveric, sorry for not reacting before but I had the Login problem many had. I logged in and as soon as I went to another page only my IP number came up. That way I couldn't check my own user page which I check through my Watchlist. Thanks for offering help. I probably will need it in the near future as I will want to add some things to the article on [Neem] I wrote. Good work and all the best. Andrew
Hi maveric, I am back again and already may need your help. I would like google to find the article on Neem in Wikipedia. As you can see on my own User page user:Vanderesch somebody suggested a way, but after 3 weeks Google still doesn't come up with a hit on the Neem article. Do you know a solution that might work??
Googles webcrawler Googlebot periodically downloads the all wikipedia pages. It does take a few more weeks to a couple of months for Googlebot to get back around to wikipedia since it is constantly downloading and indexing at least some part of the net. Just give it some time and Google will display Neem. Cheers! --maveric
Hi Andrew. Welcome to the 'pedia.
That darn John is too quick for me. :) Still, great minds think alike: when I hit the edit conflict, his edit and mine were virtually identical.
As for your size question, that could be more difficult. Small images, especially line drawings with lines off the simple vertical and horizontal, do not scale well. In this particular case, the size of the image looks just right to me: I wouldn't change it. But for future reference, I'll mention that what you really need to do to produce a reasonable quality image of any given size is work from a very large original and let your image-editing software have as many pixels to work with as possible. Also, try to shrink in even fractions. A 33% shrink, for example, nearly always looks much better than a 37% or 31% shrink.
So, it looks as though there was no need for me to answer at all in this case. (John obviously types faster than I do. I guess he cheats and uses both hands at the same time!) But you are always welcome to ask. Sing out if you have any other questions. Cheers -- Tony. (Tannin 13:28 19 May 2003 (UTC))
- You know, that "both hands" comment might not reflect well upon you. ;) But yes, I agreed that it was just about the right size as it was, it just needed to be moved to where it would be visible "above the fold", which it wasn't before. And although I don't think it bears specifically on shrinking, you could probably get some good information about how to treat the images at Wikipedia:How to keep image file sizes as small as possible. -- John Owens 13:41 19 May 2003 (UTC)
- Actually, more generally, the pages listed at Wikipedia:Graphics tutorials might have more relevant material than that one; I haven't looked through all of them yet. -- John Owens 13:45 19 May 2003 (UTC)
The Short-toed Eagle pic could stand to shrink a bit too, I see. Would you like me to do the honors, or have you found a way to do it yet? -- John Owens 14:18 21 May 2003 (UTC)
Andrew, when you leave a message, the best way to sign is using three tildes ~~~ which the software will convert to your user name giving a link back. A fourth tilde will add the date and time ~~~~ gives jimfbleak 14:42 21 May 2003 (UTC)