User talk:Schneelocke

This is the User Talk page for schnee.

If you want to leave me a message, please just append it at the bottom of this page. Thank you!

SPECIAL NOTE

I will be on holidays from June 27, 2003 on, and will almost certainly neither reply to messages nor make any edits during that time.

<big, friendly letters>DON'T PANIC.</big, friendly letters>

---

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

Hi, and thanks for your welcome! :) I'll check out the pages on naming conventions and article formatting / style. Thank you for the pointers! --schnee

Hi, thanks for you math contributions! You may want to check out the WikiProject Mathematics and the list of mathematical topics. I left a question for you on talk:Salamin-Brent algorithm. Cheers, AxelBoldt 02:08 26 May 2003 (UTC)

Thanks - I will check those out. :) --schnee

Wow, you sure learned the ropes quickly around here. Do you already have experience on the German Wikipedia? Good work on Thomas Gottschalk, it's a shame that the German article is much shorter than the English one .. --Eloquence 06:49 26 May 2003 (UTC)

Thank you. :) I have no experience with the german Wikipedia so far; I may look into it in the future, but I still have a bunch of things I want to get done on the english one first. --schnee

---

Hey - the isotope nested tables in the elements articles intentionally only list the most stable isotopes. There are tentative plans, however, to have separate "Isotopes of X" articles that will list all known (and perhaps predicted) isotopes. For more info please see the talk page archive of WikiProject Elements. --mav 04:16 31 May 2003 (UTC)

OK, sure. For the record, though, I just wanted to be helpful. :) --schnee

And the extra info you added will be very helpful as soon as we get around to having articles for each elements isotopes. You are just working ahead of the pack a bit (esp since we haven't finished converting over and de-stubbing all the elements to the WikiProject Elements format yet). --mav

OK. I'll take a look at the WikiProject - maybe I can help out a bit, too. Other than that, I think I'm mostly a more or less random contributor to Wikipedia, in the sense that I edit / amend / create entries that just interest me, without actually dedicating myself to specific topics only. Well, that's me. :) -- schnee

---

Gee thanks... (i'm the guy who extended the boss article)

You might call me a newbie here, my wikipedia account is only 18 hours old now. Could you tell me how you're supposed to talk using user_talk:xyz? I mean, when you post something on my user page, how do i reply to that? by posting in your page or by posting in mine? And also: is there an other way to get the user_talk: page other that typing that in the address bar?

these might be there in the help pages but i'm too lazy... hop you don't mind. --aravindet

p.s. I accidentally overwrote, then recovered all the other messages here. hope nothing's lost.

Not that I can see; and in any case, the document history is preserved in Wikipedia's database, so if something would be missing, I could easily recover it from an earlier version of this page and readd it. Outside of that, with regard to talk pages: the way they're usually used is that when you want to reply to something someone else said, you simply edit the talk page in question yourself and append your answer. You can use a colon (:) in front of what you type to create some left margin; this makes the page more visually appealing, and the structure of different replies etc. also becomes more clear. And BTW, yes, you can access talk pages in an easy way, too: just click on the "Discuss this page" link on any wikipedia page.

Oh, and being a newbie is not a problem at all. I still am myself, too, I think. ^_^ -- schnee

---

Nice work on the Protactinium conversion! How did you make the image? Just wondering because I never got around to uploading the the source files (other than the big blank on the WikiProjects page). I think I'll work on doing that tonight. --mav

Thanks! About the image - I mainly did that with a little bit of help from The GIMP. Using the blank one as a base, I filled in the neutron and proton numbers (Helvetica, 36pt.) and the element symbol (Helvetica, 48pt.) as well as the dots for the valance electrons, then scaled it down and added the shell picture from Francium, as well as the picture for the crystal structure. Turned out nice, didn't it? :) -- Schnee 09:36 23 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Yep, it looks real nice. The specks are a wee bit different than the ones I documented earlier today but no biggie -- nobody is going to notice. My specks may be a bit too big and need to be downsized... Hopefully my documentation and templates for each period will make things easier now. ---mav

Yeah, I noticed the font sizes you gave in particular differed a bit from the ones I used, but I agree it's probably not a big deal. And yes, the specs you put up surely will help; I'm just working on the entry on Neodymium, and will certainly be able to use those for the table image. -- Schnee 10:45 23 Jun 2003 (UTC)

---

Sorry for wrongful delete, somebody seems to have restored it while I was off-line anyway, jimfbleak 18:38 23 Jun 2003 (UTC)

No problem, Jim - no harm was done. :) -- Schnee 18:46 23 Jun 2003 (UTC)

---

No biggie but I've noticed that you are using a very thin box around elements in the locater images. IMO having a thicker line makes it easier to quickly see where an element is in the perio table but I'm more concerned about consistency. So if you think the thinner line is best then I'll go along with that but the older images should be eventually updated. Just something to think about. --mav

The thin line is due to the fact that I drew a line with a width of one pixel on the big version of the image; I'll see if two or three pixels will give better results in the scaled-down version. Outside of that, I have no preference for either. -- Schnee 09:42 25 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Yes, two pixels seems to look nicer. I just tried on Calcium: -- Schnee 09:56 25 Jun 2003 (UTC)

I agree - that does look nicer than either the 1 or 3 pixel wide versions. --mav

---

FYI: I made a minor change to - it didn't have a central dot before. I don't think it is such an important change to warrent updating the images that have already been done unless either of us happen to be updating the image anyway (changing the width of the locator box, for example). --mav

*nods* that's something I plan to do, especially since I want to convert the locator images I did on my own, anyway - won't happen until after I'm back home, though. :) -- Schnee 07:23 26 Jun 2003 (UTC)

---

<evil thought>Wouldn't it be neat to indicate which block each element belongs to in each image? All that would have to be done is draw a box with a 1 pixel wide border around the element's block and then have the name of the block (s, p, d, or f) at the bottom in oh say 16 font (for the big image). </evil thought> Just something to chew on. :-) You are doing a great job on the elements BTW! --mav

Thanks - that compliment sure feels good. ^_^ As far as the "border around the block" idea is concerned, I'm not sure exactly how you imagine this would look like. Do you have a sample image, maybe? -- Schnee 05:53 27 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Take a look at Carbon and hit reload. Here is the source file: C-TableImage-BIG.png. All I did was put a 1 pixel wide border snuggly around the block. If you like this I'll go ahead and make templates for all period/block combos. --mav 08:51 6 Jul 2003 (UTC)