User talk:Nagualdesign/Archive 8

Voyager 1 and pale blue dot geometry image

Voyager 1, 14 February 1990

Voyager 1, 14 February 1990

Hi NagualDesign. If you're interested in make a nicer image, I rendered the geometry of Voyager 1 28 years ago for Pale Blue Dot and Family Portrait (Voyager). I didn't do any special markups. Would you like to make a fancy version? (Or if you have suggestions, I can remake a different perspective, or remove Pluto for instance.) (I cleaned a bit, removed pluto) Tom Ruen (talk) 01:18, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Sure. I'll give it a whirl tomorrow. nagualdesign 01:56, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

@Tomruen: Could you rotate the view slightly so that the bottoms of the vertical lines are all at the same height, forming a right triangle? And maybe tilt down slightly so that the orbits are viewed from higher up? nagualdesign 04:49, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

How is this one? This perspective might be a little less clear with when Voyager leaves the ecliptic, since looks linear passing Saturn. Tom Ruen (talk) 14:27, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Looks good. I'll crack on with that shortly. I reinstalled Celestia last night and found the add-on for Voyager 1 (not an easy task, as Celestia Motherlode seems to be offline these days). As you probably know, it's extremely difficult to get exactly the angles you want in Celestia, and there's no way of generating the balustrade effect that your images have. What software/website are you using? nagualdesign 19:05, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

I've tried Celestia, very pretty software. This is my own 20 year old program from scratch. I call it FullSky observatory since you can view the solar system from anywhere. Tom Ruen (talk) 19:19, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Impressive stuff. Unfortunately I've been a bit busy this evening so haven't had a chance to start in earnest, and I'll be out for a few hours tomorrow, but I should have something by late tomorrow. I did manage a few preliminary edits to see what might work and what doesn't work, and I'm fairly confident now. I might send you a few mock-ups tomorrow before committing to a final edit. nagualdesign 00:12, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Position and trajectory of Voyager 1 and the positions of the planets on 14 February 1990, the day when Pale Blue Dot and Family Portrait were taken.

Sorry for the delay, Tom, but there was a lot of planning and fiddling to do to make this image (right). As you can see I made a few changes, chief of which was to use perspective. I also opted for a slightly shallower angle in an attempt to show just how 'high up' (away from the ecliptic) Voyager 1 was. Also, as you know, I normally like to use thick lines for the orbits, but it wasn't possible to show the orbits of the terrestrial planets clearly if the lines were thicker. Note that I've attempted to show how the orbits of Uranus and Neptune are tilted by making them visibly pierce the 'balustrade' of Voyager's trajectory, which extends down to the ecliptic plane. Otherwise it kind of looked like the ice giants were on the same plane as the base of the 'balustrade'. And note that I've drawn the trajectory of Voyager looping 'underneath' the orbit of Saturn. Let me know what you think, and any changes that you'd like me to make. nagualdesign 03:36, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks! It looks great. I like the transparent gray triangle under Voyager's path. The orbit lines intersecting the gray is subtle but helpful. I wondered about another image up to 2018, but the 'balustrade' really gets huge! Tom Ruen (talk) 04:28, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Glad you like it. I credited you on the image file page, by the way. We'll see if this one ever appears outside of Wikipedia!

Yeah, it's fairly easy to imagine where Voyager 1 is now, given that it's coasting at an almost steady rate and only slowing very gradually. nagualdesign 04:50, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Halley's Comet

I saw you made a Halley's comet path, so I compared to my own. Tom Ruen (talk) 04:40, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

• 
• 
• 

Mine was based on File:AnimatedOrbitOf1PHalley.gif, which I though was a bit small and had far too many frames. I basically traced it, so I'm glad to see it's accurate enough. nagualdesign 03:36, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

It's good. The weird thing you can't really see is Halley orbits retrograde compared to the planets, 162 deg inclination. But you can't really show the motion of planets well. I made an animation with perspective here [1]. Tom Ruen (talk) 04:31, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

I didn't realize that Halley had a retrograde orbit until I made that animation. I assume that by 162° inclination you mean that it's tilted 18°, taking the retrograde motion into account, and looking at your video it looks like it's tilted 'down', with most of the orbit being 'beneath' the ecliptic. Is that right? nagualdesign 04:50, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Yes on both accounts, tilted 18 degrees, and mostly below ecliptic. Tom Ruen (talk) 04:54, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Request for permission to use your panoramic view of Pendle Hill as a Website header.

Hi Joe I am currently rebuilding my pendlesoft.co.uk website as the old one is very dated. I would love permission to use your image as the site header suitable attributes & links will be included of course. My website is more a vanity thing than a money earner so the best I can offer is serious kudos to you for a great image. I created a Haloween poster from an image of Pendle Hill I trawled off google is it one of yours? Pendle Witch

Best regards, Derek — Preceding unsigned comment added by Derbatz (talk • contribs) 22:50, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

Sorry for the late reply, Derek. Feel free to use the image. It's licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License, so you're free to share it or adapt it as you see fit, so long as you provide proper attribution. That basically means adding a small caption under the image or somewhere that says, "Photograph by nagualdesign (CC BY 3.0)" or similar. Thanks for asking. Regards, nagualdesign 02:22, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

P vs. NP

Hi Nagualdesign,

Since I was the one who initially reverted you, and since the conversation on the article talk-page has not been totally positive, I wanted to try to explain my reason for the revert separately.

In mathematical writing, placing the same letter into different fonts is a traditional way of using short names for variables, sets, etc., without having to invent entirely new symbols. (This also explains why we use the Greek alphabet so much.) As a result, it is very important in mathematical writing to be consistent in using the same symbol (including capitalization, font, etc.) to refer to the same object, and using distinct symbols to refer to distinct objects. And one could write, for example, "Let $n<N\in {\bf {N}}$ be such that ..." and expect others to understand that this defines two natural numbers, the smaller of which is named n and the larger of which is named N. The purpose of the sentence of MOS that I quoted is specifically intended to allow the use of bold for mathematical symbols like this. (But I agree with you that this is not obvious to someone not well acquainted with the intricacies of mathematical writing.)

In the case of the pseudocode, there is the (maybe unfortunate) feature that the symbols P and N are being used to denote things different from what are denoted P and NP in the article.

In the case of the titles of references, I think you have a reasonable point that it would be nice to render them as compatibly as possible with the way they are rendered in the original. This is not possible to do perfectly (some sources written in a serif font use sans-serif P and NP for what we call bold P and NP in the article, but text in WP is all displayed sans-serif) but possibly could be done better than it is at the moment.

I realize that being full-reverted after one has put some thought into a good-faith edit is annoying, and I apologize for that. Let me know if I can be more helpful somehow.

All the best, JBL (talk) 01:57, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

I really appreciate you taking the time to post this, Joel. And for what it's worth, you have nothing to apologize for. I only wish that other editors were as willing to engage in good-faith discussion without all the shitty jibes and rudeness that I was subjected to today. My guess would be that David Eppstein was already in a foul mood to begin with, and didn't really read what I'd written properly before taking umbrage to my presence. Then XOR'easter, who's relatively new to Wikipedia, also grasped the wrong end of the stick based on some rather silly presumptions. Ah well!

I get that there are certain conventions in mathematics. Believe it or not I'm fairly well educated in that regard. I also know a thing or two about computers, having been programming for over 30 years, including professionally. The thing I was trying to discuss today though was Wikipedia's formatting conventions, which I doubt that any of us are experts in really. In the end it was simpler to just ask at the Manual of Style.

It never ceases to amaze me how fast things can go south around here, depending on who you're talking to. It's what I like to call the butterfly effect. Thankfully I can look back and laugh at it, and you're more than welcome to laugh along with me.

Kind regards, nagualdesign 06:51, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

Hey, my pleasure. Communication on the internet is hard, even among groups of well-meaning people. I enjoyed your essay. See you 'round, JBL (talk) 12:05, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

Siddiq (The Walking Dead)

Hi Nagualdesign, really appreciated the great collage you made for the Jesus (The Walking Dead) article and wondered if you can make another one for Siddiq (The Walking Dead) please? If so, I've found these images for the comic, video game and TV versions of the character, in order of appearance. You might want to search for better quality or better proportion images though, but these are just examples. Cheers, --Theo Mandela (talk) 18:42, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

Sure. I'll do that later today and ping you when it's done. nagualdesign 18:58, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

Okay, Theo, I've uploaded the image and added it to the article. There's one thing that still needs to be done; on the image file page there is no author information for the images used. I'd appreciate it if you could do that bit and save me the trouble. I hope that's okay. Regards, nagualdesign 19:35, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

Thanks a lot Nagualdesign, the image looks great. The uploader for the comic image on Walking Dead Wiki here and the uploader for the video game image here, I can't find the uploader of IMDb image, but the Jesus collage has the author as "Robert Kirkman, Charlie Adlard and AMC". The game is owned by Telltale Games and Robert Kirkman's company Skybound, whereas the comics are published by Image Comics and the TV series is owned by AMC. Let me know if it's helpful. --Theo Mandela (talk) 21:05, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

That'll do, I suppose. I've added the author information to the image file page as "Image Comics, AMC and Telltale Games." Cheers. nagualdesign 21:12, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

making the 'oumuamua light curve simulation

I have a question: how did you make the light curve simulation?

I have to do this myself and I need some help.

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.149.86.53 (talk) 10:34, 25 June 2018‎ (UTC)

In short, with difficulty! Assuming that you're familiar with Photoshop or similar I'll try to explain as best I can...

The light curve itself is much larger than the section you see in the animation, as is the star field. Having worked out how many frames I needed and how far the graph and starfield needed to scroll it was a fairly straightforward matter of setting up the first and last frames and using tweening to create all the intermediate frames. That was the easy bit.

The hard part was creating the rotating tumbling asteroid, which required a separate layer for each frame. If I remember correctly I started with a small, elongated ellipse and made multiple copies of it, then transformed each copy (rotating and resizing) by hand until I had the entire sequence set up, after which I applied an embossing effect to each one to make them look more three-dimensional, and added a little noise for texture.

There were lots of niggly bits to keep in mind that took me a while to get my head around, so there was a lot of trial and error involved. For example, initially the first and last frames had to look the same so that the animation would cycle seamlessly, so the bottom right corner of the starfield had to be identical to the top left corner, but then I had to delete the final frame in order that there weren't two consecutive identical frames. The practical upshot being that the number of frames that I needed to tween was actually one more than I'd anticipated, throwing my calculations off. I spent a lot of time starting over, and it took me a while to work out how to match the motion of the asteroid to the graph.

I hope that makes some sense to you. I still have a copy of the .psd file. If you'd like I could email it to you. And if you need any help creating a similar animation I might be able to help out. Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~). nagualdesign 13:32, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

Re 24.121.195.165's spelling rant

That IP posted the same rant on a bunch of talk pages as well as at Talk:Great Britain. Check out his other contributions. Batternut (talk) 22:32, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

Okay, fair enough. Feel free to revert my revert if you haven't done so already. nagualdesign 22:34, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

Fly

Thanks for the perspective you offer on some talk pages I watch. See my talk: five biographies, three died, I am happy that I managed the fifth while was still alive. Life is short, thank you for the reminder. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:27, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

Sorry to hear that, Gerda. I think it behoves us not just to be polite and respectful to one another (both here and off-Wiki) but to actively take care of each other. The older I get the more I realize that love is a verb, and can be applied to strangers just as easily as it's applied to family and friends. In fact, I highly recommend that we all maximize our efforts in that regard. We're all brothers and sisters, and we live in a society that constantly sows the seeds of division.

All the best, nagualdesign 22:59, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

One for the road.

Crap days, bro. Take good care. —SerialNumber54129 paranoia /cheap sh*t room 13:27, 7 July 2018 (UTC)

A beer for you!

Been there & done this. Don't let an asshole get to you. Wikipedia needs you. Rowan Forest (talk) 15:34, 7 July 2018 (UTC)

A pie for you!

... to go with the pints. Hope to see you back one day; in the meantime, be well. Sam Sailor 18:10, 7 July 2018 (UTC)

(pictured)

I don't know how to take care, - hope he'll survive. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:18, 7 July 2018 (UTC)

Sorry I moved Die Fliege down, because s/he displaced the next image in my design (our rather, br'er's design). Do you have a solution for that? Then move the creature up again. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:13, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

Give me an hour or so, Gerda. I'm a bit busy writing a long post for the Commons at the moment... nagualdesign 20:16, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

I only wanted to explain the move to lower, no disrespect for Die Fliege, just a design matter. I'm licking my wounds from the last call to the commons, so please understand that I won't add that scene to my concerns. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:13, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

Happy you see your well-designed signature again. Can you take Fliege in your care? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:51, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

I really don't think I'll be sticking around, Gerda. I just want to finish this last task and then get on with my life. I may feel differently in 6 months. Who knows? nagualdesign 12:58, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

As you wish, - I'll try to take care then. If you listen to me, you just call it "semi". There are always thistles, and I think their colour goes well with your signature ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:06, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt: I've brought him her back into the fold but left his her twin brother sister on your talk page. Feel free to shoo him her away if you wish. Also, try clicking on him her. nagualdesign 05:57, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

Thank you. Love your In memoriam section. Ours is here. I guess you qualify for the cabal of the outcasts ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:59, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm one foot in the grave. nagualdesign 17:37, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

The one who died is missed the most, but left great impact: ignore ignore ignore. (He said so in 2012, but I still have a hard time to follow, although I know it's the best you can do.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:55, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

"Ass kicking"?

In regard to your edit summary, "It's ass kicking time" left here [2] -- I'm going to caution you against anything you may be planning that will equal disruption and pointy contributions in order to seek some sort of revenge. Such behavior will probably end up getting your account blocked. Your user page says you've retired. Then let it be that. Don't go out under a shadow of negativity. If you choose to return, you'll want to do it in a manner that equals positive contributions. -- ψλ ● ✉ ✓ 19:29, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

Surprise surprise. How did I know that you'd say exactly that, I wonder? Well, don't you worry, Winkelvi. Sit back and have some popcorn. I promise that I'm going to do the right thing, and I'd appreciate it if you didn't interfere. I understand that you have a hard time parsing these sort of things, and that's fine. When the dust settles I'll buy you a drink. Sincerely, nagualdesign 19:37, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

One final task

Thank you all. Before I go for good I need to unpick some of the bullshit and I'd appreciate it if the people who watch this page, who I consider as friends, lend their support. I realize now that I should have just asked for help in the first place and ignored short-sighted rules like WP:CANVASSING. I think I've been far too polite.

If you haven't done so already, please add my user pages on Commons to your watchlists and keep a close eye on proceedings while I clear my name and expose some of the bullshit that goes on around here. Sincerely, nagualdesign 19:33, 8 July 2018 (UTC) (And please, call me Joe.)

It seems the "vanishing" dissociated the name nagualdesign, as I only get a red link. An url to the relevant Commons page will be useful to me. Thanks and good luck. Rowan Forest (talk) 20:56, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

I misunderstood how vanishing would work. Seems like I've basically renamed myself to a load of random characters, which seems rather pointless. Anyway, here's a link. nagualdesign 21:05, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

July 2018

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.

---

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Talk:Elon Musk's Tesla Roadster. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continual disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Warning is in regard to this disruptive and premature close of discussion [3] -- ψλ ● ✉ ✓ 19:39, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

If you want to leave that discussion open, that's your prerogative. nagualdesign 19:40, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)@Winkelvi: I seem to recall on at least two occasions defending you out of an indefinite block here, and spending considerable time getting the community to let you off with a 1RR restriction. Turning up here and badgering an editor who's considering jacking it all in is therefore a misguided move. Think before you hit submit. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 00:28, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

Ritchie333, did you look at the edit to which I was referring? Did you see the talk page discussion on NeilN's page regarding what was starting to look like a meltdown by this editor that included threats and disruptive behavior? Adn then this a few minutes ago from ND [4]. I get what you're saying re:my situation, but this is a whole different ballgame. And I can't help but think you're not seeing the whole picture (including what's been going on at Commons in relation to all of it). -- ψλ ● ✉ ✓ 00:37, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

I read through the whole shenanigans on Commons this evening, shook my head and thought "life is just too short to get caught up in this sort of stuff anymore". I think everyone needs to calm down and take a deep breath. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 00:41, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

I agree. That said, my warning here was left long before everything went in the toilet. It was left as I sensed things were about to spiral out of control, which is why I left the message I did with Neil. Who then also came here to ask ND to take a breath. He did not. What happened next had nothing to do with me. My warning was merely a formality to log that something was noticed, it was inappropriate, and that taking a moment to stop and think would be a good thing to do. Even after Neil tried to talk him off the proverbial ledge, he continued down the wrong path. And it still hasn't gotten any better when you look at the diff I provided above, his comments to me, and him striking my comments. There's something more afoot beyond getting caught up in the emotional side of the whole shebang and I'm thinking it lies in part with WP:IDHT and WP:COMPETENCE. That's my take on it, anyway. -- ψλ ● ✉ ✓ 00:49, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

@Winkelvi: I archived the discussion at Talk:Elon Musk's Tesla Roadster#Concerning the frequent edits because it appeared to have run its course and was nothing more than a tit-for-tat argument over something so trivial as to be considered disruptive, and as an uninvolved third-party I was well within my rights to do so. You undid the archiving part and that's your prerogative. Both of us acted within proper guidelines. Coming here to issue the warning shown above was hypocritical and misguided, but I consider you such a small fry petty tyrant that I let it pass.

The post I left on NeilN's talk page was to thank him for his level-headed approach. If you think that was "starting to look like a meltdown" you're not very perceptive, and I defy you to produce any diffs featuring threats and disruptive behavior.

Your partial reverting of my edit on Commons, along with the edit summary, exemplify your self-importance, your inability to comprehend simple situations and your discourteous attitude. The comments I struck on your behalf are indeed libellous, and I suggest once again that you strike them immediately.

Since you insist on continuously popping your head above the parapet, without comprehending that you're not exactly covering yourself in glory, I'll also point out the moment that I appeared on your radar, so that others can play Whack-a-mole! with you: It was when I made this post on MjolnirPants' talk page, wasn't it? You may not be very perceptive but I am, and I can see right through you. You read that post and had enough wherewithal to realize that it was at least in part about you. What you're too thick to realize is that I was praising MjolnirPants for treating you with kindness and patience, because I think that that's the right thing to do with people who suffer from Asperger's. I sympathise with you. It was also a way of letting MjolnirPants know that I was grieving for a friend who had died, but that bit seems to have escaped you completely. I'm going to go out on a limb here and presume that you've never lost any close friends or relatives, and you have very little life experience (the alternative here is to presume that you're a heartless, mindless, malicious a-hole who deserves a good slap).

If I encounter you again you'd better watch your step, because I'm done playing nice or excusing you because of your disability. And no, that isn't me being threatening. To be clear, I'm saying that I won't put up with one iota of your self-indulgent shit, and I'll throw the book at you if you take a single step out of line. Now fuck off and don't come back. Sincerely, nagualdesign 01:36, 11 July 2018 (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.

Note

"Courtesy vanishing is discretionary and may be refused. It is not intended to be temporary. It is not a way to avoid scrutiny or sanctions. It is not a fresh start and does not guarantee anonymity. Any of the deleted pages may be undeleted after a community discussion. If the user returns, the "vanishing" will likely be fully reversed, the old and new accounts will be linked, and any outstanding sanctions or restrictions will be resumed."

I also really don't want to block you so knock it off with the attacks please. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 19:58, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

I can assure you, Neil, that I have no intention for my courtesy vanishing to be temporary. I'm leaving Wikipedia, but before I go I think it's only right that I defend myself, and I'll do so in accordance with all the rules and regulations, I promise. What you call "attacks" are merely an exposé of Sladen's ill-behaviour which, if you permit me, will become clear. I have proof! nagualdesign 20:13, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Hi nagualdesign, Sorry bud but the whole "Before I go I think it's only right that I defend myself" no longer applies, You had that right before vanishing, The whole point of Vanishing is exactly that ..... Walking away and never looking back ..... You can't vanish and then return to defend yourself as like I said you lost that right when you obviously vanished. –Davey2010^Talk 20:33, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

Well that wasn't at all clear to me. If it's all the same with you I think I'll just crack on. nagualdesign 21:07, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

PLEASE just take a break, ND. This will end with everyone feeling awful, including you. Please. EEng 21:52, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

Don't worry EEng, I'm done for the evening. If you think I've said anything that I shouldn't over on Commons then please let me know. I'm trying my hardest here under extremely difficult circumstances, as you know. nagualdesign 22:01, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

Maybe because of the name change I can't even find your talk page at Commons. Whatever you did or said there, please just post a followup saying, "Look, I'm not myself lately, I'm gonna take a month off and then we can sort all this out." This is not to say that you bear any fault in what led up to this, but if you're doing anything in response to burn your bridges, please stop. EEng 22:12, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

Commons:User talk:Renamed user g5r8c5h8j5g2f55v5h2h5g5d2s2c5b5

As I've just explained to someone else via email, I'm not interested in personal disputes or burning bridges, but I'm very interested in highlighting procedural irregularities with a view to those procedures being tightened up, or the people tasked with applying them being properly (re)trained.

I've also been reading through the archives of the Roadster talk page and there's a pattern of behaviour by Sladen, along with another user saying that they had also noticed his gaming the system. If he's going to talk smack about me in my absence, convincing everyone that I plagiarized that image, I think he deserves to be brought to account. Exercising my right of reply is not the same as indulging in a personal dispute.

Were you, me and others indulging in a personal dispute when we tried to hold Sebastian to account, or do you think we were trying to do the right thing? nagualdesign 22:35, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

High-handed admins on parade

Note: Subthread heading by EEng

I was just banned from Commons indefinitely, and without a chance to appeal in my Talk page or contact an administrator there. Complete block in 100% commons. Why? Because I posted in your now deleted page a request to the administrator Yann to please review your car/rocket diagram and lift the ban if proven yours. I said please and thank you. You are in the hands of a rouge administrator on a "road rage". Very irregular actions of Yann, and he is covering his tracks by deleting my message/request too. I can't stick my neck any longer, even if I wanted. There is a loose beast (or loose system) after you. Sorry. You were right all along. Rowan Forest (talk) 01:29, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

I just posted this strongly worded rebuke [5], which I'm copying here since I have the odd feeling it may get revdel'd as well:

Christ, over here at Commons the lunatics really do seem to have taken over the asylum. WP admins can only dream of getting away with such imperious bullshit. Shame on you, Yann. Now, I understand Rowan Forest posted a comment to a discussion here which appears to have been deleted; I formally request that it be restored so that we may all see its content. The deletion smells very strongly of someone trying to suppress criticism of himself or his fellow admins. Or will you block me now too for talking back to my betters? EEng (talk) 02:06, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

EEng 02:10, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

What the fuck?! I'm so sorry that you've been dragged into the thresher while trying to pull me out, Rowan. This is exactly the sort of bullshit that I'm railing against, and I hope that thanks to your sacrifice others can now see that I'm not on some sort of misguided personal vendetta but simply trying to clear my name and hold other editors and admins to account. Fear not, Rowan; by acting like this Yann has actually stuck his head above the parapet and made it much easier to highlight his errant behaviour. And thank you very much for sticking your neck out for me! Sincerely, nagualdesign 09:17, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

Cooler heads have prevailed

Thanks to Commons admin Guanaco, the picture in dispute has been undeleted, and we can now have a proper discussion about its authorship and copyright status. Walk this way → c:Commons:Deletion requests/File:Tesla Roadster Falcon 9H.png — JFG ^talk 03:10, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

Aftermath

You are vanished[6] and supposed to no longer edit. If you are not going to comply with WP:VANISHED then it will be enforced by block. Look at this example[7] for getting some idea. Capitals00 (talk) 12:58, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

Looks like there was a combination of a temper and a misunderstanding of the consequences of WP:VANISH. I would suggest that the best course of action at this stage would be to un-vanish Nagualdesign (looks like it's just a rename?), let him go through the proceedings at c:Commons:Deletion requests/File:Tesla Roadster Falcon 9H.png, let the RfC about his work run its course, and perhaps later he can decide with a clear head whether he wants to vanish or just take an ordinary wikibreak. — JFG ^talk 13:09, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

@Capitals00: Then un-vanish me. As far as I'm concerned another editor was waging a smear campaign against me after I had declared my retirement from editing. I should have right of reply, even though I may have misunderstood the consequences of WP:VANISH. nagualdesign 13:18, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

(edit conflict)@Capitals00: See also Nagualdesign's remark today on NeilN's page[8] highlighting the misunderstanding: Either way there will remain a trail of breadcrumbs leading to my account, which will remain extant in perpetuity. Now that I know that, the whole idea of vanishing seems rather pointless. Reversing the WP:VANISH action would look best imho. — JFG ^talk 13:20, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

Requesting un-vanishing would be the correct solution. Capitals00 (talk) 13:48, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

@Capitals00: How would I do that? nagualdesign 14:02, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

Notifying Xaosflux who participated in the vanishing.[9] Capitals00 (talk) 14:58, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. nagualdesign 15:21, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

While logged in on this account just go to Special:GlobalRenameRequest and request your name be changed back. Once completed if you want to resume old account flags you can request review at WP:PERM — xaosflux ^Talk 15:32, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

 Done, thank you. nagualdesign 15:41, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

I've just !voted at Commons to desysop the admin who created this mess there, which has very little chance of actually happening, because the culture at Commons is kind of like "F.U. en-wiki". Nagual, I hope that both you and Rowan will stick around here at en-wiki and not feel any need to be driven off the site. As far as I can tell at the moment, everyone has been unblocked. I think a good strategy to deal with the maligned image is to upload it locally here at en-wiki, which gets you out of the morass of satisfying the licensing rules at Commons. As for how the image is used here at the Musk car page, that's for the ongoing RfC to decide. --Tryptofish (talk) 18:18, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

Some noncontroversial work?

In case you'd like to change your mind, there is an interesting map to simplify and improve there: Talk:List of military occupations#Improving the map. I pinged you, but not sure you got it due to the vanish-unvanish shenanigans. — JFG ^talk 18:11, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

I spotted that earlier and added the page to my watchlist, and I've been following the conversation. I appreciate you considering me, but right now there are more shitstorms going on than I can keep up with. Hopefully one of the original creators of the map will step in, if not.. I may consider it. Sorry to be so vague but I'm pretty exhausted. Regards, nagualdesign 18:16, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

No worries; this was just a friendly suggestion to clear your mind of the "shitstorms". — JFG ^talk 18:54, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

Looks like you've got things covered over there. Looks good so far. nagualdesign 15:39, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

Some progress, but not very good yet. I'd appreciate your input. — JFG ^talk 17:53, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

Alaskan wooly-back log spider

Does the Alaskan wooly-back log spider really exist? or is it just a hoax you made up, I suspect it is the latter because I can't find anything about it on Google. If it were real I would be able to find at least one article about it because you can find even the most obscure articles on the most obscure things on Google, just type in the key words and there you have your results. Blank search results means the Alaskan wooly-back log spider either does not exist or the research paper doccumenting it's existance have not been released yet.SpidersMilk, Drink Spider Milk, it tastes good. (talk) 22:46, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

PMSL... Wow. I laughed for a long time at that one, and I'm still laughing as I type this... So funny! For those of you following along at home, Spidersmilk is referring to this post I left on his talk page, bless him.

To put you out of your misery, the entire paragraph was a spoof (ie, a hoax, prank or joke). There's no such thing as an Alaskan wooly-back log spider or an Appalachian forest spider. I don't think there are any spiders that weigh as little as 0.1 milligrams, or give birth to only one spiderling in any given season. Spiders do not give birth, they lay eggs, so they don't have birth canals. There's no such thing as "the spider kingdom" - spiders belong to animalia - unless of course there's a spider with a crown somewhere! (There isn't.) Spiders do not produce milk or suckle (they are not mammals). And I'm guessing that Rowan didn't really base his PhD thesis defense on those 'facts'.

Thank you for a hearty belly laugh, my silky friend. nagualdesign 23:27, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

I read that paper on Gravity as a fluid dynamic phenomenon in a superfluid quantum space, by the way. Thank you for the link. Very interesting stuff.

May I ask you an honest question (and I'm really not joking this time, I promise), are you autistic? nagualdesign 23:32, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

Witch runs in my family.

-EEng

Been diagnosed with many possible things, Asperger's, High functioning autism, ADHD, OCD, possibly Manic depressive, witch seems to run in my family. I have a high visuospatial and logical-mathmatical iq but a low verbal iq, which makes it dificult for me to both learn from verbal lectures and to comunicate my ideas.SpidersMilk, Drink Spider Milk, it tastes good. (talk) 01:45, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

I see. The reason I thought you might be autistic is the fact that you didn't realize I was obviously joking even after I'd explained that it was a joke, yet you're able to digest some pretty serious scientific literature. Reminds me of one of my cousins who's high-functioning autistic. Many years ago when he was a little boy and on holiday in Egypt (actually, I think they lived there for a short while) he went missing and his parents were distraught. They were eventually contacted by the police (not the other way around) because he'd somehow managed to order a taxi and give the driver directions in Arabic but when they arrived at the apartment he had no concept whatsoever of having to pay the driver for the ride, so the driver called the police!

Take care, nagualdesign 02:05, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

So you didn't know there were still theories that ether exists?SpidersMilk, Drink Spider Milk, it tastes good. (talk) 02:31, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

Having read the paper, I wouldn't characterize it as an aether theory. The luminiferous aether was supposedly the medium through which light propagates. This superfluid quantum space theory is more of a theory of gravity, and maybe explains the properties of fundamental particles themselves. Light, they say, is like a phonon travelling through the SQS. Also, any theory has to be invariant to moving frames of reference and allow for accelerating reference frames, which wouldn't be possible if there was some sort of aether (ie, a fixed metric).

To be honest, I don't know enough to even fully comprehend what they're saying, but my hunch is that it's probably wrong. For starters they accept that superfluidity (something that happens in a plenum) has a non-zero viscosity, so I'd be surprised if they can model, say, a single electron that would persist for any great length of time before decaying, yet we know that electrons are extraordinarily long-lived. They also seem to be implying that the theory only works properly when things are moving, but no particle can be said to be moving in its own co-moving reference frame, by definition. And it's full of spelling mistakes (lenght was mentioned a few times), and they use the word theory when they should be saying hypothesis. If I were a betting man, my money would be on entropic gravity.

By the way, I've just been watching one of my favourite YouTube channels, which you might be interested in: PBS Space Time (and in particular, videos featuring Matt O'Dowd). nagualdesign 02:55, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

The hypothesis says that the superfluid has a non linear viscocity, meaning that as one approches the speed of light, viscocity increases until it becomes infinite for all things containing mass. I have heard people hypothesise that particles absorb energy from somewhere, in such a way that if the speed is far enough below the speed of light, it (the particle) will be able persist. I have heard that Hydrogen likely becomes very unstable and undergoes radioactive decay at close to light speed.SpidersMilk, Drink Spider Milk, it tastes good. (talk) 13:01, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

You should also note that that is by far not the only version of Superfluid vacuum theory. Others exist in which the vacuum has absolutly no viscocity.SpidersMilk, Drink Spider Milk, it tastes good. (talk) 17:50, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

July 2018 (2)

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.

---

Please do not delete or edit legitimate talk page comments, as you did at Talk:Donald Trump baby balloon. Such edits are disruptive, and may appear to other editors to be vandalism. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Warning is in regard to this edit. If someone needs to change something they added, let them know and allow them to fix it - do not take it upon yourself to make the change. See WP:TPG for more. You were warned about this recently on Commons and know better. -- ψλ ● ✉ ✓ 01:22, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

Winkelvi, BushelCandle is perfectly capable of objecting if they want (though I have every confidence they won't). At Commons you defended the indefensible, and now here you're faulting the faultless. Stop playing the fool. EEng 01:57, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

Sigh... Policy is foolish? Not in my world. -- ψλ ● ✉ ✓ 01:59, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

As is so often the case, that wise and mature editor, User:EEng's predictive faculties are spot-on. I have no issue at all with other editors correcting howlers or typos I make with my own talk page posts - how could I have, when tolerant and erudite editors like he and User:SMcCandlish have had to put up with my own nit-picking and compulsive copyediting tic for some while now?

I do apologise to all parties for being the blundering proximate cause of this spat - especially when I should know better. (My only excuse was the ease of using copy and then paste, but I do now take User:Newyorkbrad's point about how distracting such sloppiness can be.) --BushelCandle (talk) 17:38, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

User:Winkelvi: Although it can be so tempting to use a ready-made template (with appropriate internal links pre-formed and language committee-edited to be bland and diplomatic), there are times when just the act of using a templated comment comes over as irritating, pointy and largely inappropriate.

Perhaps the time has come that you should make every effort to avoid interacting with User:Nagualdesign at all, and especially with a template, unless such action is absolutely unavoidable and imperative.

We both know that you often have pertinent points to make, Winkelvi, but the very act of making them to Nagualdesign has perhaps reached the stage that it is completely counter-productive. --BushelCandle (talk) 17:38, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

(edit conflict) FFS! BushelCandle thanked me for that edit immediately after I made it. Using somebody else's signature is against WP policy (WP:SIGFORGE - Never use another editor's signature) and although BushelCandle wasn't committing forgery per se he obviously got the message and appreciated my edit. It's about time you got the message too. Your constant jibing at me, including following me around wherever I go and trying to stir up shit, and posting outright lies about me, is growing extremely tiresome. What you don't seem to realize is that each and every edit you make can be seen by everybody and I'm compiling a list that will demonstrate a pattern. I warned you that I was going to throw the book at you and I meant it. Please take as much rope as you wish.

EEng is right; you do play the fool. You appear to believe that you can use your Asperger's as a get out of jail free card. Well, I've encountered quite a few people on the autistic spectrum in my life and I can honestly say that none of them are quite like you. The negative traits you exhibit have nothing to do with Asperger's and everything to do with you being immature, self-absorbed, self-important and rather transparently having double standards.[10] (There's plenty more diffs where that came from.) Saying, "Waah! Asperger's!" every time someone picks you up on your tiresome bullshit is an insult to people with Asperger's. nagualdesign 02:46, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

I’ve restored the edit. Incorporating a signature’s font and color in the middle of a talkpage comment is unnecessarily distracting. (Using the word “no-no” in an edit summary seems a bit patronizing, however.) Newyorkbrad (talk) 02:43, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

It isn't patronizing, it's a simple way of expressing that it's verboten while acknowledging that BushelCandle wasn't wantonly breaking the rules. BushelCandle obviously didn't find it patronizing. I could argue that your post is a little patronizing, couldn't I? Don't worry, I wouldn't dream of it. nagualdesign 02:49, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

Well, that’s my thanks for agreeing with you. I think my work here is done. Newyorkbrad (talk) 02:51, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

Okay. No offense intended. Let's just leave it there. nagualdesign 03:14, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

• Newyorkbrad: Thanks for taking the trouble, and please excuse ND's teechiness – as you may know he's been run through the wringer lately.
• Nagualdesign: Slow down. When someone takes the trouble to back you up, don't make them regret it.
• Winkelvi: You're now graduating from playing the fool to being a fool: your understanding of WP:TPG is unsubtle; if it's true what's said about you above you need to recognize your limitations and stop trying to police the interactions of others; and it's patently obvious that you're sore about events at Commons. Now stop playing with fire before you get burned.

EEng 03:31, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

Point taken. I really should have put a on the end of that post. Not to worry, Newyorkbrad has already excused my tetchiness by thanking me for my subsequent edit. All is well, and thank you for the oil, EEng. nagualdesign 03:39, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

nagualdesign taking a break from WP editing to go into full-time rope production

"Sore" about Commons? What an idiotic statement and completely off the mark. Sorry to disappoint you, however, I feel nothing but one giant eye-roll about the Commonsgate cluster-eff brought on by a bunch of drama queens and divas on a mission of disruption who came over from en.wp. But, in case you didn't notice, that whole basket of deplorable behavior wasn't centered around me, but the person by whom this talk page is maintained. My participation there was minimal, therefore, I can't even imagine what I would have to be "sore about". And, once again, if insisting on appropriate behavior as described by policy is foolish, I'll accept that label, no problem. -- ψλ ● ✉ ✓ 03:47, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

*facepalm* nagualdesign 03:58, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

Winkelvi, do you not see that a sitting arbitrator has already stopped by to undo your meddling? Do you not see how this will end for you if you don't cut the crap right now? EEng 04:08, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

I saw it and honestly, I couldn't care less (about the "undo"). -- ψλ ● ✉ ✓ 04:09, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

*facepalm* X 2. In that case do carry on: the sooner you get yourself blocked the less trouble for everyone. EEng 04:24, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

Blocked for what? Doing something someone (or three someones) disagreed with? Surely you know not a day goes by in Wikipedia where that doesn't happen to numerous editors. Including you. -- ψλ ● ✉ ✓ 04:27, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

I'm going to throw you a bone here and suggest that you read Wikipedia:Harassment in its entirety. Or don't, it's up to you. nagualdesign 04:35, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

To which I will add: "There once was a drunk driver who was driving the wrong way on the freeway. Upon hearing on the radio (over the honking horns) that there was a drunk driver who was driving the wrong way on the freeway, he peered through his windshield, noticed all of the headlights heading toward him, and exclaimed 'My God! There are dozens of them!!" [11]

At this point I suggest we let Winkelvi say whatever he's going to say, without responding, in the hopes that he will meditate on what's happened here and perhaps mend his ways. EEng 04:43, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

(edit conflict)"You appear to believe that you can use your Asperger's as a get out of jail free card. Well, I've encountered quite a few people on the autistic spectrum in my life and I can honestly say that none of them are quite like you. The negative traits you exhibit have nothing to do with Asperger's and everything to do with you being immature, self-absorbed, self-important and...Saying, "Waah! Asperger's!" every time someone picks you up on your tiresome bullshit is an insult to people with Asperger's."

So, I need to read the article on harassment because...your comments ^^^above^^^ about my unchangeable condition (which is officially considered a disability) is so incredibly tolerant and understanding and not harassment? Got it. -- ψλ ● ✉ ✓ 04:45, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

Hatted? That's no fair. I did not get to participate in the drama. Now I'll have to go pick a fight on the street corner or something. Damn.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  17:46, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

What about me? It's not real drama without hammerpants! ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 20:22, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

Reported to ANI

I've reported Winkelvi to ANI, as promised. nagualdesign 20:25, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

Winkelvi

Hi. I just wanted you to know that I NAC-closed the AN/I discussion you started about Winkelvi on the basis of that editor agreeing to a voluntary one-way interaction ban regarding yourself, and that I have logged the voluntary I-ban here. Beyond My Ken (talk) 00:47, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for that, Ken. May I also ask, can you still bench press 256kB? nagualdesign 00:56, 16 July 2018 (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.

Design

Hey - I made a few changes to your design, and just sent you an email but we can't attach anything to Wiki emails. Let me know when you read it. ^{Atsme📞📧} 18:27, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

While we're here, I found something tangentially related to the baby balloon : File:Trump Is Like My Son's Nappies.jpg Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 14:44, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

... and needs to be changed as soon as possible. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:57, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Baby balloon

"Reverted to version as of 00:07, 17 July 2018 (UTC) - Alex, please calibrate the colour of your monitor! Also, remember to work on full-resolution images."

I did work on the full-resolution image, I just cropped it a little. My version was a bit oversaturated, but yours was a bit undersaturated. The balloon should not appear to be skin color, it's orange. (except for the bit around the eyes)

By the way, I've been meaning to ask about the Tesla debacle. I was only able to recover a thumbnail, I wonder what the full image looks like. I would also be interested to know if you made it by creating the whole thing as a 3D model or some other way? Alexis Jazz (talk) 02:08, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Hi Alexis (sorry I called you Alex in my edit summary!), my mistake about the cropping - I thought you'd worked on a lower resolution image. I will stand by what I said about colour calibration though. This is extremely oversaturated, and the balloon is orange in all versions of the image. Hue and saturation are two different things. I could alter the colour to make the balloon more orange, but that would necessarily change the rest of the image, and the alternative - making a local rather than global edit in order to affect just the balloon - is not really in the spirit of an encyclopedia. You could try globally increasing the contrast slightly, which will affect the saturation, but I can tell you that I already tried that and the red channel goes awry (and again, just turning the red down isn't very encyclopedic).

File:Tesla Roadster Falcon 9H.png is still available if you'd like to take a closer look. None of the finished image is a 3D model. While preparing to make the final image I made a rudimentary 3D model in Sketchup of the Falcon Heavy upper stage, including the engine nozzle, fuselage (if that's the right word) and the fairing (nose cone). That way I could orient the model to fit the payload and payload adapter, and also get the correct angle of view, so that I could then draw it with accurate perspective and foreshortening. I basically took a snapshot of my 3D sketch and used that to draw the illustration. All of the colour, shading and finer details (like the "race track") are hand drawn, like the rest of the illustration. nagualdesign 02:29, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

@Alexis Jazz: Just for you, I've uploaded the first rudimentary image I created of the Falcon Heavy upper stage that I then used to create the 3D sketch, which I've also uploaded. Both files can be downloaded here. I don't know how useful they'll be to you, but you're welcome to them. Looking at the .skp file it looks like it's still in the final orientation/AOV that I settled on for the illustration. I had to keep moving it, taking a snapshot and opening the snapshot in Photoshop many times before I got it just right. nagualdesign 02:39, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, I've downloaded the files, but I think my computer can't run Sketchup. I was mostly interested to know if the whole thing was 3D. They could hardly copyright the wrinkles in the fabric, so by putting the camera in another position and changing the angle, you would have a genuine own work. Alexis Jazz (talk) 03:17, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

I think my computer can't run Sketchup Really? I guess you must be running Linux then. Or a modified Speak & Spell. Can you use it to phone home? nagualdesign 03:33, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)(edit conflict) I'm going to have to agree with Nagual. However, I did notice that the lighting and exposure of that image does make the balloon look a little more yellow than in higher resolution photos, so I tweaked the color curves just a bit. I also removed some of the compression artifacts that had been there since the original upload. Either of you may feel free to revert me if you don't think it's an improvement. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 02:43, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Looks good - apart from the super-saturated nipple. I really should have taken care of the compression artifacts in my original upload. Thanks, MP. nagualdesign 02:50, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

@MjolnirPants: much better, thanks! (except the nipple, but beggars can't be choosers) Alexis Jazz (talk) 03:17, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

If anyone does decide to desaturate that particular body part please use the edit summary "Tweaked his nipple". Cheers. nagualdesign 03:33, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

I had noticed the nipple was a little too... fluorescent? but I figured one of you guys would fix it. Then I saw this last comment and couldn't resist doing it myself... :D ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 03:54, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

The glow is from the listening device Putin implanted. EEng 04:19, 19 July 2018 (UTC)