User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr./Archive

For discussions prior to September 2, 2005, click here.

For discussions prior to October 17, 2005, click here.

Image Thumbs

Can we change the background color of image thumbs to black? The yellow links don't show up very well against white, currently. --Peter Farago 16:04, 2 September 2005 (EDT)

Planning on some cosmetic changes anyway. So I'll get right on it. -- Joe Beaudoin 16:29, 2 September 2005 (EDT)

I'd like to voice an opinion for dark grey or some shade. I think it's important to stand out against the black page background, but I agree the links are impossible to read. I'd been meditating on a proper solution for a couple days and dark grey doesn't entirely satisfy me, but it's better than either white or black. In my opinion, anyway. --Day 17:03, 2 September 2005 (EDT)

How about the red shade I've implemented? -- Joe Beaudoin 17:04, 2 September 2005 (EDT)

Hrm. Not what I'd expected, but not bad, either. The links are certainly readable now, and it fits more with the theme of the site, so I think it's a good call. --Day 17:17, 2 September 2005 (EDT)

While we're on the subject of changing link colors, do you think the dark blue color that's used in the navigational links at the top of BSwiki and for Wikipedia links could be lightened up a bit? They're kind of...dark. On a more subjective note, I think blue doesn't even fit in the red-yellow-on-black color scheme that you fine gentlemen have set up. I'm sure everyone else disagrees with this, clearly, but that's just my opinion. Regardless, they are just a tad too dark and don't show up very well against the black background.

Jzanjani 16:42, 7 October 2005 (EDT)

Image Floats

When using the extended image markup to float an image left or right without a thumbnail, a red background gets left behind in my browser. At the moment I'm using <div style="float:right;"></div> tags to surround the image, which doesn't give me the problem, but the use of HTML is undesirable for various reasons. Do you know why this is happening, and whether or not it's fixable? --Peter Farago 21:38, 20 September 2005 (EDT)

I'll check that issue out and get back to you. Thanks! -- Joe Beaudoin 22:15, 20 September 2005 (EDT)

Military Ranks

Discussion moved to Talk:Military Ranks (RDM) by Joe Beaudoin at 21:46, 17 October 2005 (EDT).

Logo

I found a font that looks like the BSG font and I thought, Joe, if you'd like, I'd redo the logo so that Wiki is in exactly the right font. I'f want to do it off of whatever original was used for the one that's up, if it's still around. That way I wouldn't have to redo some already-done work and futz with matching the gold under the letters. I also thought it might be nice to have a favicon pic. I'm not sure how, exactly, those work, but I understand they're 16x16px, and I thought a W in the BSG font would be nice, to kind of mirror the Wikipedia W, but, you know, with a Battlestar twist. Whatcha think? --Day 22:58, 17 October 2005 (EDT)

Feel free to make a logo and favicon. I've been meaning to make one, but I'm not artistically inclined. -- Joe Beaudoin 14:18, 22 October 2005 (EDT)

Do you have the original image that you could share with me? I'm not sure how well I'd be able to get rid of the old text. If not, no worries, I'll give it a try anyway. Just lemme know. --Day 18:08, 22 October 2005 (EDT)

Actually, it's just a screencap of the logo that was used at the end of the opening credits in season one. Essentially, I erased the "BSG 75" at the bottom and added "Wiki". However, the screencap came from an inferior non-DVD copy of an episode, so you may want to just go ahead and screencap that same logo, if you have a DVD version of any first season episodes. -- Joe Beaudoin 19:01, 22 October 2005 (EDT)

Oh this project is just too cool! I can't wait. Good luck, Day. --Watcher 21:33, 22 October 2005 (EDT)

Thanks, Watcher. I'll go for a DVD screen cap, if I can. The player I use for it (because it doesn't have copy-protection or whatever it is in the normal player that makes all my caps turn to just blak) is somewhat inaccurate with the pausing, so I will probably spend more time listening, over and over, to the final ten seconds or so of the credits than working on the thing in GIMP. Heh. --Day 06:05, 23 October 2005 (EDT)

File:Logo.jpg

Dig it. Whatcha think? I dunno how to make Favicons, so I'll do some research. I think this thing turned out decently, though. Comments on changes are welcome. I make no promises, but I'll see what I can do about them. Also... why's there red sticking out around my image. As you can see (if you clikc) that's not part of the original. --Day 20:05, 23 October 2005 (EDT)

Excellent Centurian (I'm watching "Rome" right now). Proceed with the gods' blessings. --Watcher 21:45, 23 October 2005 (EDT)

I kind of like Mason's. --Peter Farago 00:54, 24 October 2005 (EDT)

True, MASON's version is very nicely realized. It is clean in execution while simultaneously addressing the concern Day originally raised. I preferred it, initially (due in no small part to its appearing first). However, there is a grittiness and rough hewn realism to the series that I feel is more appropraitely reflected in Day's version.

This is, without a doubt, an artistic conceit and it can surely be argued that this site strives to bring greater clarity to the show (as it could be said MASON's version depicts), but I feel Day's version would be more evocative of the experience that brings people (non-wikipedians) to this site in the first place.

Perhaps Day's logo could somehow be used in the articles intended for public consumption and MASON's on the pages folks like us peruse. (I have no idea whether this is even possible, Joe.) --Watcher 03:28, 24 October 2005 (EDT)

File:BSG-WIKI.png

I, ah, "MASON's"? I didn't mean to start a competition, really. Where is it? Or did he make the one that's used now? I'm so confused. --Day 08:48, 24 October 2005 (EDT)

I also made an .ico, but it won't let me upload it to the Wiki, here. How is your preferred method of transfer, Joe? Email? Also, I tested it out in FF and Opera, but I couldn't make it work in IE. This maybe be because I am not running a web server and, thus, can't put it in the right place. Lemme know what you like, Joe. --Day 10:13, 24 October 2005 (EDT)

Peter linked me Mason's logo and I added it here for reference, to the left... Also with an inexplicable red thingie. --Day 11:25, 24 October 2005 (EDT)

Hi, Day, I didn't want to stir up controversy or start a competition, just offer my two cents and an option. Try switching your skin to monobook in your user preferences and you'll see the added benefit you get from removing the background and saving the image as a png (gifs leave that nasty ragged edge). It works better as an icon for the wiki no matter what skin you apply in your preferences. We could do the same with the screencap logo but I happened to have already made an icon of this image for my own personal use and liked it enough to mod it and post it here. :D --MASON 13:06:02, 2005-10-24 (EDT)

Ahha. I see. Mine's a jpg, for the record. I hadn't considered transparency. One problem, though: IE6, which is the most common browser used on the internet (though maybe not fot this site), doesn't support png transparency. This issue is supposed to be fixed for IE7, but even after that IE6 will be fairly common for a good while. There are ways of scripting around it, but I don't have any clue how they would interact with MediaWiki because 1) I have no idea how MediaWiki works and 2) these fake png-transparency things all looked too complex for me to delve into.

So. With that in mind, I'd rather your logo with a square background or my logo: flip a coin. However, I don't think relying on png transparency is advisable with IE as prevelant and buggy as it is. We might be able to fake transparency, by having the image change with the layout settings, but I don't know if that's possible. I also don't think we can resolve anything further until we hear from Joe and he's probably not gonna be around for a few days. Anyway... there's that. Cheers. --Day 01:37, 25 October 2005 (EDT)

Very well, I can't say I know anyone who still uses IE6, but I'll leave my version as is, it will still render properly in other browsers (firefox, camino, safari, mozilla, netscape) will likely work fine in IE7 (if that's even what they'll call it), and doestn't look too shabby with its vestigial black background in IE6. As most people won't be changing the background of the site, the transparency is really more of a power user feature, for those who will likely be sporting the leanest and most feature rich browser they can find. The transparency also acts as a bonus for fans who want to create their own personal fan art, as most of the editing work is done for them. --Mason 07:28:13, 2005-10-25 (EDT)

There is an effective hack to enable PNG transparency in IE 6 that Joe an implement on this site if he's interested. --Peter Farago 15:41, 25 October 2005 (EDT)

Hurricane Wilma

Hope everything turns out OK for you, Joe. I'm sure I'm in safe territory to say we'll all be pullin' for ya. --Watcher 03:35, 24 October 2005 (EDT)

Thanks Watcher! I appreciate your concern. :-) Everything is going well, so now I'm pulling for those who were drastically affected myself. -- Joe Beaudoin 10:57, 7 November 2005 (EST)

It's good to hear everything's all right. --Talos 12:00, 7 November 2005 (EST)

I'd like to draw you're attention...

...to this discissuion again. You were one of the only two other people to reply to it initially, and I'd appriciate feedback, befor putting my most recent proposal up on the main page. Thanks in advance, and I hope everything's working out for you in light of a large swirling column of wind. --Day 12:16, 31 October 2005 (EST)

Please permanently ban Jzanjani

"Oh and Ricimer, tell your mother to wash up - I'll be by later."--Posted by Jzanjani on his user page on November 7. This guy was already on warning after a one week ban. Please get rid of him for good as he is obviously not going to learn, plus he's barely contributed anything to this wiki. --Ricimer 07:54, 7 November 2005 (EST)

Joe, I don't agree with Ricimer's request for a permanent ban on Jzanjani--yet. But baiting someone with immature comments, and using the otherwise user-edited-only home page as a shelter to add baiting comments (of which Ricimer violated the custom of never editing a user page other than one's own), I'm recommend a 6-month ban if you see fit. At the same time, Ricimer needs to remember the old adage of sticks and stones. If Jzanjani said something like this to my face, yeah, I'd punch him out of principle, but he did not do so to Ricimer, and this is just an annoying person doing annoying things under anonymity, an unfortunate side-effect (and form of cowardice) of posting here. --Spencerian 08:48, 7 November 2005 (EST)

Galactica Station images

I don't think you necessarily had to delete the screen grabs borrowed from Galactica Station, for reasons I stated on Ricimer's talk page. --Peter Farago 18:21, 7 November 2005 (EST)

Galactica videogame materials

Hi; I was the scriptwriter for the Galactica videogame in 2003, and I noticed you have some material on the wiki about the game. If you're interested, I'd be happy to supply you with the full character bios and backstory elements that were written for the game design process. Email me. --James Swallow 11:47, 29 November 2005 (GMT)

It would be wonderful to have additional information on the video game. I'd be particularly interested to know which elements were sourced from which series, and which were original. One potential problem I see is that Wikipedia's open nature makes it an unreliable host for original source material (a criticism frequently leveled against wikisource), but Joe could probably create locked pages on the wiki to host whatever original material you make available. Thanks for contacting us! --Peter Farago 23:12, 30 November 2005 (EST)

"Email me," he says. Yet, maybe I've missed something, but--he didn't give one to us to email him, did he? Or maybe he emailed Joe. Let's hope for that. --Day 13:12, 3 December 2005 (EST)

3D Modeling area

Joe,

Are you interested in including articles on publicly available 3D models for BSG ships? I'm a member over at http://www.scifi-meshes.com, where BSG models are frequently under construction, many of which will become publicly available for fans to use to make 3D pictures of BSG ship scenes. It's something of intense interest to a few people - fans who know how to use 3D modeling programs to make scenes - but their pix are enjoyed by many, and public models are hard to track down. Having articles that point people to these models would be of great informational help.

Just wondering. I have no idea where these kinds of articles would go, or how they should be formatted.

CrimsonLine 20:11, 29 November 2005 (EST)

It would be nice to link to fan models from articles on ship classes. --Peter Farago 23:13, 30 November 2005 (EST)

As long as the ship classes are part of the Battlestar canon, I don't see why we can't include pictures (and external links) to the applicable articles. Any other questions, comments or concerns? --Joe Beaudoin 10:31, 3 December 2005 (EST)

I'd rather not have pictures of fan models, if only because it would be difficult not to present them as canonical elevation renders (like the ones we have from Zoic). Links to fan-models would be a helpful resource, however. --Peter Farago 19:08, 3 December 2005 (EST)

I'd be very interested in this, and would suggest that any references to mesh downloads be in open formats. Specifically DXF, although not as powerful as some other proprietary formats, can be view by virtually anyone. If anyone has a better format in mind, please propose it. --Mason 00:46, 4 December 2005 (EST)

I don't think we should be hosting models, just providing references. As such, the format is not within our jurisdiction. --Peter Farago 03:54, 4 December 2005 (EST)

I concur, Peter. Let us provide links off-site, but let us not display pictures or model files. This is kind of like fanfiction, really. It may be very, very close to what shows up on the show, but it's not what's actually on the show, so we should link it and clearly label what it is we're linking to, but not host it. --Day 10:14, 4 December 2005 (EST)

Yes, I agree, just link to it -- but we shouldn't host it. -- Joe Beaudoin 02:39, 5 December 2005 (EST)

Re-imagined Series definition: Battlestar Group ^{(TRS: "Water")}. It also doubles as an acronym for the television series itself.

Re-imagined Series definition: the brig