User talk:InfiniteNexus

This is InfiniteNexus's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29Auto-archiving period: 14 days

If I have left you a message: please answer on your talk page, as I am watching it. If I have been active and have not yet responded, please place {{Talkback|your username}} on my page as I may have missed your response. If you leave me a message: I will answer on my talk page, so please add it to your watchlist. Please click here to leave me a new message.

Please don't template me! Everybody makes mistakes, and this user finds user warning templates impersonal and disrespectful. If there's something you'd like to say, please take a moment to write a comment below in your own words.

This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.

Hi InfiniteNexus, thank you for your help in restructuring the CoStar Group article. I appreciated your comment about the Criticisms section, and proposed a suggestion for how to merge the content into the article. If you have some time to look it over and update accordingly, I think it would further improve the article. Thank you! Hbensur (talk) 15:51, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Done – I've cleaned up the entire article. InfiniteNexus (talk) 18:41, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

I recently invited you to take a survey about administration on Wikipedia. If you haven’t yet had a chance, there is still time to participate– we’d truly appreciate your feedback. The survey is anonymous and should take about 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement.

Take the survey here.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 00:39, 13 November 2024 (UTC) [reply]

 Done InfiniteNexus (talk) 23:39, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed 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 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:39, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please provide an explanation as to why you replaced A Minecraft Movie poster.png with its JPG version? I specifically decided not to perform the non-free reduction in the JPG format because of the inherent generational loss. The width of 220 pixels was intentional too, as thumbnails are displayed at that size by default, so there will be no additional scaling necessary; I am well aware that, by doing so, the size falls below the 0.1 megapixels convention, but there’s nothing inherenly bad about this — ultimately, according to the content guideline, images “should be rescaled as small as possible to still be useful as identified by their rationale, and no larger”, which I believe to be the case with the PNG version. —Rossel44 (talk) 07:43, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The JPG file already existed, so it should have been overwritten rather than replaced with a new file in order to retain the version history. The standard file format for film posters is JPG, and I don't think there's any noticeable difference in quality in terms of compression. Furthermore, 220 × 326 is too small; the largest possible size is 259 × 384. InfiniteNexus (talk) 07:47, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You’re claiming a size of 220 × 326 pixels to be “too small”, but, as I stated, that’s the size the image will be displayed at by default; even if a higher resolution version is uploaded, the image will be scaled down to this width at content delivery. Due to JPEG compression artifacts and the Nyquist–Shannon sampling theorem, this will result in lower visual quality despite the higher initial resolution. Furthermore, we do not need to utilize the largest possible size, but rather one that is “as small as possible to still be useful as identified by their rationale”, as per the guidelines for non-free content. I would have overwritten the existing file if the file formats were compatible; ultimately, however, the version history is of less importance than the content (in this case, the image) itself, else the template PNG version available and its note for non-free images would be superfluous. Lastly, regarding the file format, I’d like to cite from COM:FT: “(…), if the original file is in JPEG, it generally makes no sense to convert it to PNG: converting a lossy compression into a ‘lossless’ format doesn't buy you anything since the ‘loss’ already occurred in the original, and doing so will only increase the file size (any edits, however, should probably be saved as PNG as well as JPEG). An exception is high resolution JPEGs that have no visible compression artifacts. Conversion to PNG will avoid the thumbnails having additional compression artifacts.” That is the case here. —Rossel44 (talk) 08:30, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That isn't the norm on most film articles, and there's probably a reason to it. As mentioned, given the small size of the image, there is practically no noticeable difference between the JPG and PNG, so it doesn't really matter. For what it's worth, when I zoom into the infobox thumbnail and compare the live article with this version, the JPG image looks sharper, especially with the text. Since the original file was in JPG format, and there are no noticeable "compression artifacts" or other difference in quality, I don't see a reason to go out of our way to replace the existing JPG file with a PNG. Re-reading the cited portion of COM:FT, it seems they are referring to high-resolution JPGs, whereas this is a low-resolution JPG that happened to have been resized from a high-resolution JPG. InfiniteNexus (talk) 23:13, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings. Do you mind if I transclude your Marvel and DC release guides onto one of my subpages? Rockfang (talk) 17:38, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Go ahead. InfiniteNexus (talk) 23:46, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, InfiniteNexus. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "MCU: The Reign of Marvel Studios".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! – DreamRimmer (talk) 12:45, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]