User talk:Gennaro Prota

As a security measure, new users can't upload new versions of existing images. Please upload it under another name and then I'll replace the old one with the new one. Ausir 14:36, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Sorry for the late reply. Yes, I understand the measure, of course, though in this case the image to replace had just been uploaded by myself (a question: until when one is considered to be a "new user"?). I'll notify you when I'll upload the new file (not soon, I guess, because my todo list is getting quite long :)). Thanks for your help. Gennaro Prota 00:50, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

{{Information}}

Hello Gennaro,

I greatly appreciate the changes you are making to {{Information}}. Except for one :) I think your choice of a dark gray color places much more emphasis on the template that it should. I personally found the light blue a lot more subtle. I'm not going to revert just yet; I dropped a line in here instead. For reference, here is your version at the time of this post:

Description	description
Source	source
Date	date
Author	author
Permission	permission

—UED77 00:04, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks :) I know these are personal taste issues. That's why I reserved this change as the last one: this way it could be reverted without also removing the previous fixes. I find the old color a little flashy, and thought a shade of gray could look more professional. BTW, I also tried sevaral nuances near to this: Maybe this? :) (white on blue looks quite well, and is often used in the W3C web pages too). In any case, I think it must judged "in live usage". See for instance: Image:Flag of the Italian Republic (1802).svg. Feel free to revert, if you want to, but I'd suggest keeping it for a while and see the general reaction. Since this template is used everywhere the changes are unlikely to get unnoticed :) --Gennaro Prota 00:22, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

I agree, we should wait a couple of days to see if people start complaining. I personally oppose the gray (and the W3C teal) because it's too dark, and I feel it draws more attention to the labels than it should. Hopefully, glancing at the content would reveal what the purpose of the text was; in fact, to be a little extreme, I bet we could drop the labels altogether, and the content of the template would remain comprehensible. So, while I do agree that the "little boy blue" we had previously might somewhat tarnish our professional image, it had the great advantage of being a subtle color that placed just enough emphasis on the labels without being overly "loud". Nevertheless, it is a matter of taste, but I thought I might let you know.

Oh, and I did get your message on en.wiki, but you didn't have to do that. I am one of the few admins whose primary project is actually the Commons. Plus, I tend to get bored when there is not a lot going on and I refresh my watchlist often, which includes all pages I have posted to. But thanks anyway for letting me know :) —UED77 00:37, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I do the same about the watch list :) Anyway, one thing I didn't say before (though probably implicit) is that, as paradoxical as it may seem, my goal was exactly to make the labels less prominent :) In other words, we agree on the aim, we disagree on the mean. Well, there are really lot of colors to choose from, though, so I do not give up hope of finding one which is both professional, subtle, and "Wiki" enough to make everyone happy :) —Gennaro Prota 01:31, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Heh, that is indeed funny :) The template is, as you've stated, quite noticeable, and it has been receiving plenty of edits in the past week. We'll see what time will bring. Take care :) —UED77 01:38, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Hi UED, maybe you could fullfill my unprotection request at the template talk page? I just propose to insert a link to the actual documentation page. --Gennaro Prota 18:21, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

SVG source code

Thanks for cleaning up Image:Sound-icon.svg. The source is readable and clear... great work! 128.158.145.51 15:32, 8 June 2007 (UTC)