Page semi-protected
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Commons?

Shouldn't this be on commons? -- Jtneill - Talk 13:54, 12 November 2009 (UTC) reply

Edit request on 21 January 2012

How do you get this page unprotected?


Runjonrun ( talk) 06:39, 21 January 2012 (UTC) reply

You file a request at WP:RFPP. But if you really are referring to this image, given how many pages it's used on unprotection is not likely. Anomie ⚔ 18:51, 21 January 2012 (UTC) reply


Compress image

It would be great to compress this image, particularly given how frequently this image is used.

  • Original
    Original
  • Compressed
    Compressed

After running it through svgo I was able to reduce the file size by 20.86% . It is a lossy change, but the visual difference is not noticeable.

Jamesmstone ( talk) 02:39, 7 October 2017 (UTC) reply

MIME type

Please make sure this file has the image/svg+xml MIME type like all the other SVG files. Otherwise, web applications have a hard time working with it. Thank you. Ender and Peter 19:40, 3 December 2017 (UTC) reply

@ Enderandpeter: sorry I don't know how to do that. Would you care to explain? Are you asking for a new version to be uploaded? If so, can you rovide the new version — Martin ( MSGJ ·  talk) 08:04, 5 December 2017 (UTC) reply
I have disabled the request. Please reactivate when responding. — Martin ( MSGJ ·  talk) 10:48, 6 December 2017 (UTC) reply
@ MSGJ: Thank you very much for responding. Yes, this has me very confused as well and I wish I was more familiar with Wikimedia's infrastructure. So, the problem is that when you visit the link above to the original file, you will notice that your browser will just show the SVG markup as text instead of showing the image like any other SVG uploaded to this site. From what I can tell, this is due to the MIME type the server sets for this particular file. The server sets the header Content-Type: text/plain instead of image/svg+xml. You can see this if you open up the browser console and look at the request/response details for these files. I do not believe this can be addressed by uploading a different file (although I will prod at this file a little bit to see if maybe I'm wrong, as the only thing I can think of that would cause this on the file level is some error in the markup perhaps).
It would appear as though the server, for some reason, is not serving this file correctly. I am indeed perplexed as to why only this SVG is being very inconveniently served as plain text as opposed to all the other SVG files. Is there any way to get the attention of people more familiar with Wikimedia's servers to help find out how to make the server give this file the proper header?
Typically what is done on such a server is since this kind of thing is so ground-level, there is usually configuration for the web server software that takes care of this. For example, I'm familiar with the infamous Apache Web Server and this capability is already setup by default. So, with httpd, there is typically a TypesConfig directive that names a file with which MIME types are associated with file extensions. In the default config for httpd, you'll find a line in the main conf file that sets TypesConfig conf/mime.types and in the conf/mime.types file you'll find a line like the following:
image/svg+xml                    svg svgz
which tells the web server to always use that Content-Type when serving files with those extensions. And so, one would think that Wikimedia's servers are similarly configured, yet here is an single SVG file that is not getting that header set.
And so, it's hard for me to see what needs to be done unless I can take a look or if someone else can on our behalf... Ender and Peter 15:54, 6 December 2017 (UTC) reply
I just wanted to add that I'm not seeing any issues with this file after downloading it and loading it in my browser either as a local file or from a local web server. And so I am hesitant to suspect the file itself so much as it seems like the problem could be on the web server level. But again, it is very unclear why this certain SVG which I assume was uploaded like the others would not be served like the others. Maybe it would help to reupload it? Ender and Peter 17:12, 6 December 2017 (UTC) reply
Sorry, let me just provide a link to the file I just downloaded, which should be the exact same as the current Original File for this image. I also tried copying and pasting the text from the text/plain-served file and KDiff tells me that "Files A and B are binary equal", and so I really do believe this is the exact same file which my local installation of httpd has no trouble serving as image/svg+xml.
Ah yes, and for what it's worth, the Original File link at Wikimedia Commons does provide a file with the correct header. So that's what needs to happen for this file. Ender and Peter 17:21, 6 December 2017 (UTC) reply
I tried reverting to the previous version of the file, and now the same thing is happening to that one! — Martin ( MSGJ ·  talk) 13:11, 7 December 2017 (UTC) reply
@ MSGJ:Very interesting... Yes, I only just now noticed that the first file listed in the File History section loads properly, yet the next one and the one you uploaded again are somehow still being served as text/plain. It indeed really looks like something is out of sorts on the server side, but I'm still not sure what exactly... I'm noticing how the previous image was archived yet still is plain text, so it doesn't seem like this just happens with the current image. Somehow, the manner in which the file was originally served is maintained in that archive link. Again, even the previous image loads just fine on any other web server so that I am compelled to rule out an issue with the file contents, yet open to the possibility I could be mistaken. Well, I hope that there's some way to get the attention of the people who are more familiar with what's happening at the server level. Ender and Peter 17:56, 7 December 2017 (UTC) reply
Question: Could this have to do with the Content Model? Currently it is wikitext. It can be changed by admins via /info/en/?search=Special:ChangeContentModel?pagetitle=File%3AQuestion+book-new.svg but I'm familiar enough to say if it needs changing, and if yes to what. Ben · Salvidrim!  ✉ 22:26, 7 December 2017 (UTC) reply
@ MSGJ:@ Salvidrim!: Ah, that makes a lot of sense. Thanks for the excellent insight. So, from what I'm learning, this is a feature of MediaWiki, which I also clearly need a lot more familiarity with. Okay, so if that's the case, is it possible for either you or MSGJ to change the content model for this file to whatever is set for any other SVG? I cannot visit that page as I do not have permission. So yes, hopefully this is the issue. Ender and Peter 20:48, 8 December 2017 (UTC) reply
In the choices I have for content models, nothing screams at me "this is for images". Can you give me an example of an image with the correct data so I can compare? Ben · Salvidrim!  ✉ 20:51, 8 December 2017 (UTC) reply
@ Salvidrim!: Thanks a lot for jumping on this, good sir. Well, this is most peculiar... If you take a look at the current file link for this image, it now has the right Content-Type so that you will see an image in your browser instead of text. However, the previous version of this image is still plain text. Did someone do something? If so, what?
As far as another SVG file on this site, one such example would be the Creative Commons logo. This is all very interesting... but hopefully someone else is also doing something to help and they will share what was done, because it would be preferable to restore the previous version of this image, which was originally the latest version, if possible. Ender and Peter 21:00, 8 December 2017 (UTC) reply
Nope, that CC logo file also has the "wikitext" content model, which makes sense considering the other choices. FWIW, this seems to be more of a Mediawiki bug and less something that admins can help with. I would probably recommend posting on Wikipedia:Village pump (technical) for investigation? Ben · Salvidrim!  ✉ 21:17, 8 December 2017 (UTC) reply
Ah, I see. Okay, I have feeling that it's referring to the article page for the file, which would indeed be a normal wikitext file, as opposed to the links to the actual binary file. Yes, I will most certainly make an inquiry on that page. Would you mind restoring the previous version of this file to be the current so that it's back to the 6KB version? That would be awesome. Thanks a lot! Oh yes and sorry, that was the Wikimedia Commons logo, not Creative Commons as I mistakenly said. Ender and Peter 21:19, 8 December 2017 (UTC) reply
Content model should have nothing to do with it (it's for the file description page, not the image itself). Problems like this (SVG shown as XML source, not as the rendered image) have come up on several SVG files in recent weeks, and I've noticed that there are two things that the problematic ones all seem to have in common: (i) they begin with a <svg> tag, there is no XML declaration; (ii) the <svg> tag lacks a version= attribute. In the case of the 12 June 2016 version of File:Question book-new.svg it starts 
<svg xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" viewBox="0 0 262 204" enable-background="new 0 0 262 204" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">
whereas the current version starts 
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<!-- Generator: Adobe Illustrator 13.0.0, SVG Export Plug-In . SVG Version: 6.00 Build 14948)  -->
<!DOCTYPE svg PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD SVG 1.0//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/REC-SVG-20010904/DTD/svg10.dtd" [
	<!ENTITY ns_flows "http://ns.adobe.com/Flows/1.0/">
	<!ENTITY ns_extend "http://ns.adobe.com/Extensibility/1.0/">
	<!ENTITY ns_ai "http://ns.adobe.com/AdobeIllustrator/10.0/">
	<!ENTITY ns_graphs "http://ns.adobe.com/Graphs/1.0/">
	<!ENTITY ns_vars "http://ns.adobe.com/Variables/1.0/">
	<!ENTITY ns_imrep "http://ns.adobe.com/ImageReplacement/1.0/">
	<!ENTITY ns_sfw "http://ns.adobe.com/SaveForWeb/1.0/">
	<!ENTITY ns_custom "http://ns.adobe.com/GenericCustomNamespace/1.0/">
	<!ENTITY ns_adobe_xpath "http://ns.adobe.com/XPath/1.0/">
]>
<svg version="1.0"
	 xmlns:x="&ns_extend;" xmlns:i="&ns_ai;" xmlns:graph="&ns_graphs;" i:viewOrigin="21 142" i:rulerOrigin="0 0" i:pageBounds="0 90 300 0"
	 xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:a="http://ns.adobe.com/AdobeSVGViewerExtensions/3.0/"
	 x="0px" y="0px" width="262px" height="204px" viewBox="0 0 262 204" enable-background="new 0 0 262 204" xml:space="preserve">
Much of that is superfluous junk caused by Adobe Illustrator. But the two significant differences are the XML declaration (the very first line of the current version) <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?> and the version="1.0" attribute on the <svg> tag. Try adding both of those in to the 12 June 2016 version, thus: 
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<svg version="1.0" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" viewBox="0 0 262 204" enable-background="new 0 0 262 204" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">
and see if it makes a difference. -- Redrose64 🌹 ( talk) 21:31, 8 December 2017 (UTC) reply
Redrose64 thanks a ton for your help!! How can the proposed code be "added to the June 2016 version"? Sorry if that's a silly question. :p Ben · Salvidrim!  ✉ 21:51, 8 December 2017 (UTC) reply
@ Redrose64:@ Salvidrim!:Yes Redrose64, I think you just might be on to something... Yeah, as I look at other SVG images like the Wikimedia Commons logo, I'm seeing the xml preamble. Salvidrim!, I went ahead and made such an edit to the previous latest file so go ahead and use that one. Basically, just upload this file to be the current version. Thanks a lot to everyone who looked into this. Ender and Peter 22:01, 8 December 2017 (UTC) reply
Done Please check that the fixes worked. Ben · Salvidrim!  ✉ 22:11, 8 December 2017 (UTC) reply
@ Salvidrim!:Yes! I can confirm that the current file link is to the 6KB version with the intro XML element that is now resulting in the file loading as a proper image. Thank you very much again everyone. This was excellent teamwork :-) So, I guess it was a combination of a file and server-side issue, in that there are indeed web servers and server-side software that will treat an SVG file as such even without the XML element, but in this case we had to make that change to the file to accomodate the web server/MediaWiki. I really appreciate all the research. Thanks again to you and to Redrose64 for the crucial background knowledge Ender and Peter 22:29, 8 December 2017 (UTC) reply
100% of the thanks go to Redrose64, I just pushed some buttons as instructed. ;) Ben · Salvidrim!  ✉ 23:46, 8 December 2017 (UTC) reply

Protected edit request on 15 January 2018

This must have been added expansions from the archetype, as it is most normal with texts of Bharat. Details could be implanted depending on the requirements of both time and space, but archetype theories remain. 1.23.123.37 ( talk) 07:38, 15 January 2018 (UTC) reply

Not done: I suspect you are on the wrong page, as your comments do not relate to this image — Martin ( MSGJ ·  talk) 09:18, 15 January 2018 (UTC) reply

Design update

Not sure if this should go in the Commons discussion page, if so my apologies. In any event, I think the current design is dated, in particular the squiggly text lines of the left page and the question mark font on the right page. My computer drawing skills are nonexistent but it would be greatly appreciated if someone could update the design of this image, mostly by straightening out the "text" on the left page and changing the font of the question mark on the right. (To preempt a potential opposing talking point, this isn't reinventing the wheel so much as it's putting new tires on, IMO.) Apologies if I come of as rude. Thanks! - John M Wolfson ( talk) 03:02, 15 March 2019 (UTC) reply

Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=File_talk:Question_book-new.svg&oldid=1083039496"